She was just as bad on Sunday Politics with Andrew Neil a few weeks ago. People like Farage and Cameron, whatever you think of their policies, are very good as public speakers and also at giving coherent answers to any questions thrown at them. She could get ruined at the debates; though that is probably the last thing that the Tories want to happen.
I saw her on Sky News a few weeks ago on a very staged interview and she did well. Complete collapse today and she shouldn't have pulled out of LBC tonight. She could have saved herself a lot of grief by going ahead with that.
@Folev the red Makes an excellent point. The majority of British voters will vote purely on media appearances and public speaking. That's why Farage is so dangerous, as regardless of what you think of his party's policies, he is an excellent speaker….most of the time. Cameron is even better but I'd expect nothing less from an ex-PR man. Although the Tories are petrified of putting him in for the debates.
I'd rather vote for Labour than them and I despise Labour.
For a party who wants to reduce the army and boarder controls. Legalise those who are part of the Isis group and send the Queen to a council house. I remember Caroline Lucus once said we should give in to Argentina over the Falklands.
Even £74 a month to all of us is utter madness, how is the goverment going to pay for that when our debt has been increasing?
Come on given her break. It's a new style of politics, showing your incompetence before you go to the electorate. And she wants to be part of the Election debates.
Love em or hate em, Neil Kinnock and George Galloway were/are excellent speakers. She should be taking tips of whoever she can.
"The party has elections every two years for Leader and Deputy Leader roles and this is the third election since the party decided to switch from having principal speakers to having a leader and a deputy leader, or co-leaders. In May 2012, Caroline Lucas announced that she would not seek re-election, hoping that instead other talented individuals could rise to the top of the party".
Leave comrade Bennett alone. This is clearly staged by the capitalist pigs, the fascist government clearly gave her a cold deliberately for this interview.
I normally have time for the Greens since they're the closest thing we have to a people's party ever since Labour shut their doors to anyone except their own but the more oxygen this woman is given the more of a loony she is revealed to be. Clearly her pie-in-the-sky policies were too crazy for Australia so she tried to bring them here. Clearly has no idea of the culture of this country or how things are run. Unlike Australia we don't have several thousand square miles of land ready for cheap development. She might want to look in a book at some point in the next few days, she has clearly been avoiding them for most of her life.
I'd rather vote for Labour than them and I despise Labour.
For a party who wants to reduce the army and boarder controls. Legalise those who are part of the Isis group and send the Queen to a council house. I remember Caroline Lucus once said we should give in to Argentina over the Falklands.
Even £74 a month to all of us is utter madness, how is the goverment going to pay for that when our debt has been increasing?
Awful party
Careful, Disco. The Basic Income is a key policy of Roland's party, Vivant.
Heart is definitely in the right place but the thought of her negotiating with the likes of Merkal and Putin sends a chill through me not felt since I walked in on someone cracking one off over the match day programme in the covered end bogs last year.
Haha covered end. First slag off young mothers, now the greens. Why no thread about Rifkind and Straw with their noses in the trough?
I think you'll find, that I haven't slagged off either. I put them up, as I thought they were news stories of interest, that we probably weren't aware of.
I think we've all seen the Rifkind & Straw, with their noses in the trough, stories.
I'd rather vote for Labour than them and I despise Labour.
For a party who wants to reduce the army and boarder controls. Legalise those who are part of the Isis group and send the Queen to a council house. I remember Caroline Lucus once said we should give in to Argentina over the Falklands.
Even £74 a month to all of us is utter madness, how is the goverment going to pay for that when our debt has been increasing?
Awful party
How much of that is from Green Party literature and how much is from our totally unbiased press?
I'd rather vote for Labour than them and I despise Labour.
For a party who wants to reduce the army and boarder controls. Legalise those who are part of the Isis group and send the Queen to a council house. I remember Caroline Lucus once said we should give in to Argentina over the Falklands.
Even £74 a month to all of us is utter madness, how is the goverment going to pay for that when our debt has been increasing?
Awful party
How much of that is from Green Party literature and how much is from our totally unbiased press?
Both of those claims that @DiscoCAFC make came directly out of the mouths of the individuals in question, Natalie Bennett and Caroline Lucas.
The ones about the current Green Party aims have been covered extensively in the press (from both sides of the political spectrum; i.e Daily Mail vs The Guardian), and they appear to originate from this interview. Another incredible piece of PR from Ms Bennett ahem:
Sadly, the one or two decent ideas in their proposals are outweighed by utter tosh.
As for Caroline Lucas and her views regarding The Falklands, those sentiments came out of Caroline Lucas' own mouth in another interview; on Question Time back in 2012. I can't find any footage on Youtube, but doing a quick google gives enough discussion results.
If I recall correctly she made it clear she didn't give a crap about whether the Falkland Islanders identified themselves as British or not, we should simply be handing them over to Argentina.
For once this isn't a case of biased media; it's a case of people who are detached from reality making clueless statements about stupid ideas.
To prove that point, Natalie Bennett has today (attempted) to give an interview about proposed policies without having a single clue on how such policies would be feasible. For another example, in the Youtube video above she advocates a Wealth tax, but was completely unaware of how successful this kind of tax was in other (culturally, geographically and economically similar) countries. Or where Andrew Neil has to inform her about her own policies.
I can't wait for this Green Party "fully costed" manifesto to come out in the next weeks... The fact she deems it acceptable make these claims without a single fact or figure behind her, and acts surprised when she's questioned, shows just how seriously she takes her words.
