THE DNA OF CONSERVATIVE DEFEATS: 2019, 2021, and 2025 (?)

David Parker, April 9 2025

Today, I want to talk about why the Conservative movement in Canada has lost to the Trudeau Liberals in the last two elections—and what could cause another defeat in the upcoming April 28, 2025, election. These are my personal reflections as a long-time conservative staffer, organizer, and now activist. As with anything political, there’s no single cause behind the Conservative Party’s struggles or the Liberals’ enduring strength since 2015. But I hope this analysis sheds light on the challenges we face and points to solutions we can still pursue.

When Stephen Harper stepped down in 2015, he left the Conservative Party in relatively strong shape. We didn’t collapse into the kind of infighting seen after Brian Mulroney’s departure. The movement stayed largely united, and though Trudeau won big, there was a clear path back to government in 2019. So clear, in fact, that Andrew Scheer’s inner circle was convinced of victory just weeks before the vote.

So, what went wrong? Why did we lose in 2019 and 2021? And why are we at risk of losing again in 2025?

The answer, I believe, is that Stephen Harper made one major mistake as Prime Minister—an error that still haunts us: he left the leadership race process broken.

The 2017 CPC leadership race was one of the most brutal and divisive in our history. Its legitimacy is still questioned by hundreds of thousands of conservatives. Maxime Bernier was poised to win, especially after gaining the endorsement of populist Kevin O’Leary. Bernier had the support of the party’s libertarian and populist factions and was the strongest fiscal and nationalist conservative in the race. But he lacked backing from social conservatives and the CPC establishment—both of whom rallied behind Andrew Scheer. With help from Erin O’Toole’s Red Tory supporters, Scheer narrowly squeaked out a win. That "victory" planted the seeds of his eventual defeat.

It’s no surprise to those who know me that I’d be critical of Scheer. I was one of the first organizers to call for his resignation after the 2019 loss—even creating an organization called Scheer Must Go to ensure he stepped down. But what might surprise some is how hard I worked to make him Prime Minister in the first place. At the time, I was working with the Modern Miracle Network, led by conservative powerhouse Michael Binnion. Many know his influence through the “Proud” network—Alberta Proud, Canada Proud, Ontario Proud, etc. We were one of the largest third-party groups pushing for a Scheer victory and a Liberal defeat.

Scheer lost for many reasons, but two stand out: the rise of the People’s Party under Bernier, and Scheer’s failure to address the abortion issue. His core supporters were social conservatives, and he should have known abortion would be a key issue. The Liberals were always going to exploit it, and yet Scheer had no compelling answer when pressed by media or in debates. That failure spooked just enough voters in swing ridings to hand Trudeau a minority—and ended Scheer’s leadership.

The next leadership race was supposed to be a coronation. Peter MacKay entered with strong caucus backing, more than enough money, and the pedigree of a centrist who could win in Ontario and Atlantic Canada. Top-tier organizers rushed to join his campaign—but there were too many cooks in the kitchen. Decision-making stalled. Messaging muddled. This opened the door for Fred DeLorey and a talented team of underdogs who pushed Erin O’Toole into contention—and ultimately to victory.

I’m biased here—I was one of the key organizers behind Erin’s rise. I advised him to launch his campaign in Alberta. It was through my network, and the hard work of our team, that we secured Jason Kenney’s all-important endorsement (at the time, Kenney was the de facto leader of the conservative movement in Canada). I helped shape the strategy of targeting low-membership ridings in Quebec, building a powerful alliance between Westerners and a small but influential group of Quebec conservatives. It was, from a technical standpoint, the best-run campaign I’ve ever been part of.

But O’Toole’s victory came with a fatal flaw: he ran as a Blue Tory, but was always a Red Tory at heart. During the leadership race, he promised to defund the CBC, defend gun rights, and fight woke ideology. In reality, he was far more moderate—and likely needed to be to win seats in Ontario.

Then COVID hit. No one knew what it would become. Like many, I initially bought into the fear. I believed the death toll would be catastrophic, and that the world would never be the same. While I was right about the world changing, I was wildly wrong about the rest. COVID allowed Erin to gain ground on MacKay and win—but it also reshaped Canadian politics. A new force emerged: the Freedom Movement.

Erin’s strategy became clear: tack left to appeal to the mainstream. But while Trudeau divided Canadians by pitting vaccinated and unvaccinated against each other, Erin avoided the fight. The unvaccinated—mostly in conservative areas like Alberta, Saskatchewan, and rural B.C.—were abandoned. By trying to straddle the middle, Erin alienated the Freedom Movement and looked like “Liberal Lite”—a label that spells death for any conservative leader. When Canadians are offered a choice between a fake Liberal and the real thing, they pick the real thing.

Which brings us to today.

Pierre Poilievre has been building toward this moment his entire life. Anyone who’s followed his career knows he’s a master of message discipline—especially on fiscal issues. He built one of the largest conservative followings in Canada, with a dominant presence on Facebook. Even during the 2020 leadership race, people kept saying they wished Pierre would run. So when Erin lost, Pierre seized his moment. With an army of loyalists he’d cultivated for years, he moved quickly to oust Erin and take the reins.

Then, like any smart politician, he jumped in front of the biggest parade—the Freedom Movement. But he didn’t just march—he became its hero. Pierre became the most popular conservative figure since Harper, drawing huge crowds and becoming a populist icon. People began to see him as Canada’s Donald Trump: a fighter who would topple the establishment, end Trudeau’s reign, and restore prosperity. His support base mirrored Trump’s in 2016—ordinary Canadians who felt abandoned.

As long as Trudeau remained in power, Pierre kept rising. The CPC machine leaned into this, launching a wave of attack ads. The demonization of Trudeau reached new heights—and it worked. The country turned on Trudeau. Even one of the best campaigners in Canadian history knew his time was up—and resigned.

Pierre’s support hasn’t disappeared. Polls remain steady, with the CPC sitting around 38–40%—right where Harper was when he won a majority in 2011. But here’s the catch: the same traits that got Pierre to the top—his firebrand rhetoric, populist tone, and embrace of the Freedom Movement—are now scaring Canadians.

This is the paradox at the heart of the 2025 election: the more support Pierre appears to have, the more unified and motivated the Canadian Left becomes. His rallies, while electrifying to the base, are sparking national backlash. To centrist and left-leaning voters, these gatherings don’t signal hope—they trigger alarm. They remind Canadians of Donald Trump, and that association—however unfair—is politically toxic. Trump’s trade wars and tariffs left many Canadians feeling attacked and economically punished. And now, with Trump returning to the spotlight, Canadians are rallying—not for Canada’s interests, but against anything resembling Trump. And that includes Pierre.

That fear is why this populist momentum—rallies, viral clips, and provocative messaging—may be steering us toward disaster. Pierre’s public support for Bitcoin, his pledge to fire the Governor of the Bank of Canada, and his attacks on Canada’s financial institutions echo the kind of anti-establishment rhetoric that made Trump a force in American politics. But in Canada, that same rhetoric triggers a deep unease. It makes swing voters question whether Pierre would be a steady hand on the wheel of the economy—or a wildcard. The more he leans into this style, the more he fuels the belief that the Conservative movement isn’t just inspired by Trump—but increasingly resembles him.

That’s why Liberal donors are reactivating. Why former NDP and Green voters are drifting back to the Liberals—not out of love for Mark Carney, but out of fear of what Pierre might do in power. We’re not watching a country shift to the right—we’re watching the Left unify under siege. Unless we recognize that, and understand the emotional weight of Trump’s return and the fear it provokes, we won’t just lose—we’ll never see it coming.

This is the DNA of Conservative defeat: leadership races that fracture our coalition, leaders who campaign one way and lead another, and a failure to understand the emotional terrain of Canadian voters. Scheer couldn’t answer the abortion question and lost the centre. O’Toole campaigned as a Blue Tory and lead as a Red, losing both the base and the middle. Now Pierre risks making a new version of the same mistake—letting his image be shaped by his loudest supporters and most viral moments, rather than a disciplined vision for the country. Like Scheer and O’Toole, he’s running into the trap of energizing the base at the expense of broadening the tent. If we don’t learn from this—if we mistake movement momentum for national consensus—we will once again snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. And this time, the cost won’t just be another lost election. It will be the full consolidation of power by a Liberal establishment that has perfected the art of exploiting our every misstep.