Has the TV debate been discussed at work?

[View From The Top]

Of my team only 3 watched it, the rest had/have no interest and really weren't interested in anything that had been said.

 

Is this typical of England (I'll exclude the rest due to the devolution of powers)?

[Thedelldays]

Of my team only 3 watched it, the rest had/have no interest and really weren't interested in anything that had been said.

 

Is this typical of England (I'll exclude the rest due to the devolution of powers)?

some said at work today that they never watched it because..

 

A. they could not be arsed

B. there was a leaving run last night and that took their attention

C. no matter what was said, they had already decided on who they are voting for and a few sound bites would not change their mind

[SuperMikey]

Only 9.9m watched at it's peak last night, which is pretty poor imo. Would've expected more to watch it.

Maybe the numbers will pick up in the other debates.

[badgerx16]

Those that have commented said that DC was bland in the extreme. Personally I watched Have I Got News For You and Outnumbered.

[CB Fry]

Only 9.9m watched at it's peak last night, which is pretty poor imo. Would've expected more to watch it.

Maybe the numbers will pick up in the other debates.

 

 

Only?

 

That's as many as watch Eastenders or Coronation Street. Pretty astounding viewing figures by any measure, especially as it was pretty dull and very long.

[Saintandy666]

9.4m average which isn't bad to be fair, considering 27.1m voted at the last election... that's over a third of the voting public if turnout stays the same.

[swannymere]

Those that have commented said that DC was bland in the extreme.

 

He's not the right person to be Prime Minister, regardless of the fact he's the leader of the party most likely to win the election they've played it safe by picking a boring, safe and ultimately 'picked by ticking the right boxes' bloke who didn't have any skeletons in his closet. He's been chosen by PR people and its backfired. If the Tories had chosen somebody with a bit of personality they would've walked this election. The shock of the whole thing is how well the Liberal Democrats have done this time round, who want to bet against them if Nick Clegg can keep up last nights performance in the next two debates?

[Scudamore]

He's not the right person to be Prime Minister, regardless of the fact he's the leader of the party most likely to win the election they've played it safe by picking a boring, safe and ultimately 'picked by ticking the right boxes' bloke who didn't have any skeletons in his closet. He's been chosen by PR people and its backfired. If the Tories had chosen somebody with a bit of personality they would've walked this election. The shock of the whole thing is how well the Liberal Democrats have done this time round, who want to bet against them if Nick Clegg can keep up last nights performance in the next two debates?

 

There aren't actually that many people in politics with "a bit of personality" to be fair. Let alone Tory's with personality.

 

Having seen DC in Prime Minister's Questions a few times i don't think it's fair to label him lacking in personality. Whether he's your cup of tea or not i find it difficult to see how you've come to that conclusion.

[TopGun]

He's not the right person to be Prime Minister, regardless of the fact he's the leader of the party most likely to win the election they've played it safe by picking a boring, safe and ultimately 'picked by ticking the right boxes' bloke who didn't have any skeletons in his closet. He's been chosen by PR people and its backfired. If the Tories had chosen somebody with a bit of personality they would've walked this election. The shock of the whole thing is how well the Liberal Democrats have done this time round, who want to bet against them if Nick Clegg can keep up last nights performance in the next two debates?

 

Of course I'll bet against them as their vote is spread too thin. They come second in hard Labour seats and second in hard Tory seats.

[Saint_clark]

No-one at my work place is even voting. P*sses me off as the only person I can really have a debate with is my dad, and he votes Labour just because he always has.

[Wade Garrett]

He's not the right person to be Prime Minister, regardless of the fact he's the leader of the party most likely to win the election they've played it safe by picking a boring, safe and ultimately 'picked by ticking the right boxes' bloke who didn't have any skeletons in his closet. He's been chosen by PR people and its backfired. If the Tories had chosen somebody with a bit of personality they would've walked this election. The shock of the whole thing is how well the Liberal Democrats have done this time round, who want to bet against them if Nick Clegg can keep up last nights performance in the next two debates?

 

To be fair, he wasn't chosen by PR people. He was chosen by a democratic vote.

 

I thought they made a mistake and should have gone with David Davis.

[Thorpe-le-Saint]

No-one at my work place is even voting. P*sses me off as the only person I can really have a debate with is my dad, and he votes Labour just because he always has.

 

God that must be frustrating at work! Make sure you remind them when the start moaning about the state of the country that they had a chance to change it/voice their opinion but didn't take it.

[thesaint sfc]

Everyone at my work are voting conservative. They all said they liked Lib Dems leader + policies more than labour or the conservatives, but felt that voting lib dem was a waste of time as they would never get in and if conservatives didn't get enough votes it would pose too much of a risk of labour getting in again.

 

I'm voting lib dem. If you only ever vote for second best its only ever going to be Labour or Conservatives who run this country.

[benjii]

I discussed it in some depth with my boss. Fact.

[Saint_clark]

God that must be frustrating at work! Make sure you remind them when the start moaning about the state of the country that they had a chance to change it/voice their opinion but didn't take it.

 

Oh I will, don't worry. Takes ten minutes to vote and shape things to your liking. Lazy b*stards.

[SuperMikey]

Only?

 

That's as many as watch Eastenders or Coronation Street. Pretty astounding viewing figures by any measure, especially as it was pretty dull and very long.

 

Point taken, but surely a debate between the 3 people who could be RUNNING THE COUNTRY in a few weeks time is more important than Eastenders? It's about a third of the people who voted last time, there are something like 45m people eligible to vote in this country and to only get 9m of them is pretty poor imo.

[Thedelldays]

Point taken, but surely a debate between the 3 people who could be RUNNING THE COUNTRY in a few weeks time is more important than Eastenders? It's about a third of the people who voted last time, there are something like 45m people eligible to vote in this country and to only get 9m of them is pretty poor imo.

not poor at all..

 

most people (clearly) are not stupid enough to vote for someone on the basis of a few lines on telly..

 

what did the other night tell us..? not a great deal

 

most people I know have already decided who they are voting for...we pretty much know what each party generally wants to do...just getting all wet after a glorified TV interview is a bit daft

[SuperMikey]

not poor at all..

 

most people (clearly) are not stupid enough to vote for someone on the basis of a few lines on telly..

 

what did the other night tell us..? not a great deal

 

most people I know have already decided who they are voting for...we pretty much know what each party generally wants to do...just getting all

wet after a glorified TV interview is a bit daft

 

I decided who I was voting for about 3 years ago when I started to get interested in politics, but I still watched the debate, along with 5 other people in my household (and a dog). If nothing, it's an interesting insight into both the policies of the respective parties and how confident the leaders of said parties are with public speaking. Cameron looked like a fish out of water for most of it, and Brown and Clegg did okay, which has definitely contributed to the major opinion shift in the YouGov we saw after the debate (Con 33, Lab 28, Lib 30).

 

I hope the next two debates bring in more viewers, because even if people have decided they're not voting, they should still at least see who could be running the country and what they stand for. I've not got that much faith in the general public though...

[Thedelldays]

so..you are hoping people vote on the best speaker with style..?

 

wasnt that a thing to bash cameron supporters not so long ago..?

[View From The Top]

so..you are hoping people vote on the best speaker with style..?

 

wasnt that a thing to bash cameron supporters not so long ago..?

 

I would suggest that many people, my missus included, found Clegg more "normal" than Brown (disliked by most) or Cameron (considered smarmy).

 

Many, many people vote of personality and not policy, which is why Cameron beat Davis in the 1st place.

[Thedelldays]

I would suggest that many people, my missus included, found Clegg more "normal" than Brown (disliked by most) or Cameron (considered smarmy).

 

Many, many people vote of personality and not policy, which is why Cameron beat Davis in the 1st place.

I agree..just NOW it seems ok but before, it was a good way of bashing the cameron supporters (or even the BNP ones)

 

clegg did well but for me, the limiting immigrants to certain areas was stupid and wont work, and scrapping Trident is a no-no...on that,

IMO OUT

 

he was always going to do well..for the first time, the 3rd party was seen at the same level as the big two..despite the current % of the vote telling us otherwise.

 

he was always going to come off the best when starting nearly every sentance saying how his lot are different from the other two

[SuperMikey]

so..you are hoping people vote on the best speaker with style..?

 

wasnt that a thing to bash cameron supporters not so long ago..?

 

Not just that, but it does play a part. Imagine if we had somebody like Boris Johnson running the country (however much I like the guy, he's a complete buffoon). Every time he came on TV stumbling over his words, spouting a tirade of "golly" and "gosh" every time he forgot something he was going to say, wouldn't you feel embarrassed and wished we had somebody who could talk better? After all, we have no personal contact with our Prime Ministers really, so we go on what we see on TV.

 

These debates can help establish the public demeanour of our candidates, as well as giving people a chance to learn about the policies and tendencies of the main parties. There's nothing wrong with watching it to see how the candidates handle themselves whilst under pressure. Would you rather see Cameron, Clegg and Brown navigating the Total Wipeout course or something?

[View From The Top]

clegg did well but for me, the limiting immigrants to certain areas was stupid and wont work, and scrapping Trident is a no-no...on that,

IMO OUT

 

1st point. Great idea in places such as Oz & Canada but unworkable on a small Island such as ours, although, as it all about skills based immigration only, I see the logic.

 

2 point. Vote winner. The Cold War is over and people (women) don't want to spend that sort of money on a relic. It's been mentioned by my missus and both my sisters (one Tory one Labour).

[Thedelldays]

1st point. Great idea in places such as Oz & Canada but unworkable on a small Island such as ours, although, as it all about skills based immigration only, I see the logic.

 

2 point. Vote winner. The Cold War is over and people (women) don't want to spend that sort of money on a relic. It's been mentioned by my missus and both my sisters (one Tory one Labour).

cold war is over...but MORE states are developing nuke weapons..depsite our best efforts to stop them with threaties..

 

that relic as you put it is a very small percentage of our GDP when costed yearly

[View From The Top]

cold war is over...but MORE states are developing nuke weapons..depsite our best efforts to stop them with threaties..

 

that relic as you put it is a very small percentage of our GDP when costed yearly

 

It's a relic designed for a war that will now never be fought.

[Thedelldays]

It's a relic designed for a war that will now never be fought.

 

indeed..some would say because of that, then it has worked..then it could easily be said the other way