Article content continued

To be sure, there were other notable scuffles and catchy one-liners from the night. Mulcair, obviously coached to stay so smooth that he might have changed his name to Triple Distilled, stirred long enough to sting Harper on the question of whether Canada has slipped back into recession. The Prime Minister, under heavy fire, defended his position on national security with surprising, even persuasive, energy. Trudeau came out of the gate like a charged-up thoroughbred, showing needed passion. And May gave fits to everyone with whom she tangled. They all had their good spots.

But nearly all of that was to be expected – crystallizing trends, differences and issues that have been well-established. Held hostage to the task of manufacturing an opinion, analysts will find it possible to locate plenty of highs and lows. But what of it all? With a watching public bound to be a fraction of the accustomed consortium debates, did anything emerge with the power to affect the election’s result? The honest answer is probably not.

Except, perhaps, for Sherbrooke. It stands out as the obvious possible exception – a topic that no one’s been talking about but that could yet become important for a couple of reasons.

First, it’s a fight between the two contestants for change. Both Mulcair and Trudeau need to win a pair of battles during this election. They’ve got to beat Stephen Harper but, before that, one must triumph over the other as the preferred alternative. Sherbrooke is an issue where there is a clear and pronounced difference of opinion between the two Opposition leaders. Such differences can be revealing and defining to voters.