 |
|  |
 |
|
Riesstiu IV
|
|
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_polit...age/4487253.stm
quote:
American coverage of the British campaign has been less than wall to wall.
The UK election has been mentioned on most US news outlets but even though Tony Blair is well known in America, there is little in the way of day to day election news from Britain.
Mr Blair has crashed down to earth, according to a reporter for the NBC television network, but the correspondent added that the opposition conservatives were in a ditch.
That is the conclusion being drawn by almost all American coverage of the British election - that Mr Blair will win, but that Britain is no longer enthusiastic about its leader.
'Unimpressed'
The well-connected and left-leaning columnist Joe Klein said Mr Blair was staggering to the finish line, unloved and untrusted, after a volatile campaign.
The Washington Post talks of Iraq as an issue which has dogged Mr Blair from the start of the campaign.
"The divisive war has taken chunks from Blair's popularity." the paper says.
"Accused of deliberately hyping the threat posed by Saddam Hussein to justify the invasion, Blair's credibility and trust ratings plummeted."
But most American commentators have been unimpressed by the alternatives to Mr Blair.
Contrast in coverage
The Los Angeles Times has written of a ramshackle Conservative Party opposition that seldom goes through a week without shooting itself in the political foot.
Most news outlets here have covered the election in some form or other but generally with one piece of reporting intended to suffice for the whole campaign.
Most Americans have heard of Tony Blair and are mildly interested in his fate - but only mildly.
The contrast between British coverage of the American electoral process and American coverage of the British is marked and reflects the fact that Britons care about America more than Americans care about Britain.
One aspect of the British process which is commented on regularly and positively though is the short length of the campaign.
The Leader of the Free World is chosen after a battle that lasts the best part of two years. His British sidekick is picked after just a month.
That fact, if no other, impresses American observers.
|
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Riesstiu IV
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DRoseDARs
Do ya'll happen to have oil? Are you longing for democracy? Has the Royal Family finally gotten on your last nerve?
Is it time for a regime change? |
This sounds like an advert for a drug to help cure depression.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Shi Huangdi
|
 |
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999 time: 00:35
|
|
Hmm this is interesting, according to the most recent poll, the Tories have closed the gap with Labour to two points. This could get interesting after all.
Last edited by Shi Huangdi on 27-04-2005 at 21:14
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Shi Huangdi
|
 |
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999 time: 00:35
|
|
Well, right now the polls are at:
LAB 36
CON 34
LD 23
OTH 7
I had read previously, though I am not sure if this is correct, that the Tories usually do 2-3 points better then the polls suggest. So if that effect were to hold true again, and the in the last of week campaigning the Tories managed to swing 3% of voters over to there side(or blair was hit with some last minute scandal), we get
CON 40
LAB 30
LD 23
OTH 7
Which would lead to a Conservative overall majority of 2. Unlikely, but there should be some outside chance of it.
Of course, even if the polls remain as they are, but the Tories still did 3 points better then the polls predicted, getting us
CON 37
LAB 34
LD 23
OTH 7
We would get a hung parliament, albeit with Labour as the largest party.
And of course, even if Labour managed to hold on to it's overall majority, I imagine it would still look bad for Blair if his party did not receive the most votes.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35. Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|