Canadian Chat → [Poll] English Debate

Presentation: 50% Harper, 50% Duceppe
Issues: 50% Duceppe, 50% Layton

Worst Performance: Martin (could he be more rude and obnoxious?)

said by julez_atf:

---

Presentation: 50% Harper, 50% Duceppe
Issues: 50% Duceppe, 50% Layton

Worst Performance: Martin (could he be more rude and obnoxious?)

---

I "almost" fully agree with you my only change would be to put Layton in Harpers place for presentation. I did not like how Harper would not look into the camera & I liked how Layton did, it's as if he was speaking directly to me. But IMO Layton & Duceppe stole the show at least with the issues that mattered to me and even some that didn't.

I also agree about your opinion on Martin and I'll add he looked like a wimp and threw his hands up when he was backed into a corner or loosing the debate and side stepped so many questions. He kept looking to the lady mediating the debate as if she could bail him out some how.

But I have to pick one person and it was Jack Layton for me with Duceppe a close second.

Paul Martin got ripped apart from all sides.

I hate to admit, but Gilles Duceppe has put on a strong attack on Paul Martin.

Harper kept his cool, Layton kept on the pressure.

There were no clear winners, but there is a clear loser and that is Martin.

said by StEC:

---

Poll

Votes:

---

Of course Harper won!

I think this race is far from over. The debate showed how many issues overlap while others are opposed.

Besides, it might not be horrible to have a close minority goverment. With almost all sides having an equal voice in the country.

2 more weeks until we find out how Canadians feel. I just hope its not 2 more weeks of attack ads when all this time could be spent discussing real issues.

Gilles Duceppe and Stephen Harper both won - Gilles on hammering down the issues, Stephen for composure. Jack Layton tried hard, but he just sounded too scripted. His opening remark sounded exactly like the TV commercial. I don't hold this against him, it's just an observation. One thing that I did notice was that Jack Layton and Stephen Harper both smiled and seemed submissive to the idea of being elected, while Paul Martin was on the defensive, only smiling when he was laughing or rolling his eyes at one of the candidates, and never answered any questions. Then again, the only person who actually answered questions directly without spinning them was Gilles Duceppe. I liked how Stephen Harper managed to spin Paul Martin's attack on using the not withstanding clause to say how the Liberals would, in affect, allow child porn to exist in this country and not protect children.

When it comes down to it, many Canadians won't like Paul Martin's performance in this debate and will be turned off by the 'handlers' comment. This just drives more votes to the Conservatives and NDP. Craig Oliver said that the Tory's are now in a very good position to a few seats in Quebec, as the response in French Canada to both Stephen Harper and Jack Layton's command of the French language (for anglos, anyway) was very well received.

I was watching it in and out tonight and you can tell it was poitics since instead of providing answers, they just continuted to criticize everyone else with more questions.

You could tell that Martin was just attacking Harper because Martin knows Harper is his greatist risk - Along with all the commericals the Liberals have been putting on TV. None have been good - all they are doing is attacking everyone else (especially the conservatives) since they know that they are at the end and have nothing else they can back on.

Martin lost...he was seen as the gibbering idiot he is.......Questioned time and again on failed Liberal "promises"...

said by Snickerdo3:

---

When it comes down to it, many Canadians won't like Paul Martin's performance in this debate and will be turned off by the 'handlers' comment.

---

Yeah, Martin cracked when he let off that handlers comment to Layton.

I don't like the Conservatives, but even I can tell that Harper handled the pressure better than Martin.

If I was French I would have voted for Gilles Duceppe for his strong performance.

Harper won? Hah. He avoided the extremist issues well enough to confuse you folks, I suppose. Yeah, privatization of health care sounds real peachy to me. So does making Canada war mongers with our US neighbours, banning abortions, and all the other western desires brought forward by the Reform party, and then the Alliance, and then the Conservatives (same fucking party, same ideals, new failure leader), but then hidden and denied, so to not scare off voters east of Manitoba.

Martin sucked, Duceppe was ok but he doesn't matter anyway, and Layton was loud, rude, and disruptive for constantly trying to talk over everyone else. I'd never vote NDP after seeing that, that's for sure. Not even just because I disagree with many of their policies, and because they'll raise my income taxes.

Agreed...he seemed bright....Layton seemed like the fruitcake we know and hate from Toronto.....Duceppe was bright....Martin...he seemed like a Senior Citizen (as he is) that needed more meds..

And Paul Martin couldn't answer one of Gilles Duceppe's questions about stealing from us and disgracing the province of Quebec. If all thieves are idiots, and some thieves are Liberals, does that make all Liberals idiots?

another poll also shows harper did quite well.

»sympaticomsn.ctv.ca/serv ··· pstories

What of what I said upset you so much? Where's the false information?

The Liberals are far from perfect, and the scandals and waste are bad, but Harper proposes spending many many times that wasted money on the army, and equipment that we don't need, as Martin pointed out tonight. Things aren't that bad about Canada as it is now. We'll only get fucked if the rednecks or the NDP win. A Liberal minority would do them some good, so they can smarten up.

said by osme:

---

Poor, misguided fool...

---

Self-disgribed....aptly

A Liberal Minority would still funnel billions upon billions of dollars into Quebec ad firms as a way to launder money from the federal government into the Liberal Party of Canada through backdoor channels. And you support this? You're the misguided fool, not me.

A Conservative Majority will be elected, they will fix this country up, you'll cry because some crazy HRDC program you used as a hand-out won't exist anymore, and I'll be happier that my taxes are lower. Boo hoo for you, woo hoo to Canadians who have a job and actually work hard for their money.

I look at it from the perspective of what some analysts have said. Who won the debate is not important but whether each leader met their objectives. Big difference.

If you look at Stephen Harper he needed to articulate his platform, what he actually stands for and overcome the fear or doubts that people have about him. I don't think he did that. In all honesty his platform is not as bad as the Liberals make it out to be like the whole aircraft carrier thing, massive military spending, $50-billion black hole, etc. But he needs to go beyond just relying on broken Liberal promises and sponsorship scandals. He's not getting his message across and if he loses this election it will be his own fault.

Paul Martin survived which is a victory for him. A new lease on life as someone said. He basically stopped the possibility of a Conservative majority and has thrown doubts in the minds of people concerning the Conservatives. I would say his message, whether true or not, is actually getting across unlike Stephen Harper. Paul Martin mentioned his vision of Canada and what Canadians stand for. What does Stephen Harper stand for? Making sure the corrupt Liberals don't get another term? Stephen Harper needs to do better than that if he wants to overcome Paul Martin.

Jack Layton. All valid points on many issues but he won't be forming the next government so people basically tuned out. I think his best moment was his closing statement when he said the NDP has a role to play even though we won't be forming the next government. Vote for us because we can influence things and make a difference. That's what he should have been emphasizing during the whole debate instead of waiting till the end.

Gilles Duceppe. Much more focused than other leaders. More specific but he has the luxury of speaking for a smaller group of people while the other leaders have to pander to a greater Canadian audience. Nothing to lose and bringing forward issues, raising points, etc. is easier to do when playing the devils advocate.

Anyways, it was interesting. The election campaign is far from over and is probably more wide open than it was before. Another point if you ask me though was the moderation. It sucked. Leaders were allowed to outdo each other and it was who was going to speak louder than the other guy at one point. Crap, you're the moderator, do your job, say something or at least attempt to control the situation. Where's Chelle?

edit: typos
--
Outrageous stunts and imaginative special effects.

said by Dark Shoes:

---

I would say his message, whether true or not, is actually getting across unlike Stephen Harper. Paul Martin mentioned his vision of Canada and what Canadians stand for.

