And if the debates didn't happen, how would people choose? Like it or not, most people will not undertake a detailed review of the party policy! I think the TV debates leads to a more informed electorate.
TV Election debates - how are they doing?
- Thread starter rossyl
- Start date
And if the debates didn't happen, how would people choose? Like it or not, most people will not undertake a detailed review of the party policy! I think the TV debates leads to a more informed electorate.
This sounds entirely like an 'ignorance is bliss' stance.
Whilst I do agree that public spending is largely influenced by confidence, I simply don't accept that hiding the truth is the best way to achieve this.
If I'm to trust someone to run the country, I need to be given more information, not less.
For me the only person with any 'track record' is obviously Gordon Brown. But even then there are some very big questions that need to be answered, especially when it comes to the economy.
Last edited:
Can't see that happening tbh, even after last night, it's so unlikely that Lib Dems will come out on top that the other two parties are still going to try to get on side with them predicting a hung parliament.
Britain is a small, powerless and fairly insignificant country on the world stage. I can't believe anyone gives the UK any concessions because it has an active nuclear arsenal, it's not as though they can used. The UK already spends too much money propping up useless defence companies, take a look at the Eurofighter, A400M and new carriers that are being built, they are not cost effective. Spending billions on a nuclear deterrent is a folly.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 12,631
I don't think anyone here's really going to use the debates to seriously decide their vote.
I'm still moving between all 3 parties, but conserv and libs are in the lead by a bit, mostly because of a few poliicies Lab. have.
I'm sure though that in reality many are going to watch the debates, sure they'll base something off of that, but I do think many will at least have a look at each party more than anything else.
I quite enjoyed the debate personally. Of course each of them are going to use lines to grab your votes, each of them is guilty of that.
I wasn't able to watch the program last night, but I did catch some of it on the radio.
I went into it with a totally open mind and actually found the whole thing quite interesting.
What I most liked, was that this was obviously a chance to see a bit more depth to each of the leaders. We can all look up the various party policies and manifestos, but for me this was a chance to see who was really passionate about various issues, and who you felt you could be trusted to do what they have said they will.
For me, the main thing that came across was that Cameron (in particular) constantly refused to answer specific points, and instead answered with a very general comment about their policy on a more general subject. And that is one thing that really winds me up with politicians - someone asks a specific question on an important issue and the answer they get back is just some generic waffle summarising one of the party's policies that relates to the general topic.
Unfortunately I wasn't able to listen to enough to gather much more information than this.
Don't be a retard, we're the 6th largest economy in the world with a permanent seat on the UN security council.
Agree completely with this having watched it on tv, Cameron was the worst then Brown and still at times Clegg for answering questions with their scripted answers on that subject, even if it didn't actually answer the question they were asked in the slightest.
The kid asking about schools was one of the best examples, he said "why are we tested so much, it just seems that we're being taught to pass tests and not to actually learn" and both Brown and Cameron said "yes, well we need lots of tests to check the standards are high" and then carried on with waffle about their policies
the set was awful, lighting was poor, inconsistent sound, all the hallmarks of a live tv broadcast!
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 13,598
the set was awful, lighting was poor, inconsistent sound, all the hallmarks of a live tv broadcast!
Nothing new was said, a bit like a school debating forum without - apart from Clegg - any passion.
Cameron gave a very wooden performance, he looked as if he was trying to remember how he was told to stand to look good etc, etc
Brown at times looked uncomfortable, shifty - a bit like Nixon did.
So far, Clegg and with the Lib Dems and also winning the Chancellor's debate.
I will still not vote for any of them, time to sweep away the established lot and put in fresh blood to remind the politicians that we, the people are the masters and not the serfs.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
How are Cameron and Clegg not fresh blood? (not trolling, asking for your opinion).
Well i have to say, the Conservative Party had its socks blown out of the water. Cameron failed to answer 5 questions, 2 of which were the Policing and even AS couldn't get an answer out of him hence him asking him to "keep his answer to one sentence".
I found that of the 3 Gordon Brown was the man who had all the answers, and as i saw earlier in the thread someone said that he mentioned "we need to do more", which is true and its something every leader would have had in their underlying message.
The only point i saw Clegg really struggling or being ignorant was over the issue of the promised Tax Cuts, the how, the where and the when.
Quite frankly this has exposed David Cameron as a completely useless potential PM and both me and (even a Tory friend) were gobsmacked by the instant reaction opinion poll how he came out second. He kept going red, looked uneasy, didn't answer questions, kept referring to the NI increase etc etc, overrall very poor debating from a man i think will be running the country... i'm worried.
I felt regarding the Economy, Gordon Brown should have give himself credit for masterminding the global recovery, afterall he was the person on the phone until the early hours to get the G20 to meet and raised $1tr for the IMF.
