[Closed] did anyone else see zac goldsmith vs johgn snow on channel four news?

Lordy....anyone sit through the whole 10 mins of that?

I managed 32 seconds - could you summarise kimbers?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/17/zac-goldsmith-versus-jon-snow

basically dispatches was looking at electoral funding zac goldsmith came out on top with the most fiddled numbers

and refused to answer questions over and over about his spending

the bit im referring to is zac saying "if ofcom prves me right you better watch out"

what a ****, he only gave up his non dom status in november so he could run in teh election obviously doesnt care enough about the country to pay taxes but good enough to be an mp i guess

I was ambivalent on the subject of Zac Goldsmith. Now I am entirely hostile to him. I'm sure he'll cope, but there we are. 🙂

To summarise: I've got absolutely bucket-loads of cash. None of which I've earned, and none of which I've ever paid any tax on.

I intend to spend said fortune on getting myself elected to a position of power where I can issue edicts to the common peasantry. Probably while eating a swan or something

And, lest we forget, This is the chinless **** who in a previous incarnation had the audacity to title himself an 'environmental campaigner'. All while jetting off round the world in private planes and being ferried from the airport to final destination by helicopter

I was (un)lucky enough to watch this when it was on, Jon Snow was well within his rights to say "shut the f up you c" and move on to the next story.

How did Goldsmith earn all that money as he seems like a clueless idiot to me?

How did Goldsmith earn all that money as he seems like a clueless idiot to me?

Earn?

[url= http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/175000/images/_179200_goldsmith150.jp g" target="_blank">http://news.bbc.co.uk/olmedia/175000/images/_179200_goldsmith150.jp g"/> [/img][/url](click)

Is the ridiculous carry-on about demanding an apology for supposedly mis-representing his willingness to come on the programme a deliberate (if counterproductive) device to neutralise the interview, or a disastrous failure to appreciate that we aren't interested in that, we're interested in a straight answer to the difficult question? He's such a pompous jackass that it's really hard to work it out.

Cameron's leadership allies the dynamism of youth and the moral certainty of great wealth. Goldsmith perfectly exemplifies the new face of modern Conservatism. 🙂

It is a marvellous piece of telly. I mean it took Alistair Campbell a war, several enquiries, a shooting and a change in leadership to get that wound up, and Zac Goldsmith gets that animated over was essentially an administrative error. It's priceless. That is 10 minutes of a man shouting his way out of a position in the cabinet. What a tosser.

I've just been looking at the comments on various blogs about this. Some of the Tory ones are truly comical complaining that John Snow was 'overly aggressive'. That's a bit like saying Alan Bennett is quite intimidating 🙂

Zac - what a gimp.

Lets hope he follows in the footsteps of such Tory Grandees as Aitken & Archer...

'overly aggressive'

I think Snow sticks to his guns well in the face of Goldsmith's reeking sense of entitlement and importance. The result is not pretty television, but the day when these guys simply shut up and listen to Zac telling everyone that they don't understand and that what he has to say is the only thing worth hearing we're doomed. 🙂

IanMunro - Member
I've just been looking at the comments on various blogs about this. Some of the Tory ones are truly comical complaining that John Snow was 'overly aggressive'

Had John Snow "hurt his feelings"?

Very amusing! Up there with Michael Howard getting that interview-colonic from Paxo.

Snow must be rubbing his hands at the thought of this Administration 😆

nickc - Member

That is 10 minutes of a man shouting his way out of a position in the cabinet.

Yup, I can't see Cameron giving his old Etonian mate any sort of job which requires dealing with the media now.

And I wonder how the LibDem half of the coalition now view Goldsmith - he probably wasn't very popular with them before this happened, as the dodgy expenses claims questions were in connection to the election when he ousted the sitting LibDem MP Susan Kramer. Kramer is fairly well regarded within the LibDem party (I quite like her too) And unlike Goldsmith, she certainly has plenty of media savvy.

It seems also that Goldsmith has something of a persecution complex - apparently it's not just Channel 4 who's out to get him, quote :

[i][b]It led to him calling Kramer an "attack dog" who told "the most appalling lies" about him. He accused the Lib Dems of trying to "kneecap" him. His posters were torn down, he claimed, and Lib Dem activists had tried to infiltrate his campaign team.[/b][/i]

[url= http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/may/07/zac-goldsmith-takes-richmond-park-from-susan-kramer ]Zac Goldsmith wrenches Richmond Park from Susan Kramer[/url]

So everyone's telling "lies" about the Celebrity Tory Boy then.

