Friday, April 16, 2010
Last night i watched the first televised election debate between the three main party leaders. Whilst watching it i was wondering why they didn't do it sooner. A debate such as this can show the vulnerability and incapacity of each leader when it comes to thinking on their toes, and each one of them did stumble. However, and before i say this i was intending to vote for them anyway, Nick Clegg came off best. As the most outspoken, inquisitive and interesting of the three, he raised points, made decent argumentsand held my attention the most. Cameron came out of it the weakest in my opinion, looking like abit of a foolish school boy between Clegg and Brown, whereas Brown seemed outdates, monotonous and disinteresting, in whatever topic he was talking about. Clearly thr country needs something different after so long under Labour.
But before people get excited about Nick Clegg, bear this is in mind : he 'plans to join the euro, scrap the Trident nuclear deterrent and offer an amnesty to illegal immigrants.' So a country as patriotic as ours is really willing to give up the pound? Being honest i don't care, we'll still have the queen's head on our overpriced stamps. Plus, what are we going to deter Iran with if they start getting frisky with us? Harsh words and finger pointing? I like Nick Clegg, better than the other two, but is he really any better?He doesn't appear ruthless enough to become prime minister. He needs to come out fighting now, and be as argumentative and as harsh as the conservatives and labour are being to one another. If he lies in the background too much, we'll never get 'real change'.
0 Comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
