A common theme is emerging from Conservatives who are freaked out by the party’s stalled polling numbers behind Mark Carney’s Liberals: Pierre Poilievre will dominate the upcoming leaders’ debates and, in so doing, save the CPC campaign. But there are reasons to be skeptical of this. Conservatives need to be cautious about the potential impact of the debates and more effectively manage expectations about Poilievre’s upcoming performance.
Thus far in the campaign, Conservatives have existed simultaneously in two contradictory worlds. The first world is sunny and bright: it’s the world of massive rallies. Poilievre’s campaign has been remarkably effective, positive, and disciplined. The leader has stayed on message, consistently garnered positive reviews for thoughtful policy announcements, and committed no real errors. The crowds at Conservative rallies have approached records for previous political rallies in Canada. Support for the party is at remarkable new highs.
But then there is the second world, which is decidedly darker. This is the world of the pollsters and their spawn, the aggregators and projection websites. Carney has maintained a stubborn and consistent lead in the polls that might well lead to a majority Liberal government. This is true despite his campaign being an objective mess, with the leader himself stumbling and mumbling through answers to reporters’ questions, uninspired policy announcements, and pointless conflicts with Conservative premiers.
As Poilievre attracts roaring crowds that rival attendance at the Winnipeg Jets’ home games, Carney has generally drawn modest audiences largely made up of the sort of lily-white old-timers that the media used to love mocking Conservative leaders for attracting to their meetings.
For Conservatives, the existence of these two worlds seems inconceivable. But there is one place where the two contradictory worlds of the campaigns and the polls will suddenly be reconciled.
Next week’s leaders’ debates.
Finally, there will be nowhere left for Carney to hide. Just as Poilievre flayed Justin Trudeau alive day after day in Question Period, so too will he expose every inch of Carney’s weakness, shiftiness, and self-contradiction in the debates. Once Poilievre has the opportunity to take Carney to the woodshed. Next, the polls will correct themselves and all will be well again in Conservative Land.
But we should be cautious about this prediction.
There is the inconvenient fact that debates very rarely make much of a difference in election campaigns. They sometimes cause a temporary blip in party support. But, most of the time, the debates simply reinforce what party supporters previously thought.
Those of us who know too much about Canadian political history think that the rare occasions on which debates did make a difference are always about to be repeated. We’re all familiar with Brian Mulroney’s withering “You had a choice, sir!” retort to John Turner during the leaders’ debate in the 1984 election. Maybe Poilievre will provide just such a spectacle at Carney’s expense. But chances are that won’t happen.
That having been said, there are some indications that the upcoming leaders’ debates may in fact have a big impact.
The first argument from pollster David Coletto is that the debates could matter because impressions of Carney are based on “broad perceptions of competence and professionalism” rather than on any detailed idea of what he believes, his policy stances, or his own character. Carney’s sterling reputation precedes him. But, once Canadians get a closer look at him under the glaring lights of the debate stage, they may be less than impressed.
The second reason why the debates may matter is that support for the Liberal Party is quite soft. People who say they will vote for Carney are more likely to be unsure about that decision, and more susceptible to changing their minds. This contrasts with Conservative voters, who are more likely to crawl across shards of broken glass to cast their ballots for Poilievre than consider switching their support to another party.
In other words, Carney has a lot to lose in the debates. Conversely, Poilievre has a lot to gain.
Can Poilievre exploit the opportunity? Conservatives almost universally believe he can. While he undoubtedly has the skills to do so, leaders’ debates are unique, fluid events. It’s hard to predict with much certainty how the contestants will perform.
Yes, Poilievre has years of bruising experience as a Conservative MP, including as a minister and leader of the Opposition. He has been extremely effective in this role, much to Trudeau’s misfortune. And, as many of us are discovering during this campaign, Poilievre is the best Conservative orator Canada has produced at least since Brian Mulroney, and perhaps not since John Diefenbaker.
All this looks very good compared to Carney’s low-energy events and lack of political experience.
But the skills that make Poilievre an outstanding campaigner and Opposition leader do not necessarily translate to those that will allow him to succeed in the debates. While Conservative partisans may want him to take Carney apart piece by piece, this might be an ill-advised approach to take. If the debates are used to more fully introduce the leaders to Canadians, that might in fact be a forum that favours Carney rather than Poilievre.
The truth is that neither Carney nor Poilievre has ever participated in a leaders’ debate. They are approaching one another on relatively equal footing. We have to recognize that, and temper our expectations for Poilievre accordingly.
One final note. Former Conservative leader Arthur Meighen is recognized as one of the greatest, sharpest orators in Canadian political history. As opposition leader, he regularly raked Liberal Mackenzie King across the coals in Question Period. King, a former academic, was very far from a charismatic public speaker. Furthermore, he was rightly terrified of Meighen. On some occasions, King became physically ill at the thought of facing him in the House of Commons.
But did this matter? The numbers provide a definitive answer. Meighen was prime minister for about one year and eight months. King, in contrast, governed for over two decades, and remains Canada’s longest-serving prime minister.
Maybe Poilievre will emerge triumphant from the coming debates and his performance will change the course of the campaign. Maybe not. But there is enough uncertainty surrounding this that Conservatives need to both be realistic and, much more importantly, start to better manage expectations about Poilievre’s upcoming debate performance.
