2015 UK General Election Thread

Originally Posted by MarkC1984

Apparently, debates are only good for those opposing the sitting person (in this case, it would be good for Miliband, etc. but bad for Cameron). So if this is indeed the case, then of course Cameron will be scared. What Cameron needs is for Mili-Bean to be caught insulting voters before the election, a la Brown and his bigoted woman slip.

Yup. The debates would allow Miliband, who is generally viewed poorly in terms of leadership, to appear on a level footing with the Prime Minister. Since expectations would be so low for Miliband he could well gain from it whereas it's hard to see how Cameron benefits unless Miliband has a meltdown.

Debates aren't a democratic right. This is only the second election we may have them. They're a political campaigning tool as so they will be viewed as such by the political parties. Cameron doesn't want them because he doesn't suit him and Miliband desperately wants them because the format suits him.

Cameron would have rather been seen as a coward than allow Miliband to be seen as a prospective Prime Minister.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Derek

A poll also suggested they would win the referendum.

Indeed and that's why we can have all these polls saying this and that but the only one that matters is in the first week of May.

[nashville]

I dread to think what will happen if the SNP win , we will be back to a referendum in no time, Makes me wish I was English,

[MalteseFalcon]

Do you think the SNP would push for that in a coalition deal, like the Liberals did with a referendum on the AV system?

The SNP has a long list of things it wants out of a coalition. Their list is so long, they have already pretty much guaranteed that a coalition involving them is off the table.

But no, they won't get another referendum, even if it's their only demand.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by denphone

SNP set for 56 of 59 Scottish seats in general election, poll suggests.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...-poll-suggests

Great.

Now we'll all be able to focus better on what the SNP's going to do about all that oil revenue it's already 'spent' many times over but isn't likely to get any time soon.

Just listening to the Daily Politics and Lord Adonut claiming that Gordon Brown agreed to TV debates because he thought they were a "good democratic innovation". What a crock!.....

I don't think the SNP want to enter a formal coalition anyway.

I wonder if the broadcasters will follow though on the threat to empty chair Cameron? If they had a two way debate with only Miliband turning up that would be a pretty brutal image for the Conservatives. Would the BBC/ITV have the nerve to do it?

[Kursk]

I think if the Prime Minister decides not to attend it is the right decision. Let's get back to the Government governing this Country, not the media.

The TV would love a "ratings busting" bickering talkshop. If the debates go ahead, an empty chair will show me that Mr Cameron is getting on with the real job, not turning up to squabble with a bunch of no-hopers.

This isn't a service for the public either; it's not as if we'll all be sitting around with our popcorn watching.

[nashville]

Originally Posted by Chris

The SNP has a long list of things it wants out of a coalition. Their list is so long, they have already pretty much guaranteed that a coalition involving them is off the table.

But no, they won't get another referendum, even if it's their only demand.

I hope your right Chris,

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Damien

Yup. The debates would allow Miliband, who is generally viewed poorly in terms of leadership, to appear on a level footing with the Prime Minister. Since expectations would be so low for Miliband he could well gain from it whereas it's hard to see how Cameron benefits unless Miliband has a meltdown.

Debates aren't a democratic right. This is only the second election we may have them. They're a political campaigning tool as so they will be viewed as such by the political parties. Cameron doesn't want them because he doesn't suit him and Miliband desperately wants them because the format suits him.

Cameron would have rather been seen as a coward than allow Miliband to be seen as a prospective Prime Minister.

Not a massive fan of the debates tbh, three hours on TV do not a statesman make, I mean everyone agreed with nick during them but no one has agreed with him since

---------- Post added at 15:40 ---------- Previous post was at 15:39 ----------

Originally Posted by nashville

I hope your right Chris,

I hope he's wrong about the referendum

[tweetiepooh]

People don't really care what politicians think, they want to see a barney arguing over party lines and seeing who can perform the best. So politicians don't state what they think in debates, it may come over wrong, may give the wrong image.

The modern curse, image over content.

[Hom3r]

I see Cameron's spine has turned yellow.

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by Hom3r

I see Cameron's spine has turned yellow.

I am hoping they go ahead with the debates and leave a gap where he should have stood so everyone can see what a yellow belly he is.

[denphone]

The cowardly lion in The Wizard of Oz seems to have more courage then Mr Cameron if he can't face the Labour misfit Mr Miliband in a one on one debate.

[heero_yuy]

Originally Posted by Sirius

I am hoping they go ahead with the debates and leave a gap where he should have stood so everyone can see what a yellow belly he is.

I remember the "Have I got news for you" quiz where they put a pat of lard in the chair that Roy Hattersley was supposed to occupy.

Perhaps members could nominate a product to occupy Dave's vacant chair?

Yellow custard?