highwaystar101 said:
I'm confused, no judgement about his ability to be prime minister has been made in this thread. |
I did see the content of the link. I thought the OP was trying to say Cameron was only out to win public opinion by saying statements of that kind, rather than do anything.
...
To be honest I'm just irritated by the BBC constantly bashing Cameron for the tiniest things at the moment, and giving Labour a stage to do it. The articles are written in a tone like the government is defending itself from some scandal, whereas really they haven't done anything to criticise yet.
Here are the main politics stories today:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8681624.stm <--- The 55% thing doesn't benefit Cameron at all, its purpose is to protect the Lib Dems from snap elections and to make the coalition more stable. It's not an erosion of political liberty like the article suggests.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8684173.stm <--- Why would anyone have to 'defend' going with the Conservatives now? Labour wasn't willing to concede enough and a five-party coalition was a lot less of an option.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8683310.stm <--- And did they bash Labour when they had the exact same number of women in the Cabinet (four)?
They also managed to find the very few Tories who don't like the coalition and interview them at length. Ignoring the majority of each party that either support the coalition or believe it's the only workable option for now (which it is).
There is no need to treat politics news as so adversarial now the election is over. And certainly not to have a constant stream of headline news criticising a goverment that has only just been formed and not been able to do anything yet. The BBC is now biased. I wish it wasn't.
