David Cameron's non-appearance at the leadership debates...

[beorhthelm]

... the TV audience for HIGNFY is the same one that watches these debates.

but Miliband, Clegg and Farage are no Paul Merton and Ian Hislop. Farage will get a few good gags in, Clegg might land something, Miliband will try but fluff delivery. i'm saying if they pick on that issue for duration of the debate, i reckon the audience and the public will tire of it very quickly. it will become a tedious phrase on every statement " unlike Cameron, who didnt turn up tonight, we will...".

in any case, i predict Ofcom will change their view, probably after weakly defending a Green legal challenge.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I don't know what DCs strategy is, but these debates are a complete waste of time. Will they inform anyone of policies ? No. Will they change anybodys' mind about the party they support ? No.

It'll be a shouting match - and I couldn't care less who "wins" that, it achieves nothing.

Strangely, I think they should go ahead though !

 

[Surf's Up]

Cameron's playing a canny game as he knows the Greens will attck Labour from the left. There is a potential for cannibalisation of the left vote as tradional Labour voters realise that their party are just neo-cons wearing red and it is only the Greens that have a truly left of centre agenda.

Pretty sure OFCOM will cave on this and the Greens will be there.

I think this is the likely outcome.

 

[Surf's Up]

I get the impression the public think Cameron should be up on stage and if he's not there then he'll be fair game for a ribbing. What makes you think there won't be plenty of fun poked at Cameron - the TV audience for HIGNFY is the same one that watches these debates. Boris Johnson showed that you can go far if you can combine comedy and politics.

Farage is a man of the people, he'll recognise this and I think he will go on the attack because I think he'll actually be quite angry at what Cameron has done.

Farage is as much a man of the people as my arse.

 

[spring hall convert]

Will they change anybodys' mind about the party they support ? No.

They clearly did last time, if I remember correctly. Thanks to Nick Clegg's uncanny ability to simultaneously recall a plebs name and look them in the eye whilst talking to them.

He was regarded as the saviour of British politics, ended up polling 23% of the vote.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Farage is as much a man of the people as my arse.

But can your arse smoke a fag, hold a pint AND kick a Romanian all at the same time?

 

[Buzzer]

If he doesn't turn up the leader of the nation looks like a shitter
If he turns up and the Greens don't he looks like a bull-shitter
If he turns up and the Greens do he'll get battered by 4 different parties.


Some have suggested it was a shrewd move

Not quite. I said it was a shrewd move by Cameron, who clearly doesn't want these debates to link his appearance in with the Greens. I think the reasons I gave are that it downplays the perception of UKIP as a major party by his comments about Greens being a minor party like UKIP, that there will be no mileage in the Greens attacking the Tories (as someone else said); their natural voters are on the left so they need to focus on why voters go for the Greens rather than Lib Dem or Labour which means they need to attack those two parties. And by having a fifth person in the debate dilutes the amount of time Cameron has to speak (which is a win for him) and the time the Lib Dems or Lab have to attack the Tories added to which they will have to mount their own defence against attacks from the Greens.

I don't think you've rebutted any of those points either.

 

[Pavilionaire]

Are the Greens that big a deal to anyone at the moment? The big issues are the deficit, immigration and now terrorism.

 

[Buzzer]

Are the Greens that big a deal to anyone at the moment? The big issues are the deficit, immigration and now terrorism.

They're only a big deal in the constituencies mentioned above but that won't stop Cameron from linking them with UKIP. But then again, you could argue that you're being very unfair on the Greens - they're a long-standing national party with an MP, MEPs, councillors - they have policies on all the above that you've mentioned and arguably are as big as the Lib Dems and a bigger core base than UKIP. I'm still baffled by the Ofcom ruling that ignored all these factors and said they didn't need to be invited to the debate.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

They clearly did last time, if I remember correctly. Thanks to Nick Clegg's uncanny ability to simultaneously recall a plebs name and look them in the eye whilst talking to them.

He was regarded as the saviour of British politics, ended up polling 23% of the vote.

Maybe, but you would have to be extremely weak-minded to let that circus sway you ..... but then I guess there are an awful lot of people who pay no heed to politics most of the time and just read the headlines in The Sun, so I guess I've disproved my original message.

 

[DTES]

Are the Greens that big a deal to anyone at the moment? The big issues are the deficit, immigration and now terrorism.

I think the NHS could prove to be as big as any of those issues over the election campaign. I'm not sure that's an issue that will have people running to the Greens either (although they will be even more anti-private sector involvement than Labour), but still.

