Could over-confidence be Dave’s undoing?
August 18th, 2008
Should he really be calling fellow leaders a “liar” and a “joke”?
With barely nineteen months to go before a general election has to be declared the Tory leader, David Cameron, has moved into dangerous territory, I believe, with some of the language he is using publicly to describe Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg.
As the Telegraph reports it this morning “In a series of conversations for a new book by Dylan Jones, the editor of GQ magazine, the Tory leader.. launches his strongest attacks to date on his political rivals - calling Gordon Brown a “liar” and Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, a “joke”.
On Brown Cameron refers to the statements that opinion polls played no role in his decision to call off an early General Election and says: “It was a lie and it was treating people like fools.”
On the Lib Dem leader it’s revealed that Cameron and his team habitually use the description “calamity Clegg” - the two words that appeared on a Chris Huhne press briefing document during last year’s leadership contest. But he goes further - “asked for his favourite “political joke,” Mr Cameron says: “Nick Clegg, at the moment.”
In both cases the extra elements in Cameron’s comments did not add anything but they could just come back to haunt him. When you are presenting yourself as the Prime Minister designate terms like “liar” and “joker” are ones you should try to avoid.
I’ve observed before here that I believe that the biggest danger for Cameron is over-confidence that could lead him to saying or doing something that could jar with the voters and undermine his position.
Of course having gone through awfulness of the Brown bounce a year ago and moving to a situation where he’s 20% ahead he must feel that he can do no wrong. But he needs to temper his language at all times - even with jokes told in private with his team.
The last thing he wants is for people to conclude that beneath that “nice” image that he has worked so hard on that there is a nasty Tory after all.
I’ve got a feeling that the Clegg comment in particular could re-bound. After all many of the voters he has picked up have been former Lib Dems and he should not do anything that could alienate them.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I’ve often had the same concern about Alex Salmond, who had a pretty high opinion of himself even before he became an election-winning juggernaut. Fortunately I doubt he’d ever use put-downs as unimaginative as these.
Possibly, but only if the public believes Brown isn’t a liar and/or Clegg isn’t a joke.
He’s on safe ground with the first, I feel. The second is the risky one.
It’s pretty clear that Brown did lie, so not to say so would be the poor decision.
If any future PM has to worry that they will lie similarly in power and so lay off a previous incumbent as a result then they aren’t very worthy of being PM.
It seems quite clear to me from the context of the remark that his referring to Clegg as a ‘joke’ was meant as just that…
Even if it weren’t intended in such a manner, who is to say that it won’t chime with popular opinion? Clegg isn’t exactly setting the country alight if the polls are any guide, is he?
“I’ve got a feeling that the Clegg comment in particular could re-bound. After all many of the voters he has picked up have been former Lib Dems and he should not do anything that could alienate them.”
Mike, the term Calamity Clegg came from Huhne, while the reference to Clegg being a political joke seems to have come from the period during which the Libdems reduced the Westminster Parliament and the voting on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to ridicule.
Not surprisingly, Clegg and his party will not have been on the top of either Cameron’s or the Conservative party’s Christmas card list then.
If these comments gain any real attention in the media so will some of the other details around that period, and that would in fact be more damaging for the Libdems in this instance, in particular Clegg. They would have to at least attribute the nickname to its original source. How many of us on here thought the abstention during that vote, and the planned strategy of a *spontaneous* walkout in protest during a HoC’s debate beyond parody?
And as for the comments about Brown and the election that never was, talk about stating the obvious, the journalists on the day of that press conference could not hide their derision at Brown’s excuses. Are they, and the public now going to fake outrage at Cameron’s honesty or lack of respect for Brown after watching the shannigans of Brown himself and his party?
I agree that Cameron would risk all that hard work over the last couple of years if he were to appear over confident. In fact, he appears very keen to avoid making that mistake. But I also think he is an extremely astute politician who realises that the public are fed up of the phoney spin and super sweet blandness of Labour’s heyday. The reality of the tough economics times and Brown’s weak premiership calls for a more bluntm honest and human response.
2. I disagree. Clegg is a joke or a least a non-entity, and Brown has surely lied. But Cameron’s language is still unacceptable and un-prime ministerial. It shows immaturity, possibly petulance.
As someone who is fed up with Labour and don’t think the Libdems stand for anything identifiable I might consider voting for Cameron. But this sort of stuff massively puts me off. i might abstain.
Necessary to read the article in full, I think, rather than Rosa Prince’s selective summary. The use of inverted comments around the word “liar” is a warning signal.
7. SawadeeKAP.
Yes, the article in full shows that Cammo hasn’t been quite as insulting as the summary suggests. He just says that Brown’s statement that the polls had “no effect on the decision to call off the non-election” was a “lie”. He doesn’t call Brown a “liar” as far as I can see.
Saying the notorious Brown remark was a lie is a simple statement of fact which everyone in the entire world, possibly including Brown the Liar himself, would acknowledge. I remember Snowflake, on this site, womanfully trying to claim it wasn’t a lie at the time, but in the end even she gave up, and she’s about as tenacious as they come. I miss her.
So it was a lie. Brown lied. We all know he lied. He knows we all know he lied. I’m sure he regrets the lie. But it was a lie nonetheless, and an important lie, it was the lie that showed he was a liar, the lie that began this lying government’s descent into more lies and chaos. Therefore to come and say No it wasn’t a lie would be a bit daft.
I think Cammo is on fairly safe ground here.
The Clegg thing is indeed a more flippant remark. Probably a throwaway gag that maybe seems slightly juvenile in retrospect. But then again Clegg IS a bit of a joke, and frankly, swathes of voters are not gonna be influecned by one mildly catty sentence in an obscure book by “Dylan Jones” the editor of “GQ”.
I predict the Tory lead will survive Politicaljokegate relatively unscathed. Indeed I’m willing to put 2680 baht on it. And that’s money I could spend quite happily elsewhere.
Shurely it’s a masterstroke by Cameron rather than a risk? When people realise that he has described Clegg as a “joke”, four million former Lib Dem voters will immediately instantaneously and automatically think to themselves “Oh, I hadn’t realised that Clegg was a joke, I had thought that he was a brilliant and charismatic leader with all the right sensible policies for taking the country forwards; but I now realise that Clegg is a joke and a lightweight and a fool with no proper sustainable policies and therefore I will vote Conservative.”
V-P Market
Washington Note: the decision has been made</b
Not : Daschle, Clark, Reed.
Maybe: Biden, Sibelius ; “circumstantial evidence points to Biden” ; “he’s in Georgia”
One well placed political expert just told me on the phone that we may all be wrong and that Obama could come out with something completely unexpected — a Hillary Clinton or even (and this shocked me) Al Gore or John Kerry.
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2008/08/latest_on_the_d/
H/T : 538.com
10. It could be Jimmy Carter. He’s only done one term so he’s still eligible.
Little as I may like the relentless antipathy and contempt that politicians display towards one another, reflected so well in the posts here, I suspect that voters have come to expect it.
Clegg talks publicly about the number of women he’s bedded. Is this a serious politician?
8. Not everyone in the entire world.
Doctor Palmer would assure you that Gordon doesn’t lie. Nick’s “not sure that anyone answering questions on the hoof is going to be able to avoid that kind of imprecision”
So the opposite of telling the truth is a kind of imprecision.
Would you like fries with your feet, Nick?
Ketchup?
[12] Quite. One reason I still read threads here (or some of them) is to act as an antidote to every seemingly sensible article written in the Guardian by a Shadow Cabinet member. If it weren’t for PB, I almost wouldn’t know that the Tories were the nasty party.
Party loyalists of all sides would do well to remember that this is an open Forum, and that floating voters may read it.
And now I’m off to do jury service…
Not so much over confidence as underlying sense of superiority from being an OE, or innate nastiness. Take your pick.
If Cameron’s undoubted arrogance doesn’t damage his campaign to be PM, it could a be a pretty dangerous trait for a PM. Blair & Thatcher walked the line between confidence and arrogance. When he strayed into the latter it never worked out well. Since Cameron lacks any sign of Blair’s humility ;-), we could be in trouble with Dave Just imagine if it get’s known what he thinks the French/US president.
1. rullko
And there is another difference too: Alex Salmond is already in office, but it could easily be portrayed that David Cameron is counting his chickens before they have hatched, and voters hate being taken for granted before they have actually cast their votes.
Also, Salmond’s opponents - Annabel Goldie and (almost certainly) Tavish Scott - are held in far higher regard than Cameron’s opponents - Gordon Brown and Nick Clegg. The danger will arise with whoever is elected to lead the dying remnants of the once almighty Scottish Labour Party. That that person is a serial liar and a hopeless joke is already guaranteed, given that Cathy Jamieson is not going to win the imminent leadership election.
I agree with Mr Smithson that overconfidence is David Cameron’s biggest risk. I disagree that he has overstepped the mark here - but he shouldn’t stray into this territory very often.
I particularly disagree that the “joke” remark about Nick Clegg will do much harm. Quite apart from the fact that in context it is obviously an off-the-cuff piece of flippancy, who is going to keep it in the public eye? It’s not as if the Lib Dems are going to advertise that anyone has been so beastly as to refer to Nick Clegg as a joke, and if they aren’t going to push the point, who is?
Politicians should reserve the word “lie” for special occasions, where an accusation of dishonesty is integral to the attack. This occasion did not justify its use, but in practice David Cameron will get away with it 1) because what Gordon Brown said was a lie and 2) because that’s just the way the political climate is right now.
8,14 — I don’t think Brown lied.
Rather, he was hoist by his own petard in a double whammy, as A-level English candidates are trained to say. Election fever was originally whipped up to wrongfoot the Conservatives.
Whammy one: it provoked the Tories into announcing a policy voters liked.
Whammy two: everyone (else) thinks Brown is a liar.
Meanwhile, Team Brown gets itself another article full of internecine feuding in the Times:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4553466.ece
The most interesting point in this article is the suggestion that a reshuffle might not happen after all. If this is correct, this would be a smart decision by Gordon Brown. I’m therefore assuming it’s wrong.
The country is heading for the rocks with government debt out of control, making interest rate cuts impossible, and a recession, unemployment and business closures inevitable. If Cameron offers a way out of the mess created by Gordon Brown, he will get voted into power.
There hasn’t been an economic downturn since 1992, and a whole generation is now learning what the trouble is with Labour governments. They wreck the economy.
Money talks louder than any words.
RIP John MacDougall
The Scotsman: ‘PM to lead MacDougall tributes’
“… both the SNP and Labour last night dismissed speculation of an early by-election. Sources from both parties said that it was unlikely that a by-election would be called until Parliament returned from its long summer break, in October.”
http://tinyurl.com/5n25g3
The Herald: “… most political pundits agree that, unlike the snap poll in Glasgow East, Mr Brown will opt for a late by-election - it has to be called between September 11 and December 4. October or November seem the likeliest months… The PM may hold it in early November… “
http://tinyurl.com/6536ek
The Times: “Gordon Brown is today holding talks with local Labour Party officials about the timing of the Glenrothes by-election… The informal discussions will be held after the funeral of John MacDougall, which Mr Brown will attend… It is thought that Mr Brown still supports a delay, in the hope that the Scottish Nationalists… will run into trouble.”
http://tinyurl.com/5zl92v
Excellent piece Mike. I know I’m a partisan Lib Dem, but anything that makes DC seem as arrogant as he probably feels he is allowed to be at present is just going to make more likely the mental connection to ‘Tory Boy’ joke of the 80s or his membership of the Bullingdon club.
‘Power companies welcome public sector bulk-buy’
“Ministers have issued a tender to supply electricity on a national basis to all public bodies, in an attempt to replace hundreds of individual contracts worth £200million a year.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4553632.ece
‘Q&A: Jim Mather’ - The minister for enterprise, energy and tourism comments on the Scottish Government’s plans to bulk-buy electricity for the whole public sector with a view to saving taxpayers’ money in a climate of soaring energy bills.
http://news.scotsman.com/opinion/QA-Jim-Mather.4399378.jp
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2427403.0.Salmond_aims_to_save_with_single_public_sector_power_contract.php
Sheffield Syndrome??
I see that the brotherly love and harmony is continuing today at John Smith House:
“The Scottish Labour leadership campaign erupted into a war of words yesterday - after the favourite was accused of helping botch last year’s Holyrood elections.
The insider said: “He must have advised then Scottish secretary Douglas Alexander about the election and things like the ballot paper but it ended up a total disaster. You’ve got to ask yourself whether someone so heavily involved in an almighty cock-up is the right person to lead Labour in Scotland.”
… the Labour source said: “Iain Gray is now trying to present himself as a fresh face and a fresh voice but he was up to his neck in it before last year’s election chaos.” … the source added: “He’s done nothing since going back to Holyrood. He was totally wrongfooted and made to look foolish when the SNP’s budget went through the parliament. Since then, he’s done nothing but bide his time waiting for his chance to become leader.”
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/scottish-news/2008/08/16/scottish-labour-leader-candidate-iain-gray-comes-under-fire-for-election-fiasco-86908-20699132/
Err, well… quite!
Oh Tapestry, Mr Great Economic Sage; would you care to explain why “government debt out of control, making interest rate cuts impossible”.
Glance around the world. There are many countries with far, far worse government deficits, yet with far lower interest rates. It is *inflation* not government debt that prevents an interest rate cut. (Not least because it is the BoE that sets interest rates.)
But actually, I forgot, you’re an economic illiterate. Silly me.
85, previous thread, atheism isn’t disbelief in God, it’s disbelief in any god.
It’s not the same as saying you’re aconservative or alabour, because an atheist believes in no god, whereas even an anti-Tory or anti-Labour chap can be pro-another party.
On thread: Cameron does need to guard against complacency and overconfidence.
However, the example you cite about lying plays against Brown rather than Cameron because nobody with an ounce of brains believes Brown was telling the truth over his electoral antics.
It was, however, beastly of Cameron to pick on Cleggover.
I think the premise of the question is right, but the answer is No. Especially in Brown’s case. just telling everyone inflation was only 2% when it clearly wasnt, and that most peoples experience of inflation has been double digit. The list of Brownies compliled by Coffee House was somewhat lengthy. Nick Clegg is a slightly different mattter and DC needs to bemore careful. Over confident, no chance. The Tory strategy has been to avoid this at all costs, though its difficult when you have such a loser as Brown.
26
No
“Labour leadership contender Iain Gray yesterday called for supermarkets to sell bread and milk at a “social tariff” to ease the plight of the hard-up.
Mr Gray said the idea of “social tariffs” for energy companies could be extended further.”
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2427406.0.Leadership_hopefuls_at_hustings.php
May I just say how lovely it is to see ‘Scotland’s Leading Quality (ha ha) Daily Newspaper’ publishing Labour Party press releases verbatim. The comrades would extend all due favours… if they had any left to extend.
Cameron isn’t IMO as pleasant as widely suggested, but I’m not sure that in itself will harm him as people like to see a rough edge in their potential PMs. On the other hand, it reinforces an impression that some people are already dubious about, an Etonian assumption of personal superiority. He may be at risk of confusing disgruntlement with Labour with general admiration for himself. Most people quite like him but haven’t really made up their minds. His conference speech this year, which is supposedly going to be policy-heavy, may crystallise views one way or another.
To reply to Matthew at the end of the last thread (though it’s hard to beat JohnLoony’s hilarious answer) - I think councillors generlaly get a default email address from their councils, but like MPs they vary in their enthusiasm for IT, so the fact that they’ve got an email address doesn’t mean they actually use it. If they advertise it in leaflets as a contact point then of course they’ve only themselves to blame, but otherwise I’d advise writing a letter.
BTW, had a Q&A session a couple of days ago with Justine Greening whom some of you have mentioned recently (with a couple of hundred members of the British Youth Council) - nice lively event and she did fine. Not an especially partisan occasion - mostly things like ‘how do we get more young people interested?’
Mike, I have just seen what DC ACTUALLY said on Conservative Home.
I quote
Ms Prince also notes Mr Cameron’s low opinion of Nick Clegg:
“Asked for his favourite “political joke,” Mr Cameron says: “Nick Clegg, at the moment.”
Its not quite the same as directly calling him a joke, its a joke in itself isnt it…..?????
I guess it depends which way you spin it???
Panzer Leader Cameron has at least lost the Oxford Street vote.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1046233/Cameron-Punish-Russians-attack-Georgia-banning-shops.html
Ah! Ivan we must pull out of Georgia immediately or Olga won’t be able to shop in Marks and Spencers.
32 No it doesnt Nick, try and be sensible, lets not go down the Old Etonian tory toff route. It got Labour crucified in C&N and in Henley. Doesnt Labour ever learn from its mistakes????.
Another response for Matthew at the end of the last thread:
have a look on the council web-site and find the email of the group leader, asking whether there is a group policy for emails not to be answered? Peer pressure might produce results.
26?
14. “Doctor Palmer would assure you that Gordon doesn’t lie. Nick’s “not sure that anyone answering questions on the hoof is going to be able to avoid that kind of imprecision””
Did Palmer really say that about the Brown non-election Whopper? Really? Oh my giddy aunt, as my giddy old Cornish aunt used to say.
Lol. I think Mr Palmer’s revelation about Brown might make a good headline:
Lying Labour Liar Tells Lie about Lying Labour Leader’s Lie.
It’s not exactly news, but it alliterates nicely.
28. Our collapsing exchange rate may boost inflationary pressures and prevent the BoE cutting interest rates despite the weakening economy. The proportion of government debt owned by overseas investors has skyrocketed. We have been heavily dependent on inward capital flows to keep Sterling strong and with zero real interest rates, an economy moving into recession and Sterling showing signs of weakening, overseas investors may start to pull their investments out of the UK causing a Sterling crisis. After all Every post war Labour government has precipated a Sterling crisis and we shouldn’t be surprised that this one will. The question then becomes how on earth are we going to service our huge trade deficit. It will require a substanial reduction in UK consumption and the transfer of labour from jobs satisfying domestic consumption and those unproductive jobs created to lower unemployment in the public sector into businesses that generate export earnings.
37. Punter, I really do wonder about you sometimes. You seem to have a negligible knowledge of basic UK politics topics. Again and again you have to ask about really elementary comments made by other posters. Fair enough, occasionally all of us are a bit deficient in our mental knowledge database, but you seem to need to ask day-in day-out. How old are you?
38: If you rely on mirthios as a source for me, sean, you’re building on sand. He’s quoting me on a different subject altogether.
MTF, it’s not a matter of being a toff - the vagaries of the English class system probably put me in the same category as DC. But Eton does, as any toff will tell you, instill in its pupils a belief in superiority. It’s generally useful in life but has its pitfalls.
Yvette Cooper gets a good reception to her article on Tory economic policy. The comments say it all really
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/aug/18/davidcameron.conservatives
The Conservatives are drinking in the last chance saloon with Cameron. If he doesn’t win, and he doesn’t justify the support he will break the party coalition once and for all.
Cameron as Heath? Now that’ll be hilarious poetic justice!
Or, on closer inspection, if he wants to be as radical on social policy as Thatcher was for economic policy, I wonder what his version of the Poll Tax and Black Wednesday will be?
O/T - Musharraf to resign. Hmm.
41 Nick, Are you a toff then… but in self denial?
NYT : Russia moving missiles into Georgia…
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/18/world/europe/18georgia.html?_r=1&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss&oref=slogin
@42:
Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty!
The Russian military deployed several SS-21 missile launchers and supply vehicles to South Ossetia on Friday, according to American officials familiar with intelligence reports. From the new launching positions north of Tskhinvali, the South Ossetian capital, the missiles can reach much of Georgia, including Tbilisi, the capital.
What a revealing thread.
42, we’re in the antithesis of Brown’s first three months now. The idea of attacking the Conservatives on the ecnomy as inflation keeps rising and many are predicting a recession is a somewhat novel approach.
41. “He’s quoting me on a different subject altogether.”
Your answer to the accusation that Gordon Brown lied to the House of Commons on the subject of the 10p-tax “refund” being paid to every basic rate taxpayer was:
“OK, your point is that as you’re over 65 you didn’t get the reduction in personal allowances after the Budget, because you’d already had it in the Budget. I’m not sure that anyone answering questions on the hoof is going to be able to avoid that kind of imprecision, but your point is, for what it’s worth, correct”
It’s the same subject - Brown’s integrity. Just a different lie.
O/T, but Guido is officially on holiday.
Yesterday Gordon Brown congratulated Team GB and, lo-and-behold, the Aussies have overtaken us in the medal table! Few - apart from the obvious apologist - would see this as a triumph…!
It does seem that ‘Cameron is horrid’ is the next great idea (or rehash of one used before) to attack him. I’m not sure how reminding everyone that Brown did lie and Clegg isn’t that good helps though.
Erm, isn’t Cameron just stating the bleedin’ obvious?
53 - Sometimes stating the bleedin’ obvious is not politically wise:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/7567239.stm
@53:
I think Mike should have one of his periodic polls of the membership. To see if we can get the “Clegg not a joke” and “Gordon not a liar” options into double figures.
Small problem with the headline, Mike. The word you were looking for was arrogance, not over-confidence.
“calling Gordon Brown a “liar” and Nick Clegg, the Liberal Democrat leader, a “joke”.”
Well done Cameron. A politician speaking bluntly and honestly for once. This will go down well with most voters IMO.
@56:
I think the word you’re looking for is ‘honesty’, Mr Soldier. A quality clearly not valued much by you?
51 The government, and Andy Burnham in particular, claiming credit for winning medals is going to backfire on them badly if they persist with this line.
58 I will leave you to judge. But “honestly” you have to admit that Camero´s achilles´heel is that he comes over as arrogant.
Slated in the mail today, btw
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1046212/Camerons-dangerous-posturing.html
Does not Cameron’s arrogance towards the other party leaders fit in all too well with the misdeeds of disgraced Conservative candidate Ian Oakley? It seems to me to be just a matter of degree.
55.
Is Clegg a joke:
a.Yes X
b.No
Is Brown a liar:
a.Yes X
B.No
There, that wasnt too difficult was it.
The two best points have already been made. cameron needs to avoid Sheffield syndrome and any resurecion of the Tory boy motif. I’m sure an incautious interview like this will blow over quickly. Its only if it becomes part of a narritive that its a problem.
Mike is spot on to ask the question though.
61: Go visit mountainoutofmolehill.com
@60:
I’m amused to see that Dacre’s still holding the official Brown line. How long until he realises he’s never getting that knighthood and Brown’s treating him like a useful idiot?
Cameron is entitled to be confident in private - and these are private mutterings that have been selected for public consumption (obviously with the risk factor taken into account). If you look at Cameron’s interviews after the recent by-election and local election triumphs he goes out of his way to say that the Conservatives are not counting their chickens and that there is a whole lot of work to do in order to win over the British public.
42. Who thought it would be a good idea for Yvette “hard sums” Cooper to go on the offensive against the Conservatives on the economy just as Uk PLC goes down the plughole after 11 yrs of Labour priming the keg of debt ? Those media goons in no10 are definitely overpaid.
65: It’s an odd line for Brown to promote as all it does is remind everyone that Brown did lie.
It’s interesting to see a degree of Tory double standards over a flippant remark in a men’s magazine by a political leader. Hopefully they’ll display the same understanding when discussing Nick Clegg’s bedroom history.
But somehow I doubt it.
I would have thought calling Clegg a “hypocrite” had more resonance - especially on Lisbon.
60, the Mail has had a split personality for some time now regarding Labour and the Conservatives.
I read a little of McKay’s hilarious (unintentionally) column criticisng Cameron for visiting Georgia. Apparently we can’t do anything and are meant to be America’s lapdogs… so the line seems to be Cameron is standing up for the UK’s interests too much.
I agree with the general view that Cameron needs to be very careful about arrogance or over-confidence. It is a indeed a point he himself makes very often, but it is easy to understand that he might occasionally find it hard to resist the occasional joke along the lines reported. He does need to be careful.
On Mike’s specific point: “I’ve got a feeling that the Clegg comment in particular could re-bound. After all many of the voters he has picked up have been former Lib Dems and he should not do anything that could alienate them.”
Is this really right? As a LibDem himself and a party man, I can understand Mike personally feeling that way, but surely the former LibDem voters whom Cameron is trying to attract are floating voters who have no special tribal loyalty to the LibDems as a party. Are they really going to be put off by jokes about Clegg? Inasmuch as they have any opinion about Clegg, they probably agree with Cameron.
On the Brown point, I think he is on safe ground.
The economic news is unremmitingly grim. The world faces a serious geopolitical crisis over Georgia. At home, evidence of appalling incompetence in the management of the education system comes to light.
And what does the British left obsess about? Someone’s school background. And Labour and their Lib Dem friends wonder why they are seen as a ‘joke’.
