Albo and Dutton debate was a complete farce

Politics is a metaphorical war. It is no place for civilians

Central to our two-party liberal democracy is political debate. Our system allows for peaceful revolutions at the ballot box. It requires our political leaders to fight so that we don’t have to. The current debate format that brings voters into the equation is a complete cop-out. It sucks. Instead of our leaders debating each other, they have to be nice to the voters participating in the debate show.

The contemporary political debate format where voters get to ask questions in the middle of the debate sucks. It is not good for our democracy.

Writing in the Morning Double Shot newsletter, Terry Barnes had this to say:
Michael de Percy watched last night’s leaders’ debate and was unimpressed. You know what the debate told me? Instead of being about issues that really matter, this has become a Seinfeld election about nothing – when it should be about everything. De Percy effectively corroborated master Liberal campaigner Ian Hanke’s distaste for leaders’ debates. All that said, Peter Dutton deserves credit for performing solidly after just learning his father in Brisbane has had a heart attack, but Anthony Albanese was so gratingly on-message there was no winner (the audience polled gave it to Albanese by a decisive margin, an online poll said very differently). There were better things to do with one’s evening than watch this political version of World Championship Wrestling.
My latest in The Spectator Australia, Albo and Dutton debate was a complete farce.

Comments

Post a Comment