politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polling finds David Cameron would get the blame were th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The polling finds David Cameron would get the blame were the debates not to take place
The polling by YouGov on the debates doesn’t make for good reading for David Cameron, such as 50% think David Cameron is scared to debate other party leaders. whilst 38% mostly blame Cameron for the stalemate over the debates, whilst 13% mostly blame the broadcasters, and below, David Cameron doesn’t come off as sincere in regards to the debates.
Comments
-
So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
0 -
Broken, sleazy, COWARDLY Tories on the slide?0
-
Blackburn to beat Liverpool today, can get around 12/10
-
BTW, our BRITISH tennis ace Andy Murray 2 sets up against USA's Isner in the Davis Cup
0 -
test0
-
@BBCNormanS: MPs to debate broadcasters' proposals on #tvdebates in Commons this wed on @duponline motion0
-
So all that means is that a few TV companies will be less than happy and the rest of the population will carry on about their business..and watch something else.. Bake Off or a reality show.0
-
I'm becoming ever more convinced that if Labour can galvanize the opposition to bring about tactical voting the Tories could become toast. The Scots did it during the referendum and Labour could do it now. There's plenty to dislike. The debate issue is symptomatic but not decisive. It needs working on but Ed's started well0
-
Actually I think those that understand it will regard it as extremely cynical, especially given Dave's stance when he was LOTO.0
-
I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.0
-
Most amused to see those fresh faced young Tories
behind the smart casual attired Dave waving their placards
with the phrase "Strong Leadership" on them
At least it seems irony isnt dead in the Conservative Party0 -
Salience is the point. Who cares?
And "wants/has most to gain from a debate" is an excellent proxy for "is in a desperate position". The changes on January 2014 are very encouraging for the tories.0 -
I don't give a toss either way, the interest bubble on here is so weird.richardDodd said:
So all that means is that a few TV companies will be less than happy and the rest of the population will carry on about their business..and watch something else.. Bake Off or a reality show.
0 -
I'm not 100% sure how you can vote tactically in a referendum with a single either/or question, but maybe you can enlighten us.Roger said:I'm becoming ever more convinced that if Labour can galvanize the opposition to bring about tactical voting the Tories could become toast. The Scots did it during the referendum and Labour could do it now. There's plenty to dislike. The debate issue is symptomatic but not decisive. It needs working on but Ed's started well
0 -
Even now, Crosby's allies are dismissive of the broadcasters threat to 'empty chair' Cameron.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2984681/JAMES-FORSYTH-Dave-s-trick-winning-TV-debates-Don-t-turn-up.html
They point out that a six-way debate without Cameron would make his case that the choice at the Election is between him and 'chaos', while a head-to-head Prime Minister's debate without Cameron would be like Hamlet without the Prince.
They are unbothered by the prospect of Miliband being offered the whole primetime slot if Cameron doesn't show. One Tory source quips: 'Given his personal poll ratings, who cares if he gets an hour and a bit?'0 -
Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.Sean_F said:
I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
0 -
BRITISH Tennis ace Andy Murray defeats Isner in straight sets to give GB a Davis Cup win against the USA with two matches spare! 0
-
A lot of people who understand it will be cynics and probably won't blame Cammo for something they would do, in similar circumstances.Pulpstar said:Actually I think those that understand it will regard it as extremely cynical, especially given Dave's stance when he was LOTO.
0 -
Pulpstar said:
So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.0 -
Indeed. It's a walkover with just EdM as PM Candidate.
The Tories can't lose. Very astute by CCHQ.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2984681/JAMES-FORSYTH-Dave-s-trick-winning-TV-debates-Don-t-turn-up.htmlScott_P said:Even now, Crosby's allies are dismissive of the broadcasters threat to 'empty chair' Cameron.
They point out that a six-way debate without Cameron would make his case that the choice at the Election is between him and 'chaos', while a head-to-head Prime Minister's debate without Cameron would be like Hamlet without the Prince.
They are unbothered by the prospect of Miliband being offered the whole primetime slot if Cameron doesn't show. One Tory source quips: 'Given his personal poll ratings, who cares if he gets an hour and a bit?'
0 -
Can ed convince an empty chair, in only 90 minutes, that a freeze is the same as a cap?
