Lots has been written and said about last night’s Presidential Debate on TV chaired by Vincent Browne (or as I like to call it the Battle of Ballymount), and I’m sure that plenty more will filter out today.

Mary Davis
The abiding sense of Davis last night is that she was unsure. Like a bus backing up a cul de sac, Davis’ opening salvos about dirty tricks went nowhere. And it’s not just me, I’m listening to round-table commentary on this morning’s Today with Pat Kenny and they echo this.

Davis made promises of conveneing This and That to honour, well, This and That. Sticking to prepared mantras like plastic to a TV dinner, Davis really needed to inject passion and thinking on her feet to the debate.

Dana Rosemary Scallon
Dana seemed to be participating in a completely different debate to everyone else. In her opening address, on the topic of negative campaigning, Dana perkily chimed in that the candidates were debating about negative campaigning while the people of Ireland lived in negative equity.

Oh, but more than that, on seeing Vincent’s book, Dana thought that she’d join in. Bookoff! Out came the Bunreacht. Out came the European Constitution. And as we bated our breath to see what else was stuffed in her jumper, Dana launched into an attack on Europe dictating our corporation tax. Dana supporters no doubt lapped that up. It doesn’t matter what Dana is for or why she’s running to them, it’s the usual story of what she’s against that will bring out the Dana vote.

Sean Gallagher
Gallagher was a little reticent, no doubt afraid of the being at the sharp end of Browne’s ire. Browne brought up Gallagher’s in-and-out member of FF. Also, Sean please put away the campaign leaflet arguement. Yes, it makes sense and it would save money. Two things that are imminently sensible but it’s not doing a thing for you in the campaign, unless you can use it as a sweetner to crowbar in policies in how to replicate this on a much bigger scale should you win.

Martin McGuinness
What else can one say about the veil dance of IRA books that Browne performed on McGuinness alleging him of continued membership of the IRA past the 1974 date that McGuinness claims? It was wonderful television and possibly something that I’ll watch back. The volumes have been out there for years, but I’m pretty sure that McGuinness was prepared for the attacks Mitchell launched on him. (Dunphy was a warmup)

McGuinness wasn’t prepared for the all-out dramatics of Browne listing off books claiming his membership of the IRA extended past the 70s. Shell-shocked, he was.

Gay Mitchell
What a disappointment Mitchell was last night. Us Bingo players got it all. Building buses. Masters. Big family. Networking in Europe. Mitchell clung to his sob story touchstones like he always does.

The rest of his energy was directed at playing tough guy with McGuinness slogging it out for the remains of the republican vote (little ‘r’, note!). Of course, most of Mitchell’s gusto was easily stolen by Browne’s book club revealing the shaky sands he built his performance on.

Michael D Higgins
Out of the whole lot of them, Higgins seemed the most able student of the constitution. As in his way, he rattled off articles like a batty old uncle. While he was happy to let the other candidates duke it out, I have to admit, I couldn’t stop looking at his box. Browne, however, had no such qualms. Even wee Michael was challenged on his dogged support of his party’s line in Dail, when he could broken the Whip and championed popular causes.

David Norris
As the debate closed, Norris had to be feeling nervous. Every other candidate had withstood the spotlight of Browne’s attention but him. What could be in store? A book? No. An email from Tel Aviv University! Ho! Now legal comment is legal comment is legal comment and who knows what *those letters* contain, but it was an interesting sleight of hand. Already tethering off-kilter, news of the Tel Aviv Uni mail provoked Norris into a terrible state of flapping. The flapping didn’t at all become Norris, or Norris as president-to-be.

–

The only winner last night was Vincent Browne, and by proxy TV3 for giving Browne the room to maneouver, to zero in on specific issues and give candidates the grace to interact with each other.

Modern television debates often bar candidates from interacting with each other, have strict prepared statements on the clock and agreed questions. Where Browne really shone was where he applied inquisition to the dramatics of unfurling a library of IRA literature or his letter to Tel Aviv University on the legality of Norris’ claims about his letters. Now supporters of those candidates could argue that Browne’s unveilings were unfair and his accusations were unfounded, but noone can deny the power of those moments and how compelling Browne’s theatrical line of questioning was.

Update:
To watch, check out the debate stream on the TV3 website.