AHC WI Chretien Wins Fourth Term

How could Jean Chretien manage to win a fourth term and at least temporarily avert the Martinite tgreat? What would be the effects? Bonus points if Martin never becomes PM, extra bonus points if Chretien serves a full fourth term. Go ahead !
 
I remember reading that around 2002 (or possibly early 2003), when the Martinites were being really aggressive in trying to force Chretien out of office, this had the opposite effect on him psychologically. Chretien seriously considered calling a snap election and leading the party through another campaign (backing off on his pledge that 2000 would be his final campaign) to more than anything assert his leadership.

While it's possible that Chretien would take a fair amount of heat from the public for calling an election as little as two years after the previous one, the Liberals were still doing very well in 2002 and early 2003 IOTL (with the Alliance often polling behind the PCs, and the Bloc continuing their downward trend; in fact, I think the Liberals were the only party consistently polling above the low twenties, and by a wide margin) that I think they'd still win a fairly easy majority government even with any early-election backlash. Besides, even then I could imagine Chretien framing the election as a referendum on his leadership, of sorts, which he could be excused for given the publicity of the Martin insurgency.

If he won (which I'm nearly certain he would), I'm skeptical that he would serve out the full four years (probably retiring around 2005), but if he did frame the election as a referendum on his leadership the Martinites would likely be far more weak than OTL.
 
What True Grit said. If you want to kill it off immediately then have Martin decline Finance, taking Industry instead while Manley takes Finance - Martin seriously considered this IOTL in 1993. Chrétien has to treat Martin as just a finance minister rather than giving him OTL's outsize caucus stature, and aggressively install his own people in the organization.
 
If Chretien called a snap election in 2003 he'd probably get a comfortable majority, this was before the sponsorship scandal really wrecked the Liberals. He could make the election the chance got the public to reaffirm his mandate over Martin and while people were tired of him he was still popular and his oponents were so weak so I'd say he'd get about 160 ish seats. Then he could get enough of a honeymoon to last until 2004 or 2005 when he is promptly embroiled in the sponsorship scandal. Maybe this would allow an anti-Martin candidate(Manley I'd guess) to mount a serious challenge to Martin. There can't be an earlier PoD because without Martin pushing him he'd probably retire earlier rather than stayong on to spite Martin. Do you have any ideas on how this could play out?
 
Much more than that, Grits were nosing 50. Another POD is Martin retiring in 2000, as he briefly considered doing. Not retiring from politics but trying for an 80s-style coup. Chrétien would not necessarily be embroiled in sponsorship because he'd refer it to the RCMP instead of a public inquiry.
 
Much more than that, Grits were nosing 50. Another POD is Martin retiring in 2000, as he briefly considered doing. Not retiring from politics but trying for an 80s-style coup. Chrétien would not necessarily be embroiled in sponsorship because he'd refer it to the RCMP instead of a public inquiry.

Wasn't those poll numbers after Martin became leader and got a honeymoon period? Also please explain how refering it to the RCMP would prevent it from hurting the Liberals so badly.
 
Wasn't those poll numbers after Martin became leader and got a honeymoon period? Also please explain how refering it to the RCMP would prevent it from hurting the Liberals so badly.

No, Grits were there in early 2002. By referring it to the RCMP sponsorship would have much less media attention, being conducted behind closed doors. Most of what Fraser wrote had been previewed for years beforehand... journalists like the Globe's Dan Leblanc and Campbell Clark had been reporting on it since 1999.
 
No, Grits were there in early 2002. By referring it to the RCMP sponsorship would have much less media attention, being conducted behind closed doors. Most of what Fraser wrote had been previewed for years beforehand... journalists like the Globe's Dan Leblanc and Campbell Clark had been reporting on it since 1999.

What I'm seeing on the polls is in 2003 with Martin as leader. So if the sponsorship scandal was referred to the RCMP it would be a minor embarrassment, another of Chretien's forgettable ethical scandals?
 
2002Q2 = 49%. Look at "Longitudinal Ballot Tracking." As for RCMP, I'll say moderate. Bigger than Shawinigate but not lethal, especially considering what was going on across the aisle then.
 
2002Q2 = 49%. Look at "Longitudinal Ballot Tracking." As for RCMP, I'll say moderate. Bigger than Shawinigate but not lethal, especially considering what was going on across the aisle then.

Ok. But how would a scenario of a 2003 snap election under Chretien in 2003 and beyond go in your view?
 
Chrétien cleans up, but because of regional concentration Alliance losses are less than polls indicate. Say 50 seats, not 30. Tories and NDP could well lose official party status. In the Tory case that means lights out and merger. However Chrétien will still face a restive party and angry caucus that is majority-Martinet, and still faces the mandatory review. Martinets had a supermajority by 2003 IOTL, but if his third term goes a bit different he could squeak through. At best he ends like Ralph Klein IOTL.
 
Chrétien cleans up, but because of regional concentration Alliance losses are less than polls indicate. Say 50 seats, not 30. Tories and NDP could well lose official party status. In the Tory case that means lights out and merger. However Chrétien will still face a restive party and angry caucus that is majority-Martinet, and still faces the mandatory review. Martinets had a supermajority by 2003 IOTL, but if his third term goes a bit different he could squeak through. At best he ends like Ralph Klein IOTL.

Weren't the PCs polling ahead of the Alliance at this time? Maybe the come second in the popukar vote, the Alliance vomes fourth there but gets a few more seats.
 
Again, I doubt that. Prairies are not gonna go Liberal or PC. Remember that in 1997 Grit polling had them between 180-220 seats, they won 155. PCs were a tire fire, and Joe Clark was still a lame duck leader from August 2002 to May 2003.
 
Top