Politicians and Comedians

[Serial_Apologist]

And for complicity in the whole thing I give you a life-long opponent of the EU Jeremy Corbyn

...Who could of course forfeit any chance of us landing a decent alternative to the present regime by heeding the electoral base's support for Brexit, of course. Any future Labour government would neded to call on support from the Greens, and in any case, from the discussions we're not privy to courtesy the MSM and have to dig to find out about, the Greens would be pulled into the gathering of ideas on sustainable jobs etc. But for some people, even in this situation nothing is ever good enough.

[Conchis]

There's no point in criticising Boris for what he is, the country is likely to be stuck with him until a sufficiently serious gaffe will provoke even those politicians who put ambition above all other considerations. The real criticism should be directed against Cameron + Osborne (+ probably the rest of that cabinet) in using a referendum to defeat a threat from their right wing (a party that soon showed its true colours once their smooth talking demagogue left) - no research was done as to the potential fall out from such a ploy with no thought as to what direction the UK (tho not for much longer U) should take. Their are many criticisms that can be raised against the increasing federal nature of the EU which in the absence of the UK may well result in an unholy mess + a grossly imbalanced Europe as north Europeans show growing distaste for those in the nationalist East + the financial irregularities of the Latins. Almost the same blame should be placed on May - her style was obvious from her days as a very right wing home secretary who seemed unwilling to listen or to accept any criticism - vide her many spats with the European court - she managed to waste 3 years avoiding any sensible discussion of what the UK should aim for. Corbyn will be seen as a throw back to the 60s - chosen as no alternative not already mired in the mess of the labour party could be found and thought to be mouldable by certain left wing union paymasters.

Stop it!

[Conchis]

Oh, I think there's every reason to criticise "Boris", er, Johnson, for what he is (or isn't...for "being Boris"..)...and go on and on doing so...
The laughter of ridicule is often the best lance for pomposities & pretensions to power...

Tuesday's debate should be ve-ry interesting TV (for "personalities" revealed rather than comments or "insights" into "the situation"...), perhaps we'll observe a gaffe or two there....."working with what we have" I see Gove and Stewart doing well in this...)

Rory Stewart for PM! :**
Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office "Larry" for Home Sec....

(**at least half seriously....as a desperate interim measure, you understand...God help us preserve some iota of civility...)

It’s being presented by Emily Maitlis, which I see as a positive thing. If Andrew Neil or John Humphreys had been in charge I would complain beforehand.

I’ll probably complain anyway, because all the various candidates have been doing it talking about how wonderful they are without any serious challenge from their so-called interlocutors (who continue to refer to one candidate by his preferred familiar name, thus indicating their bias).

These are basically informericals for the Conservative Party.

[MrGongGong]

It’s being presented by Emily Maitlis, which I see as a positive thing. If Andrew Neil or John Humphreys had been in charge I would complain beforehand.

I’ll probably complain anyway, because all the various candidates have been doing it talking about how wonderful they are without any serious challenge from their so-called interlocutors (who continue to refer to one candidate by his preferred familiar name, thus indicating their bias).

These are basically informericals for the Conservative Party.

With a soundtrack by the great Chumbas ?

[eighthobstruction]

....they've done a good job on Johnson....hair cut [untousled]....better fitting suit....more reticent demeanour....speech and vocab control....some self censoring....some how they have got the news media to use new photos' of him looking serious and churchillian....Why haven't the news media found out what company/people have produced these changes. linton Crosbie for one , i guess....

[Maclintick]

Eddie Mair would be my choice in the interlocutor stakes. He skewered Johnson in a memorable TV interview over his phone call to fellow-Etonian Darius Guppy.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/video/2013/mar/24/boris-johnson-accused-nasty-video

More Bo-jo doo-doo here: (sorry, that should be Johnsonian ordure)

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/boris-johnson-questions-tory-leadership-contest-2019_uk_5cfe19fbe4b04e90f1cc075b

[jayne lee wilson]

It’s being presented by Emily Maitlis, which I see as a positive thing. If Andrew Neil or John Humphreys had been in charge I would complain beforehand.

I’ll probably complain anyway, because all the various candidates have been doing it talking about how wonderful they are without any serious challenge from their so-called interlocutors (who continue to refer to one candidate by his preferred familiar name, thus indicating their bias).

These are basically informericals for the Conservative Party.

Excellent to hear that Emily Maitlis is doing this - keen mind and the sharpest interviewer around just now.
Infomercial?
No it isn't, but even if it were conceived as such The Electorate is far more media-wise now about reading through this particular type of interlocution; we're looking further ahead to think how the new leader approaches the present and future crisis, how they would cope with a General Election etc. Brexit is being questioned here too, indirectly or not.
One of the few benefits of 6/16 and after is a greater enthusiasm to make your voice heard and use your vote, especially among younger people.

The fact that this particular contest is only voted for by the Tory Party, can only sharpen that apprehension the more. These events can be unpredictably revealing, and the Electorate (of whatever group) quite fickle. Remember Cleggmania?

As for the suggestion that it shouldn't be on TV because it is only voted for by the Tory Party....
Remember what happened to Nick Griffin.........exposure often works better than you expect.

