This one is for rage.

 

or at least that is how it leaves me. 

It's quite ironic that the wee Scottish person comes across best (so far) I wish she was in our party.

The Australian one is quite good at picking meaningless figures out of the air but.

The Big Two have had it all their own way for so long - taking turns in buggering things up - I'm rather hoping for another coalition* (as long as Nige doesn't feature in it)

 

* Red Ed led

I'm quite happy with the big two m'self. Ideally I would prefer a more left wing Labour Party, but the two main parties should cover everything. A pox on the novelty parties and their muddying of the waters.

Farage thinks that changing the Barnet formula so that less money goes to Scotland will help fund his spending requirements. What he (and IMO everyone else) seems to fail to take into account is that if the formula was changed to ensure that less money goes to Scotland, by default it would mean that less money would be COMING FROM SCOTLAND too!

I haven't been on all week and wasn't going to tonight, but watching Farage makes my blood boil! 

If I ever was going to vote for him (which I wasn't) what he just said there shows him and his party up for what it is! and in no way will I vote for them now! 

 

Making plans for Nigel by XTC was a great song.

Do we know why Cameron and Clegg are not involved tonight?

Cameron apparently said the debate was for opposition leaders, so why wasn't Cleggy there I ask myself?   Cop out all the way if you ask me 

Cameron said he would only be involved in one debate - no idea why there's no Clegg though.

Stop shaking your head Ed, I'm no great follower of you but this may be the only way (working with Sturgeon) that you can get rid of Cam 

Probably cos both parties didn't need to work then maybe? 

Don't know....I was only a child then!

Because he's a spineless waste of space who's Cameron's fag. 

How true that is   Danny Alexander's just said the Lib Dems were excluded from the debate at the insistence (sp) of the Tories  

Ed gets my vote!

According to the Lib Dem guy there it was Cameron who insisted the BBC don't invite them!

I don't like everything they stand for, but out of those on stage he seemed to come off best, IMO 

The Lib Dems are just a satellite of the Tory Party under Clegg.

Farage on Radio 5 live tomorrow morning with Nicky Campbell 

What did he say that annoyed you?

The bit about the audience...

He was right tho, the BBC are a very left wing station these days and they always hand pick the audience to be lefties and hostile to anyone with differing opinions...have you ever watched Question Time?  lol

Yes, I watch it every week 

Then you'll see what im saying.

 

You know there was something questionable about that audience when they cheer everything Nicola Haddock said.

 

not watching any of it...but I thought I would pop this in here 

 

His mate Ian Duncan Smith might be able to help him with that...he knows a few zero hours employers.

http://www.express.co.uk/news/...ng-as-Farage-claimed   Well im shocked.

That article contradicts itself!

 

The hesdline say a ratio of 2:1 for the audience, but the body of the article says a ratio of 2:1 OF THOSE WHO EXPRESSED THEIR PREFERENCE

 

I admit I haven't read the whole thing....did it say that the audience was made up of ONLY those who expressed a preference?

ICM used the following audience ratio for those with a party preference:

Conservative 5

Labour 5 

Lib Dem 4

Ukip 3

SNP 2

Green 2

Plaid 1.

This meant that just 36% of audience members swung to the right.

Yes, FOR THOSE WITH A PARTY PREFERENCE, but does it say anywhere how much (if any) of the audience DIDN'T express a preference?

 

So it doesn't necessarily mean 36% of the audience unless it states that 100% of the audience stated a preference.

We could assume it was mainly a leftie audience by their reactions to the leaders comments...that would suggest a heavy bias in favour of the left.

The Daily Express - owned by someone who has just donated a million pounds to UKIP.  

The stats about the makeup of the audience haven't been denied by the BBC .

The last local QT took place a few weeks ago in a fee paying school in a rural area and had a distinct market based right wing aspect.

The audience last night appeared to be .......
29% nationalist loons
23.8% Tory
23.8% Labour
19% LD. No hopers
9.5% Green as living proof that the Brown acid is specifically bad.

David Dimbleby clearly stated that the audience was not selected by the BBC.

But I'm not talking about assumption and suggestions. I'm talking about the wording of the article.

 

One wording is telling you that the whole audience was made in this ratio and in the next breath the wording is telling you that only a proportion of the audience is in this ratio.

 

"1 in three of the audience...." inferring that this applies to the whole audience.

 

 

"FOR THOSE WITH A PARTY PREFERENCE" inferring that some of the audience had (or gave) no preference - thus "1 in 3" has no quantifiable meaning unless the proportion of the two parts of the audience is known.