Is Gord’s biggest flaw that he hates Tories?
November 15th, 2007
-
Should policy be about more than just wrong-footing Dave?
For me the defining image of the Brown premiership was the look on his face (above) while the chancellor, Alistair Darling, was announcing Labour’s inheritance tax plan just eight days after the Tories had made this the centre-piece of their conference.
Defining because whether this had been planned or not Brown was taking great pleasure at thwarting what the polls suggested had been an electorally popular initiative. Defining also because this apparent policy nicking became part of the anti-Brown media narrative which is still going on.
Yesterday’s affair of the amazing change of mind on detention limits by the security minister and former Admiral, Lord West, has further focused attention on what the Guardian leader notes this morning - that Gordon Brown’s policy agenda is driven far too much by his desire to wrong-foot the Tories.
For the plan to go beyond a 28 day maximum period is resolutely opposed by the Tories and Brown wants to use this to accuse them of being “soft on terror”.
Lord West’s unfortunate Today programme comment supporting 28 days undermined that plan - hence the clumsy climb-down. It all looked so naff.
-
The problem is that Brown has got himself into a position where every policy development can be viewed simply in terms of him trying to undermine the opposition and not what the policy would bring about.
His “vision” needs to be more than he does not like Tories.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Flaw - it is a requirement in my household!!!
I’d imagine that Blair has seen that smirk plenty of times after Gordon Brown thwarted some initiative or other.
It looks more like a character flaw then a particular aversion to the Tories. Anyone who looked like standing in his way would have the same effect on Brown.
That’s so unfair, Mike.
His vision is so much more than that. It includes “don’t like Tony Blair” “don’t like colleagues” and “do like being Prime Minister”.
Missed the announcement of your IPO (well nearly,Mike) yesterday - Cricket Club accounts called!
Not many threads keep on subject for a hundred posts! Concur with the congratulations and messages of support -I have confidence that the ethos of the site you have created will be maintained and am sure that you are sure footed enough that any new initiatives, even money making ones, will enhance the site. If that is possible!
It isn’t hatred’ it’s fear.
It isn’t hatred, it’s fear.
To break new records for getting off-topic…
Can anyone explain how all these Libdems intend to “go to jail before surrendering personal data for the ID card database”, when giving up such data is going to be made a requirement of getting a new passport? Are they going to give up overseas travel?
I think there’s a slightly wider issue here that we need to take a step back ourselves to see - and it’s that the tribality of politics and politicians just isn’t resonating with the public.
There are many posters on here convinced that every story is great for their party and the beginning of the end for the others. But from the canvassing I’ve done, this image of party loyalty just isn’t there, apart from people who have voted for the same party all their lives and will do again (Labour as I have seen but I’m sure the Tories in other areas.) People aren’t interested enough in party politics and party labels and any politician who only responds to an opposition announcement with ‘Party X can’t be trusted on this, only my party has the answers.’ never generates traction (although Blair warning about the Tories on the NHS is the exception.)
The problem with Brown I see as exactly this - his vision seems to be very tribal, and involves keeping the Tories out of power because they are the Tories and not because of what they are saying or how well they would manage things - and it seems to be that this is not resonating across the country at all.
7 (con) - Scrap that. If half of what is in the hardcopy version (not the online version strangely) is true, then i don’t think anyone will be going abroad.
“…travellers will have to provide upt to 90 pieces of information to officials including credit card details, travel plans, email addresses and contact telephone numbers.”
What we need is for Eire to go into Schengen then we will be able to go from N. Ireland to Eire and on to other EU countries without restrictions.
When are we going to adopt the best bits of the EU - Schengen and the Euro?
10. When a government has both the desire and the guts to make the case for one or either - which won’t be in the next decade. I’m surprised that the number of people who say in polls that they’d be in favour of joining the Euro is anything above single figures given how one-sided the argument has been since its launch. That it’s not that low (although it’s a long time since I’ve seen one of these polls), says to me that a sustained campaign by the Yes lobby might stand a chance in the right circumstances.
I think that we are reading too much into this. I am hardly Gordon’s biggest admirer (actually I can’t stand the man), but Gordon Brown and the Labour Party want to govern the country to implement the policies that THEY think are right for Britain, and the main threat to them is the Conservative Party. So of course they try and outwit and wrong-foot them as much as possible.
However, first and foremost is the desire to get their legislative programme through the H of C, not just score points of the Tories.
I
sometimes despair of this tribalistic interpretation of everything! Just because I think that the country would be better off overall with a new Government, I certainly don’t disagree with everything that Labour has to say, just because they are Labour. I don’t pour scorn on their motives either.
Maybe I’m being too idealistic, but I am sure that this posture of “we are always right and our opponents are always wrong” turns the voters right off.
The problem is not that Brown spins and schemes - all politicians do that, it is part of their job - but that he is so cringe-makingly bad at it. Blair and Campbell et al were true masters of the art and, even if you disapproved, you could not help but admire the deftness and lightness of touch.
Brown on the other hand is just embarrasingly awful at it, like a chef whose hollandaise sauce inevitably turns into scrambled eggs.
All very sad really, both for him and his party.
Back on topic, Gordon has always seemed to place a high emphasis on short-term gain - more than one of his budgets delivered good headlines on the day, decent ones the following morning and fell apart by the Sunday papers. Perhaps he does dislike the main opposition party more than is healthy in a Prime Minister, but as Matt J accurately says at [2], this may be more to do with their inability to agree with him and potential ability to thwart his plans.
In the longer term, I suspect a different facet of this flaw will become the biggest problem for him - his appointment to the cabinet of too many people whose principle qualification seems to be that they are ‘Gordon’s men and women’. This decision could go wrong in at least two big ways: firstly, discussion before implementation is a good thing. While it might not always produce better policies (though it should if done properly), it is at least likely to produce policies that have a better political base. Initiatives that are rushed in are more likely to go belly-up and cause embarrassment. Secondly, the cabinet is seriously lightweight, as discussed when we looked at possible successors to Brown. In those circumstances when ministers are put under a lot of political pressure - policy or organisational errors - my guess is that it is more likely that they will end up resigning. If this happens too often, it will make the government look accident-prone.
Great governments rarely had harmonious cabinets but that didn’t stop them from doing great things. Indeed, I’d argue that a good degree of fractiousness in the cabinet is probably a necessary - though obviously not sufficient - condition to allow governments to achieve great things. This one hasn’t got it and won’t do it.
Good Morning all.
12 - I totally agree with this. We must all take a step back once in a while. I am fed up when the media etc, on hearing a government announcement, starts the “Why are they doing this” rollercoaster - who’s up, who’s down, who’s in or out, who’s wrongfooting who - instead of (just this once) looking at the policy and reporting the effects. Everything in politics is seen through this cynical prism. Not that the media shouldn’t be cynical, but at times it just gets so boring and silly (i.e. everything Brown has ever said or done is just to wrongfoot Cammy and vice versa).
The Terroism statement was a case in point. Announced in the media as the end of the world. When you heard the thing, a pretty sober report with some solid postive proposals. Exactly the sort of thing the govt should be doing and in no way anti-Tory. Brown has a BIG media problem, not a problem with the Tories.
16 - yes, the media are just in a very “difficult” phase at the minute. Petulant is the word. If you don’t bend over backwards and give them what they want (or, to be a little honest, if you are a bit cack-handed with them) they don’t like it. They all seem to have a chat and agree on the “line” to take, regardless. One has to wait for them to get bored and then the agenda will change.
I don’t think Brown hates the Tories anymore than “grind the bastards into the dust” Kinnock. And I think it was part of what drove Blair, too. The difference with Brown, though, is that he doesn’t appear to offer anything beyond that core animus. It is the prism through which all actions are judged by him.
It is quite interesting that the only expressions of hate which politicians have not touched are those against someone’s political views. I think this site is very largely clear of it, but even here there are occassions where if the sweeping generalisations about a particular party’s voters/members were replaced by Jew or Muslim or Black or Gay, then Inspector Knacker could be expected to knock on the door. Perhaps we just develop thick skins by daily bathing in the pools of political bile. And long may it remain so!
“As you sow so shall you reap”. So shall it be for G. Brown.
Cannot get along with talented people = A cabinet of the G.O.A.T.I.s. (Govt Of All The Incompetents)
Manipulate Labour MPs to avoid a contest = Arrive as PM without their abilities and policies being honed in debates.
Play around with our elections for advantage = The October polling debacle.
Interrupt Conservatives conference with a stunt = A backlash in the media.
Steal opposition policies = Viewed as a fag end govt bereft of ideas.
17
If in doubt, blame the media. “We are not getting our message across properly” was the plaintive cry of the Major Government.
IF the Gov’t could for example persuade us that 56 days detention was ideal..
But J Smith has no idea
Admiral West does not agree…
Don’t blame the media… the message is not just mixed.. it’s the messengers who appear not to agree.
10. Labour’s only great success over the last ten years has been the adoption of central bank inflation targetting to smooth out booms and recessions. Why should we reverse this by handing over the power to the ECB whose (a) independence may not last long if the French get their way and (b) will be mainly concerned with central European economies which are structured very differently (read worse!) to our own and thus will enter recessions and booms at different times. Additionally, we would be hanging our economy on the fiscal responsibility of continental governments. Seeing as France and Germany have both broken the rules already, I don’t have much hope the rest of the continent will keep it up long term, especially with the public opposition to reform of pension systems facing bankruptcy.
11. There has been a lack of argument on both sides. Although the “join” crowd has tried to do things through stealth, the “keep out” side has mainly relied on jingoistic nationalist sentiment when there are very sound economic reasons for managing our economy.
OT: The New Yorker has an excellent aticle, nominally on Obama, but which also goes into a lot of detail about how things play at caucauses, which we were discussing yesterday. A very informative read for anyone who wants to understand the system.
17 “One has to wait for [the Media] to get bored and then the agenda will change.”
Maybe, RedFlump. For now though, Gordon Brown and his band of half-wit Ministers are the gift which keeps on giving….so don’t wait up!
9 renew your passport now, however many years it has left to run and get 10 years of freedom from the ID database. If it does ever happen then yes I will either not go abroad or smuggle myself out.
Off Topic, so Labour MPs have already been boosting their taxpayer funded communications at election time. Surprised? No.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/2007/11/labour-mps-in-m.html
“MPs re-standing in Labour’s fifty most marginal seats increased their spending on taxpayer-funded postage by 35% in the year before the 2005 election only to reduce it by 22% in the year after. On average they spent £6,091 each – the equivalent of 25,380 letters sent by second class mail.”
“Notable examples include Home Secretary Jacqui Smith who increased her spending by 69% in election year, Schools Minister Jim Knight who defended Labour’s most marginal seat by increasing his spending by 50%, and Linda Perham, the MP for Ilford North, who increased her spending by a whopping 338%.”
16 and this morning they start floating 58 days as the new policy. why didnt GB mention this in his parliamentary statement yesterday? why didnt he put the arguments for 58 days?
Instead he floats the idea in the press to try and make the Tories look weak on terror…….
17 RedFlump talking about the media. “If you don’t bend over backwards and give them what they want (or, to be a little honest, if you are a bit cack-handed with them) they don’t like it.”
Absolutely right! Not only that, but they also have an arrogance - an air of smug superiority. It wasn’t so long back that they were boasting about being the “real opposition” to the government when the Conservative leadership under IDS was so weak. And slightly further back still, there are the famous claims mad by a certain newspaper: “It was the *** wot won it”.
No one elected these prima donnas in the press who think that they have the right to make and break careers, and make the running for “the story”. They are taking their own description of themselves as “The Fourth Estate” far too seriously.
Stephen Pound on Newsnight to bail out the admiral. That was twice in one day - 3 times in last few days. Government at panic stations.
Also amusing to see the panic in Sion Simon’s eyes when he found himself sitting next to a lab mp asking a question critical of PFI at PMQs. He had to shake his head throughout the question just in case the great clunking fist thought he was complicit.
[Benedict, I saw Sion's puerile behaviour live on Parliament channel, sad I know, so have no link.]
Yes I do think Brown is playing politics with this 58 day thing. Yes I do think Brown is not getting good advice.
But Cameron’s rape talk, and catch phrases like moral collapse show as well Cameron using an emotive issue to play politics, grab some headlines backed up by his customary poor judgment.
The worse thing about Brown is that he is actually starting to make Cameron look vaguely competent.
Brown is Oliver Hardy, to Cameron’s Stan Laurel. Mr poor advice versus Mr poor judgment, who loves his gimmicks.
27
ps, if you want a clue, Benedict, it was like Kevin the teenager reacting to a comment from his father.
26. et al. Yes, Blair made a very good speech on the subject as he left office - and the response from the fourth estate was as predictable as it was depressing. One might begin to take them seriously if there was some evidence of journalists pursuing the same standards of integrity they routinely expect of politicians.
28 Tyson. Your analagy in comparing Laurel & Hardy to Britain’s political leaders is false - Laurel & Hardy were very good at their jobs! (And in any case, Chris Huhne is the one who most resembles Stan Laurel!).
28. So Cameron is not allowed to address sensitive issues now? The idea that 50% of males think its sometimes ok to force women into sex IS moral collapse, and it is deeply disturbing we have sleepwalked our way into this position with barely a mention. Why should he sugar coat his words when the issue needs pressing action?
In Mail and Telegraph the leading articles are against Brown.
“Fortress Britain and a gift to terrorists” Mail
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/newscomment.html?in_article_id=494152&in_page_id=1787
“forcing through measures that curtail the liberty of the individual is doing the terrorists’ job for them.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/11/15/dl1501.xml
The Sun was more favourable
“GORDON Brown yesterday spelled out impressive plans to avert another 7/7 slaughter of the innocents.”
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/sun_says/article244723.ece
10: Schengen - border controls need tighetening (a lot) not relaxing, so not anytime soon
Euro - never i would guess. Which is a good thing.
26, 30 etc. The media is depression. They hound and chase politicians on little things, desperately trying to force a u-turn or “catch them out”, or else have high pitched rants about things. But when it comes to a serious issue such as the creeping erosion of our civil liberties they fail to make a vocal, reasoned case. And then they hang on politician’s media stunt announcements to set the agenda. It’s all so depressing.
[28][31] The Three Stooges, maybe?
Labour rebels have an interesting time ahead of them. Do they defeat their government again and embarrass their new master? Or do they sit on their hands and let this illiberal and plainly ill thought-out legislation through?
Will there be any polls this weekend?
I’m eagerly awaiting Cameron’s first ‘Roger’ since GB won power (irony), and now is the time for it!
On the 58 day matter how come the Home Secretary did not know what number of days the Govt would ask for, yet Downing street and a junior minister stated the target within hours of her being asked?
How come Brown made the presentation in the HoC and not her?
Is she really Home Secy or just a front (Carry on snigger)?
Competent management of any organisation requires the CEO to support their Dept Heads and not to undermine their authority in this way.
The end result of this behaviour by a CEO will only end in tears. The Dept Head resigns or switches off and they are bypassed by their next reports (junior ministers) who go directly to the CEO.
Which is precisely what is happening now, so the CEO ends up with too many direct reports and cannot focus on his main job. Brown needs to be PM, not a Dept head. More good news for the Conservatives.
How embarassing - NR chief sold shares while urging others to buy….
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2007/nov/15/northernrock.banking
This tribalism can be dated to 1979. Anyone who lived through Thatcher’s time is entitled to be afraid-very afraid-of another Tory government however soft and cuddly it looks.
To think this is unique to Brown is to ignore what is possibly a majority of the population who feel exactly the same. I reckon it’ll take at least a generation and maybe a change of name before the stigma disappears sufficiently for the Tories to win another election in their own right whatever the polls might say now.
I think Brown realizes that electorally this will always be his strongest weapon so he doesn’t mind reminding voters who the opposition are but at a deeper level he feels it himself. Why did he invite her to tea? That’s what the psychiatrists should be looking at!
If the Government is indeed acting in the way suggested by the main article, and the very fact that it has been written suggests there is some evidence to that effect, then we are in for a more disastrous period of administration than can ever be imagined. Blair came in talking about “joined up government” but this proved to very much more difficult to do than say. However, the underlying impact of the suggestion will be fragmented government in a big way. If it is indeed the driving force of ministers, the electorate will punish harshly the kindergartens responsible.
32. Because it’s an extremely complex issue that experts have been trying to get to grips with for sometime. There is nothing so muddying of the water than a politician giving his half baked home spun ideas and dodgy statistics to a complex subject. Read Benedicts blog. It’s got a much more rational piece than anything that was said by Cameron. Cameron should have learnt this lesson from Blair
One politician hates other politicians? Dog bites man.
