and worth a listen

On the eve of the election David Dimbleby appears on the BBC election cast. I meant to post earlier,

https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p0j81f0x

He opened with this observation - I partly paraphrase

"Im fine, watching this campaign with huge interests. A a "national conversation" we're in the position of the opening lines of Dante's Inferno - we're in the middle of a dark wood where the path out is not clear. I think we're in a terrible state as a country at the moment - huge deficit, NHS , education - whatever govt wins has five years to move mountains - I worry for this country - difficult painful period, to tell the truth

Challenged about his supposed "impartiality" with this comment, he defended it as perfectly impartial thing to say, true says his interviewer, Fair thing to say, everyone feels this.

Making a bald comment, no, no, no he says, if Were interviewing Starmer or Sunak I would say exactly that, and I'd expect you to answer. No qualms, it's a given, we're in a bad way, and so are lots of other countries the same,

Election campaigns narrow , can't frighten the horses, Can't think of a single campaign where candidates where comment isn't "not talking about the real issues"' it's always the same. Elections are fought by pulling the punches.

It's worth a listen, he comes across quite well here, in my opinion, and he corrects his younger colleague on several occasions. There's a pleasing laconic and acute quality to his observations which takes the younger man aback. The idea of "sunlit uplands" is for the birds. Politicians can't do half the things they say they can. But then he goes back to the fifties and "Butskellism" where both parties seemed to share some decent ideology. I do the same too, my first introduction to political awaremess and better politics, which Thatcherism destroyed. .

Dimbleby, "what are you saying? You must be saying something, or you wouldn't be sitting here", and to the political journalist "So do you think political journalism is part of the problem with democracy, is that what you're saying?" - for instance the D day fuss, or the betting fuss. The point's been made, what should be discussing, what's on people's minds, is that betting thing the lead? Really?

Dimbleby continues to regret the exit poll, the worst bit of the election night, like a thriller where you get the denouement on the first page. He surprised his interviewer - the excitement has gone. David Butler would get out his slide rule after the first result and not before, and make a prediction on this.

"What does the election say about what the people thinking? "

I have been listening to this show for a few weeks, and the BBC and Guardian political podcasts, I listen to be informed as to what the main stream are thinking but honestly the programme and its analysis is a shallow and as evanescent as a puddle following a summer shower. The presenters are not interested in anything fundamental, but it's the "excitement" of the game, the political playing and the players, their feints and charges, their deceits and their tricks - they are appalling.

For another take on the election, see the Duran

https://podcasts.apple.com/nz/podcast/the-duran-podcast/id1442883993?i=1000661253894

Marcouris makes a comment on Farage, and his success, he thinks this the most important part of the result, and he sees Farage's gain as a major dislocation, I'm not so sure, it's still a one man band, with a pretty horrible man in charge.