I would love to know what the Tory Party are paying these advisers they have brought in. Backed into a corner over the TV debates and is now known as the Poultry PM. Then I assume to take the headlines off the TV debates, announces, Vote Tory bring back fox hunting. One word.....BRILLIANT!
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
I wonder how long before someone decide to use the old faithful that those criticising Cameron's stance or tactics are doing it just because they don't like Cameron or the Tories or don't want them to win the election. Cannot be long, as we're already getting hints of the 'normal people don't care about this political stuff so you're all being stupid for thinking it has any impact at all' arguments which never need to be made because everyone already knows normal people only very rarely pay attention to this sort of thing.
If the is a question on the spare room subsidy in the 6 person debate - all 6 will venehmently agree that taxpayers should cough up for spare rooms for those not working... Including Farage.
Awww whazza matter don't you like standing all alone on a piece of legislation that has always been decidedly dubious. Would you like us Kippers to hold you wittle hand and say its wonderful when it isn't?
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.
I'd like to see Farage stick up for subsidising empty space at the taxpayers expense. Suspect it will be ditched in the manifesto,
I doubt it. From what I can see it was bad legislation and bad legislation should be scrapped. As I understand it in numerous cases those rooms were never empty and saying they were was just a rather malevolent piece of propaganda from Tory stooges but hey if you think banging on about it serves the Tory purposes carry on.
The government used the same room criteria and need as set down in the 2007 local housing allowances. If it is empty in the private sector, surely the social sector is the same?
Some people have bare faced cheek. Not only do they want me to pay for a roof over their head, they want a spare room in case Auntie June wants to visit.
Why are Oldies spared this wonderful piece of legislation when they have the most spare rooms and receive more taxpayers money than any other section of society.
Clue because there would be uproar from people who mainly vote Tory
Which is the reason why social housing rules and private renting rules were split in 2007. Because those in social housing disproportionately vote Labour.
Shock news, politicians give tax breaks/ extra spending to those groups that support it.
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
OT I must commend the thread header for it's balance and lack of hysteria. On this occasion OGH has called it correctly - we won't know whether No 10 has called it correctly for some time. My own view is that by their nature, these debates favour the opposition and the underdogs, so I'm content with the No10 strategy.
Perdix, Clegg challenged Farage to a head to head before the Euros, it was more one sided than anybody could have predicted. Several times a week Farage holds public meetings and hustings, he's been doing it for 20 years. The others are accustomed to stage managed PR events with planted questions.
The reporting was that the political journos at the debate thought Mr Clegg had won, it wasn't until the polls came in they realised he hadn't.
Evening all and I do hope Dave sticks to his guns. The debates ruined the 2010 General Election because they became the only game in town. Politicians seeking election should be meeting voters not the same group of London chatterati they surround themselves with all yrrent seat.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?
Some may be using standard political hyperbole to describe the potential consequences, but that doesn't make the idea of the debates themselves ridiculous, particularly when we know Cameron does not share genuine antipathy for them (at least, not so much that could not be overcome if he thought he would benefit, as shown by his willingness to attend the debates last time). It doesn't automatically follow that the debates are a good thing of course, but the implied insistence from some corners that they have an undue influence that is wholly wrong, when other campaigning impacts are not, is far more pathetic as I see it than people engaging in hyperbole, which to bookend this paragraph, is entirely standard stuff.
Style over substance, total bollocks
That's a valid opinion to hold. Cameron clearly doesn't hold it given he was fine with them last time, but that too is a valid opinion for him to hold. But I do think we're on slippery ground if we decide some types of campaigning are bollocks (and thus shouldn't be allowed to happen) over others.
I happen to think a piece of A5 paper with a couple of hundred words and some stock photos, which may or may not have any direct relevance to the constituency it is mailed in, and which is full of ridiculous spin either way, is not a very good basis for people to make up their minds, or contribute significantly to them making up their minds at any rate, but parties still stuff them through letter slots to make that happen all the same (yes I know they have other purposes, but it is at least partly designed to be about swaying the wavering).
But I'm sure someone being swayed by five carefully spun and probably contextless bulletpoints of text and a photo of a grinning Nick Clegg (as a hypothetical example), or a billboard of a wrecking ball and the opposing party's name, is nothing but pure substance. Why, if it was not particularly substantive, we should not have them at all, right?
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
3.4% Undecided 7.6% Conservative 39.6% Labour 1.6% Liberal Democrat 33.6% UKIP 10.8% Green 2.5% SNP 0.2% Plaid Cymru 0.0% DUP 0.0% Sinn Fein 0.2% SDLP 0.2% Alliance 0.2% Other
Evening all and I do hope Dave sticks to his guns. The debates ruined the 2010 General Election because they became the only game in town. Politicians seeking election should be meeting voters not the same group of London chatterati they surround themselves with all yrrent seat.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?
Some may be using standard political hyperbole to describe the potential consequences, but that doesn't make the idea of the debates themselves ridiculous, particularly when we know Cameron does not share genuine antipathy for them (at least, not so much that could not be overcome if he thought he would benefit, as shown by his willingness to attend the debates last time). It doesn't automatically follow that the debates are a good thing of course, but the implied insistence from some corners that they have an undue influence that is wholly wrong, when other campaigning impacts are not, is far more pathetic as I see it than people engaging in hyperbole, which to bookend this paragraph, is entirely standard stuff.
Style over substance, total bollocks
That's a valid opinion to hold. Cameron clearly doesn't hold it given he was fine with them last time, but that too is a valid opinion for him to hold. But I do think we're on slippery ground if we decide some types of campaigning are bollocks (and thus shouldn't be allowed to happen) over others.
I happen to think a piece of A5 paper with a couple of hundred words and some stock photos, which may or may not have any direct relevance to the constituency it is mailed in, and which is full of ridiculous spin either way, is not a very good basis for people to make up their minds, or contribute significantly to them making up their minds at any rate, but parties still stuff them through letter slots to make that happen all the same (yes I know they have other purposes, but it is at least partly designed to be about swaying the wavering).
But I'm sure someone being swayed by five carefully spun and probably contextless bulletpoints of text and a photo of a grinning Nick Clegg (as a hypothetical example), or a billboard of a wrecking ball and the opposing party's name, is nothing but pure substance. Why, if it was not particularly substantive, we should not have them at all, right?
Well thanks for confirming my opinion is valid, much appreciated kind sir.
My point is the slickest wins, not the one with the best policies. They should follow Major's example and get out and meet the people, though given Brown's episode last time I can understand why Labour would prefer a PR stunt.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
He makes plenty of sensible points. Our system is not well fitting for this sort of thing. Regional variations mean who is getting invited is highly open to debate, and it almost feels like a Pluto planetory body/not a planet scenario, where you either end up having to 8 or 50 in the system(or whatever it was), or in this case 3-4 or 8-12 depending on how you decide to do it. He's also right things will go on even if they don't happen, we did after all manage it before.
None of that means it will definitely have been worth if for the the Tories to be making this chaotic situation even more chaotic - time will tell, as I stated I think the biggest loss from it is the Tories' own opportunity given Cameron's supposed strengths and Ed M's weaknesses - but it is fair game to make the argument our system is not well suited for this sort of thing. Cameron is unfortunately the worse person possible to make that argument, but as Fraser states that is his own damn fault.
"...if he didn't want to do them, or wanted them in a particular fashion, why didn't he [Cameron] just state it months or years ago so it seemed less like a last minute thought?"
Perhaps because Cameron doesn't do strategy. That is to say he does not spend energy on anything other than what is immediate. Thinking ahead and planning for the future is not something he bothers with. Why should he? After all leaving it to the last minute has worked for him ever since he was at Uni.
Unfortunately, whilst Cameron might be convinced that his own brilliance will always see him through, and it might well do so in terms of his own personal ambitions, it is a disastrous trait in a Prime Minister.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
It is quite unbelievable. No matter what way a Tory could spin this, he cannot win. He has left himself with no wiggle room at all. If I was a Miliband adviser I would hope Cameron sticks to his guns and stays away. Never will an empty chair be so hilarious.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
It is quite unbelievable. No matter what way a Tory could spin this, he cannot win. He has left himself with no wiggle room at all. If I was a Miliband adviser I would hope Cameron sticks to his guns and stays away. Never will an empty chair be so hilarious.
Perdix, Clegg challenged Farage to a head to head before the Euros, it was more one sided than anybody could have predicted. Several times a week Farage holds public meetings and hustings, he's been doing it for 20 years. The others are accustomed to stage managed PR events with planted questions.
The reporting was that the political journos at the debate thought Mr Clegg had won, it wasn't until the polls came in they realised he hadn't.
Yes - they said what they wanted to say and hoped that they could say, with no one able to put a contrary view because they all had the same hope. Groupdenial.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
This whole debate malarky is just too absurd. A circus with clowns then a circus with one fewer clown. Then an Alan Bennett monologue.
It is all a bit embarrassing. Should have been sorted out months ago rather than on the hoof with 9 weeks to go. The debates themselves are the most boring thing to debate about.
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I despair at the thought of Labour taking over. Meh!
Constituencies where the SNP has out preformed the Area Yes Vote (in percentage points):
Cumbernauld (+0.9%) Dundee West (+1.7%) Gordon (+3.4%) **Alex Salmond Standing** Inverness (+2.9%) Toast
What's your source for Yes vote by constituency, please?
