Punchy Miliband was the big winner against a flat Cameron

The Labour leader easily exceeded expectations and eroded the PM's advantage on leadership.



It was Ed Miliband who had the most to gain from tonight's TV event - and he did. He was better-prepared, more fluent and more inspiring than David Cameron, reminding us of the qualities that enabled him to defeat his brother for the Labour leadership in 2010 (a subject raised several times). As one aide told me afterwards: "That's why David Cameron doesn't want to go head-to-head with Ed Miliband".

The evening started badly for the PM as a forensic Jeremy Paxman pressed him on foodbanks, zero-hours contracts and his net migration pledge. Faced with the kind of sustained scrutiny he rarely endures, Cameron was nervy and rattled. "That's not the question," he helplessly pleaded when asked whether he could live on a zero-hours contract, a slip that provoked guffaws in the press room. He never recovered from these missteps and rarely appeared in control.

After this mauling, the Q&A with a studio audience came as welcome relief. Only once was he troubled, when a questioner recalled his broken pledge not to impose a "top-down reorganisation" on the NHS. Cameron made no attempt to deny this, instead changing the subject to health spending. But the otherwise soft and banal questions didn't require him to break sweat. Cameron never dazzled but after his tortuous encounter with Paxman a solid, gaffe-free session was enough.

When Miliband appeared before the same audience it became immediately clear why he chose to go second having won the coin toss. He swiftly capitalised on Cameron's slip on zero-hours contracts, pledging a crackdown and framing his opponent as elitist and out-of-touch. Asked to name Cameron's best qualities, he didn't miss a beat, praising his introduction of equal marriage and his commitment to the 0.7 per cent foreign aid target. There were awkward moments when he was questioned on his brother (describing their relationship as "healing", rather than healed) and on New Labour's record but at no point did he flounder. Having been labelled as "gloomy" by one audience member at the outset he managed to deploy humour and wit (self-deprecatingly referring to his bacon sandwich moment).

But against expectations, it was during his clash with Paxman that Miliband truly flourished. Unlike Cameron, who melted under the heat of the rottweiler's questions, he fought fire with fire. "You're important, Jeremy, you're not that important," he declared when Paxman suggested a hung parliament was pre-destined, a line that prompted thigh-slapping approval from Nigel Farage in the spin room. He turned his perceived weakness to his advantage, presenting himself as a leader who had been continually "underestimated", a man who was told he couldn't beat his brother (he did) and who was told he couldn't become prime minister (he can). He may have gone too far when he declared: "Am I tough enough? Hell yes." (a line straight out of a bad American action movie) but the abiding image was of a man up for the fight. His superior performance was a reminder of one defining advantage: an opposition leader has far more time to prepare than a prime minister.

The instant Guardian/ICM poll gave Cameron victory by 54-46 - but Labour will settle for dramatically reducing the PM's long-standing advantage (Miliband often trails by as much as 20 points). Among the small but significant group of voters who changed their mind after the debate, 56 per cent backed Labour and just 30 per cent backed the Tories. Tonight's result demonstrated why this format favours Miliband - a man who cannot fail to come across better than his press tormentors would like. He may have been denied the prize of a head-to-head clash with Cameron but he still has three more TV opportunities to further erode his rival's crumbling lead.

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/03/punchy-miliband-was-big-winner-against-flat-cameron

This is where I meant to post this:

UPDATE: ICM tables are now up here (thanks to that fine man Tom Clark!). As expected, perceptions of who won fell pretty much along the lines of pre-existing party support – 84% of Conservatives thought Cameron won, 74% of Labour supporters thought Miliband won, Lib Dems were split, Ukippers thought Cameron won, Greens thought Miliband won. Note that while the sample was demographically and politically weighted to be nationally representative, it was a very heavily Labour sample in terms of current voting intention: the pre-debate voting intentions of the sample had an 10% Labour lead (thus are the difficulties of doing things like this – people who watch programmes like this are different from your average voter!)


http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/


If it is weighed heavily in Labours favour who is asked and Miliband still lost by a margin of 8%, it actually shows how badly Miliband did last night. So no doubt the margin is no doubt much higher if a balanced percentage of voters were asked.

In our view Ed Miliband put in a better performance in the studio - but is that reflected in the opinion polls rushed out to gauge voters' reactions?

In the run-up to the Battle for Number 10 TV debate, David Cameron comfortably led Ed Miliband in opinion polls. But looks Miliband's fighting performance may have made a difference. Here's what the numbers say.

Guardian/ICM: Cameron won

David Cameron was narrowly ahead in an ICM poll of 1,123 people immediately after the show.

Who impressed more in the first leaders' show?

55 to Cameron 45 to Miliband

Guardian/ICM

However, the news was better for Miliband among voters who were considering changing the way they vote:

Undecided voters: Who would you change your vote to?

30 Cameron 58 Miliband

Guardian/ICM

This latter is, obviously, the result that Labour is focusing on this morning.
Red Box/YouGov: It was a dead heat

Who won the first TV leaders' show?

51 Cameron 49 Miliband

Red Box/YouGov

A small YouGov survey (800 people) for The Times' Red Box is not enough to count as a poll but the findings reflect the general trend.

The leader's performance was too close to call, with 51% coming out for David Cameron and 49% saying that Ed Miliband won.

"Cameron has edged ahead," observed YouGov's Laurence Janta-Lipinski. "But if you asked that question before you'd have found Ed would have much further behind."

"Both parties can say it's a good night for them."

Demos/Twitter: Miliband won




http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/ampp3d/battle-number-10-cameron-miliband-5410042

Note, results from Guardian and You Gov.

lol the Mirror? Of course they are going to think that.
Blimey.

Kay Burley hits back after claims of bias against Ed Miliband in TV debate

Kay Burley faced a barrage of complaints on Twitter today after she seemed to give Labour leader Ed Miliband a harder time than Prime Minister David Cameron



Kay Burley faced a barrage of complaints on Twitter today after she seemed to give Labour leader Ed Miliband a harder time than Prime Minister David Cameron

Kay Burley has been accused of giving Ed Miliband a harder time than she gave David Cameron

Sky News presenter Kay Burley is under fire today after her repeated interruptions of Ed Miliband in last night’s TV debate.

The long-serving news presenter remarked “your poor mother” after the Labour leader discussed defeating his brother, David, to the party leadership in 2010.

Communications watchdog Ofcom said 131 people have complained about a perceived bias against Mr Miliband in the Sky/Channel 4 debate.

An Ofcom spokesman said: "We are assessing the complaints before deciding whether or not to investigate."

A Channel 4 spokeswoman said it had received around 300 complaints, but was unable to say specifically what they were about.

Channel 4 presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy tweeted: “Am confused whether Kay Burley is supposed to ask supplementaries? She didn't with Cameron but does with Miliband #BattleForNumber10”

In a series of tweets he later deleted, former England footballer Stan Collymore said Ms Burley “Virtually gave Dave a hug and a kiss. Embarrassing.”

He followed up: “Please get Kay Burley off these debates. If she can’t give both equal treatment, she shouldn’t be allowed to host. More Paxman.”

Ms Burley hit back: “@StanCollymore Stan, its @KayBurley if you need to slag me off directly. Surely you remember from when your were direct messaging me ”

Labour London Assembly Tom Copley was also critical of the presenter, tweeting “Kay Burley is a disgrace #Battle4Number10”

It seems the criticism got too much for Ms Burley, who tweeted this afternoon: “Sooo annoying when journalists criticise me on Twitter they don't even have courtesy to tag me in. You know who you are. I'm going for a run.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/kay-burley-hits-back-after-5412731

To anyone who actually watched it, it was perfectly obvious what she was trying to do, but thats Kate for you, how she has the nerve to call herself a journalist is beyond me.