AHC: Kim Campbell is PM longer

samcster94

Banned
I do not know much about her except she was the first and so far only female PM of Canada. Can she be extended past her OTL government of a few months?
 
Maybe she can last longer if she calls a snap election immediately after becoming Prime Minister, but even then that would require her honeymoon period lasting throughout the rigors of an election campaign, which isn't particularly likely. Other than that, I don't really think she has a shot. The Mulroney government that came before her was ridiculously unpopular, so Campbell (or whoever else succeeded him as PC leader) was pretty much doomed from the start.

Theoretically, if she does well enough on the campaign trail and prevents Reform from supplanting the PCs, she might be able to stay on as leader and possibly return to power in the next election, though I think the chances off that happening are slim. Her best bet, honestly, is to lose the leadership in 1993 and make a run later; maybe she keeps her seat (or wins in back in 97/00?) and takes Harper's place?
 
It's fun to remember that Campbell was seen as an outsider, the type who wasn't really connected with the "establishment" and wanted to do politics differently. She was also incredibly popular when she first started, and for the first few weeks of the election the Tories were actually only slightly behind Jean Chrétien. I'm fairly certain voters preferred her as PM over Chrétien prior to the ad criticizing the Liberal leaders face.

Oddly enough she never seemed to play to her strength, that she was the outsider and Chrétien was the same-old career politician who had been around since the 60s. Plus Chrétien was a notoriously horrible opposition leader. Disunity, confusion, and massive flip flops characterized his leadership years of 1990-1993, up until he replaced his chief of staff.

Had she truly embraced the mantle of outsider, dine something really meaningful while in power, and at the same time kept the Mulroney campaign team in place, she could've won against the Liberals.
 
I think having a more successful Mulroney era is the key to this. But even then, she would face the Mulroney coalition collapsing (or at least shrinking), and so she would have a much reduced majority.
 
I think having a more successful Mulroney era is the key to this. But even then, she would face the Mulroney coalition collapsing (or at least shrinking), and so she would have a much reduced majority.

I've seen a few different approaches to this. One is to give Mulroney some success in his constitutional reforms. It'll save the PCs in Quebec, even if they die out West. Another way isin 1988 and Jean Chrétien.

Had the Little Guy from Shawinigan succeeded in his coup against Turner prior to the '88 campaign, you could see some real divisions within the Liberal Party. If you'll recall, the NDP was doing fairly well in the polls 1984-1988, and were only ten seats behind the Grits. Throw in a little Liberal infighting, some bad campaigning by Chrétien, a similar PC showing in Quebec like OTL, and you could easily set the stage for a divided left going into 1993, which greatly benefits the Tories. A favourite of some Prime Minister Lists is having Ed Broadbent become OO leader in '88. If that happened, it would be anyone's guess as to what would happen in '93, or '92 if Mulroney doesn't feel the need to run out the clock.
 
I've seen a few different approaches to this. One is to give Mulroney some success in his constitutional reforms. It'll save the PCs in Quebec, even if they die out West. Another way isin 1988 and Jean Chrétien.

Had the Little Guy from Shawinigan succeeded in his coup against Turner prior to the '88 campaign, you could see some real divisions within the Liberal Party. If you'll recall, the NDP was doing fairly well in the polls 1984-1988, and were only ten seats behind the Grits. Throw in a little Liberal infighting, some bad campaigning by Chrétien, a similar PC showing in Quebec like OTL, and you could easily set the stage for a divided left going into 1993, which greatly benefits the Tories. A favourite of some Prime Minister Lists is having Ed Broadbent become OO leader in '88. If that happened, it would be anyone's guess as to what would happen in '93, or '92 if Mulroney doesn't feel the need to run out the clock.

Interesting, no doubt. But is there a way to avoid Mulroney's economic mismanagement? Or is that the inevitable byproduct of the Progressive Conservatives being (mostly) out of power for a decade and a half?
 
Interesting, no doubt. But is there a way to avoid Mulroney's economic mismanagement? Or is that the inevitable byproduct of the Progressive Conservatives being (mostly) out of power for a decade and a half?

Perhaps, but that's the case for any government. In Mulroney's case that could require a different finance minister, a different economic agenda, who knows. But, as we've seen, a government doesn't always win an election based on good economic management :p
 
This one is not really that difficult. A snap election and a really good Tory campaign might be all that is needed.

The Conservatives could lose in 1988, then Campbell becomes leader of the party and gets the party back into power.

You could probably boost the NDP, pretty much everything went wrong for them after 1990. A better leader is key, but have a few other things go right and get them to 15% of the vote instead of 6%, with the additional votes coming out of the Liberals and Reform. The Liberals move left to deal with the NDP, and the Conservatives take some vote share from the Liberals. Do enough of this and you get a weaker Liberal minority government and the Conservatives having done well enough that they can come back with Campbell. However, there was a huge movement to consolidate the votes of everyone left of center behind the Liberals exactly to prevent something like this from happening.
 
It's fun to remember that Campbell was seen as an outsider, the type who wasn't really connected with the "establishment" and wanted to do politics differently. She was also incredibly popular when she first started, and for the first few weeks of the election the Tories were actually only slightly behind Jean Chrétien. I'm fairly certain voters preferred her as PM over Chrétien prior to the ad criticizing the Liberal leaders face.

Oddly enough she never seemed to play to her strength, that she was the outsider and Chrétien was the same-old career politician who had been around since the 60s. Plus Chrétien was a notoriously horrible opposition leader. Disunity, confusion, and massive flip flops characterized his leadership years of 1990-1993, up until he replaced his chief of staff.

Had she truly embraced the mantle of outsider, dine something really meaningful while in power, and at the same time kept the Mulroney campaign team in place, she could've won against the Liberals.

The ad had serious fallout for the PCs. Maybe Campbell still loses, but she set the stage for the party to just get beat on an unprecedented level by being coy about Chretien's Bell's Palsy. At around 1:20 in the link, they talk about all the PCs that were trying to distance themselves from it.
 
You remove the ad completely, or hire a different campaign team, and the ad never happens. Easy fix.

I thought the whole reason for the ad was precisely that the PC's were already trailing badly in the polls by October. In other words, it was a desperation move that backfired, not the cause of the defeat.

Polls During the Campaign
Polling firm
Date PC Lib NDP BQ Ref
Angus Reid September 11 35 37 8 8 10
Comquest Research September 14 36 33 8 10 11
Angus Reid September 20 35 35 6 11 11
Gallup September 25 30 37 8 10 13
Environics September 26 31 36 7 11 13
Leger & Leger September 26 28 34 7 12 15
Ekos September 30 25 39 6 12 17
Compass Research October 2 26 38 8 12 14
Angus Reid October 8 22 37 8 12 18
Comquest Research October 16 22 40 7 13 16
Leger & Leger October 19 21 39 6 14 17
Angus Reid[9] October 22 18 43 7 14 18
Gallup[9] October 22 16 44 7 12 19
Results October 25 16 41 7 14 19

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_federal_election,_1993
 
Last edited:
I interpret it that the Progressive Conservatives were headed to a minority not dissimilar to what the Liberals had in the 80, the 2011 election (when they dropped down to the third party), or what the UK Torries had after New Labour in 97, crushing defeats, but within reason----but to go down to two seats after having a majority government is insane.
 
I interpret it that the Progressive Conservatives were headed to a minority not dissimilar to what the Liberals had in the 80, the 2011 election (when they dropped down to the third party), or what the UK Torries had after New Labour in 97, crushing defeats, but within reason----but to go down to two seats after having a majority government is insane.

That's why 1993 is a favourite starting point for TLs, mine included.
 
Campbell was a sacrificial lamb.

It's probably easier to envision scenarios where she stayed as PC leader despite losing power than it is to imagine her staying as PM longer, unless you just handwave away all the reasons Mulroney was unpopular somehow.
 
Top