Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Tuesday, 7 January 2014

TV debate league

There is a row about repeating the 3-way political TV debates in 2015. The Libdems, whose vote has shrunk to 5%, are struggling to be considered in the same league as Cameron and Miliband. And then there's UKIP, polling three times the Libdems share. Four politicians would probably not make good TV, either.

However, the TV companies could use a well-practised sporting method - and increase public interest - with a debate league. Winners of each debate would be declared by the studio audience; the first round would be Farage vs Clegg, with the winner meeting the winner of Cameron vs Miliband in a final. Same airtime, same number of debates but some fun for us.

Politicians, never in favour of we ordinary voters deciding anything, will hate it.


Mike Spilligan said...

A splendid suggestion; and therefore it can't possibly happen.

Anonymous said...

Yep, get the judges off "Strictly Come Dancing" to score the contestants, run phone-in votes to raise some dosh to pay for it, and have the week's loser dance an American Smooth wih George Osborne....... might attract the attention of some of the 99% who wouldn't / don't otherwise give a damn.

Anonymous said...

The days of gentlemanly conduct are over. If you get that you're halfway to understanding how the modern politician can tell such whoppers and still get away with it.

People still think these people have honour. They don't, indeed the last one I can think of who did was Lord Carrington, 30+ years ago.

Lying is part of their psyche.


Obama had to resign from the Chicago Bar Association for making a false statement on his application. He failed to divulge his alias: Barry Soetoro.

Cameron has promised a referendum on our membership of the EU. He is on record as saying that even if we vote to leave he will ignore the decision.

Miliband lied to his brother over the leadership challenge.

Clegg said he would never vote for the rise in tuition fees.

They lie.


Shotover said...

They might agree in principle but fail to get seeding arrangements sorted so wouldn't happen.

Anonymous said...

Farage, dope that he is missed a trick and considering himself to be the heir to Enoch, didn't recognize a line from one of Mr. Powells most famous speeches:

I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking – not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.

Straight away, Farage should have shoved that right back Dermot Murnaghan grinning mush and asked,

"a good line and evidently you must recognize those words as prophetic because, has it not come to pass Dermot?"

Open goal went begging, he didn't recognize the bloody speech.

Thus, I don't want Farage anywhere near a debating chamber with Dave - he'll tear him to shreds.

Nigel is a bully in the playground but never is he debater.

Enoch went on to say:

We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancées whom they have never seen.

Cripes he got that and told us - 40 years later a behaviour that is still rampant, the horse has fucking bolted and still another 500k came in last year - well that's the government figure...............Inundated? Overrun more like

John M said...

The format kind of debate you propose sounds like it has an awful lot in common with the video game "Mortal Combat"

If that were to be the case, perhaps we should implement it fully, i.e. the loser of each contest then subjected to a phone-vote competition on which exotic fatality method (or "FINISH HIM" combo) he should meet his doom with.

These are normally quite entertaining, very bloody, and in the case of Ed Miliband at least, would generate millions in public phone vote fees for charity.

Ian Hills said...

The audience would be rigged, as on Question Time.