There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
Oh he could still pull this one out of the bag, there's a chance. It's just a shame he didn't back himself to come out on top of the second broadcasters' proposal, which seemed pretty good for him.
And as has been pointed out, he is vulnerable if he claims that is what is happening, as his view was the total opposite 5 years ago, so it is hard to stand on principle.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
The Scum headline tomorrow from Tom Newton Tory "Six leaders chicken out of debate with Cameron as Dave stands firm like the bastion of democracy he is".
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
Tomorrow's Times Leader pans arrogant broadcasters.
Any media outlet panning another for arrogance seems a little questionable, but if we are to keep the circus rolling on this scenario it's good someone is taking up the other side at least.
Lab pull into 4% YouGov lead- 35-31 for 5th March. Forgive me if this is old news?
All is forgiven, as that was a hilarious result, given there was at least some hope that a trend of a Tory lead might be blossoming. I still would have preferred the Tory lead as I think the Labour reaction to a sustained period of Tory leads would be great to witness, but I'll take what I can get.
Tomorrow's Times Leader pans arrogant broadcasters.
Any media outlet panning another for arrogance seems a little questionable, but if we are to keep the circus rolling on this scenario it's good someone is taking up the other side at least.
All this about the debates and we haven't even addressed STVs plan to only invite the UK leaders to their Scottish debate (i.e. Miliband not Murphy).
Given this is a Westminster election, of course UK leaders would be invited. Murphy is no more significant than anyone else - just like in a Holyrood election you'd see Murphy and not Milibland invited.
As someone who has only just started re-engaging with UK politics can someone somewhere tell me why the Tories are overwhelming favourites for most seats on Betfair? Perhaps Osborne is going to unmask Miliband as Jimmy Saville's lovechild on budget day.
Tomorrow's Times Leader pans arrogant broadcasters.
Any media outlet panning another for arrogance seems a little questionable, but if we are to keep the circus rolling on this scenario it's good someone is taking up the other side at least.
Murdoch on Murdoch panning is also a bit weird
But at least it's not quite as clear cut as the dim lefties suppose.
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.
Of COURSE more people will watch if Cameron is not there. It will become a kind of political freakshow, the opposite yet equivalent of the day they invited Nick Griffin onto Question Time.
The broadcasters will (understandably) play it for the maximum drama. Will the PM turn up at the last moment? Or is he really a total nonce? Tune in at 9! etc etc
It will get huge viewing figures (for a political debate).
As will the parties, Farage will bill it as the day Cameron hid away from the people on the EU, Ed Miliband and Labour will keep up the same attacks they're throwing at Cameron now putting it in the news, the nats hardly need any encouragement to whip themselves into a frenzy and it's the Greens' big moment. Not quite sure how Clegg turns it into an occassion. The breadth of the parties represented alone will draw interest - From potential Kippers who hate normal politics, to students hoping Natalie Bennett's brain doesn't melt.
It may only get the same viewing figures as it would've got with him, purely because it's difficult to know if a normal leaders debate is literally the maximum audience you'll get (the days of 25 million watching one channel being long gone), but it certainly won't be a non event. The previous ones had close to X Factor ratings, which is pretty much the largest you get for something that doesn't involve Andy Murray - in other words a phenomenal audience compared to Newsnight or Question Time which those with an interest like to think can influence opinion somehow.
As someone who has only just started re-engaging with UK politics can someone somewhere tell me why the Tories are overwhelming favourites for most seats on Betfair? Perhaps Osborne is going to unmask Miliband as Jimmy Saville's lovechild on budget day.
Labour are disintegrating in Scotland.
Though the Conservatives weren't overwhelming favourites last time I looked.
@Ishmael_X Dumb lefties know that aside from the obvious reasons on here, there is another far more interesting one for his spin doctors to try and dodge the debates, and to downplay them. ^^
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion. This is more a desire to make a considered adjustment, rather than a blanket refusal.
However, such subtleties are often lost in the political rough and tumble, and it's also possible that it's simply a pretext to justify avoiding the debates, given that the broadcasters will want to hold debates during the main campaign period when the public is most likely to be interested.
As someone who has only just started re-engaging with UK politics can someone somewhere tell me why the Tories are overwhelming favourites for most seats on Betfair? Perhaps Osborne is going to unmask Miliband as Jimmy Saville's lovechild on budget day.
Some Tories are really optimistic because they feel they should be deserving of a rise in the polls at some point. Hasn't happened yet, but in their defence Labour have slipped in the past year.
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 remember the tub of lard - but I had no recollection of who it was standing in for.
@Ishmael_X Dumb lefties know that aside from the obvious reasons on here, there is another far more interesting one for his spin doctors to try and dodge the debates, and to downplay them. ^^
Can I admit that I couldn't be bothered to watch the previous debates, so I'm unlikely to watch whatever turns up. The highlights consisted of the party leaders repeating their well known positions, and Cleggy gained a little short-lived attention.
Cameron will probably agree to a compromise but either way, he looks a lesser PM for the fuss. If he's seen to be bullied by the media, he'll have lost
Labour look shouty, but that's their normal position anyway.
I would watch a Paxman or Brillo examination of all the party leaders but that will never happen.
But the media love stories about the media and will lap up all the attention, and we'll end up with an anodyne set piece.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion.
The debates did not dominate the campaign out of all proportion. Just ask Gordon Brown after his visit to Mrs Duffy.
Cameron was consistently calling for TV debates from BEFORE he became Tory leader. He was instrumental in letting that genie out of the bottle. That is why he is in trouble now. He may as well have signed a pledge.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
In 2010 Cameron thought he would beat Brown easily in the debates and so didn't prepare properly.
The result was the Cleggasm.
Now although the Cleggasm had dissipated by polling day it became standard Cameroon thought that it was the debates which stopped the Conservatives from winning a majority.
It being much easier to believe this than to accept that the whole 'Cameron Project' was fundamentally flawed.
This 'debates = bad' meme is now ingrained and affecting their judgement now.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion.
The debates did not dominate the campaign out of all proportion. Just ask Gordon Brown after his visit to Mrs Duffy.
Well last time everybody was overshadowed by the appearance of the King himself...
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion.
The debates did not dominate the campaign out of all proportion. Just ask Gordon Brown after his visit to Mrs Duffy.
Cameron was consistently calling for TV debates from BEFORE he became Tory leader. He was instrumental in letting that genie out of the bottle. That is why he is in trouble now. He may as well have signed a pledge.
Bad Al's position in 2001 was completely different to now, is it OK for him to change his mind?
Therehe is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
Now although the Cleggasm had dissipated by polling day it became standard Cameroon thought that it was the debates which stopped the Conservatives from winning a majority.
It being much easier to believe this than to accept that the whole 'Cameron Project' was fundamentally flawed.
Honestly I like Cameron in general, I would prefer him as PM than Ed M, but given the number of times just today I've seen the reasoning that the debates are, paraphrasing now, an abomination, due to the impact they would have which I regard as a little over the top, for the very reason you state (that is, they supposedly cost Cameron the election due to the Cleggasm), makes your conclusion harder to dismiss in its entirety. There are good reasons not to like the debates, principled reasons, but the fear of them from some quarters does seem based in the faulty logic you identify.
Is that the best defence they have. At least the Thatcher analogy was entertaining. Oh dear.
Just lou BJO and Compouter boy?
I don't think he has any plans to have a deal with the SNP.
WThis is gonna happen but I can't tell you yet".
Seeing L
"imploding across England and Wales"??????????
A Lab/SNP arrangement in the next Parliament will be catastrophic for Labour.
Maybe so, but how long could they stick together to drag that disaster out? It doesn't do the country or the Tories much good if they stick it out for years, which they well could even if the signs are terrible, or even because of it - as the LDs have shown, people don't have a willingness to cause too much of a ruckus if they think they would be hammered at the ballot box, and people can withstand a lot of hatred and internal ructions.
