Hi, Welcome!

The community is a safe space for people living with and connected to arthritis to ask questions and share experiences. Get started by registering here and posting your first comment or question!

Sign In with a Versus Arthritis account

Election coverage

stickywicketstickywicket Posts: 25,992 ✭✭✭
edited 14. Jan 2015, 05:32 in Community Chit-chat archive
I caught a bit of a politics programme on Radio 4 in which people were asked what sort of election coverage they'd most like.

Overwhelmingly people wanted politicians to say what they would do and how they'd pay for it NOT just criticise what their opponents were doing or promising to do.

One brilliant idea was no live interviews – all should be recorded in advance and, the minute the politician went off subject, started waffling or talking about his opponents, that section should be cut out of the subsequently broadcast interview. If it was pure waffle etc the interviewer should explain that was why there was no interview broadcast :D

There was also a plea for no political wives, especially of them holding baby lambs or visiting children's hospices :lol:

I'm sure you all have your own ideas.
“There is always a well-known solution to every human problem - neat, plausible, and wrong.” H.L. Mencken

Comments

  • LadybrownLadybrown Posts: 130
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    We'd all save a lot of time if they were only allowed to talk about their own actions! And I love the idea of cutting out all the waffle and tangents!
  • LignumVitaeLignumVitae Posts: 1,972
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    Personally I would make each party submit three sides of A4 with a bullet for each government department - NHS, defence, community, education, environment etc. Further info can be available to beef the summary up. Each party would have to submit at 10 am Monday three weeks before the election so there could be no reflexive policies, prior to this no policy options could be discussed. There would then be ONE televised and radio broadcast debate where each could set out their options and justify them. That would be it.

    I heard a programme on the radio where they were discussing the three main parties already holding meetings to negotiate coalition agreements - sounds like they have already decided what we will do. :x :roll:
    Hey little fighter, things will get brighter
  • theresaktheresak Posts: 1,998
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    I`m all for cutting out the waffle, and the constant carping about the policies of opposition parties. I`m definitely against using any form of " props " to gain votes, whether they be babies; cute puppies; little fluffy lambs etc.

    Perhaps a time limit on any speech so they have to concentrate on the most important/relevant points to voters.
  • stickywicketstickywicket Posts: 25,992 ✭✭✭
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    What really bugs me is when they talk over each other so you can't hear either. I've seen it done deliberately so that an opponent's valid and cogent argument couldn't be heard. I would love, on say Question Time or Newsnight for the question master / interviewer to simply disconnect all but the current speaker, who would have a limited time in which to speak.

    I am now envisaging debates 'Just a minute' style.

    “David Cameron / Ed Milliband / Nick Clegg etc you have one minute to outline your plans for the economy / NHS / education etc etc. No hesitation, deviation, repetition or dissing your opponents. If you do so, the buzzer will go, you will automatically be disconnected from the microphone and you will have handed control and opportunity over to your rival instead.”

    LV, I'm guessing you meant 'a bullet point' for each department, not just a bullet but I guess both ideas have their merits :wink:
    “There is always a well-known solution to every human problem - neat, plausible, and wrong.” H.L. Mencken
  • theresaktheresak Posts: 1,998
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    What really bugs me is when they talk over each other so you can't hear either. I've seen it done deliberately so that an opponent's valid and cogent argument couldn't be heard. I would love, on say Question Time or Newsnight for the question master / interviewer to simply disconnect all but the current speaker, who would have a limited time in which to speak.

    I am now envisaging debates 'Just a minute' style.

    “David Cameron / Ed Milliband / Nick Clegg etc you have one minute to outline your plans for the economy / NHS / education etc etc. No hesitation, deviation, repetition or dissing your opponents. If you do so, the buzzer will go, you will automatically be disconnected from the microphone and you will have handed control and opportunity over to your rival instead.”

    LV, I'm guessing you meant 'a bullet point' for each department, not just a bullet but I guess both ideas have their merits :wink:


    Put them in the Mastermind chair and shine a spotlight on them during their allotted speaking time!!
  • barbara12barbara12 Posts: 20,857
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    I would like to hear plain and simple truth..instead of saying what they think we want to hear...or do they not understand the word..maybe let them them take a lie detector... :)
    Love
    Barbara
  • stickywicketstickywicket Posts: 25,992 ✭✭✭
    edited 30. Nov -1, 00:00
    Ooooh I like the lie detector, Barbara :lol:
    “There is always a well-known solution to every human problem - neat, plausible, and wrong.” H.L. Mencken
Sign In or Register to comment.