English-language leaders' debate 2011

103 posts / 0 new
Last post
RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

I liked Jack's crime bit. Listen to Shawn Atleo about education. Why are FN's so overrepresented in jail? Because we don't treat them as human beings.

murray dobbin murray dobbin's picture

Harper gets away completely with his low-tax future argument.   But Iggy sounds credible on how the government can find $$ - repeats the jets, jails and corp tax cuts mantra. And Jack goes after Harper on cuts for big bisiness versus small biz and harper lies his way out of it.  Harper lies again - every credible economist says... Complete BS but again he managed to frame the corporate tax issue before the debate. No one is aying the obvious: that tax cuts mean less money for insfratsructure, education, worker training, child care  - all things that business needs to be competitive. A lost opprtunity that is unforgiveable. By refusing to challenge Harper they give him the entire field on tax cuts.

Life, the unive...

Well the the most clear outcome is that Paikin should never be allowed to moderate a debate, even at the highschool level, ever again.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

General impression: Ignatieff is revealing himself as mini-Harper "I will be in control, I will decide" lots of my way or the highway stuff. And I can't believe no one let their inner school teacher run wild and cut Harper down on his attempt to redefine how the government operates.... no, the party with the most seats does NOT get to to form the government, they get the first chance to gain Parliament's confidence.... they can blow it. Do they teach any civics in whatever Ontario town he is from?

Wish Gilles and Jack could garner enough seats to form a coalition government between them.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Rebecca West wrote:

Layton: Your party has a long history of making promises and breaking them right after elections.

Ignatieff: Well, at least we get elected.

 

Brilliant.  Just brilliant.

Serious, I'm behind on tape delay?

Waiting for this. Gah!

murray dobbin murray dobbin's picture

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

Well the the most clear outcome is that Paikin should never be allowed to moderate a debate, even at the highschool level, ever again.

 

I agree - he is incredibly biased and ideological.

Life, the unive...

Rebecca West wrote:

Layton: Your party has a long history of making promises and breaking them right after elections.

Ignatieff: Well, at least we get elected.

 

Brilliant.  Just brilliant.

Actually I think with Layton's retort Ignatieff came out looking really bad in that exchange.  He played right into the entitlement and arrogance meme for the Liberals.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Let me be clear: that debate was depressing.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

bagkitty wrote:

Wish Gilles and Jack could garner enough seats to form a coalition government between them.

We can dream bagkitty! I'm optimistic tonight. We have to be.

melovesproles

I think Rebecca was being sarcastic.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

melovesproles wrote:

I think Rebecca was being sarcastic.

oh im quite sure too. that was unreal.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

brilliant for Jack though so Im not sure she was that sarcastic.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

melovesproles wrote:

I think Rebecca was being sarcastic.

It's brilliant for Jack

Life, the unive...

Well CBC just went full on Liberal.  So typical.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

this credit card fee shit really deserves no truck in this kind of debate. otherwise, well done jack

MegB

Catchfire wrote:

Four white guys fielding questions by all-white askers. This is democracy in Canada.

 

And now we can watch the all-white aftershow.  It would be jaw-dropping, if it weren't so predictable.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

lol, drew lots and it came out jack, gilles, count and simply not true liar

the last two seemed to get extra time as well, meh

lib, tory, same old story

play it again cbc

murray dobbin murray dobbin's picture

Harper did what we should have expe ted him to do: he framed the issues to divert attention from his record and lied blatantly whenever he needed to. All of this was carefully planned and practised.  A patholoical liar trying to sound like a chuld care worker. The crisis in democracy continues.

Fidel

Layton slew both of them when he called Iggy Harper's best friend after the Liberals voted with the Harpers over a hundred times.

And then after Iggy drones on about democracy, Layton pointed out that Michael Ignatieff was absent from the House of Commons 70% of the time when the NDP were present and voting against the right wing ReformaTory agenda.

Jack was the clear winner, no question about it.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

I was surprised at how lame Ignatieff was - I expected more from someone who apparently was a master of debates at Harvard. And Harper - he did seem to be on Valium.

 

Jack was the clear winner.

Paulitical Junkie

This is about what I expected from Canadian media. From Evan Solomon's twitter:

"Early media folks giving debate to SH for staying steady and performing well. Will take time to find out what sticks in mind of Canadians. Days..."

 

kim elliott kim elliott's picture

That is quite a good feature. I wonder who/how they are doing this. While the debate has been going on, I received I think six "reality checks" from the a provincial NDP office - I imagine they could partly compile it from those (but then you'd have to fact check those "facts"...)

On CBC, Manbridge just pointed out Harper looked at reporters while they asked questions - unlike his behaviour towards the leaders during the debate.

Soulforger

N.Beltov wrote:

Gilles Duceppe: I'd like to congratulate Mr Harper for answering a question from a citizen for the first time in this campaign.

 

Direct Hit! (Harper only tightened the mock smile pasted on his face. No reply. )

HA HA!  Harper has to go!

kim elliott kim elliott's picture

Paulitical Junkie wrote:
This is about what I expected from Canadian media. From Evan Solomon's twitter:

"Early media folks giving debate to SH for staying steady and performing well. Will take time to find out what sticks in mind of Canadians. Days..."

 

Can you still find that tweet? I just looked for it, and it appears to have been deleted...

Paulitical Junkie

Hmm, I copied and pasted it from the CBC.ca live chat. I assumed it was from his Twitter but maybe he wrote it directly in the chat. Or he deleted it.

Unionist

Unionist wrote:
Ok, I've just postponed a long-standing night out on the town (well, evening out on the neighbourhood) in order to watch this simulacrum of democracy. It had better be good, or else... umm... yeah!

Not sure who won, but I know exactly who lost.

I'll never get that evening back.

 

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Paulitical Junkie

Am I the only one who heard Harper say (in response to Ignatieff, I believe): "I do not accept the truths of your accusations."

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Unionist, I was just about to berate you for clearly throwing us under the bus and re-opting for your (Tuesday?) night-on-the-town. And here you are claiming you saw the whole thing and deprived us of your penetrating analysis. Well, we're waiting.

ETA: Boom Boom: a "hashtag" is a twitter term used to categorize twitter posts. It's prefaced by a number sign. For example, the hashtag for this election is #elxn41 (the 41st election). "Fail" is an internet slang term which indicates a mistake or screw-up. Layton chose, for some reason, to put these two terms together and I have no idea what it means! (But I think I like it.)

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

What does "hashtag fail" mean?

ETA:

Know Your Lingo - Hashtag Fail

Lens Solution

Harper may end up being considered the winner of this debate overall.  I thought he was more relaxed and effective than in previous debates, and much better than in 2008.  He seemed more comfortable with himself than in the past, and stayed focused on the messages he wanted to get across.

Harper maintained good eye-contact with the audience the whole time, and the G8/G20 scandal didn't seem to hurt him much afterall.  He also kept coming back to the theme that this is an unwanted and unnecessary election and the fourth one in 7 years.  Surprisingly, neither Ignatieff nor Layton took him down on this point by reminding people that he called an election when he felt like it in 2008 that people didn't want, and broke his own election laws.

Ignatieff seemed awkward at the beginning, but gained momentum and effectiveness as he went along.  Harper was less effective at the end than in the beginning.  Layton also got in some good moments and was more effective at debating Ignatieff and taking him on than Harper was.

ilha formosa

Life, the universe, everything wrote:
This terrible broadcast is making the case for an independent debate organization with Elections Canada or something oversight.  The production values are terrible.

The broadcast consortium obviously didn't care much that there was a horrible echo in the room. There is a bias in the camera shots and the switching of views. Why show a certain leader at a certain time with a certain expression? I'd like to see a split screen with views of all leaders faces along the bottom, and a broad view of all of them standing along the top.

Unionist

@Catchfire, who is trying to provoke me into joining this thread:

1. Harper won. He totally bamboozled them. They obviously didn't predict this approach. Didn't rant on about the coalition - didn't even raise it. Didn't attack Duceppe (until Duceppe finally baited him into it). Didn't talk about the past (Liberal sins, etc.). He's a Prime Minister defending his record, focused on what is most important to people (the economy), enjoying the applause of the IMF and all the economic experts, not interest in petty squabbles, wants to work with everyone (but hard to do so with people whose only interest is making trouble and demanding elections for personal gain) - and he kept his cool throughout.

2. He lied, of course, pathologically and without pausing for breath. But the only way to deal with a liar is by telling the truth. Unfortunately, Ignatieff and Layton were hesitant, for whatever reasons, to proclaim the truth, the whole truth, and the passion behind the truth. So Harper got a pass on lots of stuff.

3. Layton kept attacking both Harper and Ignatieff, with almost ritual evenhandedness. Huge mistake. He should have ignored Ignatieff (who was making it easy to be ignored), and in equal measure (1) refuted Harper's lies with truth, and (2) spoken with passion about what and whom his party represents which is so dramatically different from the other two. Only sporadically, and toward the end, did he start to do (2). But he was working from a script which said, "mention PR; mention Afghanistan; mention the $4500 per job created; doctors and nurses; don't forget the credit cards for god's sake". Etc. I would have picked one or two topics of profound concern and talked only, and in detail, about them. Layton (I believe) is far better than his scriptwriters and spindoctors, and you could see him almost breaking through. But not enough. The NDP will succeed by showing that the two poles are the Conservatives and the NDP - that only the NDP can offer a better vision. The way to do that is to actually offer that vision, not make irrelevant comments about the Liberals.

4. Ignatieff was a joke - but what do you expect when you have to follow a party line like the Liberals'. If you're going to keep yapping about "jets, jails, and tax cuts", you should have the nerve to say something better than, "we'll put the jets out to public tender". Something like: "There will be no attention paid to any new jet orders - not even thinking about it - until we have balanced the budget, lifted Canadians out of poverty, and restored Canada's dignity in the world arena, which was not built by fighter jets". But I would have liked to hear Layton - anyone - say that. Duceppe came closest, but he had very parochial objectives, so it wasn't that effective, other than a few good lines he got off.

5. They all attacked Harper, making him look like the PM who only needs a majority to stop the "bickering". If they were going to attack him, they should have said nothing against each other (I'm looking at Jack) and forcefully said that this man has started destroying Canada and mustn't be allowed to continue. But they are so fearful of the "coalition" smear that Harper got his way without even having to use it! Irony.

Those are initial thoughts, Catchfire, but my overall feelings are depression, disappointment, and regret (about my evening).

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Excellent summary, Unionist. Although I agree with whoever it was that said Harper looked like he was on Valium.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

I feel much the same as unionist, except that I feel less charitable about Jack Layton's performance. I no longer believe he is better than his scriptwriters and spindoctors. I think he is their product, and I think their product is second-rate, like them.

Life, the unive...

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

I feel much the same as unionist, except that I feel less charitable about Jack Layton's performance. I no longer believe he is better than his scriptwriters and spindoctors. I think he is their product, and I think their product is second-rate, like them.

Why because he wouldn't turn the other cheek and let Ignatieff and his fakery off the hook.  I was very pleased that Layton exposed both Harper and Ignatieff as the hypocrits both of them are.  Why the NDP should be held to a standard the Liberals never are is beyond me.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

We'll probably get a Harper majority now just to keep these debates away from decent folk for the next four years or so.

Fidel

Jack won hands down with pointing out the awful records of both the old parties on health care, the environment, education, immigration, and with pointing out that Iggy has been Harper's bff since 2008. 

And Jack won the corporate welfare debate, too, after pointing out that the Tories and Liberals are both responsible for slashing taxes for large and profitable multinational corporations in Canada. The debate didn't go so deep as to why corporate tax cuts don't work to fuel economic growth as previously claimed by ideologues on the right. But the two oldest parties are virtually indistinguishable on taxpayer handouts to already profitable companies, or at least, this was true until the time arrived to make grandiose election promises in 2011. The two old parties have no credibility on corporate tax cuts as CCPA reports have mentioned recently.

Overall, Harper tried to sound a lot like Jack. And Iggy tried to shadow Jack. However, there was only one Jack Layton in this debate.

Duceppe finished a strong second.

Life, the unive...

Boom Boom wrote:

We'll probably get a Harper majority now just to keep these debates away from decent folk for the next four years or so.

If we get a Harper majority it will be the fault of the Liberals.   Instead of trying to take on the Cons directly, and thus reducing their seat numbers, Iggy went fishing in the smaller NDP pond.   The Liberals have left their entire right flank vulnerable and Iggy's uninspired performance made that worse tonight.   The Liberals need to either s$#t or get off the pot.  If they want to be centrists then they should be going the portion of votes available on their right.  But they have done nothing to try to attract any of those voters.

Lens Solution

If we get a Harper majority, it will actually be the fault of all 3 opposition parties - not just one of them.  All 3 opposition parties are needed in different ridings to take away Conservative seats, and none of the 3 are doing an effective enough job yet.  Even Gilles Duceppe and the BQ are letting the side down with declining numbers in Quebec.  We need them to take away Con seats in Quebec City, and so far most Quebec journalists say the BQ is running a lacklustre campaign.

JeffWells

I've come to despair when I hear Layton's soothing election-cycle voice. He seems to be running to convince Canadians he's trustworthy, or that they should have a beer with him, or jam with him in the garage. Well he's already won those polls. What's been lacking is some indignant fire. Yes, he's "safe" (thank you NDP braintrust), but there's just no spark about him.

I'm ready to say, let's absorb the losses election night and bring on Mulcair.

 

ghoris

I agree that Jack should have gone after Harpo more aggressively, but to be fair, when the media narrative is that your party is hemorrhaging support to the Liberals, it's kind of hard to resist the temptation to take some shots at them.

Iggy was clearly not ready for prime time. Duceppe was overall disappointing compared to previous outings. Harpo probably wins on points by handling pretty much everything that was thrown at him and following his "Look Prime Ministerial" script.

alan smithee alan smithee's picture

Best part of the debate was Layton's zinger about the Senate.

I think Layton,Duceppe and Ignatieff did alright but they should have thrown some harder punches and wipe that permanent smirk off the Emporer's face.

I'm looking forward to the French debate tomorrow.

I'm predicting a major ass kicking at the hands of Gilles Duceppe.

Life, the unive...

Sorry I disagree.   The Liberals have ceded the right wing field to the Conservatives.  They are not even trying to catch votes in that pond. I see no evidence the other two parties have done this to the same degree.   It is about high time progressive started calling the Liberals on their bullshit. 

Stockholm

I can't be objective in watching these debates and I'm very aware that Layton's strategy in a debate has nothing to do with speaking to someone like me (political junkie who always votes NDP) - he targetting a whole different audience. I'm pleasantly surprised that all the pundits seem very positive about Jack's performance and that anecdotally he seems to have done very well. It seems that he got in a few zingers that will get replayed.

I should also add that when the campaign began, there was all this talk about Jack's health and how he looked and if he was going to be able to get through a campaign etc...I thought that he LOOKED very good and if you didn't know that he had had cancer and major surgery four weeks ago and tuned into the debate - you would have thought he was as vigorous as ever.

Fidel

I thought Duceppe came in second to Jack. He was the next most sincere. The other two guys finished tied for lyingest liar. Iggy had a disturbed look on his face for some time after Jack referred to him as Harper's best friend.

And Harper's expressionless face and staring downward way too much was a dead giveaway. Psychologists will tell us that looking down while speaking tends to be associated with lying.

Unionist

Oh, and dare I say I agree with E. May's comment? She said no one talked about women, indigenous peoples, climate change, or Libya.

 

Lens Solution

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

Sorry I disagree.   The Liberals have ceded the right wing field to the Conservatives.  They are not even trying to catch votes in that pond. I see no evidence the other two parties have done this to the same degree.   It is about high time progressive started calling the Liberals on their bullshit. 

So you want the Liberals to be more progressive, but you also want them to move further to the right to appeal to the right-wing?

Ignatieff deserves some credit for spending most of tonight attacking Stephen Harper and his policies.  Ignatieff isn't the greatest leader and he is obviously not going to be around by the time of the next election, but at least I can stand the sight of him - something which I can't where Harper is concerned. 

Lens Solution

ghoris wrote:

alan smithee wrote:

I'm looking forward to the French debate tomorrow.

I'm predicting a major ass kicking at the hands of Gilles Duceppe.

I wouldn't be so quick to predict that Duceppe will dominate Harper.  His performance tonight was pretty lacklustre, even for the English-language debate.  In 2008, Harper handed Duceppe a club to beat him with - namely his comments on the arts cuts and young offenders which seemed to provoke a firestorm of criticism in Quebec.  Duceppe came to the 2008 debate armed with that ammo. He's got nothing comparable in the chamber this time.

And in 2008 it was actually Stephane Dion who was considered the winner of the French debate by the Quebec media.  He came across as passionate and articulate and like Duceppe really went after Harper on the arts cuts issue.  It was Dion's one moment in the sun in a bad campaign, and he managed to raise the Liberals a couple points in Quebec.

ghoris

alan smithee wrote:

I'm looking forward to the French debate tomorrow.

I'm predicting a major ass kicking at the hands of Gilles Duceppe.

I wouldn't be so quick to predict that Duceppe will dominate Harper.  I thought his performance tonight was pretty lacklustre, even for the English-language debate.  Not living in Quebec, I cannot comment directly but many in the punditocracy feel the BQ have not run a great campaign so far.  In 2008, Harper handed Duceppe a club to beat him with - namely his comments on the arts cuts and young offenders which seemed to provoke a firestorm of criticism in Quebec.  Duceppe came to the 2008 debate armed with that ammo. He's got nothing comparable in the chamber this time.

Pages

Topic locked