|It was Clegg who won it
||[Apr. 23rd, 2010|11:38 am]
Today in Politics
You pays your money and takes your choice in today's newspapers about who won the leaders' second television debate. "Cameron fights back," says the Daily Telegraph. "The Cam Back Kid," says The Sun. "Cameron wins with passion," claims the Daily Express. "Cameron nicks it," says The Times. All Tory-leaning, of course. The Labour-supporting Daily Mirror counters: "One foot in the Dave," while The Guardian opts for "Clegg weathers the storm."
To be fair, some of the headlines were based on the papers' own opinion polls. Given that David Cameron and Gordon Brown directed so much of their fire at Nick Clegg last night -- in sharp contrast to the first debate -- I think Cleggy did incredibly well. He couldn't possibly repeat his barnstorming performance of last week without the novelty factor. The attacks on him by Cam and Brown were a testament to his success. The two other leaders did better last night than last week. But Clegg did indeed weather the storm.
"To be fair, some of the headlines were based on the papers' own opinion polls"
And some of the headlines were based on lies, distortion and the concealment of inconvenient poll answers. The only people served by some "news"papers are the proprietors, why portray them in any other light?
The Indie has already reported the non reporting of an inconvenient ugov poll by the Sun, why on earth should anybody trust one single word? Myself, I'm not even sure that the page 3 tart is female any more.
How did you know though? Andrew Grice must be very intelligent!
2010-04-23 01:12 pm (UTC)
It's a shame there weren't other parties represented
This debate was dull- they could have put Greens BNP UKIP & some provincial parties. And maybe Mr Blobby to moderate. And some drunks in the audience. & some surprise guest questioners like Karzai or Rompuy or Carla Bruni. Unfortunately Sky bosses are completely devoid of imagination (as anyone who's had the misfortune to watch their sporting coverage knows) so it ended up worse than the first debate where Alistair Stewart's name-barking did at least enliven things.
Was Adam Boulton allowed to question Clegg about the headlines in the gutterpress?
Won't have done anyone but Murdoch any harm :)
2010-04-24 12:41 am (UTC)
Not according to the supposed rules of the debate, no.
This week, with a coordinated series of press attacks on Nick Clegg, Cameron was supposed to win the debate, and win convincingly, reminding people that the mantle of change was his, that he is the future. Instead, he came in second, the press attacks failed to convince and far from reminding people of change, his failure to win reinforced the idea that he is not up to it. So, what's next? Dave and his allies will up the ante and go for broke in the fear stakes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmairWoMG-A
2010-04-23 05:55 pm (UTC)
Could attack on Clegg precipitate break-up of Murdoch press?
The Murdoch media empire (which includes Sky's Adam Boulton's) and the wider Tory press are playing a dangerous game.
They know the public would see nothing wrong with legislation that set strict limits on ownership of British media by people who don't pay British tax.
Murdoch held this off when he backed Blair in 1997.
After what happened yesterday, why wouldn't a LibLab government take action to break up the British arm of the Murdoch empire.
drg40 is on the money. I always found Pravda more honest than the Sun, but the Sun crosswords were easier because the letters all faced the same way.