As if proof were needed that the man on the street is more interested in other news stories than political ones, this is currently the most read and most emailed item on the BBC News website
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7095134.stm
What’s the country coming to when a man can’t make love to his own bicycle in the privacy of his own (locked) bedroom?!
41 Roger makes a political prediction “…I reckon it’ll take at least a generation and maybe a change of name before the stigma disappears sufficiently for the Tories to win another election in their own right”. A generation, 20 years?
Well that’s good news for the Conservatives. However, I will always consider a prediction from Roger on cultural matters where he is a star.
45. Bob. Excellent story. Comforting to know he’s now on the sex offenders register. Our bikes can sleep comfortably in their garages
45
It looks like a very nice bike.
12 - thanks, Disraeli. The reason some posters here were surprised by the Brown bounce is that they let the media talk them into a caricature of the man, and caricatures don’t usually survive contact with reality. There are signs that it’s happening again - you wouldn’t think from reading pb.com that GB was more popular than both DC and Labour.
I know GB reasonably well and I don’t think GB does hate the Tories any more than TB did, though GB is certainly more of a core Labour man: it’s actually very difficult to hate people whom you work with on a daily basis unless they’re real monsters, which Tory MPs are not. What TB and GB share is that they have never thought the post-Thatcher Tories collectively very impressive - too much positioning, not enough conviction.
But practicing politicians on both sides nearly all share Socrates’ view at 35 of the media as it currently operates. I remember a Labour poster here (stjohn?) saying he found Campbell’s diaries (which are permeated with a dislike of the media) repulsive - personally I think they’re spot on.
Got the first question today so I’ll leave it there…the optimal university policy in nourishing hi-tech spin-offs, in case you wondered. Probably won’t be the first story on the news.
10. Never. We need stronger border controls not weaker ones.
No it isn’t his biggest flaw - that is in his approach to Government. the article in the FT referring to a bunker like PMs Office:
“Insiders say that no papers, no ideas and no decisions are getting through the barbed wire – only announcements from the leader that have been discussed with no one outside Mr Brown’s inner circle.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/376f1c14-923b-11dc-8981-0000779fd2ac.html
The hatred of the Tories (or is it mostly hatred of the Toff Two Cameron & Osborne?) is a sympton of his approach - those who aren’t with me are against me - which as be honed by 10 years of internal opposition preceded by the years of opposition.
Interesting article Mike. When Gordon first came in the media and the public gave him a fair crack of the whip. If now even the Grauniad is turning against him, he is in trouble.
49: We saw the truth from Kinnock and his desire to destroy the Tories.
PS: As someone who thinks openess about political funding is so important will you be pressing for full disclosure of the evidence in the Cash for Peerages investigation?
Re 27, FR, “[Benedict, I saw Sion’s puerile behaviour live on Parliament channel, sad I know, so have no link.]”
I don’t suppose you could tell me in what context? PMQ’s, or what?
Ted, all signs of a very flawed Leadership style. All papers go through No.10 so it all slows down to the speed of one. And that one person gets more tired and irritable through a lack of sleep and relaxation.
Brown’s “10 minute summer holiday” was a classic sign of a person who cannot delegate. Did anyone know who was the Deputy in Brown’s absence on holiday? The answer probably is that he did not name one.
Things can only get worse for this Govt.
Brown’s great flaw is not that he hates Tories but that he stifles argument, let alone dissent. As David Herdson @ 14 notes, this is not a recipe for sound government.
Brown is not alone in this: Blair and Bush; early Clinton and late Thatcher.
Unexamined policies, often little more than a couple of slogans strung together, are ineptly executed. Political capital is squandered and on the ground, communities, economies and lives can be destroyed, in some cases literally so.
The London underground and bus bombings showed the risks are genuine. There really are bad people out there. It would be nice to think ploticians are serious about more than dishing their opponents.
32- socrates- Cameron’s “moral collapse” phrase was just gut wretchingly pass me the puke bucket embarrassing, especially when he was talking about rape, and cheered to the rafters by a group of blue rinses. Broken down society was another appalling catch phrase, obviously well rehearsed through some focus group.
Cameron is playing the fear card as much as Gordon. Cameron loves his gimmicks, as much as Clarkson loves his gadgets.
Cameron just hasn’t got the stature, coherence of thought, or character to be a good PM. he has already blundered on many occasions, and doesn’t seem to learn. He is riding high on government unpoularity, and Brown’s scheming and poor presentation.
But then there are alot of people on this site who are so blinded by their partitisan, tribal love of the Tories, and cannopt see any of Cameron’s faults. But he has many, and his “rape” speech again exposed these.
[49] Nick Palmer MP writes of real monsters, which Tory MPs are not - it’s those Lib Dem MPs who are truly monstrous
54
Debate on Queen’s speech, c. 5pm, Stewart Jackson speaking, gives way to Sion who makes fatuous comment (sorry, can’t remember what), Stewart cracks a little joke in return, Sion lolls over empty bench, arms flailing in mock laughter.
Its always a waste of time hating another party, when your real enemies are in your own.
I love this term ‘flawed’ we are all flawed, in some way or another. GB’s problem is the obvious, ‘apprentice’ problem, now he’s got the master’s job he’s trying to hard.
Nick Palmer All those negative polls on Brown before his elevation to PM, and all those negative comments from his cabinet colleagues gave us a clue. If that has morphed into a ‘caricature’ the responsibility for that is Brown’s. It his own actions and words that have firmed that image in many people’s minds.
49.I dont believe that recent polls prove that GB is more popular than DC at all. All those polls show is that GB has been in power for ten years so people have seen the reality of him in charge and ru(i)nning the economy.
As an individual and on likeability DC is way ahead. Annoying as it is to most of us here, that is how many of the floating voters will decide (e.g. my wife who voted for Blair 3 times because she liked him and now says she will vote for Cameron because she likes him (i.e. she voted Labour and will now vot Tory)). Such peoples’ votes count as much as someones who has tribal convictions.
Its been much quoted on recent blogs that Callaghan was always way ahead of Thatcher personally but look what happened in 79. I could be wrong but it feels like its Labour spinners focussing on these as a way of distracting from the deteriorating news in the headline figures.
Cameron effectively lost any advantage at PMQs when he said “I don’t care what the Govt does, I care about what it says” which caused much laughter from Jacqui S in particular.
57. Sorry poster but you are clearly much more blinded by tribalism and prejudice then many here. Of course Cameron has faults but you (Labour supporters generally) cant accuse him on the one hand of not seeting out and agenda and policies and then crtiscise him for gimmicks and politics hen he tries to raise issues.
He is clearly doing something right and if thats just making use of Brown’s incompetence then thats the right thing to do at the moment. He doesnt want to disclose too much policy as Broon will just nick it.
Ands as much as t pains you, Camerons decontamination of the Conservative brand is one of his greates sucesses that enables Conservatives to take advantage of Labour decline. However I am not sure you can see through your tribalism to tuly see that.
57. People on each side will always accuse the other of being “blindly partisan” in their views, and failing to see. That is probably partisanship in itself. If Gordon Brown was arguing for the left-wing policies that you agree with no doubt you’d defend him, and look past his faults. I don’t think Cameron is without mistakes - the grammar school row is testament to that - and I’d also agree that the phrase “moral collapse” was also carefully selected, but that doesn’t mean Cameron was wrong to bring it up, or to get to the heart of the issue: we need to do more to make it clear to men in this country that forced sex is never acceptable in any circumstances.
65 - Yes, of course rape is wrong, but what is he going to *do* about it? Exactly HOW does he intend to shift the culture? More sex-ed? I’ll think Cammy’ll find a fair few Cornerstoners believe that sex-ed merely encourages the young to have sex (a stupid view, but there you are).
Brown’s inability to delegate, relax, select subordinates on basis of abiltiy, and the desire to micro manage other departments seem to be big flaws along with holding grudges. He may appear to hate the Tories, but then again he seems to have hated plenty of others in his own party.
Northern Rock touching new lows today (nearly in the 10% club). Deadline for bids is tomorrow - fallout could dominate the weekend.
The taxpayer may get its money back but shareholders and employees could be up the creek.
Mary Hinge [50] Surely it is the job on the EU to have strong borders if that is what you want. Borders between the various countries - England and Scotland for example are silly.
O/T - last night’s thread
Out last night so missed your announcement Mike.
Can I wish you all the very best with the new arrangements and I’ve got no doubts that you will continue to take pb from strength to strength. This has been a fantastic year for the site, not only with the record months in September and October and the arrival of top-line advertisers such as The Economist, but the major coup of getting both Huhne and Clegg to appear for the online hustings.
