The moment I knew.
Thursday, 6 November 2008
Monday, 13 October 2008
Gordon...international man of the hour.
First he gets invited to the Eurozone summit to pretty much tell Europe what to do, now we see the Nobel Prize winner for Economics declare Gordon Brown as the saviour in the financial crisis, the man leading the world. http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/opinion/13krugman.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
While we pitied and sorrowed over GBs loss of support here at home, we neglect shouting about the praise and admiration the international community has for Gordon Brown. No other world leader currently has the expertise and experience as GB. Its a bit like Lost, everyone looks to Jack, at home he has his troubles, but in a crisis we all want the good doctor to show us the way. Don't be fooled by those Tories. Weeks overdue, their 'analysis' of the crisis has only led them to attack bonuses. Well done, clap clap. You've managed to find the most populist stance on something that pails in comparison to the day to day events of this crisis. The end of Thatcherism, eh? What do the Tories do.
In the US people are swinging to the Democrats. Obama's got a solid lead, despite the possibility of the McCain camp stirring up a race riot. Is it the natural reaction to go against the incumbent in an economic crisis? Bush has mishandled the economy certainly, while in the UK at least we enjoyed the years of economic growth by fixing our schools and hospitals, its as if a large proportion of Americans lost out completely.
But is it the natural anti-incumbent reaction, like Hoover losing in the Thirties or even Hitler's rise. Or is it a swing to the left. A desire for intervention and redistribution to help those hurting more than any other in the crisis. The consensus gripping the UK right now is certainly along those lines. People would rather see a big government right now, than a big hole left by the collapse of the financial industry.
Comparison with the US is of course difficult. I think it unjust to compare the legacy of the Bush years with those of Labour. From an entirely bias standpoint, Bush has done next to nothing of worth, while Labour has a decent sample of achievements. Bush's 'election' was built much more on divide and conquer, than big tent, centre ground consensus. The big issue of Iraq, is better divided by the two Parties, whereas here, both the main parties supported it.
Perhaps it has nothing to do with left or right, but simply who has the best ideas, who looks the most competent. Bush and Paulson look out of depth, Obama looks statesmanlike and more plausible in his analysis of the crisis.
In the short term, its all about Brown. The Tories look petty and [only in a global crisis is this apt,]too nationally focused. Every now and then Baronet Osbourne is wheeled on at the BBC for his side, he says nothing of impact or worth. Like a man complaining about the food on the Titanic . I mean, how weak was Cameron's speech now? Of all the times to declare your position, to announce your strategy, what does he decide to discuss? The most insignificant issues , more appropriate for a Daily Mail letters page. Nothing on how Britain's education system competes with the world, but a passage on how its so awful for 2 marks to be awarded for writing 'Fuck off,' is that what should be on a politicians priority list? How about the remodelling of the global financial system? Nah, lets just change 'Free Market' to 'Free enterprise' and pretend we care how much Bankers are paid. Its not the most convincing vision to say your reason for getting into politics was to cut taxes.
Voters weren't convinced by Kinnock in '92. The Tories haven't shown any reason to be convinced by them now. Another 5 years, sure. Not yet.
While we pitied and sorrowed over GBs loss of support here at home, we neglect shouting about the praise and admiration the international community has for Gordon Brown. No other world leader currently has the expertise and experience as GB. Its a bit like Lost, everyone looks to Jack, at home he has his troubles, but in a crisis we all want the good doctor to show us the way. Don't be fooled by those Tories. Weeks overdue, their 'analysis' of the crisis has only led them to attack bonuses. Well done, clap clap. You've managed to find the most populist stance on something that pails in comparison to the day to day events of this crisis. The end of Thatcherism, eh? What do the Tories do.
In the US people are swinging to the Democrats. Obama's got a solid lead, despite the possibility of the McCain camp stirring up a race riot. Is it the natural reaction to go against the incumbent in an economic crisis? Bush has mishandled the economy certainly, while in the UK at least we enjoyed the years of economic growth by fixing our schools and hospitals, its as if a large proportion of Americans lost out completely.
But is it the natural anti-incumbent reaction, like Hoover losing in the Thirties or even Hitler's rise. Or is it a swing to the left. A desire for intervention and redistribution to help those hurting more than any other in the crisis. The consensus gripping the UK right now is certainly along those lines. People would rather see a big government right now, than a big hole left by the collapse of the financial industry.
Comparison with the US is of course difficult. I think it unjust to compare the legacy of the Bush years with those of Labour. From an entirely bias standpoint, Bush has done next to nothing of worth, while Labour has a decent sample of achievements. Bush's 'election' was built much more on divide and conquer, than big tent, centre ground consensus. The big issue of Iraq, is better divided by the two Parties, whereas here, both the main parties supported it.
Perhaps it has nothing to do with left or right, but simply who has the best ideas, who looks the most competent. Bush and Paulson look out of depth, Obama looks statesmanlike and more plausible in his analysis of the crisis.
In the short term, its all about Brown. The Tories look petty and [only in a global crisis is this apt,]too nationally focused. Every now and then Baronet Osbourne is wheeled on at the BBC for his side, he says nothing of impact or worth. Like a man complaining about the food on the Titanic . I mean, how weak was Cameron's speech now? Of all the times to declare your position, to announce your strategy, what does he decide to discuss? The most insignificant issues , more appropriate for a Daily Mail letters page. Nothing on how Britain's education system competes with the world, but a passage on how its so awful for 2 marks to be awarded for writing 'Fuck off,' is that what should be on a politicians priority list? How about the remodelling of the global financial system? Nah, lets just change 'Free Market' to 'Free enterprise' and pretend we care how much Bankers are paid. Its not the most convincing vision to say your reason for getting into politics was to cut taxes.
Voters weren't convinced by Kinnock in '92. The Tories haven't shown any reason to be convinced by them now. Another 5 years, sure. Not yet.
Tuesday, 7 October 2008
Is Obama actually going to win this thing?
Keeping an eye on the polls at fivethirtyeight.com. Obama's lead has been growing on the nationwide polls ever since Palin revealed her inner Bush. State by state he's looking even more solid. He's ahead in Florida and even red state Virginia. Current electoral projections give him over 340, only needs 270!! Please,please ,please keep this up.
I used to respect McCain, I thought if Obama lost it wouldn't be so bad. But this election campaign is revealing not just his errors of judgement but the really revolting side of US politics. I respect British politics so much more now. We may be getting a little caught up on the personality stuff, but really at heart, people are swayed by policy. The biggest issues that have lost a party votes here are Iraq, 10p tax, crime, public services. Elections aren't made into a culture battle, where one side can claim patriotism and god on their side, attack the opposition for not being patriotic or godly. Its so disgraceful, they've lost all dignity, all the moral high ground. They are not addressing peoples fears but stoking them beyond any rationality.
All the GOP has to do is suggest Obama's a muslim , a liberal who's grown up abroad and wants to talk to dictators and terrorists, someone who's unpatriotic and elitist. Convince half the country and they won't have to provide any answers beyond 'I love America, it's the best country in the world, and we need to fight the terrorists' How scared must people be of the alternative if they feel reassured by 'we're gonna fix America', 'we're gonna stop the terrorists' but with no answer to how. Its so pathetic. We criticise the Tories for not revealing their policies, but even in an election republicans try to deflect any scrutiny of their policies with petty smears and downright lies about the opposition. They've got that smear machine so well tuned that they can attack Obama for something thats more evident in McCain. They call him an elitist. A man from a single parent home being attacked for being elitist from a man with more houses than he can count, who married money, and comes from a line of Admirals.
I really detest how they politicise patriotism as if you're only patriotic if you believe in small government. As if diplomacy is selling America short. It seems they don't want to learn from the mistakes of the past 50 years. Diplpmacy and talking to foes isnt't giving in to terrorism, its not a sign of weakness, its the greatest sign of strength. McCain of all people, hasn't learnt the lesson of Vietnam. Their attitude to Iran is full of hypocrisy and misinformation. Its so unbareable to see Palin talking in such concrete terms, 'we know the difference between good and evil', the fact that she believes that is scary enough, the fact that McCain allows her and his campaign to talk down to the public is even worse. Why is it so hard for them to gain some perspective, to try and imagine the view from the other side. Its not hard. Every time the US mourns a soldier dead in Iraq, take that feeling and transfer it to the mothers, fathers, children and siblings of the 100,000s of civilians who've died in Iraq. If we anger at the illegality of the war, and the senselessness of when our soldiers die, what would be the perspective of those relatives? How would they become to view the US? As liberators? The whole point of grief is that it can turn the most rational being into irrational. They will look for someone to blame and see events out of their control as caused by them. The US wanted to win hearts and minds in Vietnam, to persuade them of the merits of capitalism and democracy. But how were they trying to persuade them? By misunderstanding their culture, by bombing their land, by supporting corrupt and undemocratic regimes. Who in their right mind would be convinced. So now in the middle east, they want people to support democracy, to stop hating America and the west, to stop blowing us up. How are they doing that? By invading sovereign territory, by rejecting the electorate in Gaza's decision to vote for Hamas, by threat of war. These would be the same people you sold and/or smuggled weapons to in the 1980's, and the similar regimes that you happily to business with. I saw a video this week, where a McCain cheerleader attacked Obama for his speech in Berlin, for wanting to rebuild the bridges with Europe, admitting where America had made things worse. She made it out that it was unamerican, that because the US was such a great 'force for good' that they shouldn't have to. Why is it that wanting to correct Americas faults is unamerican, but to let them to persist is patirotic? Are they really convinced that unilateralism will be effective in any of the world problems. Its beyond naivity.
But they don't really believe it do they? They're just stirring it up. Of course its better for the US to work effectively with Europe, in their heart of hearts they'd probably support what O's said, if it was a republican saying it. If McCain said we should talk to Iran, they'd say a wise decision. But the dems said it first, so we'll just demonise it as weak and a danger to America. If McCain wins this thing, then they'll probably keep trying to distract the public, while doing whatever the want with limited scrutiny. McCains so deep into the Rove-style politics and Bush's old puppetmasters now, you can see him dying inside when he he's pushed to make those talking points.
Thank god we aren't like that. Thank god elections aren't won on guns, abortion or patriotism. Will Obama change things in US politics. Maybe, he'll be a sign that the culture war's waiving. The left has its role too. Its not just the right stirring it. The left and the dreaded 'liberal media' can demonise the right and act as a further polarisation, not quite as shit-stirring, but their unwillingness to listen to the concerns of those on the right prevents change too. That is something that we need to do in Britain too. The left shouldnt address the concerns of the BNP, but we should address the concerns of those working classes who are being attracted to it. They aren't racists, they're vulnerable and disillusioned. The BNP are only too happy to fill the vacuum.
Wednesday, 1 October 2008
Cameron, old bean.
Judgements based on poor experience, character based on Boden catalogues.
This is the first time in a few years, where I'm not going to bother watching Camerons speech. Just check the headlines and what the news' take of it is. View it not as a nerd of politics, but just a normal person. Haven't done that since I started sneaking home from school to watch PMQs every wednesday.
Just heard a focus group on Radio 4s PM. They hated it, tedious apparently. But I'd hazard a guess, that most people would find a 65 min speech to the party faithful boring. It sounds like a real Conservative speech, with a big ol' C.
A week after Browns speech and the 'no time for a novice' has caught on. What part of DCs speech will be remembered. 'I've got judgement' or 'I'll be Thatcher'?
Screw it, I'm reading the speech.
And what exactly is 'radical conservative reform'? An oxymoron if ever I saw one.
This is the first time in a few years, where I'm not going to bother watching Camerons speech. Just check the headlines and what the news' take of it is. View it not as a nerd of politics, but just a normal person. Haven't done that since I started sneaking home from school to watch PMQs every wednesday.
Just heard a focus group on Radio 4s PM. They hated it, tedious apparently. But I'd hazard a guess, that most people would find a 65 min speech to the party faithful boring. It sounds like a real Conservative speech, with a big ol' C.