 

[Buzzer]

Maybe, but you would have to be extremely weak-minded to let that circus sway you ..... but then I guess there are an awful lot of people who pay no heed to politics most of the time and just read the headlines in The Sun, so I guess I've disproved my original message.

And likewise an awful lot of people who read the Mirror and believe the spin about Labour 'saving' the NHS despite both parties being fully paid up supporters of privatisation of ancillary NHS services, PPF and suchlike.

 

[Tyreman123]

Its all bullshit!! every labour Government overspends!!FACT, puts us in the shit and then they have to be booted out while the bad Tories come in and try to clean up the frigging mess! after a while of success (to varying degrees), but with spending cuts in place, those peskey ordinary people don't like it any more and so we have to bring in Labour again to woft around , Harry Enfield style ,wads of money that isn't theirs to get people to like them again! (next appearance around May time!!) and so it will go on for ever or until the eastern and western cultures of the planet collide and we literally blow the whole frigging place up! this whole thing is duplicated throughout various housing estates and homes throughout the country,and even with many people we all know , many trying to make out how successful they are , when in reality they are so far in the Shit that all reality has gone!!! you know how it goes,someone in the house spends too much , someone tries to stop it happening, etc etc you get the drift, and the whole cycle of boom and bust just goes on and on!! There ive ranted!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Not quite. I said it was a shrewd move by Cameron, who clearly doesn't want these debates to link his appearance in with the Greens. I think the reasons I gave are that it downplays the perception of UKIP as a major party by his comments about Greens being a minor party like UKIP, that there will be no mileage in the Greens attacking the Tories (as someone else said); their natural voters are on the left so they need to focus on why voters go for the Greens rather than Lib Dem or Labour which means they need to attack those two parties. And by having a fifth person in the debate dilutes the amount of time Cameron has to speak (which is a win for him) and the time the Lib Dems or Lab have to attack the Tories added to which they will have to mount their own defence against attacks from the Greens.

I don't think you've rebutted any of those points either.

I think you're clutching at straws here. Who on earth thinks UKIP are a major party? I'm not convinced the Greens will necessarily "attack" anyone with any regularity, won't they just want to get their message across in a non-aggressive manner? Does Lucas have a habit of aggressive debate? Not from my knowledge? And it might dilute Cameron's air time, I'll agree with this but one extra person in the room doesn't significantly reduce the time in my opinion. And if it does then how does a silent PM standing on the periphery look to umpteen million viewers?

I personally think he's boxed himself into a corner. He's not a savvy politician.

 

[drew]

Farage is only on one of the live debates anyway.

 

[Buzzer]

Who on earth thinks UKIP are a major party?

Ofcom, for a start. All those companies conducting opinion polls for another. All those newspapers commissioning them for a third. ITV for a fourth. Most people apart from you for a fifth. They may not be here in the long-run but right now they're clearly a big deal in UK politics. To try to deny that just seems silly even if you disagree with everything they stand for.

I'm not convinced the Greens will necessarily "attack" anyone with any regularity, won't they just want to get their message across in a non-aggressive manner? Does Lucas have a habit of aggressive debate? Not from my knowledge?

It probably won't be Lucas debating, it will more likely be the leader of the Green Party.And I think you're being a bit patronising about them when you think they will be a meek and humble mouse in the corner, just grateful for sharing the top table with the big boys. There's lots of mileage in attacking Labour and the Lib Dems records in the last and this governments respectively and a large part of the Green's strategy in the news has been to emphasise the lack of daylight between the three older parties and how they are the only ones on the left offering a real alternative to austerity or austerity-lite.

I'm not sure if it's those red-tinted specs or just a lack of awareness of the way the Greens have been campaigning in the last few years but it's been as much a mix of positive and negative as any party. Any time the Greens are on something like Any Questions or Question Time will back this up. Clutching at straws? Nah.

 

[Pavilionaire]

They're only a big deal in the constituencies mentioned above but that won't stop Cameron from linking them with UKIP. But then again, you could argue that you're being very unfair on the Greens - they're a long-standing national party with an MP, MEPs, councillors - they have policies on all the above that you've mentioned and arguably are as big as the Lib Dems and a bigger core base than UKIP. I'm still baffled by the Ofcom ruling that ignored all these factors and said they didn't need to be invited to the debate.

I actually agree with Cameron that they should be on the stage, but unfortunately for them the key issues on which the election will be decided are not Green issues. On that basis I don't think the other parties have anything to worry about from the Greens right now.

White van man - and much of Middle England - will think "Petrol is down to £1 a litre so who gives a sh1t? I care more about immigration / my zero hours contract / getting blown up in the Channel Tunnel?" etc