The debates did not shift many older voters but they did do something. @Ishmaelx can tell you what it was, and why "Brave Dave" is standing in a minefield.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion.
The debates did not dominate the campaign out of all proportion. Just ask Gordon Brown after his visit to Mrs Duffy.
Well last time everybody was overshadowed by the appearance of the King himself...
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
From a purely intellectual point of view I have some time for Cameron's argument that the debates would be best held before the official campaign period, because they came to dominate the campaign out of all proportion.
The debates did not dominate the campaign out of all proportion. Just ask Gordon Brown after his visit to Mrs Duffy.
Cameron was consistently calling for TV debates from BEFORE he became Tory leader. He was instrumental in letting that genie out of the bottle. That is why he is in trouble now. He may as well have signed a pledge.
Bad Al's position in 2001 was completely different to now, is it OK for him to change his mind?
"Al" is simply irrelevant, he's not in a leader debate, he never was in a leader debate and he never will be in a leader debate. You may as well ask your nan.
Whereas David Cameron as LoO (and before) repeatedly called for debates as a vital part of democracy and goaded the then PM repeatedly for wanting to bottle them (which he didn't).
He is now attempting to do a 180 when nothing fundamental has changed. He simply believes the politics does not to suit him this time around. This borders* on hypocrisy. He should pay a price for this and it looks like he will.
*Borders in the sense that simple hypocrisy would be an improvement on his position.
There is a possibility that the broadcasters onslaught may be counter productive if David Cameron sticks to his guns as it could be seen that he is standing up for his view and acting strongly against intimidation
That could work... If Cameron hadn't done the debate's in 2010. That's his problem. If he'd refused to do debates, on principle in 2010 (as The Good Lord urged him to I think?) he would be justified in standing his ground now.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
In 2010 Cameron thought he would beat Brown easily in the debates and so didn't prepare properly.
The result was the Cleggasm.
Now although the Cleggasm had dissipated by polling day it became standard Cameroon thought that it was the debates which stopped the Conservatives from winning a majority.
It being much easier to believe this than to accept that the whole 'Cameron Project' was fundamentally flawed.
This 'debates = bad' meme is now ingrained and affecting their judgement now.
Yes about right. I seem to recall in the end the debates and indeed the campaign made little difference, but I doubt Cameron sees it that way. Personally having got 7 7 2 as formulae he should've gone with that, but I can also see that given Ed's ratings are so subterranean there's a logic that it's not worth the risk of a sucker punch in a one off debate. The truth is we will never know if the one to ones never happen. It'll be one of those "what if alternative history questions" either way post election.
The Tories have the budget left and that's a big weapon as GO is hyper political and I'm sure will have some surprising goodies to pull from the hat. But nevertheless I expect a near dead heat with Ed in no 10 as the weakest PM in a hundred years ( 1923? ), being played like a fiddle by Edinburgh. Nobody's going to win except the Nats. I can't help feeling this will be Labour's 92 - the one they should've lost. Whatever Ed or Len McClusky think Balls knows there's not enough bankers and mansions in reality and there will be tax rises on real people and big cuts. Add in the Scots demanding tartan unicorns on every street corner in Airdrie or they'll pull the plug, which will go down lik a mug of cold sick in England, and it would require a genius not to plummet to great depths of unpopularity pronto. However, Ed is not a genius - he really is crap.
Still it will be entertaining. Copper or Burnham PM by 2017?
Is that the best defence they have. At least the Thatcher analogy was entertaining. Oh dear.
Just looking at that front page, is Ed going to rule out a deal with the SNP?
Surely the electorate in England and Wales need to know before the GE, what say you BJO and Compouter boy?
I don't think he has any plans to have a deal with the SNP.
When a politician say's they have "no plans" to do something it's basically code for; This is gonna happen but I can't tell you yet".
Seeing Labour grovelling to the SNP and imploding across England and Wales will be great fun.
"imploding across England and Wales"??????????
A Lab/SNP arrangement in the next Parliament will be catastrophic for Labour.
Very, very funny. But catastrophic for your party.
I agree. It would hammer the final nail in the SLAB coffin and antagonise the English as Ed Milliband dances to an SNP tune.
A deal with the SNP would shred Labour.
Noone actually wants Ed in past a bet winning exercise though right ?
If he's out before the year end that'll be another winner !
I dunno.
Everyone likes an underdog, and ed pulls off the remarkable feat of appearing to be the underdog, while actually being the favourite.
The equivalent of the PB tories in 1945 were utterly shocked that the country could be so stupid as to elect that weak, pathetic looking Clement Attlee.
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
"isam said: Basically, he gave it the big one and couldn't back it up..."
"Oh dear. I don't need to whip out my wad for it to be true that Farage will not be included in any TV debate as an equal with Cameron, Clegg or Miliband.... ...I think you should let this one go.
When Farage is not in the debates you can thank me "
Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) 06/03/2015 23:08 It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
A very privileged apologist for evil: An heiress wife. A £700k Surrey home. How the public school educated 'human rights' champion who praised Jihadi John lives the good life in the country he's trying to destroy
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
A very privileged apologist for evil: An heiress wife. A £700k Surrey home. How the public school educated 'human rights' champion who praised Jihadi John lives the good life in the country he's trying to destroy
@isam Bit late for the Sundays? But I would love to know which Tory "accidentally" leaked it. I hope it wasn't someone in one of the "future leaders" offices.
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
Is that the best defence they have. At least the Thatcher analogy was entertaining. Oh dear.
Just looking at that front page, is Ed going to rule out a deal with the SNP?
Surely the electorate in England and Wales need to know before the GE, what say you BJO and Compouter boy?
I don't think he has any plans to have a deal with the SNP.
When a politician say's they have "no plans" to do something it's basically code for; This is gonna happen but I can't tell you yet".
Seeing Labour grovelling to the SNP and imploding across England and Wales will be great fun.
"imploding across England and Wales"??????????
A Lab/SNP arrangement in the next Parliament will be catastrophic for Labour.
Very, very funny. But catastrophic for your party.
I agree. It would hammer the final nail in the SLAB coffin and antagonise the English as Ed Milliband dances to an SNP tune.
A deal with the SNP would shred Labour.
Noone actually wants Ed in past a bet winning exercise though right ?
If he's out before the year end that'll be another winner !
I dunno.
Everyone likes an underdog, and ed pulls off the remarkable feat of appearing to be the underdog, while actually being the favourite.
The equivalent of the PB tories in 1945 were utterly shocked that the country could be so stupid as to elect that weak, pathetic looking Clement Attlee.
But elect him they did.
Major Attlee was anything but weak, he was the second to last man to leave Gallipolli in 1916 and wounded in action that year. My grandfather was a private in his regiment.
Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) 06/03/2015 23:08 It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
Running smoother than a well oiled velvet codpiece.
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
It is. But like Anton Chigurh, the Conservatives will hunt them down one by one with a bolt gun. Starting with their least favourite and the first to need their help.
Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) 06/03/2015 23:08 It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
Running smoother than a well oiled velvet codpiece.
A very timely leak to dominate the weekends reporting. What master strategist could come up with such a wheeze?
Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) 06/03/2015 23:08 It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
Running smoother than a well oiled velvet codpiece.
A very timely leak to dominate the weekends reporting. What master strategist could come up with such a wheeze?
The Tories have the budget left and that's a big weapon as GO is hyper political and I'm sure will have some surprising goodies to pull from the hat. But nevertheless I expect a near dead heat with Ed in no 10 as the weakest PM in a hundred years ( 1923? ), being played like a fiddle by Edinburgh. Nobody's going to win except the Nats. I can't help feeling this will be Labour's 92 - the one they should've lost. Whatever Ed or Len McClusky think Balls knows there's not enough bankers and mansions in reality and there will be tax rises on real people and big cuts. Add in the Scots demanding tartan unicorns on every street corner in Airdrie or they'll pull the plug, which will go down lik a mug of cold sick in England, and it would require a genius not to plummet to great depths of unpopularity pronto. However, Ed is not a genius - he really is crap.
