Who Gets Your Vote?

[Derek Hazell]

I know you don't talk about politics in civilized company, but this isn't civilized company, so let's do it regardless

I realized from this thread that people aren't averse to talking about politics on here anyway.

I'm going to experiment with a bare bones poll this time, as when I have tried to make them more interesting/amusing I have also faced criticism for them being too specific.
So, just a simple voting system.


Edited to close poll.

[Jimmy Gough]

OMRLP

[Dinos Sfyris]

I'm not voting, not due to age or indifference. I like the idea of voting but since I doubt my solitary vote would be the casting one I don't see why I should bother

[Ben Hunter]

I'm not voting because having your name on the electoral roll makes it easier for government and certain BBC institutions to find you. But if I did vote it would be for the Lib Dems.

I wonder how many Lib Dem votes are lost to paranoia?

[Daniel O'Dowd]

W00h00 the Greens are in joint lead atm! That's how I vote; I used to be Lib Dem, but even though I realise they are the most potent vote to debar Conservative and Labour governments, I am much more closely politically aligned to the Green Party.

http://www.politicalcompass.org/

Anyone who wants to take this test; do give us your results! I'll insert my own later when I can be arsed.

[Michael Wallace]

You say the 'next' election, which would be the European (or locals if you're out in the sticks), but then your first option is 'Keep Labour in', suggesting you mean the next general election.

In short, this is yet another poll on this forum which is terrible and bad and rubbish and bad.

Did I mention this poll was bad?

[Derek Hazell]

You say the 'next' election, which would be the European (or locals if you're out in the sticks), but then your first option is 'Keep Labour in', suggesting you mean the next general election.

In short, this is yet another poll on this forum which is terrible and bad and rubbish and bad.

Did I mention this poll was bad?

Gayness may not be catching but Reynolds's Syndrome certainly is!

If I make these polls any more bare bones we'll be picking through each others skeletons!

Oh damn, I forgot necrophilia on that last poll

[Michael Wallace]

Gayness may not be catching but Reynolds's Syndrome certainly is!

If I make these polls any more bare bones we'll be picking through each others skeletons!

Oh damn, I forgot necrophilia on that last poll

Ok, you do know I was taking the piss, right? I can't tell.

[Derek Hazell]

Ok, you do know I was taking the piss, right? I can't tell.

That's for one of us to know, and for the other one to find out

[JimBentley]

Lib Dems, although it's pretty pointless as the sitting Labour MP here has a majority of about 25,000.

Who are the Jury Team? I'm hoping they're like the Justice League of America, but I bet they're not. They probably don't even have superpowers at all. Pff.

[Derek Hazell]

This poll is now closed and votes are all in.

Seems Countdown aficionados are mostly a MOR crowd, with most votes going to the Liberal Democrats.

Green came 2nd, either because we love the environment here, or because we thought they had a better chance of overthrowing the big guns.

Interestingly only one of us voted for our current government to continue, and there were only two votes for the Tories. The remaining votes were for anti-Europe/foreigner parties UKIP and BNP.

An equal number of people who voted the top choice of LD said they would not vote.

So, Liberal Deomcrat we are then!

Incidently on Phil's IMDb page someone has insinuated that he rather likes Lembit Opik, so as a treat he will be appearing on Question Time tonight.

[Phil Reynolds]

Incidently on Phil's IMDb page someone has insinuated that he rather likes Lembit Opik

Eh? Where on the page does it say that?

Someone's been busy - since I last looked at the page, it's been updated (and not by me) to include my BrainTeaser/Millionaire/Three Little Words appearances. Weird. I'd also love to know who added the droolsome snippet that I used to be a software developer.

[Derek Hazell]

Incidently on Phil's IMDb page someone has insinuated that he rather likes Lembit Opik

Eh? Where on the page does it say that?

On your message board here: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1075455/board

Someone's been busy - since I last looked at the page, it's been updated (and not by me) to include my BrainTeaser/Millionaire/Three Little Words appearances. Weird. I'd also love to know who added the droolsome snippet that I used to be a software developer.

Lol yes, must be nice to have so many people showing an interest in your life/career.

[Phil Reynolds]

Incidently on Phil's IMDb page someone has insinuated that he rather likes Lembit Opik

Eh? Where on the page does it say that?

On your message board here: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1075455/board

Oh my lord. It's never even occurred to me to look there. Weirder still. (And no, Lembit Opik doesn't float my boat.)

[Derek Hazell]

Oh my lord. It's never even occurred to me to look there. Weirder still. (And no, Lembit Opik doesn't float my boat.)

Do you know anyone called H. Grainger? If so, what would their reason be for posting such a thing?

[Phil Reynolds]

Do you know anyone called H. Grainger? If so, what would their reason be for posting such a thing?

If it's who I think it is, it's a colleague of mine from my Marconi days, which would explain where the trivia item about my erstwhile career came from. However, I'm none the wiser as to the justification for the Lembit Opik comment.

[Derek Hazell]

Did our one BNP voter enjoy last night's Question Time? And was anyone else converted to the party through seeing it?

[Kirk Bevins]

Did our one BNP voter enjoy last night's Question Time? And was anyone else converted to the party through seeing it?

I don't usually watch question time, nor am I interested in politics but I watched bits of this last night. I liked the man in the audience who asked why they are still letting immigrants in to work when there is record numbers of unemployment in Britain then this stupid woman argued back saying she has some foreign woman working for her in a hospital and she works well bla bla bla. That's exactly his point - thousands of British nationals (whatever race) have no job as foreigners come into the country and steal them.

[Jon Corby]

Did our one BNP voter enjoy last night's Question Time? And was anyone else converted to the party through seeing it?

I don't usually watch question time, nor am I interested in politics but I watched bits of this last night. I liked the man in the audience who asked why they are still letting immigrants in to work when there is record numbers of unemployment in Britain then this stupid woman argued back saying she has some foreign woman working for her in a hospital and she works well bla bla bla. That's exactly his point - thousands of British nationals (whatever race) have no job as foreigners come into the country and steal them.

As one of the unemployed, you must be livid that you are constantly being refused jobs that are instead being given to immigrants.

Am I right?

[Marc Meakin]

I thought question time was supposed to be about topical issues

There was no mention of the postal strike or MPs refusing to pay back their expenses
It just seemed an excuse to give Griffin a good kicking (which he deserves) and not about the important issues

[Jimmy Gough]

Yeah, there was literally no debate or discussion; it was more just a chance for people to attack and ridicule Nick Griffin - he wasn't even given the chance to explain himself or his policies without constantly being interrupted mid-sentence. I mean, I dislike the BNP, but isn't that a complete democracy fail? Watching somebody being bullied like that will probably only increase BNP support.

I also found the Muslim lady amusing: "Grr, Nick Griffin you're such an evil bigot (BTW I hate gays)"

[Charlie Reams]

Did our one BNP voter enjoy last night's Question Time? And was anyone else converted to the party through seeing it?

I don't usually watch question time, nor am I interested in politics but I watched bits of this last night. I liked the man in the audience who asked why they are still letting immigrants in to work when there is record numbers of unemployment in Britain then this stupid woman argued back saying she has some foreign woman working for her in a hospital and she works well bla bla bla. That's exactly his point - thousands of British nationals (whatever race) have no job as foreigners come into the country and steal them.

Define "steal".

[Derek Hazell]

I liked this from Jon Snow:

"The BNP continues to breathe the oxygen of publicity before their appearance on the BBC tonight. There is a large demo outside TV Centre and a general spirit of revulsion in the air.

Nick Griffin has just gone in via the tradesman's entrance, normally the preserve of BBC staff and those intent on desecrating the Blue Peter garden."

[Michael Wallace]

I thought question time was supposed to be about topical issues

There was no mention of the postal strike or MPs refusing to pay back their expenses
It just seemed an excuse to give Griffin a good kicking (which he deserves) and not about the important issues

Didn't they cover the postal strike and MPs refusing to pay back their expenses last week?

To be fair, Nick Griffin has been the news for the last week, although I agree they could have asked more topical questions than basically making the whole programme "hey, did you know that Nick Griffin is racist?". On the other hand, I'm kinda glad they did do it the way they did - if they'd just asked normal questions he probably would have made far less of a tit of himself, and hopefully a lot of stupid people who'd've watched for the first time last night would have come away just thinking he's a moron (not that I actually expect it to have made any real difference to anything).

I think one of my favourite parts was how on the Stephen Gately question, which didn't explicitly have anything to do with gayness he still managed to say something objectionable about gay people.

[Kirk Bevins]

Define "steal".

OK. Suppose all those foreigners who work in this country were to leave. This would open up thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed in this country. Surely this has to be a good thing?

[Ben Hunter]

I also found the Muslim lady amusing: "Grr, Nick Griffin you're such an evil bigot (BTW I hate gays)"

Dimbleby was pressing her ever so slightly to mention the fact she's been shopped a few times for homophobic leaflet campaigns. If Nick Griffin wasn't such a crazed paranoid schizophrenic he could have used this to score a few points for his side, talk about how Muslim beliefs are at odds the tolerant values of modern British society etc. Instead he want on a crazed rant about militant homosexuals. After last night I actually doubt Griffin's theory of mind, he has almost no ability for deception at all.

Not sure how successful he'd have been either way though, given the cognitive dissonance shared by many liberals in this country (freedom of speech and freedom of sexuality are good, but don't offend Muslims).

[Charlie Reams]

OK. Suppose all those foreigners who work in this country were to leave. This would open up thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed in this country. Surely this has to be a good thing?

The same would happen if we got rid of everyone over 6 feet tall. What's the difference?

[Michael Wallace]

Not sure how successful he'd have been either way though, given the cognitive dissonance shared by many liberals in this country (freedom of speech and freedom of sexuality are good, but don't offend Muslims).

Well that's just common sense; I don't want to be blown up.

(that was a joke, please don't blow me up )

[Alec Rivers]

Define "steal".

OK. Suppose all those foreigners who work in this country were to leave. This would open up thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed in this country. Surely this has to be a good thing?

Unless I'm mistaken, the majority of jobs done by overseas workers are the ones we don't want to do for the pitiful wages they're paid. Here comes the controversial bit: Slavery is alive and well, it seems.

[Jimmy Gough]

Define "steal".

OK. Suppose all those foreigners who work in this country were to leave. This would open up thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed in this country. Surely this has to be a good thing?

Yeah, I'm all for unqualified doctors.

[Derek Hazell]

Here comes the controversial bit: Slavery is alive and well, it seems.

Everybody: That Alec Rivers, blah blah blah
Sue Sanders: Stop!
Everybody: But, that Alec Rivers!
Alec Rivers: Just me, and justified yes
Everybody (individually): I'm justified too

(repeat as necessary)

[Charlie Reams]

If Nick Griffin wasn't such a crazed paranoid schizophrenic he could have used this to score a few points for his side, talk about how Muslim beliefs are at odds the tolerant values of modern British society etc.

I think he did do that, in response to the question about Islam being a "wicked religion". He gave some very reasonable points about the incompatibility of Islamic beliefs with modern Britain (albeit conveniently omitting any mention of the similar problems with, say, Christianity) and even allowed that Islam does have some redeeming features. For me it was only the point about gayers where he really exposed himself as an embarrassing anachronism.

[Alec Rivers]

Here comes the controversial bit: Slavery is alive and well, it seems.

Everybody: That Alec Rivers, blah blah blah
Sue Sanders: Stop!
Everybody: But, that Alec Rivers!
Alec Rivers: Just me, and justified yes
Everybody (individually): I'm justified too

(repeat as necessary)

lol. Is this bolting the gate before the horse has even woken up?

[Ben Hunter]

If Nick Griffin wasn't such a crazed paranoid schizophrenic he could have used this to score a few points for his side, talk about how Muslim beliefs are at odds the tolerant values of modern British society etc.

I think he did do that, in response to the question about Islam being a "wicked religion". He gave some very reasonable points about the incompatibility of Islamic beliefs with modern Britain (albeit conveniently omitting any mention of the similar problems with, say, Christianity) and even allowed that Islam does have some redeeming features. For me it was only the point about gayers where he really exposed himself as an embarrassing anachronism.

Yeah you're right, I forgot about that bit and yes his points were valid. He would have made that point hit home had he kept on that tack when the chat about gayers came up.

[Charlie Reams]

Here comes the controversial bit: Slavery is alive and well, it seems.

Everybody: That Alec Rivers, blah blah blah
Sue Sanders: Stop!
Everybody: But, that Alec Rivers!
Alec Rivers: Just me, and justified yes
Everybody (individually): I'm justified too

(repeat as necessary)

Relax dude, most people's opinion of Alec ranges somewhere between appreciation and gentle indifference, occasionally coupled with amusement at some of his wackier material. He's hardly the new Clare Sudbury.

[Darren Carter]

Define "steal".

OK. Suppose all those foreigners who work in this country were to leave. This would open up thousands of job opportunities for the unemployed in this country. Surely this has to be a good thing?

Well except that you have just shrunk the economy and got rid of many talented and hard-working individuals, which is a bad thing.

I think it's pretty obvious that there are major problems with immigration at the minute, but unfortunately the BNP take it to so much of an extreme which makes it impossible for people to vote for them. Some of their non-immigration policies are quite decent though. Question Time seems to have had the inverse effect that the BBC wanted as the BNP reckon that 3,000 people have registered to sign up as members as a result of the program.

[Charlie Reams]

Some of their non-immigration policies are quite decent though.

Examples please!

Question Time seems to have had the inverse effect that the BBC wanted as the BNP reckon that 3,000 people have registered to sign up as members as a result of the program.

I would guess that those are mostly people who were fascists already, and seeing something on TV made them do something about it; 3,000 is a low yield on however many millions of people tuned in, especially after you factor in the BNP's notoriously creative accounting. How many people more now recognise the BNP as a bunch of homophobic neo-Nazis? I'd say it had exactly the desired effect.

[Derek Hazell]

Relax dude, most people's opinion of Alec ranges somewhere between appreciation and gentle indifference, occasionally coupled with amusement at some of his wackier material. He's hardly the new Clare Sudbury.

It's okay, it was just my attempt at satire.
I wasn't trying to initiate a new Rivers of Blood.

[Darren Carter]

Some of their non-immigration policies are quite decent though.

Examples please!

Crime and Justice:

- Free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket which is stopping them from doing their jobs properly;

- End the liberal fixation with the “rights” of criminals and replace it with concern for the rights of victims – and the right of innocent people not to become victims;

- Re-introduce corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals;

- Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence).


Education:

- The teaching of old-fashioned literacy skills (as opposed to clearly failed “modern” teaching methods);

- The teaching of old-fashioned mathematics skills which have practical application to everyday life;

- The abolition of fees and the restoration of full grants to university students studying proper subjects (as opposed to fake “social sciences”);

- The improvement of school food as proper meals have been shown to be linked to behaviour and achievement;


Health:

- Replace 100,000 NHS bureaucrats with doctors, nurses and dentists;

- Invest sufficient money in the NHS to provide a decent service to the British people;

- Bring hospital cleaning back in-house and make high cleanliness a top priority;

- Revitalise the healthcare system by boosting staff and bed numbers, slashing unnecessary bureaucracy and by addressing the root cause of low recruitment and retention — low pay



These are a few that I quite like. A lot of their policies though are quite frankly ridiculous, especially the race-related ones.

[Michael Wallace]

So many of those are pretty silly (and many are just laughably vague), so I'll just single out:

- Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence).

Really?

[Charlie Reams]

Crime and Justice:

- Free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket which is stopping them from doing their jobs properly;

- End the liberal fixation with the “rights” of criminals and replace it with concern for the rights of victims – and the right of innocent people not to become victims;

- Re-introduce corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals;

- Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence).

Ohhh, you're a fascist! Why didn't you say?!

[Kirk Bevins]

The same would happen if we got rid of everyone over 6 feet tall. What's the difference?

But that's ridiculous. It would mean for people to get jobs they'd have to travel abroad, because foreigners have got our jobs. That doesn't make sense.

Some people who are 6 feet tall were born in Britain and so deserve to stay here. Those who are foreigners weren't born in Britain so I don't see your logic.

[Liam Tiernan]

So many of those are pretty silly (and many are just laughably vague), so I'll just single out:

- Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence).

Really?

So: Degree of proof should determine degree of sentence? In that case juries would be asked to deliver verdicts such as Maybe guilty,Probably guilty,Definitely guilty, Hang the bastard,?

[Ben Hunter]

- Free the police and courts from the politically correct straitjacket which is stopping them from doing their jobs properly;

That's just a load of buzz words.

- End the liberal fixation with the “rights” of criminals and replace it with concern for the rights of victims – and the right of innocent people not to become victims;

Of course justice in cases where criminals are injured by people protecting their own homes should be skewed towards the home owner, but everyone should have a right to a fair trial, and on the condition that you end up in jail, a right not to get bummed.

- Re-introduce corporal punishment for petty criminals and vandals;

There's probably a study on this somewhere, but I doubt petty crime here is any worse than petty crime in nations that amputate thieves.

- Restore capital punishment for paedophiles, terrorists and murderers as an option for judges in cases where their guilt is proven beyond dispute (such as with DNA or other compelling evidence).

The death penalty is the ultimate expression of state dominance over the individual and we should never allow it.

- The teaching of old-fashioned literacy skills (as opposed to clearly failed “modern” teaching methods);

What evidence is there to say that modern literacy training is failing?

- The teaching of old-fashioned mathematics skills which have practical application to everyday life;

These are taught in primary school. Teaching advanced mathematics is how people can start computing, science and engineering courses without having to learn insane amounts of new maths.

- The abolition of fees and the restoration of full grants to university students studying proper subjects (as opposed to fake “social sciences”);

I'm all for scholarships for science and engineering students, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that social sciences are 'fake'. Do the BNP always have to use this sort of language?

- The improvement of school food as proper meals have been shown to be linked to behaviour and achievement;

More a statement than a policy but yes why not.

- Replace 100,000 NHS bureaucrats with doctors, nurses and dentists;

How is this even possible? Would the BNP pay to train the 100'000 data entry clerks to become doctors?

- Invest sufficient money in the NHS to provide a decent service to the British people;

No problem with this.

- Bring hospital cleaning back in-house and make high cleanliness a top priority;

If more cleaners can be afforded then why not.

- Revitalise the healthcare system by boosting staff and bed numbers, slashing unnecessary bureaucracy and by addressing the root cause of low recruitment and retention — low pay

Sure, but don't the other parties believe this as well?

[Ben Hunter]

The same would happen if we got rid of everyone over 6 feet tall. What's the difference?

But that's ridiculous. It would mean for people to get jobs they'd have to travel abroad, because foreigners have got our jobs. That doesn't make sense.

Rephrase that to "because foreigners have got my jobs", it means the same thing but it demonstrates the wrongness of it more clearly.

[Darren Carter]

Wow, ok I don't particularly want to waste loads of time defending a party I don't even support or like - I guess the point I was trying to make was that not absolutely everything they stand for is racist or homophobic - much of it is, granted. But the way they are perceived in the media, you would think that they are nothing but that.

[Kirk Bevins]

Rephrase that to "because foreigners have got my jobs", it means the same thing but it demonstrates the wrongness of it more clearly.

I'm not with you. It's nothing to do with me strictly. I've only applied for 2 jobs so I can't comment on a personal level but I'm told thousands of people are out of work and read in the papers that unemployment levels have never been so high in Britain.

[Mark Harrison]

Wow, ok I don't particularly want to waste loads of time defending a party I don't even support or like - I guess the point I was trying to make was that not absolutely everything they stand for is racist or homophobic - much of it is, granted. But the way they are perceived in the media, you would think that they are nothing but that.

You can make the same argument about the Nazis. The construction of the autobahns in Germany got looooooads of German workers in jobs, and propped up the economy during the Great Depression. It was a great idea. But most people, subsequently, have regarded the fact that they wanted to see an end to the Jewish race as more significant than that (and quite rightly!).

It's the same with the BNP - whatever policies they have aside from their views on race and immigration, most people will see that as by far the most significant thing about the party, because it turns most people's stomachs.

[Phil Reynolds]

I also found the Muslim lady amusing: "Grr, Nick Griffin you're such an evil bigot (BTW I hate gays)"

Dimbleby was pressing her ever so slightly to mention the fact she's been shopped a few times for homophobic leaflet campaigns.

Yet again someone with a bigoted agenda gets mileage out of describing Section 28 as "banning schools from promoting homosexuality", which makes it sound at least semi-justifiable, when in fact it did nothing of the sort.

[Michael Wallace]

Topical.

[Matt Morrison]

Topical.

Much appreciated, Michael. The 'boy are getting ridiculously on the ball, this is much quicker than their usual output.

[Charlie Reams]

The same would happen if we got rid of everyone over 6 feet tall. What's the difference?

But that's ridiculous. It would mean for people to get jobs they'd have to travel abroad, because foreigners have got our jobs. That doesn't make sense.

Some people who are 6 feet tall were born in Britain and so deserve to stay here. Those who are foreigners weren't born in Britain so I don't see your logic.

You've failed to identify anything special about people who were born in Britain. Why do they "deserve" jobs and others don't? How is that separation any more meaningful than separating people on the basis of height, nostril diameter, preferred type of cheese etc? You keep calling them "our" jobs but you haven't made any case for that.

Also you've failed to address the other points raised by people in this thread, so to summarise:-
1) Expelling people from the country shrinks the economy, or at least slows growth (I'll defer to any closet economists on this.) Whatever the case, this is bad news for everyone.
2) In many cases, recent migrants are willing to work for lower wages. If British people would work for the same wage then they'd have just the same chance of getting the job, or maybe even higher due to their better English.
3) Many foreign workers are highly skilled. We can't just kick all the foreign doctors out of the country and magically replace them with British-born people, we don't have enough people with those skills.
4) Consider the reverse problem: many British people live overseas. If all countries were to expel non-natives, Britain would actually gain more people than it would lose.

[Kirk Bevins]

You've failed to identify anything special about people who were born in Britain. Why do they "deserve" jobs and others don't? How is that separation any more meaningful than separating people on the basis of height, nostril diameter, preferred type of cheese etc? You keep calling them "our" jobs but you haven't made any case for that.

Also you've failed to address the other points raised by people in this thread, so to summarise:-
1) Expelling people from the country shrinks the economy, or at least slows growth (I'll defer to any closet economists on this.) Whatever the case, this is bad news for everyone.
2) In many cases, recent migrants are willing to work for lower wages. If British people would work for the same wage then they'd have just the same chance of getting the job, or maybe even higher due to their better English.
3) Many foreign workers are highly skilled. We can't just kick all the foreign doctors out of the country and magically replace them with British-born people, we don't have enough people with those skills.
4) Consider the reverse problem: many British people live overseas. If all countries were to expel non-natives, Britain would actually gain more people than it would lose.

OK I resign. I'm still not voting though.

[Charlie Reams]

Wow, ok I don't particularly want to waste loads of time defending a party I don't even support or like - I guess the point I was trying to make was that not absolutely everything they stand for is racist or homophobic - much of it is, granted. But the way they are perceived in the media, you would think that they are nothing but that.

Fair point. Nevertheless this is a classic wedge strategy; on obvious cheerleading points like "make the NHS better!!!!" and "less crime please!!!!!" they can propose unrealistic solutions because they know they won't win a general election any time soon. But on other matters, their views are offensive on every point where they could be offensive.

OK I resign. I'm still not voting though.

[Jimmy Gough]

On the other hand, I'm kinda glad they did do it the way they did - if they'd just asked normal questions he probably would have made far less of a tit of himself, and hopefully a lot of stupid people who'd've watched for the first time last night would have come away just thinking he's a moron (not that I actually expect it to have made any real difference to anything).

Why? I don't see how it is acceptable to create a program about "topical debate" and just use it to persistently attack one guy for an hour and a half to ensure that he and his party look ridiculous. I doubt many politicians from any party at all could've dealt with such a barrage much better. Just seems really unfair to do that because you dislike somebody's political views.

[JimBentley]

OK I resign. I'm still not voting though.

Kirk, please rethink this. It's low turnouts due to apathetic voters that allows fringe parties like the BNP to appear to get (relatively) large shares of the vote in certain constituencies. They can then say "ah, but we got 20% of the vote, we are a mainstream political party now". They may have got 20% of the vote, but if the turnout is only 30% then they're really only representing 6% of the people (admittedly this is assuming that BNP voters are not apathetic, but then that's probably broadly true).

[Mark Harrison]

On the other hand, I'm kinda glad they did do it the way they did - if they'd just asked normal questions he probably would have made far less of a tit of himself, and hopefully a lot of stupid people who'd've watched for the first time last night would have come away just thinking he's a moron (not that I actually expect it to have made any real difference to anything).

Why? I don't see how it is acceptable to create a program about "topical debate" and just use it to persistently attack one guy for an hour and a half to ensure that he and his party look ridiculous. I doubt many politicians from any party at all could've dealt with such a barrage much better. Just seems really unfair to do that because you dislike somebody's political views.

I thought they were reasonably normal questions, if for no other reason than the fact that Nick Griffin appearing on Question Time is the big news story of the week in itself. There was a question on something else at the end - there should perhaps have been something on the postal strike, but I didn't think it was unreasonably unrepresentative.

He kind of made himself look ridiculous; his party's views are outrageous, and most of the audience and panel disagreed with him enough to openly mock and scorn. That's not to do with the format of the show, that's politics...

[Michael Wallace]

On the other hand, I'm kinda glad they did do it the way they did - if they'd just asked normal questions he probably would have made far less of a tit of himself, and hopefully a lot of stupid people who'd've watched for the first time last night would have come away just thinking he's a moron (not that I actually expect it to have made any real difference to anything).

Why? I don't see how it is acceptable to create a program about "topical debate" and just use it to persistently attack one guy for an hour and a half to ensure that he and his party look ridiculous. I doubt many politicians from any party at all could've dealt with such a barrage much better. Just seems really unfair to do that because you dislike somebody's political views.

The following is obviously a gross simplification, and fairly presumptuous, but it illustrates my point.

Option 1) The BBC carefully constructs Question Time to make Nick Griffin look bad, and it causes a huge reduction in BNP support.
Option 2) The BBC runs Question Time as normal, Nick Griffin gets to look like a fairly reasonable person from a fairly reasonable part, and the BNP get lots more supporters.

In principle, option 2 is the 'fair' one. But I would rather they did option 1, because the outcome suits me much better. It's like if someone was all "either we'll chop your legs off or we'll chop off the legs of a million other people", you could argue that in principle me losing my legs is better, but I'm going to prefer the other option (assuming they don't all come after me, which they probably won't because they won't have any legs).

[Kirk Bevins]

OK I resign. I'm still not voting though.

Kirk, please rethink this. It's low turnouts due to apathetic voters that allows fringe parties like the BNP to appear to get (relatively) large shares of the vote in certain constituencies. They can then say "ah, but we got 20% of the vote, we are a mainstream political party now". They may have got 20% of the vote, but if the turnout is only 30% then they're really only representing 6% of the people (admittedly this is assuming that BNP voters are not apathetic, but then that's probably broadly true).

I don't enjoy politics and I don't understand politics. As far as I'm aware they're all liars. I don't know enough about the world for me to warrant voting so I'm not going to. If I vote and say I vote BNP and they win by a single vote, your argument may backfire Jim - you'd rather I'd have abstained.

[Matt Morrison]

if someone was all "either we'll chop your legs off or we'll chop off the legs of a million other people", you could argue that in principle me losing my legs is better, but I'm going to prefer the other option (assuming they don't all come after me, which they probably won't because they won't have any legs).

click image for full size