Although regulars will know that I normally tend to be a lurker rather than a poster, running the site while Mike’s away has given me an insight into how much work is needed to keep things ticking over and to stay on top of everything - the flood of posts after Ming resigned, with 1000 in a day, brought it home even more than before that pb is very much the online eye of the political hurricane.
This is without doubt one of the very best political sites anywhere and that’s testament to all the hard work that Mike has put in - the very best of luck (although I’m sure it won’t be needed!) as pb enters a new era.
You are dead right about the “vision” thing.
Bill Clinton advised Labour that you should always be in the “Future game”. Blair understood this and focused on values rather than policy. As, you have to say, did Thatcher. Major and Brown - they are managers not visionaries.
One major change in the world, is that the pace of change is now so clearly visible for all to see (except maybe Simon Heffer). We can all see that we are on a fast road to the future. A conservative (small “c”) stance wishing to hold on the past is just unsustainable.
That does not predetermine what the future is, it just means any politician must have a vision for it - or fail
RedFlump @ 66 re changing culture — you change the adverts, so far as I can tell. Posters offer the morning-after pill to the under-19s; the earlier version to girls aged 13-19.
It no longer appears to condone illegal behaviour. Whether it will lead to less sex and/or fewer pregnancies, … who knows?
Where will the taxpayers money come from - The potential takeroverers (if its not a word it should be!) have already asked for the BoE interest bill (£2bn and counting) to be waived. If it is not taken over then we will see just how good the mortgages are that were put up as collateral. Mortgages don’t go bad in their first few months.
GB yesterday failed to answer Vince Cable’s question on NR -claiming commercial confidentiality!!!
Why are they asking for an extension over 28 days to study complex evidence ? They couldn’t get it right in eight years ! [Barry George's appeal is allowed]
66- redflump- exactly. Cameron’s great generalisations “”moral collapse”, “society is breaking down” deserve sweeping, and challenging visions of change.
But what do we get, more sex ed, umghhh; using charities to deliver community services, and….
This is why Cameron just looks gimmicky, PR and focus group led, and just well a lightweight.
If he makes sweeping comment he needs some blindingly good policies to give people a feeling that he can deliver real change.
66. Something those that favour state action often fail to appreciate is that change can come in society simply by the issue being highlighted and talked about, and people making their own decisions from that. Jamie Oliver’s campaign for school dinners may have got more funding from government to improve kid’s school meals, but the main result of it was parents around the country becoming more involved in their children’s nutrition.
Government action may well be needed on this issue, considering the concerning scale of the belief, but the idea that “just” talking about something can’t cause any change is patently false. There is more to society than just the state.
75. I’m sure there will be plenty of good policies in the manifesto, which should come out before the election - it’s clear Labour would take them and claim credit otherwise.
75: The person who ‘looks gimmicky, PR and focus group led’ is Gordon Brown not Cameron.
Continuing Double Carpets support for Mike.
When your marketing department advises a relaunch I trust you will learn from Labour rather than the Conservatives.
“New Politicalbetting.com”
I am afraid has a better ring than
“Mike Smithson’s Policalbetting.com”
72- john l- there is the real world where children get drunk and have sex, and Tory blue rinse world where children should be seen and not heard, and they need to be properly educated to understand this.
Redflump and Tyson, you are losing what little credibility you ever had by these jaundiced and prejudiced anti Cameron rants of yours.
The topic under discussion “ Is Gord’s flaw that he hates Tories” and not “What drivel can I spout that will deflect said Topic”
Try posting less often and actually thinking a little more.
John Wheatley @ 71 re vision.
Thatcher decimated British industry which may have seen her fall had not bedsit socialists and South American fascists come to her aid. Her later vision, the poll tax, ended her career.
Blair messed up the constitution and embroiled us in foreign wars.
Did they really have a vision, other than destroying opposition, both internal and external? A vision Brown does share. It is certainly hard to discern any coherent political philosophies.
71. That was all very well for Clinton - he had a fixed horizon of an eight-year term limit.
At some point yesterday’s “future” becomes today’s “present”.
80
“there is the real world where children get drunk and have sex, and Tory blue rinse world where children should be seen and not heard” would make more sense if it said “there is a real world between where children get drunk and have sex, and Tory blue rinse world where children should be seen and not heard”
O/T: Lib Dem leadership debate on Question Time this evening - given that the consensus seems to be that Huhne tends to outperform Clegg, is now the time to stick a little more on Huhne in anticipation that his odds will fall after the debate, enabling one to lay later (if I’ve got the terminology right there)?
85. The odds are difficult to shift on betfair - they haven’t blinked for weeks.
Lack of polling data ?
Chessman, you saucebox. I try not to indulge in “anti-Cameron rants” as you put it. I am merely pointing out the gap between his cliched platitudes and what he actually intends to do about the problem.
Like the environment. “Vote Blue, Go Green”. OK. What are his environmental policies? Rubbish nuclear energy and proposed eco-towns and, erm, that’s it. Oh and oppose more airports but then accept there should be more. Same with house building and road building. Both agree and oppose.
Tyson @ 80 re Blue Rinse world.
There is also New Labour world where no-one should have sex or alcohol until they graduate from Oxbridge at the age of 21. Leaving school, getting married and starting a family at 16 are abhorrent to these people, many of whom despise the working class as binge-drinking chavs and violent, racist thugs.
86 Yes that’s right, Harry.
In view of the nature of the election, I think there’s unlikely to be much change before the vote takes place. Those of us who have taken a bit of a punt on Huhne will just have to sit and hope.
Many of whom despise the working class as binge-drinking chavs and violent, rascist thugs.
You mean they aren’t!
O/T Honours evidence ‘not revealed’
90 That’s right, Coldstone, they’re not.
That’s why I left them.
87: Cliched platitudes: ‘British jobs for British workers’, ‘my vision’, ‘deep clean for hospitals’, etc.
Again you a criticising Cameron for what Brown does all the time.
Re 59, FR, “Debate on Queen’s speech, c. 5pm, Stewart Jackson speaking, gives way to Sion who makes fatuous comment (sorry, can’t remember what), Stewart cracks a little joke in return, Sion lolls over empty bench, arms flailing in mock laughter.”
Presumably yesterday? If so I will see if it is online.
Gordon Brown? Edward Heath’s reincarnation, you mean. It was bad enough the first time around.
‘His “vision” needs to be more than he does not like Tories’?
It is - he really doesn’t like us.
That’s ok though; nobody thinks higher of Gordon Brown than I do, and I think he’s a sh-
Re 65, “we need to do more to make it clear to men in this country that forced sex is never acceptable in any circumstances.”
And women too actually.
92
Me too, all the fun went!!
88 John L “There is also New Labour world where no-one should have sex or alcohol until they graduate from Oxbridge at the age of 21. Leaving school, getting married and starting a family at 16 are abhorrent to these people, many of whom despise the working class as binge-drinking chavs and violent, racist thugs.”
Eh? When did Labour start to despise the working class? I must have missed that particular seismic shift in Politics.
IG index have stopped offering shorts on Northern Rock
No doubt that Brown’s inability to understand why people vote Tory is a very great flaw. I am sure that Blair disliked the Tories too but coming from a Tory background he understood what made people vote Conservative and knew how to woo them.
Brown is the most tribal of politicians of a type that only the bitter, insular and personalised nature of Scottish politics could produce. The man is a dinosaur and how he got to the position that he has done in the age we live in, is beyond my comprehension.
His constant desire to beat the Tories rather than govern in the national interest is indicative of the mindset of Opposition. Despite ten years of power the Labour Party still seems unused to governing.
101 - Whilst David Cameron is just born to rule.
Redflump, you try not to indulge in ranting? Another disappointment for you I’m sure as you all to often fail. However you are amusing I’ll give you that, I have not been called a saucebox for many a year….arr sweet memories.
Chessman - but where they have a point is that “The world is going to the dogs” is not an election winning slogan, even if it might be!
It plays badly with all those who need to improve their lot, and plays well with those who have something to lose. Bad tactics in my view by DC
Disraeli @ 99. Not Labour, New Labour.
O/T Mayor of London market now available on Betfair.
Livingstone looking a strong favourite to kick off.
‘The world is going to the dogs’ may not be an election winning slogan (?) But the Daily Mail sells millions of copies everyday based on that belief.
Why people vote for a particular political party is something of a mystery. I’ve known people whose beliefs seem to be diametrically opposed to their voting.
