...my views have changed on it quite since its conclusion at 10:00 PM ET and now. At its conclusion, I thought Layton had done the best, struck the most blows and attacked Martin and Harper both quite effectively.
But after some sober second thought, I now think Jack Layton was just being Jack Layton, and people don't really like it. He comes across as orchidaceous, turgid and over-the-top. He may get some support from the Libs, but it will be minimal. Even his own supporters seem conflicted. My immediate post-debate thoughts were that Martin and Layton were best, followed by Harper and Duceppe. I thought Harper was too meek.
I still think Martin did well. Certainly better than I had expected. He was punchy and agressive, but maybe too much so. Harper was calm and collected. That seems to be what people want. All of the post-debate network polls, as Andrew Coyne notes, show that the normal people assembled for these focus group things think Harper did best.
There was no clear "winner." But I now think that because Harper didn't lose, he may have won. The chances of the Liberals salvaging this election at this point are looking pretty bleak.
# posted by Adam Daifallah : 12:15 AM
