Originally Posted by Thunderball
I agree... and even as far as contributions go... Duceppe is far more worthy to be there than May was... she was an utter joke... and not a funny one. Her initial statement was so bad, I nearly gagged... her "solution" to the economic downturn is to tax the crap out of job creators, lower the dollar to re-encourage inefficiency, and destroy investor confidence in the Canadian market.
My ranking of the debaters is as follows:
1. Harper: Won the debate by simply not lowering himself to the level of the lowest common denominator. His facts were straight, his numbers were decent and his stance on the economic situation is correct. However, I felt he was a little too passive.
2. Duceppe: He is exactly what he claims to be, a Quebec nationalist party leader. He has no aspirations to live on Sussex, and his ideas are good... for Quebec only. He attacked whoever he felt he had to attack, not just Harper. He might have saved his party from oblivion. I don't agree with his leanings, but I respect him as a leader, and debater. Well done, Gilles.
3. Dion: He struggles with the english language, which is excusable, but he also struggles with explaining the green shift. Harper was right, the numbers in the Liberal book don't match up. Unless of course, their book explained it wrong too. To his credit, he at least looked like a legitimate party leader, which is more than one can say for the next two.
4. May: For being a lawyer, she gets way too many facts wrong to be a viable leader. What this tells me is she thinks with her heart and not with her brain. Her fiscal policy is like a bizarre marriage between the NDP and Liberals... and neither of those are very strong to begin with. Her lack of foreign policy knowledge was woefully apparent. But, hey, as a party with zero elected MPs being allowed to participate because of sexism allegations, there really isn't anywhere to go but up, right? Well, there is staying where they are, with 0 seats and less than 10% popular support, and that looks likely. Her attacks were poor, with very few redeeming points. CBC has their head firmly entrenched in anus if they think she performed well.
5. Layton: What can anyone say about Wacky Jack? He sounded like the Alec Baldwin puppet in Team America when backed into a corner, "uhh... corporate america, and hybrid cars, and republicans, and Exxon, and uhh..." Pathetic. I'm glad he got exposed as the hypocrite that he is with that private health clinic revelation. Who cares if its covered, Jack... you're supposedly against any for-profit medicare... you're gonna defend it like Tommy Douglas would, right? What an assclown. This man was shameful, he was annoying, loud, rude, and does not belong in the same room as real leaders. None of the legitmate leaders engaged in the name-calling or playground antics Jack did. The NDP are the largest of the fringe parties, and like fringe parties, they can promise anything they want, because god willing, they will never be allowed to implement their disasterous plans or be held accountable to them.
In conclusion, the 5 party debate is a terrible way to do business. I would rather see several debates. One with just the CPC and Liberals, one with those two and the NDP, and one in french with the governing parties and the Bloc. Maybe add the Greens when they actually win something. Five turns into a shouting match and a gong show.
|