The official reason Adrian Dix gave for refusing a one-on-one televised debate with Christy Clark was that he believed that John Cummins, the leader of the provincial Conservatives, and Green leader Jane Sterk should also be there.
The unofficial reason is obvious to anyone who has spent more than a few minutes in conversation with Dix. Clark and Dix don't just represent different political philosophies, they're utterly different people. Other than the fact they are both fiercely intelligent and passionate about the province, their personal styles are polar opposites. In a televised debate, Clark would crush him, not because she's smarter or quicker on her feet but because she's the charismatic communicator and he's the absent-minded professor.
During his exclusive wide-ranging 45-minute interview Monday with Citizen reporters and editors, Dix couldn't sit still, bobbing and weaving in his chair, fiddling constantly either with his tie or a bottle of water. Some questions were challenging intellectual puzzles that he answered quietly while leaning back, his brow wrinkled in thought. Other, more philosophical questions about equality and addressing voter turnout he answered louder and more animated, sitting forward, hands gesticulating.
During her interview at the Citizen 10 days ago, Clark was as poised and polished as she was in her Sunday night made-for-TV infomercial. Aware she was being photographed but completely comfortable with the flashes going off, she managed to sit still while maintaining both a relaxed and engaged demeanor. She answered our questions directly and succinctly. Confident in her ability and her politics, she couldn't wait for the next question to be asked.
In a one-on-one televised debate, Clark versus Dix would have been Kennedy versus Nixon in the 1960 U.S. election all over again. Most radio listeners of that famous debate thought Nixon had won but everyone who watched the debate at home on TV saw a young, fresh articulate young man who spoke directly to the camera (Kennedy) and a ruddy, tired and sweaty old man who shifted his eyes and his body constantly (Nixon).
The non-verbal cues from Kennedy projected calm, friendly assurance while Nixon appeared shady, shabby and untrustworthy. It cost Nixon the election.
Looks and style really do matter. We all say that we can't be swayed by these surface concerns, that we judge people solely on their smarts and their substance, but we also all know how that's not really the case. Particularly in politics, we all expect our leaders to be the best of us, both in style and substance.
Dix even joked about it near the end of our interview. After taking several minutes to answer a question, he joked that he had some work to do before the televised debate on April 29, where he'll have 45 seconds to give tight, concise responses. He's fully aware of his weakness.
Still with style, Dix was quick to point out that he has not personally attacked Christy Clark or any of the Liberals, while the Liberals and their supporters have gone after him steadily over the last few months, particularly on TV ("my parents can't even watch a Canucks game anymore," he complained only half-jokingly).
On the surface, Dix's tactic sounds noble but it can easily be perceived as being weak or unresponsive. Dix would be served well to show some grit during the campaign, which officially kicks off today.
Some carefully planted sandpaper thrown Christy Clark's way during the televised debate would be a good place to start. Surely, something rubbed off on Dix working for former premier Glen Clark, who was the feistiest, most combative partisan the provincial NDP ever had.
After sitting down with both Clark and Dix, one thing is obvious - voters have a clear choice in who will be their next premier and it's not just a decision regarding political philosophy.
