Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The debates stand off: This could have been the afternoon w

So now we have it. Number 10 had made its final offer on the TV debates which had been rejected by the broadcasters who say they are going ahead with their three events irrespective of Cameron’s view.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Yes along the horizontal, SNP perecntage along the vertical
FF sake Dave,
Just do them, he'll probably win against Ed and the other two will be draws anyway.
I liked the second and third debates last time (I missed the Cleggasm). I think Cameron should have taken part. But, I don't see this issue moving many votes at all.
December: "Cameron's so clever! He really really wants the debates, but he's negotiating them to be on his terms."
February: "Cameron's so clever! He doesn't want the debates, so he's negotiating to avoid them happening without taking the blame."
March: "Well debates are dumb anyway."
Portsmouth is 1-2, Elmet 9-2 but Paddy limited stake (Nabavi tip)
Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken Chicken........................!!!!!!
Cluck, Cluck, Cluck................................!!!!
This compromise will gain acceptance and the debates will go ahead with Cameron, but just on different dates than planned.
He has to compromise at least on the date or the broadcasters can just let it slide by and see what he does next.
For the @Pulpstar and @antifrank amongst us
Man decides to slit his wrists-is that good or bad for him?
Man doesn`t turn up for interview-Did he get the job?
chestnut said:
» show previous quotes
The issue is the media controlling parliament.
Cameron is right to say that it isn't up to Murdoch and co to determine how electoral campaigns are conducted.
An invitation should not oblige the recipient to accept.
The problem is I believe that neither Ofcom nor the Electoral Commission have the power to intervene and in this case when we are talking about a significant new (as of 2010) enhancement to the campaign process really the whole issue should be deferred to them to come up with guidelines by which the TV Companies and political parties should adhere to.
What is clear is this current farce is embarrassing and damaging to our electoral system. Its like telling five year olds that they have the run of the kitchen to make a cake. All you get is one almighty mess
Spectacular own goal by Cameron. He should have taken the revised offer from the broadcasters, that was a win for him. Now he looks, and will increasingly look, shifty, untrustworthy and, most importantly, unprime-ministerial.
The broadcasters in their letter today have left the door open for Cameron to turn up until the last minute. For those on here who believe that the prospect of Ed v an empty chair would be broadcasting suicide consider this:
At every morning news conference, at every walkabout the first, second, and third question asked will be "Will you be attending the debate?"
The broadcasters will bombard the airwaves with pre-debate adverts and news reports based on "Will Cameron show up?". It will make the coverage of "who killed Lucy Beale?" seem insignificant.
And then one day, on one walkabout, or one phone-in Cameron will be faced with a little old lady who will give him both barrels on his cowardice on the debates. That one moment will then be on an endless loop across the news across the campaign with, no doubt, a ubiquitous youtube video and "downfall" parody.
The moment will arrive, on the day the papers will be leading with - "D-day for Cameron" The Times, "Cameron the Chicken" The Mirror, "The REAL debate challenge: when will Phillip debate the ghost of Diana", The Express..
The debate will happen, viewing figures will be through the roof, and Ed will be alone. Those viewers may well then change channels in droves. The damage to Cameron will, however, have been done. It will be far from negligible.
An entirely preventable and monumental own-goal.
And to think that finally the polls were turning to the Tories.
(edited for typos may not have caught them all
and
One other thing to note. Im not sure, but wasn't the last time someone withdrew from a debate John McCain in 2008. He "suspended" his campaign - including his debate with Obama - in order to "deal with the financial crisis". He was going to be empty-chaired, Obama said something like "to be President you have to deal with more than one thing at a time". McCain caved with a day to spare.
Lessons? 1. You will be empty-chaired and you will give in 2. After the debate no one will care.
Cameron should take note.
Sub-60% turnout is close to nailed on, imo.
And the broadcasters will turn round and tell him that they don't have time to change the logistics that quickly, then ask him to further reconsider.
Many people said it was suicidal of Ed M, to take on Murdoch, but it is apparently a master-stroke by Dave to take on all of them bar his section of the press.
http://tlv1.fm/so-much-to-say/2015/02/26/why-netanyahu-wont-do-the-televised-debate/
Lesson? 1. You will be empty-chaired 2. After the debate no one will care.
If they go ahead when will they be repeated on Dave?
Exactly.
And if he agrees to participate in the first one only (selling this as a compromise on his initial offer) 2 and 3 will look very silly indeed.
At this point, Cameron needs to just accept he made a mistake and back down. He already won a tremendous victory in getting the Lib Dems and UKIP demoted to minor parties. He must just quickly accede to the existing offer and everyone will have forgotten about his reluctance in a week. My worry is that his refusal to admit when he is wrong, which has been a common theme to much of his leadership, will see him make a minor blunder into a catastrophic error that undermines him for much of our election campaign.
Cameron's (a little damaged from copping out) sits back in Downing Street with a bag of popcorn to watch the mayhem......
is complete Tory meltdown
"Its all a left wing plot by these well known lefty broadcasters" LOL
Labour majority price will come in from 20s to 1/20 if Jacob gets
any more airings on tv
Forget Manic Monday this is Magic Friday for all
anti Conservative voters
What does this model say for Orkney/Shetland ?
Dim lefties in premature ejaculation shock.
edit: Hengist *snap* (but why four?)
9.5 + 4 + 8.5 probably doesn't add up to much more than 11. But that's still plenty, of course.
The question has to be asked what is Cameron scared of? It can only be Ed. Nothing else makes sense.
PS. How many votes did that oaf Rees Mogg just lose the Tories? Who chooses him to represent the party?
The model says Orkney and Shetland is safe LD hold
Con 1509
Lab 1530
LD 8901
UKIP 907
SNP 6618
"Media stories shift far fewer votes than is generally appreciated."
I can understand the straw clutching. Really. Not since the days of Hague can I remember the Tories looking so dishevelled. I'm starting to feel sorry for them
22 million viewing the debates in 2010 say you're wrong.
Sorry but that just isnt true, 22 million over the three debates maybe but not 22 million individual viewers. Plus it didnt really encourage a much bigger turn out in the election itself. Novelty value of debates soon fades.
Makes it just that little bit more funny for lefties.
for an interview? Labour couldnt have picked a more
pompous out of touch Tory posh boy to turn off the
floating voters in droves if theyd been asked
Run out of people to obsess about George and Dave with you on your twitter feed???.. Martin Day would be proud of you.
Can any of the broadcasters place a cut-out of Cameron hiding behind the empty chair?
It's a great shame we don't have Spitting Image any longer. They wouldn't even need a script
coolagorna
I can only imagine Rees Mogg self selects
Basically Miliband would be auditioning for PM with the 5 most antogonistic interviewers he could ever want.
Clearly Cameron thinks that the five non governing parties can do more damage to Ed in the debates if he's not there than he and they would to Ed if he was.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nvlTJrNJ5lA
right, and you don;t think the other half of that applies; that Labour haven't advanced their agenda either, or is what you're saying Labour's priorities for a broken nation is a bloke in chicken suit ?
Cameron backing down is meaningless - far too complicated for 99% of people - 99% won't register it.
Miliband has dug his own grave. He will get beasted in a 6-way debate - Farage or Sturgeon could eat him alive, and anyone else with a pulse would always be odds-on favourite against him. He has guaranteed himself a humiliating loss in the third division at the moment when he is trying to look like a serious championship contender.
Surely if there's one thing worse for Dave than Farage being in a prime time debate, it's Farage being in a prime time debate as effectively the standard bearer of the entire anti-EU right?
The more I think about this the more I believe Cameron has much less to lose by sitting it out than taking part.
I also do not agree with those who think that Ed Miliband will be on the receiving end of the abuse. Politicians are hyenas: they prey on the wounded when they can't defend themselves. Cameron is giving them a huge opening here. They will all form a consensus that the Conservatives are only protecting the interests of the rich and no-one will be there to argue otherwise. When a common view like that is expressed in unison from parties of all different stripes, I worry a lot of unaligned viewers will just accept it as a given.
Furthermore, there is the real danger that the planned one-on-one debate will end up with Farage and Clegg invited to make up for Cameron not being there, once again promoting them to the major leagues, as the Americans would say.
This is all in the context of the Conservatives being behind in the polls and needing to shake things up. It just seems like a dramatic tactical blunder. It can still be fixed, but the twenty-something know-it-alls at CCHQ often have too much of their reputations invested in an argument to admit they were wrong. Let's hope they don't wreck the rest of the party and all its hard-working activists with their stubbornness.
Saturday's Independent:
Former Tory chairman calls for coalition with Labour
#tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers
head around
This debate will be a love in as the four members of the Rainbow
Coalition to be gang up on Nigel while Ed sensibly does a Gordy
and tries to cosy up to one of the three lovely leftie ladies (in
political terms)
Plenty of "I agree with Nicola" on Austerity, Welfare Cuts, NHS, tax
cuts for the rich, bankers bonuses, greedy energy companies and
of course the weak embarassment of soon to be.booted out
PM Daves miserable failure to defend his record
"or is what you're saying Labour's priorities for a broken nation is a bloke in chicken suit ?"
LOL!! It's not just Labour but you've just about hit the nail on the head
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/why-a-conlab-coalition-may-be-needed-to-save-the-united-kingdom-10092247.html
Only on PB
At the last communiqué no, he wants the only debate moved forward, and his press office is adamant.
Very funny..headless chickens running around screeching and they don't realise they have no idea what they are screeching about..
.
No, their "job" was to reach an equitable deal with all the parties, not pander to Little Lord Flauntleroy.
Who else is going?
PS It is however a very good example of why Dave would want to stay away from the debates because no question he would get beaten up on that issue.
Doh!
The question I ask of the denizens of this site is how much, if anything, the debates issue will shift money and therefore odds?
Cowardly Cameron in every answer IMO