Anti-Panel, Week 4: The debates are over. The GOTV surge begins

On the awesomeness of Steve Paikin, ruining the other guy's clips, and gettin' mushy for the long weekend.

Programming note: The Line will be taking Easter Sunday off. Watch for our next dispatch on Monday. Happy Easter, and, of course, a happy Passover as well — it’s still goin’ on, so we didn’t miss it!

The Line: Okay, team. Not much time left in this campaign. A long weekend looms. Two debates are in the books. Where do you guys think we are with barely a week to go?

Jamie Carroll: I think David Coletto summed up the debates with his post-release: "The key metric for momentum is movement, and on that score the dial barely twitched. Just four per cent of viewers tell us they’ve actually switched their vote."

While I thought Carney and Poilievre both did what they needed to do, if the needle didn't move for Poilievre, that was really his last chance to move it in a big way. And likewise, if Carney was going to fuck it up, the debates — especially the French one — were the most likely place to do it.

The reality is that advance voting is now underway, and as we've seen in recent campaigns, more and more people take advantage of those advance polls. So as of now, significant numbers of Canadians are actually casting ballots.

In terms of other debate observations, I really wish Blanchet didn't hate Canada, 'cause as is so often the case, the guy with the least to lose at the English debate was often the easiest to like (I can remember thinking the same about Duceppe once, but don't tell my old boss Stéphane Dion!).

And Jagmeet ... sigh. These debates really epitomized why I dislike Jagmeet. Even when he's making a perfectly valid point — which he's more than capable of doing in both official languages — he then suddenly starts interrupting and cutting off both Poilievre and Carney for no apparent reason. Whose vote was he trying to win when he repeatedly did that?!

I will give him props on two fronts: first, I did respect him going at Patrice Roy on health care — it's a big issue and it could have gotten some airtime (though I feel the same about national defence!); and second, I thought Jagmeet was the best by far in telling some of the “independent media” to go fuck themselves and the horse they rode in on at the scrums.

And on that, holy shit balls did the Federal Debate Commission dare the next Parliament to blow them up. It was never one of my more favourite Trudeau-era innovations, but in the space of about 24 hours they changed the debate time for a hockey game; kicked out a party for a failure that had existed for weeks;
let one Q&A be denominated by certain online outlets; and then canceled the next night's Q&A completely — because, see previous fuck up.

If we're still talking about this thing four years from now, I'm voting for the Rhinoceros Party.

Amanda Galbraith: First off, let’s take a moment to appreciate Steve Paikin, our national treasure! Honestly, the man should be moderating every debate from now on. He’s sharp, direct, and runs the show like a maestro conducting a symphony. Plus, he’s refreshingly non-partisan, which is no easy feat in today’s political circus. And if that’s not enough, he’s just a genuinely nice guy. So, before we dive into the chaos, let’s give a well-deserved tip of the hat to Steve Paikin.

Now, let’s talk about the debate commission — an organization so ridiculous its very existence offends me. Honestly, it should be put out of its misery. We’d all be willing to forget the cringe-fest that was the 2021 debate format, but the sheer incompetence on display this time is practically begging the next government to bury this farce once and for all. But even putting the last 72 hours aside, how do you manage to blow half a million dollars on salaries in a year when there are no debates? What on earth are you even doing? This was always a problem searching for a solution, and it's high time we put a fork in it.

As for the debate itself? Well, I think Carney and Poilievre both had a solid night. Poilievre struck the right prime ministerial tone — less attack dog, more seasoned leader. He made some savvy contrasts with the Liberals on key issues like pipelines and crime, and he handled the national security clearance question that Carney bizarrely tossed his way like a pro. (From a pure tactical perspective, I have no idea why Carney gave the airtime to Poilievre when he could have done so with a lesser threat like Singh.)

I know I’m getting a bit mushy, but I found myself touched when Pierre got emotional at the end, lamenting that he no longer has time to meet everyone who shows up to his events because of the election’s frantic pace. Carney chimed in to agree, and it was a refreshing moment away from the usual bickering. It reminded us all that up there in political land, they’re just people doing their best. Maybe it’s the holiday vibes getting to me, but I thought it was a heartwarming moment for everyone.

Looking ahead, I have a feeling the campaign will solidify this weekend. I truly believe that family gatherings over long weekends spark those important vote-deciding conversations. Just like back in 2006 over Christmas. With Easter falling at just the right time this year, I’ll be keeping a close eye on the trends and rolling samples early next week to see what, if anything, stirs the pot. Buckle up!

Kim Wright: Bravo Steve Paikin! You made moderators great again.

From a format perspective, I appreciated the talking-time scoreboard so everyone knew how much time they took. I also appreciated that they did away with the bullshit, canned opening statements that bore the shit out of the audiences and made them turn the channel. So well done there.

But the debate commission is charitably equivalent to three raccoons in a trench coat. They had one job! Run two debates without becoming the worst of all process stories. They should have understood how the various actors, including parties and media, game the system. Set out rules to address what works and doesn’t work. And FFS, when you decide to kick out a party, don’t do it 24 hours before the debate. The Greens deserved to be kicked out for being 100 candidates short, but they also deserved to be told earlier.

