Poilievre’s miscues won’t save Trudeau

OAKVILLE, ONT.—According to some political observers, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s secret weapon is Conservative Party Leader Pierre Poilievre. That’s to say, even though Poilievre is currently leading in polls, some believe he’ll crash and burn before the next election, either because he’ll commit political errors or because he’ll be deemed too aggressive. Now, I can certainly understand why some would hold this view, but, in my opinion, it’s a misreading of political reality. But before I get into my own thoughts on this matter, let’s review the “Poilievre is going to blow it” criticisms which have recently been leveled against the Conservative leader. First off, Max Fawcett, a columnist for The National Observer, noted a few weeks ago that “If Justin Trudeau finds himself celebrating a political comeback for the ages at some point in 2025, he’ll probably look back to this past week as the point where it began.” And apparently, it’ll begin with Poilievre’s decision to vote against a free trade deal between Ukraine and Canada, since it includes a provision on carbon pricing. Fawcett thinks such a stance will make it difficult for Poilievre to win over “moderate Central Canadian voters he needs to actually win an election.” Then Fawcett pointed out how during that same week, Poilievre refused to apologize for misrepresenting the recent fatal car crash at Buffalo’s Rainbow Bridge as a terrorist attack; instead, says Fawcett, he “went on a meandering and mean-spirited tirade against a Canadian Press reporter who asked him about his comments.” “This” says Fawcett “was the Poilievre id on full display, stripped of the image makeover gurus and slick advertising campaigns.” Meanwhile, National Post reporter John Ivison also took aim at Poilievre for his tirade against that CP reporter, writing, “Poilievre’s derisive and misleading response last week offered an opening for the Liberals to put doubt in the minds of the jury.” Nor were Fawcett and Ivison alone in making these observations, as I saw few other news stories headlined “Poilievre’s bad week,” which seemed to suggest Poilievre’s empire was beginning to totter. So why am I skeptical about these takes? Well, to begin with, and this is something journalists sometimes have a hard time understanding, most people don’t really pay much attention to political news, meaning Poilievre's stance on a Ukrainian-Canadian free trade deal is likely not on anybody’s radar. Indeed, foreign affairs is usually the last thing on people’s priority list. At the same time, I’m willing to bet not many Canadians will ever even realize Poilievre was allegedly mean to a CP reporter. In other words, Poilievre's actions during his “bad week” didn’t put doubt in the minds of the jury, because the jury wasn’t listening, it was too busy worrying about the price of groceries. Also keep in mind, Poilievre is currently high in the polls not because people necessarily like him or because they think he’s a saint; he’s high in the polls basically because he isn’t Prime Minister Trudeau. He’s the “other guy.” My point is, Trudeau’s problem is that people are simply getting tired of him (this is not surprising, as all politicians have a limited shelf-life) and because, rightly or wrongly, they blame him for Canada’s souring economy. Also, the more he hangs on, the more Canadians will grow weary of him. And if there’s a recession, that’ll only increase economic anxiety and thus further damage Trudeau’s brand. All of this will only make Poilievre look better. Now I’m not arguing Trudeau can’t make a comeback. It’d be difficult, but doable. But for him to succeed, he can’t just rely on Poilievre to fail. Gerry Nicholls is a communications consultant. The Hill Times