Tory lead down to 2%

[unrepentant]

deadslow said:

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Hague certainly. Clarke is proven, he was an excellent chancellor and has held a number of other key offices, including Home Sec and Health Sec. Willets and Gove both have brilliant minds but are weirdos. As for the rest;

Osborne -
Fox - should have stuck to medicine
May - horrible old bint
Greg Clark - who?
Francois - eh?
Grayling - nonentity
Grieve - boring
Pickles - you're having a laugh right?
Letwin - enough said
Hunt - you know what it rhymes with
Maude - wet and past it
Mitchell - horrible
Young - should have been speaker, decent bloke
Warsi - ok
Villiers - lightweight
Shapps - who?
Spelman - average
Strathclyde - decent
Neville Jones - headed the JIC so at least has relevant experience
Mundell - who?
Paterson - eh?
McCoughlin - who?
Herbert - looks a right one
Lansley - average
Hammond - anonymous
Gillan - token taff

[The Hypno-Toad]

CDP said:

Mclovin said:

the first day of a new government, you could cut the publicity down to what it was 10 years ago and bang your saved a couple of billion - check out the number of bloody directcrapgov and quango adverts there are on bloody tv and radio....

I don't listen to commercial radio much but when I went to the gym yesterday the number of government messages was frankly astonishing and accounted for at least half the adverts played. In fact I can't imagine that channel would be feasible with purely commercial advertising.

Maybe this is why ITV is profitable again?

Cameron said they can save half a billion on government advertising but I'm wondering if they could do a lot better than that.

This issue has been bugging me for quite awhile to.

So lets get this straight, if Liarbour don't get back in then ITV might lose half their advertising revenue? Because if that is the case, it might give them a very good reason not to show unflattering or critical news items on Brown & his cronies during the election. In fact, it might even led them to more critical of the Tories.

But of course this is the UK and that could never happen could it?

[JagLover]

deadslow said:

tinman0 said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Is Cameron going to be a better leader than Brown? Somehow I doubt it. Even with all the bad press, the animosity and distain directed towards the labour party and Brown, Cameron still possesses the charisma and more important the gravitas of a low ranking civil servant. The man doesn't cut it as a viable leader, less so every day. There's no sustance to him.

You mean it's possible to be worse than Brown?

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Are any of the Labour front bench?

[JagLover]

drivin_me_nuts said:

I can't think of the last time I heard a really compelling political speech. It seems to be an artform completely lost to the latest generation of politicans hung up on soundbites and attention seeking one liners.

The sort that can be played on a 30 second slot in the evening news you mean?.

Given how today's electorate ignores parlimentary debates politicians have to change their style to suit.

[Fittster]

unrepentant said:

deadslow said:

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Hague certainly. Clarke is proven, he was an excellent chancellor and has held a number of other key offices, including Home Sec and Health Sec. Willets and Gove both have brilliant minds but are weirdos. As for the rest;

The general public have already voiced their opinion on Hague, he is yesterdays failure. Clarke is poison to the party and tory voters. Fancy listing the labour cabinet?

[sadoksevoli]

Fittster said:

unrepentant said:

deadslow said:

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Hague certainly. Clarke is proven, he was an excellent chancellor and has held a number of other key offices, including Home Sec and Health Sec. Willets and Gove both have brilliant minds but are weirdos. As for the rest;

The general public have already voiced their opinion on Hague, he is yesterdays failure. Clarke is poison to the party and tory voters. Fancy listing the labour cabinet?

I'd like to give the general public a chance to reconsider their verdict on Hague (a la Irish Lisbon Treaty referendum maybe). He's 10 years older, hopefully wiser (except when it comes to believing very rich ba5tards who want a peerage), and afer 9 more years of Blair and WInky since 2001, I think the electorate might jsut see the error of their ways.... except Labour will bribe the electorate, smear and get personal on the opposition, rig the vote and keep politics nice and dumbed down.

[Oilchange]

I would say of all the people in the Commons that are embarrassing, its Gordon Brown and Harriet Harman. He is either Stalin or Mr Bean, can't answer a straight question and is described as the worst PM in living memory and she can't string a coherent sentence together.

That's a national embarrassment.

[TASS]

[drivin_me_nuts]

JagLover said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

I can't think of the last time I heard a really compelling political speech. It seems to be an artform completely lost to the latest generation of politicans hung up on soundbites and attention seeking one liners.

The sort that can be played on a 30 second slot in the evening news you mean?.

Given how today's electorate ignores parlimentary debates politicians have to change their style to suit.

I agree, politicians have to alter their style to suit. But saying that there has to be something beyond the 'soundbite generation'. I am reminded of the sketches on the BBC by Miller and Armstrong ... give me the facts ... soundbite trinkets that add up to little more than tackly charms on a cheap silver bracelet.

Where is the policy, the meat, the substance, the grit of a full repast that lies behind the short PR friendly News24 infomercials? I think that over the last few years, starting with and perhaps a little before Blair we've got so used to a style of presentation that delivers punchy straplines but little body. Brown doesn't have the charisma for this style of politics, he's a lumbering herbivore, whereas Cameron is little more than a two fanged rodent trying to pull him down.

It's frustrating to watch when you realise the debate is between a politically dead lumbering dinosaur and a rat with teeth that can barely scratch the underbelly, whilst at the same time, we have huge decisions to make about the future of this nation, that neither side seems to be prepared to be up front and honest about. Whilst they fight, the meteor is about to hit and wipe them and us all out yet they carry on scrapping over the politics of personailty.

I hope they just wise up in time to realise, actually most people could not care who the top of the tree is providing they have both the courage to make the decisions that matter and the tenacity to see them through. Brown or Cameron? I don't care. Just get off your damned self serving ego trip and fix the damned mess so we can all move on.

[tinman0]

unrepentant said:

deadslow said:

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Hague certainly. Clarke is proven, he was an excellent chancellor and has held a number of other key offices, including Home Sec and Health Sec. Willets and Gove both have brilliant minds but are weirdos. As for the rest;

Osborne -
Fox - should have stuck to medicine
May - horrible old bint
Greg Clark - who?
Francois - eh?
Grayling - nonentity
Grieve - boring
Pickles - you're having a laugh right?
Letwin - enough said
Hunt - you know what it rhymes with
Maude - wet and past it
Mitchell - horrible
Young - should have been speaker, decent bloke
Warsi - ok
Villiers - lightweight
Shapps - who?
Spelman - average
Strathclyde - decent
Neville Jones - headed the JIC so at least has relevant experience
Mundell - who?
Paterson - eh?
McCoughlin - who?
Herbert - looks a right one
Lansley - average
Hammond - anonymous
Gillan - token taff

Unfortunately, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, these two make the list above look pretty good:

[s2art]

The problem is that the Tories are also clueless.

Read; http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/chri...

[JagLover]

tinman0 said:

Unfortunately, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, these two make the list above look pretty good:

Not to forget Ed Balls and Harriet Harperson as well.

The prospect of Ed Balls as Chancellor if Labour steal the next election is truly a horror to contemplate.

[TASS]

tinman0 said:

unrepentant said:

deadslow said:

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

Hague certainly. Clarke is proven, he was an excellent chancellor and has held a number of other key offices, including Home Sec and Health Sec. Willets and Gove both have brilliant minds but are weirdos. As for the rest;

Osborne -
Fox - should have stuck to medicine
May - horrible old bint
Greg Clark - who?
Francois - eh?
Grayling - nonentity
Grieve - boring
Pickles - you're having a laugh right?
Letwin - enough said
Hunt - you know what it rhymes with
Maude - wet and past it
Mitchell - horrible
Young - should have been speaker, decent bloke
Warsi - ok
Villiers - lightweight
Shapps - who?
Spelman - average
Strathclyde - decent
Neville Jones - headed the JIC so at least has relevant experience
Mundell - who?
Paterson - eh?
McCoughlin - who?
Herbert - looks a right one
Lansley - average
Hammond - anonymous
Gillan - token taff

Unfortunately, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, these two make the list above look pretty good:

I'll drink to that, this pair epitomise the modern career politician, utterly ignorant and inexperienced in anything other than trying to convince people they telling the truth when, in reality, they are not.

I'm not a violent person but the mere sight of them makes me want to hurt little fluffy things

[unrepentant]

tinman0 said:

Unfortunately, no matter how right (or wrong) you are, these two make the list above look pretty good:

Oh the Millipedes are awful, as are the rest of the cabinet. The problem is that we want them removed and therefore we have to have an alternative. The Tory front bench is shockingly second rate. After 13 years in opposition they should have a premiership standard team that the public can believe in. When Labour came in they had frontline politicians who the public believed (rightly or wrongly) offered a better alternative. Blair was personally very popular in 97 and Brown was highly respected, as were Mowlam, Blunkett, Cook, Dewar and Straw. Whatever we think of them now they had genuine credability back in 97. The CMD tories are a mixture of has beens, never will be's and jokes. Apart from Hague and Clarke there is not a credible politician amongst them.

[Olivera]

drivin_me_nuts said:

deadslow said:

tinman0 said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Is Cameron going to be a better leader than Brown? Somehow I doubt it. Even with all the bad press, the animosity and distain directed towards the labour party and Brown, Cameron still possesses the charisma and more important the gravitas of a low ranking civil servant. The man doesn't cut it as a viable leader, less so every day. There's no sustance to him.

You mean it's possible to be worse than Brown?

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

William Hague. He seems to be that rare thing in politics, a conviction politician that comes across as smart, savvy and genuine.

[sadoksevoli]

Olivera said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

deadslow said:

tinman0 said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Is Cameron going to be a better leader than Brown? Somehow I doubt it. Even with all the bad press, the animosity and distain directed towards the labour party and Brown, Cameron still possesses the charisma and more important the gravitas of a low ranking civil servant. The man doesn't cut it as a viable leader, less so every day. There's no sustance to him.

You mean it's possible to be worse than Brown?

Tell the truth. Are any of the Tory front bench Cabinet material? They are embarrassing.

William Hague. He seems to be that rare thing in politics, a conviction politician that comes across as smart, savvy and genuine.

ummm, what's your point? It's a man at a theme park.

[Pesty]

I used to like him until I heard him do several interviews on the non dom status of Ashcroft.

He was embarresingly evasive and I do not for one minute belive he didn't know what teh score was.

(ps i don't think ashcroft is an issue Labour are being tts about it backed by the media its just he couldn't handle the questions and I do not trust him one little bit.)

[Iain328]

Pesty said:

I used to like him until I heard him do several interviews on the non dom status of Ashcroft.

He was embarresingly evasive and I do not for one minute belive he didn't know what teh score was.

(ps i don't think ashcroft is an issue Labour are being tts about it backed by the media its just he couldn't handle the questions and I do not trust him one little bit.)

Maybe he was evasive about it - but , given that no laws were being broken, was it really his place to disuss another man's private financial affairs & tax status? Indeed, which cretin of an interviewer even bothered to ask the question to Hague but not to Ashcroft himself?

Let me guess - its was the BBC.

[Oilchange]

Yes the Millipedes are laughable but when you say New Labour were voted in on 'frontline politicians the public believed in' well thats laughable also.

The Conservatives were voted out, not Labour voted in. Labour simply played on the fractured Tory Government at the time and Tory voters looked for an alternative, which was smiling Tony. He played the middle ground and won.

Time to get rid of these Champagne Socialists and rebuild this st economy into what it was when Clarke was Chancellor!

[quote]
Oh the Millipedes are awful, as are the rest of the cabinet. The problem is that we want them removed and therefore we have to have an alternative. The Tory front bench is shockingly second rate. After 13 years in opposition they should have a premiership standard team that the public can believe in. When Labour came in they had frontline politicians who the public believed (rightly or wrongly) offered a better alternative. Blair was personally very popular in 97 and Brown was highly respected, as were Mowlam, Blunkett, Cook, Dewar and Straw. Whatever we think of them now they had genuine credability back in 97. The CMD tories are a mixture of has beens, never will be's and jokes. Apart from Hague and Clarke there is not a credible politician amongst them.
[/quote]

[Wacky Racer]

TASS said:

I'm not a violent person but the mere sight of them makes me want to hurt little fluffy things