04.13.2011 06:51 AM

KCCCC Day 19: Picking through the entrails


 

 

80 Comments

  1. MontrealElite says:

    “All for one, and one prorogues!”

    Amazing that the purported winner is the robot. What is this, Jeopardy?

  2. Dude Love says:

    In the end, Ignatieff is still a Professor of History and the debate proved that.

  3. Michael S says:

    I think you should have a caption contest for this: http://thestar.blogs.com/.a/6a00d8341bf8f353ef01157073136a970b-320wi

  4. Scott Tribe says:

    Well, if Ipsos claims that.. it’s much closer obviously.

    By the way, not to put your current employer down, but a 21 point poll lead for the Conservatives, according to their poll in SunMedia today? Really? And with no specifics released?

    • fritz says:

      That poll seems to be an outlier at best, Tory spin at worst. COMPAS was founded and is run by Conrad Winn an ultra conservitive; from what I can find out; so this may be like Rasmussen polling in the US which is always pro Republican.
      It has to be taken with a whole shaker of salt when they only released snippets taken out of context and with no info on the questions asked and in which order.
      Until they release the whole poll and the crosstabs it’s just spin paid for by QMI & Sun Media.

  5. Dr.Dawg says:

    Warren, Iggy’s 2010 voting record is a matter of, uh, record.

    I think Layton won the debate, with Harper a strong second. I’ve known Jack to do badly, sometimes very badly, so I don’t think my own bias is clouding my judgement here, but last night he was centred, comfortable in his skin and well-prepared. Ignatieff, on the other hand, seemed histrionic, forcing his emotions. trying too hard.

    Tonight will be interesting.

    • CQ says:

      Two full hours of standing, even with an available chair behind each podium. It was good to see Mr. Layton now appearing in improving health last night. That crutch line, sideswiping Ignatieff, was pretty good.
      Not epic but the overall debate stage was way better than the previous kitchen table version of ’08. And better than the placard trampling visuals of the hectic Toronto debate last fall.

      • The Other Jim says:

        I agree – it was really nice to see how healthy and vibrant Mr. Layton looked. I disagree with Dawg as to the quality of his performance (hopefully I’ll have a moment to provide more on that later), but it was just nice to see him apparently on the good road to recovery.

  6. que sera sera says:

    Caption: It’s called democracy – not bickering!!!!

  7. Dr.J says:

    Looks like Gilles just cut the cheese and Iggy got the strongest whiff!!! I must say though I agree with the oldest kid….Why is Gilles even there?

    • Dr.J says:

      I thought Jack was a close victor over Harper but really no one did that much better than the other.. Jack comes across as a nice guy…Harper was controlled and looked like a PM….I thought Iggy would have been better given his Harvard past but his body langage sometimes bothered me with the hand on his hip,plus his attendance shot by Jack was the quote of the night because Iggy never explained it he looked like a deer in the headlights on that one…..and Gilles well…….Anyways thank god hockey is on tonight!!

    • Dave M says:

      Because he’s the leader of a party that has 47 seats in the House of Commons (which is more than Jack Layton’s party and no one claims that Jack shouldn’t be there.)

  8. Caption: Aw, geez Gilles… at least excuse yourself.

  9. Rob says:

    Unfotunately, Ignatieff’s brief spell grasping for a word stands out.

    Harper got off easy on the G8 spending scandal, and even the description of it by Ignatieff didn’t give it the weight it needed. It needs to be hammered home how the G8 spending is what the Cons are getting away with in a MINORITY. Given a majority, this will pale by comparison.

  10. Smith says:

    Hi Warren,

    You were wrong about Duceppe. He was excellent on immigration and was the only one to point out that shameful CPC ad calling the Tamil boat people “criminals”. It was a very touching moment to see him rise to the defense of new immigrants – yet defend Quebec’s values. He presented his quick wit, and an excellent grasp of the facts, something most of the leaders failed to do. For this viewer, Duceppe proved he was not living in a bubble.

    Smith

  11. Bruce Wayne says:

    “GO TEAM VENTURE!!!!”

    I got nothin’

  12. Mathew says:

    Who won the debate – Harper? Well who lost is definitely the Canadian people, because immediately following the debate the media of all stripes focused on how Harper won because basically he didn’t throw a tantrum on live TV and stuck to his rehearsed story. Now polls are saying nothing has changed. How about media keep some of the focus on right & wrong, democracy, ethics, and Facts instead of who kept the straightest face during the debate. Judging from how 35% of the population thinks Harper is fit to lead, I’d say the media isn’t getting the truth out very effectively, or alternatively isn’t intending to. You decide, but I’m disgusted.

  13. kyliep says:

    Ultimately, if you’re the guy behind 10 points and you don’t come away the winner, then well, not losing outright doesn’t really matter. I thought Iggy has some strong moments and the point about bickering being democracy was delivered forcefully and effectively. But it also struck me as preaching to the converted. Who better connected to the 5-10% of swing voters? Probably Harper. I think Iggy missed an opportunity to go beyond wounding Harper and make viewers comfortable with the idea of he and the Liberals not only winning the election but leading the country. Despite stating, a few times, what a Liberal government would do if elected, he didn’t really make the sale, I thought.
    I guess the bigger question is, ‘What does this mean?’ at the end of the day? With the numbers narrowing in Ontario and several weeks to go, there’s still plenty of opportunity for the Liberals. Will be interesting to see what happens in the tracking polls over the next few days. If they stay tight or get narrower between the Liberals and Conservatives, then maybe the debates didn’t have much of an effect. If they widen, then I think it’s safe to say that Harper did what he needed to do yesterday to win the election.

  14. MontrealElite says:

    When Harper is tossed out, does anyone think he can land a gig on Dexter?

  15. Anne Peterson says:

    Lets look at content. I helps a person to be able to look straight into the camera and lie. It also helps to have kept most of the information from the Canadian public because then you can tell any kind of lie you want.

    e.g. All the reputable economists say we are in good shape and my way will make us in better shape and we lead the world in recovery.

    Believe that? Check out the annual report of the Conference Board of Canada which says we have slipped to 10th of 17.

    How about the media does some fact checking to see who tells the truth.

    And debate in parliament is ‘bickering.’ To question Harper in parliament is ‘bickering.’ Boy you could do a personality analysis based on that comment, couldn’t you?

  16. Connoisseur says:

    I see Harper and Duceppe holding hands here, guess a Sovereignist isn`t so bad to touch after all….

    Blogging Tories are saying that Mike quoted Mao with his `let the flowers bloom`bit…..know what that means !!!

    • Dan F says:

      Equating the leader of the Liberal Party with a murderous dictator is certainly beyond the pale of rational political dialogue. I know that Warren has a history of calling out that kind of hateful crap, and fully expect he will do so in this case as well…

      Right Warren?

      • Roger says:

        I dont know…quoting a murderous thug while lecturing about democracy seems odd to many I would think…..how is it hateful crap anyways?

      • Warren says:

        I read Brian’s story after reading your comment. I don’t get the impression that he was doing anything other than having fun.

        The Beatles wore Chairman Mao jackets. And I know Lilley likes the Beatles.

        • Dan F says:

          Fun? Are you for real?

          Back in the day, you would have been all over them. Have you lost your mind? If someone took a Harper quote out of context, and made it sound like something that Hitler once said, you would (rightly) go totally apeshit! Please Warren, don’t trade in all your credibility on the hate-speech file for this job. Its not worth it, and if the frat boys in the Tory war room get away with this one it will only get worse before the campaign is over, and I think we know where that leads.

  17. MontrealElite says:

    Guess I shouldn’t be surprised at the polls.

    Fools also re elected Bush in 2004

    • Dr.J says:

      So the public are fools now?…just maybe the fools are not buying what the Liberals are selling……AGAIN!!!!

      • MontrealElite says:

        Not all the public. Just the ones who vote CPC.

        • Marc L says:

          So, 40% of canadian voters are fools. That’s exactly the attitude that hurts the LPC — smug, arrogant, and condescending. Maybe they’re not fools but just don’t like what you have to offer. Just maybe…

  18. Pete says:

    If the libs take many of Iggy’s attacks on harper and put hem in ads they will sell much better than last night as stand alone comments. I thought he was dead on but Harper just played dead and then tried to change the page with lies straight into the camera.

    Its plain to see harpo is playing the rope a dope campaign.

  19. AP says:

    Let’s play two rounds of word association:

    Good:

    Harper – Solid

    Ignatieff – Passionate

    Layton – Principled

    Duceppe – Honest

    Bad:

    Harper – Dismissive

    Ignatieff – Ineffectual

    Layton – Sanctimonious

    Duceppe – Separatist

  20. Cat says:

    Hey Warren. Here’s my take on your take:

    Your Impressions – you’ve been working overtime on trying to help the Lib. leader – I don’t think anyone’s paying you much attention, which is too bad because you gave them some good advice.

    Agree that the overall winner was Harper, who was mono-toned as you suggest but he also didn’t flap or get angry and didn’t just stop the shots but earned a shut out (definitely channeling the Canadiens and NOT the leafs in that respect). Harper looked past his opponents and directly into that camera so Canadians tuning in – all 12 of them couldn’t mistake the message. I would have liked him to be a bit more animated but it worked for him. He definitely wasn’t the angry guy in the room.

    On Igantieff – agree re: that the “bickering” line was a good one but on the other hand it did remind me of all of those Question Periods we’ve seen so yes, bickering it was. Did it have to be? Nope.

    On Iggy’s loss – I agree with you but have to add that the Epic fail was in the media’s build up of Ignatieff to something that he wasn’t – a seasoned politician, nervous, first-time rookie stuff. Well, he met those expectations that the media set for him I think. They’ve socially promoted Ignatieff through so far leaning on that old LPOC brand but it’s not worked out. Ignatieff deserves kudos for doing his best but the media has to own up….but they will not.

    I sure hope that when the time comes for the grass root LPOC to pick a new leader they stay away from university professors. Just as you suggested that Harper was scripted, Ignatieff also seemed to have learned his lines almost too rote to be believable AND he didn’t talk enough about himself and why Canadians should see his as the alternative to Harper. Layton also muddied those waters for Iggy.

    Layton – class clown but got his groove back. Had the line of the night re: showing up for work – which apparently he told a reporter in the scrum was public information. I give the guy credit for standing there for 2 hours. I really think he’s the sleeper now and could tip those close Liberal/NDP races in his favour if he can continue at this pace.

    Duceppe – ?? Passionate about his cause….Quebec. It might serve him well/might not.

    Caption “Three Men and a Baby” (which is which can be left to one’s own imagination or partisan perspective.

  21. Dan F says:

    Warren,

    How are you not outraged this morning by your employer’s comparison of the Liberal leader to a murderous communist dictator?
    If any other media organization had compared Harper to Hitler, you would be flipping out. (and rightfully so).

    Clearly the same bunch of frat boys running the ReformaTory war room are also in charge at the Sun newsroom.

    What gives?

  22. Cat says:

    Hey Warren – when Ignatieff started talking about flowers growing, did you, for a split second think he was going to suggest Daisies? I did….but then I didn’t know that he was quoting from Mao either so….

  23. Mark says:

    I was only able to catch parts of it on the radio so I was unable to see the dynamic between the leaders but I was surprised at how well prepared and composed Harper sounded. Ignatieff’s line about bickering and democracy was very good and, as much as I vote conservative, I have to say it struck a chord.

  24. catherine says:

    I agree with comments that there are some good Ignatieff-Harper shots that could be used.

    btw, off topic, but did anyone notice that the CPC misquoted Page, as well as Fraser? See http://www.hilltimes.com/dailyupdate/view/125
    I’m really curious what more tuned in political followers make of this. Seems so obvious that misquoting the AG and PBO is not going to work, because those people will obviously point out the “error”. So exactly what does Harper have to gain from this? Or is this really bungling, like having some teenagers in charge of the war room who can’t keep track of correct quotes?

  25. Peter says:

    I think Harper did a better job addressing the swing vote. Layton’s and Iggy’s bases had things to cheer about (“You tell him, Michael”, “Right on, Jack”), but I don’t think they did much to attract waverers. On crime and immigration, Harper was able to present himself as much less hard-ass than the others wanted to paint him, but Layton and Iggy succumbed to flowery rhetoric that made it sound like they didn’t even see any problems.

    Harper went back to the economy too many times and came close to running out of things to say, Layton stuffed way too many issues into his remarks like a kid with an endless Christmas wish list, Iggy looked at times more like a prize-fighter at a weigh-in trying to trash talk his opponent.

    Verdict of the undecided and non-partisans in my office: Harper won on both presentation and substance. I think the Libs and Dippers would be well-advised to stop just trying to rely on spreading Harper Derangement Syndrome.

    • The Doctor says:

      It’s consistently been too tempting for the Libs and Dippers to talk about how awful Harper is, rather than focusing on what they propose as an alternative. And I think that costs them politically, because Harper plays that “jeez look at this histrionic whiners” card, like he did last night. Iggy needed to spend more time talking up his alternative policy program; instead he spent too much time trying to bloody Harper’s nose and we’ve seen this movie for the last 3 debates — there’s nothing original about it anymore.

  26. Cat says:

    Here’s something interesting that could help in tonight’s debate – NDP wimps out.
    http://www.thespec.com/news/local/article/516186–christopherson-voted-against-early-release-of-audit

  27. James says:

    Okay, so who has the worst morning-after hangover?? Iggy for sure.

    Iggy was scripted throughout the entire debate, and his post-debate media scrum with reporters was awful (his wife actually dragged him away from the podium). In Iggy’s defence, this was his first-ever leaders debate, but he came across more as a professor than an inspirational PM-in-waiting. He also didn’t look comfortable.

    Almost all of the commentators on CBC and CTV panned Iggy’s performance; Pamela Wallin said that Iggy spoke in “bumper stickers”.

    Harper’s message was brilliant: Do you want more of this every two years? Why are these three goons sidetracking the entire country with an unnecessary, contived election?

    At the end of the debate, voters were left with a clear choice: electing a clear, defined, focussed Conservative government, or a murky, hazy, uncertain “melange” of the of the other three.

  28. Peter says:

    One other success for Harper. Monday’s “game-changing” scandal was all but gone by Tuesday night. Why did the others drop it so fast? You are the pro, Warren, was it because they were wary of being seen to be making a fuss over portable potties?

  29. The Other Jim says:

    I reluctantly voted Conservative in ’08, had a major problem with the attempted coalition thereafter, but have been non-plussed with the performance of the governing party over the past 2 1/2 years. I’ve been impressed with the Liberal campaign so far, particularly MI’s emphatic rejection of a formal coalition with the Bloc, and really like our local Grit candidate. I didn’t expect much from the debate and, sadly, my expectations were only just met.

    Prime Minister Harper did fine. It often seemed like he was looking down instead of straight at the camera, which was a bit distracting. He had a consistent message, didn’t get baited, and probably did enough to get himself re-elected.

    I’m in the minority, I guess, in thinking that Michael Ignatieff did quite well (at least for the first 2/3rds of the debate). The problem, as I see it, is that he was strongest on the issues that meant the least to the average voter. I was very impressed with his passionate attacks on the CPC’s contempt for Parliament – he was believable and RIGHT. All of his strongest moments came on that core issue. To the average voter, though, it doesn’t mean a thing. They think that all of the parties act like idiots in the house, generally don’t trust politicians, and wish a pox on all of their houses. I wish that he had been as strong on issues that resonate with the average voter such as the economy. The big thing is that he seemed to tire part way through the debate. He seemed dazed and confused in the later stages.

    I didn’t care for Jack Layton’s performance. There’s no doubt that he got in some great shots (I was particularly fond of the “You changed, Steve…” theme) including the big 70% hit, but he did nothing to convince me that he or his party deserve my support. As mentioned above, though, I was happy to see that he is doing well, health-wise.

    Duceppe was awesome on the boat people issue, the rest of the debate, not so much.

    So, at the end of the day, the debate didn’t mean much to me. I’ll probably still vote Liberal, but I expect the CPC to win both in my riding and nationally. I feel that a Liberal minority victory or a Conservative majority victory (or something extremely close to such, like 150+ seats) would be the best outcome for Canada, in that order. I dearly hope that we don’t simply see a return to the status quo.

  30. W.B. says:

    Why didn’t someone tell Ignatieff where the damned camera was!

    • Cat says:

      good debate prep. would do that – pretty sure Warren would have covered the basics…don’t know that for sure but I’m guessing.

      • Namesake says:

        oh, I’m sure he “would have” if he were actually working for the LPC war room, but, um, he hasn’t been for about a year and a half, now. And if any of you conbots don’t know that, but have been coming here to talk trash thinking that you ARE rattling the LPC war room, well…. stop, because you’re barking up the wrong tree.

  31. V says:

    To be honest, it seemed like Harper was the detached school principal and the others were the impassioned school kids who had come to say how they’d been wronged. They may have been right, but Harper still came off like he had this silent authority and right to rule, while the others seemed a bit… desperate? I’d prefer to see Iggy passionate, yes, but speaking TO Canadians, instead of doing the “And YOU did this! And this! Pay atteeeention!!!”
    Also,
    “every videotaped questioner was white. Didn’t look like Canada, to me.”

    Shit, I know. I couldn’t believe it every time they put up a new one.

    Also, I’m so disappointed that it was *Harper* who really called Duceppe on his racist multiculturalism bullshit. For once showing some “leadership” as PM. It was so wrong that they really sidestepped the obvious racism there especially when the whole broadcast was incredibly WHITE.

  32. Ted H says:

    Mr. Harper was solid, I hate to admit so. But he was robotic and the way he looked at the camera, not the others was annoying. I wish Mr. Ignatieff had provided a snappy comback to Mr. Laytons accusation about attendance. The NDP sure likes to lie in the bushes and ambush the Liberals but all they are doing is helping the Conservatives ultimately. Lots of shots of the back of Mr. Duceppe’s and Mr. Harper’s heads, that is not a $2000 haircut.

    • Cat says:

      right now though I think Canadians prefer “robotic” to oh, Mr. Beeper – (you had to grow up in southern Ontario to know who that was).

  33. Lloyd says:

    IIggy was sure a DUD. For someone who apparently is a world-reknowned scholar, he was easily the third place in this event, and that’s being generous. No wonder the Liberal spin doctors were in panic overdrive mode, since about the middle of the debate. Iggy’s phoney acting, and facial expressions were telling – the man is like a fish out of water in this politics thing. He should go back to something he is apparently good at – being a teacher; because he sure isn’t ( and won’t be) a Prime Minister in this country.

  34. Bitter says:

    I thought Layton had a solid win against expectations, with a tactical victory to Harper. Layton did a superb job of balancing casual, knowledgeable attacks and quick cuts to contrasting, concise, positive solutions. Health care, proportional representation, working with parliament… you could almost see Jack ticking off the platform points for his swing voters, one by one.

    The big disappointment was that in his own way, Ignatieff was even more scripted than Harper; aside from the Afghan discussion and the “not bickering” bits where he seemed unscripted and genuine, he focused robotically and nervously on negative slogans we’ve all already heard, instead of trading ideas to differentiate himself and rise above the pack.

    More than one person has made the “let Iggy be Iggy” comment in the last few years; whoever advised him to be more like a scripted message track politician and less like a professor yesterday was a fool. He won’t have another chance, unless millions of Canadians decide to learn French this morning. And so we’re left with a Prime Minister who’s smart enough to know how our Parliamentary system works, yet cold enough to lie about it. Welcome to the future.

  35. A big missing issue last night was the environment. Science, facts, trends, stats, all that stuff tells us that we are heading into very deep doo-doo, not only on global warming but on food supply, arable land, species extinction and the pending death of the oceans. For example, the only seafood our kids and grandkids may eat will be farmed. Huge issues that hit us in the gut. What did we hear last night from our 4 Old White Guys? nada, zip, rein. tragic….

  36. mamapeggie says:

    Harper was solid – Ignateiiff lectured ( still don’t know what he stands for and now I don’t care) and JAck was JAck – good looking, well tanned, clear speaking, the hot hit now and again – the real carnival huckster of the lot – tap dances well. JAck made mincemeat of Ignatieff.

  37. ski says:

    Ignatieff lost when he quoted Chairman Mao to make his point about democracy. Are we to believe that the Harvard history and politics professor doesn’t know, “let the flowers grow” is part of the Mao doctrine?

    • TDotRome says:

      Are we to believe that you think most Canadians know anything from the Mao doctrine? Because they don’t. That isn’t a loss for Iggy.

      Iggy’s biggest loss is failing to hammer the G8 spending throughout the debate. Not to mention the Fraser misquote.

    • Namesake says:

      I dunno; who’s more like Mao:

      the one who wants the gov’t to FUND org’s like Kairos, and the Court Challenges program, and dozens of women’s groups, and many more, again, even if they have dissenting views which hold the gov’t to account; or,

      the one who cuts off their funding and has his Senator warn the others to shut the F up if they don’t want more of the same, and who even named his party the CPC, just like the, um, Communist Party of China?

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hundred_Flowers_Campaign

      Just because Mao quickly changed his mind about letting other democratic voices flourish in the land as soon as it proved inconvenient to him personally doesn’t mean it wasn’t a good idea.

      As an historian, MI’s message here — which you Children of the Sun all-too-predictably missed — is that people who forget history are condemned to repeat it. He challenges Harper’s authoritarianism, while far too many of you revel in it.

      • Namesake says:

        p.s., acc. to this 2006 National Post article, a “senior Conservative” — apparently (since he’s the only other one named in the article) no less an authority than Hugh Segal, the Conservative Senator and former Chief of Staff to Mulroney, himself —

        “recounted being told Harper had ‘read and mastered’ the biography and leadership style of Russia’s Communist dictator Josef Stalin, and said the prime minister has adopted some of the same tactics. ‘He plays people off against one another, he attempts to inspire fear rather than respect, he is unpredictable and he is 100 per cent focused on eliminating the opposition.'” http://urlm.in/hnfs

        I’ll patiently await the twin columns by Brian Lilley & the QMI editor on that……

  38. Andrew says:

    “hope somebody picked up the Costco size bottle of hand sanitizer.”

    “scientists believe this is ground zero of the great Kooties outbreak of 2011”

  39. The Doctor says:

    I disagree with a lot of the CPC stuff on crime policy, but from a political point of view, I think Harper probably scored points with Mr. and Ms. Average last night in that exchange with Layton on crime issues. It was the bit about criminals only serving 1/6 of their sentences, and Harper’s allegation that the opposition obstructed CPC efforts to toughen that up. Layton’s retort was to come back with some line about funding for women’s shelters or something like that. Most ordinary folks out there in TV land were probably with Harper on that one. Layton basically let Harper own the tough-on-crime issue. Same way Harper’s owning the long-gun registry issue in rural ridings.

  40. Big Old Goofy Man says:

    A Night at the Debates with Harpo,Chicko,Zippo and Groucho.

  41. Observer says:

    Thanks for pointing out the obvious in ‘Epic Fail’. The optics of what you describe in ‘Epic Fail’ is quite amazing, I mean,
    it’s 2011! As usual, the mainstream media and the politics of the day remain far behind the reality (this probably
    benefits the Conservatives). It will be interesting to see what happens when (and not if) we see the ‘Nenshi’ effect in federal politics.

    • The Doctor says:

      Nenshi projected a very positive vibe and was seen as novel, different, outside the box, etc. There’s very little of that going on in our federal political scene. It’s all more of the same. Last night’s debate, in terms of tone and overall dynamic, was the same movie as the last two. Oppo leaders talk about how terrible Harper is, and he rope-a-dopes and does his best to look unruffled and above the fray. I suppose the Greens are the most “Nenshi-like” entity or vehicle out there, but with Liz May they’re going nowhere, and besides most people who lean Green lean left and the left side of the spectrum is crowded, if not fully occupied.

  42. scott says:

    Many people are delusional here. Layton, who is usually strong, was weak last night. There was no sense of a larger NDP vision and he seemed unable to put 2 sentences together. Honestly it made me wonder how his health really is. I like him but last night was a dud. I would add that Iggy had a few good moments had some serious stumbles where he seemed to be at a loss what to say. In the case of the Robot, if that doesnt creep you out then nothing will.

  43. The Doctor says:

    I’ve always wondered why certain opponents of Harper expect or hope for him to come out snarling and barking, or have a meltdown, or anything like that. I don’t know if I can recall a significant public performance or appearance by Harper where he’s been like that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


*