Débat des chefs: secondes réactions - Macleans.ca

Débat des chefs: secondes réactions


Another poll, this one by CROP for La Presse:
Duceppe et Dion, les grands gagnants

From the French press:
Dion présente un plan économique (La Presse)
A quatre contre Stephen Harper (La Presse)
Tous contre un (Radio-Canada)
Harper assailli de toutes parts (Presse Canadienne)

And the English:
Dion uses debate to lay out economic plan (Globe and Mail)
Harper fights off rivals at French debate (National Post)
PM criticized on economy, environment (Toronto Star)
Leaders gang up on Harper (Ottawa Citizen)
Harper hammered on economy in debate (CP)
Harper gets gang tackled in French debate (CP)
Politesse reigns in debate format that prompted pointed exchanges (CP)
PM on hotseat in debate over climate change (AFP)
Harper targeted on economy, crime in French debate (CBC)
Harper targeted on economy, environment (CTV)
Rivals target Harper on economic troubles (Global TV)

Don Martin: No clear winner at French debate
Jeff Simpson: Debate format, linguistic disadvantage hobbles Harper
Vincent Marissal: Une très longue soirée pour Harper

Filed under:

Débat des chefs: secondes réactions

  1. Jeepers. 32% call May “the least convincing.” That’s gotta hurt. If it’s any consolation, 46% chose Harper.

  2. pw, you obviously haven’t found reliable sources. To wit:

    Elizabeth May wins the French debate

    GPC press release

  3. Well, that’s certainly a sincere source.

  4. “History will be kind to me for I intend to write it.”

  5. What would Don Martin know about a French debate? He was probably watching the Cubs & the Dodgers while it was going on (Dodgers won – the 100 year rebuilding plan for the Cubs looks set to continue).

    Dion won this debate. He was – well, Prime Ministerial. The smackdown of Layton over Afghanistan was a thing to behold.

  6. Four opposition parties,

    all criticized the party in power and front runner.

    As a result, Canadians are more likely to vote for a carbon tax?

    Memo to media:

    “gotcha” is not what this election is all about.

    The same writers of those headlines, were absolutely convinced that the “pooping puffin” would cause Harper support to drop, then the bad joke, then five year old speech.

    Before that the press was baffled that “cadscam”, or “in and out” or “boob gate” didn’t cause major damage.

    A debate performance can affect voting intention to the extent that it highlights an existing problem.

    If anything, this debate highlighted that without a majority, the next session in parliament will be nothing more than constant partisan sniping.

  7. I thought Dion wiped the floor with Harper; no “knock-out punch” really but several brutal assaults. He didn’t look like a wimp for even a split-second.

    He and Duceppe evidently had some sort of non-aggression pact going. No “sovereignty” obviously, but also Duceppe seemed to make his general rhetorical points either to Dion or to the moderator, which I thought enhanced Dion’s presence.

    Dion went for long stretches without saying anything, then he struck. Really, it was an admirable performance. I’m not surprised that francophone voters were impressed; I missed the English dubbing so I didn’t get to hear his Scottish doppelganger.

    But I wonder what effect it will have. Perhaps prevent the loss of Liberal seats? I mean, for a while there it was looking like the Liberals might lose every francophone seat they have in Quebec. I bet this puts confidence into their Quebec races, though I doubt they can win anything more.

    The major result seems to me to be the impression Harper made. I thought he did well – Mr. Wells said he was better in French than two years ago; but he never caught fire, didn’t have any one-liners, pure rope-a-dope. He looked like he was hiding something, and the surreal gentleness of his tone didn’t help in that regard. My prediction: status quo ante in Quebec, and thus no Conservative majority.

    Of course, God knows what will happen tomorrow! If May is half as feisty and sincere in English as she was tonight, the vote-splitting in Ontario and BC might hand Harper, what, a dozen seats?

    Horserace-wise, this is the most interesting election I’ve ever followed.

  8. Dion was, as others have noted, most impressive and prime ministerial. I hope he can recapture that tonight in English. His economic plan and his excellent explanation of the green shift were especially important, I think, in positioning him as a leader with vision.

    I did like the format of them around a table — it seemed more collegial and I swear Dion looked very comfortable, if serious, in that setting.

    Also, Harper’s constant attack on “arts galas” was really a miss. I think he thought he had a great key message there, for the “common folks” but it came across as bitter and targeted. Besides, aren’t most arts galas actually fund raisers?

  9. “Of course, God knows what will happen tomorrow! If May is half as feisty and sincere in English as she was tonight, the vote-splitting in Ontario and BC might hand Harper, what, a dozen seats?

    Horserace-wise, this is the most interesting election I’ve ever followed.”

    Yeah, I thought the last one was as good as it gets. I guess I was like, 12 when Kim Campbell took the Tories down to two seats, but I suppose that would have been interesting too – two new parties, the end of two party politics.

    I don’t think May will present as well to anyone but Green supporters. She might effectively debunk Harper’s plan on the environment, but the environment hasn’t been a big issue yet, the economy is. And everyone knows that Liz May and her gang both no chance for getting a seat, and no plan for the economy anyway.

  10. Ignoring for a second the stupidity of having a separate french language that focuses exclusively on Quebec, does anybody know why the french language debate always seems to come before the english language debate? I could be mistaken, but it always seems to be this way election after election.

  11. Josh, seems that way to me too. The parties probably want it that way, so they can prepare soundbite attack lines for the next night in English. It allows them to see how the other leaders are likely to behave in the debates, so they can adjust their attack points, etc.

  12. I thought the most telling moment of the debate was right at the end — all the leaders except one got up to shake hands with their adversaries. The one spent his time shuffling his briefing notes. I guess the sweater shtick didn’t impart any manners or grace.

  13. Josh ! It is very easy to understand why the french debate is always first in hand.

    1- we are french
    2- we know how to cook
    3- we don’t eat at subways each day
    4- we don’t put cucumbers between two pieces of
    5- Our drinking law age is only a suggestion
    6- we are mostly more bilingual than the rest
    of the country
    7- And we love Youppi esti!

  14. Chantal Hebert is the political analyst I listen to the most when it comes to the Quebec battle. And last night, she graded the leaders as such:

    Harper B+
    Dion B+
    Duceppe B-
    Layton C+
    May C-

    Interesting …

  15. I’m trying to understand how Hebert could give Harper a B+.

  16. Chantel and Don Martin never seem to have anything critical to say of the PM.

  17. It’s so silly. The debates should just alternate questions between english and french. Doing it this way leads to a whole host of inequities, nevermind elavating Gilles Duceppe as the champion of the ‘Quebec Debate’.

  18. Carey – that’s not always the case. For example, Hebert just recently called Harper’s cuts to the arts a “stupid strategy” to employ in Quebec. I agree with KRB that Hebert is far more insightful than anyone else I have found with respect to Quebec politics.

  19. Seriously Chantal… Duceppe gets a B- while Harper gets a B+ ???

  20. Yes Josh, she was recognizing a misstep — but in general, I feel she likes Mr. Harper as does pretty well everyone on the “At Issue” panel. As a digression, I enjoy watching the “At Issue” panel (except for Don Martin) even if I don’t always agree with them.

  21. Carey – I agree. As for the “At-Issue” panel, I wish they would limit it to three people. Trying to squeeze in a fourth opinion, in addition to Mansbridge, does not enhance the quality of the discussion….especially when that fourth voice is Don Martin.

  22. Never mind Chantal Hebert, she works for the Toronto Star. There is politics in your own day to day work i should say. Gotta watch out for your going to say ! when she worked for the Devoir or la Presse, can’t remember, her french agends was always being on top of things.

    another story…