-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
UK PoliGAF: General election thread of LibCon Coalitionage
- Thread starter Chinner
- Start date
- Status
am i the only person who really can't bring themselves to care about the politics of the eu? seems to me like it has a bunch of problems that we should try and iron out, but we gain a lot from the economic regulations, can opt out of some of the weird stuff and that's its impact on people's lives is actually rather small.
How the fuck can you be so stupid?? Do you know what powers he has? His role is half ambassador and half chairman. His executive power is so minimal that even if he did "turn into a facist" there's nothing he could actually do - short of calling a press conference - to make you know it.Linkified said:
Seriously, just fucking learn something on the stuff you're criticising.
Sir Fragula said:
What? --- Glad then all the political parties have pledged to support this then.
Well care to explain why Blair was in the ballot of the government heads of state to vote on for the presidency.
And can you explain why we are paying £45million a day for joining EU zone yet we are in debt and no one has campaigned to cut the entrance fee for the next 10 years in order to bolster our economy?
http://www.politicshome.com/images/Telegraph21st.JPG
Bad news for the Lib Dems after such a good week for them... This is the Telegraph though. Wonder if it has legs.
ComRes for ITV
CONSERVATIVES 35% (nc)
LIB DEMS 27% (+1)
LABOUR 25% (-1)
Bad news for the Lib Dems after such a good week for them... This is the Telegraph though. Wonder if it has legs.
ComRes for ITV
CONSERVATIVES 35% (nc)
LIB DEMS 27% (+1)
LABOUR 25% (-1)
jas0nuk said:
Comres again? I'm really interested why theirs always seem to have the Conservatives with a significant lead. I could understand a small discrepancy, and the YouGov one shows the Conservatives have had a boost too, but the last two Comres ones have really stood out as odd.
Linkified.curls said:
How to watch the debate:
http://blogs.news.sky.com/editorsblog/Post:743febb7-7a88-48c3-aae8-444434dd77a4
editing into OP.
http://blogs.news.sky.com/editorsblog/Post:743febb7-7a88-48c3-aae8-444434dd77a4
editing into OP.
The UK election is just like the one we had in New Zealand in 2008
People are sick of Labour after having them in for so long, so they vote for change and actually beleive that the tories wont try their old tricks.
Here in NZ, our sales tax is going up, there have been heath and education cuts, research cuts and now they want to start mining our national parks >_<
People are sick of Labour after having them in for so long, so they vote for change and actually beleive that the tories wont try their old tricks.
Here in NZ, our sales tax is going up, there have been heath and education cuts, research cuts and now they want to start mining our national parks >_<
Article here:jas0nuk said:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ele...d-payments-into-his-private-bank-account.html
It'll have legs, newspapers always steal shit from each other and the right wing is desperate to pin something on Clegg.
As for the article itself, the headline is misleading and it does seem abit dodgy, but once you read the article it's not bad. However, this is the kind of thing newspapers love cause they can just twist it
Still, election news moves quickly and if Clegg does well tomorrow it'll be forgotten straight away and the Torygraphs attempt will have failed.
Direct democracy means that the 95% of the population who know nothing on the subject vote on it, it means higher public spending, and lower taxes simultaneously, it means experts get less say.
Now we have a bit of that atm with MPs not researching the digital economy bill and not really being all that representative at all.
The best way is a representative democracy with as much transparency as is feasible, as much accountability as is feasible, plenty of honest debate, very little influence from big business, or even strong but weird campaign groups (though advice from all organisations is welcome), a good bit more decentralisation of decision-making, and a fair, transparent and democratic approach to how money and gifts flow in politics.
Now we have a bit of that atm with MPs not researching the digital economy bill and not really being all that representative at all.
The best way is a representative democracy with as much transparency as is feasible, as much accountability as is feasible, plenty of honest debate, very little influence from big business, or even strong but weird campaign groups (though advice from all organisations is welcome), a good bit more decentralisation of decision-making, and a fair, transparent and democratic approach to how money and gifts flow in politics.
As I said before, newspapers are a business so you shouldn't be surprised, especially considering circulation numbers are going constantly downwards along with revenues and they have no idea on how to adapt and make money. But that's another topic.
Be glad that we've got some left wing papers though, Guardian, Independent, Mirror (lol) and the Morning Star.
Be glad that we've got some left wing papers though, Guardian, Independent, Mirror (lol) and the Morning Star.
The Clegg story is a little bad ethically, but £250 a month back in 2006 is pretty weak as far as things go, there was no coverup which is important, no taxpayer money was wasted in it, and i don't think anyone who follows politics thinks that any of the parties are 100% clean. We'll have to see what kind of traction it gets in terms of the media narrative, if it's brought up in the debate then it's very bad for the LD's as the press will focus on that in the post-coverage, if not then i think the leading narrative from that will keep the story away from the headlines.
Daily Mail tryin' hard.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ECTION-2010-Nick-Clegg-Nazi-slur-Britain.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ECTION-2010-Nick-Clegg-Nazi-slur-Britain.html
Big smear campaign going on. Clegg is right though.
Mama Robotnik
Member
God allmighty, the newspaper owners must be scared to death of him...
