Canadian leaders debates - 2015

583 posts / 0 new
Last post
Pondering

Michael Moriarity wrote:

I'm disappointed by the NDP decision, and I think it may actually hurt them. However, I feel quite confident that if the Lib and NDP polling numbers were reversed, Trudeau would be doing the exact same thing, because the Lib "campaign professionals" are at least as disgusting as the NDP ones.

I don't think so. I am very much looking forward to the Macleans debate coming up in exactly a week. However little an effect it has on the polls in mid-summer, this is Trudeau's first serious test on his "readiness".  He doesn't have to win the debate but he can't seem lost for answers. Mulcair not knowing the corporate tax hasn't hurt him too much but if Trudeau makes a mistake like that it could hurt him much more. Trudeau has to prove he is prepared to take office. If he does then Liberal fortunes could eventuallly rise again as the campaign goes into full swing. If he flubs it badly it would not augur well for him because there is no more practice time. If he hasn't got it down now he's done for.

In the French debate Harper isn't important. He could win a few seats but he is very unpopular. The people Quebec wants to hear from are Mulcair, Trudeau and Duceppe.

The TVA debate Trudeau has not yet accepted nor declined isn't until Oct 6th so he has plenty of time to accept it. Now that Mulcair accepted, then declined, it would be quite odd for him to change his mind yet again.

socialdemocrati...

terrytowel wrote:
So why the change this year? Last year everyone was on Team Olivia saying it was arrogant of John Tory to pull out of some debates.

But using socialdemocraticmiddle own words, you could say "if John Tory doesn't show up, there isn't much point in showing up when the time finally comes."

So why the change in attitude this year?

I haven't changed my attitude. But I'm sure if you asked around they'd say the same thing.

It's arrogant of Stephen Harper to pull out of these debates.

And if Harper doesn't show up, there isn't much point in having them.

If Harper does show up, the NDP will be there.

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

I hate these power plays. And these shenanigans show no respect for citizens/voters.

Pondering

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

And if Harper doesn't show up, there isn't much point in having them.

Why not? A lot of voters are deciding between Mulcair and Trudeau.

bekayne

NorthReport wrote:

Tom will be participating in 4 debates, double the number that Jack did in 2011, our last election.

The length of the campaign is also double what it was in 2011

takeitslowly

I hope Tom Mulcair didn't just cost the NDP his majority government by refusing to debate without Harper's presence.

 

Dumbest poitical move I have ever seen in awhile. Truly a wtf moment. Is Tom Mulcair a liberal insider?

Pondering

Macleans has published their guide to the debates!  Too bad you have to pay for it.

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/digital-extra/

But this is free!

4. Strategy. Two philosophies dominate contemporary debate strategies; call them Tyson and Foreman. The Tyson unleashes violent punches hoping to capture the television/YouTube/Twitter clip that will dominate post-debate coverage. Brian Mulroney’s “You had an option, sir” against John Turner is the gold standard. By contrast, the Foreman technique treats debates like an infomercial. Rather than exchanging blows, the goal is to pitch your message directly to target voters. Harper is a skilled Foremanist.

Other strategic decisions are also required. Which leaders do you seek to tangle with? Which should be ducked? Which topics are kryptonite? Do you have a go-to line if you get tagged hard? All these considerations will be gamed out in advance.

5. Mocks. The most delicate aspect of debate prep is the mock, or mock debates. Rehearsals are held in a studio with cameras, backdrops and podiums patterned on the real event. To ensure the leader’s ease, the team should be kept to a bare minimum, while the leader is coached on topics such as how to stand, where to look, what to do with his or her hands and why that tie (or necklace) sucks. Same goes for delivery. Is the leader speaking too fast? Landing her best lines? Too practised? Not practised enough? And remember, it’s a process of constant critique. It can wear on people. The wise debate-whisperer will shrewdly balance correction with encouragement to nurture the best from his leader.

Drawing on MPs and trusted colleagues, surrogates will be recruited for the mocks. Their job is to closely mimic the habits of the other party leaders, usually supported by their own research teams. In rehearsal, the stand-ins must press, but not punish the leader. The goal is to improve performance, not beat up the boss.