Painfully going through each council area and roughly mapping them to Constituencies. So there is no subtlety to the process at all. My Glasgow ones will be well out as I half arsed mapping the Holyrood constituencies (which were used for the breakdown of results) to the Westminster constituencies.
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
Perdix, Clegg challenged Farage to a head to head before the Euros, it was more one sided than anybody could have predicted. Several times a week Farage holds public meetings and hustings, he's been doing it for 20 years. The others are accustomed to stage managed PR events with planted questions.
The reporting was that the political journos at the debate thought Mr Clegg had won, it wasn't until the polls came in they realised he hadn't.
Yes I remember it well, the Libs cheerful and backslapping, the look on their faces when the results were read out was hilarious. It was a moment that summed up the Westminster/media bubble for me, utterly out of touch with the general public.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
This whole debate malarky is just too absurd. A circus with clowns then a circus with one fewer clown. Then an Alan Bennett monologue.
It is all a bit embarrassing. Should have been sorted out months ago rather than on the hoof with 9 weeks to go. The debates themselves are the most boring thing to debate about.
I thought that the Tories had done well to get the Greens into the debate, and they should have taken what was on offer at that point, but they have now blown that advantage.
Cameron's one debate stance makes little sense to me, I sure as hell don't see how that makes him look good. Too clever by half? More like plain stupid.
About the best the Tories can hope for now is that the debates don't move opinion much.
Just between the two of us can I say that I despise Osborne even more than I do Cameron. I really would not piss in that man's ear of his brain was on fire.
Personally I agree with Alistair Campbell. Unlike Cameron I am willing to offer Gideon some grudging respect as a political player. I think he has been a chancellor who has aimed at tactical advantage rather than national interest and detest a lot of his views and what he has done, but he seems to be the only senior politician in the big two parties at the moment who is hungry to win and showing the ruthlessness needed to do so, I think this may prove telling come May.
And I say this while holding my nose, but I would far rather have Gideon in no.11 than Balls or any of the other Labour front bench.
I can't honestly see it would be any worse having Ed in no 10. than Camneron (other than it would consequently conflict with the above paragraph)
Evening all and I do hope Dave sticks to his guns. The debates ruined the 2010 General Election because they became the only game in town. Politicians seeking election should be meeting voters not the same group of London chatterati they surround themselves with all yrrent seat.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?
Some may be using
Style over substance, total bollocks
Th
Well thanks for confirming my opinion is valid, much appreciated kind sir.
It's just an expression, no need to be tetchy. Since you seem engaged by my use of it, I will clarify that I sometime use it to make clear I am not being dismissive of someone's point of view - rather than for instance writing off an opposing side' s opinion as being nothing but bollocks as though I have not even considered it, which may or may not be the case, or indeed be reasonable, depending on the circumstances - so they are clear I have given at least fleeting attention to the point they were making.
Lack of brevity, pomposity and self righteousness are I suspect more common failings of mine in writing, but if you felt I was being condescending I apologize, it was not my intention. Perhaps I should have just made the written equivalent of grunting insults that make up online political discourse in some of the darker corners of the internet, which at least are less open to misinterpretation.
Evening all and I do hope Dave sticks to his guns. The debates ruined the 2010 General Election because they became the only game in town. Politicians seeking election should be meeting voters not the same group of London chatterati they surround themselves with all yrrent seat.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?
Some engaging in hyperbole, which to bookend this paragraph, is entirely standard stuff.
Style over substance, total bollocks
That's a valid opinion to hold. Cameron clearly doesn't hold it given he was fine with them last
They should follow Major's example and get out and meet the people,
Am I allowed to say I agree with that? Though I don't see why you cannot do both and maximise how you reach people - the pure, face to face version, and that apparently eeevil over television way.
‘I can confirm that Al Murray’s party has had the name Free United Kingdom Party approved by the Electoral Commission. We have informed the party of our decision.’
Maybe if he isn't too busy touring he could take Cameron's place?
As I understand it in numerous cases those rooms were never empty and saying they were was just a rather malevolent piece of propaganda from Tory stooges but hey if you think banging on about it serves the Tory purposes carry on.
Under-occupancy is rife in UK housing. It is much more prevalent than overcrowding.
Well that's if you accept the government's definition of under occupancy perhaps.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Imagine you are a Miliband adviser. Are you seriously thinking that all your Christmases have come early?
Depends how clever the empty chair is . . .
1. Have you seen Clint Eastwood vs empty chair? Who do you think won?
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
Perdix, Clegg challenged Farage to a head to head before the Euros, it was more one sided than anybody could have predicted. Several times a week Farage holds public meetings and hustings, he's been doing it for 20 years. The others are accustomed to stage managed PR events with planted questions.
The reporting was that the political journos at the debate thought Mr Clegg had won, it wasn't until the polls came in they realised he hadn't.
Yes I remember it well, the Libs cheerful and backslapping, the look on their faces when the results were read out was hilarious. It was a moment that summed up the Westminster/media bubble for me, utterly out of touch with the general public.
That poll on who won could have been done in advance with the same result.
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
A large steaming bowl of thick yellow custard (with apologies to Damian Thomson for cribbing his meme).
Or if it has to be a person Harry Enfield in character with his Tim Nice but Dim character.
This whole debate malarky is just too absurd. A circus with clowns then a circus with one fewer clown. Then an Alan Bennett monologue.
It is all a bit embarrassing. Should have been sorted out months ago rather than on the hoof with 9 weeks to go. The debates themselves are the most boring thing to debate about.
Cameron's one debate stance makes little sense to me, I sure as hell don't see how that makes him look good. Too clever by half? .
Unless his aim was to get the debates called off, a gambit of a different gambit, I've been struggling with that one too. Getting the Greens and PC in to hopefully undermine Labour more than him seemed like Cameron had done very well for himself, and limiting that to one event rather than 2, and then a chance to finish Ed M off one on one, seemed counter productive.
Perhaps they felt the 2 seven person debates would give Ed a chance to recover, whereas in just one with no previous experience of what Labour might face from the other leftist parties Ed would probably take at least a moderate hit initially. It cannot be repeated enough that the principled stance of many on here who dislike the debates cannot be applied to Cameron's reasoning, given his history on them, so the answer can only be in terms of political calculation.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The broadcasters clearly need Cameron to take part in these debates if they are to achieve any kind of reasonable audience size. Who, other than a few obsessives, are going to bother watching these things if Cameron doesn't show up?
The 30%+ who are leaning Conservative won't bother to look in and there's not much of interest for those of us who make up the other 65%+ either if we're not going to get to see anyone land a blow on the PM.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?<
Style over substance, total bollocks Th
Well thanks for confirming my opinion is valid, much appreciated kind sir.
It's just an expression, no need to be tetchy. Since you seem engaged by my use of it, I will clarify that I sometime use it to make clear I am not being dismissive of someone's point of view - rather than for instance writing off an opposing side' s opinion as being nothing but bollocks as though I have not even considered it, which may or may not be the case, or indeed be reasonable, depending on the circumstances - so they are clear I have given at least fleeting attention to the point they were making.
Lack of brevity, pomposity and self righteousness are I suspect more common failings of mine in writing, but if you felt I was being condescending I apologize, it was not my intention. Perhaps I should have just made the written equivalent of grunting insults that make up online political discourse in some of the darker corners of the internet, which at least are less open to misinterpretation.
Evening all and I do hope Dave sticks to his guns. The debates ruined the 2010 General Election because they became the only game in town. Politicians seeking election should be meeting voters not the same group of London chatterati they surround themselves with all yrrent seat.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?
Some engaging in hyperbole, which to bookend this paragraph, is entirely standard stuff.
Style over substance, total bollocks
That's a valid opinion to hold. Cameron clearly doesn't hold it given he was fine with them last
They should follow Major's example and get out and meet the people,
Am I allowed to say I agree with that? Though I don't see why you cannot do both and maximise how you reach people - the pure, face to face version, and that apparently eeevil over television way.
Fair enough, no need to apologise, things don't always come over as intended on the Internet as we all know to our cost!
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
I know it would be nil, maybe a cardboard cut out just stood there looking out to the audience as a reminder for everyone.
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
A large steaming bowl of thick yellow custard (with apologies to Damian Thomson for cribbing his meme).
Or if it has to be a person Harry Enfield in character with his Tim Nice but Dim character.
Perhaps they felt the 2 seven person debates would give Ed a chance to recover, whereas in just one with no previous experience of what Labour might face from the other leftist parties Ed would probably take at least a moderate hit initially. It cannot be repeated enough that the principled stance of many on here who dislike the debates cannot be applied to Cameron's reasoning, given his history on them, so the answer can only be in terms of political calculation.
I think they got greedy, and now Cameron looks stupid.
Cameron's problem is that if the debates do take place, at least once, without him, they will be MORE of an occasion BECAUSE he is absent. People will tune in for the weirdness and the "hilarity"; it will provoke endless hashtags and derision. Disaster.
Does anyone here remember the time Roy Hattersley went on HIGNFY? Er, no. Do they remember the time he DIDN'T go on and he was empty chaired and replaced by lard? YES.
This could be the pivotal moment in the election campaign, the moment when the prime minister of the UK was too scared to have a 7 way debate, just because, well, he is too scared?
It's calamitous. He needs to find a way, quickly, of digging himself free. Already it is unseemly.
He has offered to take part in a 7 way debate, though. He needs to keep renewing that offer.
