The internal bickering has increased over the summer, but the reality is there is very little chance of ousting Pierre Poilievre unless the caucus decides to turn on him.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on August 3, 2026.

OTTAWA—Polls are for dogs.

That famous phrase was originally coined by then-prime minister John Diefenbaker when he was questioned about lagging personal popularity.

Diefenbaker was originally elected with the largest majority in the history of Canadian politics. In 1958, the Progressive Conservative Party swept to power under his leadership with 208 out of 265 seats.

That remained the largest majority in Canadian history until 1984, when prime minister Brian Mulroney secured 211 seats out of 282 seats. Diefenbaker was also the only Tory leader to form government between 1935 and 1979.

But after securing the first majority, he managed only minority governments in two subsequent elections after which his own party turned their guns inward. The Conservatives subsequently secured his resignation at a leadership convention including Diefenbaker. He received a humiliating rebuff by members of his own party, coming in fifth in a vote that selected Robert Stanfield as leader.

Diefenbaker’s famous phrase is used by politicians when they are facing popularity issues with the public. Ontario Premier Doug Ford has used the phrase recently.

With the polling numbers presented to Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre this week, he may want to repeat the phrase. But the leadership convention held by his own party last January gave Poilievre an overwhelming mandate.

The public has been less kind. In the Nanos monthly poll released on July 29, Poilievre is literally slipping into the teens when it comes to the number of Canadians who want him as prime minister. Only 18.2 per cent want him, while 54 per cent favour current Prime Minister Mark Carney.

Carney’s personal popularity is pulling the Liberals up while Poilievre is dragging his party down. Liberal popular vote stands at 44.7 per cent while Conservative support stands at 29.5 per cent.

The Conservative base is solid at almost 30 per cent, but the other problem the party is facing is the inefficient distribution of its vote. With overwhelming support in Alberta and Saskatchewan, the party needs a lot more than 30 per cent to win an election. The last time the Conservatives outstripped the Liberals in popular vote was during the 2021 race between then-leaders Erin O’Toole and Justin Trudeau.

O’Toole’s 34.1 per cent of the popular vote managed to secure 121 seats while Trudeau’s 31.8 secured 156 seats. The gap between popular vote and electoral success is much wider for the Conservatives, so the dip below 30 per cent must concern Conservative supporters.

The internal bickering has increased over the summer, but the reality is there is very little chance of ousting Poilievre unless the caucus decides to turn on him.

Unlike all other federal parties, the Conservatives have agreed to an internal mechanism which allows a caucus majority to get rid of the leader without a party vote. The Reform Act triggers a secret caucus vote when a majority of members have signed a resignation demand letter.

It is a similar process to that in the United Kingdom which seems to go through leaders like toilet paper. The country has lived under six prime ministers during the last decade. During the same period, Canada had one.

Internal party pressure forced five of them to resign while David Cameron, the author of the Brexit fiasco, quit when the country decided to leave the European Union.

In Poilievre’s case, he has a better chance of keeping the caucus onside because, unlike O’Toole, he is politically aligned with the large majority of pro-convoy, pro-Trump backers.

In O’Toole’s case, he was too liberal for many in the caucus. But it was that centrist approach that could have helped the Conservatives form government by attracting the rest of the population.

Poilievre still has the caucus but, if current numbers hold, his path to prime minister is fraught with problems.

Carney has called three byelections for the end of August. The outcome of those elections may well be a trigger for tiring Tories to pull the plug on Poilievre.

The Conservative Party currently held one of the three seats, in Quebec. But that MP quit to join the Senate. If the numbers in this byelection are as bad as some are predicting, concern will be building in the caucus in areas where a comfortable Tory majority doesn’t exist.

If the Ontario and Quebec byelections go big for Carney, it could be a catalyst for Tory leadership change.

Some Liberals are secretly hoping that does not happen as Poilievre’s national unpopularity is working in their favour.

