A conservative strategist, the author was once an adviser to the Harper government. He did the same in opposition.
In the media or even in person, the gloves were thrown off very early on in the Conservative leadership race. Several important figures of the Conservative Party of Canada (CCP), including Preston Manning himself, have asked the candidates to calm things down. Despite this, the animosity remains great and the hostility palpable. If there was no traditional exchange of handshakes in the previous debate, Pierre Poilievre not having extended his to Jean Charest, it is not because of the sanitary measures.
Pierre Poilievre is the favorite in this race. Brilliant, renowned for his ability to take the pulse of CCP members, he draws large crowds across the country. His strategy is not to gain height, as one would expect of a point guard. On the contrary, he attacks first and often makes populist proposals to mobilize his base. This appeals to some, but repels others, to the point of causing controversy, even outcry. We cannot divide by being a unifier. Mr. Poilievre knows this and he fully assumes his entrenched positions, displaying an unshakable confidence, although it is a double-edged sword.
Jean Charest puts forward his stature as a statesman; his struggle for the unity of the country, his knowledge of power and his experience of federalism. Its strategy is to offer content in this race, and it is to its credit. However, the attacks of the Poilievre clan, which questions its conservatism, have hit the mark and must be running through its head as well as that of several members. He often burns his speaking time justifying himself and defending his record. This limits his ability to stand out with what he wishes to put forward. He had obviously not prepared his return to politics and he fights against the idea that his candidacy is motivated by opportunism which may displease the conservative family.
A great divide
There is also a cleavage between the clans with, on the one hand, Pierre Poilievre, Leslyn Lewis and Roman Baber and, on the other, Jean Charest, Patrick Brown and Scott Aitchison, reputed to be more progressive. So far the content in this run has been limited. Each camp has made strong political statements of different variations on the theme of freedom. There have of course been more specific proposals, but that is not at all what has come to the surface.
Jean Charest is the one who made the most proposals. However, its advertisements find it difficult to showcase in the media. The format of the last two debates is partly to blame, especially when time is eaten up by variety show questions.
The performance of the participants in a debate is judged according to their objectives and the expectations of the target audience. Please, let the candidates pronounce the name of Justin Trudeau. The last debate rule was laughable.
Mr. Charest is recognized for his speaking skills, his enthusiasm and his perfect bilingualism. We therefore expect a good performance from him, which also means that expectations will be high for him. The goal for him will be to use this latest media platform to make a final appeal to his supporters to take their party card. He will have to balance his speaking time, even if it means strategically ignoring attacks to favor his content and recruitment.
For Pierre Poilievre, this will be an opportunity to make himself known in Quebec. Admittedly, Mr. Poilievre has visibility, but he is less known there than Mr. Charest. He will have the opportunity to make a good first impression on many people. His reputation precedes him; his hard-hitting attacks and shattering declarations are appreciated. But as my former colleague, ex-conservative strategist Yan Plante once said, using the analogy of chocolate cake: you like a piece, but you don’t always want to eat the whole cake. He will have to moderate the risk of disgust.
The other candidates are almost unilingual English, with the exception of Patrick Brown who has a working French. They will read or recite boxes, which will ensure that part of the debate will be boring. It is certain that media coverage will highlight this weakness, which will not improve the image of the CCP in Quebec. It is unacceptable for the party to accept leadership candidates from people who are not bilingual. However, the job description is clear: to be able to speak to all Canadians. The Bloc Québécois probably has its press release already written with the words “contempt” and “Quebec bashing » for all cases.
seduction game
We can expect Bill 96 on the official and common language of Quebec, French, to be debated, in addition to the Act respecting the secularism of the state. The unacceptable situation at Roxham Road will be denounced. The revival of GNL Québec will be on everyone’s lips. I dare to hope that there will be larger blocks of questions on foreign affairs, defense and the economy. There is still a war raging and the economy is our business.
It will be interesting to count the occurrences of the word “freedom”. He has the advantage of speaking easily, even with an English accent, and of responding to a multitude of subjects. We must not forget that Éric Duhaime succeeded in recruiting more than 57,000 members in Quebec with this positioning.
“History will be indulgent to me, for I intend to write it,” said Winston Churchill. MM. Charest and Poilievre will try to do the same. The first will certainly make some shortcuts on his past and his record as Prime Minister. The second will not fail to rewrite his version in turn.
After this debate, there will only be ten days of final sprint left before the end of recruitment, on June 3. After this date : alea jacta is. The teams will start a BBQ marathon with the current members. The sinews of war will be on three fronts: identification, direct communications and a machine to get the vote out.
A game of seduction will also take place in order to convince the members to put the names of the candidates on the ballot paper in the order allowing a postponement of the favorable votes. It is a preferential vote, with several ballots, as long as a candidate does not obtain the majority.
During the last race, there were some 270,000 members, of whom 175,000 exercised their right to vote, with a participation rate of around 65%. A record number of 400,000 members is mentioned for this race.