Someone I once knew(during the Thatcher years) was a staunch Tory, but his opinions weren’t, opposed the selling of council houses, privitisation, hated the city, (parasites) in fact a Bennite really. I asked him why with his opinions he voted Tory, he looked at me as if I was stupid, ‘Cos Labour let the wogs in, thats why!’ I didn’t bother after that!
104: A lot of the criticism of Cameron can just as easily be put on Brown. Of the two it seems to be hurting Brown more as the polls show.
Labour’s unflinching support in the NE must be in doubt in the medium term ?
http://www.advfn.com/p.php?pid=charts&cb=1194519860&symbol=L%5ENRK&redir=1&period=1&freq=0
You should have quietly explained that it was that Enoch Powell chap as Health Minister that was responsible.
Once was on a plane from Belfast. Enoch was reading a book, I think, called 6 Great Prime Ministers - Was pleased I was able to say “Glad you never made it!”
The ultimate in political contrariness is this man.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_C._Gillette
Anyone out there doing a degree in politics, what a subject for a thesis.
I made a comment about Rogers post at 43, which at one point said “Read Benedicts blog. ”
With which I of course agree.
That post has not appeared. I wonder why? I don’t think I used any spammy words.
That said as Roger says it is a complex issue. It is also more of a soc i al (perhaps that was the issue) problem rather than a legal one. That said some of Cameron’s language recognised that, and looks to deal with attitudes as much as anything else.
OT - I’ve filtered the latest Iowa polls to come up with a projection. Also John McCain faces an interesting dilemma.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2007/11/15/should-mccain-stay-or-should-he-go/
“Whitehall chief faces the sack after accusing Brown of running Government by ‘clique’”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=494226&in_page_id=1770
102 - Redflump, I can think of no better example of the sort of mindless tribalism I was writing of than your response to my comments!
114. GB will pay in the long term for rubbing the mandarins up the wrong way.
This is going to get ugly - John Major style.
Disraeli @ 99: There is a story (possibly apocryphal) about Peter Mandleson visiting a chippy and ordering “some of that guacamole” while pointing to the mushy peas.
From Me’s [114] link
“Criticising the Prime Minister is deemed damaging, but the attack on the Cabinet Secretary - the head of the Civil Service - is seen as a “sackable offence”
107 I’ve certainly met Conservative Party members whose political opinions are very firmly on the Left, and who seem to have drifted into the wrong party by mistake, and I’m sure the same is true in reverse in the Labour Party.
116-He is already paying in the short term…
118- Ben Brogan has a piece on the subject too:
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2007/11/deadhead-made-t.html
Me @ 114: Any idea who the mystery man might be?
Gordon says Scotland can win.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/football/internationals/7092597.stm
Back Italy…
122-None, Brogan says: there is a “clearly untrue” rumour that Alex Allan was the source of the article….
“Downing Street has also promoted Sir Suma Chakrabarti to replace Mr Allan at the MoJ (which scotches a delightful but clearly untrue rumour that he was about to be exposed as the source of the Sue Cameron item I mentioned yesterday).”
117 Ed B - Re:Peter Mandleson story.
That’s a good story!
Almost the opposite happened to me when I went to a Mexican restaurant, but fortunately I didn’t put my foot in it.
I love Mushy Peas. See how cosmopolitan we Londoners are - we appreciate food from all round the World.
I’m sure I’m just one of many ex-Labour supporters who finds Brown increasingly odious, shamelessly dishonest, and somewhat sinister.
Fortunately, he’s also proved himself to be thoroughly incompetent and palpably not up to the job.
I’m beginning to doubt that he’ll survive up to the next election (resignation on “health” grounds) and his Premiership will go down as a minor footnote in the history books, though his Chancellorship will be recorded as being largely responsible for the burgeoning economic problems that lie ahead.
123 Marquee Mark. That’s CRAIG Brown, not Gordon Brown! I know how all these Scots look alike to some of you parochial Englishmen, but really!
Go Scotland!
“Here’s a Tory split on Europe you won’t have heard about”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/the-magazine/the-week/354346/heres-a-tory-split-on-europe-you-wont-have-heard-about.thtml
126.
“I’m just one of many ex-Labour supporters who finds Brown increasingly odious, shamelessly dishonest,”
You mean you think he’ll make a good Tory PM just like his ex-mate Tony B?
129 A *bad* Tory PM perhaps
127 Just my little joke….!
…..because Gordon only cheers on England…..!!
132
Glad to see you Tories so obviously rattled “odious, shamelessly dishonest” - hah, Cameron fits the bill perfectly!
134. RF - you need to calm down. I’m sorry its all gone so wrong but that’s politics.
Just because you want something not to be true don’t make it so.
Yours concerned.
H.Flashman.
Redflump, rattled by what exactly………..an eight point lead?
99When did Labour start to despise the working class?
I heard a quote from a female labour MP, cant remember the name, after a Labour defeat. Soemthing along the lines of “Bloody working classes. They read the Sun and vote Tory”.
It was following 18 years in the wilderness that Labour decided the British people are the enemy. That is when they decided they needed to import a new working class, a new electorate.
One thing that hasn’t been considered is that Scotland may qualify and England won’t. Brown has made a big point about supporting ‘our’ sports teams. How excited would he be to support the Scots if England weren’t around?
As for the hate thing, I reckon it’s important. If it didn’t work for Kinnock in the 80’s, it certainly won’t work for Brown now. He’d be better off regarding the Tories as misguided fools, but I don’t think he has it in him. And his hatred is not just limited to the Tories - many in his own Party would recognise it. If he’s not careful, people are going to start seeing him as a very sad man indeed.
I hate to quote Star Wars, but how about this from the great Sir Alec ‘Don’t give in to hate Luke. That only leads to the dark side’. Trite, I know, but there’s a ring of truth about it.
134: And there in one and a third lines is the reason why the Brownies are is so much difficulty.
The polls are going South for Labour not because of what Cameron did but what Gordon did, and is still doing.
BBC news had something about Allen and the MoJ, did anyone see and hear the detail?
140-“Downing Street has also promoted Sir Suma Chakrabarti to replace Mr Allan at the MoJ (which scotches a delightful but clearly untrue rumour that he was about to be exposed as the source of the Sue Cameron item I mentioned yesterday).”
Ben Brogan…
134, on the contrary “rattled” sums up Brown and his minions perfectly.
BTW I only became a Tory fairly recently when I finally realised just how appalling Brown is.
138 Yet another post asserting that Gordon Brown hates the Tories. Maybe he does - maybe he doesn’t.
The only person to actually post who knows the guy says that Brown doesn’t hate the Tories, and gives a completely plausible explanation for Brown’s actions.
So has anyone actually got any evidence to back up the claim that Brown hates the Tories? (and I don’t mean circumstantial).
137 - “import a…new electorate”. Just what are you on about?
” 101 - Whilst David Cameron is just born to rule. ”
And lead.
Brown stomps his way forward trying to drag people along.
Cameron, gently but firmly, walks alongside you.
Interesting about this extension of the 28 day detention. 3 former Home Secretaries on the back benches (Blunkett, Clarke, Reid), what will they do? Do any of them still have an axe to grind with Gordon? I’d imagine Blunkett would be happy with 90 day plus detention, but I’m not sure about the others. Clarke was thought to be very reluctant when Blair made him push for 90 days and for all Reid’s bluster he never touched the detention issue.
I think they could make things very tough for Gordon.
A new rap record out for flumpy and her chums
http://www.pitchforkmedia.com/article/record_review/47095-public-enemy-1
145 - Oh please, I thought the Messiah had gone when Tony retired. “Cameron walks alongside you” - what a load of guff!
Made me chuckle!
Are you in love with Dave, Matt?
143, are you really so naive?
148, Are *you* in love with Brown, RedFlump. Little else could explain your slavish devotion to the vile and wretched creature.
150. Brown’s his boss, isn’t he?
150 - Listen bub, Gordon is *all man*, OK? Not like some mollycoddled poshboy I could mention.
148: Did Dave make gordon go to Iraq in the middle of the Tory Conference? Did he make Gordon mess up calling an election? Did he make Gordon use slogans from the BNP? Did he make him promise to give hospitals a ‘deep clean’ and not actually do it?
Or was it all not David, just Gordon?
149. Ah! Voxpop. Thank You for replying. OK, please demonstrate how I am being naive, by laying out your evidence. If you don’t reply within an hour, I shall assume that you have none.
All I have seen so far is the assertion, repeated over and over again that “Brown hates Tories”. As if repeating it over and over again will make it true.
P.S. I’m in love with Nick Clegg.
155. Is it you thats keeping his price down on betfair then ?
155-I guess you will like this:
http://www.newstatesman.com/200711150016
154. Benjamin - good to see you back in British politics. I, like everyone else, cannot say for CERTAIN whether Brown hates the Tories. But so many of the things he does give that impression, one that feeds down to the voters, who make decisions based not on what they are sure of, but what they think is most likely. Brown’s manner comes across as deeply unpleasant and will likely harm him.
152 RedFlump: “Listen bub, Gordon is *all man*, OK?”
If you say so, dear
Have you had a ride on his rocking horse yet?
156. Ha, sadly I don’t have anywhere near the funds required.
154, The evidence is right there before our eyes, Disraeli. Take your blinkers off and watch this Brown fellow in action when faced with the Tory ranks. Naked hatred is written all over the miserable wretch’s face. If you can’t see it then I suggest you get your eyes tested.
If you don’t reply within an hour I shall assume that you are, in fact, Brown himself, and that you have bottled it again!
Sad things is I think it’s a vision that would have been highly successful in the 10 years following 1997 when Gord really wanted to be PM. He inherited the Labour Party at precisely the time when the evil party isn’t quite so evil anymore.
145.
“Cameron, gently but firmly, walks alongside you.”
Yea and if I walk in the valley of the shadow of death. . . .
Pass the sickbag, Alice.
146.
“I’d imagine Blunkett would be happy with 90 day plus detention,”
Nowhere near long enough for him but throw in a Kimberly Quinn lookalike and he’d keep himself amused for the period of his detention before tossing her onto the Hoggart pile.
[143] It seems apt that someone who chooses the nom de blog Disraeli should adopt such an outdated approach to political debate. It is not a question of evidence (facts, appeal to the head) but of narrative (passion, appeal to the heart). If enough Blue Harpies say long enough and loud enough that Gordon Brown hates Tories, that becomes reality. Do try to keep up.
[128] I had to smile reading about all these new Tory MPs and candidates who want government to do lots, lots less. The “Blueberry Hill” mob remind me for some reason of the last Social Credit administration in British Columbia, elected a few years ago now on a cast-iron unbreakable pledge to scrap politicians’ pensions. Guess what? Once elected, they found it impracticable for some reason or other I forget right now. Give the Blueberry Hillbillies some red boxes and they’ll suddenly discover why government ministers like doing things…
Well, there’s hate and there’s hate. Surely every PM hates the opposition party to a greater or lesser extent - after all their main purpose is to bring down the Government and to curtail the careers of its ministers.
I don’t see much evidence that Brown’s supposed degree of hatred is any more or less than that of his predecessors. In fact, judging by his recent “let’s grind the bastards into the dust” comments, I would say that Neil Kinnock’s hatred of the Tories exceeded that of Brown by some considerable measure.
162. Agreed. Brown is yesterday’s man trying to utilise sentiment and policy from 10 years ago (as are some of the posters on here as well). The Nu-Labour experiment is nearing the end and the Brown-nosers are playing Canute.
According to Merv King the finale will be a very nasty and unpleasant economic storm over the coming 18 months which will be an appropriate (though unwelcome) epitaph for the great waster Brown.
Brown’s problem is that he’s a political mediocrity who thinks he’s a genius. It’s not all his fault – for years sycophants in the press and his inner-circle have been heaping utterly unwarranted approbations upon his swollen head, and like many mediocrities the poor man was egotistical enough to swallow it. Now he thinks that every partisan stunt he pulls is oh so clever, while the rest of us just shake our heads in sorrow and disbelief. Mike’s correct: the silly smirking fit Brown could not stifle during the Inheritance Tax business (similar to that look he had in the car once he thought he’d finished off Blair) was most telling. If he is to avoid catastrophe, Mr Brown needs to start seeing the political landscape as it is – not as he thinks it is.
166. Well Kinnock’s hatred is of course fuelled by sour grapes and the bitter bile of catastrophic and self-inlficted failure.
“We’re Allright!!!!”
Thats what some of the Brown-nosers should focus on when they accuse the Conservatives of being smug and complacent.
107/119 I know some members of the Liberal Democrat Party whose views on immigration and repatriation go much further than the BNP would advocate.
September saw the worst banking crisis for 100 years,inflation is about to let rip,bird flu has reappeared and our underfunded over stretched forces are fighting on two fronts and return to slum like barracks on their return to the UK.
Meanwhile, our Prime Minister’s focus is on playing childish party political games,fortunately the public has been quick to see through it.
163. Yea and if I walk in the valley of the shadow of death. . . .
At last Labour begin to recognise what they have done to this country!
161 Voxpop. You don’t persuade me with lines such as “Naked hatred is written all over the miserable wretch’s face.”
This only convinces me that you hate Brown!
I don’t hate him - I merely want him and his Government out of office ASAP.
165 Innocent Abroad. Very good! Ten out of ten for style AND content :-).
I’ve had a fair few debates in the past that have gone along these lines:
Person A: “But what about the facts . . . .”
Person B: “Don’t try and confuse me with the facts…”
[174] Thankyou, my dear Sir…
Well well well, talk about *Gordon* hating *Tories*!
There seems to be many Tories on this site that seem to hate *Gordon*. You all need to get a grip. Have a nice sit down and a cuppa tea. And some hobnobs.
I may dislike Cammy but I don’t *hate* him. Some of you on here just sound like mentalists when you go into GB bashing overdrive.
167,
Well at least it was good economicaly from 97 to 07.
We have to go back along way before such a period continued growth.
Certainly felt better to live through than 79 to 97.
But then again you have been probably been saying that little speech for the last ten years.
You are worse than a clock.
meant stopped clock, dont want to accredit to much such insight.
Disraeli @ 174
Wouldn’t your quest for evidence be better directed at Mike S, after all he wrote the topic, posed the question and stated his ‘defining moment’
This is not a court of law, it is a blog site, to argue on such a premise is just plain silly.
165-It’s always like that, people promise one thing when they are in opposition and when they finally have the power to do it, they can’t do it for some reason.”Nothing more conservative than a liberal in power and nothing more liberal than a conservative in oppostion”… =)
Just to say I shall be using this username permenantly now. Frank Booth (138) has been consigned to history, rather like the Labour Red Flag and the Conservative Torch.
I did consider some other names for my rebranding:
The Silent Minority
Jack Dubya
Vote Blue Go Red
The People’s Poster
Still, I couldn’t afford to employ Saatchi and Saatchi.
I’m surprised that there’s not one single Labour-supporting punter here who is willing to give me odds of 6-1 against my tenner that ICM will report Labour’s share of the vote falling to below 30% on or before 31 May 2008. For this to happen, would mean the Tories achieving around 45% in such a poll and Labour facing possible meltdown with their present leader. At these fairly modest odds, it would seem there is a general feeling that such an outcome is seen as being a distinct possibility.
Of course, this bet is also open to the first Tory or Lib Dem supporter to accept this bet - I’ll take anyone’s money.
182 - I would, but I’m afriad I don’t gamble. Talk of Labour going below 30% is nonsense.
182 PtP you answer the question, Labour punters expect that there is a low, but real chance of things getting worse. 2:1 maybe fairer, not that I am offering!
182 It does not surprise me much that noone has taken your wager offer , I would have thought the chances of an odd Labour poll below 30% as in March this year and Oct last year is a bit shorter than 6-1 . Not one of the many Conservative doomsters on here would take my wager offer that there would not be an economis depression or house price slump in 2008 despite their daily forecasts of apocalypse 2008 .
182. To clarify - if I wager £10 you will pay me £60 if Labour scores 30.49% (rounded down to 30% for headline) or lower before 31st May ?
177. Well I much preferred 79-97. Then again I was at school and university with no resposnibility whatsoever. No stopped clocks. I agree that economically 97-07 has been fine. Thank the Conservatives economic reforms in the 80’s, Ken Clarke, US and Asian econonomies, globilisation and Blaire’s restraining hand on McBroon for that.
I liked Blair or rather I put up with him. If I squinted you could pretend he was a Conservative. With Brown he’s all politics of ennvy, class warrior, Old labour. I dont hate him anymore than I hate a dog turd I tread on in the street. I do find him equally as distasteful though.
185. Mark, you might consider the new SpreadFair house prices market if you want to bet on a housing crash, or like me (a Tory), bet against one.
