Facts are stubborn things, and those facts continue to contradict what the Charest campaign claims.
If it wasn’t so damaging to the country, you would almost feel bad for the Charest campaign.
They continue to make wild claims, only to have those claims demolished time and time again.
Alas, pity can often be a weakness, and the more proper approach to the Charest campaign would be contempt.
Contempt for repeated attempts to divide the CPC, contempt for pushing a Trudeau-style worldview, and contempt for adhering to the bias of the establishment press.
Main narrative demolished
As we have witnessed, the Charest campaign has based their entire effort on the idea that Charest supposedly has appeal among the ‘centrist’ voters who ‘decide elections’, while Pierre Poilievre supposedly does not.
Charest is in effect saying that he won’t give Conservatives what they want, but that he can replace Trudeau, and so they should settle for the imposition of a worldview similar to Trudeau’s and be happy with Trudeau himself being out of office.
Basically, Charest wants Canadian Conservatives to settle for the bare minimum.
He does this of course with no guarantee that he would even win if he became CPC leader. Many polls have shown that the CPC would lose to the Liberals under Charest’s leadership.
In short, Charest’s candidacy seems almost designed to deny Canadians a real Conservative option in the next election campaign.
But what about the message pushed by the Charest campaign that Poilievre doesn’t have appeal among ‘centrist’ voters?
It’s completely false.
A new Abacus poll shows that Poilievre has much better net approval than Trudeau among ‘centrist’ Canadians.
Here’s what Abacus said about their findings:
“Among those on the centre of the spectrum, Poilievre is 15% positive, 20% negative, meaning a lot of centrist votes are up for grabs – and his -5 net score with this group compares favourably to Trudeau’s -23.”
This is the latest example of the Charest campaign narrative being discredited.
Clearly, Poilievre has what it takes to beat the Trudeau Liberals.
Resilience vs Weakness
We must also consider that Poilievre has shown tremendous political resilience throughout the leadership race.
He has been subjected to relentless and unhinged attacks from the Liberals, the Charest campaign, the now-defunct Patrick Brown campaign, and the media.
Many of the attacks have been shockingly extreme in nature, seeking to make Canadians see Poilievre as some sort of far-right caricature
Yet despite all of that, Poilievre is still more popular than Trudeau among centrist Canadians.
Meanwhile, the Charest campaign has shown profound weakness.
Charest has had positive coverage from the establishment elites and media, who have tried to boost his candidacy over and over again.
With all the backing of the establishment, Charest’s poll numbers are still weak, and he is still deeply unpopular among Canadian Conservatives.
What this demonstrates is that Poilievre has already shown he can hold up under sustained attack, while Charest’s numbers would likely crumble further whenever negative attention is focused on him.
Charest’s weakness would put the CPC at risk of both a massive internal fracturing, and big defeat in a general election.
With all of those facts in our minds, it is clear that the Charest campaign narrative has been further discredited.
No matter what the media may say, we just can’t trust Huawei Charest.
Spencer Fernando
Photo – YouTube
***
If am funded by Canadians like you, not the Trudeau government. If you support my writing, you can make a contribution through PayPal, or directly through Stripe below.
[simpay id=”28904″]