A week after Browns speech and the 'no time for a novice' has caught on. What part of DCs speech will be remembered. 'I've got judgement' or 'I'll be Thatcher'?
Screw it, I'm reading the speech.
And what exactly is 'radical conservative reform'? An oxymoron if ever I saw one.
'Character and judgement are more important than experience'
But what experiences have led you to those judgements? What experience leads you to believe SureStart should be cut? I'm guessing his experiences in Eton and Bullingdon led him to call for less city regulation. And what part of his character finds it OK to use his children as political tools or makes him consistently dodge questions about his party's bankroller in chief, Lord Ashcroft?
As a friend put it: "The 'judgement better than experience' thing might have worked if he hadn't spent 3 years changing his mind on grammar schools, green taxes, spending plans, Northern Rock, B&B, regulation of the city, and the hypocrisy of still being bankrolled by people who don't pay UK tax and pretending to clean up politics."
Judgements based on poor experience, character based on Boden catalogues. Hohoho
But what experiences have led you to those judgements? What experience leads you to believe SureStart should be cut? I'm guessing his experiences in Eton and Bullingdon led him to call for less city regulation. And what part of his character finds it OK to use his children as political tools or makes him consistently dodge questions about his party's bankroller in chief, Lord Ashcroft?
As a friend put it: "The 'judgement better than experience' thing might have worked if he hadn't spent 3 years changing his mind on grammar schools, green taxes, spending plans, Northern Rock, B&B, regulation of the city, and the hypocrisy of still being bankrolled by people who don't pay UK tax and pretending to clean up politics."
Judgements based on poor experience, character based on Boden catalogues. Hohoho
Monday, 29 September 2008
It was the media all along.
After GB made his speech last week, a Mr Freedland [I believe] of the Guardian, suggested that media scrutiny of the Tories was likely to step up. A two horse race is more fun to report than a one horse race. Once its had its fill of battering GB over and over again, they've turned they beady eyes to to the other corner. Finally. Tonight's episode of Newsnight was a fine example.
One point first, the financial crisis clearly overshadowed anything Baronet Osborne had to say. So it was the third slot for the Tories. And a seemingly less than relavent discussion of the day at conference. Emily Maitliss did her best to make Ossy look rather petty, in the grand scheme of things. There they were, sat in a little box in Birmingham, while in the US, congress refused a $700bn bailout. While a bank both at home and in europe faced collapse and nationalisation, and all that he could come up with was one sound bite to another. No Golden parachutes, no to taxpayers bailing out, stability, tax cuts, protect the poorest, chase the bankers for the money blah blah. The Council tax thing doesnt seem to have been quite as headline grabbing as it would have last year. And a tad contradictory. 'The cupboard is bare, debt is too high, borrowing is too high...but we'll still cut taxes'
I've lambasted the traditional media in previous posts. But one should never underestimate their power to spin for themselves, and effectively, to change perception. The media scrutiny of Labour of the past few months has been fierce, so too has the public's perception grown fiercely hateful. I give up on reading anything on Cif nowadays, its become such a cauldron on hate, its beyond any rational basis, Labour are dirt, pure and simple, stained in the eyes of so many readers.
But you do get the sense of them wanting to even things out. Tories will remain on top, certainly. The crisis won't last, and the change agenda will return. But at least we'll be able to debate things a bit more rationally. I think, partly as a reaction to Broons speech, the left or at least some of the unions have sensed it'll be better trying to change Labour in power, than fight the Tories again. Though, can't take that support for granted. Heard in the news some unionists are planning to protest at Tory conference, during DCs speech. That'll be quite a turnout if it gets on the news.
Still think its vital Brown makes further steps to sure up the core vote. The speech got us listening, now we need solid statements and policy. Stuff we can take to the doorsteps. And some moves to a least calm the waters at the Guardian. We've been haemorrhaging votes there for years. First we lost the hard left in 1994 with clause 4, then we lost the Guardianistas and the liberal left with Iraq and cosying up to Bush, then Tony lost all support after Lebanon, then the ordinary member felt slapped in the face by 10p and all those things we've brushed aside in the past. All those times we've thought, 'well, benefits outweigh costs, at least its labour' they've all come back. PFIs, selling gold, soft-regulation, 28-42 days, pensions, cash for honours, etc etc. They're all there, in the back of our minds. On the doorstep, right when we need to be 100% certain over why people should vote Labour. Its there. And we can't answer. Mix that sense of fatalism with the leadership completely failing to provide strong arguments, and causes to boast about....Crewe and Nantwich. Demoralised members + directionless leadership = 'Tory Toff' campaign.
Anyway, theres where we've gone wrong. Don't do it again. Start afresh. Get those lines of attack focused and consistent, the lines of argument backed up with principles and proven policy, give the grassroots some meat. And we can win again.
I've lambasted the traditional media in previous posts. But one should never underestimate their power to spin for themselves, and effectively, to change perception. The media scrutiny of Labour of the past few months has been fierce, so too has the public's perception grown fiercely hateful. I give up on reading anything on Cif nowadays, its become such a cauldron on hate, its beyond any rational basis, Labour are dirt, pure and simple, stained in the eyes of so many readers.
But you do get the sense of them wanting to even things out. Tories will remain on top, certainly. The crisis won't last, and the change agenda will return. But at least we'll be able to debate things a bit more rationally. I think, partly as a reaction to Broons speech, the left or at least some of the unions have sensed it'll be better trying to change Labour in power, than fight the Tories again. Though, can't take that support for granted. Heard in the news some unionists are planning to protest at Tory conference, during DCs speech. That'll be quite a turnout if it gets on the news.
Still think its vital Brown makes further steps to sure up the core vote. The speech got us listening, now we need solid statements and policy. Stuff we can take to the doorsteps. And some moves to a least calm the waters at the Guardian. We've been haemorrhaging votes there for years. First we lost the hard left in 1994 with clause 4, then we lost the Guardianistas and the liberal left with Iraq and cosying up to Bush, then Tony lost all support after Lebanon, then the ordinary member felt slapped in the face by 10p and all those things we've brushed aside in the past. All those times we've thought, 'well, benefits outweigh costs, at least its labour' they've all come back. PFIs, selling gold, soft-regulation, 28-42 days, pensions, cash for honours, etc etc. They're all there, in the back of our minds. On the doorstep, right when we need to be 100% certain over why people should vote Labour. Its there. And we can't answer. Mix that sense of fatalism with the leadership completely failing to provide strong arguments, and causes to boast about....Crewe and Nantwich. Demoralised members + directionless leadership = 'Tory Toff' campaign.
Anyway, theres where we've gone wrong. Don't do it again. Start afresh. Get those lines of attack focused and consistent, the lines of argument backed up with principles and proven policy, give the grassroots some meat. And we can win again.
George pulls another billion £ rabbit out of the hat
So this years inheritance tax is Council tax. A lovely promise to allow councils, voluntarily, to freeze council tax rises.
Meanwhile Gordon and Alastair are nationalising Bradford&Bingley.
See how this is spun. Will it swing for the Tories once again?
15:40 'Speech proves an instant political hit for Osbourne' Guardian
'Why George Osbourne's council tax claims may undermine his credentials' Times
'Why Osbourne's speech was a success' Telegraph
Times' is obviously my preferred one...
'The instant reaction both in the hall and the media was a good deal less positive than in Blackpool as questions over how the policy will work and who will benefit went unanswered. Mr Osborne’s central message is that he intends to protect the poorest while reducing both debt and – over time – the share of national wealth given to public spending. Promising what is in effect a tax cut that will benefit the most wealthy homes could undermine that claim.'
We shall see. Headlines will probably be good for them. Only the bailout is overshadowing them so far. Its not about to be spun into, 'tax break for the rich', which would have been ideal. O what I'd give for the Tories to have a 10p tax moment.
17:15 Widespread applaud for GO speech. Gosh darn it.
Meanwhile Gordon and Alastair are nationalising Bradford&Bingley.
See how this is spun. Will it swing for the Tories once again?
15:40 'Speech proves an instant political hit for Osbourne' Guardian
'Why George Osbourne's council tax claims may undermine his credentials' Times
'Why Osbourne's speech was a success' Telegraph
Times' is obviously my preferred one...
'The instant reaction both in the hall and the media was a good deal less positive than in Blackpool as questions over how the policy will work and who will benefit went unanswered. Mr Osborne’s central message is that he intends to protect the poorest while reducing both debt and – over time – the share of national wealth given to public spending. Promising what is in effect a tax cut that will benefit the most wealthy homes could undermine that claim.'
We shall see. Headlines will probably be good for them. Only the bailout is overshadowing them so far. Its not about to be spun into, 'tax break for the rich', which would have been ideal. O what I'd give for the Tories to have a 10p tax moment.
17:15 Widespread applaud for GO speech. Gosh darn it.
Labour pains...II
We need to renew the party. Bring back internal democracy. Under New Labour, it feels more like we're members of the Blair/Brown group rather than them being part of our movement. And members are so vital for elections. Canvassing year in year out. Knocking on doors, fundraising, getting out the vote, making the arguments down the pub, and telling MPs what's really happening. Any party renewal has to involve a remodelling from the bottom up. Learn from the Obama campaign. They have a massive grassroots machine. Hundreds of campaign HQs across each state. All registering voters, etc etc. Who are people more likely to listen to? The papers? The news? politicians? Or their neighbour or friend or sibling. Get the party out fighting. There was all that hope and ambition in 1997. Making Labour a million strong party. Membership of parties are desperately low now. The combined numbers of all parties is still less than that of the RSPCA. People want to feel their membership means more than a few quid and the odd vote [if MPs let us] We should make leadership more accountable to members again. Prevent MPs from holding coronations. No new leader without every member and union voting.
Really, this kind of thing is unavoidable. Opinion and debate is becoming more democratised and personal. I don't switch on the TV or read the paper for a debate. I don't wait for them to ask the questions. I go to forums, start threads, talk to people all over the world. I debate what I want, where and when I want to. The media can't control the topic. Thank god. If we only had TV. All that would have been discussed the last few months is threats to Gordon Browns leadership. They've had a one track mind. All events must be related to challenges to Brown. What does the economy do to Brown? Will the Olympic wins rub off on Brown? Was this speech, was that speech a hint at Brown? What does Browns holiday show about his leadership? blah blah blah. The traditional media doesn't say or ask anything new and yet we're supposed to be so influenced, and in respectful awe of its views. Inevitably, I'm still influenced by what many of the media say or do [ especially the Guardian] But its changing. The internet is full of big ideas, not just the status quo of Auntie Beeb, bless her.
What I'd really like to see an end to: speculation and opinion from newscasters. They have far too many 'editors' on Newsnight. Tell us the days events, and by all means explain economic events in simply terms. But enough of the speculating what one line meant in a speech, what a missed handshake means for the relationship between chancellor and PM. Tell us the news. Then we can decide what to think. Its the media debating with the media. Its like sitting in on an editors meeting or a campaign stategy, where they forget that your actually in the room.
'So Micheal, how will Labour voters react to the PMs speech' 'Well Jeremy, many will feel reassured at his explanation of the economy, blah blah blah' Why don't you just wait and see? Why don't you just report the reaction tomorrow? Why speculate and second guess what we're all thinking. Or is it what you want us to think. 'yeah, now you say it, I am reassured' Its just like the US. The debate happens. But thats not it. No, no. You don't make your mind up then. You have to wait to see what spin the campaigns put on it. You could think Obama won it, then whats this, a bright, confident man on the TV says Obama looked shifty. -Does that suit the channels editorial line? Yeah, lets go for that. Edit all the bits where Obama looks at his hands- 'o, he did look shifty'
We're not their yet. But the web offers both relief and adds fuel to this problem. Theres still plenty of opinion on the web. Its full of it. [Look at me, who the fuck am I to say anything] but its also got plenty of raw data, and perspective from millions of views all over the world. If you're sick of the BBCs coverage of the US debate. Go find it online. Watch it on Youtube. Make up your own mind. Then debate what you really took issue with. Not Obamas speaking style or McCains tie [horrible btw] but whatever you want. If you get bored, well theres plenty of downloaded Family Guy and clips of people falling over, just a couple of clicks away.
