How the BQ keeps getting on these national televised debates and the Greens do not has always been a head-scratcher to me. That's like saying if the Wildrose Party was national, they have more of a right to be there, which is horrendously wrong. No regional parties should ever take part in this debate. EVER.
I hated Margaret Day with a passion last night, but it doesn't mean she shouldn't be on TV. Her party is far more federal than the BQ, and therefore has more legitimacy IMO.
National or not, the BQ at it's peak was large enough to become Her Majesty's "Loyal" Opposition. The Green Party is just a protest party at this point and has done little to move beyond that.
The BQ has far, far, far more right to participate in the debates than the Greens do.
Well, the root cause of that is a culture of defeat on the reservations but that's a different matter to be addressed. Then again, Harper's prime election advisor is Tom Flanagan (my prof once) and he wants to take away all the treaty rights and benefits from aboriginals. The reservations are in a terrible state. It's like moving from Canada to a 3rd world country sometimes.
I think to be fair, you are misrepresenting Tom Flanagan to a pretty big extent. His thesis is a lot more comprehensive than simply cutting aboriginals and leaving them to freeze in the cold.
National or not, the BQ at it's peak was large enough to become Her Majesty's "Loyal" Opposition. The Green Party is just a protest party at this point and has done little to move beyond that.
The BQ has far, far, far more right to participate in the debates than the Greens do.
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? Why is it right for your family and wrong for the rest of us? 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.
Last edited by Thunderball; 10-03-2008 at 11:02 AM.
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.
But don't tell me that isn't his point. If I was a centre-left voter and I had to choose between Dion and Layton, I know exactly what my choice would be.
Dion looked awful. He let himself get absolutely eviscerated by Layton and was unable to match any of the passion exhibited by any of the other leaders.
But don't tell me that isn't his point. If I was a centre-left voter and I had to choose between Dion and Layton, I know exactly what my choice would be.
Dion looked awful. He let himself get absolutely eviscerated by Layton and was unable to match any of the passion exhibited by any of the other leaders.
Dion didn't look good... there's no two ways about it. But Layton simply sounded like an angry drunk at the local pub. If people are impressed by baseless bluster, then yeah, go Jack go. If Layton was a centre-right leader and his mindless bluster was aimed at the lefties like that, I still don't think I could vote for him. Its fine to engage in a good attack or two... but it needs to be measured, and mixed in with solid leadership, charisma and intelligence.
Dion didn't look good... there's no two ways about it. But Layton simply sounded like an angry drunk at the local pub. If people are impressed by baseless bluster, then yeah, go Jack go. If Layton was a centre-right leader and his mindless bluster was aimed at the lefties like that, I still don't think I could vote for him. Its fine to engage in a good attack or two... but it needs to be measured, and mixed in with solid leadership, charisma and intelligence.
I agree and good for Paikin on calling Layton on some of his more ridiculous claims. But there is a large segment that is voting solely based on anti-Harper feelings and I think Layton got that segment on his side tonight. Dion looked absolutely weak and defenseless in the way of Layton's attacks. And what's worse is that Layton was right on a lot of things, Dion supported this government over 40 times. Not very good for an opposition leader.
Against Harper however, you are right. His attacks were pathetic and baseless and easily deflected by the Prime Minister.
I agree and good for Paikin on calling Layton on some of his more ridiculous claims. But there is a large segment that is voting solely based on anti-Harper feelings and I think Layton got that segment on his side tonight. Dion looked absolutely weak and defenseless in the way of Layton's attacks. And what's worse is that Layton was right on a lot of things, Dion supported this government over 40 times. Not very good for an opposition leader.
Against Harper however, you are right. His attacks were pathetic and baseless and easily deflected by the Prime Minister.
I think Dion did land a few blows against Layton too... such as labelling him too socialist for Canada. Layton proved the more vocal of the centre-left parties, but a better opposition? Canadians don't like going to the polls, and if a Minority government with Wacky Jack as the opposition leader means going back to the polls within 6 months... maybe he isn't such a good choice. I think they want a thoughtful, strong opposition, who won't simply vote against the government for spite, but only do so if the government is clearly acting poorly. However, I'm assuming that Canadians can read between the lines.
The problem that I found was all of the "misinformation" that was not countered last night. The average, uninformed, person watching it wouldn't know what is true and what isn't.
After the debate I watched CBC's "fact checking" segment. One of their points was even though a Carbon Tax is common in Europe, it hasn't lead to green house gas reductions in any kind of a reliable manner except in Denmark. Take it for what its worth, but the "It's being done elsewhere" doesn't mean "It's working elsewhere".
The problem that I found was all of the "misinformation" that was not countered last night. The average, uninformed, person watching it wouldn't know what is true and what isn't.
After the debate I watched CBC's "fact checking" segment. One of their points was even though a Carbon Tax is common in Europe, it hasn't lead to green house gas reductions in any kind of a reliable manner except in Denmark. Take it for what its worth, but the "It's being done elsewhere" doesn't mean "It's working elsewhere".
Not too mention that all European countries with a green tax are in deep recession. Germany has unemployment of like... 18% or something crazy.
IMO, all the party leaders had good performances are there was a virtual stalemate last night. I think views on the debates will only solifidy preconceived notions. No big winners which helps Harper.
Harper again remained relatively calm under fire, but took some heavy hits with little or no return fire. I agree with the notion that his calmness and that smirk came off as arrogance to some though.
Duceppe was Duceppe, to the point and he got some good hits on Harper. I think he has further solidified his support and taken away from the Conservatives.
Dion did much better than I anticipated, but in the minds of most I probably not enough. Harper really could not touch him, and he did he best to redress the Conservative falsehoods. Layton however, give him some trouble. A solid, but unspiring performance.
I really did not know what to expect from May, but found her to be very strong and assertive, so much so that she at times was a little irritating (making her one-liners out of turn). Her base is a bit confusing though as she is trying to mix the environmental crowd with fiscal conservativism. Not enough in that mix to do real damage.
Layton, I think provided some of the most memorable quotes, but for the most part it's the same old anti-corporate stuff. Does that resonate now with fears of the financial crisis heading North? Probably not.
Bottom line is that unless something dramatic happens, IE Converatives making serious gaffes or coming out with a great, big-tent platform. It will pretty much be status quo. A Conservative minority with the Liberals as Official Opposition. The ball is in Harper and Co.'s court.
IMO, all the party leaders had good performances are there was a virtual stalemate last night. I think views on the debates will only solifidy preconceived notions. No big winners which helps Harper.
Agreed, with the format slanted against the incumbant, the ideas and platforms of the opposition parties are irrelevant in the debate. The format only creates the requirement that the opponents of the incumbant have as many possible chances to land heavy blows against the Prime Minister as possible. All of the opposition parties failed to do this, so IMHO today, the debates did very little to change the voting landscape, there might have been some vote exchanges between the losing parties, but I don't think that the PC's will lose much in the way of votes, I also don't think they'll gain much either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
Harper again remained relatively calm under fire, but took some heavy hits with little or no return fire. I agree with the notion that his calmness and that smirk came off as arrogance to some though.
Harper is in that bad position of damned if he does damned if he doesn't. If he goes on the attack or shows any kind of anger, the press and the opposition cream him as mean and power hungry. I don't think that he took any hits that were particularly damaging, and even though his opponents left some major openings, Harper didn't go after them. I really wished that he would have gone after Layton on his spending platform. Harper's temper did flash a couple of times with the phrase "Lets be clear"
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
Duceppe was Duceppe, to the point and he got some good hits on Harper. I think he has further solidified his support and taken away from the Conservatives.