Conundrum for ed's handlers: in an ed v chair debate do you have the onscreen worm thingy? What if the chair wins?0 -
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
0 -
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2984681/JAMES-FORSYTH-Dave-s-trick-winning-TV-debates-Don-t-turn-up.htmlScott_P said:Even now, Crosby's allies are dismissive of the broadcasters threat to 'empty chair' Cameron.
They point out that a six-way debate without Cameron would make his case that the choice at the Election is between him and 'chaos', while a head-to-head Prime Minister's debate without Cameron would be like Hamlet without the Prince.
They are unbothered by the prospect of Miliband being offered the whole primetime slot if Cameron doesn't show. One Tory source quips: 'Given his personal poll ratings, who cares if he gets an hour and a bit?'
That's the trump card.
The morning with the inevitable fallout from the previous nights "Telebate" it's simply pointed out that's what the government would look like in reality after May 8th.
You wouldn't need party political broadcasts after that ... Sorted!
0 -
Agreed. Especially as the main feature of Scottish politics appears to be, at least partly, the collapse of anti-Tory tactical voting to the benefit of SLAB, to the latter's great detriment.JohnLilburne said:
I'm not 100% sure how you can vote tactically in a referendum with a single either/or question, but maybe you can enlighten us.Roger said:I'm becoming ever more convinced that if Labour can galvanize the opposition to bring about tactical voting the Tories could become toast. The Scots did it during the referendum and Labour could do it now. There's plenty to dislike. The debate issue is symptomatic but not decisive. It needs working on but Ed's started well
0 -
0
-
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
0 -
yawn...zzzzzzzzzzzzzcoolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will0 -
@Ishmael_X
Are you children still playing games?
"Despite the wholesale cost of gas and electricity falling 20% and 9% respectively in the last year, the retail cost of energy has not fallen.
Labour’s motion promised to freeze energy prices until 2017, allowing them to fall but not rise, as well as giving the market regulator the power to force energy companies to lower their prices if the wholesale cost is dropping.
Iain McKenzie commented afterwards:
“Once again the Tories have shown they are living on another planet."
Stop reading your comics and have a browse through Hansard, it might help you grow up.
0 -
I must admit, I don't understand the accusation of "chicken".Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
If you are acting rationally, then to avoid a fight that you will likely lose is a sensible thing to do.
"Chicken" is a playground taunt that tries to entice someone to be have non-rationally - it's actually a good thing to ignore the accusation0 -
wishful thinkingRoger said:I'm becoming ever more convinced that if Labour can galvanize the opposition to bring about tactical voting the Tories could become toast. The Scots did it during the referendum and Labour could do it now. There's plenty to dislike. The debate issue is symptomatic but not decisive. It needs working on but Ed's started well
0 -
General public wasn't really interested last time.only 22 million watched!0
-
I suppose you could call what Farage and Sturgeon will do to Miliband in a debate "discussing the country's future direction", in the sense that Scipio Africanus "discussed the country's future direction" with Hannibal at Zama.coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will0 -
Audience for cameron interview on Marr.
About 50 including 25 known as Pb tories0 -
Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
So when Cameron has an opinion on how the debates should be run he is stated as bullying the TV companies. When same Tv companies "threaten" to empty chair him to force his participation the TV companies are not accused of bullying?
Mmmmmmm..... Hypocritical or what?
My view don't do them let the remainder Telebate" just to show how chaotic it would be.0 -
We're holding back ELBOW as long as possible to give TNS time to release their poll which surely was with fieldwork last week, but we can disclose that Lab have a 0.3% lead across all nine polls so far. This would be the lowest ever Lab lead in ELBOW since its inception in August, unless TNS come to the rescue!
Now, here's the other interesting bit:
just including the five YouGov polls this week, it's a dead heat! 33.7% each for Lab and Con!
By contrast, excluding YG and just including the four non-YG so far this week, Lab actually have a 0.7% lead!
0 -
22 million people didn't watch...there was a combined total of 22 million views across all debates, NOT THE SAME THING. Its like saying Man Utd's attendance last season was over 1 million, when for most matches I would think 70% at least are the same core group of people.SMukesh said:General public wasn't really interested last time.only 22 million watched!
It was actually about 7-10 million for each debate, not an insignificant amount for sure.0 -
So you agree Cameron will "most likely lose" to Miliband ina debateCharles said:
I must admit, I don't understand the accusation of "chicken".Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
If you are acting rationally, then to avoid a fight that you will likely lose is a sensible thing to do.
"Chicken" is a playground taunt that tries to entice someone to be have non-rationally - it's actually a good thing to ignore the accusation
Yet Tories have said for ages....yes we know Labours policies
are far more popular than ours but when.they compare Dave
to Ed will be where we score
So his policies are worse, he will most likely lose in a debate,
he trails by miles on "understands people like me" in polls and
on "in touch" polls and thanks to Cleggs one decent act of the
past five years over boundaries has a "mountain to climb"
electorally according to Mike
Not looking good for old Dave is it really?
0 -
No: I think there is limited upside for Cameron (because everyone expects him to win) while Miliband may outperform or at least deflect. So the risk/reward profile is not in Cameron's favour.coolagorna said:
So you agree Cameron will "most likely lose" to Miliband ina debateCharles said:
I must admit, I don't understand the accusation of "chicken".Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
If you are acting rationally, then to avoid a fight that you will likely lose is a sensible thing to do.
"Chicken" is a playground taunt that tries to entice someone to be have non-rationally - it's actually a good thing to ignore the accusation
Yet Tories have said for ages....yes we know Labours policies
are far more popular than ours but when.they compare Dave
to Ed will be where we score
So his policies are worse, he will most likely lose in a debate,
he trails by miles on "understands people like me" in polls and
on "in touch" polls and thanks to Cleggs one decent act of the
past five years over boundaries has a "mountain to climb"
electorally according to Mike
Not looking good for old Dave is it really?
0 -
The desperate rush by loyal pb tories to justify chicken Dave's actions show they know that it will not go down well with the voting public as a whole and just hope that the damage will be limited .0
-
given the amount of chicken calling I suspect it's not the Tories who are desperate.MarkSenior said:The desperate rush by loyal pb tories to justify chicken Dave's actions show they know that it will not go down well with the voting public as a whole and just hope that the damage will be limited .
0 -
Edit:- I just checked, roughly (as telly people talk in peak and totals), but one got 10 million, one got 4 million, and one got 8 million.FrancisUrquhart said:
22 million people didn't watch...there was a combined total of 22 million views across all debates, NOT THE SAME THING. Its like saying Man Utd's attendance last season was over 1 million, when for most matches I would think 70% at least are the same core group of people.SMukesh said:General public wasn't really interested last time.only 22 million watched!
It was actually about 7-10 million for each debate, not an insignificant amount for sure.0 -
Calling it as it is and how the voting public see it . Why can't you loyal pbtories just act as loyal Chelsea fans and go around chanting " Our leader is a coward and we are cowards too "Alanbrooke said:
given the amount of chicken calling I suspect it's not the Tories who are desperate.MarkSenior said:The desperate rush by loyal pb tories to justify chicken Dave's actions show they know that it will not go down well with the voting public as a whole and just hope that the damage will be limited .
0 -
OK, so ed will obviously win a majority in May. The end. So mortgage your grandmother and bet on that outcome.coolagorna said:
So you agree Cameron will "most likely lose" to Miliband ina debateCharles said:
I must admit, I don't understand the accusation of "chicken".Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
If you are acting rationally, then to avoid a fight that you will likely lose is a sensible thing to do.
"Chicken" is a playground taunt that tries to entice someone to be have non-rationally - it's actually a good thing to ignore the accusation
Yet Tories have said for ages....yes we know Labours policies
are far more popular than ours but when.they compare Dave
to Ed will be where we score
So his policies are worse, he will most likely lose in a debate,
he trails by miles on "understands people like me" in polls and
on "in touch" polls and thanks to Cleggs one decent act of the
past five years over boundaries has a "mountain to climb"
electorally according to Mike
Not looking good for old Dave is it really?
In the meantime don't gloss another poster's "likely" as "most likely". It's dishonest and bad manners.
And congratulations on your insight this morning that Lamb could never lead the LDs because he has a comic surname. Who is the shadow Chancellor?0 -
Cameron is correct not to turn up to the debates.
For the reasons given, as it might help Milliband.
The perception to the public is therefore reinforced as no one even many conservative supporters know what he really stands for, or believes in.
From Green issues, to the EU or the debates themselves, he is not an astute tactician, as could be seen from the last GE.
That is why they pay good money to Lynton Crosby to stop Cameron from himself.0 -
Quite so. Indeed, I'd go one step further and hazard that those who already think favorably of Cameron will see it as astute, those who dislike him will see it as cowardly, and those who have no opinion won't be arsed one way or the other.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.0 -
I suspect the public won't actually care that much.MarkSenior said:
Calling it as it is and how the voting public see it . Why can't you loyal pbtories just act as loyal Chelsea fans and go around chanting " Our leader is a coward and we are cowards too "Alanbrooke said:
given the amount of chicken calling I suspect it's not the Tories who are desperate.MarkSenior said:The desperate rush by loyal pb tories to justify chicken Dave's actions show they know that it will not go down well with the voting public as a whole and just hope that the damage will be limited .
0 -
The 22 million is a "reach" figure, i.e. 22 million separate individuals watched some portion of any of the debates (the standard minimum is three consecutive minutes).FrancisUrquhart said:
22 million people didn't watch...there was a combined total of 22 million views across all debates, NOT THE SAME THING. Its like saying Man Utd's attendance last season was over 1 million, when for most matches I would think 70% at least are the same core group of people.SMukesh said:General public wasn't really interested last time.only 22 million watched!
It was actually about 7-10 million for each debate, not an insignificant amount for sure.
0 -
KGM on CH4 on Friday challenged this figure too, and the Sky bod conceded that it wasn't really that many. And 3 consecutive mins is basically nothing, that is like leaving your telly on the wrong channel while you went to the toilet.NeilVW said:
The 22 million is a "reach figure", i.e. 22 million separate individuals watched some portion of any of the debates (the standard minimum is three consecutive minutes).FrancisUrquhart said:
22 million people didn't watch...there was a combined total of 22 million views across all debates, NOT THE SAME THING. Its like saying Man Utd's attendance last season was over 1 million, when for most matches I would think 70% at least are the same core group of people.SMukesh said:General public wasn't really interested last time.only 22 million watched!
It was actually about 7-10 million for each debate, not an insignificant amount for sure.
I am not saying that the numbers weren't decent. 10 million is very good peak number. Just this banded about 22 million figure is nonsense, flicking channels around, watching for 5 mins and then going god these people total idiots and changing channel doesn't count as engaging in the debates.0 -
If I was the Conservatives I would be pushing for Cameron to have a nice cosy chat with Andrew Marr on 30th April, that is about the level he could cope with.
I would avoid Andrew Neil like the plaque.0 -
Ive always seen the debates thing as tactics by Cameron (which he has been very cunning in so far). But, if he doesnt actually take part in them at the end of the day i'll be disappointed.0
-
Coolangora " Pointing at fish". Bingo.. How is the Cheshire Estate and the offie doing0
-
Cameron was crap with Marr during the last GE, and Marr played dirty, remember how he flashed up the Bullingdon picture (after he got attacked, literally attacked by a Labour bod, for asking Gordo about his meds*).Yorkcity said:If I was the Conservatives I would be pushing for Cameron to have a nice cosy chat with Andrew Marr on 30th April, that is about the level he could cope with.
I would avoid Andrew Neil like the plaque.0 -
Nothing to do with cowardice. Cameron would beat Miliband in a debate, with a probability of say 80%. Result: none - Miliband's uselessness against Cameron is already priced in. If Cameron stays out of it Miliband gets publicly slaughtered by Farage and Sturgeon, and then outwitted and humiliated by an empty chair. Result: 5% off labour in the polls and a completion of their destruction in Scotland. I don't see how cowardice comes in to it. I do not intend to spend the rest of the afternoon hitting myself in the face with a hammer. Does that make me a spineless poltroon?MarkSenior said:The desperate rush by loyal pb tories to justify chicken Dave's actions show they know that it will not go down well with the voting public as a whole and just hope that the damage will be limited .
0 -
Just had a quick read of some of your offeringsIshmael_X said:Can ed convince an empty chair, in only 90 minutes, that a freeze is the same as a cap?
Conundrum for ed's handlers: in an ed v chair debate do you have the onscreen worm thingy? What if the chair wins?
Like this typical one above. truly the work of an intellectual giant
Im sorry no one replies to your posts Mr X but I guess even PB Tories have
some standards
0 -
Smarmeron said:
@Ishmael_X
Are you children still playing games?
"Despite the wholesale cost of gas and electricity falling 20% and 9% respectively in the last year, the retail cost of energy has not fallen.
Labour’s motion promised to freeze energy prices until 2017, allowing them to fall but not rise, as well as giving the market regulator the power to force energy companies to lower their prices if the wholesale cost is dropping.
Iain McKenzie commented afterwards:
“Once again the Tories have shown they are living on another planet."
Stop reading your comics and have a browse through Hansard, it might help you grow up.
Its so funny, i cant stop myself laughing. You do realise that we all have the internet as well? And with the magic of google we can trace the quote like you did?
That quote above is from January 2015, after oil prices collapsed. Miliband's pledge was september 2013.
It's like fish in a barrel. Keep trying though.0 -
Impressively Cameron has come across as both untrustworthy and a coward. He should have just said no.Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
Of course I can understand his fear of debating Farage.0 -
With seven and perhaps eight leaders being interviewed in 90 minutes there is not sufficient time to forensically test the party leaders or policies.
So the debates are a waste of time.
Better to have the leaders interviewed one at a time by Andrew Neil et al on each TV channel.
0 -
But you just did reply to one, didn't you? So not your best point of the day - that would be your "Lamb" insight. #dimleftiecoolagorna said:
Just had a quick read of some of your offeringsIshmael_X said:Can ed convince an empty chair, in only 90 minutes, that a freeze is the same as a cap?
Conundrum for ed's handlers: in an ed v chair debate do you have the onscreen worm thingy? What if the chair wins?
Like this typical one above. truly the work of an intellectual giant
Im sorry no one replies to your posts Mr X but I guess even PB Tories have
some standards0 -
But would it change anybody's voting intention?0
-
Lol..ok ill give you that oneIshmael_X said:
But you just did reply to one, didn't you? So not your best point of the day - that would be your "Lamb" insight. #dimleftiecoolagorna said:
Just had a quick read of some of your offeringsIshmael_X said:Can ed convince an empty chair, in only 90 minutes, that a freeze is the same as a cap?
Conundrum for ed's handlers: in an ed v chair debate do you have the onscreen worm thingy? What if the chair wins?
Like this typical one above. truly the work of an intellectual giant
Im sorry no one replies to your posts Mr X but I guess even PB Tories have
some standards
Plead guilty to the dim leftie hashtag too but there are millions
of us out here..As John Winston Lennon said "Im not the only one"
0 -
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
Have we seen or heard anything from Cameron since Friday? Or is he still hiding behind the Downing St. chaise longue?0
-
Why the debates are pointless
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2015/03/a-masterclass-in-dodging-questions-from-philip-hammond-and-caroline-flint/
The y will not elicit a single straight answer from any of them.
0 -
GIN1138 He is probably enjoying a great weekend at Chequers..I would..0
-
As someone said in an earlier post, if Miliband manages to get through the debate without soiling himself, he will be defying expectations.
Of course this is unfair as Miliband is not a bad debater. He might not get the better of Cameron at PMQs very often, but he aint third rate.
George Bush's single biggest attribute was that people underestimated him.0 -
Probably. He might not have many more weekends there...richardDodd said:GIN1138 He is probably enjoying a great weekend at Chequers..I would..
0 -
Andrew Neil is a conservative, but he is the best interviewer by a mile at holding politicians to account.Ishmael_X said:
By flossing?Yorkcity said:
I would avoid Andrew Neil like the plaque.
I imagine that is why Cameron would avoid the opportunity to have an hour on his own with him on 30th April.
Apologies for the earlier typo of plague0 -
6.1k shares for the Cyril Smith story in the Mail on Sunday....0
-
I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
Cameron doesn't have a good record to defend, and I'm sure he knows it. His trump card is that a Labour/SNP coalition would be worse.FalseFlag said:
Impressively Cameron has come across as both untrustworthy and a coward. He should have just said no.Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
Of course I can understand his fear of debating Farage.
0 -
Whoever wins, we lose.TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
Agreed I had put you in the blue column though, are you now going green ?TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
I always think it is really disappointing we don't have at least one QT a year with the leaders, and one with the chancellors / shadows, etc...I think say 5 a year where it is a head to head of the big beasts of each party would be a good exercise.Artist said:I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
@notme
Well sunshine, if you have google, you can see the exact wording of the motion, then giggle yourself to death.
The motion was moved, debated, then defeated, and as such your definitive source would be "Hansard", which as you might have noticed was where I was pointing you to.0 -
We are skill rabbiting on about 'debates'? Clearly the economy must be on the up.
Still trying to defend Miliband for not having the sense to realise what an energy market is all about?
The Return of the Trolls.
It looks like this site is becoming unreadable again.0 -
There's a general optimism which I thought we might never ever get back. As if what happened in 2008 was the mark of our terminal decline. The city of london, gone for ever, unemployment never to get materially better. Our standard of living to just drop and drop and drop, with the USA dropping out of leading the free world.Sean_F said:
Cameron doesn't have a good record to defend, and I'm sure he knows it. His trump card is that a Labour/SNP coalition would be worse.FalseFlag said:
Impressively Cameron has come across as both untrustworthy and a coward. He should have just said no.Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Most of the public won't care. Those that do will not have a favourable impression of the PM over this. Like the boundary changes for Clegg the issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
Of course I can understand his fear of debating Farage.
This is not the case. We have a lot of problems, but a lot to look forward to. I think it is absolutely extraordinary how changes to welfare have fundamentally altered what those who have been long term recipients expect for it.
I think the next government is going to have a hell of a tough time managing the spending restraints necessary to get into balance, but the nation is a better off nation then it was in 2010. There might be points on a graph where we are not where we used to be, but the trajectory has been turned around.
0 -
We the public have lost big time, due to the banking industry these past 8 years, and for at least another 5.Sean_F said:
Whoever wins, we lose.TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
Which way does it seem to be going in Loughbrough? Labour still invisible?TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.0 -
Perhaps you could introduce legislation to make it a legal requirement.FrancisUrquhart said:
I always think it is really disappointing we don't have at least one QT a year with the leaders, and one with the chancellors / shadows, etc...I think say 5 a year where it is a head to head of the big beasts of each party would be a good exercise.Artist said:I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
I don't have a clue. Probably just scrawl obscenities on my ballot paper in green crayon!Yorkcity said:
Agreed I had put you in the blue column though, are you now going green ?TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
And if you refuse...off to the Big Brother with you...saddened said:
Perhaps you could introduce legislation to make it a legal requirement.FrancisUrquhart said:
I always think it is really disappointing we don't have at least one QT a year with the leaders, and one with the chancellors / shadows, etc...I think say 5 a year where it is a head to head of the big beasts of each party would be a good exercise.Artist said:I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
Incidentally I have just done quite a big YouGov on the debates and about the leadership qualities of Dave and Ed with a focus on how good in a crisis.0
-
I have it on good authority that he's at Eton today, for some reason.GIN1138 said:
Probably. He might not have many more weekends there...richardDodd said:GIN1138 He is probably enjoying a great weekend at Chequers..I would..
0 -
The banking industry played a part, they precipitated the bust, but they also precipitated the boom. Anyone who on here saw their property value increase played just as much a part in the boom and the bust.Yorkcity said:
We the public have lost big time, due to the banking industry these past 8 years, and for at least another 5.Sean_F said:
Whoever wins, we lose.TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.0 -
Caught a glimpse of him on sky news wearing a jumper in london ,at a meet the faithful event.GIN1138 said:Have we seen or heard anything from Cameron since Friday? Or is he still hiding behind the Downing St. chaise longue?
Plenty of hand picked people, very diverse looking, holding blue placards.0 -
Yeah, nothing from Labour, but the whole family got personally addressed guff from both Cameron and Morgan on Friday. Nowt from any other party, either.foxinsoxuk said:
Which way does it seem to be going in Loughbrough? Labour still invisible?TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
I agree. I suppose the problem is how do you prevent them cancelling at short notice when, as is inevitable, one is up and another is downFrancisUrquhart said:
I always think it is really disappointing we don't have at least one QT a year with the leaders, and one with the chancellors / shadows, etc...I think say 5 a year where it is a head to head of the big beasts of each party would be a good exercise.Artist said:I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
How catty...FrancisUrquhart said:
And if you refuse...off to the Big Brother with you...saddened said:
Perhaps you could introduce legislation to make it a legal requirement.FrancisUrquhart said:
I always think it is really disappointing we don't have at least one QT a year with the leaders, and one with the chancellors / shadows, etc...I think say 5 a year where it is a head to head of the big beasts of each party would be a good exercise.Artist said:I don't what the dynamics of a six person debate will be, but it's only one extra panelist than on Question Time and you can certainly create a good (or bad) impression on that.
The main risk for Cameron in avoiding the first two debates is that Farage would have a free run as the only right wing candidate and probably the only leader involved that will appeal to Conservative type supporters.0 -
Here is the motion November 2013:Smarmeron said:@notme
Well sunshine, if you have google, you can see the exact wording of the motion, then giggle yourself to death.
The motion was moved, debated, then defeated, and as such your definitive source would be "Hansard", which as you might have noticed was where I was pointing you to.
That this House
calls on the Government to freeze electricity and gas prices for 20 months whilst legislation is introduced to ring-fence the generation businesses of the vertically integrated energy companies from their supply businesses, to require all electricity generators and suppliers to trade their power via an open exchange, to establish a tough new regulator with the power to force energy suppliers to pass on price cuts when wholesale costs fall, and to put all over-75-year-olds on the cheapest tariff.
At the heart of this debate is a question about whether we believe that people have been overcharged and let down by a regulator that has failed to do its job, and that to win back the trust of the British people we need to mend this broken market. Today we put before the House a motion that proposes two measures to provide real help now through a temporary 20-month price freeze and by putting all those over the age of 75 on the cheapest tariff, as well as deep structural reforms to the way that this market works for the future. These are the measures that we will take if we win the next election, but these are measures that this Government could take now, for which they would have our full support.
0 -
I voted yellow last time but I feel the same as you this time.TwistedFireStopper said:
I don't have a clue. Probably just scrawl obscenities on my ballot paper in green crayon!Yorkcity said:
Agreed I had put you in the blue column though, are you now going green ?TwistedFireStopper said:
Have a word with yourself. Hopefully, the Tories, and your lot of incompetents will both "get it".coolagorna said:
So you dont think that during the closest election.in yearsPlato said:Quite, and *something that didn't happen* isn't much of anything.
Sean_F said:I don't think there's any way that Cameron looks good over this, but that may well be better than giving Milliband or Farage the chance to shine in debate. It doesn't seem to be an issue that shifts votes.
the general public wont be thinking
Why is our PM going around pointing at fish whilst Miliband
Farage and all the others are discussing the countrys future direction??
You PB Tories really dont get it do you? But you will..mark
my words you will
The general public don't want either of you in any great quantity. Hopefully, you'll both get a third of the vote each, and destroy yourselves in the recriminations after. I feckin despise the lot of them, and judging by the polls, so do most of the voters.
0 -
Yes, he blocked me on twitter when I pointed out that he said it....SeanT said:
Agreed. I feared we were terminally f*cked in 2008. It just turned out we were monumentally screwed, but it wasn't the end of British prosperity forever.notme said:
There's a general optimism which I thought we might never ever get back. As if what happened in 2008 was the mark of our terminal decline. The city of london, gone for ever, unemployment never to get materially better. Our standard of living to just drop and drop and drop, with the USA dropping out of leading the free world.Sean_F said:
Cameron doesn't have a good record to defend, and I'm sure he knows it. His trump card is that a Labour/SNP coalition would be worse.FalseFlag said:
Impressively Cameron has come across as both untrustworthy and a coward. He should have just said no.Sean_F said:
In this case, there's not much distinction between being chicken and being astute/sneaky. Cameron is both afraid of the debates, and acting rationally in avoiding them.Peter_the_Punter said:Pulpstar said:So if the TV debates fail to happen, the public will at least be left with the impression of the Prime Minister as an astute tactician.
No.
Yes, it's a topic that's unlikely to excite anybody outside the Village and anoraks like us.Pulpstar said:he issue may be of low enough saliency to work to Dave's advantage.
To the extent the more general public does form an opinion I would imagine it would split more or less equally between those who think Dave is chcken (wrong) and those who think he has been either astute or sneaky (both arguably correct).
On the whole, it won't sway many votes, so the damage is probably regarded as acceptable by CCHQ. Proper debates might have been catastrophic.
Of course I can understand his fear of debating Farage.
This is not the case. We have a lot of problems, but a lot to look forward to. I think it is absolutely extraordinary how changes to welfare have fundamentally altered what those who have been long term recipients expect for it.
I think the next government is going to have a hell of a tough time managing the spending restraints necessary to get into balance, but the nation is a better off nation then it was in 2010. There might be points on a graph where we are not where we used to be, but the trajectory has been turned around.
Remember David Blanchflower and his "five million unemployed" etc etc0 -
Things have generally worked out better than I thought they would in 2010, which is why I'm willing to give Con (or the coalition) another go.SeanT said:
Agreed. I feared we were terminally f*cked in 2008. It just turned out we were monumentally screwed, but it wasn't the end of British prosperity forever.
Remember David Blanchflower and his "five million unemployed" etc etc
For our business 2011-2013 was grim, but things are definitely going well now.0