And remember: ed is crap, sturgeon and farage aren't, and miliband's scalp would be a great prize to either of them.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
Cameron's problem is that if the debates do take place, at least once, without him, they will be MORE of an occasion BECAUSE he is absent. People will tune in for the weirdness and the "hilarity"; it will provoke endless hashtags and derision. Disaster.
Does anyone here remember the time Roy Hattersley went on HIGNFY? Er, no. Do they remember the time he DIDN'T go on and he was empty chaired and replaced by lard? YES.
This could be the pivotal moment in the election campaign, the moment when the prime minister of the UK was too scared to have a 7 way debate, just because, well, he is too scared?
It's calamitous. He needs to find a way, quickly, of digging himself free. Already it is unseemly.
I am praying he digs in and stays away. DON'T LET THEM PUSH YOU AROUND DAVE!
Back in reality, it's a normal Friday night, and away from the bubble, no one is remotely interested in the debates, just enjoying themselves.
And there it is! Why cannot this point just be added as a headed post at the top of every thread? While some few get overexcited about how this or that gaff or a photo in a morrisons (or whatever) will swing an entire election, it seems pretty well accepted by most people that they know we are weirdos who are obsessively interested in politics, and that normal people will not be paying attention to such things - the hope instead being that an event might manage to catch on and begin to impact narratives and the general political mood in a sort of osmotic way - so it is not as though so grand unconsidered point has just been made clear.
Take it to its logical conclusion and it can be applied to virtually everything written about on a daily basis on any political website, and then what could I rant about?
Back in reality, it's a normal Friday night, and away from the bubble, no one is remotely interested in the debates, just enjoying themselves.
And there it is! Why cannot this point just be added as a headed post at the top of every thread? While some few get overexcited about how this or that gaff or a photo in a morrisons (or whatever) will swing an entire election, it seems pretty well accepted by most people that they know we are weirdos who are obsessively interested in politics, and that normal people will not be paying attention to such things - the hope instead being that an event might manage to catch on and begin to impact narratives and the general political mood in a sort of osmotic way - so it is not as though so grand unconsidered point has just been made clear.
Take it to its logical conclusion and it can be applied to virtually everything written about on a daily basis on any political website, and then what could I rant about?
I don't think it will swing the election. However, I don't think it will help the Tory cause, cannot understand that with so many paid advisers in Tory HQ they manage to clusterfcuk the situation and the complete manic hilariousness of the whole thing.
The broadcasters clearly need Cameron to take part in these debates if they are to achieve any kind of reasonable audience size. Who, other than a few obsessives, are going to bother watching these things if Cameron doesn't show up?
Well you'd get a few curious souls no doubt, those people who become interested in politics if not perhaps not in a partisan way, at GE time. And maybe a few fantasists who could pretend that for a moment, their dream of UK politics with nothing but left wing parties was a reality. Granted, even with going after the Labour vote UKIP kind of mess that up, but it'd be easier to pretend with Cameron not there.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
I know it would be nil, maybe a cardboard cut out just stood there looking out to the audience as a reminder for everyone.
Still nil. Empty-chairing is one thing (I doubt there would even be an empty podium on display ), but doing something which looks like it is designed to embarrass whoever isn't present, is another.
Kind of reminds me of some of the posters on here.
Re your earlier point isn't it odd that as we move more towards US style prersidential debates we have some of the least presidential material on the podium in living memory ?
I think it's harder now. With the media and scrutiny the way things are. It's harder to control perception than in the past
It's no harder than it was 5 years ago. And odd that if your claiming debates make life so much harder for policitians that so many leaders seem to want them.
I don't mean debates so much as the news cycle, the constant tv reports etc. The greater the exposure the less sense there is of mystique or grandeur etc.
They pander to it. It;s hard to feel sorry for people who create their own problems.
Such as ever with politicians and the media. I suppose what I think is that if politicians seem smaller now, it's mainly because we're standing closer to them.
Back in reality, it's a normal Friday night, and away from the bubble, no one is remotely interested in the debates, just enjoying themselves.
And there it is! Why cannot this point just be added as a headed post at the top of every thread? While some few get overexcited about how this or that gaff or a photo in a morrisons (or whatever) will swing an entire election, it seems pretty well accepted by most people that they know we are weirdos who are obsessively interested in politics, and that normal people will not be paying attention to such things - the hope instead being that an event might manage to catch on and begin to impact narratives and the general political mood in a sort of osmotic way - so it is not as though so grand unconsidered point has just been made clear.
Take it to its logical conclusion and it can be applied to virtually everything written about on a daily basis on any political website, and then what could I rant about?
You mean that the folks down the pub aren't totally transfixed by twitter at 10:30 when the daily YouGov is out.... shocking....
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
I know it would be nil, maybe a cardboard cut out just stood there looking out to the audience as a reminder for everyone.
