Wednesday, April 13, 2011

Debate Night Commentary

Seeing how I have exams and an election is on, I will refrain from posting my second piece on income until I have some time to write it up well. Instead, I would like to talk a bit about the last couple of weeks and last night's leaders' debates.

Possibly the most noticeable shift of this campaign has been that of support from third parties to the Liberals and Conservatives. It's very clear that the message both of them are sending ("Majority or Ignatieff-led coalition" from the Harper side; "Red door or blue door" and other inane metaphors from the Grits) is sticking. The Conservatives are consistently around 40% support (which is a fair bit higher than they were going into this) while the Liberals are somewhere between 25 and 30 (pollsters disagree on whether they've actually moved since the campaign began).

One of the other shifts has been in perceived leadership traits. Ignatieff has shown improvement from his dismal numbers before the election started, likely due to positive media coverage and the pathetically low bar that was set for him. He has run a very open campaign, something that he has done in various ways since he became leader. It contrasts well with the Tory campaign, which has been criticized by journalists in particular (who are kept behind a fence at events and limited to five questions a day). That campaign has also been attacked by opposition parties for actions that include bouncing an undecided political science student who had a picture of her with Ignatieff on her Facebook page. This plays into the narrative that while the Grits are open to Canadians of all stripes, the Tories are secretive and excessively partisan; Liberals have been pressing the latter, but I do not think they have emphasized their own accomplishments in that area.

Otherwise, not much has happened. Policy announcements from all sides are a blend of uninspiring, unoriginal, and unrealistic. The ethics issue, despite the Conservative being peppered day in and day out with revelations of a less than perfectly run government, has not stuck. The just-leaked Auditor General's report on wasteful and potentially illegal spending for the G8/G20 summit might have some effect, but that depends on a lot of 'ifs' and we will not know until closer to the end of the campaign whether it will be a game-changer. The Tories have an uncanny ability to shrug off criticisms of their governance the way a labrador dries off after a swim.

Now, as for the debates: for those who have been watching the campaign to date, you will recognize pretty much everything that came out of everyone's mouths.


-Ignatieff lectured on ethics, democracy, and spending priorities
-Layton cracked jokes, made unrealistic promises, and delivered witty one-liners
-Duceppe brought up entirely unrelated points and asked what it all meant for Quebec
-Harper stared creepily into the camera, had a convincing (if not necessarily truthful) response to seemingly every criticism, and insisted that we would all be better off if we ignored the fact that Canada is a parliamentary democracy and crowned him emperor for life

On the whole it was a terribly uninspiring affair. I would be surprised if it changed anyone's voting intentions, since most of it was composed of the respective leaders' talking points. I was disappointed that Ignatieff really seemed to gravitate to the same sound bites that he delivered rather unconvincingly, rather than talk about substantial policy which he did rather well at when he attempted. As for Harper; despite the gravity of the criticisms against him, he seemed to brush it off almost effortlessly with a combination of policy competence and disdainful apathy toward the other leaders on stage. Despite the fact that they had some meaningful contributions, Layton and Duceppe really didn't control the debate - it was clearly a two-man contest (although to be fair they kept the main contenders focused on more substantial issues).

On the whole, the lack of a distinct turning point in the campaign so far or the debate leads me to believe we are headed for a parliament pretty much like the one we have now. I don't think Harper is headed for a majority: while it is by no means out of reach, he seems to have hit a ceiling and is simply not inspiring (some would say scary, I don't know if that's still the case) to the majority of the electorate. As well, his support has softened in Ontario, where many of the battleground ridings are. At the same time, while the Liberals appear poised to make some gains, there is no indication these will be significant - Conservative support is still too strong for any meaningful shift to occur. If the rest of the campaign runs like it has so far, expect a pretty familiar election result.

How disappointing.

No comments:

Post a Comment