Bollitics: VT General Election Poll #5 - Leaders Debate Two

[kidlewis]

Unbiased opinion seems to be Clegg won....

is this real world or VT world we are talking ?

VT has a 50% + Lib Dem support rate so I'd hardly call it unbiased

I gave me honest assessment on page 2 .. I had Brown down as the winner for a long period so it's a tad unfair to just bracket people as biased or unbiased ... On immigration I just don't happen to agree with Clegg he to coin a phrase needs to "Get Real" .. i don't think he was strong on defence either .... Hence why he didn't win last night in my "biased" opinion

I thought his 'get real' comment and the comment about clegg and cameron being like two boys at bath time was extremely patronising.

if I was in a meeting having a reasonably heated discussion about work and someone said to me that we were being like kids at bath time. I'd tell them to ride their high horse out of the office.

Brown has no pedestal to stand on when it comes to a) not answering the question and being somehow 'above' Clegg and Cameron when it comes to squabbling.

I did like the way Brown tried to say Cameron wouldn't keep the winter fuel payments etc, even though numerous time at PMQ's in the past year Cameron actually said he would keep them.

What I don't like is that none of them are highlighting where they could work together.

If hung parliament is going to happen they all need to realise that they cannot achieve their own manifestos and should after the result, come together and publish a hung parliament manifesto.

each take 1 major issue and 1 minor issue in each of their manifestos and work to achieving that.

I think getting Labour and conservatives to agree on HOL reformation with the lib dems could be tricky.

[Xann]

Murdoch is / was a nasty piece of work. You are seeing that now, you saw it with Fox and Obama.

Fox played it's part in Bush Jr's last term in office.

Just as the voices of the incorrectly disenfranchised were beginning to be heard - Fox called Dubya as overall winner, the other networks followed suit.

Murdoch can f*ck right off.

[tonyh29]

but to claim Cameron won it is hilarious, i'd love someone to investigate that.

I've seen about 6 polls .. some have a tie with Clegg and Cameron , Some say Clegg won , some say Cameron won ..I know Murdoch has some media influence but I don't believe he controls the whole world just yet

I've not looked at the Mirror but I can be assured they will say Cameron came last by a country mile .. should they be investigated as well ?? or is it only papers that showed Cameron winning that must be investigated ??

[drat01]

Re The Telegraph question to Clegg - it was outside the rules of the debate, I beleive.

I agree with Drat about the pernicious influence of Murdoch. There are a lot of stories about now, that he's upset that he was persuaded by his son to bacl Cameron, and as he did with McCain (again persuaded by others) that he may have backed a loser, which he hates, because he wants to back the winner all the time, to get influence and therefore money.

.................

One for you here Pete and the influence that the Murdoch clan think they can have on UK media

link

James Murdoch at the Independent: 'like a scene out of Dodge City'

In common with so many problems involving young men in modern London, it was a squall about reputation and respect

After a lifetime at the helm of the world's most powerful media organisation and in the crosshairs of the left, Rupert Murdoch has, of necessity, developed a reasonably thick skin.

The Dirty Digger is how he is disrespectfully referred to by Private Eye. Spitting Image always portrayed him as a shouty figure, irredeemably uncouth.

But his son James seems less ready to turn the other cheek, as it were. And this would seem to be the most plausible explanation for why Murdoch the younger, the chairman and chief executive News Corporation Europe and Asia, caused a media sensation on Wednesday by striding across the editorial floor at the Independent newspaper to berate its editor-in-chief, Simon Kelner.

In common with so many of the unpleasant episodes involving angry young men in modern London, it was a squall about reputation and respect. The newly relaunched Independent had produced a series of relatively innocuous promotional ads assuring readers: "Rupert Murdoch won't decide this election. You will."

There is no evidence that Murdoch senior has even seen the ads, but witnesses report that directly upon seeing Kelner, who was supervising the final production stages of that night's paper, Murdoch the younger began angry remonstrations. "What are you **** playing at?" was his opening gambit.

A bewildered Kelner quickly ushered his visitors into his office, where they remained for what have been described as "frank and full discussions" for another 20 minutes. All were grim-faced as Murdoch, carrying a promotional copy of the Independent, accused the rival editor of breaking the unwritten code that proprietors do not attack each other and of besmirching his father's reputation. With his piece said and with the matter unresolved, the aggrieved media mogul left.

The episode left experienced journalists shocked. "They strode in like a scene out of Dodge City," said one. "Murdoch scanned the room, you could almost hear him saying 'Where is he?'"

Another likened the arrival in the newsroom of Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, the chief executive of News International, to a mafia visit. "It was so bizarre. He came in all menace. You know the sort of thing: 'The boss has heard what you have been saying about him. He doesn't like it.'"

There was indeed a family style closing of ranks today, as both News International and the Independent declined to comment. But then, on one level, what occurred had elements of a family squabble.

Earlier that day, Brooks had telephoned Kelner to raise concerns about the personalised ad. It appears to have been a relatively cordial conversation. The two have in the past socialised as part of a high-powered media set centred in Oxfordshire. Blenheim is the Murdoch family retreat and it is said that Kelner has spent time "chatting to Rupert" while staying in the area as Brooks's guest.

He will have been unprepared for a such an attack from Murdoch junior, another familiar face in Oxfordshire, but then the outburst took everyone by surprise. Brooks and Murdoch actually travelled to Kensington to see Lord Rothermere at Associated Newspapers, publishers of the Daily Mail and the proprietor's group managing director, Kevin Beatty. Associated say they discussed commercial matters such digital and electronic media and iPads.

It is acknowledged that Murdoch has been meeting other heavyweight figures in the media industry to forward his father's belief that newspaper websites should be shielded from free use by a revenue-raising paywall. The Times and Sunday Times will erect a paywall in June.

The Daily Mail has set its face against the idea, but still Murdoch and Brooks appeared to be in good spirits when they ended their meeting with Rothermere and Beatty on the sixth floor, merely asking for directions to the Independent office on the second. Even then there was no immediate sign of trouble. Brooks's first comment to Kelner was "Surprise – look who's here to see you!"

There are, of course, reasons why Murdoch junior might be particularly cranky right now. The paywall experiment is an acknowledged gamble which other British outlets seem reluctant to take. And there is unease that despite the full blooded, war-footing support of the Sun, David Cameron's Conservatives are failing to establish the sort of lead that was expected of them.

Blogging today, Murdoch's biographer Michael Woolf said jitters among the two lieutenants are inevitable because Brooks persuaded James Murdoch to throw the company's weight behind Cameron's Conservatives and the young Murdoch persuaded his father. The magnate does not like bad advice, says Woolf. "Murdoch likes winners, even more than he likes Conservatives."

The fallout continued elsewhere today, as Associated complained bitterly about a Channel 4 blogpost suggesting that James Murdoch may have had a political motive for his visit the Mail – to construct a joint strategy to counteract the rise of the Liberal Democrats. Absolute rubbish, say Associated.

Repercussions for the Independent, too, which engaged the publicist Matthew Freud to work on its relaunch, only to find that the unsolicited actions of his brother-in-law James Murdoch have done the job just as effectively.

Practical repercussions as well. This afternoon, for the first time since the paper moved to Kensington 11 months ago, the newsroom door was secured with a swipe-card lock.

It seems that some are rattled

[Malachite]

Kidlewis: GDP figures show today that the country is heading back into recession, we are downgraded to 0.2% today from 0.4% on the previous quarter, yes I know what the comments are going to be to that, as all my business contacts have said, "we are still deep in recession", and we all know how adept this country is at massaging figure for gain rather then saying it how it is, so a coalition government as in wartime as in the case of the strongest nation in Europe at this time Germany has, would probably be the best thing, and these blokes will have to learn to get on with it for the good of the country bearing in mind the crap we are in.

For me the problem with a hung parliament is that when you look at Cameron and Brown they seem so transfixed on there own ego's that to be compatible with anybody else and make it work seems impossible, on that basis i may be inclined to give Clegg the nudge, but then i live in an area which is and has been for a long time Democrat.

