Phendrana Drifts

I was six years old in 1984, and at that tender age, I likely didn't care who won the leaders' debate in the federal election. And I'm bitter about that, because that was the epitome of a political debate - found here thanks to the CBC - and every single debate I've seen since the mid-nineties today I wait with baited breath for an exchange like that. And every time I'm disappointed including tonight. But that's ok, I'm getting used to debate disappointment.

I think Ed won, as the other two came across as a mixture of nervous or thin-skinned, but of course I'm biased. Good back and forth, but no interrupting or sparks - just gentle debate. Neither Jim or Ted went directly for each other's throats, but almost as a result they had very little to say. And if I had a nickel for every time Ted went after Ottawa I'd have... well tonight I would only have a buck, but still, that's some twenty times. On the other hand, Ed in his body language and what he said was so inviting and inclusive I wanted to campaign for next election right then and there, with that message.

Also, no one seemed to have a thirty-second sound-bite that is fun to share, other than Morton's attack on the reporters (which I found odd, but others found feisty). Also, given how much policy has come out in previous forums, this one was pretty light - only an Alberta pension plan and health care was given any serious consideration. Albertans have additional issues, in case no one noticed.

Thanks to the Edmonton Journal for being such a gracious host tonight to let me watch it at their place.

3 Comments:

At 11:24 PM, c-lo said…

I think Ed in general was able to differentiate himself throughout the debate. That said, his closing statement was pretty much note-perfect. I do think Dinning comes across very weak, especially on his healthcare position which I still do not understand.

Morton was good and I thought got some good points in against Dinning and defended Ed against the media report kent said.

I think Ed gave himself a chance to win... I must say, you guys should consider a delegated convention instead of this one member, one vote thing. The pagaentry is good to have and more importantly, it makes it easier for members to pick the best leader for the party. I'm really souring on the concept of enabling a group to take over a party...
At 11:15 AM, Duncan said…

But one-member, one-vote leadership selection produces such a legitimate result, which is the whole point. And that whole easier for members to pick the right leader didn't exactly work for the Liberals last time. Or Turner in 1984 - imagine if Chretien had led in '84...
At 1:07 PM, Allie said…

I think that everyone should have a vote, thats grassroots democracy. You get to go to the ballot box and mark your ballot the way you want.

<< Home

Twitter Updates

3 Comments: