General Election 2015

[gary1979666]

Crikey - it comes round fast - leaders interviews this week and the debate next week. Yeah, Cameron's chickened out, but what do you reckon to the format that we've got?

The 'smaller' debate with SNP, PC, Greens, UKIP with the addition of Labour is an interesting decision - I guess it emphasises that Camerons not there, but the parties there are all going to be going for a slice of the labour vote. Not sure if that was a sensiible move for Ed or not.

Clegg's silence in the small debate seems to have been bought by a seat in the Question Time format show.

[eFestivals]

It was a strange move, as Sturgeon had been toning down the SNP holding Labour to ransom line. But you're right, it seems very much like they want a Tory win.

I suspect it'll be a theme - of Salmond refusing to take instructions from the party leader.

In fact, I wouldn't be hugely surprised if the SNP goes into meltdown around it. It's exceedingly clear that Salmond's purpose is to do his very best to make the UK ungovernable, while it's less clear that's what Sturgeon is aiming at.

[eFestivals]

...the Question Time format show.

except it's nothing like that format. It's a sanitised version, where Chicken Dave can't be called to account.

[gary1979666]

except it's nothing like that format. It's a sanitised version, where Chicken Dave can't be called to account.

It's got Dimbleby - how is it not QT?! Only going off how it's been described. Though have a feeling whatever format it was, you'd not be happy (though the Saw debates where they have their thumbs removed while answering policy questions, might have been your preferred favourite)

[eFestivals]

Though have a feeling whatever format it was, you'd not be happy

Not true.

I'd be happy with any UK-normal-debate format.

So that would be a *normal* (rather than sanitised) edition of QT with the party leaders, or the debates as happened last time (including adjustments for other 'small' parties, much as were initially proposed by the broadcasters).

Anything outside of those is a format only being done to favour one of more parties, for the advantage of those parties and not for any better democracy.

The democratic process is (supposedly) owned by 'the people' and not the politicians. When politicians manipulate things to their advantage it's about taking the piss and nothing else.

[gary1979666]

At the moment it seems like its the broadcasters and the politicians having their say in the format, not the people. It may be a bit facetious, but if the old format (2010) puts Cameron at a disadvantage (which I thought had been agreed (remember he's chicken, but he's right to be)) then surely this puts Milliband at an advantage.

It is a shame there's no head to head though - I think if (big if) he'd held his composure, Dave would have knocked Ed out of the park (with most voters - I think you guys aren't for turning here).

[kaosmark2]

The previous format favours the challengers over the incumbent. That's fine, because the incumbent also has their record to try and stand on, while the only record a challenger has is of a previous administration that they weren't leader of.

If Call Me Dave had held his composure yes, but I don't think he would have. Ed's been getting to Cameron lately.

[fred quimby]

When politicians manipulate things to their advantage it's about taking the piss and nothing else.

You mean like every week

[eFestivals]

At the moment it seems like its the broadcasters and the politicians having their say in the format, not the people.

and yet it's still the format the public wanted in 2010, and it's still the format they want now too.

Facts 1: tory self-help nil.

It may be a bit facetious, but if the old format (2010) puts Cameron at a disadvantage (which I thought had been agreed (remember he's chicken, but he's right to be)) then surely this puts Milliband at an advantage.

So what you're saying is that it's right that Chicken Dave always gives himself the advantage.

Facts 2: tory self-help nil.

It is a shame there's no head to head though - I think if (big if) he'd held his composure, Dave would have knocked Ed out of the park (with most voters - I think you guys aren't for turning here).

the fact of Chicken Dave's chicken act proves your thinking wrong.

Facts 3: tory self-help nil.

Edited March 23, 2015 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

You mean like every week

Yep, pretty much.

Elections should be the time that a candidate is not handed an advantage on a plate.

Chicken Dave has shown that the law of elections is what he says it is. That should have anyone with a working brain cell to shout back "fuck off and die Chicken Dave".

Sadly, tories are already counting the cash that they think Dave is delivering, so they're too distracted to do that shouting.

[gary1979666]

and yet it's still the format the public wanted in 2010, and it's still the format they want now too.

Facts 1: tory self-help nil.

Link? Don't remember any poll showing preference of debate formats? I thought it was decided by Gordy, Dave and Nick? Happy to be proved wrong.

Similarly - this time there may have been a poll asking if they wanted a debate like last time, and would imagine is scored well. However don't think there was anything where other options were given.

So unless proven otherwise, don't think they're quite facts.

So what you're saying is that it's right that Chicken Dave always gives himself the advantage.

Facts 2: tory self-help nil.

Not disputing that Davey boy is trying to play the advantage. But aren't the others trying to do the same? Score draw?

My opinion may be wrong, but it was just that an opinion. Your view is hardly fact either. Do you know what a fact is Neil? You seem to think I was stating one, then knock it back with some conjecture labelled as a fact.

[midnight]

And now for something completely different - here's someone who is truely ahead of his time:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-32022484

David Cameron says he won't serve a third term.

[gary1979666]

Its seems like a big jump doesn't it! I guess depends what question he was asked and he did start his answer with an 'if'. All the leaders are talking if, when discussing post election policies.

[eFestivals]

Link? Don't remember any poll showing preference of debate formats? I thought it was decided by Gordy, Dave and Nick? Happy to be proved wrong.

Care to give me a link to show me the public disquiet about the 2010 format that Dave wanted and got?

I can show you plenty of links to public disquiet about Dave's manipulation this time around.

