General Election 2024?

[TQR 14,364]

For god sake. Tomorrow's ITV debate has the same lineup as the BBC one last week, just different standing positions.

 

L-R:

Rayner

Cooper

Mordaunt

Denyer

Führage

Flynn

ap Iorwerth

 

Moderated by the dreadful Julie Etchingham.

[prussianblue 1,005]

6 minutes ago, TQR said:

For god sake. Tomorrow's ITV debate has the same lineup as the BBC one last week, just different standing positions.

 

L-R:

Rayner

Cooper

Mordaunt

Denyer

Führage

Flynn

ap Iorwerth

 

Moderated by the dreadful Julie Etchingham.

 

I'm more tuned into politics than most and I have no idea why anyone would watch these tedious slanging matches.

[The Old Crem 3,576]

16 minutes ago, Bibliogryphon said:

This really is his "Running through Fields of Wheat" moment. 

 

The question was what didn't he have as a child. He should have prefixed the answer with an acknowledgement that it was very much something that would not really be considered a hardship for most people. 

 

He was not trying to suggest that he has experienced poverty but is just so shit at the whole being normal thing everything just emphasises his privaliged background

 But surely a lot more serious. “Running through Fields of Wheat" was just a lighthearted answer that didn’t damage her campaign or give off a damaging image, Plus May still got 42% of the vote and lost her majority because Labour consolidated the opposition and got 40%. Meanwhile Sunak could well get half of what May got on current polls and has terrible approval ratings. 

[TQR 14,364]

6 minutes ago, prussianblue said:

I'm more tuned into politics than most and I have no idea why anyone would watch these tedious slanging matches.

 

You learn more from the interviews but I do normally still watch the debates. Don't think I'll watch this one, though. Etchingham couldn't control Sunak, how the hell is she going to control seven people, five of whom are loud of mouth and three of whom are devoid of manners?

[RoverAndOut 4,731]

30 minutes ago, TQR said:

For god sake. Tomorrow's ITV debate has the same lineup as the BBC one last week, just different standing positions.

 

L-R:

Rayner

Cooper

Mordaunt

Denyer

Führage

Flynn

ap Iorwerth

 

Moderated by the dreadful Julie Etchingham.

 

We still haven't got to grips with debates in this country. The US usually have about 3 debates, some head-to-head, some "town hall" style and often divided amongst different policy areas. The same panel on this debate would have worked had the BBC and ITV discussed splitting the topics up, one doing domestic issues like housing, NHS and crime and the other covering more international affairs like defence, diplomacy and immigration. Instead, I imagine these questions will be very similar to the other night's. We're having too many debates and, paradoxically, not learning enough. Imagine the grown-up conversations we could have in the time we have across 4 broadcasters (BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky).

[TQR 14,364]

7 minutes ago, RoverAndOut said:

 

We still haven't got to grips with debates in this country. The US usually have about 3 debates, some head-to-head, some "town hall" style and often divided amongst different policy areas. The same panel on this debate would have worked had the BBC and ITV discussed splitting the topics up, one doing domestic issues like housing, NHS and crime and the other covering more international affairs like defence, diplomacy and immigration. Instead, I imagine these questions will be very similar to the other night's. We're having too many debates and, paradoxically, not learning enough. Imagine the grown-up conversations we could have in the time we have across 4 broadcasters (BBC, ITV, Channel 4 and Sky).

 

Absolutely. It'd be much more informative to have a small series of structured debates, each focusing on one broad area of policy. And crucially, what the debates are really crying out for is a mic cut for anyone who rambles on or talks over their opponents or moderator. Maybe also draft in Emily Maitlis to host them with a team of fact checkers in her ear.

 

Failing that, one big long episode of the Weakest Link.

[En Passant 3,733]

49 minutes ago, TQR said:

Failing that, one big long episode of the Weakest Link.

 

I'd vote for that.

 

My problem with the whole debate thing is it probably favours those with a knack for public speaking and quick responses whether those are due to masses of pre-prepared answers or merely being quick-witted on the fly.

It doesn't tell us who has the better policies we are seeking.

Those are mostly known beforehand anyway and are in my opinion better delievered in a format we can pore over and come to our own conclusions.

The idea of 5 years of governance by whoever has the better sound bite on any given day is scary.

 

Shouting matches don't interest me any more than vox-pops do, so I don't watch them.

[maryportfuncity 10,616]

5 hours ago, The Old Crem said:

Tories publicly admiting things are dire. 

 

 

Seriously, for that to be happening their internal polling is as bad as we think and there's nothing coming from that suggesting a route to a respectable performance on 4 July

 

The point he's conspicuously swerving in that message is that such a performance is potentially existentially threatening - driving away donors, driving the party into a meltdown over its own identity and leaving them so ineffective they're unrecognisable. Not that long ago I read a book published in 2006 called Toxic Sludge is Good for You. It's a lengthy discussion of the links between big business, politics and marketing in the US that sets out to explain why the poorest areas get stuffed by coalitions of the rich. The relevance being, this book discusses the Conservative and Unionist Party in the UK as the most successful election winning machine in western democracy and makes clear there are US Republicans actually envious of Britain's Conservatives. Apologies for mentioning this again, but it's a way of measuring who the Tories traditionally think themselves to be against what they are currently.

 

Interesting times, eh?

[En Passant 3,733]

3 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

doners

 

kebabs?*

 

5 minutes ago, maryportfuncity said:

Apologies for mentioning this again, but it's a way of measuring who the Tories traditionally think themselves to be against what they are currently.

 

Interesting times, eh?

 

No need to apologise that I can see. The revolving door isn't mentioned nearly enough by most politicians of any flavour.

 

*sorry yes, a spieling lame.

[maryportfuncity 10,616]

3 minutes ago, En Passant said:

 

kebabs?*

 

 

No need to apologise that I can see. The revolving door isn't mentioned nearly enough by most politicians of any flavour.

 

*sorry yes, a spieling lame.

 

 

FFS, that'll teach me to type and watch athletics highlights at the same time - fixing it above as we speak

[TQR 14,364]

YouTubist Niko Omilana has stood in the election as an independent candidate in Richmond and Northallerton.

And Bermondsey and Old Southwark.

And Birmingham Perry Barr.

And Coventry South.

And Dundee Central.

And Ealing Southall.

And Greenwich and Woolwich.

And Leeds East.

And Leeds South.

And North West Essex.

And Stockton West.

 

And yes, if this is indeed the same person, that is a criminal offence.

[The Old Crem 3,576]

10 minutes ago, TQR said:

YouTubist Niko Omilana has stood in the election as an independent candidate in Richmond and Northallerton.

And Bermondsey and Old Southwark.

And Birmingham Perry Barr.

And Coventry South.

And Dundee Central.

And Ealing Southall.

And Greenwich and Woolwich.

And Leeds East.

And Leeds South.

And North West Essex.

And Stockton West.

 

And yes, if this is indeed the same person, that is a criminal offence.

He stood for London Mayor in 2021 and even got a celebrity endorsement https://www.caughtoffside.com/2021/04/25/declan-rice-endorses-joke-london-mayor-candidate/

[YoungWillz 20,927]

This made me chuckle:

 

 

[En Passant 3,733]

 

 

 

[Sly Ronnie 870]

2 hours ago, maryportfuncity said:

 

 

FFS, that'll teach me to type and watch athletics highlights at the same time - fixing it above as we speak

 

Incidentally the athletics (and I presume you are talking about the European Championships) have been superb!

[maryportfuncity 10,616]

2 minutes ago, Sly Ronnie said:

 

Incidentally the athletics (and I presume you are talking about the European Championships) have been superb!

 

 

Aye, gutted for Neita last night, mind - got her whole body over the line faster than the Swiss girl, but rules is rules

[DCI Frank Burnside 3,870]

Just magnificent

 

 

 

[DCI Frank Burnside 3,870]

 

[RoverAndOut 4,731]

Just catching up with the Sunak interview (watched John Swinney on BBC1 first). I know it's going to be small fry compared to what Sunak has to say, but FFS ITV - Sunak was born in 1980. He didn't therefore spend a lot of time at St Mary's watching his beloved Southampton FC. They didn't move to St Mary's until 2002 when he was 22! If he went anywhere, he went to The Dell! 

[Sean 6,283]

4 hours ago, TQR said:

YouTubist Niko Omilana has stood in the election as an independent candidate in Richmond and Northallerton.

And Bermondsey and Old Southwark.

And Birmingham Perry Barr.

And Coventry South.

And Dundee Central.

And Ealing Southall.

And Greenwich and Woolwich.

And Leeds East.

And Leeds South.

And North West Essex.

And Stockton West.

 

And yes, if this is indeed the same person, that is a criminal offence.

I wonder if he got 10 other men to change their name by deed pool to all stand.Seems like something he would do.

[YoungWillz 20,927]

Well, Starmer vs Sunak was...as expected.

 

Starmer was so full of what he wants to do, sometimes it came as a word salad of ideas. Only real problem was the Corbyn question, which he declined to be clear on. Otherwise a fair reception, difficult to judge without a manifesto.

 

Sunak's clown show continued. Loads of laughs, loads of challenges to his record and with a junior doctor in the audience, blamed the doctors in part for high waiting lists. The repeated scripted lines, blah blah blah. A second hand cheese salesman.

 

IMO.

[RoverAndOut 4,731]

8 minutes ago, Sean said:

I wonder if he got 10 other men to change their name by deed pool to all stand.Seems like something he would do.

 

That's what the police are investigating. 

[RoverAndOut 4,731]

1 minute ago, YoungWillz said:

Well, Starmer vs Sunak was...as expected.

 

Starmer was so full of what he wants to do, sometimes it came as a word salad of ideas. Only real problem was the Corbyn question, which he declined to be clear on. Otherwise a fair reception, difficult to judge without a manifesto.

 

Sunak's clown show continued. Loads of laughs, loads of challenges to his record and with a junior doctor in the audience, blamed the doctors in part for high waiting lists. The repeated scripted lines, blah blah blah. A second hand cheese salesman.

 

IMO.

 

Didn't watch this one - did he mention the £2,000 again? (Is the sky blue?)

[Brad252 802]

2 hours ago, DCI Frank Burnside said:

Just magnificent

 

 

 

They should change that from days to hours.

[YoungWillz 20,927]

Just now, RoverAndOut said:

 

Didn't watch this one - did he mention the £2,000 again? (Is the sky blue?)

Actually he didn't. 

 

He was challenged on his own tax plans which would mean income tax would rise under the Tories, but said he didn't recognise that figure. Also said he had not seen the analysis which showed the overall tax burden rising - this is the fucking Prime Minister, who must know these things.

 

Instant reaction - 36% say Sunak won, 64% say Starmer won.