![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Apr. 13th, 2011 08:51 amWhy does http://www.deafcamp.ca/ have embedded music? Of all web sites that could automatically play embedded music...
Apr. 13th, 2011
(no subject)
Apr. 13th, 2011 11:19 amSo...leader's debate. This was my impression.
Harper: CREEPY! What the hell, he rarely even looked at the person he was addressing. I think he was probably looking at a camera...but it was rarely the camera used to air the shot, so he was always looking into the middle distance, looking like he was talking to himself. He tried too hard to be calm and unruffled. Now to be fair, as a PM who was overturned, he knew he would be under attack the hardest, and I am sure his advisors told him that he must maintain composure...ride the wave...and he did. His goal was probably not to gain ground, just not to lose ground. Deflect. Still, it's not what I want to see in a debate, and that made me annoyed by his blasé demeanour.
Layton: Well, the smarmy car salesman is back. This was Layton's problem earlier in his career, and he came out of it a bit, but it was back. "Hey have we got a deal for you. Vote now, and we'll thrown in this small business subsidy, free with every purchase. Come on down to Layton's house of congress, where the deals are craaaaazyyyyy!". He was certainly the most cheerful debater, which made me smile a bit, with a joke and a quip and a gotcha. He had a great sting on Ignatieff when in the middle of everyone slamming Harper, he turned around with something to the effect of "You have the lowest attendance record of any MP. Most people who don't show up for work, don't get a promotion". Zing!
Ignatieff: Iggy did 2 things very well in this debate. First of all, he had (for me), the right amount of measured passion. He didn't lose control, but he clearly had a fire, and was willing to let it show. He grilled Harper, he didn't just parrot platform lines, she brought up specific points, and was willing to articulate clear dividing lines. He also said with utter crystal clarity that he would *never* seek a coalition. I am not crazy with that assertion actually, but I have to respect the certainty of it, laying his attitude out on the table. He also was the best at keeping the conversation on topic. Each segment of the debate centered around a question from a canadian ("How would you make a minority parliament work?" for example). Anytime people started straying to other topics as they went back and forth, he would bring it back to what they were supposed to be debating. I hope some of that resonates with the electorate.
Duceppe: It's hard to judge Duceppe in these debates. Since he can't be PM, and can't win the election, he has utter freedom to just say what he wants and go where he wants. That makes him entertaining to watch, and he stuck Harper with some excellent points (hello 2004 coalition effort by Harper), and was like a bulldog, forcing people to answer a question. It's not a fair judgment though, since he can be a bit of an ass, without risking it hurting his election efforts.
Harper: CREEPY! What the hell, he rarely even looked at the person he was addressing. I think he was probably looking at a camera...but it was rarely the camera used to air the shot, so he was always looking into the middle distance, looking like he was talking to himself. He tried too hard to be calm and unruffled. Now to be fair, as a PM who was overturned, he knew he would be under attack the hardest, and I am sure his advisors told him that he must maintain composure...ride the wave...and he did. His goal was probably not to gain ground, just not to lose ground. Deflect. Still, it's not what I want to see in a debate, and that made me annoyed by his blasé demeanour.
Layton: Well, the smarmy car salesman is back. This was Layton's problem earlier in his career, and he came out of it a bit, but it was back. "Hey have we got a deal for you. Vote now, and we'll thrown in this small business subsidy, free with every purchase. Come on down to Layton's house of congress, where the deals are craaaaazyyyyy!". He was certainly the most cheerful debater, which made me smile a bit, with a joke and a quip and a gotcha. He had a great sting on Ignatieff when in the middle of everyone slamming Harper, he turned around with something to the effect of "You have the lowest attendance record of any MP. Most people who don't show up for work, don't get a promotion". Zing!
Ignatieff: Iggy did 2 things very well in this debate. First of all, he had (for me), the right amount of measured passion. He didn't lose control, but he clearly had a fire, and was willing to let it show. He grilled Harper, he didn't just parrot platform lines, she brought up specific points, and was willing to articulate clear dividing lines. He also said with utter crystal clarity that he would *never* seek a coalition. I am not crazy with that assertion actually, but I have to respect the certainty of it, laying his attitude out on the table. He also was the best at keeping the conversation on topic. Each segment of the debate centered around a question from a canadian ("How would you make a minority parliament work?" for example). Anytime people started straying to other topics as they went back and forth, he would bring it back to what they were supposed to be debating. I hope some of that resonates with the electorate.
Duceppe: It's hard to judge Duceppe in these debates. Since he can't be PM, and can't win the election, he has utter freedom to just say what he wants and go where he wants. That makes him entertaining to watch, and he stuck Harper with some excellent points (hello 2004 coalition effort by Harper), and was like a bulldog, forcing people to answer a question. It's not a fair judgment though, since he can be a bit of an ass, without risking it hurting his election efforts.