# Tonight's Federal debate, who will win?



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

1.Elizabeth May (my pick to win debate)
2.Thomas Mulcair (my choice for next leader)
3.Justin Trudeau (he supported bill C51, in other words, Patriot Act North)
4.That other dude, that so-called conservative party candidate

(I'm obviously not in the least bit biased :wink: )


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

PS, where to watch the debate, 8PM EST tonight..
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/the-macleans-national-leaders-debate/

(Poll only lasts one day btw).


----------



## jaybee (Nov 28, 2014)

I pick Mulcair to win the win the debate. I dunno if I want him to be the PM though.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

3 for Mulcair to win, one for May so far, and one for that so-called conservative candidate, I'm starting to think you guys are right btw, I did pick Elizabeth May, but during the last debates Mulcair wasn't there, it was Jack Layton, and popular as Jack was, I do think that Thomas Mulcair does have the debating skills, and intelligence to win this one.

PS (Given more time Jack Layton could well have gone much further this time too I suspect, but sadly it was not to be).


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Most to gain: Trudeau (lowest expectations)

Most to lose: Mulcair (he needs to appear prime ministerial while still landing punches on Harper)

Most irrelevant: May


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

Maclean's brings Evan Solomon into the fold..
article by Evan Solomon..
http://www.macleans.ca/politics/ottawa/federal-election-strategy-explained-by-evan-solomon/


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I try to not put too much weight in debates. It's definitely good to see their policy positions, but not for much else.

What I learned through high school and university debating clubs is that some people are just good talkers, or charismatic. That doesn't mean they will come up with better decisions in the role as a decision-maker, it just means they can talk well.


----------



## uptoolate (Oct 9, 2011)

Not us. You are never getting that time back folks!


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Nobody won.

It is the same stuff they have already been talking about for months.

More of the same..........with tweaks here and there, and not much substance.

In short.........Canada awaits a return to $120 oil when happy days will be here again.

It appears that Canadians want to get rid of Harper, and are trying to decide between Trudeau and Mulcair.

A split vote on the left resulting in a virtual 3 way tie and a probable minority government.

Not a bad outcome.............but how long would it last if Harper forms the government and the Liberals and NDP dictate policy ?

Not long before there was another election, I think.

Edit............an interesting moment in the debate.

PM Harper was forced to admit that Canada is falling into the dreaded "recession", so that might be fodder for the opposition in the coming campaign.

Mulcair quipped that if Harper is asked about the recession in the future.........he will have to answer "which one" ?


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

I missed most of it; the live-stream kept freezing up for me.
Will probably watch it later on YouTube


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

Watched the first 15 mins this morning.

Based on the limited sample, I would say Mulcair did well (appeared calm and mostly reasonable), while Trudeau got a little animated and tripped over his words quite a bit.

I suspect this debate (given its reported lack of fireworks) will have a limited impact on the campaign. I suspect most Canadians won't really be paying attention to the election until mid to late September.


----------



## pwm (Jan 19, 2012)

Didn't watch it. If I want to see Harper get dumped on I can just sign on to CMF.


----------



## none (Jan 15, 2013)

pwm said:


> Didn't watch it. If I want to see Harper get dumped on I can just sign on to CMF.


or on almost any website. That guy seriously sucks.


----------



## nathan79 (Feb 21, 2011)

Trudeau did fine I thought, there was no clear winner.

But my vote is still leaning toward Mulcair.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Based on the limited sample, I would say Mulcair did well (appeared calm and mostly reasonable)


 Agree. He's smart and it makes him more dangerous for Canada... 



> while Trudeau got a little animated and tripped over his words quite a bit.


 Also agree. He behaved like on some debates in high-school ..... truly "Not ready yet"  And to tell the truth , without his papa, who would know him?!

P.S. Cannot say I like Harper , but others much worse.

P.P.S. have no idea what May was doing there.... Just wasted time ... better invite The Communist Party of Canada (CPC) next time


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I have no idea why any of them were there.

None of them seem to want the PM job bad enough to overcome their over-politeness to each other.

Where is the Canadian version of Donald Trump ?

Like him or hate him............he says what he wants right to their faces, and then follows up by skewering them on Twitter.

He has all the other candidates scared to death of him.

I loved when he said that he was politically incorrect so often he didn't have time to address them all.

Mulcair and Harper both have fiery tempers we are told, but neither exhibited much passion during the debate.

There is more passionate discussion on CMF than by the leaders.

We could probably have the election today, if this is what the rest of the campaign will be like.


----------



## Beaver101 (Nov 14, 2011)

^


> .. Where is the Canadian version of Donald Trump.


? ... KOL? :biggrin: Maybe there isn't any in the land of plenty o'maple-syrup.



> ... There is *more passionate discussion on CMF than by the leaders*.


 ... good question - why is it that there is more passion displayed by ordinary Canadian citizens/taxpayers/voters ... than its leader? Or being a PM is just a job.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

Just watched the YouTube version, but I missed the part where Thomas Mulcair punched Harper in the throat, and then Trudeau and Harper waterboarded him while Elizabeth May hit all three with a chair..

Did they edit that part out? 

Meh, nothing like live-feed i guess


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

Well............in the US who are the media talking about in the news today ?

Jeb Bush ?...........Rick Perry ?..........nope.............Donald Trump................on all the network and cable channels.

Not in the debate, but what was it Trump said about Rick Perry ?

Oh yea, that he wasn't very smart and he was wearing glasses now to look smarter................LOL..........

All of Trumps "out of the box" statements get replayed and replayed and replayed.

In Canada what is the buzz on the election..................zzzzzzz


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I remember the election with Stephan Dion as the Liberal leader, and the most damaging PC advertisement against him showed him appearing near tears in question period.

When the campaign gets rolling...........Harper will take off the nice guy gloves.

The other leaders had best be prepared to respond in kind.

These days in elections............nice guys finish last.


----------



## Sasquatch (Jan 28, 2012)

I watched the whole thing and the most amazing and disturbing part for me was the fact that Harper actually seems to believe in his own lies. 
I guess if you say it often enough it becomes the truth in your little mind. Truly bizarre !!


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

I watched the whole thing on the Macleans Youtube channel. I'm not so interested in who "won" but rather I watched this to understand their differences in policy positions.

Mulcair seems to be the most consistent and logical, and I love his desire to be cautious about war and re-establish Canada as a respected country.
Trudeau is strong too, but he is too pro-war for my taste, and pro-state surveillance (C-51 etc). This is a deal killer for me.
Harper makes up stuff and is unapologetic. This is a Rumsfeld-style of politics and I absolutely will not vote for him.

On the matters that I take seriously, the Liberals and Conservatives are too close for my taste. I think I'll have to vote NDP or Green, and realistically that means NDP.

Mulcair is the only one who pointed out a really big deal -- that Canada is no longer respected on the world stage as a cool-headed, balanced, fair player in global politics & warfare. Harper has us flying around the middle east dropping bombs, and the rest of the world is asking what the HELL happened to Canada. I trust that Mulcair will re-establish our good name and repair our international reputation.

In my view, politicians cannot control the economy (it's a function of the world economy). But politicians can choose to strengthen, or destroy, our rights/freedoms, foreign policy, social services, etc. I do not vote based on the economy. Harper may love the oil sands more than anything, but if oil prices stay sub $50, he can't make a lick of a difference.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

I think you hit it right on the head.......J4B.

Trudeau's slide in popularity seemed to be connected to his pro-war and C-51 policy.


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Regarding the so-called Harper's admission of a "recession" in Canada.
It seems these days the "R" word has become so dreaded that people forget there is (or used to be) something known as business cycles.
Recessions, recoveries, booms & busts are a normal part of market driven economies.
Recessions have always been around.
There have been dozens of them since the end of WW-II.
Prior to WW-II, they were even more frequent, not including the Great Depression

Recessions are seldom the direct fault of the govt. in power, although fiscal policy can indeed exacerbate recessions or lessen its impact, depending on policy.
If Canada is indeed entering a recession, Harper is not causing it.
It can be argued that Harper govt. can do certain things to lessen the impact, such as more/less stimulus spending, more/less tax cuts, increase/reduce debt, etc.
Those are all tweaks at the margin and cannot change the fundamental fact of recession.

It is simply political pandering by the opposition to blame the govt. for a commodities induced recession.

Could the Fed. govt. have done things in the last 8 years to reduce reliance on energy and increase manufacturing & other exports?
Perhaps.
But if we assume that the BoC is truly independent, that discounts a lot of fiscal and tax policy tweaks the Fed. govt can make.
A lot of the taxation and subsidy policy is provincial, energy policy is provincial, corporate taxes are provincial, etc.

Harper is under pressure to appear calm, collected, and not take too many false steps.
Therefore, he is appearing defensive and almost apologetic.

At no point has he come out and said that we may or may not be entering a recession, but it is not the fault of the in situ government. 
At least 2 of the other leaders are old enough to remember at least 2 prior recessions.
Don't like recessions, move to North Korea.
Even China has recessions these days.


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

One can hardly fault the opposition for blaming the recession on the government when the government was claiming credit for the expansion that preceded it.

I was shocked to see that post-debate polls indicated that Trudeau gained the most through the debate. I did not think he did well, but perhaps expectations were so low people could only be positively surprised.

Not having paid much attention to Mulcair, he struck me as being pretty reasonable sounding. Pity he's attached to the NDP, whose program I can't endorse (too much pandering to labour and economically-illiterate socialists).


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

I thought Mulcair did well, too.
I haven't checked any latest poll results, but I am not surprised Trudeau beat (low) expectations.

One big issue with NDP/Mulcair is the Quebec vote, which propelled them as the official opposition during the previous elections.
Will they be able to hold on to that vote, and what will they do to buy that vote?

Regarding the Conservatives, there is such a strong anti-Harper sentiment that I doubt they will get a full majority.
Might get a slim minority vote, if at all.

Canada's recovery in the post '09 years was mainly due to recovery in commodities, a strong banking sector, and increased leverage by households and businesses.
The strong loonie helped as well, but we can't blame/credit the Harper govt for that.


----------



## mrPPincer (Nov 21, 2011)

Based on the results of this tiny poll of 14 people before the debate Trudeau was not expected to do very well, so I suspect you guys are right.
I thought he was a little timid and faltering at times but he also spoke with more passion than the other ones at times too and came across stronger then, maybe those moments are what stuck with people.

I think they all had weak moments, I suspect it's because they're all playing it a little cautiously this early because they don't wanna give anybody more ammo for the attack ads.

Here's a funny YouTube side-by-side comparison of the Canada debates with the US Republican debates..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4GygiDCqCoU
Talk about Idiocracy coming to reality, what a gong show down there.. :hopelessness:


----------



## martinv (Apr 30, 2009)

They all looked like little robots to me. They have all been given so much coaching that they can't be themselves for even a moment.
Wonder if anyone else is of the same mind as myself. This the first election where I don't know my vote well ahead of time.
It will probably be a process of elimination.
NDP: all I think of is big labour and increased spending. Mulcair maybe a nice guy but I just can't go there.
Liberal: Too many memories of Pierre, Chretien but if I put that aside, then Justin..... a very small, maybe.
Conservative: I had hoped for a new leader but they can never seem to step aside. So another maybe.
So, it may be a case of the devil you know and vote while holding my nose.
Not the best selection to choose from. But at least I am not too lazy to vote, like almost half of the Canadian population.
Oh, and while we are on the election, why can't I vote online? The environmentalists should be all over that one. Imagine here it is 2015 and everyone still has to drive their car spewing exhaust and using carbon just to vote. 
I can do all my investing, banking, income tax online but can't vote online.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> The environmentalists should be all over that one. Imagine here it is 2015 and everyone still has to drive their car spewing exhaust and using carbon just to vote.


 .. and how much paper is wasted


----------



## GPM (Jan 23, 2015)

I keep hearing conservatives. I don't have a party, but call a spade a spade. They are the Reform Party. The real conservatives died with Joe Clark. They kept the name to keep the auto voters who are already branded. Just a pet peeve. Note: in Saskatchewan days I voted for all parties in the past except reform either provincially or federally.

Agreed, the economy does what it does generally despite the party in power.

On the island. No choice but green or NDP. I will wait and vote for who's closest to win. At least it's a voice in parliament.


----------



## fatcat (Nov 11, 2009)

HaroldCrump said:


> Regarding the Conservatives, there is such a strong anti-Harper sentiment that I doubt they will get a full majority.
> Might get a slim minority vote, if at all.


i would nominally be considered a conservative voter though i am fed up with harper and the conservatives on social issues like death with dignity, prostitution and especially the war on drugs

on the other hand an ndp scares the poop out of me ... i hate to see how the tsx will open the day after an ndp win ... "let's leave all that oil in the ground"

if the conservatives form a majority government, the left will have only itself to blame

i could live with a minority conservative government


----------



## andrewf (Mar 1, 2010)

I don't think a minority conservative government has much chance of being stable. Harper made it work previously because the Liberals were weak enough to abstain from votes rather than bring the government down. I don't think the Conservatives would be collaborative enough to actually secure support of another party. An NDP or Liberal government propped up by the other is more likely. It may or may not be a formal coalition (both parties in cabinet).


----------



## HaroldCrump (Jun 10, 2009)

Among the 3 possible minority govt options, I have to say an NDP led minority govt. appears to be the most likely outcome.
I don't think the Liberals can win enough seats to emerge at the largest party to lead a minority govt.

Add the fact that Alberta has recently voted in a majority NDP govt.
Plus, the Liberals honeymoon in Ontario seems to be over and their primary vote bank (public sector unions) are souring.
All these signs are pointing to a larger vote haul for the NDP.

I love the "let's leave things in the ground" motto.


----------



## sags (May 15, 2010)

With all the new ridings and realignments, the outflow of incumbents from all parties.......but most especially from the PC party, anything could happen in this election.

Voter discontent is making for some interesting politics.

The NDP tops the polls in Canada, Donald Trump leads all Republican candidates and today I read that Bernie Sanders leads Hillary Clinton in New Hampshire.


----------