On the Tory side, the leader must keep going. But the adage, “Polls are for dogs” has some people barking.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Current polling shows Prime Minister Mark Carney wins on global leadership. But support for the Conservatives remains strong on domestic issues. And at the end of the day, Canadians usually vote on pocketbook issues.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on May 4, 2026.

OTTAWA—Former prime minister John Diefenbaker would often claim: “Polls are for dogs.”

In his first election, in 1957, Dief the Chief was elected in a minority government, but his second election in 1958 resulted in the largest Progressive Conservative majority in the history of Canada. Winning 208 of 265 seats, Dief’s record was unparalleled to this day.

Even during the Brian Mulroney sweep of 1984, the percentage in seat numbers could not rival that of Diefenbaker.

So why was Dief so disdainful of polls?

Diefenbaker personally experienced the fragility of political popularity. He went from being wildly popular in the 1958 sweep to being drummed out of the leadership at a bitter national convention only nine years later.

Diefenbaker learned the hard way that polls can be as fickle as the Canadian voter.

The polling numbers tracking Prime Minister Mark Carney today are eerily similar to those of a popular Dief.

With a first minority election under his belt, one year later, Carney could arguably be swept to a large majority if a general election were held today.

Instead, the Liberals’ new majority means that the prime minister will have three more years to build the “Canada Strong” theme that he has promoted in his first year of office.

Polling numbers greatly favour Carney when viewed in comparison to Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

In the Nanos poll published last week, overall support for the Liberals stood at 45 per cent with Conservatives polled at 32 per cent.

When it comes to personal popularity, Carney outstrips Poilievre by 22 per cent.

Carney is also ahead of Poilievre in every demographic except that of younger men between the ages of 35 and 54. In that group, Poilievre enjoys a three per cent advantage at 45 per cent favourability.

Despite politicians’ claim that they don’t watch the polls, most do. There are a few reasons why the prime minister should take note of those numbers.

The group that Poilievre manages to win over is the group most closely aligned with issues Canadians are concerned about.

Canadians’ biggest concern these days is job jitters, and that is a shift from previous Nanos numbers which identified the Trump factor as No. 1.

Both are interrelated. Obviously, concerns about Canadian jobs stem from the decision by American president Donald Trump to close off northern borders and threaten key Canadian industries with punishing tariffs.

Carney’s economic announcement of more than $6-billion in skilled trades and apprenticeships last week will definitely seek to assuage job concerns.

Not coincidentally, the target group of weaker support for Carney, those younger men, will also benefit from the combination of mega-project investment and skilled-trade opportunities.

Like Poilievre, Carney has been pretty good at sloganeering. The promotion of a “Team Canada Strong” serves a dual purpose. It connotes strength in the national government, and addresses the simmering separation questions that will be coming to the fore in an upcoming Alberta referendum.

Unlike Poilievre, Carney’s personal popularity has not yet taken a hit. In another Angus Reid poll last week, 30 per cent of past Conservative voters want to replace Poilievre.

His caucus has been publicly supportive with recent sorties of support from Members of Parliament. But that could change quickly if his party rejects him. While 60 per cent of Canadians have a negative view of Poilievre, 57 per cent of Tories think he should stay on as leader.

But dissident numbers rose from 18 per cent last August to 30 per cent in April. If that trend continues, Poilievre could see his own job at risk.

If Poilievre were no longer the Conservative leader, numbers for Carney would definitely be affected.

Current polling shows Carney wins on international leadership. But support for the Conservatives remains strong on domestic issues.

And, at the end of the day, Canadians usually vote on pocketbook issues.

Perhaps the most relevant number in the Nanos polling is the move away from concern about Trumpian international uncertainty to worries about personal pocketbook issues.

Poilievre scores well when it comes to which leader is most focused on these issues.

If the Tories own the affordability question, and they decide to replace Poilievre with another leader, the halo currently worn by Carney could definitely be tarnished.

The deep dive into polling numbers is being done by all politicians, especially those who say they don’t care about polls.

Carney’s need to work on his standing with younger men has already been acknowledged. Expect more Liberal news on affordability and jobs to come.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.

