The Second Leaders Debate - Sky NEWS HD

[Jordy]

Well I agreed with most this thread and then all the recent posts are talking rubbish so I can't use the line "Well I agree with everyone...".

I thought Clegg was terrible, he was shown by Brown/Cameron the real idiot that he is and the crap policies he does indeed have. To be fair he was dreadful however it worries me he's still doing so well in the polls. People shouldn't be voting for him because he isn't Brown or Cameron, they should look at Lib Dem policies and look what they ******* are because they worry me to be frank - To conclude I'm losing faith in Britain and as someone said on Question Time, the leaders shouldn't be elected based on 90 minutes of television but 5 years of parliament.

Brown improved a bit on last week and was okay. Cameron was fantastic in the beginning, he was full out attacking and really seemed to have the higher ground for at least half the debate, then he seemed to drift into his boring ways of last weeks debate which was a little disappointing, but them again the questions were pretty dismal after a while so it's not surprising.

It's well worth reading a quick summary of the debates by John Crace, hilarious stuff;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...-brown-cameron (First debate)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2...ders-tv-debate (Second debate)

Cameron: I'm going to keep Trident to nuke the Chinese.
Clegg: I can save billions by taxing Lord Ashcroft.
Brown: We have to carry on spending on the NHS because I met a cancer patient who said she was only alive thanks to me.

[alexxxxx]

I think most people have to realise that the policies people are formulating won't appeal to everyone nor will they agree with them. So by saying their 'policies are rubbish' just means that, unless there is a completely factual element involved, it doesn't appeal to you.

If sums didn't add up = bad policy
to scrap/reform trident = policy based on an opinion.