paterson1 wrote:
I thought the format for both debates was fine. They covered a lot of ground and I thought Steve Paiken did a good job moderating. Singh did interrupt too much, but he also had nothing to lose since his party seems to be crushed by both the Liberals and Conservatives. The NDP may not even win enough seats to be considered an official party if the polls are correct.
Well, since this was a debate, I'm entitled to a rebuttal. Singh gained nothing by doing what he did. In fact, Bill Carroll mentioned on the post game show that the words "Shut Up" were trending on social media posts across the country. So I wasn't the only one who was annoyed by his constant heckling. On the contrary, I thought he lost more of an opportunity than he gained by such idiotic behaviour. And yes, I think the NDP will be wiped out a week from Monday and he won't be leader for long after that.
paterson1 wrote:
IRA, we have nothing to learn from the US when it comes to debates. Wednesday and Thursday's were far superior to anything we witnessed in the amateur and pointless presidential debates last fall.
I wasn't insinuating that the abortion that was that debate was good. But turning off the mics might have made it at least watchable/listenable. I actually listened to it on the radio more than watched it and that just made the constant hectoring worse. But shutting off every mic, it would have been far more useful, so we could all follow what the candidates were actually saying. Just because the U.S. did it (once), doesn't make it wrong.
paterson1 wrote:
IIf you didn't get much out of it is your fault, not the content of the debate. And you even said you can't stand any politician. Why did you even bother tuning in then, you have already decided that the debate will be a waste of time. I thought there was a lot of policy and some good ideas from both Poilivre and Carney. You have to listen to what they are saying.
There was no way I could know I would get nothing out of it until it actually aired. I learned almost nothing about what any of them stood for, with little to no new information presented. On the contrary to your assertion, if I hadn't watched, I'd have no right to an opinion. It's like that old canard, if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain. I consider watching it a civic duty and despite my disappointment in the outcome, I'm not entirely sorry I did.
paterson1 wrote:
IThe moderator on the french debate did cut Jagmeet's microphone when he insisted on talking about healthcare when the topic was something else. That's why Singh was petulant after the french debate.
Doesn't give him the right to act like a petulant brat and depriving voters of a true debate - the only one in English we're getting.
paterson1 wrote:
Whatever committee was in charge of the debates have a little explaining to do. Not for the actual debates which generally were well done, but about the sudden cancelling of the Greens taking part a few hours before.
And how did non journalists from Rebel News and True North hijack the scrums after the french debate and the cancelling of scrums after the english. All Rebel wants is video themselves distrupting events so they can put it on their website to raise money for their activist movement. Watch for these clowns to be on FOX News Network in the days ahead, telling America how democracy is dead in Canada. And of course the guppies on FOX will be eating this up.
On this, at least, we agree. The Commission needs a good housecleaning. Their actions were inexcusable and there are a lot of questions about what they did. No debate about that!