Duceppe has an easy job, and he did it well, I've said it many times, I think hes a very honest and sincere man, and his passion does show. He probably gained a lot of votes in Quebec, and he probably took a lot of votes away from the fence sitters in terms of Liberal and NDP votes.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
Dion did much better than I anticipated, but in the minds of most I probably not enough. Harper really could not touch him, and he did he best to redress the Conservative falsehoods. Layton however, give him some trouble. A solid, but unspiring performance.
Is he ernest and sincere, sure, but I thought that he was terrible in his debate. He failed to gain any security on his green shift policy, and probably lost a lot of face in terms of Harper clubbing him on his 30 day economic plan, and page 78 of his own green shift document where he couldn't explain or prove his numbers. He didn't light up the room, and his participation was low. He also failed to overpower Jack Layton, which will probably cost him votes. His accusations about Bush politics and U.S. policies to me really fell flat and Harper defended himself well by admiting his mistake about Iraq. But I feel that the electorate might be worn out and not care about the hidden agenda neo-con accusations that the Liberals are throwing around.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
I really did not know what to expect from May, but found her to be very strong and assertive, so much so that she at times was a little irritating (making her one-liners out of turn). Her base is a bit confusing though as she is trying to mix the environmental crowd with fiscal conservativism. Not enough in that mix to do real damage.
I honestly found her to be rude and irritating throughout most of the debate. She has a great and positive understanding of the environment, but I think she's get carved up on her stands on crime and foreign policy, and even her flub about income splitting made her look ill prepared for this debate. I honestly don't think that the average Canadian who is worried about the economy is going to be impressed with her ideas to kill the Canadian doller and some of her other economics is going to help her. Her soft on crime proposal and Afghanistan shows that she's out of touch. She might have gained some votes from the Libs or NDP, but I don't think she did enough to damage the governing party.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
Layton, I think provided some of the most memorable quotes, but for the most part it's the same old anti-corporate stuff. Does that resonate now with fears of the financial crisis heading North? Probably not.
Outside of his one liners, I think Jack blew this debate for the NDP, especially when he went after the Oil companies and energy producing provinces which will hurt his standings in AB, BC, SK where he was hoping to make some headway. He was exposed once with an outright lie (arts and censorship), and he got stomped on the health care issue. His tax corporations will probably not ride well with anyone who's looking at job security either. I think Layton did a terrible job, but might have gained some liberal votes due to his attack on a subdued Dion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrdeeds
Bottom line is that unless something dramatic happens, IE Converatives making serious gaffes or coming out with a great, big-tent platform. It will pretty much be status quo. A Conservative minority with the Liberals as Official Opposition. The ball is in Harper and Co.'s court.
I agree, but I don't really feel comfortable with declaring the Libs as the opposition, Dion didn't help himself at all yesterday.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Outside of his one liners, I think Jack blew this debate for the NDP, especially when he went after the Oil companies and energy producing provinces which will hurt his standings in AB, BC, SK where he was hoping to make some headway. He was exposed once with an outright lie (arts and censorship), and he got stomped on the health care issue. His tax corporations will probably not ride well with anyone who's looking at job security either. I think Layton did a terrible job, but might have gained some liberal votes due to his attack on a subdued Dion
...but they're gunna get the money by not giving tax cuts to big corporations! big corporations are the devil! ...aren't they??
i think his "average canadian" show was so out of touch with reality its not even funny
I think Jack was doing well leading up to the debates with making himself the focal point of the NDP campaign and trying to make people forget about it's socialist leanings. He tried too hard to capitalize on the US financial crisis and started trying to hammer home the Exxon vs the average Canadian schtick ad naseum. IMO this will not reasonate in the minds of the mushy-middle undecideds.
The more and more I read of Dion and the Liberals plans, the more I think the undecided left of centre vote will migrate back to the Liberals once again for fear of a Conservative majority. The Liberal platform is much more balanced and has a real common sense approach. At best is a Liberal majority and a coalition with the NDPs which is really what Jack should be concentrating on. He even alluded to it himself earlier. I hope he puts Canada before his own Leader of the Official Opposition or even PM delusions of grandeur.
