Ask the BBC that one, perhaps he was not invited by them, or perhaps it is because he is not PM or Deputy PM and that is who the BBC wanted there. I would no doubt he would have been able to adequately answer the questions if he had been asked them.
I thought it was a good programme, and wish it had gone on for longer. I respect these two for doing this, Cameron has never shyed away from talking directly to the public, he has done a lot of public meetings. Pity Brown hasn't got the courage of his convictions and faced the public, if he really believed he was right he should be in the House of Commons fighting them tooth and nail, instead of hiding away.
Hey, it makes a change for the BBC to bother inviting a Lib Dem on a discussion show at all!
I actually thought Nick looked a bit uncomfortable at time. We all knew the answer to a lot of questions was either "Yes I know you're angry but just imagine how we felt when we got in and saw the books" or just as often, "I don't like it much either but more people voted for this dude so he gets his evil Tory way most of the time."
I don't buy the Clegg=Tory thing. If he was that much of one why would he join the Lib Dems? He'd have had a much better chance of getting power if he'd joined the Conservatives.
Hey, it makes a change for the BBC to bother inviting a Lib Dem on a discussion show at all!
I actually thought Nick looked a bit uncomfortable at time. We all knew the answer to a lot of questions was either "Yes I know you're angry but just imagine how we felt when we got in and saw the books" or just as often, "I don't like it much either but more people voted for this dude so he gets his evil Tory way most of the time."
I don't buy the Clegg=Tory thing. If he was that much of one why would he join the Lib Dems? He'd have had a much better chance of getting power if he'd joined the Conservatives.
He'd have had no chance of being Deputy Prime Minister though would he? He's just be another suit in a sea of suits.
ETA: No way would he have been leader of the Tories, he wouldn't have had a prominent enough position to be Deputy either.
It is only me or did Nick Robinson kept interrupting Nick Clegg from answering the questions by asking the audience to ask even more question and made the whole proceeding very confusing and frustrating?!
The trouble with shows like this is that the big beasts of BBC political coverage are analysts, not mediators. Nick Robinson is used to building up a story and giving his take. He's a Tory supporter. Ditto for Michael Crick who is tribally Labour.
This is fine if you know this and it is in the context of an editorial piece like we're used to seeing them both do. Neither is terribly good at presenting a balanced debate as they are too ready to let their colours show.
He'd have had no chance of being Deputy Prime Minister though would he? He's just be another suit in a sea of suits.
ETA: No way would he have been leader of the Tories, he wouldn't have had a prominent enough position to be Deputy either.
Given the results our electoral system generally throws up, before May 6, how many people would have counted on his chances of becoming Deputy PM in any event? Just food for thought, there.
Given the results our electoral system generally throws up, before May 6, how many people would have counted on his chances of becoming Deputy PM in any event? Just food for thought, there.
Apparently the exact same thing happened in the 70's (although the coalition was never formed) so it was always a possibility that the Lib Dems would be required to prop one of the other two main parties.
The trouble with shows like this is that the big beasts of BBC political coverage are analysts, not mediators. Nick Robinson is used to building up a story and giving his take. He's a Tory supporter. Ditto for Michael Crick who is tribally Labour.
This is fine if you know this and it is in the context of an editorial piece like we're used to seeing them both do. Neither is terribly good at presenting a balanced debate as they are too ready to let their colours show.
David Dimbleby and even Jeremy Paxman, whatever their political leanings might be, never seem so dire in fulfilling the role of an 'mediator'. Robinson is nigh to hopeless and made the whole 30-minute programme rather frustrating to watch.
Yes, Dimbleby always seems to be accused of bias but by everyone at once, which is usually a good sign that he is actually pretty impartial.
Paxman just attacks everybody, indiscriminately!
As for random acts of the electoral system, it is genuinely scandalous that the Liberals have been so far from government for so long with so large a share of the vote. The election you're thinking of, trickyvik is February 1974 when the Liberal Party got 20% of the vote but only 14 seats - an even worse ratio than this time when the Lib Dems topped 23% and got 57 seats.
Any proportional system would have produced hung parliaments (and therefore most likely coalitions at least some of the time) every election since the 1930s.
Ben - how does the FPTP system produce such ridculous results - I mean the Lib Dem's percentage increased but their seats were reduced. Labour got less votes than John Major in 97 but yet managed to win 356 seats in 2005.
It has to do with whether a party's support is geographically concentrated or spread out. If you have 20,000 votes in one town you can get an MP - if you have 200,000 spread evenly across the country you get diddly squat.
The Lib Dems (and Liberals) always suffered from having a significant level of support nationally but almost never enough votes in one single constituency to win. Even to this day "a strong second place" is practically the adopted motto of some LD local parties.
Lib Dems and Greens will benefit a little (the Greens very slightly indeed I think) from a move to AV if the referendum is passed but only a proportional system will genuinely make everyone's votes count.
It has to do with whether a party's support is geographically concentrated or spread out. If you have 20,000 votes in one town you can get an MP - if you have 200,000 spread evenly across the country you get diddly squat.
The Lib Dems (and Liberals) always suffered from having a significant level of support nationally but almost never enough votes in one single constituency to win. Even to this day "a strong second place" is practically the adopted motto of some LD local parties.
Lib Dems and Greens will benefit a little (the Greens very slightly indeed I think) from a move to AV if the referendum is passed but only a proportional system will genuinely make everyone's votes count.
Very interesting analysis Ben. Although hopefully, AV will be the start of a more fair system.
Comments
Wish the audience would press them on bringing back council homes and are they going to take us onto a war with Iran at some stage etc etc
Ask the BBC that one, perhaps he was not invited by them, or perhaps it is because he is not PM or Deputy PM and that is who the BBC wanted there. I would no doubt he would have been able to adequately answer the questions if he had been asked them.
I know
Probably cos Cameron and Clegg come across better to the public in these sort of situations.
I actually thought Nick looked a bit uncomfortable at time. We all knew the answer to a lot of questions was either "Yes I know you're angry but just imagine how we felt when we got in and saw the books" or just as often, "I don't like it much either but more people voted for this dude so he gets his evil Tory way most of the time."
I don't buy the Clegg=Tory thing. If he was that much of one why would he join the Lib Dems? He'd have had a much better chance of getting power if he'd joined the Conservatives.
He'd have had no chance of being Deputy Prime Minister though would he? He's just be another suit in a sea of suits.
ETA: No way would he have been leader of the Tories, he wouldn't have had a prominent enough position to be Deputy either.
That's a really interesting point Gummy Mummy - hadn't thought of that! It just might well happen at the next election!
Nave and....
The trouble with shows like this is that the big beasts of BBC political coverage are analysts, not mediators. Nick Robinson is used to building up a story and giving his take. He's a Tory supporter. Ditto for Michael Crick who is tribally Labour.
This is fine if you know this and it is in the context of an editorial piece like we're used to seeing them both do. Neither is terribly good at presenting a balanced debate as they are too ready to let their colours show.
Oh yeah I get it
Given the results our electoral system generally throws up, before May 6, how many people would have counted on his chances of becoming Deputy PM in any event? Just food for thought, there.
Apparently the exact same thing happened in the 70's (although the coalition was never formed) so it was always a possibility that the Lib Dems would be required to prop one of the other two main parties.
I take your point though.
David Dimbleby and even Jeremy Paxman, whatever their political leanings might be, never seem so dire in fulfilling the role of an 'mediator'. Robinson is nigh to hopeless and made the whole 30-minute programme rather frustrating to watch.
Paxman just attacks everybody, indiscriminately!
As for random acts of the electoral system, it is genuinely scandalous that the Liberals have been so far from government for so long with so large a share of the vote. The election you're thinking of, trickyvik is February 1974 when the Liberal Party got 20% of the vote but only 14 seats - an even worse ratio than this time when the Lib Dems topped 23% and got 57 seats.
Any proportional system would have produced hung parliaments (and therefore most likely coalitions at least some of the time) every election since the 1930s.
Bizarre.
The Lib Dems (and Liberals) always suffered from having a significant level of support nationally but almost never enough votes in one single constituency to win. Even to this day "a strong second place" is practically the adopted motto of some LD local parties.
Lib Dems and Greens will benefit a little (the Greens very slightly indeed I think) from a move to AV if the referendum is passed but only a proportional system will genuinely make everyone's votes count.
Very interesting analysis Ben. Although hopefully, AV will be the start of a more fair system.