On the election trail, a politician would be more likely to say... |
|
|
| Votes: 150 |
Comments: 6 |
Added: May 2004 |
Comments:
| tash - 17th August 2004 23:26
|
| 'Will'is better for an election- its more direct.
|
| |
| MrTrilby - 31st January 2006 18:06
|
| The latter is better as it avoids the passive voice, but they really shouldn't privatise the railways.
|
| |
| luke88 - 9th July 2006 15:43
|
| Whilst the second sentence might be gramatically the most correct, politicians are more likely to use the first because it enables them to disassociate their party from a potentially unpopular action.
|
| |
| gardemarine - 10th January 2007 21:00
|
| Good point, luke88. But it also depends on the country this poilitician is debating in. In an authoritarian country, people might approve the concentration of private companies in the hands of the state.
|
| |
| SimonTrew - 13th September 2007 15:25
|
| "We will"... is better, because it is more direct, but for that very reason I think most politictians in this country (UK), on the hoof, would go for the latter, as it places no onus on them individually and also fills more space and time.
|
| |
| Bryan - 26th February 2008 23:57
|
| It would depend on whether they felt their audience would view privatization as a bad thing (former) or good thing (latter). The former, from a politician, sounds like a warning. If it's a promise, they will want to take credit more directly.
|
| |
You must vote before you can post a comment.
Browse our language polls:
|
 |
| Poll Statistics |
Polls: 773
Votes: 195,132
Comments: 1,956 |
|