Reminds me of a slightly more polished Geoffrey Archer:

"Just you wait 'til I'm Mayor, then they'll catch it!" 😆

What's one more spoilt prick amongst so many ?

I like Zac Goldsmith. I persuaded my girlfriend to vote for him, as I couldn't and only had some wide-jawed Lib Dem shoe-in in my constituency.

Bunch of libdem stay at home mums round me. All of them fat.

I can't believe we live in a society where these people get elected. Elected! By the people!

To be fair I find the three main C4 news guys pretty aggressive with their interview tactics, often rude and always "superior".

Was quite a giggle seeing Snow get some of his own medicine for a while. Pity he didn't have the nerve to just say the interview was terminated, it did start turning into car-crash TV after the first couple of minutes.

that was a rubbish troll pk!

is he a member of your try club?

[b]mansonsoul[/b] writes:

I can't believe we live in a society where these people get elected. Elected! By the people!

'nuff said.

Actually, it all seems a bit of a non-issue. A few grand here and there for posters, stickers and jackets?

It's hardly Watergate is it?

yes abusing the spending rules whilst getting elected as a MP and over spending - from your own inherited wealth- and lying about it ...cant think why anyone would be upset about a fraudelent lyng MP total non issue.

well the electoral commission are going to review his funding
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/jul/21/electoral-commission-zac-goldsmith-spending

but id happily bet his trust fund that he gets away scot-free, or possibly with a fine, which would be even more of an insult to mr moneybags

also his sister jemimah kahn apparently was attacking john snow on twitter but since deleted her tweets

I don't think Jon Snow will worry about a lightweight like Jemima Khan slagging him off.

It's not Watergate, but it isn't a non-issue either. A few grand is quite a lot of money for plenty of campaigns. 🙂

Feed him to Paxman.

To be fair I find the three main C4 news guys pretty aggressive with their interview tactics, often rude and always "superior".

And thank **** for that.........I can't think of anything worst than a timid interviewer giving a politician a soft easy ride.

Democracy benefits hugely by aggressively holding politicians to account, reminding them if necessary, that it is their responsibility to represent the best interests of their electorate - not their own best interests.

In the days when I used to watch The Frost Programme, I always found the sight of a grovelling and sycophantic David Frost interviewing very senior politicians particularly nauseating - he might as well have rolled onto his back and let them tickle his tummy. It rendered the interviews utterly pointless and useless.

Politicians need to be held to account.
.

Actually, it all seems a bit of a non-issue. A few grand here and there for posters, stickers and jackets?

And yet it is quite staggering the fuss which Zac Goldsmith has created concerning the whole affair.

It's almost, as if he considers it to be extremely serious allegations.

It was an unedifying spectacle all round.

I like Snow and think that journalists should be combative or robust in there questioning when faced with BS and obfuscation. Agree with e-lynch, a simpering toady is no use to anyone but Snow didn't cover himself in glory either IMO.

I like Zac Goldsmith.

I'm sure that's somewhere in my 'phrases I never thought I'd hear' list

leggyblonde - Member
that was a rubbish troll pk!

is he a member of your try club?

Sadly not Phil, it's a genuine. I think he's a good guy myself and am actually happy that there's a bit of genuine political stuff and personality going on again rather than simpering lefty-shite and career politicians that we've been spoonfed for years.

Anything that stimulates active debate and engages the public into politics again is a good thing by me.

That was a "debate"? Whining ****t going on about REALLY UNINTERESTING details about his childish gripe with channel 4 and refusing to discuss the actual issue? Like I said, Jeffrey "Brickbrain" Archer with a coat of gloss, finishing with that laughable little "threat" at the end. Pathetic pillock.

I live in his constituency and we are supposedly the best educated electorate in the country, although this may based on figures before I moved in.

I think he had every right to question Channel 4 assertion that he refused to comment if this was not true – journalists are not renowned for their ethics either - and he did this effectively for a bit but it dragged on too long. I don’t think either party came out particularly well.

My guess is that he will get a clean bill of health from the electoral commission because campaign expenses were a big issue in the campaign (and his wealth) and he is unlikely to have risked making a mistake, but no doubt we will hear in due course. His answers to the allegations are on his website.

He won because he fought a long term and active campaign on local issues such as parking charges in Richmond Park, the 3rd runway, a new Sainsbury next to a local shopping street and the selling off of local sports field. No doubt his wealth allowed him to do this, but I don’t see why a person’s good (or perhaps that should be big) fortune should be held against them. He came across as a principled and independent candidate who fought a positive campaign and that’s why he won.

Shame he couldn't keep up the pretence on Channel 4, then...

think he's a good guy myself and am actually happy that there's a bit of genuine political stuff and personality going on again rather than simpering lefty-shite and career politicians that we've been spoonfed for years.

No doubt his wealth allowed him to do this, but I don’t see why a person’s good (or perhaps that should be big) fortune should be held against them

Anything that stimulates active debate and engages the public into politics again is a good thing by me.

I agree, but I can't help thinking Zac is the sort of thing that precipitated the French Revolution. 🙂

It is perfecting possible to run such a campaign without wealth, shaun bailey did across the river in hammersmith and he comes from a diametrically opposite background - although he wasn't successful - but no doubt wealth makes it easier.

I don't care what someone's background is, I think the most able should represent us whether rich or poor. Reverse snobbery is no better than snobbery.

BTW non doms do pay UK tax, they just don't pay tax on their foreign income.

He won because he fought a long term and active campaign on local issues such as ..........

Maybe he [i]won[/i] because he spent more on his campaign than his rivals - and therefore had an unfair advantage ?

Everyone agrees that money helps to win an election ......that is precisely why there is a legal cap on election expenses - to stop those with large amounts of money having an unfair advantage over other candidates.
And it's no bad thing either.

.

He came across as a principled and independent candidate .......

So why did he stand as the official Conservative Party candidate then ? You can't be a Conservative candidate [i]and[/i] an independent candidate at the same time.

In fact Conservative Party support for Goldsmith is so strong, that he was placed on the party's "A-List" of prospective parliamentary candidates by David Cameron.

It is clear that not only is Goldsmith not an independent, he cannot even be described as a maverick Tory ..........he undeniably enjoys backing from the highest echelons of his party.

He got very different treatment on [url=

News[/url].

Well we got as much stuff through the door from the lib Dems as the Tories so I think the Lib Dems poured money in as well. The difference was we did not get a single visit from any party other than the Tories, they came to the door three times during the election. That is not money that is a better managed party volunteers. Likewise I did not see Kramer once during the campaign - bear in mind she lives in the next street, yet Goldsmith I did see. Again, that is not money.

Yes, he was an A lister - he did do alot of their enviromental work, so what, but he was local and he was passionate about local issues. Just because he is supported by the hierarchy doesn't mean he needs them now. If party policy changes on the third runway, I believe he will stick to his guns - that is what I meant by independent.

I like independent politicians, I used in live in Ken Livingstone's constituency, whilst I rarely agree with him, I thought he was good at holding the government to account. As a result, I never voted against him

BTW non doms do pay UK tax, they just don't pay tax on their foreign income

Well we got as much stuff through the door from the lib Dems as the Tories so I think the Lib Dems poured money in as well. The difference was we did not get a single visit from any party other than the Tories, they came to the door three times during the election. That is not money that is a better managed party volunteers. Likewise I did not see Kramer once during the campaign - bear in mind she lives in the next street, yet Goldsmith I did see. Again, that is not money.

It is not about whether you saw "Kramer once during the campaign".

Nor is about whether "the Lib Dems poured money in as well".

The allegations have nothing at all to do with how the LibDems (or any other candidate in the Richmond Park constituency) managed their election campaign.

The allegations concern whether Goldsmith exceeded the permitted legal limit on election expenses.
And whether he tried to hide the fact that he had by massaging the figures.

Those are the allegations.

But this thread is not about the allegations.

It is about whether Goldsmith's hysterical extended ranting on a live TV interview was appropriate behaviour.
I think not.

And I find it all the more bizarre because he claims that it is a lot of fuss over nothing.

So mefty, forget about whether Kramer knocked on your door during the election campaign. Or what any of the other candidates did or didn't do, and stick to the topic - instead of using diversionary tactics.