During the Face to face of last week, François Legault had not only delivered a fairly ordinary performance, with his pout that did not reflect enthusiasm. He had also sown the seed of several other controversies that would screw up most of the following days.
The supreme example is the assertion that everything was settled in terms of Aboriginal relations at the Joliette hospital. He had the right to say that many actions have been taken, that he is confident that improvements will follow. But to say that everything is settled? Of course that statement was going to go wrong.
The head of the CAQ certainly came to this debate more relaxed and more motivated to participate in the exercise. He will have succeeded in placing his proposals for the future a little more. But above all, he expressed beyond any doubt his obsession with Québec solidaire. On all themes, he insisted on throwing arrows at Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois compulsively.
On the negative side, he maintained himself in a somewhat grumpy persona. On the positive side, he effectively highlighted the unrealistic nature of several Québec solidaire proposals.
The leader of the PQ
Paul St-Pierre Plamondon came into this debate on a roll. He had accomplished quite a lot in the first three weeks of the campaign: restoring relevance to his political offer, getting the PQ out of the polls and making himself known as a political leader of the caliber.
He continued on his way. Same positive attitude, but with a little more bite. A dose of idealism that feels good. He was able to insert his independence speech without it becoming caricatural. No drama, no pretense, it rings true.
Anglade with an open heart
In very difficult circumstances, I believe that Dominique Anglade did very good things to stop the slide of his party. She sincerely expressed ideas that are dear to her.
His challenge now will be to hammer out motivations daily to encourage his electorate to come out on polling day. The Liberal vote risks being amorphous in a losing cause.
Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois arrived pumped up. May be too much. He wanted to add a layer of it on the theatrical side. More annoying than effective. He has nothing more to prove on the side of oratorical performance. Rather, he had to reassure about the radicalism of his party and certain asperities of his program.
He remained entangled in overtaxed vehicles and his convoluted definition of the ultra-rich. Paul St-Pierre Plamondon made it look bad by recalling Québec solidaire’s proposal to tax-free luxury meals in large restaurants.
As for Éric Duhaime, he had several very good moments.
On his strong subjects, he was brief, efficient, clear in submitting proposals clearly differentiated from his opponents.
However, on other issues, it was evident that the Conservative Party had little to offer.
On these subjects, Mr. Duhaime stayed out of the debate or stuck to generalities.
- Francois Legault: 8/10
- Dominique Anglade: 8/10
- Paul St-Pierre-Plamondon: 9/10
- Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois: 7/10
- Eric Duhaime: 8/10