So it appears that the media has decided that only two candidates exist for the honor of competing to run our Province: Notley and Smith. Where is the Liberal Party candidate? Where is Hinman from the Wildrose Loyalty Coalition? There are other parties. This smells of election interference. The media knows that if they gave the Liberal Party an equal footing to garner support that that would cut into the NDP vote, splitting it, and likely give the UCP an easy win. For this reason, John Roggeven is the invisible man. Heck, I had to google the Liberal Party and thumb through numerous links to learn he was their leader! I'd say that was a purposeful media blackout to augment NDP electoral support.
Or perhaps I'm just salty because I like Hinman!!
Here are my point-form takeaways from this debate (video below):
1. Notley came across as being more likable. She smiled throughout the debate. Smith looked grim and never smiled. This is an easy thing to fix and I wonder why her handlers never prepared her for this actuality. You don't want to present like Hilary Clinton, you need to be personable and not bitchy looking.
2. Notley wasn't as rhetorical and verbally stumbled on occasion. Her finish wasn't as polished as Smith.
3. Pre-debate, they seem to have coordinated matching outfits and wore the same ugly suit jacket and skirt. This eliminated the always volatile and unpredictable fashion swing voters.
4. On par with #3, they both have the same hair style. Though, they did part their hair on different sides. Smith sported a right part while Notley rocked a left part - this seemed somehow appropriate. If Roggeven was allowed to debate, I wonder if he would be politically keen enough to differentiate himself with a center part? Would the Independence Leader have worn a toupee? (you know, cuz it separates from his scalp - yeah, ... I took that joke to far).
3. Notley, to me, won this debate (and I'm not a Notley supporter, I physically taste vomit whenever I have to say her name). Smith frequently spoke of grandious concepts that floated above the day to day workers head. She came across like a boring old Professor giving a lector: academic and impersonal. Only the politically wired would understand the details of her rambling about carbon taxes or past policy details. The UCP leader also suffered a couple stunning right crosses from her NDP competitor which tipped the debate scales into NDP territory. What right crosses? Well, she opened with the accusation that Smith broke the law and accused her of being an untrustworthy criminal. Smith left that to stand unrebutted. And it pains me to say, but Notley's second right cross was poignant and humorous. She detailed how Smith was combative with Everyone, including Smith's own past comments. It was funny.
Truth be told, debates are boring, so I only watched half. Maybe Smith tore the NDP a new one and shifted gears to highlight her pearly dental work, thereby undoing my observations from the first half. I'll likely watch the second half later and add to this article. So check back if you're curious!
As it stands, no new ground was broken in this debate. Adherents to each side will stick with their candidate, and for the undecided, they don't care enough to watch debates anyway!
As always, this is Ask Abe, and this is my opinion. Take care.
Comments
Post a Comment