Pundits agree: First NDP leadership debate lacks a little... Jack.

Source: The Star.

"Once again, unanimity breaks out among the Ottawa punditerati. This time it relates to the first big debate in the NDP leadership race. Journalists covering the debate agree that they disagree on who did what.

Lawrence Martin at the Globe says the debate went to Thomas Mulciar, the Quebec candidate, and Niki Ashton, “the kid candidate.” Mulcair “came across as seasoned, articulate, very much at ease. There were no flashes of his reputed blowtorch temper. More so than the others, he had the presence of a leader.” As for Ashton: “Ottawa politics is so youth-deficient that it was a treat to see the zest and command of this 29 year-old multilingual Manitoban. She’s calling for a new politics. If her age and spontaneity helps get her generation involved in the process, she will have made progress toward her goal, striking a blow against the stale thinking of aging baby boomers.”

Hmm. [National Post's] own John [...] begs to differ somewhat. He agrees Mr. Mulcair was “the epitome of collegiality and good humour” (which is significant because his temper is generally portrayed as just this side of an erupting volcano), but doesn’t think he has much hope outside Quebec. Ms. Ashton is lumped in with the also-rans, while corporate Canada is warned to watch out for Peggy Nash: ” Ms. Nash claims that the countries that have truly succeeded “haven’t handed over all decision-making power to corporations. By the sound of her plan, under a Nash government those decisions would be made by the unions, which she considers to be an extension of the party, and the government. Ms. Nash put in a solid performance and nobody should be at all surprised if she ends up winning next March.”

Barbara Yaffe of the Vancouver Sun of the Vancouver Sun thought no one was very impressive. She thinks Ashton “looked too pixie to be going for a top political job” and the candidates spent too much time agreeing with one another to create “distinctive storylines” that might make them stand out. The most intriguing moment, she thought, was when the candidates were asked who they support besides themselves. Topp and Nash both picked Ashton, probably because they figure she can’t win and are keen to gather in her supporters.

The Star's Tim Harper , like several others, thought B.C. MP Nathan Cullen outperformed expectations and that former party strategist Brian Topp “delivered perhaps the most succinct, substantive and thought-provoking answers of the afternoon, and showed an aggressive streak when he unexpectedly went after Paul Dewar over the Ottawa Centre MP’s economic plan.”

(Ivision says Topp probably went after Dewar because he has data showing Dewar is beating him, which “suggests the received wisdom that he is in the lead is wrong, as usual.”)

Rabble.ca, the left-wing site most likely to be NDP-friendly, thought the contenders “limped out of the starting gate.”

“From the dire situation in Attawapiskat to the manufacturing sector and green collar jobs — the candidates agreed, agreed and agreed again.” Mulcair “largely flew under the radar,” while Nash “largely stuck to rhetoric”. Ashton was interesting, but also prone to rhetoric and armed with something called “new Politics” which “had a few people scratching their heads.”

So, Mulcair was either a clear winner, or a non-event; Nash was heavy on rhetoric but could be a surprise; Ashton was a breath of fresh air or an also-ran who’s too much of a pixie to be taken seriously; and Dewar might be doing way better than anyone knows. The one thing everyone agreed on was that Nova Scotia’s Robert Chisholm was an embarrassment, who couldn’t speak French and looked silly pledging to learn it ASAP. (Anyone mention the Orange Crush, Robert? It happened in Quebec. Where they speak French.)" - Kelly McParland, National Post.