Andrew Neil

[drew]

Have to say that I never used to like Andrew Neil and in particular the way the national media used to wheel him out as their spokesman for a free press when he was editor of the Times to defend some of the transgressions of the red tops.

However, his interviewing of politicians from both sides of the spectrum has been excellent. He has badgered every interviewee and shown them to be fools for not answering simple questions and in doing so demonstrating that these politicians hold the electorate in complete contempt. Today was the turn of Willy Hague who was repeatedly asked the same question about protecting child benefit. The other day it was a shadow minister, Jamie Reed and there have been plenty others.

After Thursday, politicians may have to look back on the campaign and hopefully will work out for themselves (although I suspect someone will have to point it out) that the campaigns have been on a very negative basis. Seems they are scared of being honest!

Lastly, love the way the yank on the Sunday politics turns up in trainers!!

 

[8ace]

I saw William Hague with his young male "assistant" on Darlo station yesterday.

 

[beorhthelm]

while i like him and others that stick into the politicians, i've grown tired of when they relentless ask the same question, in the same way over and over, and over. as if the answers is going to change if they hit a quota. its like repeately crossing the ball into the penalty area when you have a 5'8 player and they have a couple of 6'2 CB who will read and cover every time. switch the play, try something different.

 

[clippedgull]

Will be interesting if the odious **** Iain Duncan Smith turns up for his grilling later this week. I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Tom Hark Preston Park]

I don't recall any previous election where interviewers and politicians talked so relentlessly over the top of each other. They might think they're being very clever by doing that, but the net result is that the viewer/potential voter just ends up reaching for the off switch.

 

[drew]

while i like him and others that stick into the politicians, i've grown tired of when they relentless ask the same question, in the same way over and over, and over. as if the answers is going to change if they hit a quota. its like repeately crossing the ball into the penalty area when you have a 5'8 player and they have a couple of 6'2 CB who will read and cover every time. switch the play, try something different.

Ask it once and not get an answer and then move one doesn't show anything. Ask it several times (although you know you won't get the answer) and it highlights the deceit by the politicians and how uncomfortable they appear. Tells the electorate far more.

 

[beorhthelm]

Ask it once and not get an answer and then move one doesn't show anything. Ask it several times (although you know you won't get the answer) and it highlights the deceit by the politicians and how uncomfortable they appear. Tells the electorate far more.

i get that, but after about 3 times, your just wasting time from other questions, or at least come at the same topic from a different angle.

and sometimes the answer given is legitimate but just not the one the interviewer wants or the current news cycle "demands". on some of these issues is like the media is setting the policy by pushing the politicans into ruling something in or out. example, Miliband has been bullied by the constant questioning about SNP to rule out a coalition or formal deal. i dont think thats helpful for anyone.

 

[BigGully]

while i like him and others that stick into the politicians, i've grown tired of when they relentless ask the same question, in the same way over and over, and over. as if the answers is going to change if they hit a quota. its like repeately crossing the ball into the penalty area when you have a 5'8 player and they have a couple of 6'2 CB who will read and cover every time. switch the play, try something different.

Doesnt it just give confirmation that the politician is lying and not answering a key question.

 

[Diego Napier]

Ask it once and not get an answer and then move one doesn't show anything. Ask it several times (although you know you won't get the answer) and it highlights the deceit by the politicians and how uncomfortable they appear. Tells the electorate far more.

Very much this. Ask it a second time as they may have misunderstood the question. Ask it a third time and if they don't answer then they are using evasion tactics. Subsequent repetition makes them more and more embarrassed and highlights the fact that they either don't know the answer or that it's so unpalatable that they cannot bring themselves to speak it.

 

[drew]

i get that, but after about 3 times, your just wasting time from other questions, or at least come at the same topic from a different angle.

and sometimes the answer given is legitimate but just not the one the interviewer wants or the current news cycle "demands". on some of these issues is like the media is setting the policy by pushing the politicans into ruling something in or out. example, Miliband has been bullied by the constant questioning about SNP to rule out a coalition or formal deal. i dont think thats helpful for anyone.

