Liberals Won't Participate in Maclean's and Monk Debates: A Liberal Problem

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
jerrym
Liberals Won't Participate in Maclean's and Monk Debates: A Liberal Problem

The Liberals have refused to participate in the Maclean's and Monk debates while suggesting they would do so for a TVA debate in French. Former Quebec Liberal cabinet minister David Heurtel said on Power and Politics that this is because the Liberals don't want to talk about SNC Lavalin and the India trip in English Canada while SNC is viewed differently in Quebec. He said the Liberals see opportunities to pick up seats in Quebec and feel that while the Liberals and Cons are close in the polls, the vote distribution favours the Liberals. I think the Liberals are taking a big risk in providing all the Opposition leaders a chance to shine.
It could be a big help to Singh in particular as he is still somewhat unknown and could overcome some negative views of him. Even if relatively few watch the comments in the media will be negative about Trudeau not showing up for the job interview and displaying Liberal arrogance. If any of the other leaders do well, they could get a poll boost. If they do poorly, Trudeau would have looked good if he performed only so-so. Why is he hiding from voters?
He also runs the risk of being seen as favouring Quebec in English Canada if he goes ahead with the TVA debate but no other English debates.
This is different from the Manitoba election because when Pallister turned down other debate opportunities the debates did not happen and so did not appear to have much effect on the election.

voice of the damned

Are the Maclean's/Monk debates regarded as something like official debates of the campaign? I mean, maybe not legally mandatory, but are they being seen as the standard sort of debate that the major-party leaders are expected to participate in? (For example, like the debate where Mulroney said "You had an option, sir.") 

Or are they viewed as being sort of optional things, like giving a speech to the Empire Club? 

Debater

Maclean's & Monk are additional debates that were added in 2015 by Harper & the Conservatives, which were supposedly added to make life more difficult for Justin Trudeau since they thought it would trip him up to have 5 debates.  In some of the previous elections there had only been 2 debates because that's all Harper wanted -- 1 French & 1 English.

Trudeau is doing the 2 official debates (1 French & 1 English) organized by the traditional commission consortium, plus the other French debate being done by TVA.  May & Bernier have apparently been excluded from the TVA debate.  May will be allowed into the regular 2 debates but Bernier won't be allowed into any of them unless they hear his appeal which is being decided around Septermber 16.

voice of the damned

Debater: 

Thanks. If what you say is correct, I'd imagine Trudeau can get away with not participating. Unless MNM have somehow managed to get themselves canonized as official debates. 

EDIT: Though I suppose that if he is doing an unofficial debate in French(ie. TVA), people may wonder why he can handle that additional burden, but not an English language one. 

Debater

Here's Eric Grenier's piece yesterday on why Trudeau is probably doing 2 French debates, but 1 English:

Why the TVA debate is one Justin Trudeau can't afford to miss

Liberals need the voters likely to tune in to second French-language debate

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/grenier-quebec-tva-debate-1.5275363

swallow swallow's picture

The Munk debates are a fascist-enabling forum named for a mining baron who has harmed many Indigenous lives in many countries that charge a vast amount to favoured subscribers to attend. They are the antithesis of democracy. Everyone should boycott all Munk events, especially after their absurd "debate" featuring Steve Bannon. 

Pondering

Except that isn't Trudeau's motivation. Has he actively declined or just not accepted? Having a commission that sets official debates is new. It was introduced by Trudeau. 

I don't think it's a good decision. It didn't look good on Mulcair and it won't look good on Trudeau. It's possible Trudeau doesn't feel confident in debating foreign affairs. 

What this will do is test the mettle of Scheer and Singh. May is well known. She is pretty good at debating. I think it is better for the NDP that Trudeau not be there. This will be a straight left/right battle. Singh will have more time to deliver arguments. If Trudeau were present the focus would be on him versus Scheer. 

WWWTT

Don't write Jag off from doing well in the upcoming debates!

Jag is a more than capable person. He finds ways of getting things done. I'm not sure how well he'll do, I admit, but we all know that televised debates provide an excellent opportunity!

This is Jag's best opportunity to make good. For sure he will be at the best he can be!

Unionist

swallow wrote:

The Munk debates are a fascist-enabling forum named for a mining baron who has harmed many Indigenous lives in many countries that charge a vast amount to favoured subscribers to attend. They are the antithesis of democracy. Everyone should boycott all Munk events, especially after their absurd "debate" featuring Steve Bannon. 

