taxman Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 David Cameron has said he will take part in only one televised debate ahead of the general election, featuring seven party leaders. The announcement rules out a head-to-head clash with Labour leader Ed Miliband ahead of the 7 May poll. Downing Street said it was a "final offer" and criticised the "chaos" of the negotiating process. Other parties criticised the PM, accusing him of "acting like a chicken" and trying to "bully" broadcasters. The three way debates last time seemed to be a fillip for Clegg who wasn't even on the radar until his good showing. Now it seems that Cameron wants as little airtime as possible to debate the issues, with seven different party leaders, which would lead to just 12 minutes each to get their points across. Might as well just abandon the whole idea. Thank God I'll be abroad for the election (and the coalition forming aftermath). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveJ68 Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Why is David Cameron so terrified of having a head-to-head debate with Ed Miliband? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Because at the moment Cameron comes across miles better that Red Ed. His personal approval rating is miles ahead. He would have everything to lose and very little to gain. Why would he? Wallace (or Gromit? Can't remember which) has only to gain from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tzijlstra Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It isnt the head to head with Miliband he fears, it is the head to head with the others, people are beginning to switch on to the fact that it isnt simply a matter of voting for one of two parties. So the more profiling the other parties can do, the fewer votes go to one of the two biguns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeMaquis Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 It isnt the head to head with Miliband he fears, it is the head to head with the others...... No it isn't. As said above Cameron knows only he can lose. I think they should go ahead with the debates anyway and if Cameron isn't there then the public will interpret that accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted March 5, 2015 Author Share Posted March 5, 2015 No it isn't. As said above Cameron knows only he can lose. I think they should go ahead with the debates anyway and if Cameron isn't there then the public will interpret that accordingly. They could replace him with a tub of lard like HIGNFY did with Roy Hattersley Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchemist Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The debates should go ahead without Chicken Dave and on the tory podium they should place a dead checken, free range of course Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Bloom Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 The debates should go ahead without Chicken Dave and on the tory podium they should place a dead checken, free range of course Or a pile of chicken poop on a huge silver spoon. YES, the broadcasters should NOT allow Cameron to dictate the rules. If he doesn't want to show, then an empty podium has to be the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 Because at the moment Cameron comes across miles better that Red Ed. His personal approval rating is miles ahead. He would have everything to lose and very little to gain. Why would he? I agree, it doesn't make sense. Having a 7 leader debate means that each leader is only going to get a short time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InigoMontoya Posted March 5, 2015 Share Posted March 5, 2015 I agree with Cameron. This should not be about "electing a President", it's about electing a government, and electing a local representative. The focus on the leaders, rather than their would-be cabinet team, and the policies of the parties as a whole should be the focus. Not some puerile engineered debate where the candidates read a prepared speech prior to "banter" between the protagonists masquerading as "serious debate". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now