You do not want to come to an interview with Andrew Neil unprepared - he will rip anyone to shreds once he sees an opening.
The Greens are trying to cash in on the gap in the left of centre political market housing those who are neither 'union' Labour or 'Islington Set' Labour.
We have them over in Oz too and whilst I have sympathy with their environmental concerns their economic and fiscal policies make Michael Foot look like Nigel Lawson.
If they think of a 'good' program then it just gets chucked into the mix no matter what the cost.
I saw her on Sky News a few weeks ago on a very staged interview and she did well. Complete collapse today and she shouldn't have pulled out of LBC tonight. She could have saved herself a lot of grief by going ahead with that.
@Folev the red Makes an excellent point. The majority of British voters will vote purely on media appearances and public speaking. That's why Farage is so dangerous, as regardless of what you think of his party's policies, he is an excellent speaker….most of the time. Cameron is even better but I'd expect nothing less from an ex-PR man. Although the Tories are petrified of putting him in for the debates.
I saw her on Sky News a few weeks ago on a very staged interview and she did well. Complete collapse today and she shouldn't have pulled out of LBC tonight. She could have saved herself a lot of grief by going ahead with that.
@Folev the red Makes an excellent point. The majority of British voters will vote purely on media appearances and public speaking. That's why Farage is so dangerous, as regardless of what you think of his party's policies, he is an excellent speaker….most of the time. Cameron is even better but I'd expect nothing less from an ex-PR man. Although the Tories are petrified of putting him in for the debates.
Why is Farage dangerous?
Farage is dangerous because he associates, closely, with people who refer to Chinese people as 'ting-tongs'. Farage can say what he likes about any formal position taken by UKIP, but his party represents to many racists a flag to rally round, whether that is the intention or not. The good news is that he is not dangerous because he will not obtain power, but nationalists generally are in my view a threat because there are not many degrees of separation between nationalists and fascists. During the Scottish referendum there was talk amongst some on the 'yes' campaign about whether or not Shetlanders had pure 'Pictish' DNA ffs!
Protest parties tend to fall apart when their proposals are given proper analysis, it's much easier being a protest group that can promise the earth and never have to deliver.
There's a difference between being patriotic and being outright racist / xenophobic and recycling incorrect statistics on immigration etc. Farage plays on that patriotism. Don't be fooled by him.
Comments
She's just pulled out of a scheduled phone-in on LBC tonight.
@Folev the red Makes an excellent point. The majority of British voters will vote purely on media appearances and public speaking. That's why Farage is so dangerous, as regardless of what you think of his party's policies, he is an excellent speaker….most of the time. Cameron is even better but I'd expect nothing less from an ex-PR man. Although the Tories are petrified of putting him in for the debates.
For a party who wants to reduce the army and boarder controls. Legalise those who are part of the Isis group and send the Queen to a council house. I remember Caroline Lucus once said we should give in to Argentina over the Falklands.
Even £74 a month to all of us is utter madness, how is the goverment going to pay for that when our debt has been increasing?
Awful party
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Green_Party_of_England_and_Wales_leadership_election,_2012
Heart is definitely in the right place but the thought of her negotiating with the likes of Merkal and Putin sends a chill through me not felt since I walked in on someone cracking one off over the match day programme in the covered end bogs last year.
First slag off young mothers, now the greens.
Why no thread about Rifkind and Straw with their noses in the trough?
I think we've all seen the Rifkind & Straw, with their noses in the trough, stories.
This woman doesn't sadly.
The ones about the current Green Party aims have been covered extensively in the press (from both sides of the political spectrum; i.e Daily Mail vs The Guardian), and they appear to originate from this interview. Another incredible piece of PR from Ms Bennett ahem:
Sadly, the one or two decent ideas in their proposals are outweighed by utter tosh.
As for Caroline Lucas and her views regarding The Falklands, those sentiments came out of Caroline Lucas' own mouth in another interview; on Question Time back in 2012. I can't find any footage on Youtube, but doing a quick google gives enough discussion results.
If I recall correctly she made it clear she didn't give a crap about whether the Falkland Islanders identified themselves as British or not, we should simply be handing them over to Argentina.
For once this isn't a case of biased media; it's a case of people who are detached from reality making clueless statements about stupid ideas.
To prove that point, Natalie Bennett has today (attempted) to give an interview about proposed policies without having a single clue on how such policies would be feasible. For another example, in the Youtube video above she advocates a Wealth tax, but was completely unaware of how successful this kind of tax was in other (culturally, geographically and economically similar) countries. Or where Andrew Neil has to inform her about her own policies.
I can't wait for this Green Party "fully costed" manifesto to come out in the next weeks... The fact she deems it acceptable make these claims without a single fact or figure behind her, and acts surprised when she's questioned, shows just how seriously she takes her words.
The Greens are trying to cash in on the gap in the left of centre political market housing those who are neither 'union' Labour or 'Islington Set' Labour.
We have them over in Oz too and whilst I have sympathy with their environmental concerns their economic and fiscal policies make Michael Foot look like Nigel Lawson.
If they think of a 'good' program then it just gets chucked into the mix no matter what the cost.
Farage can say what he likes about any formal position taken by UKIP, but his party represents to many racists a flag to rally round, whether that is the intention or not.
The good news is that he is not dangerous because he will not obtain power, but nationalists generally are in my view a threat because there are not many degrees of separation between nationalists and fascists.
During the Scottish referendum there was talk amongst some on the 'yes' campaign about whether or not Shetlanders had pure 'Pictish' DNA ffs!