Canada’s Pierre Poilievre has returned following an electoral setback.
The leader of the Conservative Party was victorious on Monday in Battle River-Crowfoot, a Conservative electoral district in Alberta where he has never resided. He can now finally return to Parliament after the embarrassment of losing his own Carleton seat in Ottawa during the federal election in April, an election which saw the Conservatives fall to a Liberal Party led by former central banker Mark Carney.
Poilievre secured his by-election victory with a comfortable majority. A casual observer might assume that with such a healthy margin, few would be demanding Poilievre resign as Conservative leader, mistaking one parliamentary district for the entire country—or the party. That’s a fair enough mistake. Some individuals, it’s true, were advocating only months ago for him to remain in his role. After all, the Conservatives had achieved a strong general election performance with significant gains, but were unable to secure power. Poilievre was considered a steady hand who just needed to wait for the Liberals to self-destruct, which, as all Liberals eventually do, was seen as inevitable.
April transitioned into May and June, and as summer settled in, the Liberals remained robust as Carney continued to outmaneuver the Conservatives by granting them nearly everything they desired. There was an ironic twist to this, with Poilievre largely getting his way—the end of the unpopular carbon tax, balanced budgets, lower internal trade barriers, and a government fully committed to building infrastructure. When Air Canada flight attendants recently threatened to strike, Carney’s labor minister requested the Canada Industrial Relations Board to intervene, a move one might have expected from Poilievre. Critics have been asking whether, with Liberals like these, one even needs Conservatives, or Poilievre, at least.
In January, Poilievre faces a leadership review, and now is the opportune time to question whether he should remain in his position. The answer, increasingly, appears to be no. Of course, he won his by-election with ease. However, it is one of the safest Conservative seats in Canada and was vacated by Damien Kurek, who stepped aside so his leader could easily return to office. It was a move that both undermined and affirmed Poilievre’s leadership, given he had to contest such an effortlessly winnable district when only months earlier he seemed a certain candidate for Prime Minister.
Since April, Poilievre has been unable to gain ground against Carney’s Liberals. A major issue for the Conservative leader is that when voters encounter him, when they get to know him, they tend to dislike him, which places his party at a structural disadvantage.
Polling data from the Angus Reid Institute reveals the Conservative leader’s unfavorability numbers remain persistently high. Dating back to the fall of 2022, more than 50% of those surveyed expressed a dislike for Poilievre. That figure never improved beyond 49% and currently stands at 57%. His numbers are particularly disheartening among women and younger voters, but even within the 55+ age bracket that traditionally votes Conservative, Poilievre manages only 39% approval.
Moreover, during the last federal election, where leadership was a consistent theme amidst the unprecedented threats from President Donald Trump to make Canada the “51st state” and impose devastating tariffs, Carney outpaced Poilievre on likability and governance qualities. In July, Abacus Data found that Carney still held a substantial lead, an advantage that, should it persist, could help the Liberals eventually convert their parliamentary minority into a majority.
Poilievre stated in July that “every election comes with lessons.” However, his tone never shifted. He remained the same doctrinaire culture warrior. In August, Poilievre attacked a proposed new tax, calling it “Carney’s tax” in a move reminiscent of his party’s “axe the tax” battle against carbon pricing. This strategy emerges as Trump continues his protectionist stance. But the focus makes Poilievre appear too close to Trump and risks backfiring if Carney proceeds to once again abandon a Liberal-era policy.
Perhaps the most damning indictment of Poilievre is that he has become redundant. He is a less capable, less experienced, less likable iteration of a business Liberal committed to low taxes, a lean regulatory regime, and infrastructure and resource development.
The Conservatives would benefit from a reset—a return to the drawing board. They need an approachable leader who at the very least appears to possess the capacity to connect with ordinary people from time to time. The odds suggest that the Liberals, now approaching a decade in power, will eventually undermine themselves, as all governments typically do. However, Poilievre has proven unwilling or unable to adapt to a political moment distinct from the period of prosperity his party enjoyed before Trump and tariffs. For that reason alone, there is good cause for the Conservatives to replace Poilievre sooner rather than later.
Come January, if the party has not experienced improved fortunes, some Conservatives might attempt just that.