Still it will be entertaining. Copper or Burnham PM by 2017?
People often say that the Conservatives should have lost in 1992, but Kinnock reversing Thatcherism would have left Britain a much less Conservative country than Blair reinforcing it.
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
It's nothing other than vested interest, it would suit our man but I cannot stand the shift to US style politics
Ed Miliband's wife Justine will appear at Labour campaign events from next week to help bolster his image, according to reports.
Justine Thornton, a barrister specialising in environmental law, will feature in parts of the campaign as part of a new strategy to "champion his character".
A very privileged apologist for evil: An heiress wife. A £700k Surrey home. How the public school educated 'human rights' champion who praised Jihadi John lives the good life in the country he's trying to destroy
Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) 06/03/2015 23:08 It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
Running smoother than a well oiled velvet codpiece.
A very timely leak to dominate the weekends reporting. What master strategist could come up with such a wheeze?
You'll have to go slower than that, he's not the fizziest bottle of pop in the fridge
Ed Miliband's wife Justine will appear at Labour campaign events from next week to help bolster his image, according to reports.
Justine Thornton, a barrister specialising in environmental law, will feature in parts of the campaign as part of a new strategy to "champion his character".
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
Well as ever I think Sky are just demonstrating more than anything how thick they are. What are they going to do? Rebrand their show 'An Evening With Ed'? You can't have a debate with just one participant....
The Tories have the budget left and that's a big weapon as GO is hyper political and I'm sure will have some surprising goodies to pull from the hat. But nevertheless I expect a near dead heat with Ed in no 10 as the weakest PM in a hundred years ( 1923? ), being played like a fiddle by Edinburgh. Nobody's going to win except the Nats. I can't help feeling this will be Labour's 92 - the one they should've lost. Whatever Ed or Len McClusky think Balls knows there's not enough bankers and mansions in reality and there will be tax rises on real people and big cuts. Add in the Scots demanding tartan unicorns on every street corner in Airdrie or they'll pull the plug, which will go down lik a mug of cold sick in England, and it would require a genius not to plummet to great depths of unpopularity pronto. However, Ed is not a genius - he really is crap.
Still it will be entertaining. Copper or Burnham PM by 2017?
People often say that the Conservatives should have lost in 1992, but Kinnock reversing Thatcherism would have left Britain a much less Conservative country than Blair reinforcing it.
Yeah but the ERM exit would've been on Kinnock's watch ( all three main parties were signed up to that policy mind!) five months in with a wafer thin majority or a minority. The 1997 Tory wipeout would never have happened on the scale it did for starters.
Ed Miliband's wife Justine will appear at Labour campaign events from next week to help bolster his image, according to reports.
Justine Thornton, a barrister specialising in environmental law, will feature in parts of the campaign as part of a new strategy to "champion his character".
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
Well as ever I think Sky are just demonstrating more than anything how thick they are. What are they going to do? Rebrand the show 'An Evening With Ed'? You can't have a debate with just one participant....
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
Well as ever I think Sky are just demonstrating more than anything how thick they are. What are they going to do? Rebrand the show 'An Evening With Ed'? You can't have a debate with just one participant....
They could get it sponsored by Colonel Sanders.
Yeah but do you really want all those 'Chicken Run' jokes? I thought Ed was trying to get away from the 'Wallace' image
One things is now obvious. If somehow the Tories lose, Cameron will take an even greater share of responsibility for the defeat that he would have done. It will be his fault.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
You're looking at this the wrong way around. If the Conservatives win, the BBC is going to be gutted in the Charter renewal next year. I expect the licence fee model would be found to be out of date in the new digital world. The BBC executive have taken an enormous gamble today. Correctly, in my view - but principled gambles that lose are the most costly.
I am not being argumentative, but isn't it all the broadcasters that are holding firm against Cameron rather than just the BBC? I just watched Sky News and their main man said they were going ahead with the debates with or without him
Well as ever I think Sky are just demonstrating more than anything how thick they are. What are they going to do? Rebrand their show 'An Evening With Ed'? You can't have a debate with just one participant....
Would have thought they will get Ed Nick and Nigel in, its obviously not going to be an audience with Ed
David Cameron is to become the first Conservative prime minister to send a child to a state secondary school after accepting a place at a Church of England academy a short walk from Downing Street.
Former TV news executive David Elstein said the game David Cameron and broadcasters were playing was "somewhere between tennis and chess". He said: "Even as the broadcasters put out their fairly defiant statement, Sky and Channel 4 completely undercut it, by saying they were willing to move the head-to-head with Ed Miliband anywhere from 30 April right through to next week, that puts the ball back in David Cameron's court because what he has insisted is he is not going to do anything after 30 March. "My guess is the way it will play out is this. The Conservatives will now try and unwrap the broadcasting cabal by going direct to ITV - who are scheduled to do the first seven-way debate on 2 April - and say look 'I'm willing to do it before 30 March you're trying to do it on 2 April why don't we compromise?' And given that the chairman of ITV happens to be a former chairman of the Conservative party you would have thought that was a conversation that might go reasonably well."
Cameron is playing a game, and the broadcasters are already beginning to blink, once itv compromise, and then the date of the head to head is brought forward with Sky, Cameron will not only have seen to have won the argument, He will then have time after the debates for the tory machine to unleash all hells fury on miliband, with little opportunity for Ed to directly respond
Former TV news executive David Elstein said the game David Cameron and broadcasters were playing was "somewhere between tennis and chess". He said: "Even as the broadcasters put out their fairly defiant statement, Sky and Channel 4 completely undercut it, by saying they were willing to move the head-to-head with Ed Miliband anywhere from 30 April right through to next week, that puts the ball back in David Cameron's court because what he has insisted is he is not going to do anything after 30 March. "My guess is the way it will play out is this. The Conservatives will now try and unwrap the broadcasting cabal by going direct to ITV - who are scheduled to do the first seven-way debate on 2 April - and say look 'I'm willing to do it before 30 March you're trying to do it on 2 April why don't we compromise?' And given that the chairman of ITV happens to be a former chairman of the Conservative party you would have thought that was a conversation that might go reasonably well."
Cameron is playing a game, and the broadcasters are already beginning to blink, once itv compromise, and then the date of the head to head is brought forward with Sky, Cameron will not only have seen to have won the argument, He will then have time after the debates for the tory machine to unleash all hells fury on miliband, with little opportunity for Ed to directly respond
Ed Miliband's wife Justine will appear at Labour campaign events from next week to help bolster his image, according to reports.
Justine Thornton, a barrister specialising in environmental law, will feature in parts of the campaign as part of a new strategy to "champion his character".
Is that £200k a year Justine? We're all in it together!
btw I am starting to look at Bookings prices, to be shown a card etc.. I kknow you like a bet on this.. should be up on Betfair most matches, but let me know if you like anything please?
Sunday Liverpool match, Cory Evans at 8/1 BetVictor first booking looks nice, but best see starting line ups
Comments
Excellent, I hope the rest of the right wing press follow into line with the same narrative.
Cameron is behaving like a dick on the debates. Badly advised. This is not 2001 all over again. That was almost before the internet- a lifetime ago.
And as has been pointed out, he is vulnerable if he claims that is what is happening, as his view was the total opposite 5 years ago, so it is hard to stand on principle.
Unfortunately for him, he was happy to debate in 2010, but now he isn't... Which makes him look a spineless, gutless, self-serving chicken.
There is no way Cameron can come out of this OK... He's gambled... And lost!
