It was absolutely fascinating. The two candidates present – Elizabeth
May and Jim Fannon – were as different as night and day. I spent most
of the evening not only listening to the points they made during the
debate but also watching how they made those points, taking notes on
their speech technique and manner.

Elizabeth was by far the more seasoned speaker. Here are a few things
she did particularly well.

• Her experience gave her plenty of concrete examples to cite during
  the debate.
• She used quotes to great effect, allowing her to take advantage of
  other people's clear and concise expressions while also showing
  that she'd done her reading.
• She used humor to establish rapport, and drew a number of chuckles
  from the audience. Humor also demonstrated that she listened to the
  question and reacted to it.
• She used powerful statements and good sound bites. (With content,
  mind you!)
• Her body language indicated that she paid attention when the other
  candidate spoke.
• She answered each question directly, and then expounded with more
  information. In contrast, the other candidate sometimes started
  talking and then circled back to ask what the question was again.
• Examples from international politics strengthened her case.

Interesting…

I learned a lot from the conversation afterwards, as Simon and Ian
discussed a few of the points that were raised. I need to develop
political thinking. It's a great way to practice critical thought.

You can e-mail me at sacha@sachachua.com.