Have to say I've yet to hear any politician answer yes or no to a closed question. For example, Hague was asked if they have plans to cut child benefit before 2020, yes or no, and all he said was that they have their spending plans upto 2017. It's a bit like the conservative response to Danny Alexander's allegation that they wanted to reduce child benefit. They didn't say that they looked it as one of many possible cuts and dismissed it or, like any other benefit it is always subject to review. They just said they didn't recognize it? Same with Jamie Reed when he was asked if the £2.5m that Labour were going to spend extra was in addition to the £8m the Conservatives had promised. Simple yes or simple no but all he would say was that it was in addtion to the the tory spending plans. Why not just say yes? The reason is because it probably isn't in addition to the £8m.

As for the denials about coalition partners, the leaders have backed themselves into a corner. The simple answer when asked is that you are targeting a majority but if that doesn't happen, as was the case last time, then you discuss with potential partners how best to govern the country with compromise on each side. I suspect had they answered along those lines then the issue would have been dropped weeks ago but the it's now like a dog with a bone as far as the media are concerned.

 

[Hampster Gull]

Have to say I've yet to hear any politician answer yes or no to a closed question. For example, Hague was asked if they have plans to cut child benefit before 2020, yes or no, and all he said was that they have their spending plans upto 2017. It's a bit like the conservative response to Danny Alexander's allegation that they wanted to reduce child benefit. They didn't say that they looked it as one of many possible cuts and dismissed it or, like any other benefit it is always subject to review. They just said they didn't recognize it? Same with Jamie Reed when he was asked if the £2.5m that Labour were going to spend extra was in addition to the £8m the Conservatives had promised. Simple yes or simple no but all he would say was that it was in addtion to the the tory spending plans. Why not just say yes? The reason is because it probably isn't in addition to the £8m.

As for the denials about coalition partners, the leaders have backed themselves into a corner. The simple answer when asked is that you are targeting a majority but if that doesn't happen, as was the case last time, then you discuss with potential partners how best to govern the country with compromise on each side. I suspect had they answered along those lines then the issue would have been dropped weeks ago but the it's now like a dog with a bone as far as the media are concerned.

One of the reasons Sturgeon is doing so well

 

[shingle]

Have to say that I never used to like Andrew Neil and in particular the way the national media used to wheel him out as their spokesman for a free press when he was editor of the Times to defend some of the transgressions of the red tops.

However, his interviewing of politicians from both sides of the spectrum has been excellent. He has badgered every interviewee and shown them to be fools for not answering simple questions and in doing so demonstrating that these politicians hold the electorate in complete contempt. Today was the turn of Willy Hague who was repeatedly asked the same question about protecting child benefit. The other day it was a shadow minister, Jamie Reed and there have been plenty others.

After Thursday, politicians may have to look back on the campaign and hopefully will work out for themselves (although I suspect someone will have to point it out) that the campaigns have been on a very negative basis. Seems they are scared of being honest!

Lastly, love the way the yank on the Sunday politics turns up in trainers!!

Agree 100 %, The grilling of Swinney this morning was quality. Evidence if evidence were ever needed that today's politicians are a bunch of prevaricating, evasive weasels. JUST ANSWER THE QUESTION YOU ****

 

[mona]

Being a Scot, he has not been brow-beaten by that great spender of mainly English tax payers' cash, Sturgeon. Unlike the usual BBC public school boys....and girls..

Kirsty Young once described him as liking a drink and an occasional bit of skirt. Why not!

 

[mona]

I saw William Hague with his young male "assistant" on Darlo station yesterday.

Were they on their way to Boro or just discussing the success of Hague's middle eastern strategy in Syria and Libya?

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Watched ANs Sunday Politics this morning....after a load of weasel answers I suggest the politicians have been told never say yes or no...not one of them could do it!

 

[8ace]

Were they on their way to Boro or just discussing the success of Hague's middle eastern strategy in Syria and Libya?

They got on a train heading towards Newcastle.

 

[Hugh'sDad]

I think he epitomises the modern idium of asking another question before the interviewee has answered the original.
I have him down as a smug (up his own Jack C.) kuhnt

 

[severnside gull]

Will be interesting if the odious **** Iain Duncan Smith turns up for his grilling later this week. I'm not holding my breath.

His performance on the Beeb this morning was an amazing advert for how odious most/all politicians are and how little they are to be believed let alone trusted. Amazingly skilful avoidance of straight answers but unfortunately so obviously disingenuous that he came across as being a barefaced liar even when he was potentially relating something with even a tangential proximity to the truth