Green Party/Dave Cameron

[slippermaiden]

I'm (reluctantly) with David Cameron on this one... Why aren't the Green Party invited to a televised debate but UKIP are?? Am I being unreasonable to think they stand a better chance than the Lib Dems?

I wonder if the Greens would benefit if excluded from a TV debate - the underdog phenomenon ?

it said I should vote green

Cameron can easily stand up to Miliband in the debate. He does it every week in the Commons, and usually comes out on top.

We may have to disagree on that. Cameron can't cope in situations that aren't stage managed and he clinging on to any excuse not to do these debates. When he's challenged, Cameron comes across as nasty and petulant, witness his personal attack on Dennis Skinner and his 'calm down dear' response to a legitimate question from a female member of parliament.

He hardly covered himself in glory in the 2010 debates and now he is faced with defending a catastrophic record in government against a charismatic bullshitter like Farage and Milliband who has nothing to lose as public perception of him is so poor anyway that he could gain some traction if he appears half way likeable and approachable.

PMQ's replies are mainly scripted as questions are not spontaneous but submitted in advance (I think)

Few people who vote Green would swing Tory

I'm a key Tory demographic in every single way, and have no intention of voting anything other than Green (as does MrsLH). Mind you, for fun, I did tell our local prospective candidate he has our full support. If we get bothered by Labour or LibDems, I would tell them the same. It seems polite and symmetrical somehow - a voter lying to a politician .

ghosty questions are submitted in advance and there are plenty of backbenchers from the governing party put up to ask tame questions such as 'Is the prime minister aware that a business in my constituency has created x new jobs and is this not proof that the government's economic policies are working?'

But because questioners are allowed a follow up question to the prime minister a custom has evolved where opposition MPs will submit their question in advance - about the Prime Minister's engagements that week and then ask their 'real' question in the follow up, hoping to catch the Prime Minister on the hop. So there is some potential for embarrassment.

In PMQs you'll hear the Prime Minister using the phrase 'I refer the honourable gentlemen/lady to the answer to the answer I gave some moments ago' to avoid repeating the same answer overr and over again.

I recall reading years back that Tory voters would happily vote Labour/Libdem if they want to punish the government, whereas Labour voters just abstain. If nothing else, it certainly highlights the tribal nature of UK politics.

Personally, I think almost everyone in the main political parties have got it badly wrong. In my line of work, I have often had to say the same thing

"The 50 year olds of today, are not the same as the 50 year olds 10 years ago."

Now this may sound trite - obvious or confusing even - but it contains a little truth that has cost some (including an company I used to work for) dear. The simplest way to illustrate this is to look at the "fact" that over 60s didn't use the internet. Which was probably quite true, 20 years ago. However, 20 years have passed, and all the then 40-year olds are now 60, and wearing the internet thin. If you based your marketing (as my company did) on that fact ...

This view can be quite a good driver - here's a blue-sky prediction. Accessibility - big fonts, easy to read screens, adjustments for problems associated with age - is going to really dominate future consumer tech. Because all you 30-something iPhone slingers are not going to stop just because you need varifocals.

Anyway, my point is politics is the same. I suspect my generation is not the same as the generation that came before. And it's the failure of politics - parties and people - to acknowledge this which has lead to the growing disillusionment felt generally across the UK.

I agree lurking and on a related note the idea of 'the pensioner' or 'the over 60s' as it conjures up an image of a frail old person eking out a meagre pension in a freezing cold run down house. When the term could equally apply to a hale and hearty cash-rich baby-boomer some 25 years their junior.

I'm 35, don't have much in common in terms of life experience , lifestyle or interests with a 60 year old and no researchers or marketers in their right mind would class us as being in the same category. Yet 'pensioners' are often lumped together as a homogeneous mass.

I for one would love to see the greens included, I'd love to see them explaining their way out of what a mess they've made in Brighton, the bin strikes and the ill- fated (then abandoned) tax increase to name but two failures.
I would think that a lot of people in the city who voted green in the last GE (myself shamefully included ) will not vote for them in this one.

I wouldn't be voting Green because I necessarily agree with them wholeheartedly. But voting Tory, Labour, Liberal, Social Democrat and LibDem hasn't really worked out either. I wouldn't touch UKIP with a bargepole, so there's very little left.

My hopes for the next government would be a hung parliament where no two single parties can form a majority. It might act as a brake on the extremist sides of all parties.

Quite a few Tories are under the impression that they didn't secure a majority in 2010 because they weren't right wing enough. I fervently hope they are wrong.

The Green policies are attractive - they want to do good things. But unfortunately they are just not feasible in the modern world.

TBH I'd like to see a repeat of the last result with a small Tory majority and an influential Liberal contingent to stop the more radical policies. But that's not going to happen, and I fear that with UKIP holding the balance it will push them further right.

No way will I vote Labour while those two Eds are at the head.

In my opinion the Greens haven't a clue about the energy needs of the UK, nor how to provide it.

So they're no worse than Tory, Labour or LibDem - certainly not the deal breaker it used to be (for me).

I disagree, the maths mean that a Lib/Lab coalition (possibly with Clegg going as the price of coalition) or Lab with SNP providing confidence and supply as the most likely outcome in my opinion.

First past the post means that the UKIP won't get anywhere enough to get more than a handful of seats (5 tops) despite polling more than double what the Lib Dems are. Luckily for the Lib Dems their support is highly concentrated.

Actually I would like to see the Tories trying to form a minority government and then implode in a sea of infighting and recriminations, but then I am spiteful like that.

I can only see a LibLab pact (where have I heard that before ) would be possible if Labour had more MPs than the Tories.

In 2010, the LibDems rejected a coalition with Labour on the basis:

1. The public had clearly rejected Labour as the incumbent
2. With Labour having fewer MPs than the Tories, they would be accused of propping up a minority.

Of course the vagaries of the UK electoral system mean a party can get 60% of the votes, and 40% of the seats, but we're all OK with that, so it's an irrelevance.

One interesting outcome would be a rerun of 2010. Tories not quite able to reach a majority and a possible LibDem coalition. However I see this as possibly the least likely outcome:

1. We don't know yet, but I suspect the LibDems have yet to pay the price for 2010-2015. They face the irrefutable accusation that they reneged on a clear manifesto commitment. Rightly or wrongly, the Tories and Labour can dodge that bullet

2. The landscape of UK politics has fractured in ways never seen before. The demise of Scottish Labour (and the corresponding rise of the SNP) does lead to a very real possibility that the SNP could hold a balance of power. In the UK. We have no idea how that could play out.

3. The Tories are still trying to be all things to all men - so basically dishonest. Are they Pro-EU ? Or anti-EU ? You can't have an official position of "pro" and then a phalanx of backbenchers who are clearly anti. I think some of the electorate are confused too. What does a pro-EU Tory (yes, they exist) do ?

So, interesting times we live in.

Having survived the 1992 election, when the only question was "how big will Labours majority be", I am very wary of pundits, pollsters and predictions.

Sorry Lurking I should have said on the proviso that Labour were the biggest party, but still short of a majority, which is what most of the polls seem to suggest.