So much for no more punch and Judy from Chameleon Cameron. It’s perfectly the case that Cameron represents nothing more but PR and spin, which sadly seems to be winning the case over principle and policy. He looks nothing more than a arrogant and nasty, which may not be a good idea if you want a lib dem vote. I think when you resort to such measures it is apparent you haven’t got anything of substance to say. Nick Clegg got it wrong over Lisbon and his inexperience showed, but at least he is a man of some substance. However, as a lib dem I am beginning to think Huhne would have been better. I used to be a member of the tory party, but am pleased I am no longer not and a member of the liberals. I am sick of this ‘broken society’ nonsense - all we get is hyperbole from the tories. This country overall is pretty decent, but that is not to say it is without problems. Radical social reformer my arse. The only thing we have had is giving tax breaks for married couples, which in my view could be challenged, but also it hardly helps the people of our so called ‘broken society’. I can’t believe the public are swallowing this drivel.
Iain Dale has another “joke” thread up..
http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2008/08/failures-of-ed-davey.html
@72:
There’s also the fact that Clegg, by being largely devoid of personality or talent, has been unable to frame himself properly in the political debate. Cameron gets first mover advantage on this one, by framing Clegg as a not especially funny joke, Clegg now has to move against the framing and offer a new alternative before it sticks.
The thing is, Ming was a funnier joke than Clegg anyway. So the Yellow Peril should be happy they’ve taken a step up.
So here’s a pb.com competion, if Cameron calls Brown is a “liar” and Clegg a “joke” what is he?
Sun business editor Ian King described Mr Cameron as a “poisonous, slippery individual”. Armando Iannucci said his nickname at Calton was “Satan”.
Can we do better?
An Eton Mess? << bound to be a headline if the Tories were ever to get in
The real issue about the ‘Liar’ comment is that it resonates with voters. Brown has lied, or deliberately mislead the public, on so many occaisions how are Labour going to get their message across come election time? Will the public believe a word this man says when are so many examples of his duplicity?
Every manifesto promise made by Labour in 2010 will be viewed by the public with caution given Lisbon, 10p tax, troops withdrawals, Party funding etc etc
@77
Can we do better?
It seems not.
72: Richard, the last person I heard calling Clegg a ‘joke’ was a Lib Dem councillor. Perhaps Cameron’s remarks annoy the Lib Dems more because he’s saying what many are thinking.
Camouflage is a good’un.
#81
Classic one-hit-wonder of the ‘Eighties. As Cammers has the next three General Elections all but sown up, please try again…!
Apparently everyone else in politics is rubbish. Here is Cameron being “humble”"William Hague has really helped me, because he made all the mistakes the first time round.”
I just did a quick trawl of the newspaper websites. The Independent doesn’t seem to mention this book at all. The Guardian doesn’t mention either jibe in its account of the book. The Times buries both (without comment) in the text of its report. Only the Telegraph leads its article with these stories. The BBC mentions the jibes, but again buries them deep in the story without comment.
This particular set of outbursts is not going to resonate either negatively or positively with many voters.
I think he has more to worry about in his stated aim to be more radical than Thatcher and more brilliant than Disraeli. Now that really does sound hubristic.
@83:
Not everybody else, no. But on the party leaders, you have to admit he has a point.
Unless, of course, you don’t think Brown a liar and Clegg a joke. But that seems scarcely plausible.
43
The Taliban will win…
@84:
Did Dave actually say that? Brilliant.
The thing that has made me most suspicious of Dave has been an absence of radicalism. It’ll be nice to see if he really does have post-Thatcherite fire in his belly.
SkyNews:
Miliband to visit Tbilisi mid-week. The spawn of Samuel Miliband to impose surrender to the New Soviet Empire?
87 # Love is in the air #
@88:
Ralph
28. The Greatest Economic Sage is to be read HERE.
It’s not me by the way!
77 - Well, let’s not forget that Labour screened an official party political broadcast on ‘Dave the Chameleon’. That didn’t go down too well, did it? Indeed, he turned it round very deftly: “It’s my daughter’s favourite video”.
Cameron’s in safe territory regarding Brown because the idea of him being deceitful resonates with the public opinion of the PM. As for Clegg, he’s virtually a public non-entity so what Cameron says about him probably doesn’t matter either way.
87 - The second bit is a misquote in the Guardian, further misquoted by me. The first part is over-egged by me as well (I was getting carried away this morning):
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/aug/18/davidcameron.conservatives
88. Well it’s been intriguing to see the way former communist fellow travellers have been unable to hide their glee at the resurrection of the Soviet Empire in recent days.
Oh and I meant to say - of course Mike is right. Arrogance and hubris is a killer for oppositions - and there’s plenty of other evidence that Cameron is amply supplied with both.
His jobs is to be ‘umble Dave’ until the Friday after the election, but its very easy for the mask to slip.
@96:
I disagree. As the presumed next PM, the people expect Dave to start acting like it. He’s simply responding to that requirement.
96. The level of wishful thinking about this non-issue is quite remarkable.
97 Is there a “not” missing from your third sentence?
41. OK, then fair enough, but just to get this clear, Mister Palmer, I’d like to know what you do think. Because you sometimes do seem to be…. how shall I put this… in a fairly distant orbit around the truth…. and maybe influenced by the stronger gravitational field of your own career prospects.
So let’s nail it down once and for all.
When Gordon Brown said: “the polls had no influence on my decision to call off the election” was our beloved prime minister lying or not?
A simple Yes or No answer is all we need.
99. Would you like him to start an illegal war or cancel a general election ? He might start to look like a PM then..
@99:
You think people expect their PM to be quiet and humble?
100:
Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty!
99. That childish response just about sums up the response of the Left to this..its a sign of the times that the most tiny of non-stories gets them all out here with self-righteous indignation.
As many have pointed out before me…Mike’s general proposition that over-confidence could damage Cameron is right of course.
However as all but the very silliest and desperately delusional posters have pointed out, the comments by Cameron reprsent the truth re Brown and a tongue in cheek remark about Clegg.
No resonance, no impact with floaters, no story. Thats August for you!
100 I suspect the boring reality of this is that GB was actually telling the truth on this. I suspect he’d already made up his mind not to do it before the polls came out. He was clearly never that keen, despite his ramping lieutenants. Either way it makes no difference to the impression he gave, which is what matters.
Both the current UK and US administrations have been predicated on lies, particularly in the area of foreign policy. Any opposition politician *not* calling them a liar is therefore not doing their job as regards the electorate.
It is sad, however, that people excuse lies when politically expedient and ‘forgive’ them when voting. It isn’t forgiveness it’s self interest.
Anyone who suggests not being as forthright is a little suspect in my opinion, are they holding back because they intend to do exactly the same in power? I would therefore tend to trust any politician who calls their opponent a liar as they have raised the expectations on their own truthfulness when in power. They may not reach their own standards but at least they can be measured by them.
“Does not Cameron’s arrogance towards the other party leaders fit in all too well with the misdeeds of disgraced Conservative candidate Ian Oakley?”
No, not really.
105. Oh what a load of BOLLOCKS. If the polls had said to Brown: You are going to win this election by 780 seats, you’re telling me he would have STILLL called off the election? Because the polls “had no influence on him”?
Stop F*CKING lying. Jesus. How hard is it? You’re still lying. You’re lying to cover up the pathetic lies of your lying disaster of a leader.
Just stop it. Now.
@106:
Nonsense. We expect politicians to lie all the time. The reason being the two laws of media narrative:
1) Honesty will not be tolerated
2) No good deed ever goes unpunished
105: So not a liar just totally useless eh?
Returning to a question I posed on PB.com over the weekend (174 on “What are the politics of GB’s Olympic successes?”), I am still curious as to who is buying Labour on the spread-bet market at 238 seats (current SportingIndex quote). Current opinion polls correspond to something like 170-180 Labour seats, so punters who are buying at 238 have a substantial hill to climb before they are in profitable territory, and conversely are taking a big risk if nothing much changes.
Now, I can see why one might be cautious about the Tory lead remaining as high as it is, but for every argument in that direction, there are arguments in the opposite direction. I can think of three main reasons why you might buy Labour:
1) Labour might change leader and get a bounce from someone new.
Yes, but for the reasons we’ve explored many times before, first Brown has to go (maybe 50% chance?), then the ensuing campaign may well be messy, and they might choose someone worse (eg Harman), and even if they choose someone apparently better (Miliband?) it may not work out that way. Highly risky to rely on that, I would say
2) Things should improve for Labour because this is just, in part at least, standard mid-term unpopularity.
Yes, but on the other hand the economy is likely to get worse, so it’s equally possible that Labour will be even more unpopular by the time of the GE.
3) The electorate is giving the Conservatives the benefit of the doubt at the moment, but when Conservative policies (or the alleged lack of them) are examined more closely, people will return to Labour.
As a Conservative, I would say ‘Dream on’, but, trying to be as objective as possible, is there any real sign of this? Are there any Conservative policies which are likely to be unpopular? Or Labour policies likely to be popular enough to sway things in the other direction?
It seems an enormous leap of faith to buy Labour (or sell Conservatives) at the current prices. Am I wrong?
@111:
I think you’re right. My personal feeling is that Labour still have some way to go till they reach their bottom.
I think Labour’s absolute, total, nothing-could-possibly-make-them-do-worse bottom is around 17-18%. They still have plenty of drift left in them yet.
108 Calm down dear. Just saying I doubt Brown really ever made up his mind to go for it in the first place. His default position was “off” unless convinced otherwise.
110 Nearer to the truth than “liar” I reckon. Total and utter cock-up and I’m afraid Brown has to carry the can on this one.
111 Hi Richard - I saw that previous post but didn’t have time to reply.
In short, the big value bet is selling Labour. Buying Tories is also good but not quite so good because the spread markets are underestimating the number of ‘Others’, including LDs, likely to win seats next time round.
Selling Labour is a very low risk bet at the moment. It was instructive that at the PB Bbq, it was very difficult to find anybody willing to place a floor on the likely Labour seat number. 200 was tentatively suggested and things have worsened since. Personally I would have thought 150, though extreme, is not inconceivable. Otoh, it’s very hard to imagine them winning more than 250, so the worst case scenario in selling at current prices is about 20. That’s a very low risk compared with the possibility of an 80 point gain.
Fill your boots, mate.
Tapestry, John Redwood is a very intelligent guy. Not a great economist, but still.
You suffer from cognitive dissonance. You look for evidence that backs up your point of view, and then ignore that which contradicts it.
No doubt when the Dollar was rising against the Euro, you took that as a ’sign’ that the Euro was doomed. Later, when the relative strength of the currencies was reversed, you took it as a ’sign’ that the Euro was a disaster, as it - obviously - wasn’t very good for Euro-exporters.
In the past 11 years, sterling has moved from a cross rate of about 1.50 to around 1.96. Does this mean that Brown and Blair were brilliant? No. Is it evidence of very much at all? No.
Around the world there are many countries with even worse structural problems than the UK (like Japan, a much larger dependence on imported energy, a declining population, and debt as a percentage of GDP way, way, way above the UK). Despite these issues (and an economy that has barely registered signs of life in the last two decades) it’s currency has barely moved against the dollar in the last decade.
You cannot simply take one-off economic indicators and use them to prove points. Not unless you want to come across as economically illiterate.
Here’s the question: if the Chancellor was in charge of setting interest rates, could he reduce them?
And the answer is yes. (Not least because effective government interest rates are set by auction rather than by official dictat.) Would it be in the long-term interests of the country to lower rates? Probably not. (Inflation has been barely tamed, and there are excesses that need to be painfully worked out.) But your pseudo-analysis based on selective picking of economic indicators that - you think - back up your vehemently anti-Brown/anti-EU views is ridiculous.
(BTW, your beloved Philippines has govt debt of approx 55% of GDP, against 43% in the UK. But I’m selectively picking data here…)
112 Martin
You are not thinking like a punter. It isn’t the percentage that’s so important as the overall scenario. They will be under seige on all sides, rather like the Topries in 1997. They are likely to suffer from tactical voting. There will simply be no safe havens.
They could record a reasonable percentage and still get hammered.
110. No. Brown is a LIAR. Nasty Labour-felchers mustn’t be allowed to rewrite history by claiming Brown was just a dithering incompetent twit, who never really wanted an election - and therefore told the truth when he called it off.
This is bollocks. Brown is indeed a dithering incompetent twit, but he is ALSO a great big liar.
Cast your mind back to the days preceding the non-election. The party was being organised for an election. Poster-sites were being booked. Holidays were being cancelled. Brown had told everyone to prepare, just in case - he told them he was certainly minded to do it, if things looked good. And the polls looked good. Palmer on here was egging him on - “come on Brown, let’s be having that election”.
Then the Tories pulled a fast one at the conference. IHT undermined Brown’s confidence. Cammo did well in his speeech. Then came a series of increasingly wobbly polls - culminating in one which showed Labour could actually lose, especially in the marginals.
By amazing coincidence, Brown called off the election about a day later. But then he said that the reason he’d called it off was because…. he had decided he wanted more time to show his “vision for Britain”, and that the turnaround in the polls “had no influence whatsoever” in his decision to suddenly and expensively scupper those advanced election plans.
What Brown said wasn’t just a lie. It was a the lie of lies. The mother of lies. It was a big lard-assed slapper of a lie sitting in the Starbucks of Blatant Dissembling eating a huge great full-fat Muffin of Mendacity.
Brown lied. Anyone who says he didn’t lie is a liar.
114 Has anyone bothered to do a specific seat by seat analysis yet? While the polling situation is dire/abysmal for Labour gaining 100+ is still a big ask. Local factors/popularity might save a few and boost the numbers.
Mike perhaps we could do a series of posts on key/interesting battle seats, looking into candidates, issues etc.
117 So SeanT reading between the lines, you are of the opinion that Brown lied. Is this true?
@116:
I still haven’t sunk my feet in the commons seats market, mainly because working behind the firewall of an investment bank makes it hard for me to rapidly respond to market conditions should I require.
So, you’re right, alas. But I defer to your judgment above, as it sounds eminently sensible.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Labour collapse to 150.
116 - I agree with you, and am taking your advice.
In fact, the only point on which I disagree with you is your analogy to 1997. It is potentially worse than that for Labour. What should terrify Labour supporters is what is happening in Scotland and Wales. Even where the Tories aren’t profiting, Labour are staring down both barrels.
Back on thread, Cameron can call him a liar, because he lied. The electorate will put up with a lot, but it will not have the pi*s taken. Cameron does well to remind the electorate of the contempt the PM showed for it.
He’s on dodgier ground with Clegg. The LD Leader may well be a joke, but it doesn’t look good to mock the afflicted.
I note with some amusement that nobody here seems prepared to challenge that veracity of Dave’s claims, merely the manner of their making.
Oh, apart from the couple of “not a liar, just incompetent” posts above.
I see that Brown may pospone the Local Elections due for May 2009, in order to escape further humiliation.
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2008/08/gordon-postpone.html
This will make Cameron very ANGRY, and call Gordon a Deceiver.
@124:
Surely it’s uncontentious to make them coterminous with the Euros in June?
I don’t think anybody was expecting anything else.
118 Jonathan
There have been numerous posts and the occasional threads dedicated to this. They all make dire reading for Labour backers.
Those with good personal reputations may survive the deluge. For example, I may yet vote for Harry Cohen in my constituency. He’s a good backbench MP and opposed the Iraq war. I fear for fellow PBer NickP though. He has a lot of local goodwill but I suspect the seat is too marginal.
122 - I would agree with your thoughts on Brown. On Clegg I think for all those who dislike the ‘joke’ dismissal of Clegg there will be others who will see it as playing into Cameron’s everyman image. On balance I think it is neutral really. I think frankly 70% of the population have never heard of Clegg.
119. I was worried I was being too subtle. I’m glad I got my point across.
Where I would agree with you is in Brown being an Inept and Dithering Twonk. The weird thing about the Famous Big Fat Lie is that Gordo didn’t have to do it. There are so many ways he could have elegantly extricated himself from the situation, without lying so sadly, embarrassingly - and blatantly.
He could have said something more statesmanlike (and truthful) such as this: “Yes, the polls did have an effect, they showed that the Tories have had an impact with their tax plans. As I am not in the business of leading Labour to defeat, against such a devious opposition, who will do such damage to Britain, I have decided to call off the election. Because a Labour defeat would be bad for Britain. However we need time to show the British people that the Tories tax plans are absurd, and their promises ephemeral. In these coming months I believe the British people will see what I mean and the polls will reverse. Then we will go to the voters.” etc etc
Or he could have been flippant, a la Blair. “Hey guys, who wants to lose? Yes the polls had an influence, but so did many other things…”
etc etc
He had so many alternatives. But he went for the very worst. The big bad obvious laughable lie, which has haunted him ever since.
He’s an idiot. And he was meant to be a strategic genius. Oh dear.
123 It wasn’t merely deceitful, Martin, it was incompetent. He allowed himself to be surrounded by a bunch of indifferent yes-men, allowed them to run away with a misguided strategy and failed to rein them in until it was all too late. His bold acceptance of responsibility might have rescued him if he hadn’t told that stupid lie about the opinion polls, with which his decision allegedly had nothing to do.
Did he really expect people to believe that?
114 - Thanks Peter. I agree that selling Labour looks the safest way to play this. (I am a novice at this betting lark, but hopefully learning fast!)
125. What on earth is coterminous Martin? Is it something like Musharraf resigning and the Ruskies not withdrawing on the same day?
But Brown is a proven liar, demonstrably documented more than once.
@131:
coterminous (adj.): having the same extent
‘He allowed himself to be surrounded by a bunch of indifferent yes-men’
Isn’t that perhaps the defining feature of bad leaders throughout the ages?
Frankly if Cameron wants to underestimate Clegg by thinking of him as a joke, that’s fine by me, and i suspect Clegg won’t be too bothered either. Underestimating the Lib Dems has, historically, not been a hugely wise thing to do, but we’ll see what happens.
I think these comments Do show the nasty, arrogant side of Cameron that some of us have always suspected to be lurking beneath the surface. The question is how he behaves in a General Election campaign. The British love an underdog because i think they dislike presumption and foregone conclusions; should Brown get swing back in support, and there are precedents for this - 1992 - then Cameron would’ve alienated Clegg. He should stop acting like a Prime Minister in waiting and just leave Labour to implode.
121 Antifrank
Yes I agree that it is not wholly analagous with 1997. One important difference is that Party Politics are not as polarised as then and Party loyalties not as strong. The ‘centreist’ tendency in recent years makes the situation more dangerous for Labour. People like me who normally default Left see little to dislike in Cameron and are really not that fazed by the prospect of a change of Government.
This takes us into uncharted waters. That’s why I would be very tentative about suggesting just how low the Labour seat count could go.
132 Morning Chris A.
I’ve been wanting to ask just how proud you feel about the performances of the rowers at the Olympics. They’ve been brilliant, no?
Looked it up in the Dictionary; sez it’s within the same bounderies. I’m learning all the time on this blog. Think I’ll do thesis on the educational effects of political blogging.
135. There is also the possibility - remote, I admit - that the SNP could shortly screw up. Salmond is a very gifted politician, no doubt about it - I think he’d have made a fine British prime minister (and I think the SNP would be almost nowhere without him).
But even genius kids like him can make mistakes. Right now the SNP are still in honeymoon mode, and they have the added advanntage of being able to blame any nastiness on Labour and London and Westminster etc etc.
But how long will this honeymoon last? All the way to 2010? Quite possibly, in which case Labour are looking at potentially ruinous losses in Scotland (along with carnage in England).
Yet the SNP could come a cropper. They are bound to fall out of favour in the end, and then I think Labour will come roaring back, north of the Border. Labour are too deeply rooted to disappear from Scottish politics, in a way they might disappear from southern and middle England.
If this Labour Scottish comeback happens before 2010 then thei left’s overall defeat will be considerably less disastrous. But that’s a big IF.
118 I’ll give you a rough guide.
Labour hold Portsmouth North (notionally Conservative on the new boundaries). Against all the odds, Labour have won a fourth term with a comfortable overall majority.
Conservatives gain Bristol NW. Labour lose their overall majority, but remain comfortably the largest party. Given current polls, this would be regarded as a triumph for Labour, and a huge blow for the Conservatives.
Conservatives gain Blackpool North and Cleveleys. Conservatives probably become the largest party, but are well short of a majority. This would probably be regarded as a big disappointment for the Conservatives, and Labour would be quite relieved, and probably in a position to give a minority Conservative government a hard time.
Conservatives gain Ipswich. In all likelihood, the Conservatives have won a bare overall majority, and Labour are probably down to 230-240 seats. Labour are down, but not out.
Conservatives gain Luton North. The Conservatives have a healthy overall majority of c.70, Labour are only doing a little better (in seat terms) than in 1983, and will be demoralised. In all likelihood, the Conservatives are in for two terms.
Conservatives gain Stretford & Urmston. Conservatives are heading for a 1983-type majority. Labour are heading for 180-190 seats.
Conservatives gain Sunderland Central. Conservative majority approaching 200. Labour at c.150 seats.
@138:
Blair’s honeymoon lasted pretty much all the way till Iraq (six years), and Salmond’s a far more gifted politician than Blair ever was.
Clegg is a joke, Brown is a liar. So I think Cameron will get away with it.
124) They did this in Scotland last year and combined the Local and Scottish elections. This was a disaster with spoilt ballots and confusion on the voting papers etc etc. Danny Alexander was roundly condemned for this so should be interesting to see if they try this one again after the problems reported in the Gould Report. (http://www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk/wiki/index.php/Gould_Report_on_the_Scottish_elections)
Link here
James (127). A lot of people may not have heard of Nick Clegg. At least as many don;t have the foggiest idea what the Tory party and Cameron stand for any more.
How dare the UK team win all these Gold Medals. I demand we go back to Atlanta!
@142:
The evidence of May 1st is that the people of Britain are not innately problematised by multiple ballot papers using different voting systems as long as (1) the ballot papers are distinct and easily identifiable and (2) clear instructions on how to cast one’s vote are printed on each ballot paper.
[111] - I think one reason is that Labour had 356 seats after the 2005 general election, so they could still have a disastrous [2010?] election, losing 100 seats, and end up with 256, a profit of 18 seats on the buy level of 238.
I suspect that it is that sort of thinking that is holding the price up, despite the polls pointing to a loss of nearer 200 seats being more likely.
Brown lied, Labour died.
[118] - I had thought that Smithson was gathering volunteers to do precisely this, as a replacement for Sean Fear’s Friday slot. I believe Eastercross started this off with a look at some Scottish seats, which made for dire reading for the Scottish Lib Dems.
145, problematised? Ugh.
OT: I do hope the ‘come on, Tim’ line gets firmly stuck to the Milipede.
re 23 the Herald story is nonsnse, there is no set date when a by election “has to be called”
145 Report States.
The report considered arguments for and against combining elections. It concluded that despite the cost saving benefits and increased voter turnout of a single election process, it is more important that voters engage with the campaign in a meaningful manner. “Combined elections are not only a disservice to the local councils and candidates but also to the electorate as well”.
It proposes either:
* The preferred option of separating parliamentary elections from local elections by a period of two years, or
* Maintaining combined elections, but ensuring that the casting of votes is markedly differentiated for each ballot.
When voting on 2 such separate items as Councils and Europe seems a good idea they are not on the same day
@149:
It’s a perfectly cromulent word.
@151:
But in this case, the only other option is to have the two elections a month apart.
Nobody votes in European elections anyway. Having them just a month after the county councils will just make the Euro turnout *even lower*.
152- It’s a word that really embigins you.
142 - “Danny Alexander was roundly condemned for this”
Much as I think the Lib Dems deserve to be called to account more often, I’m not sure the Lib Dem Westminster MP for Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey is really a prime force behind this farrago!
153 Any stirring in the corpse that is UKIP? The Euros is (ironically) their showcase. It is posisble if UKIP collapse that the Euros might just show some Labour gains.
100 - SeanT, where does your purported GB quote “the polls had no influence on my decision to call off the election” come from? I’ve googled it, and there are no hits. That’s strange for something that’s presented as a direct quote.
I agree with Mikes comment.
The true Cameron character is a typical arrogant,bullying public school boy and worse still a silver spooned Etonian.So far his “niceness” has disguised this-but occasionally the truth outs.
@156:
Doesn’t seem to be, if they don’t resurrect soon, I expect us to pick up the lion’s share of the UKIP vote, with a significant minority going to the BNP since they’ll have probably the simplest and clearest message on the EU.
@157:
Oh god yes. We can’t have ‘truth’ in politics, now can we?
157 Typical? Not all ex-public schoolboys are like Flashman.
158. That’s certainly what happened in the London elections. The Conservatives got the lion’s share of UKIP’s 2004 vote, but enough went to the BNP to get them over the threshold.
“arrogant,bullying”
No, you must be thinking of NuLab.
Well you all know my opinion of Nick Clegg and the LD’s! So we won’t go there! Just to say Cameron and i are on the same page on this one!
Brown is not only a compulsive liar but a cheat as well: whether Cameron could / should say this i do not know.
I am always sceptical about books and articles like this. It’s a trade off between publicity and leaving yourself open to uncomfortable quotes. Mind you politically I don’t think it harms Cameron to ridicule Clegg; indeed it helps differentiate the real deal from Clegg the cheap and naff imitation. I actually think people will be amused by the joke remark: I know i am!
The Clegg joke quote will change no votes, LD’s need to become less sensitive. Clegg has said allsorts of things about Cameron - the reason why Mike and Co take umbridge on this one is because it hurts: the truth is never easy to swallow!
Olympic - I see Brown celebrating the UK being in 3rd place has had the usual result: When i looked on the TV a moment ago the UK is now in 4th Place behind Autralia!!!
162 - “When i looked on the TV a moment ago the UK is now in 4th Place behind Autralia!!!”
Look again then, GB is back in 3rd. (Though Australia did sneak ahead of GB for a few hours there after golds in sailing and triathlon.)
162 We just won another Gold in cycling, so we’re back to 3rd! I doubt we’ll finish 3rd, but who cares it’s been brilliant.
Don’t confuse witty comments that hit home with over confidence. DC has a very good record of judging the public mood and getting his tone just right. The ‘taking the public for fools’ line was established last October and has really hurt Brown because it strikes a genuine chord. It’s only Labour wishful thinking to dwell on the ‘Flashman’ stuff. It doesn’t play with anyone else.
I agree with the worries about Cameron becoming too arrogant and I also think this may apply to Salmond. It is a struggle for politicans to get the tone right. The trip by Cameron to Georgia does not appear well judged and foreign policy seems to be a weakness of the Tories. Are people looking for a repeat of Blair?
I was amused by the spat between Frances and Sean re the Olympics. I spent last night having an Olympic BBQ in Glasgow. No-one even mentioned the idea of an independent Scottish team. We only need to look at Ireland to understand that small countries do not have the resources to compete at the highest level and anyway most of us like being part of Team GB. The BBC has done well this year, with one exception, to recognise that we have Team GB and not Team England.
As a Glaswegian I trust that the Lottery will put large amounts of money into our Commonwealth games for 2014 as well as London 2012. If they fail on this then it will be Westminster not Scotland to blame for the fallout.
163. No they have not changed it on the BBC yet! UK on aussies on 11 Gold a piece but the Aussies have more medals overall!
155. Oops meant “Douglas”. Must have been the weekend spent in Danny’s hometown of Aviemore.
See Boris is backing a monument to slavery in Hyde Park.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23538750-details/Boris+backs+Hyde+Park+slavery+memorial/article.do
Is it going to be for or against?
O/T Obama campaigning in New Mexico today. Now or never for my bet Richardson. He’s in Florida tomorrow. Announce Richardson today and hoover up some Latino votes tomorrow?
Clark and Bayh seems to be drifting with the some money coming in for Gore. Surely not.
I’d imagine we’ll know who it is by Wednesday but this has been a real lottery and it might stil be worth a few quid on a couple of long shots.
163- Yes, despite Brown putting the curse on them, the UK “Cycling - Men’s team pursuit” won a Gold (and a World Record). Having to do that with the Brown curse over your head is some feat!
167 - We now have more Gold medals than at any time since 1920!
167- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_Summer_Olympics_medal_table
172. Thank god for Nu Labour inventing the national lottery
171 - This world record they broke only stood for about a day didn’t it as they broke the record the other day in the build up.
Back in the real world, this is what really matters to voters now:
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/economics/article4553694.ece
Unemployment forecast to rise further: Comments about Clegg & Brown are small and irrelevant beer in contrast to peoples lives being made difficult, homes been repossesed etc.
This is the problem with political websites, the minutie of this Clegg joke in the greater scheme of things is utter irrelevance.
166- “The BBC has done well this year, with one exception, to recognise that we have Team GB and not Team England.”
What was the exception? I thought I heard the BBC refer to a team as an “English” but it was acually “Yingling”!
175- Yeah, we seem to be great at Cycling. Expect the press to forget about them once the Olympics is over and curse us that we arent any good at sport…
re 124 it’s a sensible thing to do and was done in 2004. it won’t do Brown any good though as it’ll just give time for people to get used to their huge tax rise in April next year (when Darling reverses the £120 bribe of this year).
David Cameron would be disaster for economy, says minister
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2578543/David-Cameron-would-be-disaster-for-economy-says-minister.html
Are Labour minister at all in touch with reality: All this says to me is Cooper is out of touch and no idea about the hardships people are going through. It examplifies Labour’s complete loss of direction/ideas/ strategy and momentum.
@180:
Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty! Kirsty!
156. 160. UKIP is headed for oblivion
Gordo plans to delay next May’s local elections
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2008/08/gordon-postpone.html
re 136 yes Peter absolutely smashing and well up to the most optimistic expectations presented to us last September. Unfortunately my sister failed to take my advice and got her fingers burnt with the women’s quad and men’s eight. The only sour note I thought was the women’s ungraciousness in their defeat. They didn’t deserve the gold medal on a plate - they had to earn it and on the day the Chinese had a better executed race plan.
180. Cooper also makes the mistake of attacking Cameron personally in this - what’s her strategy to link Cameron to the present economic downturn! Pathetic! - Absolutly pathetic!
To think people have touted her as a potential Labour leader in the future.
Mind i suppose it is only fair that Labour have Cooper and the Tories have Gove!
Time to revive that no.10 petition to change the national anthem to Spandau Ballet’s Gold.
re 145 but Marin I think we may all be problematised by all your neolgismising!
I think Cameron is coming across as arrogant and that somehow his coronation beckons…However, things can change all so quickly… Clegg needs to up his game and I am sure he has fully appreciated that over the summer. With Lisbon he was reduced to looking like a court jester… there to provide entertainment to the rest.
Even as a lib dem I think Clegg highlights there are way too many careerists in parliament with few life skills. Cable and Huhne on the other hand… If the LDs lose seats at the election Clegg will be gone
178 - Well the only sport that matters is played by 22 primadonnas booting a ball around for several months of the year and taking home obscene money for it. Basically you could train 22 apes to perform the same task and it would probably be more entertaining!
184 Noted with thanks, Chris A. Next time though, do you think we could have a few more tips…preferably before the events.
re 178 true, next week it’ll be back to acres of newsprint on speculation on whether Mrs Rooney’s best friend’s cousin’s hamster will get over its illness and one or two lines on sports Britain really excels in.
I’m greatly enjoying seeing the Comment is Free bearpit tear the lovely Yvette a new wrong’un:
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/08/18/could-over-confidence-be-daves-undoing/
Chortle, guffaw, etc.
189 Remember James that Mr Murdoch has his money in football, not cycling or rowing.
The Sun sent 3 journalists to Beijing, the Telegraph 80.
Good grief…I just praised the Telegraph! Mea Culpa.
Ivan Lewis would get my vote to lead NuLabour.
Lively times ahead for NuLabour,watch them inch up in the opinion poll ratings.
The health minister has called on the PM to increase taxes of wealthier citizens to help struggling middle-class families feeling the squeeze of the credit crunch.
Ivan Lewis, suggested an increased tax could be introduced at a rate of an extra 10p in the pound on earnings above £250,000 which would bring in an additional £3.5m a year, the Telegraph reported.
Earlier this year he also accused government of ignoring ‘ordinary people’ and said that those with middle-class incomes ought not to bear the burden of the imminent downturn.
Lewis’ outspoken views have surprised fellow Labourites, as some suggest it could also cost him his job in an upcoming reshuffle
188 “If the LDs lose seats at the election Clegg will be gone”.
Almost any plausible scenario has the LibDems losing seats. The question is how many, and that is very hard to predict because it is basically the difference between two larger numbers (gains by the Conservatives less Labour losses, excluding SNP effects).
Whether Clegg should be blamed for the current poor performance is a moot point. He may not be doing terribly well, but it is hard to see that any LibDem leader could do well in current circumstances.
190 - Now that’s what I call advance planning: lining up gambling tips for 4 years’ time.
188. What’s arrogant listing how many birds you have shagg*d, Ignoring your frontbench team on issues of national soverienty or a couple of words off the cuff in private?
Good grief ‘Clegg is a joke’ is tame in comparison to the colurful language Brown is alleged to use when abusing mobile phones! If this is the best LD’s/Labour can through up against Cameron, the respective parties may as well pack up and leave it to someone else!
@195:
I disagree. I foresee a situation in which a competently-led Liberal Democrat party, turning their guns on Labour, could be profiting handsomely from Labour’s collapse.
Fortunately for us, they’re led by a joke, and attacking us rather than Labour.
196 Well…I backed Obama two years ago, AF, and I have a promising looking bet on Scottish Independence by 2017. You have to think long in this game.
195 Richard
LD’s are, if anything, a buy at around 50 seats. They are very good at holding their gains and in many cases have strong local support. If Clegg steers them the right way and they begin to attack Labour seats, they could even improve on their current standing. Worst case scenario for them has to be about 40 seats and even that is fairly improbable.
@204:
Do the Lib Dems have the party machinery and activist base adequately situated to seriously fight the Northern Labour seats they need to replace their Tory losses?
OBAMA/McCAIN — WIN PERCENTAGE
INTRADE (last trade): 60.9 / 36.1 %
BETFAIR (last trade): 65.79 / 32.26 %
538.com (projection): 56.9 / 43.1 %
——->>> It’s the first time since 3 weeks I notice such a disparity between the 3 percentages…
Usually, 538.com was close to betfair about Obama, and close to intrade about Mac.
morning all, just released some comments in moderation, so numbering might be a little askew.
There are only two things that can go wrong for Cameron now. This is one of them - arrogance, overconfidence, bullishness, the appearance of bullying. That’s in Cameron’s hands.
The other is sleaze. The Tories didn’t lose in 1997 because of the economy, or public services, or coal mines closing, or the poll tax. In 1997 they were destroyed because of sleaze. If Labour can pin them with that, there is a chance that the gloss could come off, and this could be Con +8% Hung Parliament territory again.
To his credit Cameron has been very good at acting against sleaze - Spelman will have to go, and the Wintertons might need to be made an example. For Labour, this is the only possible line of attack that might produce more than a slight narrowing of the polls - thus why John Mann is getting so excised.
157, McGabe, isn’t it?:p
198 - True, but attacking Labour is quite hard given the history of defining themselves as “the thinking man’s non-Conservatives”. It’s a tricky about turn to execute, and Cameron hasn’t left them much room. They should probably do it, but I can’t see it producing results very quickly, especially as their activists are in the wrong places.
204 - Peter. Maybe, but if you enter even quite small variants of the current opinion polls into the seat-predictor websites, you get proportionately large variations in LibDem seats, which is not surprising. And the recent by-elections have confirmed that disaffected Labour votes are not going the LibDems’ way. Surely the basic point is that their historically very good performance over the last three elections was caused by the lack of an effective Conservative party.
207. Poor line that on arrogance! - the mass public perception is not one of Cameron being arrogant but it amuses me to think that Cameron opponents think that is the best line.
On Sleaze, that is more interesting but the Tories are not anymore sleazy than Labour. Indeed why did the leader of the Scottish Labour resign for taking donations but HH remains in place. If Labour goes on *sleaze* they are slitting their own throat! I mean, who has been investigated by the Police for C for P! Plus i think there are some further investigations pending in the next year. Could it be the bloke from the North-east, not the one with the canoe but the one related to Labour fund raising?
198. Presumably you mean £3.5bn as £3.5m would not be enough to cover the cost of postage informing people. However even £3.5bn spread over to target population is only sufficient to a proportion of the increase in your petrol* / heating* / food* / family holiday*. And this assumes that those already paying in excess £15bn will not change their employment habits.
* Strike out as appropriate.
‘The Tories didn’t lose in 1997 because of the economy, or public services, or coal mines closing, or the poll tax’
That’s very contentious, and probably too simplistic. The ’sleaze’ stories wouldn’t have resonated the way they did if the public hadn’t already been in the mood to kick the Tories, hard.
And the reason they were in such a mood was mostly down to economics - while the economy was growing by 1997 people didn’t feel well off. Many were still severely financially bruised from the 1991-1995 period.
It’s against a grim economic background that the voters start becoming really receptive to negative personality-based stories against their leaders - that is why Brown is now so loathed. And why removing Brown won’t help Labour.
Obama/Mac in Ohio:
Public Policy Polling 45-45
source: http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Ohio_818.pdf
H/T 538.com : “with this poll figured in, we now figure McCain to be a very slight favorite in Ohio“.
Cameron’s Clegg joke makes him look particularly smug and arrogant by his own high standards. I’m surprised he’s so candid while there still is a chance of a hung parliament which may require a working alliance with Clegg. Combined with the Georgia visit he looks like someone who thinks the next election is in the bag and who cares who he insults.
Perhaps more importantly I thought he’d want to join forces with the Lib Dems in attacking Labour and accelerating tactical unwind. The last couple of days have made him look more like a sneery opposition leader than a prime minister in waiting.
210 - That’s the point Martin - arrogance isn’t the public perception, so to make it so would mark a change for the worse.
On sleaze - of course the Tories are no worse than Labour, but that plays into Labour’s hands. It’s not that “you can’t elect Cameron because he is sleazy” because as you say that would backfire.
The line is “you’re kicking us out for sleaze and lying etc etc - but they are no different”. Shooting at ‘Tory sleaze’ undermines the “it’s time for a change” mood if you can convince people that the Tories would be no different.
209. I combined the SNP’s recent poll with that of the most recent Newspaper poll for the times: The result was quite interesting:
Party 2005 Votes 2005 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
CON 33.24% 208 45.00% 418
LAB 36.21% 346 25.00% 135
LIB 22.65% 67 17.50% 26
NAT 2.22% 8 2.22% 51
Tory Majority 186.
I used the Martin baxter regional predicter. The Tory, Labour and LD shares were slightly below the recent Times figures once i factered in the SNP poll: SNP - 44%, Labour 25%, LD’s 14%, Tories 13%.
Looking at this LD’s are as vulnerable to a pincer movement as Labour.
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.pl?CON=45&LAB=25&LIB=17.5&ScotCON=13&ScotLAB=25&ScotLIB=14&ScotNAT=44&NorthCON=34.7&NorthLAB=38.4&NorthLIB=18.2&NWestCON=37.7&NWestLAB=36.0&NWestLIB=16.3&YorksCON=43.2&YorksLAB=30.6&YorksLIB=15.1&WalesCON=33.2&WalesLAB=31.5&WalesLIB=13.3&WalesNAT=12.6&WMidsCON=46.7&WMidsLAB=28.1&WMidsLIB=13.9&EMidsCON=46.4&EMidsLAB=29.6&EMidsLIB=14.1&AngliaCON=55.5&AngliaLAB=19&AngliaLIB=16&SWestCON=50.6&SWestLAB=11.7&SWestLIB=27.1&LondCON=43.7&LondLAB=27.7&LondLIB=16.8&SEastCON=56.9&SEastLAB=13.1&SEastLIB=20.4®ion=All+GB+seats+majority-sorted&seat=–Show+all–
@215:
Morus, how’s your acceptance speech coming along?
I definitely think Cameron is prone to over-confidence but then he’s a product of the Public School system. Their ethos promotes self-confidence but does not attempt to temper it with humility. After all, in the REAL world where is humility going to get you? Not a place in the the boardroom, certainly.
Still, there probably isn’t much harm in him being over-confident, aside from his smug self-satisfaction putting off voters. That can’t be said of the neo-cons in America who’s misplaced confidence seems limitless. No matter what catastrophe they are responsible for they continue to believe they are on the right path. It’s as if they spend their time reading naive self-help manuals. ‘You can’t afford a negative thought’ blah blah blah. The Russia-Gerogia war will be their last big mistake before being booted out of office. Does anyone believe that Saakasvili - who looks and talks like a neocon and has embraced them in any way he could - would have launched his offensive (even the hawkish Cameron said it was unwise) without backing from Washington. I don’t think so. This whole crisis stinks of the neocons. Whatever the truth about Russian provocation this is a complex long standing conflict dating back 15 years that can’t be categorised into the simple right/wrong terms the neocons love. It was right not to admit Georgia into NATO because of that.
207 - I think there’s a third, and one which I think is more important. The behaviour of tory supporters can make a difference if they are seen to be of the unreconstructed type that people remember from past conservative governments. Cameron has done well in stopping people thinking that his party is for the self-interested and full of those who seek to curtail anything of which they disapprove. His party’s supporters could overreach and give him an annoying headache.
207 Not sure I agree Morus. There are more dimension to this than sleaze. The problem for Labour is that they have often focussed on an unpopular leader as their main attack. Rightly or Wrongly Cameron is popular and Brown isn’t. So Labour have to basically change their whole approach. There isn’t an easy answer to this.
Negative Issues that helped defeat losing parties in GEs. I have avoided all the postives.
2005 Tories (Leader, General Luck of Trust, Economic Reputation)
2001 Tories (Leader, Europe, Economic Reputation, Too Early)
1997 Tories (Sleaze, Time 4 Change, Divided Party, Economic Reputation, NHS)
1992 Labour (Economic Reputation, General Lack of Trust, Tax Policy, Leader)
1987 Labour (Defence, Economic Reputation)
1983 Labour (Economic Reputation, Leader, Defence)
1979 Labour (Economic Reputation)
217 - Too many suspect jokes, many of which I don’t think they’ll get.
O/T I have actually been approached to help out with some political speech writing this year - please send your biting political jokes (fit for broadcast please) to the usual address.
220 - So the rule is
a) Economic competance is a necessary but not sufficient condition for success, and
b) the only time in the last quarter of a century that a government has fallen, sleze was one of the major issues?
RCP average in Ohio : Mac + 1.5%
173, For, I trust.
The Labour and Liberal Democratic parties really are in an abject state. These attempts at saving their hapless leaders by trying to get the sympathy vote is embarrassing quite frankly. Good on Dave for slagging off that pair of comedians.
I accept both of these points, but since Labour has focussed on “leadership” for the past 10 years and given the growing personality cult in the media, I think “who is the best leader” trumps “which party is the most sleazy”. If Cameron can personally be seen to be a bit grubby then your point may carry more weight.
215. Interesting point Morus! But Labour are not likely to be booted out on sleaze alone it is a combination of factors. It will be interesting reading the Ivor Crew & Co. report on the next election to see what they thought was the issue that tipped it! I doubt sleaze would be IMO it is going to be the economy (Inflation, Jobs, standard of living), public service spending failure, transport, Immigration and some types of high profile crime like Knief crime which impact a small but growing number of people. Other areas such as Housing, Environmroment, may change a few votes but they have become less important as the economy has stagnated.
Sleaze is not going to be a 1997 type issue, Labour would be very dumb to try using this and indeed Labour have a parliamentry majority are reported to be pushing through a non-disclosure of some MP’s allowances such as second home costs etc.
209 Yes, this is not something I’d want to be dogmatic about. I could well be reading this particular little market wrong. I’ve been surprised how the LDs have been ‘underperforming’ both in the polls and the spread markets. All the same, I think their customary resilience suggests that they won’t lose very many seats.
Your comment also implies that the right LD strategy going forward is to attack Labour seats. If they do that, they should be alright.
That’s my view anyway, but I won’t be betting the house on it.
Btw, I should add that a sell of Labour seats combines nicely with a buy of ‘Hung Parliament’ on the Betfair Overall Majority market. You can still buy around the 3.7 mark. That price will plummet on any sign of a Labour recovery, and therefore makes a nice cheap hedge against disaster on the Seats Market.
Ohio poll, Obama with a lower percentage of votes of Democrats, suggestion that the Clinton dead enders are prepared to elect a man who is extremely pro-life and who tells jokes about rape?
Not sure that ones going to continue now Obama is back from holiday and back in the thick of things again with the conference coming up.
Ohio 538 avge - McCain +0.6
Ohio Pollster.com avge - Obama +3.3%
I’m also getting a sneaking feeling that Veep might be Clinton. Not sure why but it chimes with a late announcement.
27. Is Iain Gray the favourite now? The good news keeps on coming!
160. You really don’t believe Brown denied that the polls had any influence on his decision?
From the Daily Mail that week:
‘Gordon Brown said: “I looked at what people were saying. I heard from candidates in marginal seats - they were telling us we would win the election. I believe we would win at any time.”
Mr Brown refused to admit that he called off plans for an election announcement today after polls showed the Tories had pulled ahead…
He insisted he would have made the same decision even if polls showed Labour would win a 100-seat majority.’
From the BBC, October 7th 2007:
“Gordon Brown says he takes “full responsibility” for the snap election speculation - and denied poor opinion polls led him to decide against one.
Pressed at his No 10 media briefing, he said he had considered an election but his “first instinct” had been to have more time to set out his vision.”
Independent headline, same week:
“Polls had nothing to do with election delay, PM tells incredulous MPs”
And crucially, liveblogged from his press conference:
When Gary Gibbon from Channel 4 asked Brown “can yo usay again that the polls had no influence on this decision”, Brown said this:
“Hand on heart I can say that the opinion polls did not determine my decision to not have an election”.
Hand on heart. HAND ON HEART. What a pathetic, pusillanimous, pukeworthy little liar we have for a prime minister. UGH.
206 Philippe - Can you explain your figures? You are losing me.
Which market does the Betfair 65.79 come from?
And does your analysis imply that the Betfair price for Obama is too high or too low? In other words, do you think we should be buying or selling O at this price?
re 207 does mean that we’ve got to go back through the entire thread to read comments that we might have missed previously
218- One of the obsticales to Georgia joining NATO was Germany, who have now changed their opinion and now support Georgia joining NATO.
231 SeanT - Leave off. It is not necessary to prove water is wet. Brown could have killed off election speculation at any time; he didn’t have to wait until the polls turned South. Anybody who believed him when he said that had nothing to do with the decision is a mug. Now can you write about something more interesting?
How’s your work amongst the young in Thailand going?
Post at 228 is addressed to Richard Nabavi. Apologies for the omission.
233 - Yes, and do twenty press-ups for complaining!
234. They support it eventually, but not right away if I’m correct?
237 LOL!
You may be unaware, Morus, but Chris A is a fit bastard! Twenty press-ups? He does twice that before breakfast.
Don’t, whatever you do, challenge him to a foot race.
235. lol. Sorry but I was asked a direct and hostile question a hundred comments ago, as to whether Brown had actually denied the polls, as I claimed, etc etc etc
So I thought it best to scotch any doubts quite firmly. I do take your point, that I’ve made MY point - but as you can see from some asinine remarks on here, there are still some lefties determined to believe Brown didn’t lie, that he’s just an incompetent idiot, or whatever. I note, as well, that NickP hasn’t answered my question: did Brown lie or not?
This debate may seem repetitive, and it is, but this is also important. Brown lied on a very very important issue, in front of the whole British public, in the most contemptuous way - treating us all like idiots.
This is also important electorally - Brown’s precipitous descent can, I believe, be traced directly to that moment when he lied. In a few minutes of lunacy he destroyed all that “moral compass”, “new kind of politician” bullsh1t that he was trying to foist on us.
But yes, OK, I shall shut up now on this subject. As long as we are all finally agreed that our premier is.. you know… a big fat stupid liar.
Hope you and the “mysterious Debs” are good. I’m having a laff in Thailand, working hard on a new ending for the thriller. The American publishers - Viking Penguin - demanded more gore! Being an artist of total integrity, I have immediately agreed to their every demand, in the hope of a massive film deal.
Sawadee K.
i am slightly surprised that noone but noone has commented on Gordo planning to delay the May Local elections, I would have thought it worth a thread in its own right.
http://waugh.standard.co.uk/2008/08/gordon-postpone.html
241 Yes thanks, SeanT, Debs and I are fine.
We can happily leave Gordon to his fate now though. Lie to the electorate and it will mete out the appropriate punishment.
I think you’re a bit unfair on NickP though. The guy is a professional politician and you are asking him, in effect, to publicly criticise his boss. I mean…what do you REALLY think about Viking Penguin….be honest now.
241. IIRC they have delayed them in 2004 & in 2001. I don’t think it is such a big deal really: Yes, it may be a bit handy for Brown but their is precident on this moving the date.
238- Dunno, acording to http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2008/08/200881721384515975.html
“Saakashvili was speaking at a news conference in Tbilisi with Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, at which Merkel gave support to Georgia’s bid to join Nato, an ambition that is strongly opposed by Russia.
Georgia will become a member of Nato if it wants to - and it does want to,” Merkel said.
…
France and Germany had previously vetoed Georgia’s possible membership”
@240:
Can you just write a range of stock Hollywood endings and allow them to pick and choose?
I hope there’s an explosion and a Lesson is Learned.
Tory Home has been running a series of pieces on the misleading out of context slant that some of the DT journalists are displaying with Tory MPs. In some cases the facts have been plainly wrong.
They have taken to repeating the full discussion and letting the truth speak for itself. Duncan is suing.
Their conclusion is that Tory MPs should confine their interviews at the DT to Patrick Hennessey.
I sighed as soon as I realised this was a Rosa Prince article. Personally, I don’t take Melissa Kyte seriously either.
If Cameron is displaying any lack of judgement it was in allowing himself to be interviewed by those with a possible agenda at the Telegraph.
[Unless of course he thinks noone takes Rosa Prince [or the Telegraph seriously anymore].
The Daily Telegrph was somewhat out of the loop because of its continued hostility to Blair when in Government. There were stories in the press that Brown had invited them in from the cold if they were ‘more cooperative’.
Seems their timing is dreadful and they may find themselves cut out again if we get a Tory Governmnent. I am sure the journalists on the paper won’t care but the owners/editors should be more savy.
Shame they didn’t have the sense to listen to Bernard Dineen.
Brown: “Your overconfidence is your weakness.”
Cameron: “Your faith in your friends is yours.”
246- Werent there signs during the Brown Bounce that they might do a Daily Mail? (Although when the election fever started they reverted back to type)
I see MacCain is playing too the gallery.
Before a friendly but still skeptical evangelical crowd at Warren’s Saddleback Church in Lake Forest, Calif., on Saturday night, McCain won a roar of approval when Warren asked him at what point a human being gets human rights: “At the moment of conception”
If that is the case, then every American Citizen is born at the moment of conception, therefore they can all retire nine months earlier!
248- There is a posibility he could pick a pro-choice VP.
Let the games begin!
@249:
He is a ‘maverick’, right? What’s the maverick position on abortion? Legalising post partem abortions until 2 years after birth.
228 - Peter the Punter “Btw, I should add that a sell of Labour seats combines nicely with a buy of ‘Hung Parliament’ on the Betfair Overall Majority market. You can still buy around the 3.7 mark. That price will plummet on any sign of a Labour recovery, and therefore makes a nice cheap hedge against disaster on the Seats Market.”
Thanks - actually, I had already thought along those lines (I hope that means I’m getting the hang of this betting lark…). I’ve just taken the plunge and sold Labour at 232. I’m not normally a gambler, so it’s a novel experience. We shall see…
249 - There is precisely no chance that he will pick a pro-choice VP. He floated it, it was shot down, burned, stamped and spat upon, before being buried.
No pro-choice VP is the single biggest demand of about 65% of the voting GOP. He’s not that much of a maverick anymore.
248 - A true conservative would have told Warren that human rights are a fiction, so it never gets them. He’s drifitng Left again…
Scotland playing England at ODI Criket. Currently Scotland 60/3 (17.0/47 ov). Any chance of a shock result?
242. You don’t understand. I’m trying to save Nick’s soul! Let’s face it, he’s one of the minor if hardworking stokers on HMS Labour-Titanic, and he’s gonna down to a watery political grave, very probably, in 2010, locked as he is in the psephological engine rooms, below the waterline.
I admire his loyalty in a way, staying resolutely at his terminal task, but maybe its time he looked ahead. Put it another way, given his probable fate, I think it would be morally liberating for Nick to come clean.
Just do it, Nick. Just tear off the clothes of deceit and run naked in the playgrounds of honesty. Cry out the truth! Yes, Gordon lied! Yes, Gordon’s an idiot! Yes, I can’t stand Vera Baird! Yes, we fibbed about Europe! Who cares! We still did our best, even though our best was miserably pathetic!
It might not advance his career, but such candour would store up treasures in heaven.
And, FWIW, I love Viking Penguin, very honestly. They gave me a big fat five figure deal (nearly six), and they’ve come up with a cracking new ending which makes the book better. What’s not to love?
246 Yes. The wobbled ‘editorially’. But their problems [according to Dineen] run deeper than that.
They stopped training their own journalists and started bringing them in from outside. During their wobble they set on some who are more ‘Daily Mirror’ than ‘Daily Mail’. Then they have their UKIP element. They go for Cameron in a pincher movement and since the Barlcey Bros are anti Cameron, they seem to have developed on odd strartegy which is not endearing them to some of their own readership, or the party that looks like it could be the next Government.
Murdoch is a canny man.
He will use The Times pull the rug from under them if he thinks its time to back a Tory victorythey are not careful.
255- Yes, the Sun has been attacking Brown and praising Cameron over Georgia…if Murdoch switches sides, will it be soonish or will he wait until 6months before the election?
Sorry 255 was to 247.
I leaned on the key pad ….. spelling/puntuation uncorrected etc…
@256:
Six months? The Sun won’t pick sides until it’s absolutely certain that Dave will win. That’s usually a matter of weeks, not months, before the election.
Still, they’ve been moistening for Dave for some time in preparation.
Re-Georgia the most anti-Cameron rhetoric is certainly coming from the Mail, this by Hitchens.
Will someone send this sabre-rattling twit a history book
I like Georgia. I like Georgians and their superb hospitality. I have several times travelled to that beautiful country. But I wouldn’t lift a finger to save it from the Russians.
What cause would we be serving? Democracy? Ha ha.
This Olympically corrupt statelet is not a law-governed democracy. President Mikheil Saakashvili’s nauseatingly named Rose Revolution was a putsch achieved by an orchestrated mob, followed by an election so shamelessly one-sided that our supposed hero got 96 per cent of the vote.
The only excuse for this was that previous elections had been rigged, too, which of course they had.
American-trained he may be, but his opponents and critics fall victim to blatantly Soviet-style methods of intimidation. He is also adept at bombastic propaganda.
Do we really want young men from the Midlands of England and the Lowlands of Scotland fighting and dying for years to come to save this dubious creature from his own unhinged, wilful conflict with the Kremlin?
You might think not, but David Cameron is all for it. In an amazing demonstration of unfitness for office, the Tory leader last week wrote one of the daftest articles I have ever seen.
He wants Georgia to be allowed into Nato, so committing this country to come to Georgia’s defence if it is attacked. He wants to do the same for Ukraine.
Will someone send this man an atlas and a history book? When will our political class stop trying to grow hairs on their teenage chests by starting wars and deploying forces we no longer have?
Why should we get entangled in this? What business is it of ours if Russia wants friends and allies on its borders, rather than a weird Nato alliance, kept on life-support long after it triumphantly achieved its purpose. What is Nato for now? Does anybody know? If they know, will they say?
No doubt some half-educated twerp will now accuse me of appeasement. There is certainly plentiful appeasement going on now – of the Provisional IRA and of the European Union.
But Britain has no interests in following American adventures in the Caucasus, let alone taking sides over the dangerous future of Ukraine.
Vladimir Putin is not Hitler – or Stalin. As for Neville Chamberlain, the stupidest thing he ever did was to promise to defend Poland, when he knew we couldn’t and wouldn’t do so. When our bluff was called we were dragged by an unstable, rackety ally into a war we weren’t ready for and very nearly lost.
Who plays that part today?
247. Daily Mail & Telegraph were not going to change. They judged Brown in his first few months as PM - they refused to look at his other 10 years in power because they wanted Blair out. Labour is now judged on the whole 11 years plus - even Labour now refer to the whole period probably because Brown’s has been so dire.
Daily Mail was frustrated that Cameron did not outline more of his policy platform. The reason why the Tories did not do this is Labour nick it because Labour are ideologically & politically bankrupt. When governments have been in a longtime Newspapers will still arselick as necessary - they still like scoops etc. Although with the internet i would question whether a long interview with a particular politician is of any interest these days. Better to manage regular small doses than one big dose that may have bits that fail to be flattering.
251 Richard, in case it helps, I can tell you that I have sold Labour seats for about £120 a point at an average price of 240. I am very happy with this position.
Nobody knows what will happen but it’s good to have a view on what is likely. I expect the price to drift slowly South over the next six months or so. It then gets a bit difficult to predict because much will depend upon whether Labour ditch Brown around the time of the council/euro elections [June 2009]. If they do, much will then depend not only on who they replace him with, but on how the Leadership elections play out in the public eye. If it’s a bloodbath with a bad result (Harman?!), even 150 seats may be a sell price. If it goes well, they may recover but to no more than about 250/260 I would say. It may therefore be a good idea to realise some profit by selling off before the uncertainty of a contest.
If there is no contest and Brown stays, I’ll be holding my position right through to the GE, which I expect to be in May 2010. I would be very confident of a large profit in these circumstances.
That’s what the PtP crystal ball shows, but as you say, we’ll see….
Good luck.
242, Viking Penguin? Is Sir Nils Olav II SeanT’s publisher?
241. This has being anticipated for quite a while now, the assumption has always being that the 2009 elections would be held in june to coincide with the euro elections, the discussion was only why Gordo hadnt put through the changes yet.
245. Weirdly enough, you guessed exactly right. There is indeed an explosion, and a lesson is learned. How did you know???
*alarmed at Coxall’s casually accurate guesstimate of cleverly planned denouement*
255 LOL! OK, SeanT, I will leave you to your altruistic task of savings the souls of lost Labour MPs.
And as for your love of Penguin Viking, I am sure it is as pure and white as the driven snow.
Sawadee.
256. Murdoch does not set the editorial policy of The Times.
The Liberals control several councils in the north. Their activist base is good enough to win some seats. Everyone always underestimates how well the LDs do at elections. I am predicting stagnation for the LDs - retaining more or less the same position they have, perhaps a small net loss. The local elections showed them to have done well in areas where they have sitting MPs. Cameron should be working with the LDs in areas where the Liberals are 2nd to labour. I think he will offend a lot of liberals with these jibes. The recent by-elections are not good examples. The only one the liberals were 2nd was Henley, but that was to the tories who are resurgent.
afternoon all, haven’t time to read all the comments on this thread but given that most of the electorate seems to agree that Gordon Brown wouldn’t know the truth if it came up and kicked him in the family jewels I doubt he will lose a single vote on that one.
The Nick Clegg comment MAY be injudicious but given that I have read postings on here from Libdem PBers which have been worse and positively vitriolic about their most successful leader since WWII, I frankly doubt it will alter the minds of most voters.
So much is going to happen between now and June 2010 including at least 2 more Labour by-election losses that I doubt anyone will even remember or care. Today’s warning that 2 million will be on the dole according to the Government’s doctored manner of determining someone being unemployed suggests most people will be far more worried about the roof over their respective heads and how they are going to pay their bills and feed their families.
Anyway back to legalised people trafficing.
The BBC Olympics website record messages and emails sent by viewers. They just got this one:
“It would be nice if the BBC were a bit more enthusiastic about the Irish contestants.”
Can someone talk me through that? Bloomin cheek! Listen up Seamus, when you start paying the license fee in Connemara, perhaps then the Beeb will mention your silly shamrock-wearing showjumpers. You already get the Beeb for free AS IT IS.
Cuh!
@260:
Coldstone, you really should have put that Hitchens-P drivel in quotes. I thought that was you for a second. You don’t want to be associated with that sort of thing. Really.
I especially liked the comment about “half-educated twerp” as if only lack of education could possibly make you think P. Hitch a worthless moron.
260
The fact that Hitchens is criticising the fact that we went to war against Germany in 1939 says everything we really need to know about him and his unpalatable views.
Perhaps someone should send Hitchens a history book instead.
267 - he just writes the cheques that pay the wages of those who *do* set the editorial policy!
In all seriousness, I spent a grand evening getting utterly legless with a former Sky News (and other channels) War Correspondant, Arnault van Lynton. He said that of all the places he had ever worked as a journalist, Sky was the least interfering, and had the most relaxed editorial policy in terms of giving freedom to their senior journos.
That said, he did also say that this might be because Murdoch was a newspaper man first and foremost, so only got involved in his printed media, not so much his TV channels. Makes you wonder about Fox News though.
270, what? The Irish get the BBC for free?
I don’t know whether to be outraged they get something they don’t pay for, or annoyed that lefty propaganda is as widespread as it is.
Interestingly looking at the LibDem run website on council by-elections, since January this year, excluding the May elections where we know the Tories won huge, Labour almost disappeared and the Libdems retrenched, the tally at 7th August was Tories +10, Labour -9 and Libdems 0 i.e. no net council seats won this year. Hardly promising for the Libdems I would have thought.
273 If you were that legless, Morus, how do you remember what was said?
273- Fox News journalists get daily memos spelling out the editorial line to take and how to spin stories that are potentialy negative for the Republicans.
273. The left’s anti-Murdoch obsession is fairly pitiful. And hypocritical. Murdoch saved a lot of newspapers from going under - including lefty ones - by breaking the obscene power of the print unions at Wapping. Guardianistas conveniently forget that.
And Robert Maxwell was a MUCH nastier piece of work than Murdoch could ever be; again the lads and lasses in Farringdon Road often overlook this salient point. I wonder why.
no, not great with their by-election wins, but also not diastrous. Therefore, as I say a period of stagnation more than anything but certainly not the apocalypse that tories on here predict
270 - SeanT - you of all people need to see the blog ‘Speak you’re Branes’ - a colelction of the worst from the BBC’s ‘Have Your Say’.
http://www.ifyoulikeitsomuchwhydon‘tyougolivethere.com or Google “Speak You’re Branes”
278- Given that Murdoch suported Labour at the last 3 elections, I’m sure anti-Murdoch feeling is not just confined to the left.
And anyway, Murdoch is a prick (and supported the Iraq war that you hate so much). His priority is the USA and Australia. He couldnt give a f*** what happend to the UK.
276 - Since 2001, my evenings *start* with putting the world to rights, and *then* I get legless.
Doing things the other way round got me into a sticky position in a northern pub belonging to a BNP landlord, thus the reversal in official ‘drinking and putting the world to rights’ policy of the Morus party (very much seen as my own reflexive Clause IV moment).
260, 271 I hadn’t realised that Hitchens was a supporter of Germany’s war aims in WWII.
283 - Only until he actually went through with re-enacting it on video for Vogue magazine. Now he’s as opposed to invading Poland as the rest of us.
@280:
‘ Now would be a good time for the Georgians to ally with the Chetchians or Muslims to have them come in behind them and tear them a new butt. Then the Nato troops could smuggle in a bunch of stinggers. Russia has to decide if they want to be our allies against really bad Muslim radicals like most of the people who are not Muslim are or whether they want to continue with this empire building and holding thing. Russian troops would not do well in the mountains of Georgia just like they did not do well in Afghanistan. Bomb cities, well yah anybody can do that. Go up in the rocks as an infantry supported by a traditional military. Let the games begin. It would be a really great war for both sides to fight. The true character of man can continue to unfold and all the folks in Russia big towns and cities will eventually begin to complain about why all the kids are disappearing and not coming back.
This is the story of mankind!!
troop on the Oregon coast
troop’
284-
Did his brother participate in the video? “Come on bro, lets start rounding up some Jews”.
282 You backslider, Morus. Still, I am sure the New Morus policy will assist in your bid for the VP spot.
Good luck. When are you off?
Hitchens manages to link the provisional IRA and the EU together.
What is the concern with Ukraine? Less than 20% of the population is Russian, it seems a lot more stable than Georgia and is a far bigger country. Is it really under such a threat?
Hitchens has always had a nostalgia for Empire. Clearly the Soviet Union is no different.
@286:
I suspect that Hitchens-C hates his brother even more than the average human of sound mind. He can barely tolerate being in the same country as the man. Sharing the same mother and surname must be living torture.
273. I seem to remember an interview with Murdoch where he laughed at the ‘control’ he has over Sky News, it was along the lines of ‘i wish they where like fox news’. Whenever he tries to get involved they tell him to get lost and treat him like some old senile uncle, with all the respect due, but his opinions are not listened to or pandered to.
287 - Saturday I fly out, to give me a day or so to acclimatise (and check that wireless works etc!). Back a week later. First time I’ve taken a holiday longer than one week in about 6 years!
262 PtP - Thanks for your help. To defend against things going against me if Labour do change leader, I did wonder about a hedge based on a bet on Miliband and/or Johnson, on the basis that these are the main candidates who might be seen as likely to improve things for Labour. [I'll leave aside the question of whether that is right - it's the perception I was thinking about]. My further thought was that a bet on Miliband (currently 2-1) might also be profitable in its own right, after a Labour election defeat, even if it’s not needed as a hedge. But the odds may not be sufficiently favourable to make this a good strategy.
@291:
Oi! Just remember you’re not on holiday. You work for us now. We own you. Dance, monkey boy. DANCE FOR OUR PLEASURE.
288- Most of the the Western half of the country is pro-russian (I think)
292 Your campaign has slipped under the radar to the extent that Betfair do not yet have a price up for you. Maybe Shadsy can quote us some special odds….
Good luck and enjoy. Looking forward to your reports.
278. That should be ‘former Labour MP’ Robert Maxwell…. If he had been a tory mp, the BBC would never let us forget, but surprisingly when Captain Bob’s name pops up, that fact is forgotten.
293 - LOL! Look, by my standards getting up at 7:30am, commuting for an hour, writing a few thousand words, then crashing through jet lag constitutes a holiday!
295 - Anything over 5000/1 is value…
294. The western half? And if they are so pro-Russian would they have elected a pro-western President?
299- Whoops, yeah I meant eastern…..DOH!
272 - He merely echoed the statements of Sir Mike Jackson, who knows a thing or two about such matters. The argument against is one of people who stand at a remove, listening to the people who have experience,not those who haven’t, leads to more effective, and less emotionally incontinent, policy.
@301:
Peter Hitchens speaks for nothing except his own neurosis-fractured psyche. I think he still can’t deal with dear brother Christopher having gotten all the charm, intellect and talent.
292 Richard
That’s a tricky one. The difficulty is that there are a number of candidates if Brown falls and it’s hard to identify value in any of them. I have a number of such hedge type bets but it’s an expensive business and you could get a candidate coming late from off the radar - Cruddas for example.
Here are some alternatives to consider. You could back Cameron as only Leader at the next GE. Or you could back GB to leave office in 2009, either second or third quarter. Betfair has such markets and I think you can still get 3/1 on a 2009 departure with Hills, in which case it’s a value bet.
The good thing about these alternatives are that a) they may actually happen and b) if they don’t, it means Brown goes trundling on to electoral disaster and you clean up on the spreads.
Anyway, that’s what I’ve done, but please, no litigation if it all backfires!
302 - And Jackson? Do you suggest that you know better than him and rampaging around bashing the russkies is a useful foreign policy?
298 5000/1 ?!! I should imagine the chances of you becoming VP (Virtually Pis*ed) are much better than that, Morus?
Not on the wagon, are we?
@304:
Is Sir Mike Jackson on record as saying the IRA and the EU are equivalent, and that going to war in 1939 was idiotic? If so, then maybe Peter has found a fellow traveller.
Bah! Raining in Edinburgh. Currently Scotland are 93/5 (31.5/47 ov)
303 Incidentally Richard, I don’t know if the boys at Sporting Index are reading this thread, but the Labour price clicked down one point since it started.
306 - Who the hell cares about Hitchens? What about Jackson and what he said? Are you saying that one of our most prominent Generals is a girly wimp who must love the commies?
The bizarre bellicose ranting at the start of the Georgia conflict from a few is becoming more and more embarrassing in retrospect. McCain looks less a statesman now, he’s just a belligerent man stuck hopelessly in a timewarp.
@309:
I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT.
305 - The value in that market is long gone, PtP. Best bet on me becoming AG (Absolutely Ghoulashed) instead…
It is little over a year since we were told that Cameron was unpopular with his fellow Conservatives - in politics events and the level of support can change rapidly. What will NOT help the Conservatives at all is the “nastiness” of dozens of the comments posted on your site. I, as a Lib-Dem, wouldn’t want to co-operate with such people. Clegg - a “joke” ? Until, perhaps, in a hung parliament Cameron needs Lib- Dems to form an administration !Liberals and Lib-Dems have been “Buried” by the media and opponents many times. Watch this space !!!
309 - If you weren’t one of those suggesting that Russia needed to be taught a lesson then I apologise but there were quite a few and startlingly bellicose.
Jackson basically said that rampaging around like a bunch of testosterone filled tw*ts was the worst option and that Russia was not the nation, and was not acting, in the way that the hawks were suggesting. He also knows that Georgia is hardly lily white.
270 - Typical grasping of only part of the detail from you, SeanT. The Irish team includes the majority of Northern Irish athletes at the Games. (Indeed I’m rather hoping Belfast’s Paddy Barnes will win our first medal tomorrow afternoon.) The BBC is the home broadcaster for these Northern Ireland athletes (and I’m sure they and their families all pay their licence fees) so there really is nothing to get yourself wound up about no matter how much you enjoy it. (Personally I think the BBC commentary is quite enthusiastic enough about the Irish competitors at the Games but either way it’s something Northern Irish people are quite entitled to have a view on.)
311 Noted with thanks, Morus.
Now where’s that Shaddsy gone….?
New Thread!
@313:
Is this all to do with your one-man PBC vendetta against anything John McCain says and does?
Which statements by McCain would you characterise as ‘rampaging around like a testosterone-filled tw*t’?
314- “The BBC is the home broadcaster for these Northern Ireland athletes (and I’m sure they and their families all pay their licence fees)”
I’m sure they DONT pay their license fees. Payment of the License fee in N.Ireland is woeful.
And also, since they are representing Ireland, they clearly dont feel they are British so why should a British TV Channel report on them? The local Ulster news can report on them.
318 - Dont be a tw@t. Representing Ireland at the Olympics (or Six Nations rugby or another other sporting event) does not diminish one’s Britishness (if that is what one considers oneself to be). If you think otherwise could I suggest you ask Davy Tweed if he agrees with you?
319- I’d rather carry this on on the next thread!
Errr let me see. You have a choice of Ireland or Britain to represent. You choose Ireland. I think that makes you Irish. Should the BBC ask all the N.Ireland athletes who are representing Ireland if they also consider themselves British, and then only report on them?
Sorry, you represent a team other than Britain, the BBC is under no obligation to report on you.
I don’t mean to come across as anti-irish. I wish them all (Ireland and N.Ireland) good luck and if they want to represent Ireland then fine, it is their choice.
320 - The BBC is the state broadcaster for the UK. The UK happens to cover two different Olympic teams - GB and Ireland. Athletes from part of the UK (ie NI) can choose to represent either team. The choice of team does not affect one’s nationality or identity (which deserves to be respected by all). One can be Irish and British.
Either way people from a part of the UK have every right to expect the state broadcaster that they fund to cover their athletes at an event like this.
With respect, you’ve read too much into the comments made by Cameron. Responding to the question, ‘What’s your favourite political joke?’ by saying ‘Nick Clegg’ is not the same as saying ‘Nick Clegg is a total joke’.
As for the comment about Brown - let’s just remind ourselves about how he behaved regarding the Lisbon Treaty and it’s hard to disagree. Brown is a liar.
116. Pleased to agree with some of your opinions, Robert. But John Redwood is streets ahead of the others, I’m afraid on economics.
As for the Euro, the euro interest rate in Italy is half a percent higher than the rate in Germany. And yet they call it a single currency!
Government borrowing in Britain is sky-rocketing, so taxes are having to be raised, and lenders can call the tune with the government so hungry for cash. Of course inflation is a factor, but interest rates affect future rates of inflation, not the current one. That is because government spending was too high and interest rates kept too low in 2005/6 when there was an election to defraud, sorry win.
As Stalin so clearly said, the voters count for nothing in an election, but not those who count the votes. As in the Philippines so in Britain, elections are clearly being rigged.
169.”Don’t confuse witty comments that hit home with over confidence. DC has a very good record of judging the public mood and getting his tone just right. The ‘taking the public for fools’ line was established last October and has really hurt Brown because it strikes a genuine chord. It’s only Labour wishful thinking to dwell on the ‘Flashman’ stuff. It doesn’t play with anyone else.”
Neatly sums it up IMHO.
179.”171 - This world record they broke only stood for about a day didn’t it as they broke the record the other day in the build up.”
Yes, IIRC they broke their previous record set last year in Manchester in the previous qualifying round.
196.”I’m greatly enjoying seeing the Comment is Free bearpit tear the lovely Yvette a new wrong’un:”
Don’t normally troll through the comments there, but it was quite illuminating and in the end addictive.