Western Standard

The Shotgun Blog

« Freedom of religion is redundant | Main | Planned Obsolescence »

Friday, April 23, 2010

UK Election Debate 2010 (ii)

Yesterday Britain enjoyed their second Leader’s Debate (or what they have chosen to call Prime Ministerial debate). I must say that I am enjoying these debates much more than the Canadian counterparts. I guess it helps to not have buffoons like Elizabeth May participating.

I previously said that this would be an important debate for Nick Clegg and I think he did well. He was the most dynamic and interesting to watch of the three, and on several occasions he managed to dominate the discussion. He had a great trick of constantly bringing the debate back to the question and interacting with the questioner beyond the first response. This helped him sell the idea that he is part of a ‘new style of politics’ that is more interested in people and not spin.

David Cameron did much better in this debate than he did in the previous debate. He actually did more in this debate to win me over than he has ever managed to do. He spoke to core conservative supporters by talking a lot about how people should take responsibility for themselves and how government rewards the irresponsible. He came off as honest and sincere, though perhaps not as passionate as Mr. Clegg.

Gordon Brown had a horrible debate. His opening statement insisted that the debate wasn’t a game show, which was lame because I doubt anyone watching it was thinking that it was. Also he tried to be witty when he accused Mr. Clegg and Mr. Cameron of ‘quibbling.’ This fell flat because frankly they weren’t quibbling at all. The Telegraph revealed today that this was a prepared line and you can really tell.

Over all I would have to say that after this debate Mr. Clegg is going to continue to be a player in this election. If David Cameron had done worse he might have been on his way to Number 10, but as it is things are still uncertain.

Posted by Hugh MacIntyre on April 23, 2010 | Permalink

Comments

The biggest question: Why can't the voters also hear from UKIP?

Surely they are the party that most closely represents the views of the Western Standard, right?

Posted by: Mike Vine | 2010-04-23 12:54:28 PM


The Conservatives under Cameron have spit on the legacy of both Churchill and Thatcher! He is the new Ted Heath(like the loser Joe Clark or Gerald Ford for the North American audience). These were guys who run as the candidate of the center-right party but governed center-left. The BNP is correct about getting tough on crime and bringing back the death penalty. However, the party also seems to be led by a holocaust denier who supports pseudo-socialist economic policies(British Labour party like)and has a problem with non-whites. The Liberal Democrats are really a center-left big government party. What plans do they have to reduce personal or corporate tax rates? Where in their platform does it call for cutting spending in any department other than defense? This so-called "liberal" party is as close to classical liberalism as the socialist Democratic Party! The party has joined with Labour to promote an asinine level of political correctness on the British public! The only real choice is the UKIP(United Kingdom Independence Party). The UKIP wants to cut taxes and reduce regulation. They also want to have a referendum to remove the regulations, policies, and taxes that the European Union has forced on British society. They also call for getting tough on crime(including letting the British public decide on bringing back the death penalty) rather than letting Brussels dictating policing strategies. Also, they oppose the outlawing of the foxhunt and are open to reinstating the right of law abiding private citizens to own handguns.

Posted by: Boch | 2010-04-23 6:48:39 PM



The comments to this entry are closed.