Still nil. Empty-chairing is one thing (I doubt there would even be an empty podium on display ), but doing something which looks like it is designed to embarrass whoever isn't present, is another.
I know, I know, just think the opportunity is there to brighten up the programme. I doubt they would even empty chair/empty podium him to tell truth. But I do enjoy the situation as it currently stands. I actually think a humungous Cameron U-Turn is on the way, though hope not. STAND DAVE...STAND!
It's calamitous. He needs to find a way, quickly, of digging himself free. Already it is unseemly.
But you see, some people don't like the debates, therefore if Cameron manages to not be on any of them, clearly it follows that everyone else in the country will have to agree that he looks magnificent for not doing so. Stands to reason.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
I know it would be nil, maybe a cardboard cut out just stood there looking out to the audience as a reminder for everyone.
Still nil. Empty-chairing is one thing (I doubt there would even be an empty podium on display ), but doing something which looks like it is designed to embarrass whoever isn't present, is another.
I know, I know, just think the opportunity is there to brighten up the programme. I doubt they would even empty chair/empty podium him to tell truth. But I do enjoy the situation as it currently stands. I actually think a humungous Cameron U-Turn is on the way, though hope not. STAND DAVE...STAND!
The broadcasters clearly need Cameron to take part in these debates if they are to achieve any kind of reasonable audience size. Who, other than a few obsessives, are going to bother watching these things if Cameron doesn't show up?
Well you'd get a few curious souls no doubt, those people who become interested in politics if not perhaps not in a partisan way, at GE time. And maybe a few fantasists who could pretend that for a moment, their dream of UK politics with nothing but left wing parties was a reality. Granted, even with going after the Labour vote UKIP kind of mess that up, but it'd be easier to pretend with Cameron not there.
I actually think more people will watch it if Cameron is not there.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
It is quite a clusterfcuk for Cameron to end up in this position. He, I assume from the brains trust at Tory HQ, demands the TV debates on his terms, thinking, unbelieveably, that all the other parties and the broadcasters will bow to his every word. The broadcaster tell him to do one and they will empty seat him if he doesn't turn up. This puts omni-shambles into the shade.....and is quite funny actually.
Compy me old pal,I gave up on Cameron some years back,but Ed has PM frightens and excites me.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
I will be here, laughing along with you. Didn't HIGNFY once put a tub of lard up because Roy Hattersley no showed. What do you think would be appropriate for Cameron.
The chances of broadcasters doing anything like this during the campaign, on what is supposed to be a serious debate, is nil. Not close to nil, but nil.
I know it would be nil, maybe a cardboard cut out just stood there looking out to the audience as a reminder for everyone.
Still nil. Empty-chairing is one thing (I doubt there would even be an empty podium on display ), but doing something which looks like it is designed to embarrass whoever isn't present, is another.
I know, I know, just think the opportunity is there to brighten up the programme. I doubt they would even empty chair/empty podium him to tell truth. But I do enjoy the situation as it currently stands. I actually think a humungous Cameron U-Turn is on the way, though hope not. STAND DAVE...STAND!
Deary me, it is "compromise" not "U-turn".. heh
Or, everyone else came around to his point of view.
Is my memory faulty or did Farage or UKIP live blog (or whatever everyone did in 2010 - did we have Twitter in 2010, I don't recall) the debates last time as a passive aggressive response to being left out?
Cameron could do that. Hell, he could live-stream it, making quips and sardonic barbs at the others as they go at it.
"Oh come on Ed, you tried that line on me in the Commons, it didn't work then, it won't work on Nicola now" "Nick may say he hated every moment of being in government with me, but I still think he's a really cool dude" "What the hell is Plaid Cymru and how did they get a seat?" "Nigel looks desperate for a fag right now, amiright?"
Is my memory faulty or did Farage or UKIP live blog (or whatever everyone did in 2010 - did we have Twitter in 2010, I don't recall) the debates last time as a passive aggressive response to being left out?
Cameron could do that. Hell, he could live-stream it, making quips and sardonic barbs at the others as they go at it.
"Oh come on Ed, you tried that line on me in the Commons, it didn't work then, it won't work on Nicola now" "Nick may say he hated every moment of being in government with me, but I still think he's a really cool dude" "What the hell is Plaid Cymru and how did they get a seat?" "Nigel looks desperate for a fag right now, amiright?"
And so on
Farage said that he would do something like that if he was excluded from the debates.. but he got in.. so Dave had to duck out instead
This whole shebang is because Dave doesn't want to debate Farage.. if it had been Clegg, Cameron and Miliband he would've signed up no problem
It seems fairly obvious no one wins in this dispute as any attempt to empty chair the Prime Minister will be all about that and no one will cut through on any policies. It seems David Cameron is bringing out his inner Thatcher. 'You turn if you want, to the Prime Minister is not for turning' !!!
@Scott_P You have to admire their spirit. "Torygraph" takes sides with the PM shocker. Do Telegraph readers watch TV news these days, or are they not allowed?
It seems fairly obvious no one wins in this dispute as any attempt to empty chair the Prime Minister will be all about that and no one will cut through on any policies. It seems David Cameron is bringing out his inner Thatcher. 'You turn if you want, to the Prime Minister is not for turning' !!!
Just between the two of us can I say that I despise Osborne even more than I do Cameron. I really would not piss in that man's ear of his brain was on fire.
Personally I agree with Alistair Campbell. Unlike Cameron I am willing to offer Gideon some grudging respect as a political player. I think he has been a chancellor who has aimed at tactical advantage rather than national interest and detest a lot of his views and what he has done, but he seems to be the only senior politician in the big two parties at the moment who is hungry to win and showing the ruthlessness needed to do so, I think this may prove telling come May.
And I say this while holding my nose, but I would far rather have Gideon in no.11 than Balls or any of the other Labour front bench.
I can't honestly see it would be any worse having Ed in no 10. than Camneron (other than it would consequently conflict with the above paragraph)
Kippers would love Ed to be in No 10 just to see the devastation caused. They are irreconcilable just like ISIS
Comments
You can see what I thought for each constituency in my SMAPS document in column S
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1sAVzqjn9iA10c1wVlAwCiR0ycue0P83ixV-Zsak3ufs/edit?usp=sharing
EDIT: If anyone feels like I'v made a large error with a constituency Yes vote then please let me know.
What about some policies?
Shock news, politicians give tax breaks/ extra spending to those groups that support it.
James Chapman (Mail) @jameschappers
Here's the red teams policies.
Ed Miliband says he has 'no plans' for deal with SNP. Like the Tories had 'no plans' for a VAT rise?
Cluck,cluck ;-)
Removing Glasgow NE and Grdon which are the two outliers at either end and that becomes 3 points fewer and a StdDev of 4.1
The 3 points fewer basically covers the Greens in my view.
I happen to think a piece of A5 paper with a couple of hundred words and some stock photos, which may or may not have any direct relevance to the constituency it is mailed in, and which is full of ridiculous spin either way, is not a very good basis for people to make up their minds, or contribute significantly to them making up their minds at any rate, but parties still stuff them through letter slots to make that happen all the same (yes I know they have other purposes, but it is at least partly designed to be about swaying the wavering).
But I'm sure someone being swayed by five carefully spun and probably contextless bulletpoints of text and a photo of a grinning Nick Clegg (as a hypothetical example), or a billboard of a wrecking ball and the opposing party's name, is nothing but pure substance. Why, if it was not particularly substantive, we should not have them at all, right?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/tv-election-debates-dont-fit-the-uk-democratic-system-hence-the-chaos/
We could always all go over there one evening, and drag him back?
3.4% Undecided
7.6% Conservative
39.6% Labour
1.6% Liberal Democrat
33.6% UKIP
10.8% Green
2.5% SNP
0.2% Plaid Cymru
0.0% DUP
0.0% Sinn Fein
0.2% SDLP
0.2% Alliance
0.2% Other
Mirror online instapolling thingy http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/ed-miliband-no-plans-snp-5287834
34% Ukip vs 39% Lab is astonishing (to me anyway)
Where do I find a link to the full breakdown for each Ashcroft constituency poll?
My point is the slickest wins, not the one with the best policies. They should follow Major's example and get out and meet the people, though given Brown's episode last time I can understand why Labour would prefer a PR stunt.
None of that means it will definitely have been worth if for the the Tories to be making this chaotic situation even more chaotic - time will tell, as I stated I think the biggest loss from it is the Tories' own opportunity given Cameron's supposed strengths and Ed M's weaknesses - but it is fair game to make the argument our system is not well suited for this sort of thing. Cameron is unfortunately the worse person possible to make that argument, but as Fraser states that is his own damn fault.
"...if he didn't want to do them, or wanted them in a particular fashion, why didn't he [Cameron] just state it months or years ago so it seemed less like a last minute thought?"
Perhaps because Cameron doesn't do strategy. That is to say he does not spend energy on anything other than what is immediate. Thinking ahead and planning for the future is not something he bothers with. Why should he? After all leaving it to the last minute has worked for him ever since he was at Uni.
Unfortunately, whilst Cameron might be convinced that his own brilliance will always see him through, and it might well do so in terms of his own personal ambitions, it is a disastrous trait in a Prime Minister.
Frightens because he could be worse than brown and really clusterfcuk this country up ;-) and excites because he could be giving me laughs every week on PB - LOL ,hope your still around to see it ;-)
It is all a bit embarrassing. Should have been sorted out months ago rather than on the hoof with 9 weeks to go. The debates themselves are the most boring thing to debate about.
Yes I remember it well, the Libs cheerful and backslapping, the look on their faces when the results were read out was hilarious. It was a moment that summed up the Westminster/media bubble for me, utterly out of touch with the general public.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/us-election/9510812/US-election-2012-Clint-Eastwood-lectures-empty-chair-at-Republican-convention.html
Cameron's one debate stance makes little sense to me, I sure as hell don't see how that makes him look good. Too clever by half? More like plain stupid.
About the best the Tories can hope for now is that the debates don't move opinion much.
And I say this while holding my nose, but I would far rather have Gideon in no.11 than Balls or any of the other Labour front bench.
I can't honestly see it would be any worse having Ed in no 10. than Camneron (other than it would consequently conflict with the above paragraph)
Lack of brevity, pomposity and self righteousness are I suspect more common failings of mine in writing, but if you felt I was being condescending I apologize, it was not my intention. Perhaps I should have just made the written equivalent of grunting insults that make up online political discourse in some of the darker corners of the internet, which at least are less open to misinterpretation. Am I allowed to say I agree with that? Though I don't see why you cannot do both and maximise how you reach people - the pure, face to face version, and that apparently eeevil over television way.
Maybe if he isn't too busy touring he could take Cameron's place?
They are not, @1.5 in Edinburgh East and @2.5 in North & Leith
2. Whom do you rate higher, Eastwood or Miliband?
http://order-order.com/2015/03/06/brilliant-labour-attack-video-on-debate-dodging-dave/
Or if it has to be a person Harry Enfield in character with his Tim Nice but Dim character.
Perhaps they felt the 2 seven person debates would give Ed a chance to recover, whereas in just one with no previous experience of what Labour might face from the other leftist parties Ed would probably take at least a moderate hit initially. It cannot be repeated enough that the principled stance of many on here who dislike the debates cannot be applied to Cameron's reasoning, given his history on them, so the answer can only be in terms of political calculation.
http://www.c-span.org/video/?189763-1/conservative-party-candidates
(4min 10sec in)
The 30%+ who are leaning Conservative won't bother to look in and there's not much of interest for those of us who make up the other 65%+ either if we're not going to get to see anyone land a blow on the PM.
I agree totally, the idea that thie voting them off?<
Style over substance, total bollocks
Th
Well thanks for confirming my opinion is valid, much appreciated kind sir.
It's just an expression, no need to be tetchy. Since you seem engaged by my use of it, I will clarify that I sometime use it to make clear I am not being dismissive of someone's point of view - rather than for instance writing off an opposing side' s opinion as being nothing but bollocks as though I have not even considered it, which may or may not be the case, or indeed be reasonable, depending on the circumstances - so they are clear I have given at least fleeting attention to the point they were making.
Lack of brevity, pomposity and self righteousness are I suspect more common failings of mine in writing, but if you felt I was being condescending I apologize, it was not my intention. Perhaps I should have just made the written equivalent of grunting insults that make up online political discourse in some of the darker corners of the internet, which at least are less open to misinterpretation. Am I allowed to say I agree with that? Though I don't see why you cannot do both and maximise how you reach people - the pure, face to face version, and that apparently eeevil over television way.
Fair enough, no need to apologise, things don't always come over as intended on the Internet as we all know to our cost!
And remember: ed is crap, sturgeon and farage aren't, and miliband's scalp would be a great prize to either of them.
Take it to its logical conclusion and it can be applied to virtually everything written about on a daily basis on any political website, and then what could I rant about?
I think an empty suit would be better, but other options are available.
Edit: you forgot the BMRB
A cast iron "U" turn?
I forecast he ends up in all the debates with some face saving change of date to bring 2 way one earlier than 30th April
Cameron could do that. Hell, he could live-stream it, making quips and sardonic barbs at the others as they go at it.
"Oh come on Ed, you tried that line on me in the Commons, it didn't work then, it won't work on Nicola now"
"Nick may say he hated every moment of being in government with me, but I still think he's a really cool dude"
"What the hell is Plaid Cymru and how did they get a seat?"
"Nigel looks desperate for a fag right now, amiright?"
And so on
Broadcasters are willing to change the date of the head to head.
Wonder if we'll get a compromise something like:
25 March: 7 person
9 April : 7 person
23 April: Head to head
Maybe, just maybe, that is what Cameron is playing for - ie he knows he'll have to take part but is using leverage to get the dates moved.
*PB Hodge speak
This whole shebang is because Dave doesn't want to debate Farage.. if it had been Clegg, Cameron and Miliband he would've signed up no problem
You have to admire their spirit.
"Torygraph" takes sides with the PM shocker.
Do Telegraph readers watch TV news these days, or are they not allowed?