[cloughie]

Excellent to hear that Emily Maitlis is doing this - keen mind and the sharpest interviewer around just now.
Infomercial?
No it isn't, but even if it were conceived as such The Electorate is far more media-wise now about reading through this particular type of interlocution; we're looking further ahead to think how the new leader approaches the present and future crisis, how they would cope with a General Election etc. Brexit is being questioned here too, indirectly or not.
One of the few benefits of 6/16 and after is a greater enthusiasm to make your voice heard and use your vote, especially among younger people.

The fact that this particular contest is only voted for by the Tory Party, can only sharpen that apprehension the more. These events can be unpredictably revealing, and the Electorate (of whatever group) quite fickle. Remember Cleggmania?

As for the suggestion that it shouldn't be on TV because it is only voted for by the Tory Party....
Remember what happened to Nick Griffin.........exposure often works better than you expect.

I do not share your enthusiasm for EM’s interviewing style - never gives her interviewees chance to answer, before bombarding with more questions.

[jayne lee wilson]

I do not share your enthusiasm for EM’s interviewing style - never gives her interviewees chance to answer, before bombarding with more questions.

I think that is very unfair....don't MPs need a ruthless grilling now, at this of all doublespeak times?
Anyway, judge for yourselves.....

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=emily+maitlis+newsnight

Here's a hugely entertaining classic.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqa4kykOsEk

Let them talk (enough rope etc.) .....intervene where it tells..... fascinating body language in this one too.
(Doncha just lurve that Italian-American charm...?)

[cloughie]

I think that is very unfair....don't MPs need a ruthless grilling now, at this of all doublespeak times?
Anyway, judge for yourselves.....

https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=emily+maitlis+newsnight

Here's a hugely entertaining classic.....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqa4kykOsEk

Let them talk (enough rope etc.) .....intervene where it tells..... fascinating body language in this one too.
(Doncha just lurve that Italian-American charm...?)

Clearly, unlike me, you’re a fan!

[MrGongGong]

Clearly, unlike me, you’re a fan!

The BBC have been complicit in the enabling of some really dodgy people.
Far too many times are the likes of Johnson, JRM and Farrage allowed to ramble on without being called out for blatant lies and deception.

This is the way to do it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd9YmdenPLg

IMV they should get ONE go to answer the question and if not ..... pull the plug

[french frank]

IMV they should get ONE go to answer the question and if not ..... pull the plug

()

One thing that comes over about that clip is that Madeley was genuinely angry. You could say he lost his temper, or lost his cool - and he had every reason to do so. Being 'professional', dogged, finally recognising the man wasn't going to answer, so ending up politely, "Thank you very much, Mr Williamson" gives 'professionalism' a bad name.

[MrGongGong]

()

One thing that comes over about that clip is that Madeley was genuinely angry. You could say he lost his temper, or lost his cool - and he had every reason to do so. Being 'professional', dogged, finally recognising the man wasn't going to answer, so ending up politely, "Thank you very much, Mr Williamson" gives 'professionalism' a bad name.

I've been saying for years that politeness can sometimes (NOT always !!) be simply an encouragement to the objectionable. There are plenty of folks who put on the veneer of respectability whilst carrying out appalling things or empowering hatred. The idea that somehow getting angry or being rude means you have "lost" the argument really is nonsense.

[Demetrius]

It does now look as though the two-party stranglehold is at last approaching its demise, although one obvious downside of this is that the possibility of four parties vying with one another and no chance either of any of them gaining a majority or of agreement to form a viable coalition in the absence of one will likely mean that nothing constructive can get done for the foreseeable future ...

Hm. In countries were the members of the elected legislative body (congress, parliament et) are chosen by who gets the most votes in a certain district, voters will tend to gravitate to the candidates most likely to win (Even more so if the countries leader is decided by a public vote as well). Which is why two dominant parties is what I would call the natural state of such countries. There may be times when such a 2 party system breaks up briefly (in the US during the presidential elections in 1860 and 1912, on a smaller scale also during other elections like 1992, and nationwide during the 1800/10s and again during the 1840s/50s). But the 2 party system will return, possibly with other parties - in the UK Labour replaced the Liberal party in the 20s as one of the two dominant powers.

The British fear of coalitions is possibly a result as well. The Tory - LibDem Coalition did not suck because it was a coalition, it sucked because who formed that coalition. Germany and Austria have been run by coalitions for decades, both good and bad ones. Sweden is more often than not run by a minority government and doesn't do half bad with them.

[ahinton]

Hm. In countries were the members of the elected legislative body (congress, parliament et) are chosen by who gets the most votes in a certain district, voters will tend to gravitate to the candidates most likely to win (Even more so if the countries leader is decided by a public vote as well). Which is why two dominant parties is what I would call the natural state of such countries. There may be times when such a 2 party system breaks up briefly (in the US during the presidential elections in 1860 and 1912, on a smaller scale also during other elections like 1992, and nationwide during the 1800/10s and again during the 1840s/50s). But the 2 party system will return, possibly with other parties - in the UK Labour replaced the Liberal party in the 20s as one of the two dominant powers.

The British fear of coalitions is possibly a result as well. The Tory - LibDem Coalition did not suck because it was a coalition, it sucked because who formed that coalition. Germany and Austria have been run by coalitions for decades, both good and bad ones. Sweden is more often than not run by a minority government and doesn't do half bad with them.

My observations about the two-party system stranglehold were intended to refer only to the situation currently affecting UK; I should have made that clearer.