There is an interesting narrative shaping up around the continued speculation over the political future of Conservative leader Andrew Scheer. Namely that those calling for his replacement after a disappointing election result need to “calm down.” They must avoid becoming “nervous Nellies,” as Scheer leadership campaign chair Chuck Strahl wrote this week in the Post. Scheer must be allowed time to study the loss and figure out how he can do better.
Sure. Fair enough. But I’m struck a bit by the tone. What is a thoughtful Conservative voter to do if they have, calmly and without nerves, concluded that Scheer already did about as well as he is ever going to? What if he has no room to grow?
The election result, after all, while disappointing, wasn’t a total disaster. As I’ve previously written here, Scheer has a case to make in his own defence. The party added seats. It won the popular vote. It made some progress in the Atlantic and more or less held on in Quebec (OK, fine — less, but not a lot less). It was only in the Toronto area that Scheer came up badly short.
Toronto, alas, matters. The GTA has 50 per cent again the entire population of Alberta. You need to win there. Can Scheer?
[…]
See Also:
(1) Conservative MPs opt not to force vote on Andrew Scheer’s leadership
(2) Should Andrew Scheer step down as leader of the Conservative Party of Canada?
(3) Andrew Scheer does not sound like a man who thinks he needs to change
(4) Scheer to stay on as Conservative leader until April convention
