David Cameron and Ed Miliband Live Q&A Watch

drowzee
Badges: 15
Rep:
?
#81
Report 4 years ago
#81
Paxman being a **** as usual. Expecting simplistic answers from complex issues. I really admire the way Milliband conducted himself after those brutal and personal attacks, he really did come across as passionate. Overall I think he came across better than Cameron, especially since Paxman was giving him a worse time than Cameron. I definitely have a slightly better opinion of him now.
1
reply
miser
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#82
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#82
(Original post by cole-slaw)
But he repeatedly insists on trying to get a simple answer to a question to which there is no simple answer. Its politics for aggressive braindead morons.
I think that's not quite right - rather there is a mix between a testing of the integrity of policy, and the integrity of character. A prime minister necessarily needs to be firm and argue his corner, even when it gets personal. I think it was appropriate to push them, even if it was to deliver a yes or no on a complex question.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#83
Report 4 years ago
#83
(Original post by ThatPerson)
I don't usually watch Question Time or Paxman interviews. Do you know if the personal line of questioning was normal for Paxman? I'm all for giving politicians a hard time on policy, but the questions about his brother were in particularly poor taste.

About 15 years ago, Paxman used to be a tough but fair interviewer. But he's become less and less intelligent as time has gone on, and is now a lazy and extremely poor interviewer, asking stupid, ill-informed and often incoherent questions, and resorting to pointless trolling instead of hardhitting questioning.


But tonight really was a new low. He was so obviously biased it was embarrassing.
0
reply
KingStannis
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#84
Report 4 years ago
#84
Considering that kind of attack is politicians like Dave and Ed's bread and butter, I can't wait to see Bennett get destroyed by them.
0
reply
dumb cabbage
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#85
Report 4 years ago
#85
omfg it's annoyed me so much how he was asking Ed personal questions about his life and about his brother even the audience did that! Honestly the whole purpose of this interview was to see what Ed and David will do if they became prime minister yet Ed was grinded about his brother, that's his private life it's nothing to do with how Ed will be as a prime minister but I love how Ed gave him taste of his own medicine! Anyone agree?


Posted from TSR Mobile
1
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#86
Report 4 years ago
#86
(Original post by miser)
I think that's not quite right - rather there is a mix between a testing of the integrity of policy, and the integrity of character. A prime minister necessarily needs to be firm and argue his corner, even when it gets personal. I think it was appropriate to push them, even if it was to deliver a yes or no on a complex question.

So why did he spend his 15 minutes with Cameron ticking his balls with the tip of his tongue?

and no, I don't accept that it is ever useful, helpful or informative for an interviewer to ask illogical and nonsensical questions in an increasingly aggressive manner. How is the interviewee expected to answer a question that doesn't even make sense?

If I was sitting there, I'd just tell him to **** off and come back when he's thought of a coherent question that actually makes sense.

That probably wouldn't go down well... hence the reason I am an economist and not a politician.
0
reply
mogwai98
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#87
Report 4 years ago
#87
I think Miliband has come well out of this, despite quite childish comments and questions by Paxman. Did he really have to ask Miliband if he was okay at the end? Why would he not be okay? He appeared fairly confident and assured throughout, unlike Cameron who was completely uninspiring. Hopefully we'll see a shift in the polls after this.
0
reply
viddy9
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#88
Report 4 years ago
#88
Paxman's ad hominem attacks were completely illogical. Why should the quizmaster of University Challenge have a problem with geeks, who are intelligent, driven people, running our country?

Miliband did very well in the questions and towards the end with Paxman, and even managed to turn the tables on Paxman as well.

Burley thought that his strained relationship with his brother was important. What else would I expect from someone paid by Rupert Murdoch.
1
reply
Chief Wiggum
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#89
Report 4 years ago
#89
Guardian/ICM poll on performances:

Cameron 54%
Miliband 46%

I always think these things influence people in the wrong way. They base their views on style over substance, eg who seemed more confident etc.

Personally, I thought miliband did better, but these things are always easier for the "challenger".
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#90
Report 4 years ago
#90
Well done Ed.

Nothing substantial enough to affect my vote but he did well. It will be interesting to see any polling effects.
0
reply
Serine Soul
Badges: 18
#91
Report 4 years ago
#91
This confirmed who I'd vote for if I could vote
0
reply
Commercial Paper
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#92
Report 4 years ago
#92
(Original post by mogwai98)
I think Miliband has come well out of this, despite quite childish comments and questions by Paxman. Did he really have to ask Miliband he was okay at the end? Why would he not be okay? He appeared fairly confident and assured throughout, unlike Cameron who was completely uninspiring. Hopefully we'll see a shift in the polls after this.
I don't think we were suppose to hear that, they forgot to turn his mic off before they cut to the closing credits.

Posted from TSR Mobile
0
reply
Rakas21
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#93
Report 4 years ago
#93
(Original post by Chief Wiggum)
Guardian/ICM poll on performances:

Cameron 54%
Miliband 46%
Interesting.

I wonder if it's a bit like Clegg and Farage last year. Clegg clearly won the first debate but the polls said he lost (presumably because people had already decided they dislike him).

If this is the case then Ed will need more performances like that to change opinions.

The tables should be interesting in terms of who Ukip and Lib Dem voters said they'd won.
0
reply
ThatPerson
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#94
Report 4 years ago
#94
(Original post by miser)
I think that's not quite right - rather there is a mix between a testing of the integrity of policy, and the integrity of character. A prime minister necessarily needs to be firm and argue his corner, even when it gets personal. I think it was appropriate to push them, even if it was to deliver a yes or no on a complex question.
Paxman tended to push for an answer when there was no real answer to give. ie Paxman asks a question 'Did you borrow too much?", Miliband replies "...I think the overall point, was the financial crisis caused by labour <answer>", and then Paxman attacks Miliband for responding to the real question that Paxman was getting at. I also suspect that the "bloke on the tube" that Paxman claimed to speak to is non-existent; he probably just used it to voice his opinion in the 3rd person.
0
reply
mogwai98
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#95
Report 4 years ago
#95
(Original post by will2348)
I don't think we were suppose to hear that, they forgot to turn his mic off before they cut to the closing credits.

Posted from TSR Mobile
Oh really? You may well be right there, actually.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#96
Report 4 years ago
#96
Apparently saying something is "very likely" is now a weasel word, and saying "I would do THIS under THESE conditions" is now a "typical politician's answer".



Do you think they grill weather forecasters like this? "What do you mean its only LIKELY to rain tomorrow? What are you hiding Mr Fish?"
0
reply
miser
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#97
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#97
(Original post by cole-slaw)
So why did he spend his 15 minutes with Cameron ticking his balls with the tip of his tongue?

and no, I don't accept that it is ever useful, helpful or informative for an interviewer to ask illogical and nonsensical questions in an increasingly aggressive manner. How is the interviewee expected to answer a question that doesn't even make sense?

If I was sitting there, I'd just tell him to **** off and come back when he's thought of a coherent question that actually makes sense.

That probably wouldn't go down well... hence the reason I am an economist and not a politician.
True, I thought he was tough on Dave but still he notched it up a couple of degrees for Ed.

In the sense that I previously mentioned: to put them under pressure. The public wants to see these politicians tested - rationally, mentally and emotionally. It's not enough to ask them what they will do and have done; they have to be pressured with an intensity that can permit judgement on their character and how they'll behave under the pressure of government should they make it there.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#98
Report 4 years ago
#98
(Original post by will2348)
I don't think we were suppose to hear that, they forgot to turn his mic off before they cut to the closing credits.

Posted from TSR Mobile

There is a theory that the mic was "accidentally" left on by the tory party news with the intention of embarrassing or somehow catching out Mr Milliband.
0
reply
cole-slaw
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#99
Report 4 years ago
#99
(Original post by miser)
True, I thought he was tough on Dave but still he notched it up a couple of degrees for Ed.

In the sense that I previously mentioned: to put them under pressure. The public wants to see these politicians tested - rationally, mentally and emotionally. It's not enough to ask them what they will do and have done; they have to be pressured with an intensity that can permit judgement on their character and how they'll behave under the pressure of government should they make it there.

We should just put them in "release the hounds".

I actually think Milliband is quite good. you read a lot of **** about him in the newspapers, but whenever I see him on tv, he is pretty good - certainly far more convincing that cameron.
0
reply
Lauren-x-
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#100
Report 4 years ago
#100
Cameron got off to quite a good start, not really any particularly hard questions. Annoying how he dodged certain questions, such as the zero hour contracts- stop waffling on! He seemed very sure of himself and confident, yet I sensed that it was very 'rehearsed' and felt like he was regurgitating what he thinks we want to hear, not necessarily what he stands for. The number of times he mentioned a 'successful economy' made me want to throw my laptop into the fish tank.

Quite frankly, Miliband was a catastrophe at first. He didn't execute very strongly with certain questions, but I felt as though he cared a lot more for ordinary people and was much more passionate. Paxman was particularly harsh, I thought; the continuous personal questions were ridiculous. Thoroughly impressed with how Ed reacted and redeemed himself - Paxman got what was coming for him and you've gotta have at least a little bit of respect for Ed after that.

I'm most likely supporting Labour and was quite apprehensive at first, as Ed had a shaky start. Definitely redeemed himself though and he was a lot more genuine than David. They couldn't really get into much depth though, which was irritating - I understand the timing issues, but I would've preferred less questions and more in depth answers

Posted from TSR Mobile
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Why wouldn't you turn to teachers if you were being bullied?

They might tell my parents (23)
6.74%
They might tell the bully (33)
9.68%
I don't think they'd understand (52)
15.25%
It might lead to more bullying (131)
38.42%
There's nothing they could do (102)
29.91%

Watched Threads

View All