Fully agree. But no one is listening. The beauty contest is just too alluring.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

Unionist wrote:

swallow wrote:

The Munk debates are a fascist-enabling forum named for a mining baron who has harmed many Indigenous lives in many countries that charge a vast amount to favoured subscribers to attend. They are the antithesis of democracy. Everyone should boycott all Munk events, especially after their absurd "debate" featuring Steve Bannon. 

Fully agree. But no one is listening. The beauty contest is just too alluring.

Me three. This is one of the worst evils of so-called philanthropy.

R.E.Wood

WWWTT wrote:

Don't write Jag off from doing well in the upcoming debates!

Jag is a more than capable person. He finds ways of getting things done. I'm not sure how well he'll do, I admit, but we all know that televised debates provide an excellent opportunity!

This is Jag's best opportunity to make good. For sure he will be at the best he can be!

Why do you insist on referring to him as "Jag"? Is it to make him sound "cool"? 

Pondering

Probably just shorter to type. Why the personal put down? Why not address the content of the post? 

I wonder if the Liberal strategy is to have the Conservatives and NDP look like the two extremes. After they debate he can then present his " balanced middle of the road" approach.

I think Singh will shine in all the debates and it will boost the NDP numbers. Trudeau will be far more polished and difficult to fluster. He will focus on his talking points. Scheer is unknown but he doesn't strike me as a good debater. Neither he nor Trudeau are intellectuals by any stretch of the imagination. If Singh has done his homework he should be able to poke holes in Trudeau's claim to progressiveness. 

JKR

R.E.Wood wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

Don't write Jag off from doing well in the upcoming debates!

Jag is a more than capable person. He finds ways of getting things done. I'm not sure how well he'll do, I admit, but we all know that televised debates provide an excellent opportunity!

This is Jag's best opportunity to make good. For sure he will be at the best he can be!

Why do you insist on referring to him as "Jag"? Is it to make him sound "cool"? 

Maybe he likes jaguars, the animal and/or car?

R.E.Wood

Pondering wrote:

Probably just shorter to type. Why the personal put down? Why not address the content of the post? 

I wonder if the Liberal strategy is to have the Conservatives and NDP look like the two extremes. After they debate he can then present his " balanced middle of the road" approach.

I think Singh will shine in all the debates and it will boost the NDP numbers. Trudeau will be far more polished and difficult to fluster. He will focus on his talking points. Scheer is unknown but he doesn't strike me as a good debater. Neither he nor Trudeau are intellectuals by any stretch of the imagination. If Singh has done his homework he should be able to poke holes in Trudeau's claim to progressiveness. 

I didn't address the content of the post because I have nothing nice to say about Singh, or his prospects in the debates. I am in utter disagreement with your own prediction that he will "shine" in the debates. I still think he was probably the worst debater amongst the NDP leadership candidates, and have seen nothing from Singh since that leads me to think he's improved. Sorry, but I think he's an incompetent disaster.

WWWTT

R.E.Wood wrote:

WWWTT wrote:

Don't write Jag off from doing well in the upcoming debates!

Jag is a more than capable person. He finds ways of getting things done. I'm not sure how well he'll do, I admit, but we all know that televised debates provide an excellent opportunity!

This is Jag's best opportunity to make good. For sure he will be at the best he can be!

Why do you insist on referring to him as "Jag"? Is it to make him sound "cool"? 

Ya I guess "Jag" does sound good n English as opposed to Jagmeet. The closest celebrity name would be Mick Jagger. I spent 15 years living in Brampton and knew many mutual friends as Jag, so I'm sure Jag's good with it.

Do you have a problem with it?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

R.E.Wood wrote:

I didn't address the content of the post because I have nothing nice to say about Singh, or his prospects in the debates. I am in utter disagreement with your own prediction that he will "shine" in the debates. I still think he was probably the worst debater amongst the NDP leadership candidates, and have seen nothing from Singh since that leads me to think he's improved. Sorry, but I think he's an incompetent disaster.

I think you have a deep bias against the man for some reason and it is blinding your perceptions. Watch this fifty minute interview that he did with the Sun editorial board on youth issues. He answered the questions well and in depth without speaking notes. I was not impressed with him during the leadership campaign but frankly the field had very little depth. However his predecessor, the ex-liberal, has landed on his feet with a good gig and a new platform to pontificate from safely inside the bourgeois status quo.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=3&v=ECtsxu2ihRs