The farm has been sans hot water for a couple of days, and yours truly has been busy trying to recify the problem. The situation occupied the time from stepping in the front door to about 30 minutes into the Leaders' Debate.
Luckily, five minutes into my television viewing, and I was relieved to see that nothing of major import happened in my absence. Of course, nothing of major import happened in my presence either.
In my previous submission, I observed that political campaigns are not won with the seminal knockout flourish that gets chronicled in the textbooks for years to come. Rather, it is about 'skating a clean program' and not letting your derriere hit the ice. Clearly, three of the men at the podiums last night took this to heart, while the fourth, sensing that le debat en francais was the bigger deal essentially acted like a black hole - consuming both space and time and leaving nothing in its stead but empty darkness.
Harper skated a clean program. So did Ignatieff, and so did Layton. All played it safe and to the chest because, despite what they needed to gain, all recognized their vulnerabilities and what they stood to lose. It was the rhetorical equivalent of a reflexive grabbing of the privates when one sees a low flying pitch in the basement of the strike zone.
Of course, this does not mean that there could have been a winner. Unfortunately, the recipe for winning a debate is to have someone lose. Again, you can't guarantee a win by skating clean - you have to skate clean and hope that your opponent's toe pick turns a graceful pirouette into a death spiral worthy of a dogfight scene in a World War II biopic. Winning is not about being the best. It is about being the least worst.
Consider, then, three skaters all doing a safe program, and nobody falling down. The irresistable object meets the immovable force. The smoke clears and nothing changes.
Michael Ignatieff did what he had to do, but to complete the deal he needed Stephen Harper to screw up. Didn't happen.
Harper was 'Prime Ministerial', but he needed to show up Ignatieff. Also didn't happen.
Jack Layton, despite his bravado about becoming Prime Minister, was out to best Michael Ignatieff. Here we have the closest to what would be considered a success. Two barbs - one on attendance, and the other about the Liberals being a figurative 'crutch' to the government, while brandishing his cane (a far better use of onstage props than the piece of paper Stockwell Day used back in the 1990's). Unfortunately, saving your ammo for the last five minutes of a two hour debate might leave some lasting impressions, but it came too late in the game to count substantively.
In the end, if this debate were a horserace, the folks at Woodbine would still be reviewing the finish line photo.
So, what's the result of this?
If you leaned Tory before the debate, you are probably ready to consumate the deal. Ditto if you leaned Liberal or NDP. I suspect that the poll numbers will not have changed much. Indeed, the consequence of this whole performance is that the three are largely locked in. They have entered a part of the track too narrow for anyone to pass.
Between now and election day, only two things can alter the trajectory of the race not finishing as it stands today - the french language debate, and the final week of the campaign when undecideds typically make a commitment to fish or cut bait.
The Holy Grail for the Tories is 155. I predicted either 3 over or 3 short of this number. Nothing thus far has changed my mind.
Now, if you will excuse me, I need to boil some water.
Luckily, five minutes into my television viewing, and I was relieved to see that nothing of major import happened in my absence. Of course, nothing of major import happened in my presence either.
In my previous submission, I observed that political campaigns are not won with the seminal knockout flourish that gets chronicled in the textbooks for years to come. Rather, it is about 'skating a clean program' and not letting your derriere hit the ice. Clearly, three of the men at the podiums last night took this to heart, while the fourth, sensing that le debat en francais was the bigger deal essentially acted like a black hole - consuming both space and time and leaving nothing in its stead but empty darkness.
Harper skated a clean program. So did Ignatieff, and so did Layton. All played it safe and to the chest because, despite what they needed to gain, all recognized their vulnerabilities and what they stood to lose. It was the rhetorical equivalent of a reflexive grabbing of the privates when one sees a low flying pitch in the basement of the strike zone.
Of course, this does not mean that there could have been a winner. Unfortunately, the recipe for winning a debate is to have someone lose. Again, you can't guarantee a win by skating clean - you have to skate clean and hope that your opponent's toe pick turns a graceful pirouette into a death spiral worthy of a dogfight scene in a World War II biopic. Winning is not about being the best. It is about being the least worst.
Consider, then, three skaters all doing a safe program, and nobody falling down. The irresistable object meets the immovable force. The smoke clears and nothing changes.
Michael Ignatieff did what he had to do, but to complete the deal he needed Stephen Harper to screw up. Didn't happen.
Harper was 'Prime Ministerial', but he needed to show up Ignatieff. Also didn't happen.
Jack Layton, despite his bravado about becoming Prime Minister, was out to best Michael Ignatieff. Here we have the closest to what would be considered a success. Two barbs - one on attendance, and the other about the Liberals being a figurative 'crutch' to the government, while brandishing his cane (a far better use of onstage props than the piece of paper Stockwell Day used back in the 1990's). Unfortunately, saving your ammo for the last five minutes of a two hour debate might leave some lasting impressions, but it came too late in the game to count substantively.
In the end, if this debate were a horserace, the folks at Woodbine would still be reviewing the finish line photo.
So, what's the result of this?
If you leaned Tory before the debate, you are probably ready to consumate the deal. Ditto if you leaned Liberal or NDP. I suspect that the poll numbers will not have changed much. Indeed, the consequence of this whole performance is that the three are largely locked in. They have entered a part of the track too narrow for anyone to pass.
Between now and election day, only two things can alter the trajectory of the race not finishing as it stands today - the french language debate, and the final week of the campaign when undecideds typically make a commitment to fish or cut bait.
The Holy Grail for the Tories is 155. I predicted either 3 over or 3 short of this number. Nothing thus far has changed my mind.
Now, if you will excuse me, I need to boil some water.
No comments:
Post a Comment