Tuesday, April 08, 2008
Newsnight Debate: The Electorate Are the Losers
Having been to watch the Hammers lose 1-0 tonight I suppose I was in no mood to be impressed by the Mayoral debate on Newsnight, and sure enough I wasn't. What an appalling advertisement for the mayoral election. If I were a floating voter I'd probably have decided to stay at home after watching that poor excuse for high falutin' debate. Paddick was wooden and humourless, Ken was arrogant and without any new ideas and Boris was just not at the races. What a depressing debate.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
28 comments:
It was a comfortable victory for Ken.
Boris came across as arrogant and bumbling.
Boris was at the Bullingham cup, A one Horse Race on another planet.
Bloody Embarrassing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P5h4PFBuzvw
Vote EDP
Yes, Ken was arrogant and the other guy (whose name I forget) was about as appealing as an ice block.
Sadly and very surprisingly though, Boris was crap - I mean just really REALLY bad. He had verbal dioreha, was blabbing on and saying nothing cohessive, speaking way too fast, unable/unwilling to answer the question on the cost of new routemasters (bad briefing), which was reminiscent of Paxman's eviscertation of Micheal Howard!
If he had used his wit it owuld have been better.
I thought he was going to walk it!
Livingstone won hands down. Watch the polls closely now!
Glad I missed it then
You should have invested your time watching Liverpool beat the Gooners 4-2.
For the benefit of you Cockney Boys - that was in the Champions League....a competition that proper clubs play in.
Boris* was very weak on 'new Routemasters' and ran out of ideas very quickly on crime. It was too easy to get Ken on the defensive about the past eight years rather than saying what would happen in the next term. The all-round limits of Brian Paddick were quite obvious; he seems not to belong in the world of politics.
But what on earth were Newsnight thinking - not one question on the biggest issue in London which is housing.
* £5 donated to the campaign, OK Tessa?
Shabolic performance by Boris and I agree with Iain's analysis of old "What's his name?" (the Liberal Democrat candidate. Ken was relaxed but none of them was able tog et a word in edge ways. Someone tell Boris to stop interrupting!!!!!
This is always pointless from Newsnight because they have to have a 'chaired' debate.
Paxman was doing a good Gorbals Mick impression in keeping order.
Let them debate each other properly like in the USA.
I was at a meeting to appoint a new local candidate yesterday. Both candidates had 5mins to talk about themselves and their ideas.
The next Mayor of London gets only 4min.
boris - 4
Ken - 5
Brian - 4
See the way Ken tried to get the 2nd preferance Lib Dem vote. he knows he needs it badly. Paxman shouldn't have used that old 6th form debating question. it has a lot of significance in the vote. Watch it again Iain, just the last question and there's your post for tomorrow.
If, like me, you have grave misgivings about leaving London in the hands of an arrogant Trotskyite berk then you would do the sensible thing and vote for the candidate most likely to oust the git. That would be Bojo. The trouble is - he's shit. On tonight's evidence this city would be in the hands of a bumbling, rambling, clueless(if likeable) nitwit.
Stop waffling on about bloody bendy buses, please! What's he on about now, Routemasters? WTF???
Very depressing. Poor old London. It deserves much, much better.
I really don't want four more years of Ken but Boris? What on earth was all that about?
I thought Paxman was pathetic at controlling this so-called debate. And, of course, he was at his patronising best.
He kept cutting in - particularly on Boris before he'd said more than a few words and his silly insistence on Boris giving him a figure on the costs of replacing bendy-buses was bizarre.
I haven't got a vote but on the basis of this debate I would probably opt for Boris because he's not Ken or the other bloke.
As for Paxman - I think he's past his best and should stick to University Challenge. He's at his best when sneering at those poor innocents who don't have his wide-ranging knowledge - oh no, he's got the answers on the cards, hasn't he?
At 10:30pm I was a Boris voter. At 10:43 I wasn't.
Out of the 3 Brian Paddick came across best - but that really should read 'least bad'.
Johnson reminded me of a graduate in his first ever job interview and he hadn't done a stroke of preparation. Lamentable
Livingstone - in between his usual arrogant self - was practically performing political felatio on Paddick "I'm a friend of the lib-dems, please put me as your second choice". Nauseating.
Paddick - although a better public speaker - had little of substance and the only time there was any real passion in his voice was when talking about tackling violence, especially amongst kids.
