So will it have made a difference?
September 23rd, 2008
Do Brown’s survival chances look better?
Sorry about the site going down in the middle of the speech. We’ve been overwhelmed by traffic with so many wanting to follow the discussion.
I found interesting the way he name-checked almost every single cabinet member - that’s a Brown innovation. He very rarely recognises that there is anybody else within his government.
Overall I felt there was a surprising lack of passion. I was expecting much more than that.
There was also the good joke about now not being the time for a novice. Was that a swipe at Cameron or Miliband?
Will it have made a difference? Well for the short time - yes. But how will it look next week when the Tories have started to pick it at and, of course, Cameron has made his big speech.
There will undoubtedly be a polling boost if only because of the scale of the coverage tonight. Will that be sustained?
Sorry about the multiple postings. I was desperately trying to get a new thread up and made a number of attempts.
Mike Smithson
.
MessageSpace Advertising
Fingers crossed we are back up and running now! Was getting the shakes.
There are a lot of Labour bloggers spasming with delight at the moment - which is hardly a surprise. But tomorrow morning, their bubble will have burst.
It was an empty speech. It will do nothing to challenge the view that he has no ability to change.
Look at some of the facts he quoted (such as giving people the vote) and they will unravel.
His pledges on provision of computers and other such things do not go to the heart of what the country needs right now.
He had nothing to say as to how we could live within our means and how we have to look hard at future priorities.
He made a lot of noise. That is all it was.
Are we back ?
Jonah Brown strikes again…
Hello all. As per on (local) election night, please feel free to utilise my blog if this site falls under the weight of extraordinary traffic again.
I’ve set up this thread especially:
http://orangebyname.blogspot.com/2008/09/possible-pbcom-replacement-thread.html
Cheers!
Went down well here. Some good touches.
Any odds changed since the speech ?
P.S. I’d recommend saving the link now, so that you can utilise it if we have another crash.
Andrea’s bringing punch and pie.
Just reposting this from one of the multiple threads on the go.
“did fix the roof while the sun was shining…..
evidence?”
Well I thought the problem with Downing Street was in the foundations, subsidence means its sinking?
Did Gordon Brown mention the Armed Forces during his speech?
The armed forces got a sentence or two. That was about it.
I really don’t recall hearing Darling mentioned at all
Guido at his best….
Did Miliband Do the DJing?
As Sarah Brown came on “Beautiful Day’ by U2 was playing in the background, you could hear the lyrics:
You’re out of luck
And the reason that you had to care
The traffic is stuck
And you’re not moving anywhere
Hmmm.
Thought it was a nice touch that Sarah introduced him. It was also nice that he shook her hand after the speech. Like loving husbands do.
Tags: Anyone But Gordon
How long was the standing ovation btw ?
Speech was better than expected and obviously went down well with the party faithfull in the hall. Will it change anything? Not a thing.
as we know it’s all about how it plays in the six o’clock news. The BBC have shown themselves willing to bat for brown when needed expect it to be laid on thick tonight.
Maybe the question to ask is, what has Browns speech changed in terms of Labour’s popularity with the electorate? - not Labour’s core vote, but the voters who will decide the next election.
6. No change in the seats spread market on SpreadFair.
11 - About 4 minutes I think.
MIke Smithson knows that the same thread has loaded multiply so no need to call him!
I thought the dig about his children at the start, a dig at Cameron, was utterly inappropriate and mean-spirited twaddle that shows how bitter he is about Cameron’s background. Especially since he certainly HAS used his children in photoshoots.
Please tell me that he didn’t actually shake his wife’s hand.
(http://orangebyname.blogspot.com/2008/09/possible-pbcom-replacement-thread.html)
So whilst brave men get killed abroad for Zanulabour they get a word in the Dear Leader’s speech…………what can one expect from such a turd?
The direct payroll vote of Labour activists must make up a big chunk of the Conference audience.
360 Mps with 200 likely to lose their jobs in 2010 = 200.
4 assistants per MP with 200×4 = 800
SPADs = 200+
Labour party workers 2/3 of which are up for the chop = 200
Policy bodies like IPPR that will lose Govt contracts = 200
A total of 1,600 before we even get into the quangos. A change of Govt will bring a lot of unemployment to the lefties.
5. My my, that’s a surprise!
In all honesty, the Big Speech wasn’t the laughable catastrophe I was hoping for, nor was it the soaring game-changer I feared. Ed Miliband must be on crack if he thinks that was “the speech of Gordon’s life” - or maybe that was a subtle dig at the very low standard of Gordon speeches in general.
There were some decent lines, the wife bit was clever, he spoke with convincing passion at times, but there were still all the old Brown problems - the awkwardness, the weird “smile”, the tedious waffle and cliches, the absurdly overblown promises (a British century!), and the very uncosted pledges.
Most of all he didn’t address the two central issues: how he can embody “the necessary change” when he has been in power for eleven years, and why anyone should listen to him now, when everyone has switched off cause he’s lied too often before (the polls had no effect on my decision etc etc!).
So all in all, status quo ante I think. I reckon Labour will get a boost from sheer coverage, but it will melt away quickly. Then Labour will be back to right back to square one.
However in one respect I think this Conference was definitely good for Gordo: coz Miliband failed again. The wooden speech, the weird photos, the Heseltine slip: for some reason, the boy David ain’t got it.
And yet I still sense Labour want rid of Brown. So what will they do?
FWIW. My view is that this was a shameless core vote appeal. Child poverty, NHS, Tory-bashing, etc., and with that limited aim it can be regarded as a success. There were a couple of lines to bring a small tear to a socialist’s eye, but little meat for the neutral or the swinger.
Tomorrow’s verdict will be that he’s safe, he’s shored up the base and swatted his rivals. What the verdict will be when the circus returns to Westminster is less certain. Personally, I think he’s doomed still and won’t see out 2009.
9.Thanks Simon, Charlotte on one of the other threads said the same, she mentioned that some in the audience did not applaud them either.
It is pretty disgusting considering what is going on in Afghanistan just now, but no surprise from this hypocritical and unfeeling bunch of incompetent cretins!
I had to turn off. It was nauseating in its vacuous mawkishness.
Full of false assertions, twisted stats, unbelievable pretension; how could anybody with half a brain not be repelled by it?
I remember attending two rallies during the ‘64 election. Heard both Wilson and Home; didn’t agree with one. But both were rational, unsentimental but delivered with feeling, complete with jokes that were genuinely funny and delivered with an underlying assumption that the audience were not fools.
Brown? 10th rate.
I expect to see Labour poll 26-30%.
And then fall off a cliff sub 20% in the next 6 months.
And when the FTSE hits below 3500 …
There is a delicious irony that by (just) saving his own skin, Brown destroys Labour. Love it.
Breakdown of the speech in words (from da Fink)
New: 53 Future: 11
Fair/Fairness: 36 Global: 10
Child/Children: 23 Fight: 7
Labour: 20 I: 85
NHS: 16 You: 22
Britain: 14 Cameron: 1
Economy/Economic: 12 Tony: 1
Country: 20
Julian H oh yes Brown greeted his wife by shaking her hand… weird.
Did she conceive through an exchange of cannisters?
He claimed that Labour were responsible for giving working people and women the vote.
He must be the only politician who thinks Labour were in power in 1867, 1885, or 1918.
I switched off after he name checked the cabinet it was like:
On drums Ed Miliband
On base Hattie Harmond
Obvious and tedious
Did he REALLY shake his wife’s hand?
Did he mention the LibDems once?
I know I am not a fan - but if you don’t engage with them, they won’t just disappear.
New ARG National and State polls :
National
McCain 43% .. Obama 49%
Arkansas
McCain 53% .. Obama 41%
Massachusetts
McCain 39% .. Obama 53%
Oregon
McCain 41% .. Obama 52%
Pennsylvania
McCain 46% .. Obama 50%
Vermont
McCain 38% .. Obama 56%
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/
Gaby Hinsliff is hinting at something big -( http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2008/sep/23/gordonbrown.labourconference) anyone got wind of what it might be?
He must have said ’settlement’ at least 100 times.
Overall it was clearly a good speech, I don’t know how anyone can disagree with that. We’ll see how it pans out over the next few days.
Will posting the same topic three times make a difference?
29 - Or even existed prior to 1906!
As someone not particularly inclined towards Brown, I thought it was a pretty good speech and has probably done enough to prevent further leadership speculation for a while. Some popular promises and some recognition for various people and groups - far short of the radical change needed for a truly progressive Britain of course, but a stark comparison between the social acheivements of Labour and the opposition to those acheivements every step of the way by the Tories.
I think the speech will motivate the party to get out and start focusing on the Tories again, rather than purely on attacking each other, because the spectre looming large of a return to Toryism is something neither the party nor the public at large will want to herald.
29 - I noticed that too….and of course in 1928 under a Tory government!
29.Now knowing how well read our dear PM is on all matters of political history, do you think that was a genuine mistake or deliberate and blatant lying to the country?
The suffrage lies are just stupid. People have access to historical facts, and the Conservatives aren’t just going to let Brown claim credit for their good deeds.
Interesting claim that a quarter of a million people would be dead if the government had been Conservative.
Delivery was generally better than I expected. The Potter and “I’m glad we’re a team” jokes were flat but the novice one was better delivered, and a better line.
Overegged in every department. They’re going to spend billions they don’t have, and will bring peace to the Middle East, in between curing cancer and separating 2 year olds from their parents at the taxpayers’ expense.
I have to say that, overall, it was better than I expected in delivery, content varied (novice was good as I said) but an awful lot was verging on insane, it was either factually untrue or hopelessly optimistic (peace to the Middle East).
I think most applause was genuine. Labour’s clemency will not be mirrored by the electorate.
did anyone jump up and shout ‘Bingo’ during Brown’s speech?
How long was the ovation? Fair bit of bile on Nick Robinson’s blog, not necesarily represnetative, but more hostile than usual.
34 - Settlement requires a negotiation.
The only way for GB to seal any new settlement is to allow us to vote on it.
So if he wants to settle, I will settle for a General Election.
29. Well spotted! Brown is just a liar, isn’t he? A big fat shameless liar.
What’s more, he’s the worst kind of liar - filled with the sense of his own moral rightness even as he trots out the lies. Ugh.
I was speaking to a friend-of-a-friend the other day who met Brown at a dinner party and they said the usual stuff: in person he’s warm and clever and quite likeable, just totally lacking in charisma and common sense.
I find it hard to square these reports of how decent he is in private - with the endless, endless lies he tells.
27. “chang*” was used 27 times.
Any chance the media will actually point out this attempt to rewrite political history?
33 - That is a big hint… I hope it is as spectacular as they would like us to believe
44, yeah, the Mash said he hates the Chinese too:p
25.
I’m certainly hoping for a decent bounce for Labour. If they hit 30% I fully expect them to stick with GB till the end.
Milliband couldn’t have looked more of a tool this week if had been trying.
Every time I see Sarah Brown I think Gordon can’t be as bad as he seems but he certainly hides his charms well.
40.”Interesting claim that a quarter of a million people would be dead if the government had been Conservative.”
Don’t tell me he said that after 11 years of this governments Foreign policy!!
I saw a bloke today on tele. He kept trying to convince he was leading some sort of organisation and even went as far as saying he was our PM or some sort of leader of some sort lol.
46. Its probably ball achingly dull like Sarah is pregnant again - blah..
43. All politicians are liars. Big fat shameless liars. But you probably can’t see that through your blue-tinted spectacles.
27.
Britain: 14
Country: 20
England: 0
Perfectly average speech - managed to avoid being completely dire but there wasn’t anything fantastic pulled out of the hat.
A couple of observations:
- The ‘family as props’ thing was a little bit crass; especially as he got his wife to introduce him and, only a few weeks ago in his recent ‘relaunch’ subtly implied the death of his daughter had brought him fresh perspective. A bit of an unnecessary dig, therefore.
- The spending promises were typical Gordon;
: there won’t be many cancer patients who pay prescription charges *anyway,* as most will either not work or be older. Also reinforces the fact that Scotland and Wales have free prescriptions for all.
: the pledge to abolish child poverty was playing to the hall (and JK Rowling - we all know Labour have a poor record at meeting their targets on the subject)
: the rest just looked like typical ‘chuck cash we haven’t got at things to look good.’ Not once did Gordon say where the money was coming from. If Cameron had announced all those things Labour would have been shouting ‘unfunded spending pledges!’ before the speech was over.
- Not that much on the economy, actually. Not a criticism, not a commendation, just a comment.
Has it saved Gordon? Probably. Especially as Milipede shot himself in the foot yesterday. Has it saved the Labour Party from its unpopularity and its strong likelihood of losing the next election? Not a chance.
Not a game-changer.
This won’t make any difference to his poll ratings after the Glenrothes by election has passed. Back to square one.
28 - Why didn’t he goose her and wink lasciviously? A major missed opportunity.
49, 240,000 saved by the NHS. The Tories, naturally, would have driven them over minefields.
Still, by numbers the Tories win because of Iraq.
51
LOL!
Good peice on Con Home about Gordon’s broken promises.,.,…..
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/torydiary/files/browns_broken_promises.pdf
52. Maybe. But few politicians lie as blatantly, frequently, badly and POINTLESSLY as Gordon Brown.
Why make a claim about suffrage which is simply untrue and can be checked in a second? Why not just… not say the untrue thing, and say something true instead?
It’s weird. He’s weird.
Only heard the first bit in the car, so can’t comment on all of Browns speech, but a couple of points I want to make on the first bit of his speech;
1. He says he’s a serious man for a serious time and doesn’t do celebrity…. After just being to first party leader to be introduced on stage by his wife! Doesn’t add up, does it?
2. He said he wants a new settlement for fairness, yet this was the PM that got himself embroiled in the 10p tax fiasco - How fair was that? Doesn’t add up, does it?
This is the problem with Brown. He is so transparently political in every single thing he does that his actions often don’t substantiate his words. He is barren and bare and the the British people can see through him.
As far as the rest of his speech goes, from the details I’ve read it sounds as though it was typical Browb. Loads of new initiatives that will probably fall apart under scrutiny, but nothing coherant to hold it all together. No “vision” beyond bashing the Tories. No apology for the debale of going to Iraq during the Tory conference. No explanation about why he bottled the election. Nothing.
Oh and it sounds as we’re back to good old fashioned tax and spend socialism. How conforting as we face recession to know that the splurge goes on and the whole lot will be stuck on the national debt for the Tories to sort out!
New Research 2000/Quad City Times poll for Iowa :
McCain 39% .. Obama 53%
http://www.qctimes.com/articles/2008/09/21/news/local/doc48d5d7d0b32a5478622581.txt
61 - he is beyond weird!
60 even piece
58 - I really think that we should raise public debate beyond how many people would be dead/alive if certain politicians had/hadn’t been in power. It is crass and for a Prime Minister to resort to that is abysmal.
Gaby Hinsliff is definitely at the conference bubble. Certainly not seeing it like the outside world.
32 Just a correction JackW. The 49-43 split was Aug 30-Sept 1. The most recent poll it shows is Sept 20-Sept 22 and it’s Obama 48% McCain 46%
66, vaguely reminiscent of the Republican fear tactics in the 2004 US election. Vote Democrat and Al-Qaeda will get you!
33.”And he got away with apologising for the 10p tax debacle; hinting at spending cuts ahead; acknowledging his own unpopularity; and even the brutal attack on David Cameron for putting his children in the public eye (the line that Brown’s children were “people, not props” caused arguments in Number 10 right to the last minute, I hear).”
I would have thought that the jury is still out on this speech, I have not heard it yet and I suspect many other unsuspecting souls haven’t either. Won’t get a feel for how it went down until we see the media coverage tomorrow and the post speech polls.
God, tell me Brown did not attack Cameron through his children while having the gall to say that he did not do the same with his own?
Must have a listen to the speech, but if he did, that is pretty disgusting behaviour, but again just a measure of the man!
All cancer drugs for free? Sounds popular, but what are other people with very serious, perhaps life threatening conditions to think? That they are less important?
So often Brown is spun as a man of substance. He’s just full of gimmicks.
Hello all, didn’t see Brown’s speech, but read it online. I imagine the delivery ranged from Bad to John McCain. I thought it was quite good, not great. Few lines I thought were interesting but it wasn’t memorable and it will win him the battle (with the Labour party) but not the war (with the tories). Or he will be unceremonially dumped in two weeks.
71, I think it will be extended to other conditions in time. Of course, this will all be funded by… er…
Tactically adequate, strategically bad.
Gordon Brown is a tactical politician. He is all about hitting the tactical points -
Abolishing the 10% band allowed him to claim he lowered the basic rate.
All the stealth taxes.
The visit to Iraq during the Tory conference
The talk of nonpartisan politics
The many little campaigns against Tony.
But, when tactics are not enough (for example when the economy is doing badly, or Tony says “No, Im not leaving. What deal?”) Gordon is stuffed. He is really bad at the strategic level.
Now, he has hit the lefty targets (bludgeon the City, fairness, NHS etc)
The problem is that he isnt actually very good at managing things or thinking through the implications of his claims. His NHS claims will unravel - the whole 40+ health check thing was ridiculed when it first came out. He has no idea about how to deal with the financial crisis, and if he isnt careful he is going to make it worse. Once again he went for gimmicks - the £700 internet voucher thing, the child poverty legislation (WTF difference does that make?)
Final strategic direction? Leftwards.
And when the Tories say “see he is just a stupid thieving lefty after all”, the voters are going to run to the polling booth to vote against higher taxes = Gordon.
A better speech than one might have feared as a Labour loyalist, but not good enough to make a Tory activist fear. Enough to stabilise him in place - the left got a few crumbs and without them, the Blairites wont move. But, game changing? No. At best a beta/gamma minus.
Btw, nobody’s mentioned that he criticised the Tory stance on the EU. Apparently they’re extremist and isolationist. Ha. That’s what sticking to a manifesto pledge gets you.
73 - The Conservatives most probably.
Speech is here by the way, if any one wants to read it;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/sep/23/gordonbrown.labour1?gusrc=rss&feed=uknews
33. I like those polls, Jack. Shame they’re ARRRRGGGGHHHHH
67. It would be interesting to re-read the thread on Brown’s speech last year. At the time the lefties on here (when there were so many more of them! how strange!) were acclaiming it as a magnificent address worthy of Pericles in his Prime, and just a few of us, ahem, were asking for sickbags.
In retrospect everyone agrees the speech was a bit of a clunker, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
I suspect the cheerleaders at the conference will calm down soon enough, and get a similar perspective: they will realise the speech was, in fact, the same old same old, with slightly better delivery and some unusual mawkishness.
Ergo, nothing has really changed.
66. Its a bit like the most disgraceful political speech in my life-time, Blairs “Forces Of Conservatism” speech. That speech was really the first thing that drove me away from the Labour party in what 98? 99? Of course it was to get worse, but I thought that speech was an outrage!
To be honest though, the best bit of spin I’ve heard all day was not from a member of the cabinet, not from Gordon, not from a Grauniad journalist but…
… ta daa! I give you - Nick Robinson! Who managed to tell us after the speech that Gordon Brown has always been serious and dour and not obsessed with spin!
I repeat - *Nick Robinson thinks Gordon Brown doesn’t put an emphasis on spin!*
74. Ken: “Final strategic direction? Leftwards.
And when the Tories say “see he is just a stupid thieving lefty after all”, the voters are going to run to the polling booth to vote against higher taxes = Gordon.”
And presumably vote FOR the only party offering lower taxes, then - and that ain’t the Tories!
78, but Labour *want* to believe in Brown. It’ll save them the sheer nastiness of burying an axe in his head.
The Tories, by contrast, would be prowling about, scenting weakness and positively looking forward to a chance of bloodletting.
74. brown is doing everything to ensure his survival as leader. But every time he does he just condemns Labour to a worse defeat.
IMO the leadership issue needs to be resolved soon, it can’t go on for another 18 months. How about a back me or sack me vote straight after conference?
Interesting quote from the Guardian in May this year:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/may/10/health.nhs
Phelps (social policy officer at Citizens Advice) said Citizens Advice raised the problem with the government in 2001. “It is what we continually see in our bureaux - a group of people in poor health and on low incomes who are not getting their prescriptions. It is very worrying,” she said.
So its only taken 7 years for Gordon to agree to this. Why now? *s*
90% of the calls and posts to the BBC about the speech have been negative . says a lot really.
Interesting response on pb.com. Quite positive I think, even from the Tories. Being at conference I am in no position to judge how it will go down outside. It went down well here. Should get a decent press from what I was (over)hearing in the lobby. He looked relaxed and by the end was really enjoying it from where I was sitting, which was about as close as you can get.
81, I thought the Lib Dems were for an equal tax burden overall but cutting it for low/middle income chaps and raising it for wealthier ones?
I am back. Saw much of Gordon’s speech; it was quite good. It will at least buy him time, but will save Glenrothes? He should have had a go at LDs.
Have sore head with about 40 clamps in it, and operation a partial success - with a lot of treatment to come. At least surgery has not made me into Labour or Tory.
68 Kevin. Thanks. I read the wrong line !!
……………………..
Meanwhile after McCain indicated he owned only American cars, it seems that three of his thirteen cars are foreign. Obama now has the following ad running in car plant rich Michigan :
http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/foreignvehicles_ad/
ATID. Could you explain what the *s* means in every post you make?
34. Labour to introduce PR?
Starting betting on a Hung Parliament, lads..
88, some good news for today:)
How are you?
The speech will unravel as it is picked over by analysts on all sides of the political spectrum
Telling lies about suffrage undermines some of the other points he was trying to make.
The sly reference to his children will misfire - as will the use of his wife. And make no mistake, it was a stunt.
90 Its a smile for those of us who are not technical enough to produce those yellow smiley faces. And its not in every post. Apologies if it annoys you.
Unless I’ve missed it has there been any discussion of Boris’s article this morning?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/23/do2301.xml
91, that would be despicable, quite frankly. I can’t see it happening. I think the big thing could be nationalising mortgages.
88
Good luck
If Labour get a poll boost from this it’ll be a good time to start buying Tory seats.
67. Hinsliff is definitely in the conference bubble. This is not a game-changing speech. It was fine, and will shore up Brown’s leadership, but it wasn’t good enough to change the underlying political movement towards the Tories. It also contained a few clangers, but the media have always been reluctant to catch Labour out on this and I’m sadly convinced they’ll continue to do so.
78. Nothing Brown said today was as toe-curlingly awful as “British Jobs for British Workers,” last year, when the screaming Labour Party delegates got up and applauded the language of the BNP. The children-as-political-tools comment was the worst this year, not as bad as BJFBW but unnecessary and crude.
91 - If Labour were to introduce PR, that is just about the only way I can think of ensuring that the Conservatives polled over 50%.
86. No, not “quite positive”. The speech was dreadful and vacant - as ever - it’s just that his delivery was very marginally improved.
Moreover, the many bizarre pledges he made will horribly unravel, as they always do.
You lefties never learn. You sit there cheering Gordon Brown - like you did with his 10p tax Budget - and then some time later you realise it was all a load of rubbish, and actually pretty disastrous. And then you get angry with him.
SBS - Wonderful to have you back SBS - hope the prognosis is good? Wishing you a speedy recovery…
91. PR would be fantastic for the Lib Dems and might ruin Labour as a political force.
74 - “Tactically adequate, strategically bad.”
Reminds me of the old joke: Q. What’s the difference between strategy and tactics? A. Strategy is a long term, premeditated plan of action designed to achieve a set of preconceived outcomes. Whereas tactics are tiny minty sweeties.
Is the opposite of a bounce an ecnuob?
“Final strategic direction? Leftwards.
And when the Tories say “see he is just a stupid thieving lefty after all”, the voters are going to run to the polling booth to vote against higher taxes = Gordon.”
That Politics Home poll said that Labour could save a sizable chunk of seats if they went leftwards.
Not a bad speech as these thing’s go; something for the battle hardened activist’s
For the rest of us he looked like he was going to throw up just before he spoke, whilst most of us vomit when he actually talks. Still he did throw in Sarah Brown as an hors-d’oevre. Fahhhh!
Seems to me like a completely unremarkable speech. Which positive comment will be remembered for years to come? The only comments which may be remembered are negatives, the children line and the novice lines are (1) completely out of touch and (2) bullying to poor Mr Millipede Bananaman. Failing to mention Millipede and Darling was also an attempt to sideline, the tactic of a bully.
86. Jonathan. I think I’m trying to be as measured as I can be on here - I don’t think the speech was good, I don’t think it was dire - I think it was average at best, and did the job of saving Brown’s bacon. But, as I have said before, I strongly doubt it will make up any ground with the electorate.
106. Did it? Are those Lab > Lib?
94. No, it didn’t annoy me, it merely puzzled me. Now I know it’s a lopsided smile, I’m happy. *s*
108. Not mentioning Darling = Balls as chancellor next week ?
108, he did mention Milipede.
Not seen any of it, but after reading the BBC website review, I was about to comment on here about the “no time for a novice” gag possibly being a bit of an own goal because all the reporting of his speech will now surely be done through the prism of “Miliband doing a Heseltine - or not” rather than the PM setting out his vision. And thus fanning the flames of a challenge rather than damping down.
But then I read on here that HE SHOOK HIS WIFE’S HAND! And the “no time for a novice” bit suddenly seems an irrelevance.
OMG. What a contrast with Dave - arm round his wife, they mutter sweet nothings to each other (”inadvertently” picked up on the mic, oops) and look quite the normal happy loving couple.
But Brown SHAKES HER FECKIN HAND?!!!
Jesus, what a freak.
Surely they don’t sleep in the same bed?
And I love the U2 lyrics as he comes on stage. Says it all dunnit…
As for the substance, looks like yet more borrowing, or higher taxes for Osborne to have to introduce. I love the “computers for poor kids” initiative. Sounds like another Soviet-style cracker.
Why not give them tractors?
112, I hope so, I win a bet!
Unfortunately the currency would then devalue so much we would have to use smooth, shiny rocks instead of coins:(
Glad to have you back, SBS
81 SBS. Welcome back, welcome back indeed !!
SBS - cheers!
91. RodCrosby, I know you are desperate to believe the Tories can’t win, but there’s no way that victory will be prevented by Labour bringing in PR. C’est impossible.
For a start, they have no mandate. I also suspect they would face opposition to such a move from their own benches - enough to scupper it in the Commons, or mire it in hideous filibustering etc. The opposition to such a grotesque stunt would be ferocious from many sides.
Then they would have to somehow get it through the Lords, who would be bound to oppose such a major constitutional change occurring without the explicit permission of the people - in an election or a referendum.
And they don’t even have the time to do it, I don’t think. Taint gonna happen. Dream on.
109 No point speculating, especially from me here. Approve of the changes to prescription charges for long term illnesses. Was an interesting experience being up front.
Excellent news SBS - how long will you be in their clutches? - hope you can claim free prescriptions now!
Speech was impressive but a bit too long and really not much in it but “trust me”. Lets see what Cameron can do. Thought attacking the £1m inheritance tax policy was right if about a year late!
114. DCs “Love you babe” comment last year, made me want to vomit.
He mentioned Darling AND Miliband, I love how people just lie after the speech.
104 - What’s the difference between unlawful and illegal?
One’s against the law, the other’s a sick bird.
I find it very difficult to watch Brown without getting distracted by his odd facial movements.
This speech will make little difference overall.
63 The Iowa R2000 poll showing a 14 percent Obama lead was posted on Sunday, but I guess Jack W thinks the news was so good it is worth repeating
119. Was it long-term illnesses or just cancer? As has been pointed out, it’s less radical or expensive than it looks, as the majority of people with cancer will be exempt from prescription charges in the first place.
Also, I didn’t see him shake Sarah’s hand, he definitely kissed her before the speech anyway.
126. Long term illnesses.
122, be fair, it was an hour and someone may’ve missed something. It’s better than lying during a speech, read from a script prepared for months.
103 It wont make me buy the Observer…. and it would absolutely screw Labour. Why would anyone want to vote Labour???, It would just make more people vote Tory to get Labour out. I don’t actually believe Gordon will do it, but its possible, never underestimate Gordon’s ability to screw the nation from the point of self interest.
110. Don’t think so, there aren’t many Lib>Lab marginals, and I think it said there were about 60 seats that Labour could save. I don’t think the Liberals are going to win 60 seats at the next GE. You’ll have to read the report for yourself.
62- “He said he wants a new settlement for fairness, yet this was the PM that got himself embroiled in the 10p tax fiasco - How fair was that? Doesn’t add up, does it?”
This highlights an inevitable problem for parties that have been in total control for so long. If “fairness” doesn’t exist by now, whose fault is that? Eleven years in power isn’t enough for Labour to bring about fairness? How many years should that take? Also, what is it that Labour has been working on all these years if fairness wasn’t on the agenda up until now?
121. David Cameron’s worst conference moment must be “Let sunshine win the day.”
Yuk, yuk, yuk.
Almost as bad as Millipede’s “The world is a scary place.” How very inspiring.
89-These ads becoming puerile.
114 - What’s wrong with a nice handshake? I am not a big PDA man myself to be honest.
113/122 - Apologies he did mention Miliband and Darling. I was listening but the words were not registering. As usual with Brown.
122 - Charlie
I have searched the entire text of the speech and the only reference to our poor Chancellor was to say that he was going along with Gordon to visit the big boys in America.
There was no praise for him or acknowledgement of his role in anything.
No thanks.
Nothing.
133, that was bloody awful. Unlike Milipede, he’s made up for it with some damn good speeches though.
137. He definitely said ‘myself and Alastair Darling’ at one point, I’m sure of it.
Oh, I see what you’re saying. Yeah, you’re right, I don’t think he praised him.
139 - I used the PH full text and the only name check was the one I referenced
Tomorrows headlines:
He’s done it!
Gordon Pulls It Off!
Saved By the Balls’
Witty and confident speech thwarts rivals
Fridays Headlines:
More Plotters exposed
Why there’s more trouble ahead for Gordon
leadership contest ‘by Christmas’
Tories triumphant as Brwons rating flags further
68 - That’s right and a five point turnaround in Obama’s favour as ARG had him 3% behind in their previous national poll.
88 - Great to see you back SBS and hope the recovery proceeds apace.
128. Yes, apologies. It will be interesting (for me at least) to see how ‘long term illness’ is defined.
First verdicts from loyal-ish lefties. Jackie Ashley:
“So, was it good enough? Good enough for what? Good enough to quell the unrest once and for all? No. Good enough to make cabinet ultimatums or resignations now unthinkable? No. Good enough for a big lurch in the polls Labour’s way? Again, I fear not.
But was it good enough for those who have written off the prime minister to pause one final time? Yes, I think it was.”
Michael White:
“Not bad. Not bad at all. .. There was still too much about British exceptionalism for some tastes - do we still always have to have the best armed forces in the world? Isn’t “pretty good” good enough? - and easy talk about heroes in frontline public services. Those promises on policy he made will be unpicked and found wanting.
But for today it was enough. Slower, better delivery than usual, too. Perhaps he can change, adapt to new, demanding times. Brown has bought himself time.”
Seems to be the consensus. He’s done just enough, for now.
But events, dear boy, events…
Completely O/T but is Obama about to dump Biden?
http://theorangepartyblog.blogspot.com/2008/09/is-obama-planning-to-dump-biden.html
Would be an amazing turn of events
“He mentioned Darling AND Miliband, I love how people just lie after the speech.”
Any chance of taking that back Charlie. It appears other people also missed what you heard.
143. Despite it being ‘AAARGH’ it looks like the momentum is, once again, with Obama. The debates are going to be interesting, but at present it now looks like his to lose again.
Sorry Albion, I knew I shouldn’t have logged on today, I knew however decent the speech was, I’d still be in the minority in saying so. Apologies for the aggressive post.
Ed got more of a mention than David.
Perhaps we are in for a battle of the brothers
145. Yuk. Michael White doesn’t seem to realise that we’re fighting two wars and the armed forces only got about a sentence-worth of a mention, and yet he still thinks there’s something wrong about calling them the ‘best in the world.’
Earth to leftie.. earth to leftie… it’s *OK* to be proud of your country and the men and women fighting for it…
142. LOL!
The speech has obviously satisfied the conference and is getting a good-ish press but his future never depended on it and it will be forgotten in days or less if economic woes worsen. He will lose Glenrothes and very soon be back at square -1!
146- That would be total insanity. I haven’t heard anything approaching a good enough reason to do such a thing.
Is the ICM Guardian poll due tomorrow?I am right in saying fiedwork is normally Friday/Saturday/Sunday?If so the Lib dem bounce may have faded a bit and maybe a little benefit for Labour from events of last week.
When all the dust has settle after all conferences,say early November I think we will be back at con 45%,Lab 26%,Lib 18%,Oth 11%ie Tories c 20% lead.
rogerh
151, is that his real name, or cockney rhyming slang?:p
106. G. Not leftwards enough I suspect. Gordon isnt a natural lefty, he is more centrist, so while his tactical spin was leftwards (and will make him look left wing), it wont be enough to actually enthuse the base. Also to make progress leftwards, one needs money, whereas I think Gordon is going to have to embrace cuts. So leftwards for labour strategically, just enough to persuade everyone who isnt a lefty to vote against them, not leftwards enough to save seats.
If Labour want to go left, they have to get Cruddas in. If they want to go centrist they need to go Milliband/Purnell. Gordon gets them the worst of all worlds. Go Gordon.
145. I think they’re heading their bets a bit.
149. Charlie, you are entitled to your opinion. Stick at it. Your man did give a “decent” speech from the perspective of a leftie - nothing wrong with saying so.
The fact that the bulk of the country either disagrees or - morem probably - doesn’t care - does not make your opinion invalid.
And yes he did mention both Milibands, and Darling.
Incidentally I thought the cut-aways to a rather bored and contemptuous-looking Darling were priceless TV. I wonder if he’s for the chop or the swap - and he knows it.
155 - I was part of the fieldwork - on Thursday
I think given the year he has just had with terrorism, Afghanistan, Iraq and the credit crunch he may have thanked his Foreign Secretary and Treasurer for their support. Rather than just plodded out some tractor facts about what they were about to do.
DOW going negative after an early rally…. -21
146 - No.
Anyone going to make a serious point about the US basket case economy rather than pathetic personal stabs and whingeing?
Certainly not McCain, it’s all he has left.
146. No. What a ridiculous idea. Whoever wrote that article is basing it purely on wishful thinking.
Commentisfree has an online poll on the merits of the speech.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/poll/2008/sep/23/gordonbrown.labourconference
Running 60/40 in Brown’s favour at the moment; not brilliant, I’d have thought, from a Labour paper.
165 - I suspect that will change in the next few minutes!
165. Sean, if you saw the usual people on comment is free, that’s VERY good for Brown!
125 Jan. I’ve just noticed !! …. That’s two cock-ups this afternoon …. waiting on the third.
Meanwhile …. a little local media difficulty for Palin. She banned reporters from her UN meet and greet with foreign leaders for a simple photo op. CNN providing pool pictures for many outlets for the event pulled the plug !! …. Ooppps.
Brown’s saved his skin (for another week) seems to be the consensus.
God , this is desperate.
168 - Any more prone to error, Jack, and you too could be the Senior Senator from Delaware, running for VP!
146 - No, although the Intrade price on that eventuality has nudged up to over 8 but it’s still very low and the volumes are tiny.
95.
“has there been any discussion of Boris’s article this morning?”
Surely only Petronella is quaified to discuss the state of Boris’ article in them morning?
All in all, a decent speech given expectations …… which were catastrophically low, to be fair.
The rest, fairly predictable. Uninspiring, poor delivery, gimmick-focused, no vision. Ultimately it doesn’t really matter, since nobody else has stuck their head above the parapet, or raised the bar to a standard others are immediately measured against (as Cameron did when he captured the leadership). If Millipede had been impressive in his speech rather than plain leaden, Brown would have been dead in the water. He wasn’t, and he isn’t.
165 - On commentisfree, that’s a triumph for Gordon Brown.
Well, it seems he may have mentioned Darling, but not praised his work in the way he praised that of other ministers. Given that a large feature of the speech was the ‘trust us with the economy, we’re not novices’ message, that sounds like it could be curtains for the Chancellor. Perhaps that’s the ‘big announcement’ mentioned at 34 - Chancellor Balls?
34 - It sounds like another silly stunt to spoil the Conservative Party conference - after all, last years Iraq trip went down so well. Maybe a major Cabinet reshuffle over the weekend?
28.
“Breakdown of the speech in words (from da Fink)”
So he can count words. Do you think they might promote him to paperclips?
167. Fair point. Indeed, as I’m in a reasonably good mood and I’m off for a beer, I’ll accede your man did… OK. No more than that, but yeah… OK. He needed to shore up his base and that’s what he did.
But I still think he’s in deep deep sh1t, and its just gonna take one major setback to send him spiralling into oblivion. But then again he ’s made it through Conference without being garrotted, which itself looked doubtful a fortnight ago - so that is something.
And on that ecumenical note, I’m headed to the pub. Ciaociao!
169. ‘Brown’s saved his skin for another week’
That’s it isn’t it. He manages a stay of execution. But as Michael White says his policy promises will be found wanting.
176. A cabinet reshuffle had been hinted at in the past few days.
Sounds like Brown’s done well enough to throw a wet blanket over the already knock-kneed conspirators. Brown survives, limps on, Labour continues on the slow road to perdition.
175. Ed ‘So what?’ Balls? The Conservatives aren’t that lucky.
The Guardians a Tory paper now anyway, isn’t it?
One thing is certain, we can say that this speech was NOT the potentially politically defining speech that Camerons speech was last year. When you saw Cammos speech you just knew as you was watching it, that you was seeing history made. That here was a courageous leader rising to an unbelieavly high standard that had been set him by his party and the media. That speech and the IHT proposals of the previous day completely turned the politial narrative and changed the political weather. By that standard this speech falls woefully short.
Not a bad speech and will get decent write-ups. But not a game-changer. Tories will be on triumphalist form at their conference, Glenrothes is probably a lost cause, the economy will continue to drip bad news and the gloom will be back. It just reminds me of the dying days of IDS really.
New PPP poll for Colorado :
McCain 44% .. Obama 51%
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_CO_92365.pdf
It was a Labour leader’s speech not a PM’s speech. His intention was to infuse the activists with red meat promises that are unachievable. The “no time for a novice” line was aimed as much at Miliband as Cameron. He has made it impossible, for now, for anyone to challenge him which was probably his intention all along!
Can we please add ‘game changer’ the very long list of utterly worn out pb.com cliches.
184 One thing is ABSOLUTELY certain. the Conservative Party Conference will NOT be triumphalist.
Tracker Overview for today
Obama - 49 S2000, 48 Rasmussen, 47 Hotline, 47 Gallup, 46 Battleground.
McCain - 48 Rasmussen, 46 Battleground, 44 Gallup, 43 S2000, 43 Hotline
184. I don’t think there was anything as bad as IDS’s “quiet man” moment in Browns speech today, though.
Latest Gallup tracker :
McCain 47% .. Obama 44%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/110608/Gallup-Daily-Obama-Holds-3Point-Edge.aspx
190 Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!
191. Think you transposed those scores there Jack!
191 - Other way round, Jack W. You’re not having a good day…
McCain 44% .. Obama 47%
183. Cameron’s speech was good; but more for its delivery than its content. The fact he was facing down the Brown bounce and challenging him to call an election showed more courage than Brown has even managed to display. I wouldn’t say it was unbelievably great as a conference speech, but considering the situation the Tories found themselves in last year, it did its job very well.
Osborne’s speech on IHT was probably the best last year, but that might be because, you know, Cameron actually *lets* his shadow chancellor *announce* things to do with the economy!
188. I suspect what the poster meant was that the Tory confernece will have a sense of confidence that has been lacking at the Labour conference. They Tories scent blood and know victory is close. It won’t be a victory rally, but I’m sure it will be professional and confident. Not like a couple of years ago when they was riven bu internal feuds and disputes and The Sun termed them a dead parrot.
89. So is Rasmussen the only guy who is correct, or is his poll biased?
195. Should read, ‘has ever managed to display.’ I’m definitely not marking Gordo out to be a man of courage!!
189. So is Rasmussen the only guy who is correct, or is his poll biased?
189 This time it is ukpaul that let his Obama bias get the better of him
Battleground is not 46-46, but McCain 48, Obama 46.
Overall no clear tendency, except it is now clear that McCains declining trend has stopped.
@183. Gordon is physically incapable of giving such a speech. He just doesnt have that degree of vision. He really is one for tactics and is very good at them. But, in an economic situation like the one we are in, he is hopelessly out of his depth. Just as he was hopeless at forcing Tony out.
I think that those who are suggesting Ed Balls as Chancellor are onto something. Gordon has (I think) persuaded himself that he needs an ideas man in at No.11 and it fits in with the way he didnt laud AD in his speech. Balls is, however, a lightweight and I will be most amused if it does happen.
“For a decade Britain allowed an economy to be built on debt at every level: personal debt, corporate debt, banking debt and government debt. When you hear Gordon Brown say that we are better prepared than other countries to face the current problems consider these three facts. First, our average household debt is higher than any other country in the G7. Second, our house prices went up faster than house prices in America. Third, we enter this downturn with the highest budget deficit in the developed world and higher net debt than when Labour came to office. Gordon Brown simply refuses to even recognise the debt problem exists.” - Sqqueaky Osborne in The Independent.
Er and FOURTH: the Conservative ‘opposition’ (sic) have not proposed any serious opposition to any of the above ‘mismanagement’.
200. Jan I very much doubt ukpaul would misquote a poll on purpose. People have been imprisoned for less on this site!
Not leftwards enough I suspect. Gordon isnt a natural lefty, he is more centrist,”
No Ken-mr bean is a cnut-an utter utter cnut!
God only knows WHY you lot elected the snotgobbler in the first place!
201 - Ed Balls may be a lightweight, but it would make sense from Brown’s viewpoint. He probably believes that he was the best Chancellor since at least Hervey de Stanton (1316 – 1327). So if the economy is not going well now, it must be Darling’s fault, and the solution (since Brown is otherwise engaged) is to appoint Brown’s loyal and trusty lieutenant as a second best.
Why is Balls a lightweight? I don’t like him, but he’s clever, no?
205 - I was quoting Ken at 201. I don’t really have opinion on his political ‘weight’.
Whoever holds the title of Chancellor of the Exchequer will never actually have full control over the Treasury.
Blair made a big mistake with giving Gordon so much power through No 11. Brown is never going to give it up.
Balls won’t have any more authority than Darling as CoE - he just might have a bit more access to the Great Leader
180 A game changer of a Cabinet reshuffle. Bringing two or three LibDems into his Cabinet, including Vince Cable, in a mini National Govt. - Tories need not apply. Active discussions on PR, to be implemented in the next session, before the GE in 2010. Tories the “common enemy”. Make sure they never gain a majority again.
I could believe Brown would do it. And not a word against the LibDems in his speech, eventhough they are supposed to be targeting Labour seats? Mmmmm………
205 - Clever is not the same as heavyweight. The following are clever:
Oliver Letwin
David Miliband
Nick Clegg
None are heavyweight. Indeed, David Cameron is supposed to be terrifically clever, but more than half the population think he’s a lightweight (I disagree, but I am in a minority).
Ed Balls is so lightweight he would float on water.
183. Were we watching the same speech? Cameron’s speech was okay. I think most people said that it was good but not good enough and thought that Osborne was the real game changer.
191. Someone turn him off and on again.
208 - that would change many things. But I am not sure that Brown has booked in for a complete brain transplant over the next few days
208 - Also, Gordon doesn’t have any time at all for the LibDems. He sees them as a political irrelevance. That is why he didn’t mention them.
168- In other VP news, it’s quiz time! Which VP nominee recently uttered the following?:
“When the stock market crashed, Franklin Roosevelt got on the television and didn’t just talk about the princes of greed, he said, ‘Look, here’s what happened.’”
President Roosevelt, 1929, TV?
Was it:
a) Dan Quayle
b) John Adams
c) Joe Biden
d) Sarah Palin
e) None of the above; no VP candidate could be so historically illiterate.
Look for the answer here tomorrow!
Auntie’s rather naughtily put together a word cloud on Gordon’s speech.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7630567.stm
The words, in descending order of frequency, with some punctuation, making Gordon’s speech in a tagcloud sentence:
“People: New country! World fairness! Party, fair Labour, work Britain. Change government: today times million. Future children? NHS.”
211 Gordon would make them free first….
213. John Adams.
(Joe Biden?)
What a prat shaking hands with his wife, told you so they are not a couple
Just remmember when reading the comments on the speech, that this was washed through focus groups before today, no wonder, its the usual bland stuff
212 But the point is, he doesn’t LOATHE them like he does Tories. If they were the means to “grind the bastards into the dust”, he would use the LibDems. A major Cabinet reshuffle bringing in LibDems, announced to dominate the news over Dave’s conference glory? Yeah, Brown is capable of that.
200 - Okay, I cut and pasted the Battleground one and forgot to change the number. Whoops.
Excuse - I had a taxi waiting outside for me and didn’t check, next time I’ll type it all out separately as penance.
That’s my first mistake though, unlike Jack….
He SHOOK HIS WIFE’S HAND? Jebus. Just when you think Gordon can’t get any more inhuman, he takes it up a notch.
That’s gonna have the Gay Gordons over at Guido’s in a tizzy.
My wife thought it was quite a good speech. Nick Robinson seemed to be positive about it on BBC news. I think we had such a low expectation of what he would do that its seemed okay. I think the problem is that despite what he says the problems are there in real life and some are getting much worse. The public will wake up to those tomorrow and for months to come. Labour are still tired and lacking in vision and weak on the ground. Browns jibes and insinuations about Conservatives were really nasty, the idea that somewhow or other we would not have supported the NHS and that people would have died is way out of order by any standards.
213 - He got on the radio, not quite the same but I’m sure that amny American could work out what that meant surely, so famous are his ‘fireside chats’.
216- Ooooh, it seems you caught yourself just in time! Judges? Yes, they’ll allow that. Joe Biden it is. Vanessa, tell the gentleman what lovely prize he’s won…
222 - Not in 1929 he didn’t. He wasn’t president until 1933.
223. I don’t think it’s any worse than Obama’s 57 states or McCain’s Spanish PM gaffe.
224. And when was TV introduced to the US public?
The Colorado poll is good news for Obama, McCain needs to turn that around, unless he seriously thinks he can take Pennsylvania or Michigan to cancel Colorado out as the Republicans seem to be spending a lot of time in the industrial north. I’ve seen no evidence he can win those states though.
222- The fireside chats didn’t start until several years after the stock market crash. At the time of the crash, Hoover had just started his term in office.
Biden was either drunk when he said this or is about as clever as I would expect a guy to be who went to a sub-par law school and then had to cheat to get though it anyway.
222 - I think the historical inaccuracy was the idea that FDR was the President in 1929 when the Wall Street Crash happened.
@221:
Oh, what as surprise. Nick “Worthless, overpaid, naive, out-of-touch, insight-devoid, patronisng, incompetent, embarrassing useless f*ckface with stupid meeja cocking glasses who should be beaten to death for the good of the species” Robinson liked it.
It *must* have been good then.
225. or “I opposed the bridge to nowhere”.
222 - On that subject, who was the earliest US president to appear on television, who was the earliest to give a political speech on the radio and who was the first US president to be filmed?
In the interests of fairness (today’s word of the day), I should point out that when I was at school I earnestly suggested that Haussmann had created the Parisian boulevards to make it easier for the tanks to control the mob when it rioted, so I do have sympathy for this type of goof.
225- Are you kidding me. 57 states, I can let that slide as a mild verbal slip. Spanish PM? Almost no Americans could have answered the question either (even the interviewer flubbed it by asking about the Spanish “president”). But rewriting American history, showing ignorance of when the stock market crash happened, when Roosevelt was president, when TV was invented? This is modern American history, folks. Most well-educated American high school students wouldn’t say something so ridiculous. No pass for Joe, I’m afraid.
O/T You think Labour internal politics are complicated? try French socialists…
This afternoon SEVEN competing motions were officially presented for the November socialist congress. Party members vote on these motions and their respective score is used to appoint (proportionnally) the members of the party’s national assembly (which elects the leader) and national bureau.
Here they are:
- Alliance Delanoe (mayor of Paris, with the best personal polls at the moment)/Hollande (incumbent leader who will step down)/ Moscovici (who joined them today 1 hour before the deadline… after negotiations with all other motions)
- Alliance Royal/”ligne claire” (local barons)/Dray (former trostkyst and student leader, very good at internal party politics)
- Alliance Aubry (mayor of Lille)/ “renovateurs” (starnge alliance of former Strauss-Kahn fans (the right of the party) and leftist anti-european Fabius supporters)
- The left of the party’s motion, lead by Hamon (rising star of the party, but very leftist) which united the initial 4 (!) motions from this side of the party
- Ecolo-socialists (very small group insisting on a greenier agenda, and waiting to merge with the eventual winning motion at the congress to secure elected positions)
- Utopia (far-left of the party, proposing an anti-growth and anti-globalization agenda, this small group never merges with the majority)
- Larrouturou’s motion, advocating the 4 working days, 32 hours, week…
Obviously, only the three big alliances are contenders for the leadership, but this incredible division already means than no motion should be able to top 35% of the vote, thus depriving the members of the possibility to elect directly the party’s direction, which will only be defined through late-night lobby discussions and mergers during the Congress.
I think that Delanoe is going to make it, through a merger with Aubry, thus isolating Royal.
224 - I read that as being in the aftermath of the crash, not *immediately* after,
From William Hill:
“AFTER HIS Conference Speech, the odds about Gordon Brown ceasing to be Prime Minister before the end of the year have been lengthened from 6/4 to 9/4 by William Hill, who now make him 1/3 to stay in office at least until the end of the year. ‘There seems to be little appetite amongst the rank and file for a full blown leadership campaign at this point so we think he is probably safe at least for the rest of the year - albeit the forthcoming by-election could produce renewed pressure’” said Hill’s spokesman Graham Sharpe.
And…
GLENROTHES BYE-ELECTION…..2/9 SNP; 3/1LAB; 100 CONS;
234. No I disagree, it’s just a gaffe not ignorance and I don’t think anyone cares about this stuff.
233- But that belief is based on a popular myth, and doesn’t require shocking ignorance of history to be believed. Please give yourself a pass on that one!
229 etc. I think silly gaffes are now unlikely to decide this campaign which is looking very much as if it is actually going to be focused on the issues after all. That’s a relief after the lipstick nonsense, by that point I had almost given up. But things have got better… so far.
228/9 - See 236.
re: the Spanish PM, ordinary Americans wouldn’t know but the leader of a country shouldn’t be ‘ordinary’. Who wants an ordinary person to lead them!?!
Meanwhile, the US economy goes down the pan…..
236- You should be Biden’s spokesperson/personal spinmeister! He is in desperate need of someone with your extraordinary creativity right about now…
240- You’re right. Biden’s denunciation of Obama’s ads was a bit of refreshing honesty and perhaps a chance for a new beginning…
Polly’s v. happy.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/sep/23/gordonbrown.labourconference5
La Toynbee on Sky now.
