general election

[the doc]

here in britain on thursday, we have a general election. since i recall when you had your presedential election, we had very extensive coverage of it for weeks on end, i wondered what level of coverage there is of our election in the american media.

is anyone aware of it? do any of you know who the leaders of any of the parties are?

would be interesting to find out what you all know about it.

[Inquartata]

You elect your generals in the UK?!

[keith]

Originally Posted by Inquartata

You elect your generals in the UK?!

but only from the pentagon approved list.

[Soldier]

You have elections in the UK?

[Have At You]

Why is there an election all of a sudden? Don't you have regularly scheduled terms of office?

I'm only aware of Tony Blair. Unaware of any other current UK politician's name.

[mrbiggs]

Originally Posted by the doc

here in britain on thursday, we have a general election. since i recall when you had your presedential election, we had very extensive coverage of it for weeks on end, i wondered what level of coverage there is of our election in the american media.

is anyone aware of it? do any of you know who the leaders of any of the parties are?

would be interesting to find out what you all know about it.

Pfft. I don't even know what any of the parites are. Except Labour. The labour party. That one I know. Elsewise, I'm completely in the dark.

I know four British politicians, Tony Blair, Winston Churchil, Margaret Thatcher, and King George III.

All I know about the British government is that:

1. There's two houses or something for some reason
2. There's a prime minister
3. There's a king/queen, who may or may not have any powers depending on who you talk to.

I also know that Brits are liberal.

I found out about the election on this thread.

And that's it.

[rmyounis]

Nearly zero coverage. I'm aware of it, but only because I read www.bbc.com obsessively

[Abel]

To my knoweledge the UK has a 2 party system, like the US. Blair is of the labour party, but I can't remember the name of the chap who is the conservative candidate. He looks a bit more lively though than that John Mayor bloke who was prime-minister before Blair.

The UK being liberal is subjective I think. Us Dutchies consider the UK to be more conservative.

I also know that the UK is wedged between 2 major trade agreements. The EU on one side and the old Commonwealth on the other. A British friend of mine told me that that was the reason the UK is a bit cautious in the EU-front.

I do have a question, and I bet you can answer it. I know your queen is still the head-of-state of Australia. But is she also the head-of-state of Canada? Because, and this might sound silly, I saw some Canadian veterans on TV yesterday. -It's almost 5th of may, the day we were officially liberated in WW2 and the days before that we have many ceremonies in which we remember the British, US, Canadian and Polish soldiers who died in the war- Anyway, these Canadian soldiers were saluting their dead comrades on a cemetary and they were playing the British national anthem "God save the Queen(!). It had me puzzled.

[Gav]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

Pfft. I don't even know what any of the parites are. Except Labour. The labour party. That one I know. Elsewise, I'm completely in the dark.

I know four British politicians, Tony Blair, Winston Churchil, Margaret Thatcher, and King George III.

All I know about the British government is that:

1. There's two houses or something for some reason
2. There's a prime minister
3. There's a king/queen, who may or may not have any powers depending on who you talk to.

I also know that Brits are liberal.

I found out about the election on this thread.

And that's it.

Wow, you sound so ... pleased.

[Louweasel]

Originally Posted by Have At You

Why is there an election all of a sudden? Don't you have regularly scheduled terms of office?

No. A general election must be called at least every four years but the government can call one whenever they like. They do usually stick to about four years so in the last twenty-odd years they have all been in April May or June, but they needn't be on specific date.

[Louweasel]

Originally Posted by mrbiggs

I know four British politicians, Tony Blair, Winston Churchil, Margaret Thatcher, and King George III.

All I know about the British government is that:

1. There's two houses or something for some reason
2. There's a prime minister
3. There's a king/queen, who may or may not have any powers depending on who you talk to.

I also know that Brits are liberal.

Hmm.
a) I'm not sure why George III qualifies as a politician any more than any of the other monarchs.

b) I thought you had two houses as well. Or are the Senate and Congress the same thing?

c) The Prime Minister is the leader of the party elected to power and is asked to be Prime Minister by the Queen (which is really a formality).

d) Your analysis of the monarchy is about right

e) to say that all brits are liberal is of course a sweeping generalisation of the most flagrant kind. For one thing, ever heard of the British National Party? Look them up on google...

[Louweasel]

Originally Posted by Abel

To my knoweledge the UK has a 2 party system, like the US. Blair is of the labour party, but I can't remember the name of the chap who is the conservative candidate. He looks a bit more lively though than that John Mayor bloke who was prime-minister before Blair.

No, there are more. Three main ones, Labour (in power at the mo and led by Tony Blair), Conservative (led by Michael Howard) and Liberal (led by Charles Kennedy). Th liberals are thought to be an outside chance though. There are lots of other little odd parties too, like the Green Party whose main stance is on environmental issues. And even the Monster Raving Loony Party.
You would normally see results listed as "labour/conservative/liberal/other".

The Prime Minister before Blair was John Major, a Conservative.

[esskreemr]

Election? In Britain? I'll be damned...

Sorry, our media is too focused on the "gripping", newsworthy story of a Bride that got cold feet and ran away.

[Maeve_Mari]

Originally Posted by esskreemr

Election? In Britain? I'll be damned...

Sorry, our media is too focused on the "gripping", newsworthy story of a Bride that got cold feet and ran away.

Takes the focus off that pesky escalation of bombings and casualties in Iraq. Hey look over there, a ditzy bride who kicked up her heels in Vegas, let's go stalk her home and family!

[Gav]

Actually this bride sounds more interesting than our election. Is she a babe?

[Maeve_Mari]

I found this blog entry and liked it. It made me yearn for a real leader and a press corps that pursues the news:

Blair's final day masterclass
By Markos Moulitsas

We Americans are cursed with an inarticulate president, studiously avoiding a castrated press corps, which - when given the chance - is unable or unwilling to ask any tough questions lest they have all access cut. So forgive us for feeling a tad bit - nay, a great deal - jealous about your prime minister and your press corps.

Regarding Blair, I'm not talking issues or Iraq or any substantive policy positions. I'm talking about seeing a political master at work, quite reminiscent of Bill Clinton - political artisans of the finest quality. And your journalists! Great questions all around, tough questions, probing questions. Having seen the faltering US press corps up close and personal, it is gratifying to see that the journalistic craft is alive and well here in the UK.

But the whole was much greater than the parts. Seeing the banter between Blair and questioners was quite enthralling. When a reporter from the Times asked about Blair's "disingenuous" maths arguing that losing one in 10 Labour voters would usher in a Tory majority, Blair skilfully deflected the questioning by saying they could "debate" the arithmetic later. Probably after the election when no one would care anymore.

There were some ugly spots. Asked several times whether voters were consciously hoping to reduce the Labour majority in order to send a message (something I've heard from many a Brit this past week), Blair resorted to unconvincing and boring talking points, stuff along the lines of: "Voters will choose based on our record and policies. If they want to move forward, they will vote Labour, if they want to wake up with a Conservative government, they will blah blah blah."

That question is quite salient, quite relevant, since there appears to be a genuine aversion to the Conservatives (29-32 percent in the polls) and the Lib Dems as well, but there's also a need to knock Labour down a peg or two. Blair's refusal to answer the question may play well if he holds on to his large majority. Otherwise, he'll have no choice but to address it.

The fact that this was the one issue area in which Blair resorted to "talking point" hell suggested, to me, that it was an area in which Labour feels vulnerable. With all other questions, Blair was confident and eloquent. As usual.

But the best moments came at the close of the press conference, when a reporter asked about election reform, and for a show of hands from the cabinet showing who still thinks first past the post is still the best way to run the election. With a mischievous grin, and without missing a beat, Blair snapped back, "No, we can't."

Brilliant question, and an answer also brilliant in its disarming humour and simplicity. The greatest ones make it look easy.

http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/election...sterclass.html

[oiuyt]

Meh, I listen to NPR (National Public Radio) in the car and they broadcast various BBC World News programs. This morning on the way in to work they were in some small town in England somewhere asking undecideds which way they were going to vote... not any more newsworthy than asking Americans who hadn't bothered to figure out who was running until the beginning of November which way they were going to vote in our election. Always wondered why finding uninformed and mostly non-caring people and asking their opinions of national political leaders, some of whom they haven't ever heard of prior to the question, was something worthy of national (or international in this case) broadcast news.

One of the "undecideds" decided during the two-minute interview to vote Labour again, because "why throw out the baby with the bath water" and liking the way the past 8 years had gone. Another was still undecided but had definitely decided NOT to vote Labour (again during the course of the interview) because of a local Labour leader's statement that votes for Lib. Dems or Green were basically just votes for the Conservative party and that you'd be better off voting for Labour. He was still trying to decide between Lib. Dem, Conservative, and thought that even a vote for Green wouldn't be wasted. The third undecided still had no clue. The local bookie had the district (or whatever the local political area is called) as 8-11 Conservative, evens for Labour, 50-1 Lib. Dem, and 250-1 Green.

So it does get SOME coverage here, just not much in the primary mainstream news outlets.

-B :)

[jeff]

The NY Times has also been covering the election. I read the Economist and Spectator (hoo boy - do _they_ hate Blair; no surprise considering the editor's a Conservative MP) so its interesting to see the details in UK publications compared to the summary in US pubs. And what's this about Tony sweating a lot?

[the doc]

point of fact for lou: the election must be called at the latest every five years, but can be done at any time before then, depending on the PMs decision. they generally choose the time for when they are most likely to win. if they go for the full five years it is cos they know they are going to lose.

jeff: tony blair has a notorious habit of sweating like a fencer when you get him under the studio lights for big interviews and party conferences.

and so my original thought that there was basically no reporting was entirely correct. you lot strike me as the more enlightened of your countrymen, so i hate to think what the rest of them think!

[civiltech]

Did not have a clue here in Canada that you guys were having an election!

But of course, British Columbia is in the middle of their own provincial race, and the talk of the town is that the opposition parties (Cons, and PQ, and Independants) will win a non confidence vote against the governing power, so by May 16 we will all but be going to the poll's again ourself in Canada. This is overshadowing any foreign political news right now. They've even stopped bothering George W. right now!