General Election 2017

[PompeyVillan]

2 minutes ago, Chindie said:

UKIPs presence in anything is a farce. They're irrelevant.

They're incredibly relevant to this election. Their total collapse will likely hand the conservatives a landslide majority.

After which they'll become a totally insignificant marginal party.

[Chindie]

1 minute ago, PompeyVillan said:

They're incredibly relevant to this election. Their total collapse will likely hand the conservatives a landslide majority.

After which they'll become a totally insignificant marginal party.

I mean their presence as a party. Their collapse will have an enormous impact, but they themselves? They're given massively disproportionate coverage. They don't have an MP. They collapsed at the local elections. Why is their fool of a leader on the Beeb?

[PauloBarnesi]

9 minutes ago, Chindie said:

Why is their fool of a leader on the Beeb?

Because it fills the time?

It appears that whatever the BBC do they are annoying someone by putting too much scrutiny/too little scrutiny/too much Micael Portillo/too little Michael Portillo/too much coverage/too little coverage/stopping a repeat of Open All Hours to have a political programme, etc, etc. 

I would guess hazard a guess that whoever wins/loses this election won’t be able to thank/not thank the BBC for it. Of all the broadcasters out there, they appear to me to do a pretty good job. 

[jon_c]

Well Lib Dems new "free the weed"  policy announcement could win them the election. As long as they put all voting booths in a 24hr Spar and only between 2am and 3am. 

[Straggler]

9 minutes ago, Chindie said:

I mean their presence as a party. Their collapse will have an enormous impact, but they themselves? They're given massively disproportionate coverage. They don't have an MP. They collapsed at the local elections. Why is their fool of a leader on the Beeb?

As much as it pains me to say it, at the last election UKIP managed to secure 12.6% of the vote.  Their problem was that despite a quite significant proportion of the vote, they only managed to translate that into winning a single seat.  In many ways it is a massively messed up system that allows UKIP to get nearly 4 million votes and only one seat and in the same election for the SNP for get 1.5 million votes and get 56 seats.  Anyway to my point, as a proportion of the electorate at the last count UKIP represent the 3rd largest number of voters in the country and the Beeb have a duty to let these people hear the douchebag that now leads their party.  I don't think the BBC have to follow the same first past the post system for their coverage, I think they use a more of a PR approach which is more relevant to the people that make up the viewing public.

I'll happily see the coverage shrink with their anticipated upcoming drubbing, but until then unfortunately I think it is the duty of the BBC to give UKIP the platform that their 2015 performance merits.

[choffer]

31 minutes ago, Chindie said:

UKIPs presence in anything is a farce. They're irrelevant.

Speaking of farce, have you seen their Party Politics Broadcast? I was genuinely lost for words when I saw it yesterday.

[snowychap]

19 minutes ago, choffer said:

Speaking of farce, have you seen their Party Politics Broadcast? I was genuinely lost for words when I saw it yesterday.

Is that the one where Nutty is on his way to Amarillo?

[choffer]

25 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Is that the one where Nutty is on his way to Amarillo?

It was the one that looked like it had been filmed and edited on a first generation smartphone with these special characters speaking on behalf of the common man:

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, choffer said:

It was the one that looked like it had been filmed and edited on a first generation smartphone with these special characters speaking on behalf of the common man:

Yep, that's it:

 

[sharkyvilla]

1 minute ago, choffer said:

It was the one that looked like it had been filmed and edited on a first generation smartphone with these special characters speaking on behalf of the common man:

The second picture looks like a Norfolk version of Breaking Bad

[wazzap24]

Lib Dems have changed the game. 

Im in, I'll even put a crappy poster in my window. 

Now if they can just convince the other 5m+ stoners to get out and vote, we could be onto something! 

Edited May 12, 2017 by wazzap24

[PompeyVillan]

Lib Dems running out of ideas...and munchies I see. 

[PauloBarnesi]

2 hours ago, choffer said:

Speaking of farce, have you seen their Party Politics Broadcast? I was genuinely lost for words when I saw it yesterday.

UKIP very much not using a British typeface.

[Jon]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

I think @a m ole has written it best when he said "I don't want the BBC (or any channel) to stop scrutinising Corbyn or Labour, I just want the same level of effort and resources to go into scrutinising the Conservatives"

It's not that Labour is treated harshly, by and large, but that the tories are not subjected with the same rigour. I also think that UKIPs has been massively over-covered and the SNP, Plaid, Greens and LibDems and the different Irish ones under-covered.

So, there's a right wing bias at the beeb. Intentionally or not. 

[Jon]

3 hours ago, PompeyVillan said:

They're incredibly relevant to this election. Their total collapse will likely hand the conservatives a landslide majority.

After which they'll become a totally insignificant marginal party.

An awful lot of kipper vote was/is working class racist/get our country back.  That vote does not naturally go to the scum. 

[blandy]

4 minutes ago, Jon said:

So, there's a right wing bias at the beeb. Intentionally or not. 

I think there's a bias towards whoever is the Government some of the time on some of the coverage of the BBC. I think most of the time most of the coverage is not biased.

I also think some of the rules that have to be followed, (set not by the Beeb) are too dated and inflexible - going back to when it was much more of a 2 party world. The rules set by regulators need updating for today's bolitics. The most obvious example is that TV's UKIP coverage with 1 councillor and a collapsed support is required to reflect not the current situation, but what it was 2 years ago.

There's also another element which is not bias towards (say) UKIPs, but where TV channels have Farage on a lot, even though he's neither a leader nor an MP - they don't put other UKIPs on nearly as much, despite their actual roles, or when that bloke Carswell was an MP. They do it for ratings and because Farage would get them headlines and viewers and publicity for their programmes. They pick people who (in their view) make good headline and "enliven" programmes over the duller more worthy types.

But either way, there's no conspiracy, there's no overthrow Jezza agenda.

[Jon]

UKIP are not the government.

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Jon said:

UKIP are not the government.

They are now.

[Jon]

I think you are being too generous to our state broadcaster pete. Conspiracy or not, the coverage is skewed to the right. 

[Jon]

5 minutes ago, Jon said:

UKIP are not the government.

Touche