Minimizing debates

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Cuddler, Apr 3, 2011.

  1. Cuddler

    Cuddler Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2011
    Messages:
    122
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    A funny thing happened during the first week of Canada's federal election campaign. The current Harper, the Conservative incumbent Prime Minister, challenged Ignatieff, the leader of the official opposition Liberal Party, to a one-on-one debate. There has been no shortage of offers to host a debate between the two. Ignatieff has told Harper to name the time and place and he'll be there. No sooner had the opposition leader accepted than Harper found reasons not to go forward, instead opting for a single debate among the leaders of four parties with seats in Parliament in English and another in French.

    I was wondering if it is a common tactic for the incumbent to want to limit the number of debates, or is it usual practice for one ideology or another? Please don't start a flame war, as there's enough of "the angels on my side always wants to discuss ideals, but the evil idiots that want to destroy the country never have anything useful to say." I'm after specific instances where one side or the other worked to avoid debating opponents, and even better if they're documented.

    Broadcasters rule out one-on-one debate between Harper and Ignatieff, confirm May's exclusion - The Globe and Mail
    Any time, any place: Ignatieff wants one-on-one debate - CTV News
    Ignatieff accepts Rick Mercer debate offer - CBC News
     
Draft saved Draft deleted