Not disputing that Davey boy is trying to play the advantage. But aren't the others trying to do the same? Score draw?

Such manipulation would have proof of the attempted manipulations, of which there's none at all .... apart from by Dave.

If it's a score draw, you need to how me those own goals by the not-Dave's - but you can't.

My opinion may be wrong, but it was just that an opinion. Your view is hardly fact either. Do you know what a fact is Neil? You seem to think I was stating one, then knock it back with some conjecture labelled as a fact.

It's a fact that Chicken Dave is a chicken. You've agreed with that fact yourself.

But now you're pretending it's not a fact, and you accuse me of conjecture?

[LJS]

Care to give me a link to show me the public disquiet about the 2010 format that Dave wanted and got?

I can show you plenty of links to public disquiet about Dave's manipulation this time around.

Such manipulation would have proof of the attempted manipulations, of which there's none at all .... apart from by Dave.

If it's a score draw, you need to how me those own goals by the not-Dave's - but you can't.

It's a fact that Chicken Dave is a chicken. You've agreed with that fact yourself.

But now you're pretending it's not a fact, and you accuse me of conjecture?

As most of us have learnt long ago, Neil's definition of a fact is rather different to the dictionary's.

Neil's opinion = fact.

& yeah DC is the only one trying to play the debates for his own advantage. The rest are solely motivated by a love of democracy & a desire to please the electorate.

[gary1979666]

As most of us have learnt long ago, Neil's definition of a fact is rather different to the dictionary's.

Neil's opinion = fact.

& yeah DC is the only one trying to play the debates for his own advantage. The rest are solely motivated by a love of democracy & a desire to please the electorate.

My mistake - sorry Neil, you are, in fact, correct. How silly of me not to notice.

[eFestivals]

Neil's opinion = fact.

are you saying that Chicken Dave isn't a chicken?

Still, it goes with vote SMP get tory, and Salmond campaigning for the tories.

& yeah DC is the only one trying to play the debates for his own advantage. The rest are solely motivated by a love of democracy & a desire to please the electorate.

Care to show me any detail of them trying to manipulate the format to get themselves off the hook?

Only Dave has done that, but snippers supporting the tories? That's a long running theme.

[eFestivals]

My mistake - sorry Neil, you are, in fact, correct. How silly of me not to notice.

you said it wasn't a fact that Dave is a chicken when you've said so yourself.

If you now think it's only opinion that he's a chicken, call out your own bullshit before mine.

[eFestivals]

LJS trying to hide the SNP behind the tories. That's a first, but not the only one I suspect.

[eFestivals]

As most of us have learnt long ago, Neil's definition of a fact is rather different to the dictionary's.

says the man who can't deal with any facts at all.

Unless ... what does GERS say about the state of the Scottish economy compared to whole-UK?

And then comes only silence.

[kaosmark2]

Its seems like a big jump doesn't it! I guess depends what question he was asked and he did start his answer with an 'if'. All the leaders are talking if, when discussing post election policies.

He didn't start his answer with "if":

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/cameron-rules-out-third-term-prime-minister-three-successors

That said, he did just give a direct no to a direct question of whether he would stand again. I don't think his reply was ridiculous.

[gary1979666]

you said it wasn't a fact that Dave is a chicken when you've said so yourself.

If you now think it's only opinion that he's a chicken, call out your own bullshit before mine.

I had a bit of debate about the term chicken, but let that one go mid last week.

I said that I thought if he kept his temper, then Cameron could better Ed. You refuted my opinion by saying that in was fiction due him being chicken. I can see the logic in your train of thought there, but it's not fact. He might have been advised that his temper was a risk so told not to do it (yes chicken), but doesn't mean that my speculation was wrong.

So, not calling out yours as BS as such. But you railroaded my comment as fiction on the basis of nothing.

Also - you said that the people wanted the debate in 2010 in that format. I asked for proof of that - i.e. did they want the actual format over different format? I don't believe such a consultation took place - and more that the broadcasters/politicians decided it in 2010. Your response was to say you had plenty of proof saying that Cameron is wriggling over the 2015 debates - which I have never refuted.

Look - we're never going to agree on a lot of politics (though a lot of overlap on the Scottish thread), but your style of responses is far too abraisive / slapdash / rude / win-whatever-the-cost that anyone reading who is undecided is just going to side against you. It happens a lot with me in other threads, you start out pretty reasonable, then someone will qustion something and you go all out to shoot them down and several pages later it's just a slanging match and you're being pretty offensive (see feminism thread, scottish thread, any conversation with Barry or TGT).

[eFestivals]

Chicken Dave gets grilled by old Eton schoolchum, at the sort of level of questioning he wants for the laughable debates.

What's not to like*?

(* if you're a tory, short on brain cells, and against democracy).

[eFestivals]

I said that I thought if he kept his temper, then Cameron could better Ed. You refuted my opinion by saying that in was fiction due him being chicken.

no I didn't, but don't let that stop you from rinsing things to give Chicken Dave a free pass.

[gary1979666]

He didn't start his answer with "if":

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/mar/23/cameron-rules-out-third-term-prime-minister-three-successors

That said, he did just give a direct no to a direct question of whether he would stand again. I don't think his reply was ridiculous.

I think in the video he says if the tories were to win a 3rd term...., but don't think that has been quoted in the papers, but has been labelled presumptuous by Labour. But as I say I don't think that really matters too much. I think it could be the dangling of a Boris carrot.