I also agree with GB that cuts if they happened now would result in thousands of job losses across the coutry.
As i'm Labour through and through i have to say i was most impressed with GB, he was charismatic, he was frank, open and genuinely wanted people to see a plan, something that i didn't hear much of from the Conservatives and i'll be honest which i did hear from the Lib Dems but generally if they can't explain fully the £17bn of tax breaks and where the plug is coming from, i can't help.
I liked also GB's remarks about Lord Ashcroft made me chuckle...
I found that of the 3 Gordon Brown was the man who had all the answers, and as i saw earlier in the thread someone said that he mentioned "we need to do more", which is true and its something every leader would have had in their underlying message.
The only point i saw Clegg really struggling or being ignorant was over the issue of the promised Tax Cuts, the how, the where and the when.
Quite frankly this has exposed David Cameron as a completely useless potential PM and both me and (even a Tory friend) were gobsmacked by the instant reaction opinion poll how he came out second. He kept going red, looked uneasy, didn't answer questions, kept referring to the NI increase etc etc, overrall very poor debating from a man i think will be running the country... i'm worried.
I felt regarding the Economy, Gordon Brown should have give himself credit for masterminding the global recovery, afterall he was the person on the phone until the early hours to get the G20 to meet and raised $1tr for the IMF.
I also agree with GB that cuts if they happened now would result in thousands of job losses across the coutry.
As i'm Labour through and through i have to say i was most impressed with GB, he was charismatic, he was frank, open and genuinely wanted people to see a plan, something that i didn't hear much of from the Conservatives and i'll be honest which i did hear from the Lib Dems but generally if they can't explain fully the £17bn of tax breaks and where the plug is coming from, i can't help.
I liked also GB's remarks about Lord Ashcroft made me chuckle...
I have to disagree with this. Gordon Brown is probably the least charismatic of the lot and I believe will be the downfall of the Labour party at this election. If you look at the last 13 years of labour government - war, recession, spending and borrowing like crazy, in my opinion they needed someone new at the helm to indicate a change from the last 13 years. David Miliband would have been a much better fit to take Labour into the election. Gordon looked a bit like the odd one out last night.
His tribute to the armed forces was also cringeworthy, you could see it was scripted, and I get the vibe from him that he isn't behind our armed forces at all. Just an observation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 16,379
- Location
- 38.744281°N 104.846806°W
No inherent bias there at all is there? Shame.
Deleted member 651465
Deleted member 651465
I'd consider myself pretty impartial, but Nick Clegg certainly came across well.
Don't be a retard yourself, none of those things imply the clout to get anything done on the world stage, the UK is beholden to the financial services that drive its economy not the other way round, and look to the "special relationship" with the US to see how other countries consider the UK. The UN security council seat is there because of what the UK used to be, it's not really deserving of it now.
Nick Clegg could really go for it because he didn't have the same pressure on him that the other two did; he didn't really have anything to lose. Being on the same platform as Labour and the Conservatives has really done the Lib Dems a massive favour here. We'll have to see if the results of the polls from debate translate into votes though.
Nick Clegg was always going to come out on top because he had the least pressure and the other two candidates were mainly concerned with each other. He did well but I don't know why everyone seemed surprised by it.
Didn't believe gb at all on reforming parliament - he's promised exactly the same in the last two elections and then didn't do anything at all! He also is still stuck in his mantra of "they'll cut and we'll put more money in" when he knows they'll have to cut too. Neither the tories or labour have spelled out completely where savings will come from - labour (and possibly the tories) would definitely raise VAT if they won but surprisingly they won't mention that before the election.
Overall the tv debates are good though because it seems most people in this country don't know anything about the manifestos but after watching the debates they will have at least some idea of the proposed policies. Of course many people will ignore the debates too but they would probably never vote anyway.
Didn't believe gb at all on reforming parliament - he's promised exactly the same in the last two elections and then didn't do anything at all! He also is still stuck in his mantra of "they'll cut and we'll put more money in" when he knows they'll have to cut too. Neither the tories or labour have spelled out completely where savings will come from - labour (and possibly the tories) would definitely raise VAT if they won but surprisingly they won't mention that before the election.
Overall the tv debates are good though because it seems most people in this country don't know anything about the manifestos but after watching the debates they will have at least some idea of the proposed policies. Of course many people will ignore the debates too but they would probably never vote anyway.
I disagree that the LibDems had nothing to lose, for a fair number of people it was probably their first introduction to the LibDems, if he'd come across as weak, or said anything that sounded particularly stupid, or been frozen out by the other two it would have solidified opinion that they are an also-ran party not worthy of serious consideration. I'll agree that they had the most to gain out of these debates, but they definitely could have lost out.