This whole Nick Robinson thing is annoying me. There's always no voters saying he didn't answer the question about trust. The way I see it, and most likely everyone else who's pissed at him, Alex answered that question with his lengthy answer to the first one. He didn't give it a short, sweep it under the carpet style answer. He used a lot of economic jargon and explained the ins and outs of the corporate tax issue, and even at the end ensured there would be an inquiry about the RBS. After an answer like that, the only way Alex could have answered that question was to go "for fucks sakes, did you not hear that?! I know my shit!" It was a 2 for 1 answer, if you will. What harm would it have done Robinson to say something like "regarding my second question regarding trusting him with the economy over business owners, it would appear some may find it easy to trust Salmond due to his knowledge of the subject"?
