Oh hell, what do the Brits know about Canadian politics? Based on the debates I watched, I'd say quite a bit. Here's the conclusion in its entirety:
And, we’re done.
The immediate winner tonight is Elizabeth May. But the strategic victor is Tom Mulcair’s NDP.
Under attack from the other three parties, Harper withered. But while May rose to fill the room, and Mulcair’s calm demeanor gave him the last word over and over again, Trudeau failed to hit the near-impossible moving target he had to hit to put his party back in contention.
7 comments:
.. exactly ..
I could not disagree more.
Considering the odds Harper did very well.
Liz May shone like a star ( that she is) Mulcair was always playing catchup and Trudeau was rude.
I cannot abide Harper but he is an effective politician but a terrible economist.
The usual problem with debating Cons showed itself here. All political debaters lead with their best facts and leave others out. Most will fudge things a little bit, or indulge in rhetoric which sounds pleasant but means nothing much. Often they will respond to uncomfortable points made to them by sidestepping in some way, shifting the topic to something more favourable. Last night, all the leaders did that sort of thing.
But Cons will simply make shit up and tell blatant falsehoods. And the media will generally not call them on it. So if Mulcair, Trudeau and May were arguing what to do about a black pipeline, Harper would just claim the pipeline was white and move on. The audience can't go out to rural whereverthehell, look at the pipeline and see that it's black, so Harper's lie seems just as valid as everyone else's truth. Especially when the media busily talk forever about which of the leaders sounded most convincing when discussing the pipeline's colour without ever actually mentioning the fact of what colour it is.
My single word for each leader after the debate:
Trudeau = Novice
May = Knowledgeable
Mulcair = Effective
Harper = Robotic (or Liar)
I couldn't watch more than 15 minutes because I couldn't believe Harper would have the audacity to stand there and lie the way he does. It's shameful.
.. I watched every moment.. looking at every nuance, heard every single word..
I leap at opportunities to catch it verbatim, live...
without any spin, context, bias or positioning ..
just like I did when Harper emerged from his appointment
with the Governor General ...
Anyong said.....Elizabeth May alone, stuck to her knowledgeable, credible and clearly gained experience during that debate that wasn't. She knew the legislation, understood implications, stated her reasons for consulting with those holding different points of view in order to build consensus. She is familiar with parliamentary procedure and since she is a lawyer, told the truth about the whole shooting match. However, she like the cheese, stands alone. How many times did Harper say, "Let me be clear"? What was he? Smashed? She knows, understands and respects Canadian law and is willing to work within the law that made our country great. Mr.Harper changes the law to suit his current and dangerous agenda. She is willing to use solid environmental regulations to protect Canadians' drinking water, habitat and resources, Mr. Harper ignores these regulations. She is willing to sit down with the Premiers while Mr. Harper dismisses them wanting to be the sole ruler of the country. She aims for a better future for Canada. He wants a win. He probably will since he only has to convince 5% of the voting public. He has tried to buy some, scare some, and disgust the rest so that they won't even bother to vote. It's his kind of win. Elizabeth May is the best leader we will not have. We Canadians don't like smart people who tell the truth. What a chance missed. Why is that?
Anyong said....An important addition....Elizabeth May would move Canada into its rightful position as it once held. Respected by the world for what it stood for and everyone and his dog knows what that was.
Post a Comment