Any good historian will tell you that when the British were at war with "New France", the British called their enemies "Les Canadiens". The word "Canada" was used to describe "New France" well before what we now consider Canada ever existed.
Federalists in Quebec who love their role as Canadians consider Champlain to be one of their historical heroes. All this anti-Champlain rhetoric shows me why it is so hard for many Quebeckers to let go of history and "feel" Canadian. A shame...
Champlain is important, but he is more a forefather than actually a leader IMO. Yes he did a lot of great thing, like founding the beloved city of Québec. He also make quite many deals with the native americans, however I don't think he should be the leader unless you are offering a LOT. He was a dreamer and a builder, but he never really has the means to create much. Also, the locals peoples consider themselves FRENCHS when Champlain is around; which is very important IMO as to determine if we are talking of Canada or a French colony. I don't even know who founded New York, or Boston, or Jamestown, yet nobody would put this guy as the main leader.
Vaudreuil is a guy that many despite or hate vividly, but he was quite important and this is pre-Conquest, aka "real Canada" if you want. Post-Conquest is not the same Canada, as even the "main language" is not even French anymore. Vaudreil was definitely a french noblesman, but he was leading Canada and he was not considering himself canadian, yet, he was leading Canada and he was quite effective, in his ways. His writing clearly indicated that the locals are not Frenchs, but Canadians. Vaudreuil is also the guy who was the leader when Canada changed from Pre-Conquest to Post-Conquest; even if he was an uncooperative bunch and things didn't turn how he would have wanted them to, he is the link. Without him, and the hatred that many Canadians harbor toward him, I don't think the British would have remain long here...Québec would prolly have join the American revolution if not for him, so even if he was not willing, he is responsible for the very existence of Canada today, since if Québec would have join the Americans, the poor loyalists have been crushed and it is only the local hatred that turn the Americans away, as they where nearly victorious...the only reason Canada exist today and ain't the 51th state...it is Vaudreuil...although Vaudreuil certainly didn't want to play that role, and that France did want us to join the Americans...Canada wouldn't be today if not for Vaudreuil.
Frontenac is prolly the most "warlike" leader in the pre-Conquest, yet he always has his interpretation, his way of doing things hehe. Peoples start considering themselves Canadians pretty much with this guy, although it is impossible to link it directly...thereby, he is to Canada the equivalent of Georges Washington. I personnally consider Frontenac the first Canadian, not litterally, but as in a figure of speech...despite all the contradictions.
Post-Conquest-Canada should use Mulroney, no matter how much peoples despite the guy. See, Trudeau is pretty much a poseur IMO, yeah yeah he did flashy things and he is popular, while Mulroney, peoples start to understand the real impact he has. The free trade agreement or the "Chartres des droits"? See, this charter was coming, it is from that era, is that really Trudeau's doing or is he an opportunist? While the free trade from Mulroney, it was against the wishes of the peoples, Mulroney manages to CHANGE Canada, which is something that Trudeau would never have done, Trudeau was just a good swimmer and going with the current and the tide, while Mulroney, he did went against it. It is only a matter of time before the history book display that correctly, but prolly won't be as long as the guy is alive. Yet, as I said, you have to determine either a Pre or Post Conquest. Like I said, I prefer the Pre as it is what determine everything, the Post certainly affect many aspects and present Canada, but it change what is already in place
rather than create. My grandpa would talk of a guy in Winnipeg as an English, never as a Canadian, unless he speak french "perfectly", and there is nothing you can do to change his mind...and he has a point, even if I disagree with him.
Also, the pre-Conquest Canada would be more political, economic
(as in immediate rewards) and warfare...while the Post-conquest is more industrial, peaceful and developpment. There is a huge distinction of both philosphies, as the French masters and the English masters didn't exactly request the same stuff, in fact it was quite opposite. English-speaking Canadians are really Canadians only very recently at any rate, they where either Loyalists or English for a very long time...as to be Canadians, they need to be 1 with Quebecers, and the proof that Quebec still have some doubts is proof that the majority of the country is still more or less Canadian...No amount of "I am Canadian" propaganda can change the truth, it is a new reality.
I didn't release this one yet, cos I'm waiting for the new diplomacy 
not like it wouldnt hurt ot have lots of different leaders so everybody is happy
)