A full mock can last up to two hours, but the most productive approach is to work in 20-minute chunks, with breaks for review and discussion. After months of book learning, leaders are usually astonished at how the mocks unfold. It can take a while to master the format’s unique rhythms. But, by breaking down tape and remaining open to advice, leaders can use the mocks to build toward a poised and natural performance.

http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/inside-the-most-insider-campaign-...

terrytowel

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

I haven't changed my attitude. But I'm sure if you asked around they'd say the same thing.

It's arrogant of Stephen Harper to pull out of these debates.

And if Harper doesn't show up, there isn't much point in having them.

If Harper does show up, the NDP will be there.

When John Tory pulled the same stunt (saying he wouldn't attend any debates Doug Ford wasn't at), Olivia Chow had a different reaction. Saying it was an "insult" to voters.

“Mr. Tory, stop hiding, stop running away from the truth and stop saying anything to get elected,” Chow said in a press conference behind City Hall on Thursday.

“Mr. Tory stop hiding, stop picking and choosing who you would speak to and attend all of the debates and don’t be afraid of debating me.”

How can you agree with Tom Mulcair for doing the EXACT same thing John Tory did? When Olivia made it an issue a year ago?

terrytowel

takeitslowly wrote:

I hope Tom Mulcair didn't just cost the NDP his majority government by refusing to debate without Harper's presence.

Dumbest poitical move I have ever seen in awhile. Truly a wtf moment. Is Tom Mulcair a liberal insider?

What I think is that this is a tag-team move by the Cons & the NDP to get the network debate cancelled.

So that Justin Trudeau can be deprived of 14 million viewers hearing his pitch to vote Liberal.

I hope that the network moves forward with the debate. If they do, the NDP just gave Trudeau 2 hours of free airtime to 14 million people in Canada. Airtime the NDP will not get.

Sean in Ottawa

terrytowel wrote:

takeitslowly wrote:

I hope Tom Mulcair didn't just cost the NDP his majority government by refusing to debate without Harper's presence.

Dumbest poitical move I have ever seen in awhile. Truly a wtf moment. Is Tom Mulcair a liberal insider?

What I think is that this is a tag-team move by the Cons & the NDP to get the network debate cancelled.

So that Justin Trudeau can be deprived of 14 million viewers hearing his pitch to vote Liberal.

I hope that the network moves forward with the debate. If they do, the NDP just gave Trudeau 2 hours of free airtime to 14 million people in Canada. Airtime the NDP will not get.

I do not think this is coordinated. But I sure don't get why. It looks like a stupid move to me. I could even understand just this one but Mulcair should go if it is only himself talking. This is silly and it is going to hurt. Even supporters can't fathom it. Lots of comment on this.

takeitslowly

becasue you hate the NDP terrytowel? I thought you said Trudeau is OVER regardless. why do you care to put down the NDP?

you are weird.

 

I am just mad at Tom Mulcair , i will still vote NDP.

terrytowel

takeitslowly wrote:

becasue you hate the NDP terrytowel? I thought you said Trudeau is OVER regardless. why do you care to put down the NDP?

you are weird.

I am just mad at Tom Mulcair , i will still vote NDP.

I find that you use the word 'hate' frequently (you hate this, you hate that, etc..)  I DO NOT hate anyone, as I don't have hate in my heart. Again I'm an independent, and have voted NDP in the past. Contray to popular belief I even voted for Olivia Chow in 1997. But that was more a vote for Alexa McDonough, not Olivia.

NDP or Liberal, I don't care which one. As long as it is not Harper.

But this move about the debates is very cynical politcs. Even rabid NDP supporters are finding this hard to defend

takeitslowly

I might have donated to the NDP , instead i emaied them that theres no donation from me because Tom Mulcair's copying Harper's tactic. This is bullshit. Hes hurting the party for no reason.

terrytowel

btw this also means Mulcair has pulled out of the Women's debate as Harper will not be there. He had confirmed, along with Elizabeth May. But I guess that will be withdrawn

socialdemocrati...

There's so much bullshit in this thread it's disgusting.

The NDP is the only party that has committed to as many debates as possible. 

"Our priority is to have Tom Mulcair debate Stephen Harper as often as possible, whenever and wherever possible"

Harper is the one who said they he won't commit to the consortium debates.

Trudeau wouldn't commit to the non-consortium debates.

That has been the state of affairs for four months. Mulcair wanting to do all the debates, Trudeau and Harper playing chicken about which debates they will or won't accept.

And after all that Mulcair is still saying he would still show up to the debate if Harper stops screwing around and shows up.

Don't twist it around.

terrytowel

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

There's so much bullshit in this thread it's disgusting.

The NDP is the only party that has committed to as many debates as possible. 

"Our priority is to have Tom Mulcair debate Stephen Harper as often as possible, whenever and wherever possible"

Harper is the one who said they he won't commit to the consortium debates.

Trudeau wouldn't commit to the non-consortium debates.

That has been the state of affairs for four months. Mulcair wanting to do all the debates, Trudeau and Harper playing chicken about which debates they will or won't accept.

And after all that Mulcair is still saying he would still show up to the debate if Harper stops screwing around and shows up.

Don't twist it around.

John Tory Press Secretary "Our priority is to have John Tory debate Doug Ford as often as possible, whenever and wherever possible"

So basically you agreed with Olivia Chow when she slammed John Tory of skipping debates when Doug Ford wasn't going to be there. But when Tom Mulcair does it, you are okay with it.

Have I got that right?

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

It seems to me that Harper is avoiding the Consortium debates in order to avoid having to debate the senate scandal.

takeitslowly

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-ndp-threatens-to-pu... Did you read the news?

 

I fucking %%% Mulcair for doing this to the NDP. We took a beating on the internet and he might have destroyed the party's chance of winning because Mulcair doesnt want to debate.

NorthReport

How is the Macleans debate being broadcast?

Can the CBC broadcast the Macleans debate on Aug 6?

Left Turn Left Turn's picture

The Macleans debate is being broadcast on CityTV.

Pondering

takeitslowly wrote:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-election-2015-ndp-threatens-to-pu... Did you read the news?

I fucking hate Mulcair for doing this to the NDP. We took a beating on the internet and he might have destroyed the party's chance of winning because Mulcair doesnt want to debate. Fuck him!

This also seems very arrogant:

CBC News has learned the NDP will only consider debate invitations until Friday, Aug. 7.

That is just a week from now. Normally the writ is dropped 5 weeks before the election so the debates are set after that. Why does the NDP need a cut off date only a week away!

The poll numbers really seems to have gone to the NDP's head.

kropotkin1951

Right or wrong the message I get is that there are two parties vieing for government and the NDP is only interested in replacing the Conservatives in office not in being a fringe party like the Greens and potentially the Liberals after this election.

Have the Christian Heritage people or the Marxist Leninists been invited to the consortium debate. If not then why should the Greens and the Liberals agree to debate when only some of the parties are allowed to participate?  After all if as little as 3% of the voters chose one of them and the Greens lose only 1% of their vote either party would out poll the E.May show.

Don't Canadians have a right to hear all the parties or is it just the Greens and Liberals that need special rules??

NorthReport

thanks leftTurn

The CBC could broadcast it

So why don't they?

socialdemocrati...

terrytowel wrote:
John Tory Press Secretary "Our priority is to have John Tory debate Doug Ford as often as possible, whenever and wherever possible"

So basically you agreed with Olivia Chow when she slammed John Tory of skipping debates when Doug Ford wasn't going to be there. But when Tom Mulcair does it, you are okay with it.

Have I got that right?

You don't even have the facts right.

John Tory pulled out of all of the debates for no apparent reason. Same as Harper. Same as Trudeau.

Olivia Chow was ready to debate him. Same as Mulcair.

When John Tory pulled out of the debate, Olivia Chow decided there was no longer any point in showing up. Same as Mulcair.

Why show up to a debate that's fallen apart?

NorthReport

There may be a few people here at these discussion boards obsessed with politics but most Canadians are not
We need to take average Canadians into account
do you think they want such a long election campaign?
Do you think Canadians want a multitude of debates
Of course they don't
so where is your consideration for the vast majority of Canadians
Thank goodness Mulcair has made the decision he has
The only people I hear whining about this is basically the Liberal media complex and a few others

bekayne wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Tom will be participating in 4 debates, double the number that Jack did in 2011, our last election.

The length of the campaign is also double what it was in 2011

Pondering

The CBC Power Panel weights in.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2672888194/

 

takeitslowly

people think Bil C 51 are only for those who are "obsessed with politics", that bill is the only reason NDP is leading , why would they risk giving the liberals and green more talking point that the NDP is  not democratic. Its STUPID and i am upset. I dont think anyone is defending this move except the NDP partisans.

NorthReport

The Liberal Media Complex you mean

Pondering wrote:

The CBC Power Panel weights in.

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Politics/ID/2672888194/

 

NorthReport

---

NorthReport

There may be a few people here at these discussion boards obsessed with politics but most Canadians are not
We need to take average Canadians into account
do you think they want such a long election campaign?
Do you think Canadians want a multitude of debates?
Of course they don't
Where is the consideration for the vast majority of Canadians

Thank goodness The NDP has made the decision he has
The only people I hear whining about this is basically the Liberal media complex and a few others

bekayne wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

Tom will be participating in 4 debates, double the number that Jack did in 2011, our last election.

The length of the campaign is also double what it was in 2011

NorthReport

Agreed

Why does't the CBC broadcast macleans debate? No one from the Liberal media complex wants to answer that question why not?

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

There's so much bullshit in this thread it's disgusting.

The NDP is the only party that has committed to as many debates as possible. 

"Our priority is to have Tom Mulcair debate Stephen Harper as often as possible, whenever and wherever possible"

Harper is the one who said they he won't commit to the consortium debates.

Trudeau wouldn't commit to the non-consortium debates.

That has been the state of affairs for four months. Mulcair wanting to do all the debates, Trudeau and Harper playing chicken about which debates they will or won't accept.

And after all that Mulcair is still saying he would still show up to the debate if Harper stops screwing around and shows up.

Don't twist it around.

NorthReport

Bingo!

The universe is unfolding as it should

The CBC can broadcast the event on August 6
Isn't that their job?

quizzical wrote:

i'm fine with it why bother. keep your eyes on the prize of getting at Harper. don't delute the message etc.....

Pondering

takeitslowly wrote:

people think Bil C 51 are only for those who are "obsessed with politics", that bill is the only reason NDP is leading , why would they risk giving the liberals and green more talking point that the NDP is  not democratic. Its STUPID and i am upset. I dont think anyone is defending this move except the NDP partisans.

I wouldn't necessarily say the only reason but yes, big mistake on the part of Trudeau to support C 51. I don't think this issue with Mulcair is on the same scale although I think it will hurt him.

NorthReport

The CBC can broadcast the debate so why don't they?

Pondering

NorthReport wrote:
The CBC can broadcast the debate so why don't they?

Who says they can?

DLivings

Last tally I saw re debate participation was something like this... 

ndp - 8

cons - 4

libs - 3

green - 3

bq - 1

While it's very noble to take every debate challenge, it's not just about being the biggest debator on the block.  It's important to consider the capacity of a leader (even one as able as Mulcair) to be spending night after night on the debate circuit.  Put yourself in the debator's shoes.  This is not an easy prep... and it's toll is both emotionally and intellectually exhausting.  

Strategically it's also not clear that "I'll meet you on every corner" is the wisest move.  Currently it's an even game and, while it would be nice to show our guy in combat on every street corner, it simply may not be the wisest use of Tom's capacity or his time.

I have to come down with NR on this one.

NorthReport

You can watch the debate on cable or satellite TV and also via streaming on your computer

terrytowel

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

You don't even have the facts right.

John Tory pulled out of all of the debates for no apparent reason. Same as Harper. Same as Trudeau.

Olivia Chow was ready to debate him. Same as Mulcair.

When John Tory pulled out of the debate, Olivia Chow decided there was no longer any point in showing up. Same as Mulcair.

Why show up to a debate that's fallen apart?

No YOU don't have the facts right. He did NOT pull out of all debates.

John Tory made it CLEAR. If Ford was not going to be at a debate, he was not going to be there.

http://www.torontosun.com/2014/09/25/john-tory-running-scared-from-debat...

John Tory dismissed Chow’s attack.

“I debated her (Wednesday) night, I’m debating her tonight, I’m debating her tomorrow,” he said Thursday. “I just want to have a fair situation for myself in this campaign relative to Mr. Ford who is a serious competitor where I have to make sure I can have the flexibility in my own campaign to do what is best. 

“(Ford) seems to be able to cancel out of debates without being asked any questions by anybody and I’m just saying I think I reserve the right to review my participation on a case-by-case basis.”

So you agreed with Olvia Chow outrage last year. But now you think it is okay for Mulcair to do the same thing as John Tory did.

Have I got that right?

terrytowel

kropotkin1951 wrote:

Right or wrong the message I get is that there are two parties vieing for government and the NDP is only interested in replacing the Conservatives in office not in being a fringe party like the Greens and potentially the Liberals after this election.

