Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
the snap general election thread
Options
Comments
-
Latest poll shows Tory lead down to 3 points.
Polls could be wrong of course....“The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie – deliberate, contrived, and dishonest – but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.
Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.”
-- President John F. Kennedy”0 -
Don't think you are right and the audience was picked to be balance, problem is Conservatives only get 35% of vote so almost twice as many voters oppose them.
Polling shows consistently 50% support right of centre parties.
If we endured right wing audiences week in week out, the left would demand change without a shadow of doubt.
Remember this was not a one off, I wrote before all these debates about the audience problem, its always the same and it's not on.
TBH I hope the coalition of chaos ends up running this nation and the people finding out they were conned on a massive scale as everything collapses. We will end up remaining in the EU with massive immigration and all those simmering discontents will get far more volatile.
Instead of training UK youth and boosting productivity and wages, a bunch of simpering left wing charlatans will have open door ruinous immigration levels, whilst smart nations like Canada look on in disbelief.
The left always argues for more spending and bending over backwards to accommodate whingers and spongers, we will end up very financially unstable and with even higher dependency levels.
As under Blair, employment rules will force ever more firms not to offer permanent jobs (as a proportion of total jobs) as customers will not pay for the cost of all these rules and so firms either go bust or adapt, and adapt they will.
Life was so terrible in 2003 before mass immigration, Farron must be right in pointing this out, nothin got built, no one got cared for, it was chaos in those dark days...0 -
I was out & didn't see any of it but I skimmed the Guardian reaction page on the grounds it would paint the Tories as badly as possible. Even on there one of the featured tweets was from somebody saying it was the most biased audience they'd ever seen on a debate.
Yes, very convincing.0 -
Conrad's audience problem.Remember this was not a one off, I wrote before all these debates about the audience problem, its always the same and it's not on.
Or how those audiences just don't share the same extreme right views as Conrad. How dare they.
Don't blame me, I voted Remain.0 -
Back in 1964 Sir Alec Douglas-Home was challenged by Harold Wilson to a TV debate.
He declined on the grounds it would turn into a 'Top of the Pops' charade. The winner would simply be the best actor, who of course would have his lines prepared for him in advance by a script writer.
Smarter than he looked was Sir Alec.
Mrs May calculated it would be less damaging to be called scared than turn up and make a hash of it.
Her excuse about wanting to meet voters is just that - an excuse.
She may well be able to 'walk the walk' but these days politicians need to be able to 'talk the talk' convincingly first.0 -
0 -
In 2015 just under 50% supported Torys and UKIP so more people support non right wing Parties. The audience was picked to give all parties representation and only two of the parties were right wing also it was picked so that 50% voted leave and 50% voted remain. I don't think the BBC would blatantly lie as to how it picked audience as it could easily be checked. There was a large vocal against trident but not anywhere near 50% of audience.Polling shows consistently 50% support right of centre parties.
If we endured right wing audiences week in week out, the left would demand change without a shadow of doubt.
Remember this was not a one off, I wrote before all these debates about the audience problem, its always the same and it's not on.
TBH I hope the coalition of chaos ends up running this nation and the people finding out they were conned on a massive scale as everything collapses. We will end up remaining in the EU with massive immigration and all those simmering discontents will get far more volatile.
Instead of training UK youth and boosting productivity and wages, a bunch of simpering left wing charlatans will have open door ruinous immigration levels, whilst smart nations like Canada look on in disbelief.
The left always argues for more spending and bending over backwards to accommodate whingers and spongers, we will end up very financially unstable and with even higher dependency levels.
As under Blair, employment rules will force ever more firms not to offer permanent jobs (as a proportion of total jobs) as customers will not pay for the cost of all these rules and so firms either go bust or adapt, and adapt they will.
Life was so terrible in 2003 before mass immigration, Farron must be right in pointing this out, nothin got built, no one got cared for, it was chaos in those dark days...0 -
I'm trying hard to find a reason to vote for one of the four parties fielding candates in my constituency and last nights debate made things no clearer.0
-
To my surprise I watched the TV debate last night of the "Parts Leaders" where two Parties did not send their Leader and another sent half the Leader.
Does anyone else here think that the format of the "Show" is utterly useless? There was little real debate there with constant interrupts and with good points and good challenges alike being lost in an orgy of soundbites and petty insults.
I write "show" because I feel that the format is there because the TV companies lack the wit, and courage, to host real debates rather than slanging matters that do little but allow party activists to get their adrenaline fixes and programme commentators to pick out one-liners.
I'm not a great fan of television debates with such a large number of leaders because only 2 have any chance of actually leading the country. That, supposedly, is what the thing should be about since party policy is debated ad nausea elsewhere and I'm not the slightest bit interested in whether the UKip Leader would make a better leader than the Green half-leader. Relatively few are I think. I want to know if they are about, if they can really articulate clearly, can think away from the conditioned restraints of dogma and what their vision is.for the country.
Apart from a Leader debate it might be useful to have more specialised affairs where representatives debate their policies. Things like defenseUnion, not Disunion
I have a Right Wing and a Left Wing.
It's the only way to fly straight.0 -
Her excuse about wanting to meet voters is just that - an excuse.
In fairness, she probably was out meeting voters, while sizing up their houses to find out how little she can sell them to her insurance company mates for.
Anyway, I thought it was fraud to send your own CV but sent someone else for the interview. Obviously not.....💙💛 💔0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 343.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 250.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 449.7K Spending & Discounts
- 235.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 608.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 173.1K Life & Family
- 247.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 15.9K Discuss & Feedback
- 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards