Pierre Poilievre boasts of his gatherings. But does the dimension indicate success?
On Tuesday during a press conference in Edmonton, Pierre then decided to decide to ask the media a couple of questions, in particular the size of the crowd at his event in the city the night before.
Before a Globe and Mail journalist was able to ask his question – if the size of his rallies count – then he was asking her how she liked her campaign event.
He has already asked journalists this question, to other events that have attracted thousands of people.
This time, in reference to the Edmonton event that the campaign said it could have attracted about 15,000 people, the conservative leader also asked when it was the last time that Canada had such a great event.
“I think I have 10 to 15,000 people in a political event, this is a movement as we have never seen why people want to change,” said Poiievre. “They want to put our country first for a change.”
Oh.
Over 15,000 patriotic Canadians gathered for change in Edmonton.
When we fight together, we win together. And put Canada first.
On April 28, join us and vote for change. Conservative vote. pic.twitter.com/fhVTCMhax7
The comments of Poiilievre on his gatherings, apparently, must indicate the momentum of his campaign, despite the survey that shows the conservatives that follow the liberals.
“It is not a good measure of political support”: analyst
But the size of a political event may not be indicative of large -scale or predictive support of electoral success, some analysts say.
“The dimensions of the crowd are not a good measure of political support,” said Nathaniel Rakich, a former senior electoral analyst with the now deceased political analysis website website.
The polls, Rakich said, are really the best indicator of how a campaign is going.
“The polls are scientific. They take a representative sample of the population and measure the support between this. The size of the crowd are not scientific,” he said.
Rakich said that there are some recent data that question the value of the size of the crowd as a measure of the candidate support.
The Coach Conterating Consortium (CCC), a joint project of the Harvard Kennedy School and the University of Connecticut, has collected data on US policies. He compared the average dimension of the crowd to the rallies with then candidate for the Republican presidency Donald Trump and the democratic candidate Kamala Harris.
Despite its advantages on the contrary, Trump’s crowds were actually much smaller than Harris’s, according to CCC. Although Harris had a much shorter time for the campaign, CCC examined the size of six of his rallies, which according to this varied from 10,000 to 15,000, for an average size of about 13,400.
For Trump, who had made a campaign longer than Harris, the CCC looked at the size of the crowd of 28 of his rallies. Its average size of the crowd was about 5,600.
Yet, despite the smaller dimensions of the crowd, Trump won.
Rakich said that Harris’ numbers could have been attributed to people who just wanted to know the unknown candidate. And he said there could have been an urban-rural gap, in which Harris gatherings tended to be in the city capable of attracting larger crashes.
“If you have never been to a national campaign, it is easy to believe that the size of the crowd in an event has any influence on nothing”, Ian Brodie, head of the staff of the former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, recently tweeted in response to a comment on Poilevre’s crowd.
Meanwhile, the political editorialist Chantal Hébert indicated on x That in 1979, Pierre Trudeau spoke to about 20,000 people during an event at the Maple Leaf Gardens in Toronto, just a few weeks before his liberals had lost against the progressive conservatives of Joe Clark.
Rakich said it is certainly not bad to have great crowds; They can create good media narratives and fundraising opportunities.
“But the point is that it is not decisive. If you have someone who drives 10 points in the polls, it would be a great upheaval to lose for that candidate because the polls are scientific and the polls do not lose much,” he said.
“It would not be unusual for the candidate with the size of the larger crowd to lose.”
People who don’t attend the rallies end up deciding the elections “
Éric Grenier, an analyst of surveys and elections that writes the written newsletter and runs CBC survey trackerDel, the dimensions of the conservative crowd show the strength and abilities of the organization and that the base of Poilievre is motivated and enthusiastic.
“That’s all,” he said. “It is the people who don’t attend the gatherings who end up deciding the elections.”
The conservative leader Pierre Poerievre, who talks about Edmonton on the 17th of the election campaign, responds to a question of the globe and asked that the size of his rally is important and if his comments on the “alarm crowd” and the deceased of the CBC are expanding the support for the liberals.
Grenier said that adding up all the people in the Poiievre countryside, the campaign rallies will amount to one percent of all those who will vote for conservatives.
“The fact that one percent of conservative voters will go to the rallies and 0.5 percent will go to the liberal rallies does not say much for me,” he said.
The leadership match of Poiilievre has shown that a large range of people could excite and make them go to these events, said Grenier.
“It is not clear that those are people who are Swing voters,” he said. “They are people who are enthusiastic to vote for Pierre Poilievre.”
As for the liberals, Grenier said that it is not clear if their campaign is making the logistical effort to attract thousands of people in their gatherings.
“(In) he starts because they may not be able to do it. But they may not even try,” he said.
“These are not just organic things in which Pierre Poilievre shows up in a field and people are only migrating there.”
