It's not over til it's-actually, it's never over -

It’s not over til it’s-actually, it’s never over

Conservatives embrace the “permanent campaign”


Last year, the Conservatives raised more money than the other four federal parties combined. What’s the secret of their success? According to this week’s Hill Times, that would be the adoption of the American model known as the “permanent campaign,” which keeps the party’s fundraising fires burning between elections. Political scientist Heather McIvor explains: “You have to be constantly preparing for the next election and that means constantly raising money, particularly since you are restricted by law now. You can’t just tap the chartered banks for $10-million and call it a day, you’ve got to keep going back to people again and again. It’s very labour intensive.”

The Hill Times

Filed under:

It’s not over til it’s-actually, it’s never over

  1. Because permanent campaigning is what all Canadians have been dreaming about . . .

  2. I don’t think this is a conscious act on their part. Rather, I think it’s just the reality of minority governments and the pattern of almost yearly leadership/election races Harper and his team have had to deal with.

  3. I think that mainly it’s their appeal to committed, radical, middle-class activist groups like the anti-abortionists, the anti-gun controlers, etc. People with a Cause and the knowledge that it can never be achieved unless Harper gets his majority.

    By contrast, the far left is both lacking in issues to rally around, and poorer. So no NDP fundraising bonanza.

  4. If every party picks up the gauntlet of ” permanent campagning” i for one am going to start looking back nostalgically at the good old days of corporate finanzing. Why? Well at least then we [ the public] didn’t have to listen to the constant stream of partisan drival that constitutes much of a parties electoral appeal or messaging. The old system wasn’t as bad in hindsight as we are lead to believe. Yes, there was corruption, but most of the big donors put money on all the horses – they contributed to all the parties. [ well, at least the 2 big parties] Be careful what you wish for, is going to bite us in the ass big time.

  5. Well, the Americans have the permanent campaign because they go to the polls to elect one third of the Senate and the entire House every two bloody years.

    Here, since we are now in an era of the minority government, it’s basically the same thing, no? Approx 24 months between elections.

    First 12 months of real governance, 6 months of playing games of chicken with each other, 6 months where everyone knows the government is about to fall and the campaign begins. And fund raising and campaign readiness at red alert the entire time. Get used to it.

  6. Hmm. A political party understands the rules now in force (put in by the other guys!) and is succeeding by abiding by them, collecting smallish sums from a large number of supporters. Pure eeeeevil.

    • It’s not evil at all. I simply object to political parties becoming an arm of the marketing and telemarketing industries.

      • Hey, that’s cool. I object to political parties sucking out our collective wealth like it’s their god-given right.

        So far, you’re doing better. Only one party seems to be disappointing you; all five are disappointing me. Congratulations.

        • MYL
          We’ll never agree on this one. But believe it or not i do undersand where you’re coming from, i’m not particularly naive, i realize that many things that our govt underrights aren’t particularly productive. I happen to believe that helping to support our system of governance isn’t one of them. It is a general and positive common good. It’s not like we’re subsidizing a nasty habit, one that we really ought to give up.