Finally, firmly assess who is and who isn’t accredited and communicate it clearly. If a media outlet is accredited (at debates or events), then let them in and let them ask questions. Leaders should just answer the fucking questions and move on with their day. This precious bullshit of hating on media because they don’t fit your personal definition of legit media is stupid. It becomes the story instead of your message to Canadians. You aren’t principled, you are just feeding the beast (and letting them fundraise off of you). Why does every party fall into this trap all the time?

I hate having a discussion about who is media. A couple of weeks ago, Pierre called a reporter a protester. Other times it’s about whether bloggers/Substackers and/or podcasters are real media. Stop it, everyone. This all feeds into bullshit narratives that ultimately harm democracy.

Now onto what happened on the debate stage. I thought Jagmeet was filled with both defiance and joy. I appreciated it. People don’t like his chirping? Call a wambulance. He was calling out what he saw as ridiculous bullshit — like PP pretending to care about the environment, the Harper government’s shitty record on housing, and how Carney has never seen a tax haven he hasn’t liked.

I also appreciated Jagmeet saying during the French debate that Blanchet was as useless as the monarchy. To say this in Quebec was hilarious. As was him buying strawberries in the farmer’s market the morning of the English debate. Who knew Carney’s not buying strawberries would become his Marie Antoinette moment?

Yes, Jagmeet’s interjections made it hard for his opponents to get clean clips. And as we talked about last week: this shouldn’t be a prissy little debate society — it’s a campaign. Debates are about getting the clips for social afterwards. Jagmeet showed a lot of fight and the vibes that the NDP and progressives needed to see going into the last 10 days. That said, Carney didn’t do a faceplant in either language, and neither did Pierre. But WTF happened to Blanchet? Putting his traditional man-spreading power pose aside — he didn’t have his usual swagger at the debate, and that will hurt him.

Now that the debates are done, ground game is absolutely critical, especially with advance polls underway. But I am most excited for the ratfucking to kick into high gear.

The Line: Let’s do a quick round here before I end with a question about the final sprint. I want each of you to give me a moment from either debate for your leader that you hope everyone saw. And one you hope that everyone missed.

Carroll: I’m begging the Liberal war room to produce T-shirts with Carney’s face and “Let me finish” on them...

What I hope Canadians took away from the debate was that, no matter the language or attack, Carney was able to calmly reply — and generally with a three-point plan. From the time I've spent with him, I think that's incredibly, genuinely him.

And I think that's what Canadians have responded to.

The only real miss for me was his response to Blanchet about working together. I hope folks missed it — not because it was a fuck-up, but because it was a chance to have done better. Had Carney simply said, “Yes, of course I’ll meet with you!”, the worst-case scenario would have been: he honoured the promise, the other leaders acted like assholes at the meeting, and he never had to do it again.

Galbraith: There were so many three-point plans, like, an absurd number. Honestly, it’s not a bad strategy — most people won’t remember the actual content of what he said, but they’ll definitely remember that he’s got “a plan.” I just have to wonder … does he talk like this in real life? Is there a three-point plan for pumping gas? Grocery shopping? Oh wait—my bad. He doesn’t do that kind of thing.

That said, this was actually one of the more substantive debates we’ve seen in a while. The exchange between Poilievre and Carney on crime was sharp and revealing. Poilievre rolled out his three-strikes proposal and even floated using the notwithstanding clause to slap life sentences on multiple murderers. Carney, of course, couldn’t help but bite —cue the standard Liberal soliloquy about charter rights for criminals, which teed up a tidy little mic-drop moment for Poilievre: he’s here for victims and their families. Point scored.

Honestly, I wish more people had seen his whole performance — it was strong. What I don’t wish we had to endure was Singh’s relentless interruptions. It felt like he only perked up to speak over Poilievre, which … why? The man’s clearly decided this is his farewell tour. I can only assume he’s hoping to get a cushy appointment for completely driving the NDP into the ground.

Wright: Was there a final tally for how many times Carney used “catalyze”? I thought about making it a drinking game, but then we’d all be blackout drunk.

But yes, Amanda, I do believe he speaks like that in real life. I think he has a well-worn copy of How to Speak Like a Management Consultant that he got with his business cards at Goldman Sachs back in the day.

As for Jagmeet, there are so many times I wished he would have tightened up his answers. Again, I loved his chirps. Often they were better than his direct answers, but there were too many moments where he got way too — shall we say — loquacious. Which makes it more complicated to get a clean clip. Dear New Democrats … please tighten up all the language on social.

The Line: We’ve got a full week of the race left. What must your campaign do with it?

Carroll: I gotta say, I have found Carney far more charming in real life than I ever have found either Poilievre or Singh (although both can be very funny and pleasant when they’re not “on”). He’s quite genuine and engaging. Again, not words I’d generally associate with his predecessor — and certainly not his predecessor’s predecessor!

There's a great clip floating around the Twitter machine showing Carney and Poilievre chatting — like honest ta gawd shooting the shit — after the debate. I think both parties should run that as a fucking campaign ad: hey look! our guy is human and doesn’t hate the other guy!

As for the next week, Team Liberal just released their fully costed platform today (Saturday), so I presume they will be selling various pieces of that across the country. By the way, Amanda, when are you guys releasing a platform? With costing? Oh, right, you’re not.

Otherwise, it’s ground game: Liberals need to win every seat they hold now and make sure they have solid GOTV game — advance polls are open now! Vote early, vote often! — in the ridings where they think they’re most likely to pick up new seats. That will obviously influence the leader’s tour as well.

While I don’t distrust the science of polling like some of Amanda’s brethren, anybody who isn’t campaigning like they’re two points behind will be fucking flogged at noon!

Wright: For the last week of the campaign, it’s time to hustle your bustle, kids. Keep your eyes on your own race and run flat out. Get up all the signs, knock on every door, enter the data. Ground game is the ONLY thing that matters. Popular vote, polling data, likes, and Google clicks don’t matter for shit if you don’t get your voters into the ballot box.

Don’t believe me, ask former CPC leader Erin O’Toole what it's like to “win the popular vote” on election night. Spoiler alert: it meant “sweet fuck all” because he wasn’t prime minister. And it also meant that some nefarious asshole created a shadow campaign that knifed his political future. Who was that again? Oh right … Pierre Poilievre.

To all the nefarious assholes lurking in every party. Stop writing obituaries and plotting coups. Go do something useful like fucking knock on doors!

For those who are still trying to figure out whether you should vote strategically. You can’t predict the future but you damn sure don’t have to settle.

I’m a New Democrat because even though I was a very poor kid, I was able to rise in this country. The NDP made sure that dental care, pharmacare, $10-a-day childcare, and so much more actually happened. The Liberals and Conservatives tried to get you to settle or wait for a mythical perfect time or gaslight you into believing Canadians didn’t need them. And left to their own devices, these vital things that have helped millions of Canadians will be on the chopping block.

If you’ve voted NDP before but started wondering if it still matters — if it still makes a difference — now’s the moment to lean back in. It absolutely does.

The NDP isn’t a protest vote. It’s a demand for accountability. A demand to be better. Honestly, life is too short to settle. You don’t have to settle for “least worst” option, you can go for what you want. You should never settle in your personal life … and you should never settle in your politics!

Galbraith: What everyone else said: GOTV. It’s the final stretch, and suddenly comms and tour folks become about as relevant as a Blackberry in 2025. The GOTV and E-Day crowd start swarming the office like it’s their time to shine — which, fair enough, it is. Eventually, you’re exiled to a supply closet with a clipboard and told to knock doors like it’s your destiny.

Also, can we get more Debate Poilievre, please? That guy? Calm, confident, landing gentle punches with ease? Inject it into my veins.

And while we’re dreaming big — let’s run a full-throttle ad blitz on the return of plastic bags and straws. Yes, really. I miss my straws, okay? So do a lot of people. I have lifelong Liberal friends who’d cross the floor just to sip guilt-free from a plastic straw again. It’s the kitchen-table politics nobody sees coming.

Oh, and that clip of Poilievre and Carney having a civil, human conversation? It warmed my cold, cynical strategist heart. For one fleeting moment, I almost believed we might be okay. Sure, I still can’t picture the Liberals limping into a fourth term — but that little exchange? A flicker of faith, darling. Brief, but delicious.

Carroll: Honestly, if Poilievre had just run on bringing back plastic straws he might have gotten my vote! But if you haven’t seen Carney’s response, you should. It’s about the moment.

Galbraith: Lol. I mean, while we’re still here, I’m more than a little befuddled that the Liberals’ poster boy for fiscal responsibility — the central banker, no less — just dropped a platform with $130 billion (yes, billion with a capital B) in new spending over four years. Add that to the existing Liberal spendapalooza, and we’re looking at a casual $225 billion being slapped onto the federal debt like it’s Monopoly money. Remind me again how this “meets the moment,” as Mr. Carney says? Because I must’ve missed the memo.

The Line: Alright, alright, alright, you psychos. Let’s lock this in so everyone can enjoy their long weekends.

Wright: Happy Easter everyone or whatever you are celebrating this long weekend! I suggest reading the just-released NDP and Liberal platforms with some amazing Canadian wines and terrific made-in-Canada chocolates.

The Line: Wine and chocolates are where we’ll leave this one. Happy Easter and/or Passover to all. Enjoy your long weekends.

---

Stay tuned for the return of the Anti-Panel in one week, and the next edition of our usual weekend dispatch on Monday, after a brief break for Easter Sunday. Happy Easter and Passover to all friends of The Line.

---

The Line is entirely reader and advertiser funded — no federal subsidy for us! If you value our work, have already subscribed, and still worry about what will happen when the conventional media finishes collapsing, please make a donation today.

---

The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Please follow us on social media! Facebook x 2: On The Line Podcast here, and The Line Podcast here. Instagram. Also: TikTok. BlueSky. LinkedIn. Matt’s Twitter. The Line’s Twitter. Jen’s Twitter. Contact us by email: lineeditor@protonmail.com.