2025 was set to be a great year for Pierre Poilievre. Trump’s return to the White House forced out Justin Trudeau and the federal election looked likely to be a Conservative landslide. Yet three months of constant missteps, poor messaging, and insufficient reaction to global affairs has brought the two leading parties – the Conservatives and the Liberals – closer to parity in the polls. Canadians head to the polls in three weeks. Their anger at Trudeau has been replaced by unity against a foreign enemy, Donald Trump. Poilievre still has time to claw back a victory. Yet his performance to date has plenty of lessons about how to lose an election.
Follow the leader
During the two-month leadership race within the Liberal Party, Poilievre gave a lot of attention to the eventual winner, Mark Carney. While he chose the correct candidate to attack, he ultimately gave more attention to Carney in the process. By the time he became Prime Minister last month, he was a more familiar face to the public, while Poilievre had been somewhat sidelined. After all, almost nobody attacked Poilievre during that period. The imbalance made him slightly weaker.
Of course, continuing to focus on Trudeau after his resignation would have been fruitless. However, shifting the ‘Trudeau bad’ rhetoric to ‘Liberals bad’ could have been a more useful placeholder. More ‘Conservatives good’ messaging would have been a good complement, too. The latter, it seems, was a little absent. Between Trudeau’s resignation and Mark Carney’s victory, Poilievre changed from the leader of the Conservative Party to the chief opposition to the Liberals. A nuanced difference, but one that matters in a year where he is campaigning to become Prime Minister – not just to increase his seats in the House of Commons.
Pusillanimous Poilievre
Poilievre reacted poorly to the decisions of others over the last few months, especially Carney and Trump.
Cunning Carney
Carney did what Ireland’s Simon Harris refused to do. Upon taking office, he recognized his popularity was at an all-time high and immediately called an election. Instead of becoming an incumbent and leaving the rest of his term to chance, he decided to leverage his present popularity into a five-year term. Harris’ demotion to Tánaiste should serve as a warning to anyone unwilling to call a snap election under these circumstances.
Trump’s tariffs
Trump’s attacks on Canada led to Trudeau’s resignation in January. However, Poilievre missed the shift in domestic opinion. As the attacks from without grew stronger, the unity around the incumbent within grew tighter. A popular new face leading the incumbent leaders of the resistance is now highly likely to keep power as Trump’s aggression only grows. Poilievre, a figure often compared to Trump for his populism and bold leadership, has fallen into the impression that he takes orders from Trump.
A truly bold populist leader would have had no problem pushing back against Trump’s 51st state comments. Since this messaging push was likely designed to unseat Trudeau, Poilievre should have taken the reins in the pushback. A simple talking point about how the Liberals are not respected internationally, coupled with a declaration that no-one will mess with Prime Minister Poilievre, would have kept Poilievre in control of the middle ground on the issue. A willingness to call out Trump by name would also have gone a long way. In fact, this is the core strategy that Trump has always used himself.
Poor messaging
Poilievre’s messaging is weak, too. While it is the vogue for populist leaders to campaign on putting their country first, imagination would not go amiss in constructing a new slogan. As Canadians are growing in disdain for Trump, running a campaign under the ‘Canada First’ slogan invokes Trump just a little too much. Poilievre should focus on separating himself from Trump. If he wants to join the axis of populist leaders around the world – Milei, Trump, Meloni, and others – he should realize that he cannot do so without first becoming a leader. A willingness to actually put Canada first – rather than just talking about it – would improve his domestic popularity. As a populist conservative, strong opposition to the tariffs was his talking point to run with. Of course, Trump would be more likely to respect a populist leader that puts the populous first, too.
A push for Poilievre
With three weeks to go until polling day, Poilievre should take Liberation Day as a reboot for his campaign. With mounting domestic skepticism of the US, he must tap into this sentiment to restore his polling lead. Instead of joining Carney in his call for retaliation, Poilievre should tout an immediate zero tariff deal. This would be a fresh start with new leadership. Not to mention, it would detract the attention from Maxime Bernier of the People’s Party of Canada, who is currently a lone voice on this position. Coupled with a re-wording of ‘Canada First’, Poilievre must lean into tariffs for the remaining three weeks of the campaign. In doing so, he would separate himself from Carney and reposition the election away from endorsing ‘the new guy’.
Poilievre will win this election if he makes it a referendum between an escalated trade war and a fresh start of stability. Many Canadians may want vengeance for the tariffs, but everyone would prefer a long-term recovery with peace in the south.