Even my beloved Metro...
Even my beloved Metro...
the right-wing press, from the times to the mail, have been running non-stop attacks on the lib dems all week. it's pretty amazing to see them all line up their guns like that. they are shit scared and nothing would please me more than to see the polls stay resilient throughout this barrage.
also, it's going to be hilarious to see the torygraph (and the rest) if the tories don't get into power.
also, it's going to be hilarious to see the torygraph (and the rest) if the tories don't get into power.
Despite their political alignment, they have tentacles in both Labour and the Conservative Party. They have no, or very little, influence over the LibDems.Garjon said:
It would also send a clear message that their days of influence in both politics and the public are over, if they fail to listen to what they're saying about Clegg. It would show that TV and the Internet has overtaken the rags as the way to disseminate news.
I think if they'd all used the same "scandal" and ran with it, then the smear campaign might've worked. As it stands, though, each right wing rag has a new, wobbly slur on the LibDem leader. By the time this hits the BBC and ITV News (if it hits them at all) and is analysed and contextualised into a more balanced manner (as the networks are more balanced compared to the papers), then it'll be glaringly obvious to the public what's going on: the media are smearing him with any little thing they can grab.
I forsee this backfiring magnificently.
Mama Robotnik
Member
Varion said:
I'd like to believe that the general public are not so stupid as to be manipulated by these rags.
But I can't.
Wow. the Telegraph story is only about £250 a month? and oh it's factually wrong:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8636311.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8636311.stm
Garjon said:
Well a few reasons. Most Newspapers exist to a) make money and b) influence the running of the country. They want the Tories to win because that would make their rich owners more wealthy, it would allow Murdoch to cut into the BBC and the fairness laws that neuter Sky News and make more money there, it also ties into the next point as they profit off appearing to be important. Then, most of all they want the influence, and the papers would have to admit that 90 minutes of television just overruled years upon years of their conditioning, and they'd see a party rise in the polls that didn't have to align itself with any of the press to succeed, which robs them of much of their influence. Also many paper owners are big fans of right wing policies and hate to see the "loony left" succeed in any way.
Looking at the Sun's front page, they seem to be running with the Daily Mail's big immigration story from the other day. It's absolutely laughable, but these have the highest circulation numbers out of all papers and people will believe anything they read in a paper as stone fact.Omikaru said:
Pressure's truly on Clegg for this next debate; no doubt Cameron and Brown will start ganging up on him to reclaim lost momentum.
Don't be so pessimistic. The thing about newspapers is that they all cater towards their own audiences. Most of the people reading these papers have already decided who they're voting for. Besides, newspapers have a inferiority complex about how influential they are, and seeing as one TV debate radically changed the status quo they're trying so hard to protect, it's obvious that they're panicking.Mama Robotnik said:
Still, considering most of these claims are obviously wrong, it'll be easy for Clegg to dimiss, Broadcast will give a much fairer picture and the people will be able to see what's really going on.
Mama Robotnik
Member
Timbuktu said:
I've seen it before of course, but god its fucking brilliant.
Not really. Profits are constantly going down.Garjon said:
Newspapers make money by advertising, and they get advertising by having good circulation numbers. Circulation numbers for all newspapers has been dropping significantly since the 1980s. I understand your logic but the entire newspaper industry is in a mess trying to figure out how to stop revenues from dropping and bring back profit.
Garjon said:
Possibly. I'd attribute the money factor mainly to the Murdoch papers. The influence of the owners; the Barclay Brothers and Viscount Rothermere, plays a bigger part in the direction of the two papers you named. They clearly want to shape society in a certain way given their political leanings, and use the press as a tool to achieve that; so to see political opinion move in the opposite direction and to see their influence over that movement taken away, will concern them greatly. Also, the Telegraph likes to consider itself close to the Tory government, i think i remember reading (or hearing from my dad) that Max Hastings the former editor and his staff had a large influence over the running of the Major administration, and though it possibly profits more from smearing the left, it has more power if the tories win, and it can always attack the left from the side, or the right for not being right enough.
Souldriver
Member
Why are all the news papers shit scared of the Lib Dems and Clegg? All ethics and journalistic integrity aside, do they even have a self interest in trashing the man? Going by their insanilty, it's as if he's going to make news papers illegal.
Jesus Christ.
Also, I know it is a smart business decision to just be as outrageous as possible and pander to your readers. But at this point you'd think the big untouched market is a neutral newspaper and starting one would be an amazing business decision.
Jesus Christ.
Also, I know it is a smart business decision to just be as outrageous as possible and pander to your readers. But at this point you'd think the big untouched market is a neutral newspaper and starting one would be an amazing business decision.
Even the Sun and the NOTW circulation numbers have dropped significantly. Although admittedly their numbers are not free falling as bad as everyone elses.Empty said:
You know whos circulation numbers are up generally? The Daily Star. When they relaunched it with a new price it gave them a huge boost; it's circulation numbers rank it as the 3rd most bought paper in the UK. Fucking crazy.
This isn't really the journalists fault, more so the editorial team and the owner of the paper telling them what to do.SoulDriver said:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked