Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

PM won't debate without the Greens! Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should the Green Party be part of the TV debates?
    Yes
    82.14%
    No
    17.86%

    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, the Green's were more popular than the Lib Dem's in the last YouGov poll is saw.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by bbadonde2)
    Yes, the Green's were more popular than the Lib Dem's in the last YouGov poll is saw.
    Doesn't make them a major party though, simply polling occasionally above a major party, the LDs will still get many, many more seats than the Greens.
    If you look at the polls this year, in 2 the Greens were ahead, in 4 the LDs were, the Greens recently, apparently, getting a mini surge in support from former Labour aligned voters.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I don't think they should. First of all, they haven't ever come close to winning an election unlike all the other parties involved. Secondly, the SNP arguably have more of a claim than the Greens given their number of MP's yet no one expects them to have a place. Thirdly, a 5 way debate would be too cluttered to make much of an impact on the election campaign. Better to keep to the parties who have a significant chance of influencing the formation of the next government.
    The reason Cameron wants the Greens involved seems clear to me; in the last debates the left was split between Lib Dem and Labour while the Tories could play to the entire right. Now UKIP are splitting the right voters, Cameron wants to maintain the advantage by introducing a third left of centre party. Its also a win win for him because if he doesn't take part then he doesn't have to face the potential disaster of Nigel Farage laying into him.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    I don't think they should. First of all, they haven't ever come close to winning an election unlike all the other parties involved.
    UKIP have never come close to winning the general election out neither have the lib dems


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    UKIP have never come close to winning the general election out neither have the lib dems


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    An election, such as the last nationwide election we had, which UKIP won. The Liberal Democrats or their predecessors have come very close to overtaking Labour in the past too, while the Greens have never polled in the top three nationally.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    An election, such as the last nationwide election we had, which UKIP won. The Liberal Democrats or their predecessors have come very close to overtaking Labour in the past too, while the Greens have never polled in the top three nationally.
    You mean the Europeans where people vote in protest:erm:
    It's predecessors may have but that isn't important. That was 2 different parties and not the lib dems.
    The greens are polling high (especially among students where they are second) and have been very successful at the European elections consistently

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    You mean the Europeans where people vote in protest:erm:
    It's predecessors may have but that isn't important. That was 2 different parties and not the lib dems.
    The greens are polling high (especially among students where they are second) and have been very successful at the European elections consistently

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If a party wins a national election as UKIP did then they deserve to be represented in a leadership debate. The Lib Dems nearly polled as high as the Labour Party in the last General Election and have the third highest number of MPs; it's a given that they will be involved. The Green Party, however, has one MP, has never come in the top three in an election, and polled a measly 6.9% of the vote in the last nation election compared to the 23% that the Tories polled in third place. By your own logic these votes are in protest anyway, so looking at the last General election we can take their vote share to be 1% - less than the BNP!
    By no stretch of the imagination are the Green party viable candidates for Leadership, and so have no place in a LEADERSHIP debate.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by MedicineMann)
    If a party wins a national election as UKIP did then they deserve to be represented in a leadership debate. The Lib Dems nearly polled as high as the Labour Party in the last General Election and have the third highest number of MP's; it's a given that they will be involved. The Green Party, however, has one MP, has never come in the top three in an election, and polled a measly 6.9% of the vote in the last nation election compared to the 23% that the Tories polled in third place. By your own logic these votes are in protest anyway, so looking at the last General election we can take their vote share to be 1% - less than the BNP!
    By no stretch of the imagination are the Green party viable candidates for Leadership, and so have no place in a LEADERSHIP debate.
    An election that what fueled by a media obsession with UKIP.
    Yes I have no issue with the lib dems being there. I think it should be 5 parties. And given that the chances are no one and probably no 2 parties (unless we see a lab-con coalition) will be able to form government we need to hear from as many voices as possible


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    An election that what fueled by a media obsession with UKIP.
    Yes I have no issue with the lib dems being there. I think it should be 5 parties. And given that the chances are no one and probably no 2 parties (unless we see a lab-con coalition) will be able to form government we need to hear from as many voices as possible


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    UKIP polled higher in the 2010 general election too. Discounting UKIP's current success yet allowing the Greens (frankly laughable) 'surge' to be taken into account reeks of hypocrisy. No projection for this election that I have seen suggests the Greens will have part to play in the next government, their support base is simply too small.
    Not only that, but the Green party can't even run a local council, what have they done to show that they should be given the slightest opportunity to run our country?
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    I would like the Greens to be on the debates purely for selfish reasons. I don't know whether to continue with my original policy of voting Labour (who I hate) or vote Green because they're closer to my beliefs... but are also advocating things I really don't support. Hopefully seeing the two debate would help me make up my mind, so I suppose, if Cameron is playing the 'split the left' card here, I'm falling right into his plan. Not that it matters in Mid Sussex, of course, we'll only ever have Conservatives.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by B-FJL3)
    There should be no TV debates at all, given that they added almost nothing of any value to the last election. Instead we had the three leaders all trotting out their usual spiel and trying to score cheap points off each other, rather than actually convincing the public that they had sincere and sound ideas or principles to offer.

    They are simply an opportunity for the party PR men to go into overdrive, unleashing a load of specious drivel at the audience and forcing the leaders into artificial, awkward looking behaviour, like making Gordon Brown smile, or Alex Salmond suddenly walk forward from behind his lectern as if he were Moses delivering the Ten Commandments.

    The senior journalists presiding over them get off on the whole thing as they get to play the aloof & patrician-like chairman, finding out the "truth" for the good of the people, and generally inflating their own egos whilst failing spectacularly to get a clear answer out of any of the leaders. Naturally the various TV channels love it because they get to fill a slot in their timetable with a guaranteed ratings winner.

    Conclusion: it's reducing elections to a TV talent show rather than actually finding out anything of substance. A test of who's best at getting tarted up for the cameras and showing enough thigh to titillate the public into voting for them.
    Entirely this. They were dreadful last time, the Scottish Referendum debates were appalling. It works when there's a decent moderator, rigid rules, and 2 people. 3 makes it frustrating and drawn out. 4, including Farage will be a ****ing abortion and 5, including whoever the **** represents these utterly incompetent tin pot enviro-nazis will be intolerable.

    Sack them off. This isn't America.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Entirely this. They were dreadful last time, the Scottish Referendum debates were appalling. It works when there's a decent moderator, rigid rules, and 2 people. 3 makes it frustrating and drawn out. 4, including Farage will be a ****ing abortion and 5, including whoever the **** represents these utterly incompetent tin pot enviro-nazis will be intolerable.

    Sack them off. This isn't America.
    Politics are so personality based nowadays though. It's not so much about policy but the person that's representing you. This is why Ed Miliband always gets so much stick. It's not his policies that are generally speaking the problem, it's his personality which people struggle to relate with. And it's on that that merit that politicians like Nigel Farage move up the pecking order. I'm not saying it's right, but it is what it is.

    'Enviro-nazis' seems a bit harsh don't you think? Greenpeace maybe, but the Green Party? I'm not so sure.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Politics are so personality based nowadays though. It's not so much about policy but the person that's representing you. This is why Ed Miliband always gets so much stick. It's not his policies that are generally speaking the problem, it's his personality which people struggle to relate with. And it's on that that merit that politicians like Nigel Farage move up the pecking order. I'm not saying it's right, but it is what it is.

    'Enviro-nazis' seems a bit harsh don't you think? Greenpeace maybe, but the Green Party? I'm not so sure.
    Sorry... what policies?

    And no, the Greens are idiots. They'd bring the country to its knees in pursuit of their idiotic doctrine.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Sorry... what policies?
    Well, New Labour's, broadly speaking.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Sorry... what policies?

    And no, the Greens are idiots. They'd bring the country to its knees in pursuit of their idiotic doctrine.
    The pursuit of money is idiotic.
    Aiming fo a peaceful world where everyone coexists happily is admirable

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Reluire)
    Well, New Labour's, broadly speaking.
    And these are? I'm not trying to be obtuse here, simply that for the past 5 years all I've heard from the Ed is a load of hot air and abject disagreement on everything the government has done with no alternative. Their grand policy launch was probably the most vague sequence of aspirational sounding horse**** I've ever heard. I was still none the wiser. All I know is that there's apparently something called a "cost of living crisis". They attack the Tories on every front but they contradict themselves with every turn. Their economic competence in my view is similar to that of someone that regularly visits Wonga for a payday loan. It's spineless point scoring and it makes me sick.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    The pursuit of money is idiotic.
    Aiming fo a peaceful world where everyone coexists happily is admirable

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Jesus ****ing Christ. :lolwut: I don't want the UK to become a ****ing agrarian leper colony. What the hell are they smoking.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Online

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Mad Vlad)
    Jesus ****ing Christ. :lolwut: I don't want the UK to become a ****ing agrarian leper colony. What the hell are they smoking.
    Anti-capitalist =/= anti-technology. The Pursuit of peace and happiness is a noble cause. Money is corrupt and unsustainable as it gives the powerful more power and takes power from the poor.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Anti-capitalist =/= anti-technology. The Pursuit of peace and happiness is a noble cause. Money is corrupt and unsustainable as it gives the powerful more power and takes power from the poor.
    Lovely. I'm bored of talking to you now.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    There's such an obvious reason why Cameron wants the Greens to be in debates that it isn't even worth articulating.

    In my opinion the Greens are too small a party to put on air with the big boys. What's more worrying though, from my perspective, is that they'll end up taking votes from labour with their feel good politics that will lead us into financial collapse.
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up salt or pepper?
    Useful resources

    Groups associated with this forum:

    View associated groups
  • 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.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.