Balanced Question Time panel tonight - of course not!
Discussion
chrisgtx said:
Really,you must of been watching a different program to us, she went very quiet after Farage pointed out how badly labours PFI went,although when anyone else mentions the NHS they just shout 'privatisation'.
He, like me perhaps, might have tottered off to the fridge for another cool oneI missed her being superb though, PFI shut her up comprehensively
Brand?
Is he the odd looking chap who was sat down fairly hushed up?
Thought so
HewManHeMan said:
I must have been watching a different program.
Farage trottered out his usual sound bite bellendery whilst that Labour lady (who's name escapes me) seemed to shoot down every point she was given the opportunity to with stone cold facts and figures.
Farage stands for highly emotive subjects posturing as a straight talker, but peddles nothing more than prejudiced nonsense designed to whip up the support of the terminally ignorant. See the loudest audience members for examples.
Brand is Brand. He's a comedian. He could never go toe to toe with a full time politician because arguing their point - often to the misinformed - is what they do. Raise the conversation and you alienate the audience. Brand is used to enthusiastically summarising to the reasonably educated, Farage skillfully articulates misinformation to the stupid. Yeah, this being PH, you lot will disagree, but was there any need to employ an overly aggressive tone when talking easy, emotive, wins to the audience? Of course not. It's all part of his game.
Both Farage and Brand are clowns. Nothing more. But Brand has his heart in the right place. Farage is just a
.
That Labour lady, however, was superb.
I think you were. Creagh was utterly abysmal and didn't remotely get the better of Farage. Farage trottered out his usual sound bite bellendery whilst that Labour lady (who's name escapes me) seemed to shoot down every point she was given the opportunity to with stone cold facts and figures.
Farage stands for highly emotive subjects posturing as a straight talker, but peddles nothing more than prejudiced nonsense designed to whip up the support of the terminally ignorant. See the loudest audience members for examples.
Brand is Brand. He's a comedian. He could never go toe to toe with a full time politician because arguing their point - often to the misinformed - is what they do. Raise the conversation and you alienate the audience. Brand is used to enthusiastically summarising to the reasonably educated, Farage skillfully articulates misinformation to the stupid. Yeah, this being PH, you lot will disagree, but was there any need to employ an overly aggressive tone when talking easy, emotive, wins to the audience? Of course not. It's all part of his game.
Both Farage and Brand are clowns. Nothing more. But Brand has his heart in the right place. Farage is just a
.That Labour lady, however, was superb.
HewManHeMan said:
I must have been watching a different program.
Creagh trottered out the usual sound bite bellendery whilst that Conservative lady (who's name escapes me) seemed to shoot down every point she was given the opportunity to with stone cold facts and figures.
Creagh stands for highly emotive subjects posturing as a straight talker, but peddles nothing more than prejudiced nonsense designed to whip up the support of the terminally ignorant. See the loudest audience members for examples.
Brand is Brand. He's a comedian. He could never go toe to toe with a full time politician because arguing their point - often to the misinformed - is what they do. Raise the conversation and you alienate the audience. Brand is used to enthusiastically summarising to the reasonably educated...
One mans meat...Creagh trottered out the usual sound bite bellendery whilst that Conservative lady (who's name escapes me) seemed to shoot down every point she was given the opportunity to with stone cold facts and figures.
Creagh stands for highly emotive subjects posturing as a straight talker, but peddles nothing more than prejudiced nonsense designed to whip up the support of the terminally ignorant. See the loudest audience members for examples.
Brand is Brand. He's a comedian. He could never go toe to toe with a full time politician because arguing their point - often to the misinformed - is what they do. Raise the conversation and you alienate the audience. Brand is used to enthusiastically summarising to the reasonably educated...
In other news, crazy socialists refuse to listen to alternative views and shout them down using any epithet they choose - "racist!"
One issue panellist turns every question into the only thing they think they know about...
Journalist looks mildly peeved at having to deal with idiots, speaks sense and frankly will still be poorly thought of by the hard of thinking due to the "phone hacking scandal"
Dimbleby lets over active audience members heckle and berate panellists who he doesn't agree with - for far too long - but surprisingly they come out of it looking ok.
Common sense and the chance to actually change things for the better is overlooked in cheap point scoring non-shocker.
World keeps spinning, general public remain in a position of fed cattle. We're important, but only up to a point.
pork911 said:
Northern Munkee said:
Norfolkit said:
Northern Munkee said:
HonestIago said:
Did enjoy the disabled chap leaping to Farage's defence after the st Brand started saying about him.
Call me a cynic but I could imagine that man would be the perfect UKIP plant. I mean Brand couldn't call a disabled man racist (that's the level politics has reached). And a loud enough disabled man, that he just couldn't shout him down. Shout down a disabled man?! Brand stumped how would that play, and stumped for the rest of the show.t Brand started saying about him. Nice one "mate".
Norfolkit said:
I post on here, I don't claim to represent anyone but myself, Brand is all over the press/ Newsnight et al putting the case for the downtrodden masses, speaking for "the people", he elected himself, fair enough, no-one else would elect him.
the only difference is scale of exposurenewsnight editor - 'we'll have to go with Brand as Norfolkit said no'
A surprisingly good QT edition. I enjoyed that. Cam Cavendish was head and shoulders above the rest in terms of making well-argued apolitical points. Farage was an excellent orator as always. Highpoint for me was Bland being exposed by himself as a vacuous fool and also being soundly put in his place by the disabled UKIP man. The forgettable and condescending labour twit damaged her parties chances considerably and should get a weekly gig imho. Tory lady made up the numbers.
pork911 said:
Norfolkit said:
I post on here, I don't claim to represent anyone but myself, Brand is all over the press/ Newsnight et al putting the case for the downtrodden masses, speaking for "the people", he elected himself, fair enough, no-one else would elect him.
the only difference is scale of exposurenewsnight editor - 'we'll have to go with Brand as Norfolkit said no'
chrisgtx said:
HewManHeMan said:
Well, this went as expected.
Not really,the labour woman didn't do very well. I think even she would admit that.I though her performance was poor too, and though the best performer on the night was the reporter that sat next to brand.
The first question kinda disarmed Brand and farage while brand was further disarmed by the women giving him a b
king for talking over them.The annoying thing about Russell Brand is that he genuinely thinks nobody else has had his ideas before. Like he's just discovered them. He's let the side down there. The way he handled the Grammar School question was bloody stupid. The tt. No research. It was bound to come up and he had no idea. I agree with him about a good many things but he cannot, and will not understand the complexity of the entire picture. Cavendish made him look at utter fool. Made them all look daft. Except for Farage. He played a blinder. His answer to the NHS question was both eloquent and thoughtful. He continues to surprise.
t. No research. It was bound to come up and he had no idea. I agree with him about a good many things but he cannot, and will not understand the complexity of the entire picture. Cavendish made him look at utter fool. Made them all look daft. Except for Farage. He played a blinder. His answer to the NHS question was both eloquent and thoughtful. He continues to surprise. pork911 said:
HewManHeMan said:
That Labour lady, however, was superb.
huh?Despite or because of my small c conservative values of a lifetime, she and so many others are the reason I'm very unlikely to ever vote Labour again despite being pleased to do so in the past.
Two other women and one man on the panel were impressively restrained and considered.
Some of the audience played a blinder too. That rarely happens on QT.
Come May next year, all things considered, I'm 99% leaning towards voting for a party I've never done so before.
HewManHeMan said:
Well, this went as expected.
This? If you mean your defence of the Labour lady, it falters on three aspects:
1. Farage clobbered her on PFI
2. CC utterly dismantled her on NHS "privatisation"
3. DD showed her up on the overcrowding question when he asked simply "Do you know what % of the SE is built on" and she had to answer no when trying to defend her position of only 10% of the country was built on. On a QT filmed in the SE.
Her credibility was shot down in flames by 3 different members of the panel inc. the Chairman .
W124 said:
The annoying thing about Russell Brand is that he genuinely thinks nobody else has had his ideas before. Like he's just discovered them. He's let the side down there. The way he handled the Grammar School question was bloody stupid. The tt. No research. It was bound to come up and he had no idea. I agree with him about a good many things but he cannot, and will not understand the complexity of the entire picture. Cavendish made him look at utter fool. Made them all look daft. Except for Farage. He played a blinder. His answer to the NHS question was both eloquent and thoughtful. He continues to surprise.
Super Mr Faraget. No research. It was bound to come up and he had no idea. I agree with him about a good many things but he cannot, and will not understand the complexity of the entire picture. Cavendish made him look at utter fool. Made them all look daft. Except for Farage. He played a blinder. His answer to the NHS question was both eloquent and thoughtful. He continues to surprise. Why surprise?
have you not been following?
dandarez said:
Farage never underestimates an opponent
I'm not sure that's true is it. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pyYoL9ngtEI watched QT for the first time in months expecting the clash of the gobs
tes and to be honest was disappointed.Neither offered anything new. The audience was loaded with supporters for both and whole thing just felt staged to try and raise the profile of the programme.
the UKIP supporters are going to carry on blaming traffic jams on immigrants and the RB followers are going to carry on blaming city bankers for the price of yoghurt.
It's all very depressing.
Northern Munkee said:
Norfolkit said:
Northern Munkee said:
HonestIago said:
Did enjoy the disabled chap leaping to Farage's defence after the st Brand started saying about him.
Call me a cynic but I could imagine that man would be the perfect UKIP plant. I mean Brand couldn't call a disabled man racist (that's the level politics has reached). And a loud enough disabled man, that he just couldn't shout him down. Shout down a disabled man?! Brand stumped how would that play, and stumped for the rest of the show.t Brand started saying about him. Nice one "mate".
ks, I'd respect him if he admitted he likes his life as it is and making a very comfortable living being a comedian shagging impressionable women; that was a weaselly cop out worthy of Neil Hamilton. Dismal content- and solution-free whining filled the rest of his airtime.Farage was just Farage, avoided any landmines but didn't say anything surprising.
Cavendish was the best of a poor show by some distance.
Tory lady flannelled like a pro; I can't recall any of it, except that she could muster no reason, rational or otherwise, for not allowing the creation of new grammar schools; the practical difference betwixt grammar and a selective free school or academy must be more semantic than real.
Labour lady failed to land any punches, flinched when b
hslapped over PFI.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff