Clark and Key refuse televised debate with other leaders

29 Sep 2008 03:04p.m.

Chad, Hamilton wrote:

There are some great debaters in the minor parties. Clerk and Key know that they don't fare well in comparison to the likes of Peters, for example, who seems to shine in these sort of debates. They know the public admires (and often will sway towards) personalities who show some likeable chacteristics in this sort of arena. They know (as history tells them)its often about the confidence and control of the leader under pressure that impresses the public, not so much about the policies. What these two want is to try to control that situation and make it a battle of policies and not of personalities. Denying to debate with the minor party leaders is another way of saying "we believe its a two horse race and we would rather you back one of us".

Clerk, being a more seasoned campaigner, will feel confident that she has the edge in this debate.

29 Sep 2008 02:13p.m.

Alex wrote:

No, you ranted about "Helen" throughout your comment, neglected badmouthing John Key, then, when there'd been no condemnation of either person from anyone known to be left or right leaning of their own respective preferred PM, you decided it was time to lambast "the left" for not condemning Clark yet.

29 Sep 2008 10:52a.m.

karl morris wrote:

If we want to copy anything of the American style of politics, at least allow us to vote for the party leader, this will allow us to choose who will lead the party of our choice, and not allow them to be handed that title by way of entry to parliament via a list, this would even the field and eliminate those the public dont see fit for the job...