187. Classy.
Seems like its the Tories that are full of bile on this site.
185 Mark - I did stipulate an ICM poll. I honestly can’t remember your tempter on house prices next year on which I’ve posted here bearishly of late - perhaps you’d like to repeat your offering.
Historically, PM’s were supposed to be quite pally with Leaders of the Opposition. “Your opponents sit opposite you; your enemies sit behind you.”
If Brown genuinely does hate the Tories, then it will be a gift for them. If you hate someone, it’s very hard to respect them, and if you don’t respect your opponent, you will tend to underestimate him. And that is precisely what seems to have happened over the last couple of months.
A more interesting question is: “Can Brown learn to respect the Tories enough to impute a degree of intelligence to them, and stop underestimating them?”
Whether Brown hates Cameron is only a symptom of a much deeper problem for Brown.
Whether through bad luck or poor judgement Brown has scored several own goals and he will not thank anyone who highlights these failings in Public. As it is David Cameron’s job is to do so and as such, it seems fair to assume there is no love lost between them.
Increasingly ‘The Goverment of All Talents’ seems to be another of these errors in judgement as one by one the new recruits speak out in a manner counter to the core message from the Government.
When he first became Prime Minister Brown made much of the failings of David Cameron and the Conservatives and they responded by rising to the challenge. At the same time he set his own stall out as a strong reliable and honourable Prime Minister.
He then went about disproving this newly created self-image with a series of naive, transparent, self-promoting acts and was then forced into retreat by a counter offensive from the Conservatives.
As a result he is now forced to re-invent himself after a few months. It is reasonable to think that in suffering these reverses Brown has to some extent taken it personally and whether that continues or not may be significant in deciding his fate.
What is clear at the moment is that Brown is having difficulty in redefining himself in terms of personality and policy to prove that what he initially set out as his image is actually true and that his recent problems are but a blip. Whether he hates Cameron or not, he is not rising to the challenge and that is his main problem.
If he cannot resolve those difficulties then his premiership may not extend beyond its first term.
186 LOL! Err…. nope Harry, it’s actually intended to be the other way round I think you’ll find, but a good try all the same.
Ah yes, but does Cameron hate Brown? Of course not! He is the Lord, come down to walk beside us………(gags).
187.
I am no fan of Brown.
Always preferred Blair even in 94.
However as Milliband said once Brown was in power six months the transfer of hatred would begin.
You were lucky you had no responsibility from 79 to 97.
Two periods of deep recession from 81-83 and 90 to 93 wiped our business out.
Took a lot of hard work to get back.
Thats why it takes a lot to forget and trust economically the Conservatives again for people who were badly effected.
That fear could work either way so dont be to complacent it will go yours.
193.
worth a try I suppose.
I think you need to offer more like 1/3
O/T
http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/Vote2008/story?id=3866786&page=1
This is a story about Hillary Clinton that has legs. She hasn’t necessarily done anything bad but the pardons were one of the lowest moments of Bill Clinton’s presidency - rankled for a long time and he had to rehabilitate himself a bit over there in the way that he didn’t elsewhere. Dragging them up and associating it with Hillary, however tenuously, could hurt her badly. Especially as it adds fuel to the Edwards/Obama charge of “Washington insider” etc.
Redflump @ 193
A quick reminder.
“I try not to indulge in ‘anti-Cameron rants’ as you put it. I am merely pointing out the gap between” etc
I stand corrected…….. when I said “you are losing what little credibility you ever had by these jaundiced and prejudiced anti Cameron rants of yours.”
I should have added ‘obsessive’ ‘puerile’ and very ‘dull’
197-The press is going to put more pressure on her, but I don’t think the other candidates can do it. They all have some kind of problem with funding, which makes them vulnerable too…
197. Bill Clinton has had more lives than a cat. Nothing seems to stick to him. I’m uterly convinced that if he were to stand again for President, he would walk it. His wife wouldn’t stand a chance. So despite his lies about Lewinsky, the development of Al-Quaida under his watch in the 90’s and all those pardons on leaving office - they still love him.
195 - “However as Milliband said once Brown was in power six months the transfer of hatred would begin.”
Whose transfer? The public’s from Blair to Brown or Brown’s transfer from Blair to the Tories?
201. From Blair to Brown. Live on BBC Question Time too..
197 Ant - where do you see Hillary as being most at risk - in securing the democratic nomination or in the Presidential election itself?
I’ve just topped up on Betfair’s “First Female President” market following a slight weakening in the odds of such an eventuality, where my overall position is now just over even money.
199. The other candidates can do it. They’re just rightly worried that negative campaigning can be very counter-productive in the early states (viz Dean-Gephardt four years ago).
And I don’t think John Edwards has many problems with funding (apart from not being able to get enough). He’s rejected cash from lobbyists and taken public financing.
202 - yes, I remember! Just thinking that perhaps the other suggestion might be true too…
195. Agreed re complacency. As I pointed out earlier, the example of Kinnock is an important lesson for all Conservative supporters. I do think what you are seeing on the blogs these days is a little bit of released frustration. Conservatives have had very little to get excited about for about 15 years.
What ever your tribalism the 2010 election really is all to play for now and Cameron could well be PM (however vomit inducing that is to contemplate for RedFlump etc). Its not in the bag yet though but there is hope which there never was in 97, 01 or 07. Its that Tory hope that also feeds Brown’s fear and panic. Whatever the legalities he has no mandate from the british people he knows it, so any failure will be entirely his own. for a man so obviously impressed with himself that must drive everything he does. He may end up being even more unsuccessful than John Major (who of course did win an election!)
203 PtP.
I’m sure she’s more at risk in the election itself. Republicans aren’t as soft as people make out and she’s definitely a very divisive candidate. All the polls show that.
Don’t think I’m anti-Hillary because I’m not particularly. I think she has as decent a chance of becoming president in 2008 as she ever has/will have. Window of opportunity and all that, and she’s a worthy favourite. But I’d be very happy to reiterate every day that she has more problems in securing the nominatino than the media (on both sides of the pond) have acknowledged in recent months. What we’re seeing now is an overdue correction in their perspective.
207. Why is she so divisive? I could understand Thatcher being divisive, or certainly George Bush, but why Hilary. Is it a personal thing about her?
207 Thanks for that. Of course my even money bet equates to odds of approx of 0.4-1 at each stage. A month ago this looked loke a shoe-in, albeit one year hence, but now I’m not so sure - think I’ll stay with it through the primaries and, assuming she’s successful, look to reduce my bet then.
188 Peter , it was ICM who gave Labour 29% in March this year and October last year .
My wager offer was £ 50 at evens that there will not be a hose price crash next year defined as a fall in average house prices of 20% . HF , I think it was said a fall of 5% would be a price crash but I thought a fall of that size just merely a correction .
208: She was a lawyer, she was married to Bill Clinton, she thought being First Lady was a political post, she’s sleazy if not corrupt, she’s female, and she’s a Democrat.
204-”And I don’t think John Edwards has many problems with funding ”
What about Obama?and the Republicans? Do you think that they can “attack” her without expecting her to fight back on the question of funding?
211. yes, but then wyh do some people love her? It’s not that I don’t understand the dislike of her, it’s the fact that she is so polarizing.
Obama is 6.2 on Betfair. Clinton seems to be having a few problems, and value in that?
210 Mark - Thanks for that and I think I can just resist backing the prospect of house prices falling by 20%+ next year. I’ve recently sold this market on Spreadfair at various quarter-ending dates, mainly at the back end of the year. Their prices show prices falling by approx 1% per quarter, both in London and throughout the UK and I think this may be exceeded, but falls of 20%? No Siree!
213-”wyh do some people love her? ”
For the same reason that some people hate her…=)
209 PtP. That sounds like good betting to me. But I would keep an eye on this pardons story and Thursday’s debate in Nevada if I were you. I get the sense that we’re in a particularly critical fortnight of the primary campaign (although I recognise that everything’s going to feel more frantic and important as we get towards late December).
Governator @ 208. My understanding is that she’s divisive/unpopular for 3 reasons:
1. A lot of people don’t like the idea of a spouse gaining name recognition through their partner’s electoral success and then cashing in. This would be the same in this country - imagine if Cherie Booth ran for Parliament.
2. Being a woman is still a problem in some southern states. A poll in February showed that 11% of people still wouldn’t vote for a woman as president. It’s a big enough proportion to potentially make a difference, even if we theorise that they’re likely to be republicans anyway!
