Showing posts with label Hang Em. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Hang Em. Show all posts

Monday, 19 April 2010

Election Links and More Cameron Cobblers

Then I woke up...

According to a poll in The Sunday Times, Nick Clegg is almost as popular as Winston Churchill. This is probably not doing Rupert Murdoch's digestion much good at the moment, which is, overall, a pretty good thing. For those who are not totally into the 'Clegg= The British Obama' narrative you may want to check out Tim Pendry's thoughts. For those of you who like fishing around in Memory Holes you may be interested in this (only from last month, but that is an eternity in the 24/7 continuous media-news-entertainment loop we now live under).

One of the mitigating factors working against a Lib Dem breakthrough, apart from an electoral system where the third placed party in terms of votes could be first in terms of MPs (and vice-versa- how on Earth is that democratic?), is the tribalism which infects British politics. Frankly, it is damn hard to vote for something you were not brought up to support. I said something in a post not so long back that politics and elections should not be treated like a sporting event, one where you support your side whatever happens. However, even now I would no more think of voting Conservative than cheering on Birmingham City FC! The fear of letting your perceived main enemy win can often paralyse any effective poltical action that would really change things. Perhaps if we get electoral reform for General Elections (a big if...) people will feel freer to vote for political parties they actually agree with (as happens in European, London, Scottish and Welsh Elections, which have PR elements). Until then I think 'my party, right or wrong' will continue to shape many, if not most, people's political views, as Julian Glover discusses.

It might have been worth putting a question mark at the end there...

What makes Gordon Brown tick? An interesting interview with Colin Harvie, author of  Broonland and former acquaintance of the PM, sheds some light.

A critique of Phillip Blond's 'Red Toryism', which was half-adopted by David Cameron in the same way c.1996 Tony Blair half-adopted Will Hutton's 'Stakeholder Economy' concept, can be found here.

Finally, Dave Cameron is coming out with more cobblers, the sort Tony Blair would be proud of. After talking about ten year old members of the Royal Navy in last Thursday's TV debate (and nuking China), Call Me Dave was in fine form again yesterday:


'David Cameron clearly has trouble understanding childhood. In last week's debate he claimed to have met a man who joined the navy as a 10-year-old. Now the Tory leader seems convinced that he grew up in the 1990s. At the launch of his manifesto for older people yesterday he reminisced about his childhood, claiming the idea of the big society came from his parents. "My mother was a magistrate. She used to come home and tell us all stories about the Newbury bypass protesters and Swampy up his tree." At the height of the protests Cameron was 30 years old. And, apparently, still living with his parents.'

 
Black Wednesday, September 16th 1992: 'Mr. Lamont, can I go home now? Mother expects me home by 10 o'clock and my dinner will be burnt to cinders.' 'In a minute, son. Now watch and learn, watch and learn...'



Sunday, 18 April 2010

Battle of the Three Armies?

August 1578: Ksar El Kebir- Battle of the Three Kings

Nick Clegg did well in the first TV debate by all acounts. The polls suggest a surge towards the Lib Dems, which if repeated on May 6th, would liven things up no end.

Labour does not seem to be too bothered, even as polls suggest it has been pushed into third place. I do not think anybody, except maybe for Gordon Brown and Ed Balls, expects Labour to get an overall majority. However, for the Conservatives, who for a long time have expected an overall majority, the chances of  a hung parliament increasing is not good news at all, and they seem to be panicking. The general consensus is Call Me Dave did not do very well in the TV debate ('Ex-Carlton TV PR Flak Not Very Good On TV Shock!') and it must have galling to have been out-Obamafied by Clegg.

Nick Clegg: 'Bitter, Dave?'

Dave did himself no favours by telling an anecdote of a 40 year old black man from Plymouth who told Dave he supported tighter immigration controls. The problems being, all else being left aside, (i) Dave claimed he had been in the navy for 30 years, which defies basic mathematics (unless you can join the Navy at 10); (ii) the man was 51 and had been in the Navy just 6 years, which hardly inspires confidence in Dave getting to grips with the numbers involved in reducing Britain's deficit; and (iii) the subject of his ancedote did not say what Dave claimed he said. If you want to make up your own Dave-like anecdote, you may want to try this, which comes up with various plausible Dave bon mots.

Consternation about Dave's performance was reflected in the hardcore Thatcherite press coverage of  the TV debate. For instance, Simon 'Don't Hassle The Heff' Heffer, pompous priggish Thatcherite bore par excellence, was not impressed by Dave's performance.


Simon Heffer: 'Vote Labour and see Elevenses banned by the Politically Correct Brigade!'

Fellow Thatcher worshipper Charles Moore was not happy either. How dare those Liberal Democrats stop us Tories get an overall majority with less than 40% of the vote?


 Charles Moore: 'Brussels and BBC-backed Bolshevik Bounder Clegg deserves a damn good thrashing!'

Anyhow, the Tories have started their fightback against the Lib Dems. According to the BBC:
  
In the Sunday Times, [Shadow Foreign Secretary] Mr Hague argued a vote for Mr Clegg was a vote for the "European super-state" that would give away "more and more of the powers of this country".

It seems to me a bit late for the Conservatives to attack the Lib Dems for their supposed softness towards the European Union. As I said in a post a couple of days back, the Lib Dems should be ashamed of their behaviour in Parliament to scupper a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. It's the main reason why I won't vote for them. However, I think it equally disgraceful that the Conservatives dropped their 'cast-iron' guarantee of a referendum on it as well. Attacking the Lib Dems for their alleged softness towards the European Union has the potential to open a proverbial can of worms for the Conservatives.

Wednesday, 14 April 2010

Dem Glib Dems

Or is it...? (Hat-tip: Beau Bo D'or)



I had a quick gander at what the Lib Dems promised. A lot of platitudes and Mum's Apple Pie stuff. The one really good thing was promising to scrap ID cards, but I have a feeling whoever gets in may get rid of them simply due to the cost. The Lib Dems seem to be downplaying  their tradtional support for Proportional Representation, which seems strange when you consider that the opinion polls suggest a groundswell of popular opinion for a hung parliament, with no one party having a majority of seats (as it should be if no-one can get a majority of the votes). I have a feeling democratic principles would be abandoned pretty quickly in negotations with either (or both) main parties if the chance of Cabinet seats fell the way of the Lib Dems' leadership..

Of course, after their shameful sabotaging in Parliament of attempts to get a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, one should not expect much from the Glib Dems. My EU Right Or Wrong, Lib Dems?

Meanwhile, around here in Hampstead and Kilburn, the Lib Dems and Conservatives are both claiming to be the main challenger to Labour. An investigation by a local blogger suggests there is some truth in the claims made on behalf of Ed Fordham that he is only 474 votes away from taking the seat.


However, as the first commenter on the link above suggests, it is a bit more complicated than that. Most of the constituency is in Camden, but there are a few wards which are in Brent and used to be part of the old Brent East constituency, held by Lib Dem Sarah Teather. Now that she is standing in Brent Central, it remains to be seen if any personal vote for her in the Brent East part of Hampstead and Kilburn stays with the Lib Dems or goes elsewhere. Furthermore, the 474 figure above is based on the 2005 General Election. As far as I can make out, figures from the 2008 London (Mayoral and Assembly) Elections and 2009 European Elections suggest the Conservatives are the main challengers here. Throw in the fact we have local council elections on May 6th too and I wouldn't like to predict the result in Hamsptead and Kilburn. Who would be a psephologist?