Although of the three, he was the only one with passion anywhere. And call me old fashioned, but I'd like the person who runs London to actually give a monkeys about London.
If these clowns are the best the political parties could muster, then our country is in a pretty bad shape.
On the 1st of May, the question won't be "London Elects" but "which foot do I shoot"
So, is this why his team have ben keeping him away from hustings? I thought it was out of fear that he'd say something too exciting ("some of my best servants are darkies"), but it seems it's the opposite.
Lucky 'Newsnight' is only watched by political obsessives, all of whom will have already made their mind up.
The Tories dug their own grave by appointing BoJo. I almost wish they had s erious candidate, as I dislike Leavingsoon as much as anyone.
Didn't watch it, as I suspect 99% of the electorate.
Besides, Johnson could have staggered on drunk, goosed the compere and then exposed himself before collapsing in a vomiting heap. It wouldn't matter in the slightest.
People would still vote for him (or Paddick, or a.n. other). They will vote against Livingstone, not for anyone else...
Ken Livingstone came over as arrogant nand smug. He tried to hide his nasty side, but it didn't always work.
Boris Johnson came over as a lightweight joke. Why on earth did the Tories choose him? He bumbled his way through the whole event.
Brian Paddick fluffed his presentation slightly, but improved considerably and at least tried to stick to the questions. If I were judging the three candidates purely on what they said, I think Brian Paddick came over best. I also think he would give a much better image to the capital. Can you really imagine Boris going out and speaking to the world on behalf of our capital city? Laughable.
Boris: Not great mastery of detail but reasonable marks for trying. Didn't really get a chance to play to his strengths. Probably just about managed to show a glimpse of the engaging side of his personality.
Ken: Seemed subdued, as if he knows he is going to lose and is just making a dogged but uninspired rearguard action. Didn't really display the detailed knowledge that he does have not any display of his humourous side.
The other one (sorry, momentarily forgotten his name, honest): Surprisingly impressive but not overwhelmingly so. Weak in several areas, probably largely due to lack of experience, but not critically so.
Probably make no difference to anyones vote.
Plus, what diablo said.
Boris was by far and away the worst. And Paxman actually showed how unmanageable the clown actually is. I notice that while you were happy to poor scorn on the Huq girl in a similar situation it is the candidates not the MC that gets it this time. There is a pattern.
Boris would be a disaster for London. Slippery, wet, dangerously vague, bullshitter. Ken was OK + from what I saw. Paddick irrelevant.
What was this doing on national television any way. Should have been confined to Points South East or whatever, as 99.9% of Britain, including most of London doesn't give a toss.
The whole enterprise was ridiculously amateurish and reminiscent of a sixth form hustings shadowing a general election.
However, the cause was not the candidates so much as the peurile format and the choice of Widow Twanky to moderate it.
In many cases the questions were merely jibes dressed up as questions or completely surreal.
The prolonged discussion re falling under the front of a bendy bus rather than the side and whether it mattered if you were drunk at the time was beyond satire.
As for Paxo, with his pinched nostrils and laughable self regard, it's about time he went back to panto. 'Oh no it isn't', do you say? Oh yes it is!
Couldn't agree more. Ken was the most comfortable among the bunch but what a pathetic advertisement for the quality of the politicians looking to lead what is supposed to be one of the world's great cities.
The 'debate' was dull, dull, dull.
Boris was just an embarassment. As a Tory, I don't know who to vote for now. Why didn't he prepare?
nonny @ 3:48 AM!
'So, is this why his team have ben keeping him away from hustings?'
They haven't, its 'The Labour Candidate' who has been avoiding them.
The bus cost question was nonsense. The Labour Candidate wants to develop an Eco-Bus. Boris said he'll use that money to develop and Eco-Routemaster.
Paxman is useless with his phoney indignation, which he applies whatever the issue and position being adopted.
Boris, Ken or the other guy should have told him to stop pointing and to ask his questions in a civil manner.
Whilst everyone has been getting excited about Tessa Jowell banning the Labour Party from using the word 'Boris', notice last night that Boris himself never once referred to Ken by name, but simply as 'The Mayor'.
Probably the one bit of 'media-coaching' Boris actually remembered all night.
Boris did try to call the Mayor Kenneth.
Post a Comment