Question Time Tonight - Page 127 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

Question Time Tonight


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, Orraloon said:

his is the 21st century. Hardly anybody that I know would even consider just turning up at somebody's door without arranging it first. Anybody who just turns up at my door get a dose of the F word pretty smartish. I can't think of too many exceptions to that rule. 

Don't go annoying folk by just turning up at their door, especially when the football is on.;)

 

The Wolf of Wall Street was on the telly last night. You're basically this guy, int ye? :P

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Squirrelhumper said:

Phillipa Whitford showing exactly why she should be replace that windbag Blackford last night.

She came across really well last night.

She's a good politician, undoubtedly, but to be fair to Blackford, for his primary role, i.e. to get his party's points heard in the HoC over jeering opposition, being a windbag is advantageous. Horses for courses and all that. Angus Robertson was more of a happy medium though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, aaid said:

Presumably they'll be bussing in a suitably rapid SNP-bad audience for the Leader's Question Time tonight. 

Looked like some SNPers made it.

Must be a lot of folk in England wishing they could vote for Sturgeon.  Put her in charge of Labour and she'd have more of a chance than Corbyn...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

Looked like some SNPers made it.

Must be a lot of folk in England wishing they could vote for Sturgeon.  Put her in charge of Labour and she'd have more of a chance than Corbyn...

 

Definitely.

To be fair there are even people within the Labour party who'd stand a much better chance of winning a GE than Corbyn.  For instance, put Keir Starmer in charge of the party with a similar manifesto and the Tories are in trouble.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Toepoke said:

 

Must be a lot of folk in England wishing they could vote for Sturgeon.  Put her in charge of Labour and she'd have more of a chance than Corbyn...

 

Without a shadow of a doubt.  You'd be looking at a nailed on Labour win. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, shunkyboy and the fluffer said:

Whit is the more desirable Ford. But almost had a tear in my eye for the poor soul worrying about his taxes going up on his £80,000 plus salary if Labour gets in. His argument he wasn't actually in the top 5% was compelling. 

I used to watch QT most weeks for years but it's become too cringy and stage managed now so I rarely tune in. 

I saw a chunk of it last night and that guy on 80 grand a week was remarkable. It's like he was living in a bubble on his £80k and had the cheek to complain about a possible tax rise (whether he got his facts right or wrong).

Edited by fringo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, aaid said:

Strong showing from the FM tonight.  Looks like the SNP-bad bus got stuck in traffic as well.

 

I couldn't believe it - a Scottish voice, then another, then another... What's going on? 

Then priceless, Fiona Bruce panicking, as if to say, is everyone Scottish? 

Can't have that! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, exile said:

I couldn't believe it - a Scottish voice, then another, then another... What's going on? 

Then priceless, Fiona Bruce panicking, as if to say, is everyone Scottish? 

Can't have that! 

Yeah she had to put an end to it and actually stop any Scottish questions.

More stage managing by the BBC to try and bring that back "on track" . Very sad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, exile said:

I couldn't believe it - a Scottish voice, then another, then another... What's going on? 

Then priceless, Fiona Bruce panicking, as if to say, is everyone Scottish? 

Can't have that! 

Indeed, you don't even hear Scottish voice after another at a Scottish QT.

I thought Nicola Sturgeon did very well last night ; a class performance. You can disagree with her politics, but anyone not acknowledging she was night and day against the other three is obviously lying or seriously deluded.

Corbyn was alright, but he lacks charisma and certainly second best on the evening. He did well when up against the antisemitism question ; stumbled and passed over the Evo Morales one, and did alright overall. I think McDonnell is much clearer, better, and likeable at these things (then again, there's a huge number of people in England who hate both).

Swinson and Johnson were car crash stuff ; both appalling. I've put about 20 wee wagers on so far for the election and I think my safest punt so far is Lib Dems under 15% - the more folk see of her ; the less they like her/them. They really missed a trick by election her over Ed Davey (not great, but a lot better and coherent than her).

Johnson - Christ, that was bad ; can see why he's pulled out of C4's one. Utterly depressing people will no doubt vote for him in the droves for a proven liar. So unconvincing on everything ; trying to and probably will succeeded in winning an election by repeating a slogan 'Get Brexit Done' over and over. 

Depressing thing is  that probably wasn't watched by many or the ones who have watched will not have changed their views on Boris. If anything, it'll hopefully shave a few votes of the Lib Dems by any erstwhile Remain types in England.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Question Time always goes for a very partisan audience.  It may make for good television for some,  I'm not sure it makes for good debate and I don't think that having people at extremes is necessarily reflective of the country as a whole.   Political parties "plant" members in the audience, with or without the collusion of the producers.   Last night was no different.  You could see that with the "stitch up" questions at the start with Corbyn and similar for Johnson and Swinson.

What was different was that there didn't seem to be any level of SNP-Bad that you get when its in Scotland.  I suspect that's because they knew they had to get some pro-SNP people in - and why every Scottish voice appeared to be pro-Indy, or at least progressive.  I suspect that's just because in Scotland, the Labour and Tory support - at least those that go on to programmes like Question Time - have that rapid antipathy towards the SNP and Indy that isn't the same in England. 

That's not to say that she got it easy, there were still a few awkward questions which she dealt well with but there was no obvious Billy from Bathgates in the audience.

TBH, I thought the run of audience interventions from Scots was a bit ridiculous especially as it was towards the end of Corbyn's bit and Sturgeon was up next.  If the whole thing is as stage managed as people suggest then they didn't do a very good job, especially as she went back to someone who'd previously made an anti-Corbyn intervention - so presumably was a safe bet - and who then asked a question about Scotland  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In terms of the debate, I thought the cards fell kindly for Nicola Sturgeon. The Scots in the audience had Jeremy on the back foot over Scottish self-determination, and the locals mainly grilling him on things not affecting Scotland. In other words JC did not get a free hand at seducing Scots voters with goodies they already have via SNP. The questions for NS were a mixture of politely sceptical and indy-curious, and she handled them comfortably. The one vulnerable point I thought was on the confirmatory referendum: she should have said more clearly, that the White Paper was sufficiently detailed that it was clear what was being voted for, unlike Brexit which was a blank page. (She answered something like that, but sufficiently ambiguously that Bruce got a second bite as if she hadn't answered, and that's how the BBC news spun it: Sturgeon on the back foot). Swinson was skewered on several fronts, including her Remain stance (even from Remainers), so was unable to seduce Scots Remainers. Neither Swinson nor Johnson were asked about the constitution, so no chance to bang on about the precious union/awesome foursome, or to deflect the argument back to Scottish devolved matters. Just as well because Johnson took no responsibility for any failing of his or Tories' behaviour but deflected on to other issues and so we avoided Johnson signing off with a tirade on Scottish health and education with no right to reply.

In terms of actual policies, I think the main thing must be that the Leader of the Opposition has on live prime time TV confirmed the right of Scottish self-determination. Mostly the media are only concerned about skewering him on "when" and trying to make him look shifty (as with Brexit stance) or getting fussed about coalitions. But it was important to have the principle definitively confirmed, so the question should now be to the other parties, if they also support it (not 'a referendum now' but the right to self-determination), and if not, why not.

Looking back there was precious little on actual policy - so much was about the character of Corbyn or Johnson; even the bits on Brexit as with Scotland were about the process and format of deciding on the issue, not pros and cons), or the past record of the Lib Dems, in government.

In terms of media reaction, the BBC seems to be spinning it as if they all had a bit of a grilling, the 10 o'clock news they showed Johnson on the front foot (though he was mainly on the back foot) and the reverse for Sturgeon. To be fair, they did report him being criticised for his Islamophobic views (but implied he had defended himself, rather than pointing out he has never apologised). I don't think I've heard any media mention the big cheer Sturgeon had when she said she'd aimed to keep Tories out of Downing Street. The BBC not talking about anyone 'winning' the debate. Presumably, if Johnson had 'won' they would have told us.  Today, haven't heard any London station mentioning the Scottish dimension - that the principle of Scottish self-determination has been unequivocally been endorsed by the Leader fo the Opposition. 

Perhaps the most surprising thing was the Swinson bubble bursting - rather than 'I agree with Nick', it was almost the reverse, no one agreed with Jo. Equally surprising, is that the mainstream media are downplaying the car crash. The cynic would say the Tories need the Lib Dems to do well enough to take Remain seats from Labour, and are concerned that if the Lib Dems do too badly they could let Labour in. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, exile said:

In terms of the debate, I thought the cards fell kindly for Nicola Sturgeon. The Scots in the audience had Jeremy on the back foot over Scottish self-determination, and the locals mainly grilling him on things not affecting Scotland. In other words JC did not get a free hand at seducing Scots voters with goodies they already have via SNP. The questions for NS were a mixture of politely sceptical and indy-curious, and she handled them comfortably. The one vulnerable point I thought was on the confirmatory referendum: she should have said more clearly, that the White Paper was sufficiently detailed that it was clear what was being voted for, unlike Brexit which was a blank page. (She answered something like that, but sufficiently ambiguously that Bruce got a second bite as if she hadn't answered, and that's how the BBC news spun it: Sturgeon on the back foot). Swinson was skewered on several fronts, including her Remain stance (even from Remainers), so was unable to seduce Scots Remainers. Neither Swinson nor Johnson were asked about the constitution, so no chance to bang on about the precious union/awesome foursome, or to deflect the argument back to Scottish devolved matters. Just as well because Johnson took no responsibility for any failing of his or Tories' behaviour but deflected on to other issues and so we avoided Johnson signing off with a tirade on Scottish health and education with no right to reply.

In terms of actual policies, I think the main thing must be that the Leader of the Opposition has on live prime time TV confirmed the right of Scottish self-determination. Mostly the media are only concerned about skewering him on "when" and trying to make him look shifty (as with Brexit stance) or getting fussed about coalitions. But it was important to have the principle definitively confirmed, so the question should now be to the other parties, if they also support it (not 'a referendum now' but the right to self-determination), and if not, why not.

Looking back there was precious little on actual policy - so much was about the character of Corbyn or Johnson; even the bits on Brexit as with Scotland were about the process and format of deciding on the issue, not pros and cons), or the past record of the Lib Dems, in government.

In terms of media reaction, the BBC seems to be spinning it as if they all had a bit of a grilling, the 10 o'clock news they showed Johnson on the front foot (though he was mainly on the back foot) and the reverse for Sturgeon. To be fair, they did report him being criticised for his Islamophobic views (but implied he had defended himself, rather than pointing out he has never apologised). I don't think I've heard any media mention the big cheer Sturgeon had when she said she'd aimed to keep Tories out of Downing Street. The BBC not talking about anyone 'winning' the debate. Presumably, if Johnson had 'won' they would have told us.  Today, haven't heard any London station mentioning the Scottish dimension - that the principle of Scottish self-determination has been unequivocally been endorsed by the Leader fo the Opposition. 

Perhaps the most surprising thing was the Swinson bubble bursting - rather than 'I agree with Nick', it was almost the reverse, no one agreed with Jo. Equally surprising, is that the mainstream media are downplaying the car crash. The cynic would say the Tories need the Lib Dems to do well enough to take Remain seats from Labour, and are concerned that if the Lib Dems do too badly they could let Labour in. 

You're making the mistake of viewing this through the prism of Scottish rather than UK politics.  Sturgeon - naturally and understandably - was the only one appealing directly to voters in Scotland, there was also a lot of soft appeal to the rest of the U.K. with an eye to the future.  

Johnson, Corbyn and Swinson weren't looking to appeal specifically to voters in Scotland last night but primarily to England and Wales. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, it looks all too likely now that the Tories will win a majority as polls continue to put them 10% (or more) clear in all polls so far. I put that down to people obsessed with this 'getting Brexit done' crap. The Tories are the only ones portraying themselves as pro-Brexit and the Brexiteers will leap onto that bandwagon and to hell with the rest of their plans. If I lived down in England I'd be voting Labour as at least they are taking a more balanced view on Brexit and stuff like re-nationalisation of companies I support.

Where does a Tory majority government leave independence?

Up shit creek considering the current Tory government will never grant another Indyref on their watch. Even if the SNP did the impossible and win a clean sweep of seats at the election the Tories would not grant one. Unless the SNP get hard and take legal action to get an IndyRef then I would say we are stuck in this union until we have a new government or new Tory PM who is more giving. The only thing that it will benefit the SNP with is perhaps a strengthening of support for independence in polls with constant refusals from Westminster.

If the unexpected happens and Labour wins a majority what happens with regards independence?

Well Corbyn is certainly refusing to say he'd never allow an IndyRef2. He keeps going back to the Scottish Election in 2021 so it is quite possible if the SNP win enough seats there it will be taken as a mandate and he'd grant IndyRef2. I see that as the best case scenario at present.

If there is a hung parliament and Labour wants the SNP support to form a government then what?

I'd say Corbyn would not grant an immediate IndyRef2. He may very well hold strong on his 2021 stance and the SNP may back him in that case.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, aaid said:

You're making the mistake of viewing this through the prism of Scottish rather than UK politics.  Sturgeon - naturally and understandably - was the only one appealing directly to voters in Scotland, there was also a lot of soft appeal to the rest of the U.K. with an eye to the future.  

Johnson, Corbyn and Swinson weren't looking to appeal specifically to voters in Scotland last night but primarily to England and Wales. 

Why do you call looking through a Scottish lens a mistake?

That's my take from a Scottish point of view.  On a Scottish website. We get plenty of the UK/London view on most other media.

I'm not saying the points I am making are of interest to the rest of the UK or that it will affect much the UK election result. 

I think its interesting to think through, though, what a Scottish view might be, and then look at the likes of BBC Scotland, and STV, etc, and see how closely their output matches the London view, rather than a Scottish prism however irrelevant to the UK outcome.

Edited by exile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Caledonian Craig said:

Sadly, it looks all too likely now that the Tories will win a majority as polls continue to put them 10% (or more) clear in all polls so far. I put that down to people obsessed with this 'getting Brexit done' crap. The Tories are the only ones portraying themselves as pro-Brexit and the Brexiteers will leap onto that bandwagon and to hell with the rest of their plans. If I lived down in England I'd be voting Labour as at least they are taking a more balanced view on Brexit and stuff like re-nationalisation of companies I support.

Where does a Tory majority government leave independence?

Up shit creek considering the current Tory government will never grant another Indyref on their watch. Even if the SNP did the impossible and win a clean sweep of seats at the election the Tories would not grant one. Unless the SNP get hard and take legal action to get an IndyRef then I would say we are stuck in this union until we have a new government or new Tory PM who is more giving. The only thing that it will benefit the SNP with is perhaps a strengthening of support for independence in polls with constant refusals from Westminster.

If the unexpected happens and Labour wins a majority what happens with regards independence?

Well Corbyn is certainly refusing to say he'd never allow an IndyRef2. He keeps going back to the Scottish Election in 2021 so it is quite possible if the SNP win enough seats there it will be taken as a mandate and he'd grant IndyRef2. I see that as the best case scenario at present.

If there is a hung parliament and Labour wants the SNP support to form a government then what?

I'd say Corbyn would not grant an immediate IndyRef2. He may very well hold strong on his 2021 stance and the SNP may back him in that case.

 

Yes the Tories look in the clear now. No one seems to make any new ground to capitalise on their weaknesses. It might have needed a stronger Brexit party for that (to point out that Johnson's "deal" is not the Brexit many demanded, etc), but they look like a busted flush now, no longer the great national crusade, but just trying to hoover up some pockets of votes for the sake of their own powerbase. 

Labour could yet make some gains, but more likely at the expense of the LibDems and SNP, as in 2017. 

From last night's viewing, I'd imagine rUK Remainers would view Labour a safer bet for a chance of stopping Brexit than the LibDems.

Possibly the absence of a Swinson bounce may also be a factor, if they are seen as irrelevant across most of the UK. 

 

Edited by exile
Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, exile said:

Why do you call looking through a Scottish lens a mistake?

That's my take from a Scottish point of view.  On a Scottish website. We get plenty of the UK/London view on most other media.

I'm not saying the points I am making are of interest to the rest of the UK or that it will affect much the UK election result. 

I think its interesting to think through, though, what a Scottish view might be, and then look at the likes of BBC Scotland, and STV, etc, and see how closely their output matches the London view, rather than a Scottish prism however irrelevant to the UK outcome.

It's a mistake if you're trying to analyse what UK politicians are trying to achieve in a UK programme during a UK general election. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, aaid said:

It's a mistake if you're trying to analyse what UK politicians are trying to achieve in a UK programme during a UK general election. 

It would be a mistake - if I wanted a UK perspective, I'd go elsewhere

(though the fact that the Scottish dimension is considered so irrelevant to the rest of the UK in a UK GE is actually part of the point.) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...