Was Lee's debate aggression a winner or a turnoff? Well, that depends

Elizabeth Lee didn’t hold back in Tuesday’s ABC Leaders Debate.

With just the two of them on the stage and one person asking questions, she let people know just what she thought of Andrew Barr.

She sniped, interrupted, talked over and hurled more than a few insults at the Labor leader, who wasn’t about to take the bait, keeping a laser focus on getting his message across.

Ms Lee displayed more range in her performance, from engaging smiles – even an occasional smirk – to indignant finger-pointing to genuine passion.

Not too many facts, but that was not the point.

She was the one making the case for change, and her job was to keep reminding voters that Mr Barr had been there long enough and that she was more than ready and willing to take the reins.

Mr Barr had seen and heard it all before in the Legislative Assembly, and with just 60 seconds to answer – let’s say respond – to a question, he wasn’t going to waste precious time arguing the toss.

But at least twice, he said a simple fact check would refute Ms Lee’s claims. No chance there. With only a half hour on the clock, moderator James Glenday did his best but had to keep moving on.

Ms Lee’s most unconvincing moments were laced with the most invective when queried about costings and the budget. She said she wasn’t about to take advice from the worst treasurer in the history of self-government who was yet to deliver a budget surplus.

However, when asked about the exit of Elizabeth Kikkert from the party and the demotion of former deputy leader Jeremy Hanson, she successfully asserted that she was capable of making tough decisions.

Mr Barr remained statesmanlike throughout, projecting experience and renovating his leadership credentials by reminding voters of his steadfast service during the pandemic.

Always across the details, he dissected the Liberals’ tax and spending plans and listed Labor achievements across not just this term but the past few and those planned for the next.

However, both leaders ignored the thrust of questions to make their points and, in Ms Lee’s case, turned them around to attack her opponent.

Discovering something new was probably too much to expect after virtually months of campaigning; neither was about to announce anything.

For Ms Lee, it was about style over substance and landing a few blows on her adversary, while Mr Barr ensured he hit his KPIs.

With no clear victor, the debate outcome probably depends on your perspective.

Ms Lee’s feisty performance would have heartened the Liberal base, but it is doubtful that she would have won over disenchanted Labor voters toying with changing columns. In fact, her open disrespect for the Chief Minister may have been a turnoff.

Word is those Labor voters won’t turn blue but are looking to independents to send a message. If the next government does hang on a couple of independents, Ms Lee might have to tone down the uncompromising manner she took into the debate.

But Labor remains confident that its primary vote will hold up sufficiently to hang on to its 10 seats and that the Liberal disarray in Ginninderra might furnish another. Throw in the Greens, and you can see how hard it will be for the Liberals.

Ms Lee might mock the Chief Minister’s economic chops, but his head for numbers extends to how the votes may fall.

They have one more bout next Wednesday at the Property Council Leaders Debate. But by then, especially with early voting, there won’t be too many undecideds left to woo.