The morning after the day before

[mraltariel]

I think that in what is one of the most interesting and complex elections for a generation,  the BBC have severely let themselves (and therefore us) down with their coverage. Frivolous, inaccurate, overblown, inconsistent and uncoordinated (website and TV calling some seats in different directions!) Andrew Neil wasted on a D-list celebrity barge.

Comments

Cameron speech

[mrazalais]

Cameron's play for the LibDems very interesting. Can't believe Clegg will go for another "committee to investigate PR" without concrete deadlines for decisions & referenda though.

Fraser Nelson (he of the Spectator) is already foaming at the mouth about the even the hint of a possibility of compromise over PR from Cameron on Twitter.

Personally, I'd be very happy with a Lib/Con coalition government. Interesting times ahead!

Re: Cameron speech

[mraltariel]

Bear in mind that this is the start line for Cameron's negotations, not the end point...

Re: Cameron speech

[mraltariel]

Argh. Typng no wrko tdyoa.

Re: Cameron speech

[mrazalais]

Indeed: this is clearly merely the initial probe to see whether the LibDem leadership would go for cabinet posts instead of electoral reform. Personally, I don't think that's going to fly with the LibDem rank & file, who are likely to stiffen the spines of the leadership & demand electoral reform.

Indeed, under PR (of some sort) I look forward to a lovely new political grouping around the Orange Book LibDems & the socially liberal left wing of the Tory which I might actually be able to vote for! The far right of the Tories knows that under PR they're finished, which is why they rage against it.

One possible outcome might be a fully proportional elected second chamber: I think both sides might be able to sell that to their respective constituencies.

[azalaisdep]

On the political front, I'd shout out to Margaret Hodge. Well done to her for taking on and thoroughly defeating the odious Griffin, and addressing this in her speech.

Hear, hear to that one. Delighted with the BNP no-show everywhere I've seen, in fact - but yes, Hodge had I think had enough of a shock from the BNP threat to realise that the lofty strategy of all the national parties till very recently (of trying to pretend immigration was a non-issue with the electorate on the ground because they have been frightened of losing votes by making a positive case for why it's not generally a problem) had failed. She took Griffin on head on and demonstrated that the electorate are neither nor as stupid nor as prejudiced as Griffin pretends, and she deserves the result.

[azalaisdep]

Oh and re the coverage - I agree that by BBC standards the flying paving stones and the swinging graphics (which made me seasick!) were madly irritating; but it's worth remembering that from the viewpoints of many other countries our coverage still looks witty, insightful and agreeably irreverent...

[mraltariel]

:-) S'funny old world.

[toft_froggy]

Ah, I was hoping you'd have written something, it is always good to hear your analyses, what with how you have nolij.

On the political front, I'd shout out to Margaret Hodge. Well done to her for taking on and thoroughly defeating the odious Griffin, and addressing this in her speech.

Yes! I was very happy about that.

Looking forward, I reckon a reformed second chamber, elected on some form of PR, a reduction of the number of MPs and a consequent package of boundary change are the likely consequence of the current situation - maybe even a PR option, with a referendum ultimately wrapping up the whole reform package.

I hope you're right! That sounds okay.

[toft_froggy]

PS - one of the nice things about following from Canada was I did it entirely via the Guardian liveblog, which I have decided is great, and almost entirely avoided fucking Jeremy Paxman.

[mraltariel]

That was definitely the way to go!

I apologize for the next part of this post in advance, but I couldn't keep it in.

NoPaxman = GoodPaxman (1)

If you divide equation (1) through by Paxman, you'll see that

No = Good (2)

Since

No =/= Good, we can't divide by Paxman, so I guess that means that

Paxman = 0 (3)

This is a bad maths joke.

[toft_froggy]

Lol.

[uitlander]

I have just seen your results. Overall that's a very respectable showing, for both of you, given the constituencies involved.

[altariel]

Thank you. The other EC ward candidate is a smashing chap who deserves a stab at being a councillor.