Debate and kitten eating
A few quick things, since blogger swallowed my previous version of this post:
Iggy's exceuse for skipping the RobTV debate today was weak. Cherniak has a recap on his site. Yes, the Liberal Party wants to be inclusive, but you can't expect every company that wants a debate to invite everyone. Just like news shows are more likely to want Iggy or Rae to appear as opposed to Volpe or Dryden, someone organizing a debate won't want everyone. Unless if he is prepared to deny TV interview requests until the networks give equal airplay to all candidates, I think he was just looking for a cop-out from an Iggy-bashing fest.
Second, there's a blogger going around spouting violent anti-Kennedy rhetoric. Just like my previous post about the anti-Iggy website, I think this sort of fearmongering is wrong. At least the stop Iggy people were upfront about their dislike. This other blogger just spouts nonsense, like baseless accusations that Kennedy cheated on his taxes. It's okay to disagree with someone, but to go to this level doesn't help the debate at all. I may not be a fan of Ignatieff, but I won't go so far as to throw out stuff I don't have background information for.
And finally, there's another blogger out there who is taking a much more light-hearted note of the campaign, posting cartoons and jokes about the candidates. Some are pretty good. And at least he's being fair about it, posting jokes about everyone. A nice way to get a break from some of the more serious posts by a lot of others.
7 comments:
Kennedy wasn't invited to the debate initially. How would you have felt if it had just been the three frontrunners? This was set up months ago when it looked like it was just those three. Iggy rejected it then and it was the right thing to do.
In a campaign about renewal after years of "camps" and exclusion, we have to be particularly sensitive to excluding others. Particularly sensitive about excluding all women's voices from this debate, all non-central Canadian voices, all immigrant voices. When those are their to be heard we should hear them. The also rans represent 20% of Liberals and your guys just insulted them and their delegates. Not terribly smart, if you ask me.
Iggy has nothing to win or lose in such an exclusive debate. In fact, a 7 on 1 pile on isolates him more and is harder on him than a 3 on 1. It's us who lose when upper echelons try to exclude perceived lower echelons.
Ted, I have heard you throw this "Kennedy wasn't initially invited...how would you feel?" nonsense argument around in a few places.
We are in a different environment post-DEMs. We know with a relative degree of certainty which candidates can and cannot win now. Before that point a much greater degree of speculation was necessary to sort out who was where. Furthermore, before DEM's it was more important to give all candidates exposure so Liberals could decide who to vote for at DEM's. Thats no longer necessary.
I dont know whats happened to you lately. Everything is "Iggys so great" with you nowadays. Quit trying to spin this nonsense about Ignatieff's no-show as proof that Iggy is looking out for the little guy. That argument was pretty thoroughly rebutted by those who pointed out that him and Rae appeared on Canada AM before DEMs. I hightly doubt that many many delegates from other campaigns are going to feel too offended by a debate between the people that we NOW KNOW are frontrunners.
PS Anyone who thought Kennedy wasnt a frontrunner a few months ago wasnt being "unfair", they were just being foolish... just like I was foolish when I though Bob Rae would never show like he did.
Oh come on Cerberus, Iggy has everything to lose, that is why he is hiding.
Delegates are paying $2000 to elect a leader and they have every right to see the top 4. That is not being disrespectful to the candidates that cannot win, it is being respectful to the hard-working, rank and file Liberals that are sacrificing a lot to go the convention.
We have already seen the all the candidates in a debate, 4 times! It is time to have debates with the top 4.
I can't say how I know this but apparently Mario Dumont is set to endorse Gerard Kennedy in the coming weeks. This will be a major coup for Kennedy in Quebec.
If Kennedy wasn't invited, I would be upset. But if he was invited and didn't go, I'd be upset as well.
I understand that we need to hear from everyone, and that's what the official debates are for. But honestly, how is being invited for a 4 person debate different than if CTV invited multiple candidates in to discuss issues? They've had at least 2 with Kennedy and Brison. Should those 2 have declined because CTV didn't invite everyone?
What happened to renewal, fairness and principle?
The other candidates paid their $50,000, they've been campaigning too and they should have some input.
Even if the others don't say anything so that they don't look like their whining, it must feel bad.
Would it be that Rae, Dion and Kennedy would not be "inclusive" if one of them run - that their MP's and cabinet (like Harper) would not be included in policy and decision making?
This is showing their colours to me and I am disappointed. It certainly affects my vote.
By the way, I watched some strategists who say Iggy is doing the right thing - ground work. This debate really means nothing in the scheme of things.
Yes, and strategists were also mentioning that during this ROBTV thing, Rae was going around hugging Dion and Kennedy and doing the obvious schmoozing and butter-up. Surely to God, these guys aren't going for this - God I hope not.
Or, perhaps they like the huggy-bear, kissy face thing.
Ugh, this makes me nautious.
Post a Comment