Using your logic Olivia Chow should have been dropped from the mayors debates. And those debates should of been only Ford & Tory since they were 1-2 in the polls at the time. As Chow was a distant third in all polling.

terrytowel

DLivings wrote:

While it's very noble to take every debate challenge, it's not just about being the biggest debator on the block.  It's important to consider the capacity of a leader (even one as able as Mulcair) to be spending night after night on the debate circuit.  Put yourself in the debator's shoes.  This is not an easy prep... and it's toll is both emotionally and intellectually exhausting. 

So you agreed with John Tory view on picking and choosing debates and opposed Olivia Chow outrage over Tory debate stance.

nicky

I'm not sure what I think about this.

On the one hand I would have liked Tom to take on all comers.

On the other, we have the example of the "Opposition Debate" in the recent UK election which only benefited Cameron who boycotted it. Milliband was the target of the various microparties, just as Tom would be. While I have little doubt Tom would prevail but he would potentially trivialize his position as the main alternative to Harper.

No one can say Tom is afraid to debate. He will be in four, likely five dbates, more than in any other election.

And no, I certainly do not grieve for Elizabeth May. Yesterday she gave a disgusting performance accusing the Conservatives and the NDP of "collusion" to keep her out of te debates, as if the two major parties are as obsessed with her as she is with herself.

Stockholm

The election should be focused on attacking Harper. Period. What's the point of a nationwide debate where all the opposition leaders attack each either while Harper watches it all on TV sporting a Cheshire Cat grin?

Pondering

The consortium debates are not just another two on a long list. Harper has refused press access throughout his tenure. His refusal to answer questions or speak to the press as PMs have always done in the past has done severe damage to our democracy. I heavily fault the press for not staying on this and for not being much more hostile to Harper due to his denial of access. Normally the main parties are all consulted on the debates and the main networks consult with one another as well. This time Harper decided that he will dictate to the other parties which debates will occur and with whom. 

Apparently, the NDP supports this new system in which the PM dictates the terms of debate.

 

socialdemocrati...

terrytowel wrote:
Have I got that right?

You've now devolved to repeating yourself, and posting multiple replies to get your discredited point across.

Trudeau and Harper were the first ones to cherrypick which debates they'd show up to. Maybe if you were this vocal four months ago, they would be forced to attend all the debates, and Mulcair would follow suit as he promised.

 

terrytowel

socialdemocraticmiddle Deflecting

Just admit it, you disagree with Olivia Chow on this issue. & if you do, that is fine. No problem with that.

Michael Moriarity Michael Moriarity's picture

nicky wrote:

And no, I certainly do not grieve for Elizabeth May. Yesterday she gave a disgusting performance accusing the Conservatives and the NDP of "collusion" to keep her out of te debates, as if the two major parties are as obsessed with her as she is with herself.

Yes, what a pompous fool she can be sometimes.

Pondering

socialdemocraticmiddle wrote:

terrytowel wrote:
Have I got that right?

You've now devolved to repeating yourself, and posting multiple replies to get your discredited point across.

Trudeau and Harper were the first ones to cherrypick which debates they'd show up to. Maybe if you were this vocal four months ago, they would be forced to attend all the debates, and Mulcair would follow suit as he promised.

Trudeau accepted the consortium debates right away. He resisted Harper's new system of dictating the debates. The NDP surrendered. Harper is in charge of the NDP debate schedule. I hope that Harper screws him over good in the Conservative friendly debates Harper is setting up for himself.

mark_alfred

Stockholm wrote:
The election should be focused on attacking Harper. Period. What's the point of a nationwide debate where all the opposition leaders attack each either while Harper watches it all on TV sporting a Cheshire Cat grin?

Full agreement.

Pondering

mark_alfred wrote:

Stockholm wrote:
The election should be focused on attacking Harper. Period. What's the point of a nationwide debate where all the opposition leaders attack each either while Harper watches it all on TV sporting a Cheshire Cat grin?

Full agreement.

The point would be informing voters and giving them more of an opportunity to see their potential leaders in action as well as highlighting Harper's lack of availability to the public. His absence would further illustrate his autocratic nature.

Harper's absence could keep the debating on a more progressive plane and help voters differenciate between the NDP and the Liberals. I guess the NDP is afraid of that.

terrytowel

It is about keeping Justin Trudeau off the airwaves. No debate, no exposure to millions of Canadians.

Pages