Charities no longer funding Cage, says Charity Commission
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31771463
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-31771963
Surely the electorate in England and Wales need to know before the GE, what say you BJO and Compouter boy?
If they are anything like me, they are having a hard time typing due to the tears of laughter.
And if you think Al-Beeb were not so far up the sven Labour Party's back-side: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-31771463
Conservative Asians in Broxtowe must be a powerful group....
But at least it's not quite as clear cut as the dim lefties suppose.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983395/Cameron-s-daughter-state-secondary-Church-England-school-strict-detention-looking-clock.html
It may only get the same viewing figures as it would've got with him, purely because it's difficult to know if a normal leaders debate is literally the maximum audience you'll get (the days of 25 million watching one channel being long gone), but it certainly won't be a non event. The previous ones had close to X Factor ratings, which is pretty much the largest you get for something that doesn't involve Andy Murray - in other words a phenomenal audience compared to Newsnight or Question Time which those with an interest like to think can influence opinion somehow.
Though the Conservatives weren't overwhelming favourites last time I looked.
And good to see you again Tyson.
Loving front page reviews tonight
Dumb lefties know that aside from the obvious reasons on here, there is another far more interesting one for his spin doctors to try and dodge the debates, and to downplay them.
^^
Bagehot is a Springsteen fan apparently: [Src.: http://www.economist.com/news/britain/21645726-decade-old-fox-hunting-ban-has-irked-countryfolk-spared-few-foxes-and-damaged-politics]
:down-in-jungle-land:
However, such subtleties are often lost in the political rough and tumble, and it's also possible that it's simply a pretext to justify avoiding the debates, given that the broadcasters will want to hold debates during the main campaign period when the public is most likely to be interested.
Seeing Labour grovelling to the SNP and imploding across England and Wales will be great fun.
Do you wish to clarify what you mean, or was that the sum total of your insight?
Cameron will probably agree to a compromise but either way, he looks a lesser PM for the fuss. If he's seen to be bullied by the media, he'll have lost
Labour look shouty, but that's their normal position anyway.
I would watch a Paxman or Brillo examination of all the party leaders but that will never happen.
But the media love stories about the media and will lap up all the attention, and we'll end up with an anodyne set piece.
Cameron was consistently calling for TV debates from BEFORE he became Tory leader. He was instrumental in letting that genie out of the bottle. That is why he is in trouble now. He may as well have signed a pledge.
The result was the Cleggasm.
Now although the Cleggasm had dissipated by polling day it became standard Cameroon thought that it was the debates which stopped the Conservatives from winning a majority.
It being much easier to believe this than to accept that the whole 'Cameron Project' was fundamentally flawed.
This 'debates = bad' meme is now ingrained and affecting their judgement now.
Very, very funny. But catastrophic for your party.
And indeed that is very likely to happen.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8om47yrSZSI
'At least if Cameron is kicked out of office in a few weeks time, little Nancy won't have to slum it with the plebs..'
At least he sends his kids to state schools unlike lefty hypocrites like Abbott, Toynbee & co.
A deal with the SNP would shred Labour.
@Ishmaelx can tell you what it was, and why "Brave Dave" is standing in a minefield.
If he's out before the year end that'll be another winner !
Whereas David Cameron as LoO (and before) repeatedly called for debates as a vital part of democracy and goaded the then PM repeatedly for wanting to bottle them (which he didn't).
He is now attempting to do a 180 when nothing fundamental has changed. He simply believes the politics does not to suit him this time around. This borders* on hypocrisy. He should pay a price for this and it looks like he will.
*Borders in the sense that simple hypocrisy would be an improvement on his position.