@244:
Gordon’s speech was turgid and passionless, i.e. like Gordon himself.
However, since Polly wants Gordon to go, I don’t understand this bizarre bout of denialism from her.
Sadly, a week from now, Labour are going to be reminded what a good speech looks like, and Polly will once again be on her Angry Idiot Warpath.
Biden also telling Ohio voters that his position on clean coal plants is the opposite of Obama’s:
“We’re not supporting clean coal,” Biden can be seen telling a voter. “No coal plants here in America.”
That position would be at odds with Obama’s. The Illinois senator has supported clean coal efforts in his home state and said in his acceptance speech at last month’s Democratic convention that as president he would invest in the technology. It’s politically significant, because coal remains a key industry in the western part of Virginia, in Ohio, and elsewhere.
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/politicalintelligence/2008/09/a_friend_of_coa.html
Maybe Biden’s best insight of the campaign so far is his admission that Obama should have picked Hillary as his VP.
#71 And so I can announce today for those in our nation battling cancer from next year you will not pay prescription charges.
Not quite the same as all cancer drugs for free?
Of course for all people living in Scotland and Wales prescriptions are free of charge anyway, and guessing at the demographics of cancer sufferers, most will be entitled to free prescriptions anyway (over 60/65).
Typical Brown, and who’s to say there aren’t other deserving categories.
Polly really should make her mind up.
She is just flapping around in the wind now
And Gordon did generate a lot of that today
249- The poor girl is just going through the stages of Brown-induced grief, whether it be anger, denial, false hope, etc. Does Brown have any free medication proposal for people going through this, too?
Toynbee is saying that if there is no prolonged boost in the polls (which there probably wont be) then Brown will be removed at some point, essentially saying that there is a ‘tipping point’ I really don’t agree, the ‘tipping point’ was long ago surely and the party has had ample chance to remove him. Why should a defeat at Glenrothes be any different to Glasgow East or Crewe and Nantwich?
Yet again Brown has come out with the speech all about “I”, count them, 85, in the speech. It’s like he thinks no-one else can be trusted to help him run this poor country of ours. He just does not get it, that he alone is not the messiah who can cure all our ills. To cure the problems facing this country we need many people to pull together and get things sorted out properly. This is exactly the same thing he did last year. This is why the speech will fall apart just like last year, when it is compared to others that stress the requirement of the whole government and people pulling together to sort out the mess that Labour has got us into. It is pointless for Gordon to say “I” can do this or “I” can do that, nobody believes him any longer.
218. I am of the opinion that any such Lab-Demmery at this stage would merely cause the two to slide so dramatically in the polls that the Tories would win anyway, even under PR.
I don’t think the public would take kindly to such stunts being orchestrated merely to stay in power. Berlusconi tried it in Italy, and lost to Prodi even under a system that was supposed to give him a massive inbuilt advantage (I know he returned as PM later, however).
One of things I find most infuriating is this concept that Gordon Brown is best placed to manage the ‘global’ financial crisis - an idea gobbled up by Toynbee et al. Er, Polly, the UK was one of the main precipitators of this crisis, all under the stewardship of Brown’s Treasury.
Why is this never mentioned. Are they all in cahoots?
251.
“Toynbee is saying”
All hail the Buddess of suburbia. Harken unto her words - and look to the opposite happening.
A bravura performance I’m sure we’ll all agree. He’s not the speaker that Blair was but who is? Eight out of ten and safe well into the new year.
248 Prescriptions are not free in Scotland yet and will not be for at least another 2-3 years. How many times does this have to be repeated. See http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7127997.stm
253- But you are right that, had Berlusconi just left the system well enough alone before the 2006 elections, the Left would likely not have managed a Senate majority and would have fallen much sooner. Of course, in hindsight, he is probably better off for having given the Left two years to rule and sully its reputation before he took back the reins.
The point is well taken, though, which is that electoral system shenanigans often backfire.
@256:
Yes, Rogerdamus dear, I’m sure we’ll ‘all agree; that turgid pile of emotionless cack that Gordon shat out was ‘bravura’.
256
The words “Gordon” and “safe” should not appear in the same sentence.
256. GB’s death warrant signed.
I’m hearing ‘global’ an awful lot. Which basically means ‘not my fault mate’.
Coxall- as delightful as ever.
Gordon did a good job today. It is a shame that he blew it this year because his narrative of “the right man” may resonate. As it stands he is still a dead man walking. The bounce in the polls, if any, will be marginal.
256 - Two out of three “experts” don’t agree with you, Roger:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4812345.ece
The word “bravura” really shouldn’t be used for 8 out of 10 context, either.
A pretty boring speech-neither good nor bad.
However “no time for a novice” will resonate with the country a bit I think. I, personally, loathe Gordon but when he points to the youth of the Dave and George show he does have a point which the country may appreciate. George Osborne is a very effective politician who deserves a senior role but more clout is needed currently as shadow chancellor.
Thererfore I think that Cameron should move towards bringing in Ken Clarke from the fold and perhaps moving Osborne to Foreign Affairs. Hague could go to Leader of The House and deputy leader,
wouldn’t be a bad idea to allow some bite on domestic affairs as currently hes under used. Hague could then become deputy PM after the election and Ken Clarke could be retired in favour of Osborne after a couple of years in the job.
244.
Polly says;
“A roll call of Labour’s best achievements topped out with “We did fix the roof while the sun was shining” will finish off that Tory line of attack.”
Er, no it won’t! Just because Brown says something doesn’t make it true! The Tories have made a lot of headway with the “fix the roof” line and theres going to plenty more mileage to get out of it over the next year as borriwng soars to £100bn.
Excellent line. “My children aren’t props they’re people”
A great pity that Blair and Cameron didn’t follow that message and realize that not everything is to beused as an aide to their climbing the greasy poll.
The longer GB is in charge the happier the Conservatives will be.
Oh the shame …. the shame !! …. three boo boos on polls in one afternoon !!
I’m off to the dungeons to rack a Scottish Nationalist …. bound to make me feel a lot better and him a lot longer !!
266 - Friend of mine just said to me “If Gordon fixed the roof while the sun was shining, why am I drowning?”.
OK everyone this “Cancer announcement”. Is this free prescriptions for life? Do people with totally non-invasive non-dangerous cancers requiring simple ops qualify?
265. Disagree. I think the British people desperatly want a change, and are willing to take a gamble on Cameron and Osborne. Where Browns line of attack falls down, is that whilst he may say, its no time for a novice, its also no time for the man that promised no more boom and bust and has delivered just that. Thats Browns central problem, economically he’s a busted flush!
268- That seems to be the bottom line. If I were a Tory, I would want Brown do just well enough to fend off the conspirators, but no better. It seems like he may be doing just that.
267 Family photo. Not used politically at all….
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42984000/jpg/_42984089_familly_other406.jpg
270. As i say, Brown has not dealt with that line of attack from the Tories at all. I’ll predict that even in the general election, the Tories will be campaigning on it. Its one of their best lines for years.
Seeing as nobody seems to know or is too busy moaning about something else…..
The earliest US president to appear on television.
Herbert Hoover in a 1927 test broadcast (yes, I know he wasn’t president then - read the question!)
http://www.corp.att.com/history/television/photo_hoover.html
The earliest to give a political speech on the radio.
Calvin Coolidge, in office, in February 1924.
The first US president to be filmed?
Silent film - Grover Cleveland in 1895, signing a bill.
Sound Film - Coolidge once again, in 1924.
http://www.archive.org/details/coolidge_1924
First US president to be photographed?
John Quincy Adams (in 1843), fourteen years after he ceased to be President.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/f/f0/John_Q._Adams.jpg
First President to have their voice recorded?
Rutherford B Hayes in 1878 (no longer exists) although a recording of his successor, Benjamin Harrison does, from 1889.
http://www.lib.msu.edu/vincent/presidents/harrison.htm
Not sure what the answers would be for first Prime Minister.
274, you’re confused. That photo is clearly a mock up created by Eurasia to try and decrease the nation’s love for Comrade Brown and weaken our resolve in the war. They’ve already spread their filthy propaganda about massive debt, but Uncle Gordon says our debt is low, so how can that be true?
267.
Roger you are stupid!
In fact you are very stupid! 
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2007/03_01/FamilyBrownDM1503_468×413.jpg
From the piece on Brown and his family in this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-471520/An-exotic-holiday-like-Mr-Blair-No-Dorset-Browns.html
Since he became PM!
256: ‘A bravura performance I’m sure we’ll all agree. He’s not the speaker that Blair was but who is? Eight out of ten and safe well into the new year.’
‘Bravura’? Uurgh! A quite awful effort in my view. Making barely disguised pot shots at David Miliband and humiliating him in front of the nation - poor form I thought. However, Roger is correct that Brown is safe into the new year (and well beyond that my view): but only because he has bullied his hapless enemies into an submission.
I thought the Conservative line was about “saving for a rainy day”. I didn’t realise they had been using the “fix the roof…” line, which seems rather more tenuous.
I would have thought a rather strong line of attack was on Darling’s comments yesterday that “the country would have to live within its means for the next few years” (in relation to public spending). Which rather begs the question as to what has been happening in the past…
If the country hasn’t been living within its means then its hardly surprising we’re in trouble.
@267:
Roger, he /shook his wife’s hand/.
That kind of suggests he barely thinks of her even as a ‘prop’. She’s like hired help.
Anyway, it’s a category error. Gordon cannot use his family to try and con the public into believing that Gordon’s not emotionaly stunted because whenever he tried it in the past, it was just *creepy* and people screamed in pain until it stopped.
Not particularly on topic, but I just realised the gift that Darling and Brown’s names give the Tories if they ever fall out: I’m sure they have got “brawling and down” saved up ready for use.
To restore confidence in Politicians, the next government should pass a law making it illegal for politicians to lie, along the same lines as Trades Description Act and False Advertising.
It will be a minefield because bogus ‘politically motivated’ claims could block the system. However, if structure properly, the Lies that Labour spout could land themselves in court.
for example, EU Referendum, Labour gave men and women the vote, Labour reduced borrowing…these are all blatent, black and white lies. There should be a legal consequence.
WASHINGTON — Hunger for change is helping Barack Obama hold a small lead in four battleground states, a new poll indicated Tuesday.
The numbers:
• In Colorado, Obama leads John McCain 49-45. He had trailed in the last survey there before the conventions.
• In Michigan, Obama leads 48-44. He also led by 4 points before.
• In Minnesota, Obama leads 47-45. He also led by 2 points before.
• In Wisconsin, Obama leads 49-42. He had led by a wider margin before.
The key reason for Obama’s edge appears to be that voters want change and by wide margins see Obama as the more likely agent of change than McCain. They preferred Obama to change things by margins ranging from 19 to 24 points.
”With a lousy economy, an unpopular war and an even less popular Republican president, it’s difficult to find voters who don’t want change,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the Polling Institute at Quinnipiac University, which conducted the polls in conjunction with the Wall Street Journal and washingtonpost.com
http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/campaign-2008/story/698127.html
Apart from anything else, talking about “fixing the roof” focusses on the tendency of the Conservatives to not even bother plugging the leaks.
@285:
Oh, it’s the *opposition’s* fault that Gordon’s dumped us all in the shit. I keep forgetting.
285, what do you mean?
“Fix the roof” and “saving for a rainy day” are both equally strong lines of attack for the Tories, IMO.
274. Are you serious? If Cameron keeps using them at this rate he’ll have to get them equity cards
http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/news/article-1055603/Camerons-wife-uses-photograph-Tory-leader-disab
288 - Quite.
285 While Labour floods the country with immigrants making Labour voters vote BNP.
I agree with a previous poster, where ever Labour stands against the BNP, all other parties should withdraw so people can properly defeat evil
276. There is a recording of Gladstone;
http://www.liberalhistory.org.uk/uploads/glads.mp3
Well worth listening to - you can imagine him as public speaker.
Re Nick Robinson. Whatever he tells us is the situation we now know that it is the opposite.
Nick says Brown’s speech is great = it was cr*p.
One of those golden rule.
289, you’re confused. Cameron isn’t attacking Brown for using his kids.
@291:
Why should it be the BNP’s job to defeat evil?
289. Those in glass houses………..
Brown’s speech has done absolutely nothing to address the worries of 99.999% of folks in Britain. Going to bed tonight, they will be just as concerned about their personal circumstances as they were when they got up this morning.
The other 0.001% were in a hall in Manchester.
boom boom!
284-Change to WHAT exactly.Pathetic in the EXTREME.Fortunately enough people will come to their senses by 4th Nov to avoid a calamity.
287 - chronic underinvestment.
The more I think about Brown’s speech the more unpleasant and graceless it seems. Snide remarks about a loyal colleague; accusing the leader of the opposition of using his children as ‘props’. Not nice at all really.
@289:
Look, Roger, it’s very simple.
Gordon wants to use his family for political purposes, but he can’t. The reasons are:
1) Gordon’s an emotional retard, and any attempt to make it look otherwise is so creepy that the photos invariably make your skin crawl.
2) Dave’s family are and order of magnitude more photogenic, and so Gordon always loses out in the head-to-heads, even when he’s not being a creepy, emotionally stunted Prime Mentalist. Which he always is.
300, my knowledge of that time is quite limited (may sound convenient, but I was born in the mid-80s). However, I suspect you’re right. Despite that, underinvestment is better than running the country on debt.
291. One logically interpretation of the wording of this post is that people should actually vote BNP in order to defeat the evil that is Labour.
Just watching Brown’s speech and I think his big problem is that he mis-times his speed variations. Also it is coming across as though he is sub-consciously starting to pursue a core vote strategy.
299- At a certain point, people don’t care anymore and they’re willing to vote on the belief that the alternative to something they don’t like is probably better. If they turn out to be wrong, they’ll lurch the other way the next chance they get. The same applies to the UK, where people are willing to vote Tory because they believe that would likely produce something better than what they have now, even if they don’t really know what they’d be getting from a Tory administration.
303 - Yes, but that is why the “fix the roof” line is inappropriate. If anything the problem is that Labour has tried to fix roofs that weren’t even leaking! Not much point in spending money fixing the roof if you’re going to rebuild the house next year.
Hooray, Polly Toynee says Gordon has saved himself for the time being. Should be worth another couple of non marginals falling to the Tories
Tax and waste has done for this Government, where Brown is the main culprit. Will the party conferences make any difference? Yes, we’ll be two weeks nearer to this lot being thrown out.
New Insider Advantage Poll for Ohio :
McCain 46% .. Obama 46%
http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_923_584.aspx
303 - It all depends on where you draw your line to say underinvestment.
One of the fairest threads for some time - thanks. Maybe oddly, the bit that moved me most was the tortured child in Ruanda saying things would be all right - the UN was coming. Deciding when to intervene is never easy but that seems to me quite heart-breaking.
On a minor point for those who haven’t seen it - the ‘handshake’ was Sarah grabbing his hand as he came off the podium. I don’t think anyone who’s seen them together doubts the warmth.
Certainly the delegates are cheerful this evening. Gordon and Sarah went through the conference hotel lobby a bittle while back, and it erupted in applause. How will the wider public react? Cautiously at first, I’d think - people are sufficiently fed up that they won’t instantly return en masse. What it will do is give a reason to come back for the people who wanted to vote Labour but were thoroughly demoralised. If there’s a poll taken in the next day or two, I’d see us back over 30%. Beyond that, it should reopen some minds that had closed (hello Tyson?), depending on further developments.
Duke of Wellington in 1844, first photographed PM maybe?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2091/1500925550_9c23a4bb09.jpg?v=0
307, I disagree. The hole in the roof is the public finances, which are not in a good state, and the weather refers to the economy. Now the rain is starting pour the hole in the roof is growing, because the public finances are in a state due to overspending and borrowing.
300. Labour always say rubbish like that, with no real evidence to back it up. Did Health and Education spending rise through the period from 1979 - 1997. Yes
Even after all the investment that Labour say they put in Education and Health. Is is any better? Well my experience of the health service has been dreadful and it is no better - In fact from what I have seen it is worse! Education, not really sure on that side of things. The new use of technology would have happened anyway. The amount of wasted cash on things like Academy schools that closed after just 12 months is appailing.
O/T - The end of the world is off…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/7632408.stm
Labour finished.
Con in power for ever!!!!!!!!
500,000,000 terms minimum - or when watford win two games in a row - whatever be the longer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
314 - Well then IMO what you’re doing is re-interpreting what the phrase “fix the roof” means. At the very least it’s open to misinterpretation.
New SUSA poll for Kentucky :
McCain 57% .. Obama 38%
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=84836890-5e61-4930-bba8-8056ee24c9d1
317 Ave it. My money is on the Tories then !!
289: ‘Are you serious? If Cameron keeps using them at this rate he’ll have to get them equity cards’
An uncharacteristically petulant post from you, Roger. Clearly that article is a load of froth about nothing - a trivial mistake which was at once rectified. The fact that it quotes some inanity from rent-a-quote twerp Stephen Pound MP is as perfect a reason as any to discount it.
320
re 58 what absolute rubbish - just remind me which way did the Tories vote on Iraq?
306-S&S-I have a high regard for your posts but let me tell you right now this man has but one reason to exist & that is to get to the White House by hook or by crook,after which a big fat ZERO.Along with a wife who loathes half the population there will be interesting times ahead-I glad I dont live there.
313 - Which Duke of Wellington is that? Thought he had a bigger nose!
A motley crew on C4 News summing up Brown’s effort: Toynbee, that grinning drunkard Charlie Wheelan and some bloke from The Times with a skin complaint. Had to turn it off!
I agree with a previous poster, where ever Labour stands against the BNP, all other parties should withdraw so people can properly defeat evil
–
I take it you mean seats where it is close between Labour and the BNP. Even in those it is philsophically and tactically completely wrong.
West ham’s season is over if they lose tonight.
If we lose we still have relegation to worry about!!
The earliest PM to appear on television.
Chamberlain 1938
The earliest to give a political speech on the radio.
Baldwin? 1923
The first PM president to be filmed?
Salisbury? 1890s
First PM president to be photographed?
Palmerston 1850s
First PM to have their voice recorded?
Gladstone? 1888
Just watching the speech now. To be fair it’s not the car crash I thought it would be. That said, there was nothing in the speech that will make people sit up and take notice. In terms of substance it just seemed empty.
248.”Of course for all people living in Scotland and Wales prescriptions are free of charge anyway”
Sorry for shouting, but, PRESCRIPTIONS ARE NOT FREE IN SCOTLAND!
Any polls today for New Hampshire? Of all the blue states in 2004 it seems to be the most likely to flip the other way this time round, and, if Obama gains Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado, a McCain win in NH would result in the 269 tie analysed in earlier threads.
re 71 the cancer drugs for free is pretty much a red herring. Most cancer drugs are given as outpatient treatment because they need to be given intravenously so they do not therefore attract a prescription charge. However, the poor patient is of course having to pay their NHS car park fee, perhaps of £5 or more and perhaps several times a week. I’m pretty sure that the vast majority of cancer patients would prefer their car parking to be free instead of their prescriptions.
Also how’s it going to work? Some cancer drugs are not used to treat cancer so how are they going to define a cancer drug? How will the pharmacist know that the patient has cancer so that they don’t charge them. A big C” rubber stamp perhaps, or perhaps their ID card will be marked in some way.
An ill thought through sound-bite. I’d be amazed if it works.
324- As for what will happen post-election (and, I’m afraid, post-Obama victory), I expect for some rude surprises for a lot of Americans and a “correction” back to the right in the 2010 mid-term elections. My fear is that the Democrats will have built up such large congressional majorities that they will basically steamroll ahead with their agenda unchecked and unsupervised. Even if the GOP has a great year in 2010, they likely couldn’t retake the Congress (not impossible, though). It is 2012 that will likely provide the first real chance for the GOP to get back in the game. Sad but true.
330 - To be honest it is like one of those cheesy dance bands of the 90’s that bought out the same song 15 times with slightly different words. Gordon speeches are just reworded, he has been giving pretty much the same speech for the last 15 years!
323, you remember Labour had a majority of over 100, and the Labour Prime Minister lied about the war?
333 - I thought it was free prescriptions for cancer sufferers - ie. the money follows the person not the disease.
312.
“Certainly the delegates are cheerful this evening. Gordon and Sarah went through the conference hotel lobby a bittle while back, and it erupted in applause.”
How nice Nick. Broght a lump to my throat. Was it like that scene at the end of Dead Poets Society where all the kids get on the tables to salute Robin Williams as he leaves the school for the final time?
The “fair” keyword is going to backfire. They’ve obviously picked this up from focus groups among the kulaks but at the same time they’re making their unofficial discrimination against the kulaks into law.
Also, given Kim Jong McBean’s curse, I fully expect to see Mrs McBean eloping with JK Rowling any minute.
I thought the speech was very good to get the party’s confidence and fight back. A very bad speech at winning votes or trying to close the huge gap in the polls. I particulary disliked the jabs at Cameron’s family being used as props; that was blow the belt. I imagine DC’s script writers are already thinking up responces as we talk.
re 90 Albion it’s not difficult, you just type a colon followed immediately by a semi-colon (no space, like this
338. If only Brown was leaving for the last time
340 - “I imagine DC’s script writers are already thinking up responces as we talk.”
Cameron will ignore it.
312. Nick Have you ever got to the bottom of the Dr Ian Gibson quote “been shouted out in supermarkets”?
I would be interested to know the context of the situation!
Personally I thought Brown may have ticked the right boxes for the Labour party but anyone outside will in all likelyhood be reviled. I find the “My children aren’t props they’re people” particularly ill-judged as the links above show Brown is as guilty of that in the past. How can Brown talk about trust and him gaining it, if he lies about something as simple and cross-checkable as that!
331.That was me not fitaloon, and I see he has already made the point.
@315
I checked the numbers in “Government Spending:The facts” by Richard Cocks and Roger Bentley.
In 1996/7 Pound terms, Health and social security spending rose from under 30 billion in 1978/79 to over 50 billion in 1996/97
Education
“The 1980s saw a nearly 50% increase in spending per pupil, but this has levelled off over the past few years”.
So, yes Labour are lying.
And what is it about this bunch of losers that they think computers are the answer to everything? Computers are a tool, and one need not have access to one to be able to use it. I’d guess the extra money spent on education has had some positive impact, but I’d guess that it was marginal - they havent dealt with the 30% or so who are functionally illiterate and innumerate. Thanks to their continuation of John Major’s insane exam grade inflation, we cant actually be too certain of what is going on. But, yes an improvement, but productivity has collapsed.
The NHS has low waiting times, but are waiting times the thing we most needed to get rid of? Again, some impact from the spending, but it really hast been that good. And their insane “patient choice” thing - HTF should I know where to get my triple bypass done?
“Maybe oddly, the bit that moved me most was the tortured child in Ruanda saying things would be all right - the UN was coming.”
Bit like Darfur, really.
221 Matt - I think you have to realise that after Thatcher’s government, the hatred felt by most on the centre and left of British politics for Tories, yes, Tories (not just Thatcher) was such that they were regarded as the truly nasty party. Only now, with the floaters more and more prepared to countenance Cameron’s version of Tories, is there any sort of move towards them. The genuine politicos are still extremely suspicious. So, “way out of order” the comment may have been in your eyes, if, in fact you read it as an appeal to the Labour faithful to create some political loyalty and action, it is a comment which they will generally sympathise with.
However…. Frank Luntz’s focus group were very negative about anti-Tory comments of that sort. Perhaps Brown’s view is that he has to rehabilitate himself in 2 stages, 1) With his activists, 2) With his potential, but currently reluctant, voters.
334-noted but i sincerely hope your wrong about a Dem.victory.I shall”pray” every night until 4th Nov.
Of course, I don’t give a fig about all these warm words concerning Brown’s oration. We had exactly the same cobblers last year for what is now considered the most jejune, misjudged and smug political speech in history. Forgive me if I don’t go to bed tonight thinking ‘history begins tomorrow’.
“The genuine politicos are still extremely suspicious.”
Who?
346 - It’s quite funny that often Conservatives call for spending cuts to fund tax cuts etc, but then shout with indignation whenever someone suggests that they cut spending in the 1980s
Of course what the 1980s show is that you can’t “cut” spending, you can only slow it below the growth rate of the economy. Which hopefully will prompt a bit more realism from some of the more excitable on the Tory right.
346. The amount of immigration Labour have allowed has seriously screwed the resources Labour have put in! The waiting list side of things is just massaged, i.e now you have to wait 6 months for a referal: then the operation comes within the new time limit!
Problem with any organisation, particularly the size of the NHS is it is so resisitant to change and indeed is a large interest group. You cannot do much with it!
:;
312> Brown bounce to over 30% - I take it you mean of Labour MPs!
The point about education, health et al, isn’t that the Conservatives didn’t spend, the problem was that they didn’t invest. In fact getting investment into many public services was why they privatised so many of them. And what was the main motive for PFI (the principle of which was a Conservative idea).
Milipede bleating that the ‘novice’ gag wasn’t about him. Wot a plonker!!
Spending is “patching up the roof”. Investment is “fixing it”.
re 333 well then how is the pharmacist going to identify a cancer patient. Will they have to own up to it in the chemists - not many have private areas don’t forget. Will there be different coloured prescriptions? Will the GP have to tick a box perhaps? As someone said above will this be all cancers? And who will define the list? And what if someone’s borderline, we’ll have the same arguments as we currently have with NICE? And will it just be their cancer drugs which are free? Or all drugs for evermore? And what when they’re cured (yes it’s possible for some cancers these days)?
As I said a completely vacuous sound-bite. The biggest impact on people’s ability to access health fairly is the NHS car park tax in England. My trust rakes in over £1.5m per year from car parking, we probably collect less than £50k in prescription charges.
I get the impression that Drudge is in a mighty strop as the MSM are refusing to go with his attempts to shift the narrative. His site has become increasingly like the Twilight Zone since Palin was chosen.
Meanwhile, in the real world, yet another conservative, George Will, isn’t happy into McCain.
“Under the pressure of the financial crisis, one presidential candidate is behaving like a flustered rookie playing in a league too high. It is not Barack Obama.”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/mccains_temperment_fails_again.html
Some of the most interesting articles are being written by conservatives fed up with McCain at the moment or angered by Bush’s capitulation to Paulsen and his leaky proposals.
Wick Allison, former board member and publisher of the conservative powerhouse ‘National Review’.
“Barack Obama is not my ideal candidate for president. (In fact, I made the maximum donation to John McCain during the primaries, when there was still hope he might come to his senses.) But I now see that Obama is almost the ideal candidate for this moment in American history. I disagree with him on many issues. But those don’t matter as much as what Obama offers, which is a deeply conservative view of the world. Nobody can read Obama’s books (which, it is worth noting, he wrote himself) or listen to him speak without realizing that this is a thoughtful, pragmatic, and prudent man. It gives me comfort just to think that after eight years of George W. Bush we will have a president who has actually read the Federalist Papers.”
http://www.dmagazine.com/ME2/dirmod.asp?nm=Core+Pages&type=gen&mod=Core+Pages&tier=3&gid=B33A5C6E2CF04C9596A3EF81822D9F8E
Meanwhile McCain gets Lady de Rothschild in return.
352. Indeed the Tories did cut spending in the 80’s but never in the areas Labour accuse them! NHS & Education were never the victims of the cuts Labour claimed.
Personally I think without cutting NHS & Education huge savings could be made. Much Civil servant, Police, public sector employee work time is taken up with pointless admin. Needs a torch taking to some of the processes.
358. Labour have in that case caused the roof to have structural failure and brought the house down!
359 - it was me who said it
Might be worth having one of these for free drugs for life
Gingrich -
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/capital-commerce/2008/09/23/newt-gingrich-kill-the-paulson-plan-hard.html
“I just got back from a Newt Gingrich press conference where I had a nice back-and-forth dialogue with the former Speaker of the House about the Paulson Plan, which he totally hates. A few quotes and Gingrichian observations:
1) He called it a “stupid plan” that looks like it had been designed by autocrat Vladimir Putin. He also said it will be a “nightmare” to implement and full of corruption.
2) He said the Paulson Plan would be a “dead loser” on Election Day that will “break against anyone who votes for it.” It will hurt even worse with the 2010 election once Americans see what a drag it is on the economy when implemented.
3) He recently chatted with economic historian Alan Meltzer who advocated doing nothing rather than implanting the Paulson Plan. Meltzer apparently joked to Gingrich that this was about the third time he had seen Wall Street scream “the apocalypse was nigh” only to have the economy keep right on chugging along.
4) Gingrich thinks that if the Paulson Plan isn’t passed by this weekend, it is dead and the White House better have a Plan B, economic-growth package ready. Right now, he still thinks it has an 80 percent chance of passage, partly because of Paulson’s apocalyptic tone that if a bill isn’t passed, “the whole world will end on Tuesday.”
5) He advises McCain to play the maverick and come out against the Paulson Plan. Then it will be the Obama-Bush plan.”
If he does the last he could send the stock market into a total tailspin allowing democrats to call him imprudent and hotheaded. Could be interesting though.
How is Brown going to “enshrine Labour’s pledge on Child Poverty into legislation”?
Is this like the way they “legislated to prevent top up fees”?
365 -
312- Nick- the last year has been disastrous for Gordon. Watching him today reminded me of what could have been, but sadly, the great British public is not that forgiving,and I still think that on balance Gordon is a liability for you.
FWIW- he has won me back, for now. I would have to be reassured that he can manage to keep things going. To be honest my preference for the Tories was based more on my sheer frustration with the leadership. Anyway glad that silly phase is finished with.
367. From Nick’s comments it’s fairly clear what this speech was about. Getting the Party base excited, another stay of execution for Gordon. But in terms of vision for the future, there is nothing there.
367 - Oh, you’ll be back. Don’t think you can escape that easily. For you, englicshe Tyson, ze war is over.
368 - Definitely, the speech will resonate more in the Labour Party than anywhere else. A speech that is a holding operation.
I’m watching it for the first time now. The speechwriters did as much as they could but Brown just looks angry and depressed.
352. Didn’t Labour manage to cut spending in real terms in the late 1970s?
292 - Amazing! Doesn’t he sound like John Laurie? Who’d have thought he was an Old Etonian.
348. Interesting point and a good insight into how Labour will try to attack the sanitised Tories. Also has a touch of “return to your constituencies and prepare for opposition”.
368- Osborne’s speech last year was to shore up the core vote, and see what happened.
369-comrade John O- glad to see that your heels are still clicking.
What was Gordon Brown in 1997 if not a novice? He was a historian of the Labour party who managed to convice gullible people he was an economic guru. He’s led us to a recession and up to our eyes in public debt, and he tells us he’s the best person to lead us through it? I have to believe that the voters will see through this absolute rubbish.
372- and they started the program of privatisation.
347 ““Maybe oddly, the bit that moved me most was the tortured child in Ruanda saying things would be all right - the UN was coming.”
Unless that child is very well informed, I suspect she was told what to say.
Correct me if wrong but didnt the UN & Kofi Anan stand by and do nothing while 1.5 million were rounded up and butchered like halal sheep? I even remember watching it on the news.
Still, at least we know what UN stands for…
http://www.tinylink/?uT6xYfa9Ft
372. It wasnt voluntary and it was caused by rampant inflation cancelling out any increases.
I Saw the clips on channel 4 and can’t honestly be bothered to watch the whole thing.
From my limited perspective (much like the majority of the country)I doubt there will be much if any conference bounce so we will see if Nick P is right, but I think he has his conference coloured glasses on (but when doesn’t he).
Does anyone have the time for the standing ovation? Did it beat IDS?
376 The ONLY thing Gordon Brown knows is how to spend other people’s money. Econmic guru my a*se. He shored up the core vote today and I would be amazed if the electorate fell for it.
The next 18 months will be full of spend, spend, spend. It depends how much balls the Governor of the Bank of England has. Someone has to put a stop to it. Labour MP’s , worried sick about their seats certainly won’t.
378. Really? But I thought children weren’t props, they were people…
367 Admit it Tyson - her indoors rumbled your dalliance with Dave, didn’t she?
Anybody who was taken back over to Labour by that speech would have to be very fickle indeed.
Do you think Gingrich may be right, UK Paul?
I was hearing someone on the radio talking about how it would be the end of capitalism if it wasn’t passed.
Yet if there was ever a time when capitalism should have ended it was the Seventies. A decade which brought us two oil shocks, double digit inflation in every Western economy, industrial strife, political terrorism, the collapse of secondary banks, the Three Day Week, the fall of the Shah, the loss of South East Asia and Portugese Africa to communism, the Six Day War, a severe recession etc. etc. Relentless shocks at both the economic and political levels, yet we coped, and even then, most people in 1980 were better off than in 1970.
What are we facing now compared to all that?
Sam Coates over at the Red Box on Underlying assumptions stay the same
“Sarah Brown was a winning move, apparently only getting the go-ahead two hours before going on stage.
Otherwise, largely as expected. Better delivered than usual. Big improvement on last year. “No time for a novice” was a clever line. Pleased the hall, not least for its tack-left buttons. Probably bought him a bit of time.
But, hasn’t changed underlying assumptions. Few genuinely happy MPs around afterwards. Frank Luntz’s verdict, emailed from the US, was scathing:
“He still doesn’t get it. In his open sentence he uses ‘I’ four times. Incredible. He still doesn’t realize that it’s not about him. It’s about the British people and what they want for the future. Blair understood that the people come first. Brown still thinks he comes first.”
Time to watch the polls.”
380. The large proportion (if not a majority) of the nation will not have realised the speech was even taking place, let along watched it. It was on television in my office and not one person batted an eyelid. It was just me and my mutterings.
Even changing the electoral system won’t save Labour. The parties of the Right (Conservatives, Unionists, UKIP, English Democrats, BNP etc.) could expect to win 50%+ between them under any form of PR.
375 Tyson, I know you lurk but why don’t you post more - you’re missed?
386 - I tend to agree with Gingrich, but that’s not a difficult thing to do seeing as he is echoing economists from left and right over this.
There are quite a few saying that this is also a massive overreaction (as you imply?) and that doing less is a viable alternative. Paulson, having said very recently that he had things under control, isn’t seen as someone who can be totally believed.
386 “Paulson, having said very recently that he had things under control, isn’t seen as someone who can be totally believed.”
Doesn’t that remind you of a certain son of the manse, did me.
379
Wrong.
It was caused by a huge and growing budget deficit and the need to curb it: which failed and brought in the IMF. There were spending cuts announced almost every six months.
sorry should be 391. doh!
389, that’s irrelevent, frankly. PR is a dreadful system promoting coalition and giving parties more power than they already have. What if I loathe Labour but Gwyneth Dunwoody were my local MP? I’d have no chance to vote for her, only to give my party a vote and then they would decide which prospective candidates get in.
Not to mention gerrymandering an electoral system because your’e getting shafted in the polls is despicable.
Rejoice Comrades Tyson’s back!
278. “Roger you are stupid! In fact you are very stupid!” says Martin Day!
312. NickP “One of the fairest threads for some time - thanks” I know it’s relative but I’ve just gone through the thread and can only see three ‘fair’ posts. Isn’t it sad if that makes it the ‘fairest’ for some time….
Capitalism will always exist in some form..because lots of people people like money and lots of it.
Its human nature.
A decent speech from Brown today (I’m no Labour or Brown fan). To claim otherwise is unreasonable. It should keep the pressure off him for a while and no doubt will give Labour a healthy poll boost. Perhaps the subsequent lift in party morale could mark a turning point in Brown’s term and, if Labour win Glenrothes (which I doubt), then who knows what might happen.
It’s a bit of a punt, but maybe this wouldn’t be a bad time to buy Labour seats. It can’t really get any worse for them can it?
TAX ALERT!!!!!!!!!
——————
Labour have f*cked up the economy! They want to hand out even more of our money to spongers! If we let them in next time it means:
Basic rate 30% (lower rate for unmarried mothers)
Property tax 5% PA (except for illegal immigrants)
Stamp duty 10!!!!! (except for Labour MPs wealthy though inheritances)
386. There is a lot of hyperbole being thrown around. You could also make a good case for capitalism ending in the 1930s, but it didn’t. And did the collapse of the Nordic and Japanese bankings systems in the 1990s - which led to bailouts as big or bigger than this one - mean the end of capitalism in those countries? Of course not.
But there’s no doubt that if this plan doesn’t get quickly settled and implemented financial markets will again be plunged into serious turmoil and we will get a very deep recession. I’m deeply concerned by the partisan posturing we’ve seen among US politicians in the last 48 hours.
Anything going on in USA?
Jack W what’s happening - is McCAIN clear yet?!
375 - Osborne’s speech last year wasn’t about the core vote.
399 “Property tax 5% PA (except for illegal immigrants)”
Didnt you know, under Labour illegal immigration is now legal.
Sorry if this point is covered upthread but in Brown’s new fair world how is it fair to give cancer patients free prescriptions whilst not doing so for other serious illnesses. What about Alzheimers, Parkinsons, Motor Neurone etc. Care to comment Nick P?
397 - Capitalism like freedom needs to be defended and promoted. At the moment there are not very many defenders of capitalism and free markets. We also have a lot of people who think that the markets have been unregulated in recent years, when the truth is somewhat different. Free market capitalism is the best hope for the widest spread of wealth.
395 I was responding to suggestions earlier in the thread. I can’t think of any form of PR that would prevent the Conservatives being able to form a government, given current opinion polls.
400 But why should the US taxpayer get saddled with the banks’ bad debts?
356 - As opposed to the Labour idea of investment over the last 11 years which has been to throw money in all directions at public services without any regard for it being managed and targeted properly? With regards to the health service, a vast proportion has been tied up in bureaucracy and wage increases for administrators.
I think many people’s overiding memory of New Labour will be a lot promised, a lot spent, a lot wasted.
352 - I think you might find DC and the Conservatives are proposing slowing spending to below the growth of the economy
403 that means Council tax up 100% in 10 years then!
Ooooh just like the last 10 years….
Thanks Labour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
397, 405 There’d always be ways of extracting money from others, even without capitalism. Capitalism will always be criticised for its inhumanity, but generates outcomes that are immeasurably superior to any other that has been tried.
Cameron certainly needs to point out next week the relish that Gordon Brown feels about peoples misery, actually I think most people have noticed and the media narrative is that Brown is chuffed that there is a financial crisis (if that is not schaudenfraude re the British people I don’t know what is) what is even worse is if he hadn’t been such an incompetent profligate buffoon for 11 years then things may not be as bad as they are.
Gordon Brown the only person delighted by the finacial crises is not the person to fix it.
393 - “It was caused by a huge and growing budget deficit..”
History doesn’t repeat itself does it?
405.
“ree market capitalism is the best hope for the widest spread of wealth.”
Nice to see the tooth fairy clan are well-represented here tonight.
Complex, great lines, and left me feeling great. I might listen to it again.
Sorry, Baba O’Riley just came on my media player.
More seriously (and Baba O’Riley is excellent) for Brown this has been a good, perhaps a very good, day.
For Milipede, after making a crap speech, getting caught with the Heseltine comment and then being slapped in the face by Brown (verbally) it’s been very bad.
For Labour, it’s been mixed. They can go home all warm and fuzzy and put away their knives because they aren’t mean like Tories. But they’re still going to get hammered. At least they may end up doing one of only two things that make any bloody sense (lining up being Brown. The other’s killing him).
For Cameron, it’s excellent news. If the Tory conference is half as good as last year (and it may not be, as it lacks the unifying power of imminent annihilation) they’ll retain, possibly even extend their poll lead.
400. But why the urgency for the Paulson plan? As far as I can see the only material thing that changed between the Lehman bankruptcy and Paulson announcing his rescue package was that there was a real prospect that Paulson’s former employer Goldman Sachs may have become a victim too.
If the the banking system needs recapitalising then I favour Krugman’s idea of placing a moratorium on share dividends in the financial sector. This will give the weaker banks some breathing space without requiring public money.
412 What alternative would you propose?
“Capitalism will always be criticised for its inhumanity, but generates outcomes that are immeasurably superior to any other that has been tried.”
Your definition is fuzzy, your postulate infantile. Is there capitalism in Sweden? China? Cuba? the USA? Are the systems there all the same?
I will give you a definition. Capitalism is the distortion of and denial offree markets by the powerful and the greedy to perpetuate their own superior position without merit or reason.
Just listened to the speech. I think todays speech shows what the whole week has, that while Labour may have showed this week they are up for a fight, they are not actually listening to anybody. There was no change of approach, merely a defensive spin of his his ‘achievements’ trying to convince us that they are right all along. We got the same from Darling and Jaqui Smith and Jack Straw and all of the miniterial speakers. Anyone would think Britain was in a wonderful state listening to these people, the public don’t believe it.
The line I found most interesting was the claim Brown has ‘fixed the roof.’ I wonder if there will be a ‘dodgy fiddler on the roof’ response from Cameron next week.
The speech was good, but it’s too late for that. He needed a barnstormer of a speech to rally his support in the country, instead all he did was play to the labour faithful that remain and that was about it. In general most ordinary people don’t seem to have taken to it, most news shows have bene interviewing groups of people, and I’ve yet to hear one person say how brilliant it was. It had some weak jokes, a few swipes at the tories that while making his labour credentials look better, did little damage to the tories. Overall he’s still stuffed, as is his party, he’s just bought more time for himself
400. Because the alternative is widespread bank failures that will ultimately cost the taxpayer much more through destroyed deposits, unemployment and bankruptcies. That is the lesson from the 1930s.
We have tried to allow a market-led process of recapitalisation take place but it has failed because there are not enough strong institutions willing or able to prop up the weak.
Banks have been hoarding liquidity and cutting back on lending in an attempt to save themselves - a process which, when everyone engages in it, actually threatens to save no-one and collapse the system entirely. Only government intervention and taxpayer funds can break this vicious cycle now - there is no other credible route to the recapitalisation of the banking sector.
Tyson, you are getting a gard time iver on Guido’s blog!
Damed typo’s
Tyson, you are getting a hard time over on Guido’s blog
Have we heard whether there will be any polling tonight? Last year I think YouGov did immediate polling for Channel 4?
410 Good point
Or, from the Outlaw Josey Wales
“Don’t piss down my back and tell me it’s raining”.
New thread - Can McCain pull back ground in Friday’s debate?
420 LOL ‘feck off back to pb.com’!
Love order-order but this site is so more cultured!
Much better performance from Gordon. But I suspect it’s too late — people are no longer listening.
419 - I would dispute that taxpayer funds are necessary. Regulatory intervention is probably necessary but the big danger is that the regulators overreach themselves.
Peter from Putney and Roger- thankyou.
To Roger- I was never really far away from the Labour fold to be brutally honest.
To Peter- too much going on at work at the minute. Am also trying to master the dark arts of golf in my spare time, and still promising my wife (badly) to stay away from betting which is keeping me off being an active poster.
405 In this crisis it seems to me that what we are concerned about is companies that are too big too fail. The failure his was allowing these companies to become too big in the first place. Halifax for example should never have been allowed to merge with the Bank of Scotland.
It is uncompetitive and dangerous to allow these mega companies to exist that is the lesson that is being missed. Who allowed them to become mega companies, would it perhaps be one G. Brown. If you were a sceptic you might even think that he knew boom followed bust all along and realised a cunning path to nationalisation would be to forget all about compettion regulation so that all of a sudden we are surrounded by banks that are too big to fail.
413: ‘For Milipede, after making a crap speech, getting caught with the Heseltine comment and then being slapped in the face by Brown (verbally) it’s been very bad.’
Indeed. Never mind ‘Hezza’, Miliband has revealed himself to be Labour’s answer to Michael Portillo (and a somewhat second rate version at that) - a man who found himself in the position of having the leadership within his grasp, but who blew it with a mixture of dithering, cowardice and blundering. The Labour Party will never trust him with the leadership now. Next…
Cameron’s mother is the daughter of a second baronet and Osborne is the eldest son of a seventeenth baronet. When people say the Tory Party have ‘changed’ do they mean it’s changed to the Party as it was before the first world war?
411
read the history..not quite the same..BUT..
http://www.bized.co.uk/dataserv/chron/kf5579.htm#1974
22nd July 1977
22 Jul Following heavy selling of sterling in the spring the Chancellor announces a further £1.0 billion reduction in public expenditure for 1977/78 and adopts a target for the growth of the money supply, on the M3 measure (including bank deposits), of 12% for 1976/77
@414
The reason why things became urgent on Friday is that trust totally evaporated in the money markets. No one was willing to lend except at punitive rates. This evaporation of short term lending would have forced anyone dependent on short term credit into bankruptcy. As this spread, the knock-on effects of all the financial contracts unwinding in a disorderly fashion (prices lower than normal) would have meant that even banks not dependent on short term money markets would have taken losses. Remember that each bank only has a capital cushion of a few percent of its total assets. A total wipeout of capital in the sector was possible.
The US authorities (Fed, Treasury) decided that Lehman would not have such a large impact, but that AIG would. Unfortunately for them, the loss of confidence spiralled. Now that we know that the US authorities intend to prevent a system wide failure, the worst can probably be avoided. But…
I’ll say it again - banking crises are always political economy problems, the solutions are clear, but no one actually wants to be the villain or they want to pander to their base. The USD700 billion package isnt even a bailout package if one believes the US Treasury announcements - it mainly looks like a liquidity package, but its size suggests that it is being prepared for a couple of really large bank failures. The fund is meant to buy assets from banks at a market clearing price, so it only helps those who can write down the asset to the market clearing price. It could well trigger more bank failures as market clearing prices show that banks have not written down some assets enough.
Paulson is probably right that the G7 will have to participate, certainly the UK, France, Germany /Eurozone will. Not sure about Canada. The Japanese are probably OK - their last bank bust meant that they were not aggressive over the past decade.
Can’t find the actual report yet, but this looks interesting….
http://www.holyrood.com/content/view/2985/10552/
Monday, 22 September 2008
The Electoral Reform Society (ERS) has published a new report examining what a shift to the Alternative Vote (AV) might mean for the Westminster parliamentary elections.
The report, which is published to coincide with the Labour Party conference in Manchester, says that a move to an Alternative Vote system could be accomplished with simple legislation.
The report states that while “Alternative Vote (AV) is not proportional representation”, it adds: “However, in many circumstances it produces results that relate seats a little more closely to votes than is usual under FPTP.”
The report also states that while the effect of AV on the balance between the Conservative and Labour parties would be different in different political climates and historical circumstances, but would usually not be large, AV would “tend to give the Liberal Democrats more seats than FPTP under nearly all imaginable circumstances”.
The report adds: “AV will not do much to help fourth parties with widely dispersed support gain representation, but may enable a more constructive engagement between them and the main parties.”
Dr Ken Ritchie, chief executive of ERS said: “Make no mistake. The alternative vote is not proportional representation. It is an electoral reform, but one so small it could be enacted with nothing more than a ‘back of an envelope’ Bill.
“All MPs will have something only a handful can currently boast of – a convincing mandate from their own constituents. But our politics will not have the comprehensive overhaul it so desperately requires.
”With AV, the fundamentals of politics remain unchanged: the relationship between voter and representative, the Government and the governed, and between the parties themselves. Many of the problems of unrepresentative government will remain.
“But a shift to AV would not be a ‘stitch up’ job to keep a Labour government in power. Neither would it be a final destination for British politics. An increasingly sophisticated electorate would welcome preference voting, but real change at Westminster requires a final push towards proportional representation. We would welcome any first step on that road.”
You are all such gents on here so you would not dream of saying what I am about to say, but I was astonished by Mrs. Brown’s simply ghastly outfit. When I saw her walk out of the hotel dressed in two ugly garments that didn’t fit, I thought maybe she will change when she gets to the conference - but low and behold nothing happened. What point was she trying to make? Most of the people in the hall seemed to be in their best. Nobody would want her flashy, but in going to something like that I saw it as an insult.It sounds awful to say it but she was no better turned out than blinky’s football outfit.
Sorry Gordoom Rusty Brown, my benefit-of-the-doubt has just been exploded…!
You have no knowledge of Economics, have screwed the majority [English] in a one-eyed bigot’s revenge, and you refuse to confirm that you are a useless c*nt. Only the scion of Samuel Miliband would promote, being such a traitor.
Forget Jilted-John! Did not a [young] Paul Young perform your epitaph?
Toast: erm yeh’! A little bit of Toast..,!
There is Brown-bread (a.k.a. Gordoom Rusty McBean is dead), white-bread (bye-bye Ruth, et. el.), any kind of wholemeal-bread (Blair and his witch?), it comes in funny packages (ZaNUE-Labour) with labels (BBC and Adam Boulton?) on it’s side! THAT’S TOAST!
P.S. Some young (and naive?) bint was speaking on a train I traversed upon yesterday. She said she had Scottish-cow ice-cream. I have to assume that it was extremely fat; you know how tight those Scottish tits are!
404.Which group of patients have been in the news a lot regarding access and cost of drugs…
434. AV would be a backwards step. If you measure the fairness of an electoral system as the number of people who get their preferred candidate elected, then it can only be worse than FPTP. Under FPTP the people who vote for the 2nd, 3rd etc. most popular candidates get disappointed. Under AV either that list of people remains the same size, or it grows even bigger in the rare cases when the most popular candidate doesn’t get elected.
STV would maximise the number of people who get their preferred candidate elected, limited only by the practicalities of how long you want the ballot paper to be.
410.Yes, that is a good point, Brown has almost relished this glut of bad financial news simple because he thinks it strengthens his very weak premiership. Gordon was in denial for nearly a year about the impact of abolishing the 10p tax rate for the poorest earners, he was to busy trying to buy the middle classes.
431.Roger if you troll back far enough you might be related to the aristocracy!
Sarah’s photo op does not work out very well:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13791.html
433. Very good post Ken.
375 Osborne’s speech last year was not about shoring up the Tory vote.
I am surprised you still miss the point. Hislop did at the time. Not for long though. He voted in the most important speech of the year and gave good reasons for it.
The moment of the day for me was a slip up by Ed Miliband at the end of the Daily Politics when he was asked by Neil if the speech was good enough to make those in the Cabinet to shut up.
He said ‘I hope so’.
Neil was on him straight away. Oh so the Cabinet is……He got cut off. They’d run out of time, luckily for Ed.
But there is clearly trouble right at the top.
Please correct me if someone knows better.
If seems to me that the British tax payers are currently bailing out PRIVATE BANKS.
This means one of 3 things.
The government is nationalizing the Banking System.
The Banking System is nationalizing the country.
Or
The banking system already owned the country a long time ago, and this should be well known fact, is now clear for all that wish to see. BBC chief political correspondents being the exception to the rule.
This is the issue that Gordon Brown can not mention. Mainly because he is haggis if he does, but also because it is central to everything his government has spent the last 11 years doing.,
Steve Garner at 405 - the proposal is to start with cancer next year, then move on to other serious illnesses. You feel that unless everyone at once can be helped, nobody should be?
***SKY SOURCES: KELLY TO RESIGN FROM GOVERNMENT***
Just heard Joey Jones on Sky News break the news that Ruth Kelly is planning to resign from the government in order to spend more time with her family. Is this really the reason or has she been plotting as Mike suggested a few days ago?