[drat01]

Malachite - no the figures do not show we are heading back into recession at all. They are still positive and if you look at previous figures the first release is always lower than the actuals that are released later. Even the BBC say

The UK economy continued to recover from recession in the first three months of the year, according to official estimates.

GDP grew by 0.2% between January and March, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

That was weaker than the 0.4% growth predicted by many economists, but the figure may be revised.

The last quarter of 2009 saw GDP growth of 0.4% - revised up from an initial estimate of 0.1%. ....

I don't think you will find anyone that hasn't said that recovery from the problems wont be a slow process, but recovery is happening. Its now what cuts you think will have an impact it would seem.

If a hung parliament is what we get then so be it and it will be a true test of political aims for the benefit of the country rather than self service power aspirations that will show through.

PR is still the fairest way of voting

[mykeyb]

Unbiased opinion seems to be Clegg won....

is this real world or VT world we are talking ?

VT has a 50% + Lib Dem support rate so I'd hardly call it unbiased

I gave me honest assessment on page 2 .. I had Brown down as the winner for a long period so it's a tad unfair to just bracket people as biased or unbiased ... On immigration I just don't happen to agree with Clegg he to coin a phrase needs to "Get Real" .. i don't think he was strong on defence either .... Hence why he didn't win last night in my "biased" opinion

It certainly aint VT World.

I dont even need to come on and read this thread to find how some people saw the debate last night.

[Awol]

Zim gained independence under a Tory Government so I'd imagine that's where his soft spot originates from. As for his thoughts on British politics, well, they won't be informing my decision come May 6th.

Unless he sends "the lads" round Jon, long distance of course but you are closer than the rest of us

"the lads" would be in chains and doing hard labour if they showed up around these parts! The Omani's have the novel idea that border controls are a good thing and they owe the rest of the world neither a living or a home. I've tried to explain the UK system to a number of local friends and they look at you like you've just descended from the moon.

It's far from perfect, but their loyalty to each other/ their country is very refreshing compared to the UK.

[Malachite]

Malachite - no the figures do not show we are heading back into recession at all. They are still positive and if you look at previous figures the first release is always lower than the actuals that are released later. Even the BBC say

The UK economy continued to recover from recession in the first three months of the year, according to official estimates.

GDP grew by 0.2% between January and March, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

That was weaker than the 0.4% growth predicted by many economists, but the figure may be revised.

The last quarter of 2009 saw GDP growth of 0.4% - revised up from an initial estimate of 0.1%. ....

I don't think you will find anyone that hasn't said that recovery from the problems wont be a slow process, but recovery is happening. Its now what cuts you think will have an impact it would seem.

If a hung parliament is what we get then so be it and it will be a true test of political aims for the benefit of the country rather than self service power aspirations that will show through.

PR is still the fairest way of voting

drat01: Really couldn't give a damm what the BBC say and if we are heading back down from 0.4% to 0.2% then the direction is heading back into the direction of recession, (albeit 0.2% is technically not recession, if you believe that) and if you speak to as many people in business across the whole UK as i do then you would know that most people still think the country is well and truly phucked, and that the best measure of anything are people out there trying to create the nations wealth not people crunching figures behind a computer screen.

This recovery is scarilly weak, and its possible when they update these figures which they will do twice it could show we are in recession as it could show better growth.

[Malachite]

but to claim Cameron won it is hilarious, i'd love someone to investigate that.

I've seen about 6 polls .. some have a tie with Clegg and Cameron , Some say Clegg won , some say Cameron won ..I know Murdoch has some media influence but I don't believe he controls the whole world just yet

I've not looked at the Mirror but I can be assured they will say Cameron came last by a country mile .. should they be investigated as well ?? or is it only papers that showed Cameron winning that must be investigated ??

Tonyh29: I agree the Mirror is just as much a rag but Murdoch is well known to influence party politics here and in Australia, and i find it just a tad treacherous that a very wealthy foreigner influencing British Politics in such a damming way as Murdoch does, but maybe thats just me and it being St Georges day :winkold:

[Jon]

according to the Beeb, viewing figures peaked at only 4m for this 2nd debate, that les than half the original devate audience.

Have people got bored with it already? Have the performances of the leaders, and the media/papers, turned people off again?

[Richard]

I think some of the comments towards Thatcher on here say more about the people making them than the ex PM

[Richard]

according to the Beeb, viewing figures peaked at only 4m for this 2nd debate, that les than half the original devate audience.

Have people got bored with it already? Have the performances of the leaders, and the media/papers, turned people off again?

Or does it reflect that not everyone has access to Sky?

[blandy]

Malachite - no the figures do not show we are heading back into recession at all. They are still positive and if you look at previous figures the first release is always lower than the actuals that are released later. Even the BBC say

The UK economy continued to recover from recession in the first three months of the year, according to official estimates.

GDP grew by 0.2% between January and March, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said.

That was weaker than the 0.4% growth predicted by many economists, but the figure may be revised.

The last quarter of 2009 saw GDP growth of 0.4% - revised up from an initial estimate of 0.1%. ....

I don't think you will find anyone that hasn't said that recovery from the problems wont be a slow process, but recovery is happening. Its now what cuts you think will have an impact it would seem.

If a hung parliament is what we get then so be it and it will be a true test of political aims for the benefit of the country rather than self service power aspirations that will show through.

PR is still the fairest way of voting

if we are heading back down from 0.4% to 0.2% then the direction is heading back into the direction of recession...

No it isn't. Something grew by 0.4% then it grew by another 0.2% - it's still growing, just not growing as fast. It's not however getting smaller.

... if you speak to as many people in business across the whole UK as i do then you would know that most people still think the country is well and truly phucked, and that the best measure of anything are people out there trying to create the nations wealth not people crunching figures behind a computer screen.

Absolutely correct.

This recovery is scarilly weak, and its possible when they update these figures which they will do twice it could show we are in recession as it could show better growth

that's not possible - recession is 3 (I think) consecutive quarters of negative growth. - it's not possible to go from growth to recession in one quarter.

Cameron's prompt notes * may contain traces of satire

[Jon]

according to the Beeb, viewing figures peaked at only 4m for this 2nd debate, that les than half the original devate audience.

Have people got bored with it already? Have the performances of the leaders, and the media/papers, turned people off again?

Or does it reflect that not everyone has access to Sky?

good point Trickie, although it was on sky news, which is accessible to all on digital tv for free, i believe.

This may account for some of the falloff, granted.

i guess the figures may well go back up for the 4th debate next week, on one of the "main" channels.

[drat01]

Cameron's prompt notes * may contain traces of satire

Very good find Pete

[snowychap]

recession is 3 (I think) consecutive quarters of negative growth

Technical definition of recession is two successive quarters, Pete.

Though the whole 'technical definition' thing (and even its real importance) is rather moot as you and Malachite suggest.

Figures tell different stories however one presents them and however one chooses to look at them.

Look at the employment/unemployment figures, for example. Fewer claimants does not necessarily mean more people in work. More people in work does not necessarily mean more people in the work they want to do (not really talking about preferred job here but when those wanting to work full time are having to take part time work as that may be all that is on offer).

Look at house price figures and the regional differences; look at inflation figures and how those might differ when one drills down for different categories of people (age groups, wealth levels, &c.).

[Jon]

Cameron's prompt notes * may contain traces of satire

Very good find Pete

Yep, quality stuff. Good site that.

I like the Brown Thesauraus bit too :nod:

[kidlewis]

Cameron's prompt notes * may contain traces of satire

Very good find Pete

Yep, quality stuff. Good site that.

I like the Brown Thesauraus bit too :nod:

I do like the 'Weakest Link Debate' picture. Although they would never get any money because Gordon wouldn't actually answer the question directly, so they would have nothing to bank.

[tonyh29]

may contain traces of satire

:-) They could have done with you on that website though it seems

couple of posted deemed it necessary to post "Fake" as their comments :shock: