Harper turns down one-on-one debate with Ignatieff

[Shwa]

I will spell it out for you if you really don't get it. But seriously, just think about where tax revenues comes from for a minute.

It probably deserves its own thread if you CAN'T figure it out.

So is that your official dodge or do you have something more clever up your sleeve? If you are too afraid to "draw it out and show us the math" that public sector employees don't "actually pay taxes" then at least admit it for what it is.

Come on Bryan, man up about it and draw it out and show us the math. If only to hear the vociferous arguing.

[Shwa]

From today's Star:

Ignatieff issues Harper a ‘High Noon’ debate challenge

Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff has issued a formal challenge to Conservative Leader Stephen Harper to debate him in a letter that has Old West overtones.

“I will meet you at the time and place of your choosing,” he said Friday in the one-page open letter.

Ignatieff said he was “puzzled and disappointed” that Harper issued him a challenge for a mano-a-mano earlier this week but then backed off, saying he didn’t have time for a second one-on-one debate.

“As you stated, there are only two people who can be Prime Minister after May 2 – you or me. Canadians truly deserve to see us go face to face in a contest of ideas, values and very different visions for our country. That is what democracy is all about,” the Liberal leader stated.

Did Mr. Harper actually state that?

[Shakeyhands]

Did Mr. Harper actually state that?

I believe he did, and I'm sure it was with the belief that it would embolden the soft NDP to stick with Layton and that party. He wouldn't seriously consider debating Ignatieff.

[capricorn]

Did Mr. Harper actually state that?

He must have. After all, Mr. Ignatieff wouldn't fib, would he ?

[Bryan]

So is that your official dodge or do you have something more clever up your sleeve? If you are too afraid to "draw it out and show us the math" that public sector employees don't "actually pay taxes" then at least admit it for what it is.

Come on Bryan, man up about it and draw it out and show us the math. If only to hear the vociferous arguing.

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums//index.php?showtopic=18462

[ToadBrother]

I agree, but I would be disappointed in harper having to give canned answers because of his poor communication skills. I'd love to see it, but harper is no reagan and no mulroney. If this were to happen, harper stumping ignatieff would be mind blowing.

Which is why I put so little stock in leadership debates. The guy with the biggest smile wins, even if the skull above it is filled with hot air.

[Bryan]

Liberals balked at one-on-one debating

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1236078.html

The Liberals privately rejected Tory proposals that would have led to more one-on-one exchanges between Stephen Harper and Michael Ignatieff in the leaders’ debate, and then changed their tune in public, says the chairman of the Conservative campaign.

As a result, Harper had a bad day on the campaign Thursday, with the media reporting that he had backed down from a challenge to take on Ignatieff one on one.

The Liberals may be crowing publicly, but in private they insisted on a bearpit-style format, says Guy Giorno, a former chief of staff to both Harper and former Ontario premier Mike Harris.

Top Liberal Michael Eizenga, who represented the Liberals in talks with other parties and the TV networks on Wednesday, would not accept proposals allowing more exchanges between Harper and Ignatieff, Giorno said.

Edited April 1, 2011 by Bryan

[Shakeyhands]

Liberals balked at one-on-one debating

http://thechronicleherald.ca/Canada/1236078.html

Well isn';t that weird... I wonder which is full of it..though I have a pretty good idea.

High Noon Debate

“I will meet you at the time and place of your choosing,” he said Friday in the one-page open letter.

Ignatieff said he was “puzzled and disappointed” that Harper issued him a challenge for a mano-a-mano earlier this week but then backed off, saying he didn’t have time for a second one-on-one debate.

“I don’t understand why you have gone back on your word, or why you would wish to disappoint Canadians,” he said.

[Bryan]

Well isn';t that weird... I wonder which is full of it..though I have a pretty good idea.

So do I, Ignatieff is the one who has a track record of saying one thing, then contradicting it, only to return to the first story. Coalition anyone?

[WWWTT]

Good tactic from the Liberal camp!

In my opinion Harper can be made to look very bad and the opposition is starting to do that.

I predict that if next week is like this one then Ignatieff could be in a strong position to throw a knock out punch

Or the liberal tactic may be more like a series of flurry punches,no knock ou punch,just a death of the million cuts.

WWWTT

[ToadBrother]

Good tactic from the Liberal camp!

I think it has the qualities of a schoolyard taunt. Leader debates are a pretty questionable creature at the best of times, and having an hour or so where Iggy is trying to show us his new superman costume and Harper tossing the word "coalition" around doesn't strike me as either informative, or even instructional.

Harper may take some heat over it, and maybe lose a point for the few days that anyone remembers this story, but it doesn't have any legs.

[Shakeyhands]

So do I, Ignatieff is the one who has a track record of saying one thing, then contradicting it, only to return to the first story. Coalition anyone?

Thought you might say that Bryan....

Here is what Ignatieff said:

Less than 24 hours ago, he was saying, Lets go into the ring, toe-to-toe, head to head, and I said, Look, Im willing to do that, provided that other leaders participate in a regular debate. I dont want anybody excluded (from debates).

And now hes turned around. You cant trust this man, Ignatieff said. This is about respect for the democratic process. I think Canadians would like such a debate. Im willing to go anywhere, anytime (to debate Harper) and I repeat that.

But if hes kind of walking away, that tells you what you want to know about whether you can believe this man, Ignatieff said.

But then.....

Harper is rejecting Ignatieffs call for a one-on-one debate, saying hes more interested in campaigning on the road.

Just 24 hours after saying hed like to square off against Ignatieff, Harper now says the idea is dead.

Must be tough answering ALLLLL those questions at his stops.

Thankfully, Harper came to his senses... Good thing for him and you guys, the Booster Club!

We were open to all kinds of options. Our first preference was a direct debate with the leader of the coalition. Mr. Ignatieff insisted that his first preference was to have his coalition partners with him at the debate, Harper told reporters during a campaign stop in Halifax.

Thats the format that was proposed. Weve accepted it, Harper said.

Now he's REALLY serious....

But Harper shut the door on the idea Thursday.

Were not interested in multiple debates. We were interested in one debate. Our first preference was clear. If Ignatieff wanted that debate, he could have chosen that debate but he didnt, the Conservative leader said.

So, in conclusion, Mr Harper is full of shit, as is Giorno. But we all knew that.

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/politics/article/966455--harper-backing-out-of-one-on-one-debate-ignatieff

Edited April 1, 2011 by Shakeyhands

[Bryan]

Actually, your own quotes there prove that Ignatieff is lying. He was given the option, he rejected it, Harper accepted his rejection, now Ignatieff is changing his mind retroactively.

[WWWTT]

I think it has the qualities of a schoolyard taunt. Leader debates are a pretty questionable creature at the best of times, and having an hour or so where Iggy is trying to show us his new superman costume and Harper tossing the word "coalition" around doesn't strike me as either informative, or even instructional.

Harper may take some heat over it, and maybe lose a point for the few days that anyone remembers this story, but it doesn't have any legs.

Let me elaborate.

Harper does not like to talk.He is using this tactic that if you "don't open your mouth then nobody will think your stupid".I believe the opposition has realized that this could be Harpers Achilles heel and are looking for different angles to hammer him on this.

Harper has looked agitated when refusing to comment on several occasions.

If the liberals keep agitating him in similar but different ways such as bringing up this one on one debate they could be setting him up for a knock out punch

Your best defence is a strong offence tactic would be another description.

Up until a week ago the conservatives have bein the dominantly aggresive party and now the liberals have found a way to attack Harper in a way that could make him look insecure.And insecurity is the kiss of death for the conservatives!

WWWTT

Edited April 1, 2011 by WWWTT

[Shakeyhands]

Actually, your own quotes there prove that Ignatieff is lying. He was given the option, he rejected it, Harper accepted his rejection, now Ignatieff is changing his mind retroactively.

Silly little games from Harper and now you....

“Less than 24 hours ago, he was saying, ‘Let’s go into the ring, toe-to-toe, head to head,’ and I said, ‘Look, I’m willing to do that, provided that other leaders participate in a regular debate.’ I don’t want anybody excluded (from debates).”

I'll parse it out for you. I know words are hard for some people. He is game to debate Harper, any time and any place. It however does not excuse Mr Harper from attending the regular leaders debate.

I can understand Harpers reluctance to do the debates, he can only come off looking very badly.

[capricorn]

Ugh! The fewer debates the better I say. One in French and one in English presents plenty of opportunities to make your opponent look worse than you. Realistically, a good debater does not a good Prime Minister make.

[scribblet]

So do I, Ignatieff is the one who has a track record of saying one thing, then contradicting it, only to return to the first story. Coalition anyone?

Iggy and the media are spinning the narrative that Harper turned it down first when he didn't, Liberals wouldn't lie would they - and oh oh Today’s National Post says that Mr. Ignatieff has said things he probably would like to take back – notably the admission in an interview with the paper that he would not support an unchanged Conservative budget, which suggests we may have to do this all over again soon, if the Tories are returned with a minority - so this has been the plan all along, another election so they can form a coalition.

