He had a lot of good fleshed out ideas and critiques. I initially dismissed him based on his site and platform, but hearing his ideas fleshed out in the debate I really liked him.
I really liked how Baylis broke down Trump’s tactics and rhetoric, he felt like he had an excellent read on that situation.
Carney I liked, but I don’t think he’s winning people over, I was hoping for a little more from him, but I did agree with all of his answers. He came across as a quiet but firm leader, which works well for heading departments, but I worry about him as a statesman.
I still think Carney is the best candidate, Baylis wouldn’t have enough time for Canada to get to know him.
Frank Baylis impressed me.
He had a lot of good fleshed out ideas and critiques. I initially dismissed him based on his site and platform, but hearing his ideas fleshed out in the debate I really liked him.
I really liked how Baylis broke down Trump’s tactics and rhetoric, he felt like he had an excellent read on that situation.
Carney I liked, but I don’t think he’s winning people over, I was hoping for a little more from him, but I did agree with all of his answers. He came across as a quiet but firm leader, which works well for heading departments, but I worry about him as a statesman.
I still think Carney is the best candidate, Baylis wouldn’t have enough time for Canada to get to know him.
My gut reaction to Baylis was that he felt like a pre-allience PC more than what I would hope to see from the Liberals.
Anyone who suggests that running a business is a relevant qualification for running government is suspect in my view.
Government is very much not a business, and shouldn’t be run like one.
I agree he had a lot of great ideas. My concern for him is that he was very bland and boring. He really didn’t seem to have any personality.