The Tories have the budget left and that's a big weapon as GO is hyper political and I'm sure will have some surprising goodies to pull from the hat. But nevertheless I expect a near dead heat with Ed in no 10 as the weakest PM in a hundred years ( 1923? ), being played like a fiddle by Edinburgh. Nobody's going to win except the Nats. I can't help feeling this will be Labour's 92 - the one they should've lost. Whatever Ed or Len McClusky think Balls knows there's not enough bankers and mansions in reality and there will be tax rises on real people and big cuts. Add in the Scots demanding tartan unicorns on every street corner in Airdrie or they'll pull the plug, which will go down lik a mug of cold sick in England, and it would require a genius not to plummet to great depths of unpopularity pronto. However, Ed is not a genius - he really is crap.
Still it will be entertaining. Copper or Burnham PM by 2017?
Everyone likes an underdog, and ed pulls off the remarkable feat of appearing to be the underdog, while actually being the favourite.
The equivalent of the PB tories in 1945 were utterly shocked that the country could be so stupid as to elect that weak, pathetic looking Clement Attlee.
But elect him they did.
Interestingly, this might spare others close to him, like Osborne.
Scott_P • Posts: 6,802
January 2014
"isam said:
Basically, he gave it the big one and couldn't back it up..."
"Oh dear.
I don't need to whip out my wad for it to be true that Farage will not be included in any TV debate as an equal with Cameron, Clegg or Miliband....
...I think you should let this one go.
When Farage is not in the debates you can thank me "
http://www.theguardian.com/education/2015/mar/06/david-cameron-will-pledge-to-open-153-new-free-schools
He will climb down.
That's my prediction.
06/03/2015 23:08
It appears a Tory has emailed PM's big free school + budget speech on Monday to wrong bod, and Labour have leaked to @patrickwintour. Oops.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983427/A-privileged-apologist-evil-heiress-wife-700k-Surrey-home-public-school-educated-human-rights-champion-praised-Jihadi-John-lives-good-life-country-s-trying-destroy.html
Bit late for the Sundays? But I would love to know which Tory "accidentally" leaked it.
I hope it wasn't someone in one of the "future leaders" offices.
He did not have to prove his bravery by stunts.
Might be "chaff" to confuse the incoming missiles?
Justine Thornton, a barrister specialising in environmental law, will feature in parts of the campaign as part of a new strategy to "champion his character".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/ed-miliband/11455766/Ed-Miliband-turns-to-Justine-to-help-bolster-ratings.html
It like Gordo all over again...
Especially the puppy statuette and the Brasseye reference.
No, the one event that could lose the GE for the Tories is the budget.
David Cameron is to become the first Conservative prime minister to send a child to a state secondary school after accepting a place at a Church of England academy a short walk from Downing Street.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2983395/Cameron-s-daughter-state-secondary-Church-England-school-strict-detention-looking-clock.html
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/31769714
Former TV news executive David Elstein said the game David Cameron and broadcasters were playing was "somewhere between tennis and chess".
He said: "Even as the broadcasters put out their fairly defiant statement, Sky and Channel 4 completely undercut it, by saying they were willing to move the head-to-head with Ed Miliband anywhere from 30 April right through to next week, that puts the ball back in David Cameron's court because what he has insisted is he is not going to do anything after 30 March.
"My guess is the way it will play out is this. The Conservatives will now try and unwrap the broadcasting cabal by going direct to ITV - who are scheduled to do the first seven-way debate on 2 April - and say look 'I'm willing to do it before 30 March you're trying to do it on 2 April why don't we compromise?' And given that the chairman of ITV happens to be a former chairman of the Conservative party you would have thought that was a conversation that might go reasonably well."
Cameron is playing a game, and the broadcasters are already beginning to blink, once itv compromise, and then the date of the head to head is brought forward with Sky, Cameron will not only have seen to have won the argument, He will then have time after the debates for the tory machine to unleash all hells fury on miliband, with little opportunity for Ed to directly respond
Yes, he is playing a game, but it is starting to look like hopscotch in a minefield.
Sunday Liverpool match, Cory Evans at 8/1 BetVictor first booking looks nice, but best see starting line ups
Could be he does?
http://www.theguardian.com/media/organgrinder/2011/feb/09/tv-leaders-debates-general-election