Donald Trump keeps saying that Canada will be better off, with a better health-care system, better jobs and a better economy if it joins the United States.

By Sheila Copps
First published in The Hill Times on February 17, 2025.

OTTAWA—Sixty years have passed since Canada broke from British tradition to adopt a unique flag.

The distinctive red Maple Leaf is now recognized around the world as a symbol of Canada, but it was a much more divisive debate six decades ago.

With the exception of U.S. President Donald Trump, most people see our flag as a symbol of freedom and diversity. It often adorns backpacks of young travellers as a flag that is welcomed everywhere.

It wasn’t always so. In 1965, the Progressive Conservatives thought the adoption of a new flag was an insult to those who fought in two world wars under the unofficial national Red Ensign. The ensign included a smaller union jack and a Canadian coat of arms.

Former prime minister John Diefenbaker made it his personal mission to fight the flag.

Prime minister Lester Pearson preferred another design, which included three red flags attached by a stem with a blue border. The original designer of the flag, Mount Allison University historian George Stanley, received death threats.

The Tories voted for the single maple leaf design, thinking Liberals would support the tri-leaf version that was called the Pearson Pennant. Instead, Liberals also supported the single Maple Leaf, and an all-party committee voted 15-0 in favour of the Stanley-designed flag that was inspired by the flag of the Royal Military College in Kingston.

While the world may have embraced it, even modern-day Conservative governments have not been so celebratory.

On the 50th anniversary of the introduction of the flag, then-Canadian heritage minister Conservative Shelly Glover refused to organize a celebration of the event.

While local flag-raisings took place across the country, the only official national celebration was held by then-governor general David Johnston.

Current Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has taken a more celebratory approach to the flag.

In Tory advertisements, Poilievre is often seen walking in a field under the shadow of a huge Canadian flag.

The use of the flag as a symbol adopted by anti-vax truckers has now made its display permissible for all political stripes.

Trump recently communicated his message of economic domination by tweeting a photograph of himself standing on a mountain with a Canadian flag flying proudly behind him.

And five living Canadian prime ministers called on all Canadians to fly our flag on the anniversary date as a message to Trump that our country has no intention of becoming America’s 51st state.

In a joint letter signed by former prime ministers Stephen Harper, Joe Clark, Paul Martin, Kim Campbell, and Jean Chrétien, the leaders called on Canadians to fly the flag this past Saturday to answer the “threats and insults from Donald Trump.”

And while in Brussels attending a meeting with European leaders, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau made it very clear that there’s “not a snowball’s chance in hell” of Canada joining the United States.

He’s enlisting the support of international partners, including the European Union, as most states have been strangely silent on Trump’s annexation comments.

Europeans are listening now because Trump has been threatening them with tariffs, as well.

The Danish government has reacted to Trump’s announcement that he would like to take over Greenland. As well as threatening retaliatory tariffs on Ozempic, Denmark’s biggest export to the U.S., some Danes have launched a petition to buy California.

While all Canadians are now uniting behind the flag, the Trump threat may also serve to be a catalyst for breaking down interprovincial barriers.

If we can build a pipeline to send Alberta crude for refining in Illinois and Texas, surely, we can do the same for eastern Canada.

So when we have been delivered lemons by Trump, we need to make lemonade. And we need to start recognizing the great benefits that come with life under the Canadian flag.

Poilievre’s message that Canada is broken now needs reworking, and he was slated to deliver a major pivotal speech this past weekend.

His message will need massaging because the idea that Canada is broken plays right into the hands of Trump, who plans to crush our country economically.

Trump keeps saying that Canada will be better off, with a better health-care system, better jobs and a better economy if we join the U.S.

He also revealed earlier last week that when it comes to takeover of foreign lands, he believes he has the legal right to “take over the Gaza Strip and occupy it.”

Insert “Canada,” and we have an idea of what might be coming.

Sheila Copps is a former Jean Chrétien-era cabinet minister and a former deputy prime minister. Follow her on Twitter at @Sheila_Copps.