---

Please! The only thing Paul Martin could come up with was personifying the American-style attack ads that are on TV and lying again and again about platform promises that have yet to be implemented since 1993. His performance was horrible, and Jack Layton backed him into a corner so bad that the only thing he could come up with was to tell Jack to shut up. He will pay dearly for that.

I agree that Harper's performance wasn't as good as the Conservative in me would have wanted, but he had the edge going in to this debate, and he managed to maintain this coming out of the debate. If you think his performance cost him any chance of a majority government you're sadly mistaken. They say that there's a chance of a few Tory pickups in Quebec now thanks to the debate, something that would have been unheard of two weeks ago. Besides, us "stupid redneck Western Canadians" as some 'enlightened' people from Hamilton like to say, actually think Harper won this debate. This was nothing more then a test of skills under pressure, and Steven Harper excelled at that. Paul Martin failed horribly. When it comes down to it, it's us redneck slobs who actually vote, and we'll be voting Conservative.

And voting in Droves......

said by Ian1:

---

And voting in Droves......

---

Yeah, but you know, a Conservative voter is a second-class citizen, even though they'll be more Conservative voters in this country then anyone else. So much for an inclusive society where everyone is respected and treated equal? Yeah, that's the case as long as you fall in to the typical left-wing view of thinking. What bullshit.

said by Snickerdo3:

---

I'll be happier that my taxes are lower.

---

That's only if you fall in the low income tax brackets. If you do, first and foremost, hah, enjoy being a lifer at McDonalds. Second, I'm glad that the Conservatives can predict so much new money coming into the system that they can promise tens of billions of dollars in spending of money that isn't there. Like Martin said, they'll put Canada deep in the red. Unless, of course, they plan to gut healthcare and make it mostly private, which Harper hasn't denied, but hasn't outright said, to not scare off eastern support. Just peachy.

said by Snickerdo3:

---

said by Ian1:

---

And voting in Droves......

---

Yeah, but you know, a Conservative voter is a second-class citizen, even though they'll be more Conservative voters in this country then anyone else. So much for an inclusive society where everyone is respected and treated equal? Yeah, that's the case as long as you fall in to the typical left-wing view of thinking. What bullshit.

---

Coming from a conservative, who represent the exclusion kings of society, that's pretty funny.

Anyway, it's not like the majority of people voting are knowledgeable when it comes down to politics.

Also, cutting taxes doesn't mean you'll be a richer man, you might actually become poorer in fact when it happens. (As in if you pay other bills because of it or if there's inflation due to the cut taxes, you could end up with less constant dollars in your pocket).

The funniest thing I heard in the debate was Stephen Harper saying he'd help the poor with tax deductions on the subject of childcare. First, tax deductions benefit more to the richer people (as their marginal taxation rate is higher). Second, being poor and in need is something that is dealt with daily, not once a year on some tax return, the money has to be there daily. For example, if you have to pay now 500$ in a month for your children, you need 500$ in your account now, getting 600$ back at the end of the year will not cut it. If you don't have the 500$ now, the children will suffer.

At the end of the day, I can only pray that the country doesn't fall into the hands of USA copycats and get us back into deficits.

said by Snickerdo3:

---

said by Dark Shoes:

---

I would say his message, whether true or not, is actually getting across unlike Stephen Harper. Paul Martin mentioned his vision of Canada and what Canadians stand for.

---

Please! The only thing Paul Martin could come up with was personifying the American-style attack ads that are on TV and lying again and again about platform promises that have yet to be implemented since 1993. His performance was horrible, and Jack Layton backed him into a corner so bad that the only thing he could come up with was to tell Jack to shut up. He will pay dearly for that.

---

Yes, I'll admit that saying "did your handlers say for you to always keep talking" was bad. More of a reaction to being ganged up by three other people if you ask me which at the end of the day is understandable and not really all that important is it?

said by Snickerdo3:

---

I agree that Harper's performance wasn't as good as the Conservative in me would have wanted, but he had the edge going in to this debate, and he managed to maintain this coming out of the debate. If you think his performance cost him any chance of a majority government you're sadly mistaken. They say that there's a chance of a few Tory pickups in Quebec now thanks to the debate, something that would have been unheard of two weeks ago.

---

I think you're underestimating the political machine here in Quebec and the dynamic of the rest of the country as well. Making assumptions based on hype is just that, hype. Just like you mentioned the NDP is going to surge and pick up significantly more seats.

Never underestimate your enemy is advice I would pass on to you. One television viewer from B.C. put it best when she said she was leaning NDP prior to the debate. Jack Layton didn't shine according to her and thought he came across badly. She was impressed with Stephen Harper and thought he was more honest, straight forward, etc. When asked, "I guess you're voting Conservative then", she said, "no, I'll probably end up voting Liberal". LOL, that's the kind of crazy election this is going to be. A free for all.

said by osme:

---

That's only if you fall in the low income tax brackets. If you do, first and foremost, hah, enjoy being a lifer at McDonalds.

---

Exactly. The only people who can actually support the NDP and Liberals are people who have never done anything more with their lives than be in school and work at McDonalds. But besides that, the Conservatives plan is quite sound. I'm not going to post references done by major firms that state that the plan is sound, get off your ass and do it for yourself. They're out there, just don't let the red blindfold over your eyes stop you from seeing them.

said by str7:

---

The funniest thing I heard in the debate was Stephen Harper saying he'd help the poor with tax deductions on the subject of childcare. First, tax deductions benefit more to the richer people (as their marginal taxation rate is higher). Second, being poor and in need is something that is dealt with daily, not once a year on some tax return, the money has to be there daily. For example, if you have to pay now 500$ in a month for your children, you need 500$ in your account now, getting 600$ back at the end of the year will not cut it. If you don't have the 500$ now, the children will suffer.

---

And that's an extremely important point. If you're voting Conservative, with a family income of $60,000+, two young kids, etc., hell that sounds great. Child deductions is the answer.

Anybody else in the real world with low or middle class income, kids, living pay cheque to pay cheque and who take their refund check at the end of the year to pay off bills don't care about tax deductions. They want to know how they're going to able to afford the daycare bill at the end of the month.

said by Snickerdo3:

---

said by osme:

---

That's only if you fall in the low income tax brackets. If you do, first and foremost, hah, enjoy being a lifer at McDonalds.

---

Exactly. The only people who can actually support the NDP and Liberals are people who have never done anything more with their lives than be in school and work at McDonalds. But besides that, the Conservatives plan is quite sound. I'm not going to post references done by major firms that state that the plan is sound, get off your ass and do it for yourself. They're out there, just don't let the red blindfold over your eyes stop you from seeing them.

---

There's always going to be people working at Mcdonalds and the like. You should thank them for taking crappy jobs at crappy payrates that you benefit from, otherwise you'd have to take those jobs yourself or you would have to spend more money for goods and services (which essentially makes you poorer).

Also, there's always going to be firms to say the plans are "sound". George W. Bush plan was sound. Despite that, a lot bigger deficit down south (in the USA) coupled with broken promises. In Quebec, Jean Charest's economical plan was sound (and backed up by the same firms that back up Harper's plan), yet tough times making it even and broken promises once again. I'm sure that for every "sound" plan out there, 9 times out of 10 it falls short and results in broken promises.

In Mulroney's time, they were promising to be fiscally responsible, with the most liberal economic policies ever (note that liberal economic policies are what the conservative party is proposing). Result: record deficit after record deficit.

Anyway, no matter what, you've got your opinions and I've got mine. I really doubt I'll change yours or you'll change mine.

I'm so confused now. I thought I had it al figured out, but I don't want to vote anymore.

Layton won Big Time......nobody could get a word in edge wise.....!!! W2G

said by Snickerdo3:

---

The only people who can actually support the NDP and Liberals are people who have never done anything more with their lives than be in school and work at McDonalds.

---

Give me a break. That's ridiculous.