No knockouts, but debate still had value

Opinion

Hey there, time traveller!
This article was published 22/09/2023 (715 days ago), so information in it may no longer be current.

Journalists covering elections always make a point of keeping close watch on televised party leader debates because, well, you never know.

You never know when someone is going to mess up. You never know when someone is going to deliver “the line” of the campaign. And you never know when one leader is going to deliver a knockout blow.

However, as we witnessed Thursday night in a debate hosted by three TV networks, those things rarely happen. Political leaders are, in general, too well-prepared — and scripted within an inch of their electoral lives.

That was certainly the experience in this debate. From the first awkward, rehearsed waves and smiles as the leaders were being introduced to the answers they provided, this was a debate completely devoid of any seismic moments.

Still, in the absence of a major gaffe or knockout, there was value for voters in this debate.

It was clear that everyone — the PCs, Liberals and New Democrats — knows the NDP is well out in front in this campaign. The size of the lead is certainly up for debate. The Free Press-CTV poll conducted by Probe Research released this week showed the NDP has an 11-point lead in support province-wide and an astronomical 30-point lead in Winnipeg. Other polls have had the NDP out in front with smaller leads.

The debate confirms that NDP Leader Wab Kinew has a stranglehold on the campaign. PC Leader Heather Stefanson — and, to a lesser extent, Liberal Leader Dougald Lamont — made Kinew and the NDP the main focus of their tightly scripted attacks.

Stefanson made a point of channelling tough questions for Kinew through Lamont, a rather unusual strategy that left many observers scratching their heads. Stefanson said she asked questions to Lamont about Kinew to give the Liberal a chance to show people what he stood for.

In reality, this was Stefanson revealing her hand. She needed as many opportunities as possible to attack Kinew, but she also needed to avoid doing anything to harm Lamont and the Liberals in the hopes they can somehow claw back some support from the NDP in key ridings.

Stefanson’s overall performance was pretty solid. However, she demonstrated, as she did in earlier debates, the dilemma she presents for the PC party. Stefanson has been noticeably absent from a majority of the campaign announcements. The Tories have said they are trying to give more exposure to other candidates in tight ridings, but it has been pretty clear that Stefanson’s incredibly low approval ratings make her a risky commodity for the campaign trail.

In the debate, Stefanson demonstrated she is actually pretty good when face-to-face with the other leaders. She gave as good, or maybe a bit better, than she took. The performance was so good, in fact, that it makes you wonder why the Tories did not use the campaign to rebuild her personal brand.

Unfortunately for the PCs, the debates also revealed Stefanson is not dynamic enough to dig her party out of the enormous deficit in public support she found herself at the start of this campaign.

The second great revelation from the debate is that the Tories evidently do not have any campaign tricks left up their electoral sleeves. When she was not trying to punch holes in the NDP’s shields, Stefanson was hammering away at the well-worn and largely ineffectual planks from what has been a very unusual Tory campaign.

Stefanson used the pre-writ period to make two announcements that have become the staples of the PC campaign: a refusal to search the Prairie Green landfill for the remains of murdered Indigenous women, and a pledge to enhance as-yet-undefined “parental rights” in provincial legislation.

The first pledge is a clear attempt to tap into anti-reconciliation sentiments among non-Indigenous Manitobans; the second is a rather desperate plea to social conservatives, particularly those in south Winnipeg’s prominent immigrant communities. It’s hard to say with complete certainty that these unpalatable strategies won’t produce at least some benefits for the Tories, but poll results suggest it won’t be enough to save them on Oct. 3.

Stefanson needed to either land a more forceful blow on Kinew or prompt an unforced error of some sort. Kinew did not outperform Stefanson, but he didn’t need to. All he needed to do was stick to his campaign script and avoid mistakes, which he largely did.

Winnipeg Free Press | Newsletter

Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Tuesdays

A weekly look at politics close to home and around the world.

Sign up for Dan Lett | Not for Attribution

Sign Up

I agree to the Terms and Conditions, Cookie and Privacy Policies, and CASL agreement.

The televised debate more or less kicked off the home stretch of the campaign, where entirely new ideas will be in short supply and all three major party campaigns will transition into performing a medley of their platform’s greatest hits.

There are still opportunities for shifts in support.

The enormous lead in support the NDP enjoy could backfire and convince voters with New Democrat intentions there is no reason for them to vote. Those poll results could also push Tory supporters to mobilize for a last electoral stand.

Or, the narrative we saw in the debate could come to fruition on election night.

dan.lett@winnipegfreepress.com

Dan Lett
Columnist

Dan Lett is a columnist for the Free Press, providing opinion and commentary on politics in Winnipeg and beyond. Born and raised in Toronto, Dan joined the Free Press in 1986.  Read more about Dan.

Dan’s columns are built on facts and reactions, but offer his personal views through arguments and analysis. The Free Press’ editing team reviews Dan’s columns before they are posted online or published in print — part of the our tradition, since 1872, of producing reliable independent journalism. Read more about Free Press’s history and mandate, and learn how our newsroom operates.