Paxman spot on on the election and PPEs

[claig]

"He [Paxman] branded the choice at this election as being 'between one man who was at primary school with Boris Johnson and one man who was at secondary school with him - both of whom did PPE at Oxford.'

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3058362/Jeremy-Paxman-reveals-no-longer-watches-Newsnight-prefers-ITV-dating-Out.html

What a game, what a laugh for the PPEs and the Oxbridge teenage advisers.

Both PPEs are advised by theie teenage teams to brush up on their mockney and get as "lively" as possible and try not to grin when being questioned and caught out.

"Keep it real" is the advice they get, but method acting is the closest they get to real.

No wonder so many people don't vote when the sides can barely be told apart.

Yep, the "liveliness" is phoney and the whole game seems phoney. But this time, Scotland has blown the whole charade wide open, as the teenage teams are faced with a quasi revolution and a real threat. that's why they have been told to get "lively" and to seak with Russell Brand.

Paxman has acknowledged he is a conservative supporter. He is just trying to play down the wealth gap between Labour and the Conservatives. It's a defensive play.

He's a bit of an old fox, that's all. One think I've noticed is that cynics tend to be quite conservative at heart. They don't believe anything can change and they can't be bothered making an effort, so they like to neutralise everything in their own mind; everyone is the same self-interested so and so ... Why is this bastard lying to me ... Paxman is entertaining but you have to be careful. His attitude tends to switch off people who already get the rough end of conservative party policies and attitudes.

The Tory press love to make out all politicians are the same. It's a strategy not a fact.

Is it their background that matters? Is it all about the individual any way? What about the wider policies and wider team?

In recent elections we have mimicked the U.S. by obsessing about the individual leaders but it's a flawed approach as we don't ha e a Presidential system, we have Cabinet government and the Party we choose is at liberty to change their Leader, and our Prine Minister, at anytime without consultation. That's why policies and the personalities of other senior Party members are key.

It shouldn't be about peoples backgrounds but take a look at the conservative government. Are they really in a position to say that they have looked widely to bring in the best talent to the current government?

There is a just a small group of old school mates at the centre of the action. It sends out the signal that they couldn't care less about anyone else. You can't blame voters if you don't make an effort yourself.

Good points about Paxman, kitchin.

But the reality is that there is not much substantial difference between the opposing two teams. I don't think it is a coincidence that their elite class, the top echelons, both went to the same colleges and studied the same courses. That is how it is all kept on course by the system. That is how the game is played, the players know the rules.

The game is to try and convince the people how different they are, but it is not really working as he majority think they "are all the same".