3. There is a strong thought - summed up by many media stories - that she is cold and calculating without a personality. People see her as too keen to become president and a common complaint is they don’t know where she REALLY stands on the big issues because she doesn’t want to risk being on the wrong side of a wedge.
173,
How perceptive of you. Yes, I do hate Brown. However, there’s nowt wrong with a bit of hate now and again, particularly when it’s directed at such a vile specimen as him
That doesn’t mean that I love Cameron by the way! Only that I see him and his party as the only hope for ridding us of this bankrupt, and corrupt New Labour project.
214 noisy summer. I think that certainly offers value at the moment. It’s a price that’ll come in if Obama debates well on Thursday, and his tail’s certainly up at the moment.
211 Ralph. A far better summary than mine!!
212 Me. We all know that even hypocritical attacks can be effective. Often the first shot is what’s important.
206,
Very true Cameron has a real chance.
My only problem is in 94 I knew Blair was not old Labour, what ever the negative adverstising said the devil eyes etc.
I knew he was a centrist change thats why I voted for him three times like millions of others.
But Cameron leaves a doubt in my mind that really he is not centrist, he is just spousing compassionate conservatism like Bush did in 2000 .
Nevertheless as in 2000, I expect Cameron to win in 2010 against an uninspiring Brown just like Gore lost by not using the Clinton/Blair electoral appeal, and of not always looking forward to the future.
Like the 96 Clinton campaign of building a bridge to the new century.
Brown cant win just harking back to the Conservative recession years,if
this country is in one at the time or not.
219-”We all know that even hypocritical attacks can be effective”
True!
217 Ant - again thanks for that and I’ll look out for your future posts on the US elections. It’s PfP not PtP by the way, not that anyone’s counting!
217. And all that doesn’t even mention Whitewater and other murky areas…
213: Things that some people like about her are the things that others dislike her for. The problem Hillary has is that the dislike for her isn’t just partisan, a number of Democrats hate her too.
I wonder whether Brown hates the Tories more than he hates the Blairites in his own party. I believe politicians are more often distrustful of MPs from their own side and this has been magnified in Brown’s mind by the years of antagonism between the Blair and Brown camps.
To my mind Brown’s most serious error has been in surrounding himself with his own close band of acolytes and not giving enough say in strategy (and that vision thing) to the likes of Johnson, D Miliband and Hutton who could offer alternative and clear points of view. Brown is cementing the divide within the two Labour camps.
We don’t know exactly the extent of the Blairite/Brownite split within the parliamentary Labour party as Brown was elected unopposed. The only real guide I suppose is an analysis of how MPs voted in the deputy leadership contest. Assuming Blears, Johnson and Benn are Blairites; and Harman, Hain and Cruddas Brownites, first MPs votes split almost exactly 50/50 so if Brown is excluding the views/opinions and support of half his party this is far more of a flaw than “hating” Cameron and Osborne.
And it should be a real concern to those outside Westminister that there is now a real lockdown in communication between the leaders. MPs from different parties do generally have very good relationship with each other - much more than the public would think. The leaders however clearly don’t which is a worry when cross-party consensus on many issues such as security is needed. Brown and Cameroon should both chill a little. After all, they aren’t that far apart on many issues.
Until Brown became Chancellor, oppositions were given at least 24 hours sight of the Budget so that they could formulate a reasoned questioning of its contents. Brown ended this practice meaning that oppositions have to respond on the hoof. That is bad form and cheats the public of a proper debate - as happened with Brown’s last budget announcement. This IS playing politics with important policies and I wish that this in particular was put right.
Just think of the poisoned chalice the Tories face - 2012 Olympics, Commonwealth Games, bids for world cup. Circuses with huge bills.
Is the real truth that Brown hates anyone with an alternative view to his own?
He is Stalinist.
His actions drive away potential talented people in his own party.
Not a big tent more a tented khazi.
222 Many apologies Peter. I was careless with the moniker - the perils of trying to shorten you to PfP in the first place - but I did know I was talking to you and not Peter the Punter!!
Ant
Back to US politics, this is the sensational poll that puts Huckabee and Romney in a statistical tie in Iowa.
While the Democrat side looks good for Hillary in a state where she’s always been in a scrap with Obama and particularly Edwards, this poll shows that it’s still wide open.
For the record, I’m still very mistrustful of Iowa polls (just look at the undecideds or indefinites - and past elections prove that they often swing around right up until caucus day), but they have more value now than they did weeks or moths ago.
226. That’s no poisoned chalice. You get the credit if it works out but get to blame someone else if it doesn’t.
225,227 — Alan Johnson has cancelled more NHS private projects.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7096437.stm
This casts doubt on his Blairism, and also shows Brown does let ministers (or at least one of them) off the leash from time to time.
210 Mark Senior, I would say that a fall of 10% or more is a price crash, because that is such an unusual movement for an item that historically increases in price more years than it falls, I guess the average change is about 8%+ each year. So any fall is unusual and a 10% fall is very unusual. Hence it is a crash.
226.Just think of the poisoned chalice the Tories face - 2012 Olympics, Commonwealth Games, bids for world cup. Circuses with huge bills.
Don’t think so somehow. Brown and his team are clearly taking ownership of it so in concept and cost terms it will be easy and perfectly correct to ‘blame it on Brown’.
However, there are the issues of operational security and the smooth running of the event. In these areas the Conservatives need to make sure there are no hiccups.
In any case it will be just one thing amongst a plethora of things that will need to be put right if the Conservatives win the next GE. That will be Labour’s legacy to the country……
232 I think we are getting nearer agreement HF . Certainly I would agree 10% is a big fall though not quite a crash . Anyway home now to no internet . Now saying back online on 16th but may not be till 20th .
Just found this on the FT. Its a couple of days old so apologies if its old news. It’s pertinent to the thread though…..
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/376f1c14-923b-11dc-8981-0000779fd2ac.html
Gord’s biggest flaw is that he is just so dislikeable.
To my surprise, I find myself despising Brown MUCH more than Blair, when Blair was just as craven and duplicitous - indeed arguably worse.
The thing about Blair was that he’d pull of some outrageous lie or scam, then he’d go into his “gosh silly me” shtick and you’d somehow forgive him, on a human level, even as you despised him on a political level.
Brown entirely lacks that charm, indeed he has a rare kind of anti-charm, whereby you want to blame him for bad things other people do, not just the stuff he does. If Blair was Teflon Tony, then Brown is the velcro premier - everything sticks to him.
I think Brown’s stupid grinning during the Darling performance was when this realisation started to dawn. The man is a juvenile idiot, no matter how brainy.
New thread at 5.30 on tonight’s Question Time debate
236. Personally I agree with you. I cant imagine anyone looking at him or listening to him and having anything other than total contempt.
However, take a look up this thread and you will see that others feel the same about Cameron. It depends on your perspective. Cameron seems entirely decent to me and much more human than Brown. For others his class and education is clearly an issue.
This seems very old fashioned to many of us in the middle class but remains the default position for many of the Old Labour class warriors.
To the unconverted it seems clear that Cameron is much more accessible than the dour Scotsman and as with Blair, that actually may be what counts in the end. That is is a shame in a way but that what you get with a democracy.
236 Find it difficult to despise Brown because he must have different public & private personas. He attracts loyalty from those close to him, he has strong family relationships and friendships and seems to get on with a wide variety of public figures. He has successfully overcome partial blindness.
In public life though he is lacking in social graces, feuds, appears arrogant and self centred, seems dismissive of alternative points of view and in fact seems to dismiss those proposing other courses of action as his intellectual inferiors. Odd person.
I’ve disliked him since the first attempted coup where he and his coterie took advantage of Blair’s family difficulties - not nice IMHO and certainly revealing of Brown’s self absorption and lack of empathy.
236 seanT - I think a few here, not least yours truly, were surprised by how enthusiastic, positively gushing even, you were of Brown prior to his coronation and for some weeks thereafter - perhaps you were unduly influenced by Dacre, who seems strangely to have disappeared off the scene.
BTW are you now back in London? If so, perhaps we will hear more from you.
Yes, it certainly is a sickening grin - the sort you dread when some thug ambles up to you in a dark pub car park and you realise you’re about to get mugged.
242 Mike - hope you won’t be offended if some of us continue on this thread. Several hours of Clegg vs Huhne might prove a tad too much.
“Is Gord’s biggest flaw that he hates Tories?”
self-hatred is such a destructive trait. If there was one human fault that you would not want to pick. . . .