Opinion: The Debate Shows that the Social Democrats Are Facing a Very Difficult Choice

The Social Democrats, undeniably, had a complete mess of a debate this evening.

The debate was marked by a furious clash between the insurgent Jeskia, the Minister of Environment who, until recently, hadn't even been a member of the party and whose ties to the party are very limited and questionable, and the current leader Vincent_Wolff, the President of Demarcia, who was struggling to fend of the challenge from this opponent. GeorgeChambers and ads. barely made a mark in the debate; GeorgeChambers did strongly defend the values of the party though, and ads. delivered a zinger against Jeskia that will surely scar her for a long time to come.

There were a lot of entertaining moments during the debate, not least the one provided to us by ads., but let's face it - the debate was a disaster for the party, and the Social Democratic Party is facing a very difficult decision on 23 April with regards to its leadership.

Jeskia clearly made herself stand out on the debate stage tonight - however, it was not necessarily in a good way. Her debate performance was seen by many party insiders as being incredibly divisive and pitting certain sections of the party against the others, which is good neither for her if she wants to win, nor the party as a whole if it wants to win in the upcoming presidential and parliamentary elections.

Furthermore, Jeskia has failed to present any unique, major and defining policies of her own, other than her idea of ranked choice voting which seems to have large opposition inside the party, and she has failed at laying out the case for why she, of all people on the stage, should be the next leader of the party; she has failed at presenting why she is the one most qualified to be leader and why her vision is the best one.

As for Vincent_Wolff, she had a great election night performance and she successfully defended the record of her administration, even humbly acknowledging some of the flaws - in particular with regards to inactivity - of her leadership. However, is her debate performance enough to secure staying on as the leader of the Social Democratic Party? Her debate performance doesn't seem to have calmed down the desire for a new leadership in the party, nor has she touched on that yearning and tried to quell it in the first place.

GeorgeChambers did not succeed at sticking out during the debate, but his answers had certainly proven him knowledgeable and capable of becoming leader. His debate performance was received favorably by some pundits from within the Social Democratic Party, who are privately saying that GeorgeChambers "is the natural heir of Vincent_Wolff" and not Jeskia, as many within the party had come to believe over the last week. Many party members, who want new leadership to replace Vincent_Wolff, are struggling to decide between Jeskia or GeorgeChambers, as both people seem appealing to them.

ads., meanwhile, is not considered as a serious candidate at all by many within the party, although his contribution to the debate in calling out Jeskia has been greatly appreciated. His line "Vote for anyone but this Karen" has galvanised opposition to Jeskia, which, after this debate, is starting to come to life. "Fella's got it right" says one man, "Jeskia's a Karen. A naughty, noisy one. She's not fit to be leader at all, party's fucked if she becomes leader".

My opinion on the Social Democratic leadership election is that, whoever wins, a large portion of the party's base will be deeply unsatisfied. I believe that the Social Democrats, which have been relatively unified up until now, will be more divided than at any point in their history so far should essentially any of those people win, and this could spell trouble for the party going forward into the May elections, as well as for their plans to govern in the future.

John Guide,

Demarcian Inquirer.