I think Jack was doing well leading up to the debates with making himself the focal point of the NDP campaign and trying to make people forget about it's socialist leanings. He tried too hard to capitalize on the US financial crisis and started trying to hammer home the Exxon vs the average Canadian schtick ad naseum. IMO this will not reasonate in the minds of the mushy-middle undecideds.
The more and more I read of Dion and the Liberals plans, the more I think the undecided left of centre vote will migrate back to the Liberals once again for fear of a Conservative majority. The Liberal platform is much more balanced and has a real common sense approach. At best is a Liberal majority and a coalition with the NDPs which is really what Jack should be concentrating on. He even alluded to it himself earlier. I hope he puts Canada before his own Leader of the Official Opposition or even PM delusions of grandeur.
Dion hasn't done enough to clarify his economic platforms, and I don't think he's getting a lot of buy in from Joe Average. His 30 day platform was vague and so poorly explained that the Liberal Party had to rush out a press release after the french language debate. And his green shift has gotten next to no traction, and he couldn't explain the numbers in last nights debate.
This is no longer a fight for government of a minority or any kind of majority by Dion, its a fight to stay as the opposition.
I think Dion also realizes that any kind of coalition that actually gets NDP fingers into the budget would end up destroying the credibility of the Liberal party for years.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
I seriously love political debates. It's funny how desperate some of the politicians come across, but no one ever really explains what they want to do.
I honestly see the Green gaining 3-5% more of the popular vote than they had previous, and national polls seem to support that (but I really don't read into polls). Both NDP and Green parties should have gains, but they will be taking votes from the liberals. I think no matter what, we can all assume we'll have another woeful minority government. Canada really lacks quality leaders these days.
I haven't been following the campaign too closely, mostly because I find the partisan electioneering that goes on during campaigns rather nauseating. I watch a lot of Question Period and tend to base my political opinions and voting decisions more on what goes on between elections than during elections. So I didn't watch the debate and find this thread more interesting than I probably would have found the debate itself.
I have two comments based on the debate coverage in this thread. One is that I'm disappointed but not surprised by May's performance. I'm a fiscal conservative with a strong environmental concern, and I think the Greens have a role to play as an opposition voice. Not the official opposition by any means, but their voice in Commons I think would serve a purpose. But May sounds like she's proving to be the idiot I thought she would be ever since she was elected leader of the Greens. Too bad ... the Greens could have made some gains in this election I think, had they chosen a better leader.
And the other comment is, when is Harper going to start calling the Green Shift the Greenback Shift, like it actually is?
Dion hasn't done enough to clarify his economic platforms, and I don't think he's getting a lot of buy in from Joe Average. His 30 day platform was vague and so poorly explained that the Liberal Party had to rush out a press release after the french language debate. And his green shift has gotten next to no traction, and he couldn't explain the numbers in last nights debate.
This is no longer a fight for government of a minority or any kind of majority by Dion, its a fight to stay as the opposition.
I disagree with your take on the 30 day pledge (not platform). It is simple and shows that the Liberals are truly concerned about keeping the economy strong. I would agree with you more on the GreenShift, but it is in itself a complex plan, but Harper's attempts at discrediting its premise were pretty futile.
Dion and the Liberals will get stronger in the last days at the expense of the NDP. I see more support going to the Green Party from the Jack's party, not the Liberals.
I also predict that the Conservative platform will have some eerily similar initiatives to the Liberals. At worst they will have some that will mysteriously address their current shortcomings. Still this is their election to lose.
I disagree with your take on the 30 day pledge (not platform). It is simple and shows that the Liberals are truly concerned about keeping the economy strong.
Having a meeting within 30 days... is that supposed to imply that the Conservatives have been sitting on their hands doing nothing over the past year? If not, how is that any different than what the current government is doing?