[ToadBrother]

Iggy and the media are spinning the narrative that Harper turned it down first when he didn't, Liberals wouldn't lie would they - and oh oh Today’s National Post says that Mr. Ignatieff has said things he probably would like to take back – notably the admission in an interview with the paper that he would not support an unchanged Conservative budget, which suggests we may have to do this all over again soon, if the Tories are returned with a minority - so this has been the plan all along, another election so they can form a coalition.

As I've said repeatedly, we would not be facing an election if the Opposition refused to support the budget. Much more likely would be the GG asking Iggy (presumably) to form a new government.

Which may inform you as to why Iggy is saying this sort of thing.

[capricorn]

He wouldn't seriously consider debating Ignatieff.

Harper would be making a huge mistake if he agreed to debate Ignatieff one on one. Throughout the first week of the campaign, Harper has steadily built a narrative around a Conservative majority versus an opposition coalition. Ignatieff, on his own, does not equal the coalition. Put another way, Ignatieff represents one quarter of the coalition.

At all cost, Harper must avoid any scenario that presents Ignatieff as a contender in his own right. That would be contrary to the scenario he worked hard to build in the minds of voters. As some suggest, it's possible that Harper backed down. If that's so, he and his advisors may have decided better to be accused of running from a fight than to muddle a central campaign message. In a couple of weeks, this will be overtaken by other events of much more importance and negative impact with voters will be negligible.

[Guest peterb]

Breaking News - Layton will be Leader of Coalition not Iggy

Now it turns out Ignatieff is out on his ear in a two leader debate. We learned today that if there is a coalition on the left, people want Jack Layton to be the leader by a long shot ( 59% to 27%), and not Count Iggy . So if consortium of broadcasters arrange the two leader debate, it will be Layton versus Harper - what a turn of events - but that is democracy that Ignatieff believes in and defends.

OTTAWA — If Canadians find themselves being governed by a Liberal-NDP-Bloc Québécois coalition following the May election, they want to see the NDP's Jack Layton become prime minister, results of an exclusive poll for Postmedia News and Global National released Friday suggest.

Only 27 per cent of the poll's respondents said they'd want Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff to be top dog, compared with 14 per cent who support Bloc leader Gilles Duceppe and 59 per cent who said Layton.

Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/Layton+prime+minister+there+coalition+most+Canadians+Jack/4545686/story.html#ixzz1IJnXwAbw

[ToadBrother]

OTTAWA — If Canadians find themselves being governed by a Liberal-NDP-Bloc Québécois coalition following the May election, they want to see the NDP's Jack Layton become prime minister, results of an exclusive poll for Postmedia News and Global National released Friday suggest.

It's hypothetically possible, though having the fourth largest party supply the PM would indeed be a first anywhere in the Commonwealth. I'm not exactly sure how it would work, because tradition and precedent says that if the Harper government falls, the GG ask the leader of the Opposition to form a government. I suppose Iggy could decline, and considering it unlikely that the GG would ever ask a separatist party to form government, it would fall to Layton. Bizarre stuff, relying mainly on Iggy saying "I don't want the job", which I find very unlikely.

[YEGmann]

Isn't it still April 1 today?

[ToadBrother]

Isn't it still April 1 today?

It's been April Fools Day since last Saturday, and will continue to be until around 8pm Pacific time on May 2nd.

[Bryan]

Harper would be making a huge mistake if he agreed to debate Ignatieff one on one.

People have been mislead into thinking Harper has made tactical errors many times before. Each time he's ended up in a better position than he was before. If we get a one on one debate, it'll be because Harper not only wants it, but he already knows how he's going to win it.

What is Ignatieff going to win any points on? Have you seen his platform? No matter what he claims makes his position better, it is immediately nullified by one of two things;

a) Conservatives already proposed that. If you're so in favour if it, why did you vote against it?

Liberals have been promising that since 1993. They had consecutive majorities. If they were really going to do any of this, they would have already.

So he'll be able to preach about the subtleties of our parliamentary system and bore people to tears about contempt, and.... what else? Without lying, I mean.

[ToadBrother]

People have been mislead into thinking Harper has made tactical errors many times before. Each time he's ended up in a better position than he was before. If we get a one on one debate, it'll be because Harper not only wants it, but he already knows how he's going to win it.

There something a little too fawning and hero-worshiping about this. Harper isn't some god-like being. I'd say the 2008 prorogation was a major tactical blunder that suppressed Tory numbers for a long time. What saved Harper's butt after that was that Iggy proved a weak strategist who couldn't capitalize.

Harper isn't strong, he's just not as weak as Iggy.