Really, this kind of thing is unavoidable. Opinion and debate is becoming more democratised and personal. I don't switch on the TV or read the paper for a debate. I don't wait for them to ask the questions. I go to forums, start threads, talk to people all over the world. I debate what I want, where and when I want to. The media can't control the topic. Thank god. If we only had TV. All that would have been discussed the last few months is threats to Gordon Browns leadership. They've had a one track mind. All events must be related to challenges to Brown. What does the economy do to Brown? Will the Olympic wins rub off on Brown? Was this speech, was that speech a hint at Brown? What does Browns holiday show about his leadership? blah blah blah. The traditional media doesn't say or ask anything new and yet we're supposed to be so influenced, and in respectful awe of its views. Inevitably, I'm still influenced by what many of the media say or do [ especially the Guardian] But its changing. The internet is full of big ideas, not just the status quo of Auntie Beeb, bless her.
What I'd really like to see an end to: speculation and opinion from newscasters. They have far too many 'editors' on Newsnight. Tell us the days events, and by all means explain economic events in simply terms. But enough of the speculating what one line meant in a speech, what a missed handshake means for the relationship between chancellor and PM. Tell us the news. Then we can decide what to think. Its the media debating with the media. Its like sitting in on an editors meeting or a campaign stategy, where they forget that your actually in the room.
'So Micheal, how will Labour voters react to the PMs speech' 'Well Jeremy, many will feel reassured at his explanation of the economy, blah blah blah' Why don't you just wait and see? Why don't you just report the reaction tomorrow? Why speculate and second guess what we're all thinking. Or is it what you want us to think. 'yeah, now you say it, I am reassured' Its just like the US. The debate happens. But thats not it. No, no. You don't make your mind up then. You have to wait to see what spin the campaigns put on it. You could think Obama won it, then whats this, a bright, confident man on the TV says Obama looked shifty. -Does that suit the channels editorial line? Yeah, lets go for that. Edit all the bits where Obama looks at his hands- 'o, he did look shifty'
We're not their yet. But the web offers both relief and adds fuel to this problem. Theres still plenty of opinion on the web. Its full of it. [Look at me, who the fuck am I to say anything] but its also got plenty of raw data, and perspective from millions of views all over the world. If you're sick of the BBCs coverage of the US debate. Go find it online. Watch it on Youtube. Make up your own mind. Then debate what you really took issue with. Not Obamas speaking style or McCains tie [horrible btw] but whatever you want. If you get bored, well theres plenty of downloaded Family Guy and clips of people falling over, just a couple of clicks away.
Labour pains...I
What next.
A successful Tory conference? Lets admit it, its not going to be unsuccessful. Cameron is not about to wrongly read the situation. He knows how to grab at the public's heartstrings, and he's done it all before.
So what can Labour take from conference season? Well, firstly, the party doesn't hate Gordon. They're still worried, and still need convincing. A continuance of the last 3 months will not do. But they are there. And so is the Labour vote. Polls have shown some recovery (between 7 and 9 points recovered, better than nowt) The country hasn't gone Tory. In some polls, they trust GB and AD more than DC and GO, on the economy. [I find GO distinctly distrustful]
Labour hasn't collapsed, people will vote Labour again. This is not the end of Labour as a viable force in British politics as some rather melodramatic commentators have put it
While the economy is still precarious, moves against Gordon won't happen. I think we've pretty much learnt, the public doesn't like disunity. We stand together or nothing. So if the economy picks up...then we'll be fighting the 'change' ticket again. I don't see Labour winning this. Even with a new leader. We can limit the damage, maybe even a hung parliament. Depends on the Lib Dems too. Where its Labour vs Lib Dem, like in my constituency, can Cloggy get out of the wilderness? While its a two horse race, I don't see it. [ not with my local candidate]
In my limited experience. As a strategy. Keep GB until late 2009 at least. Show strength and experience. If, by then the scrutiny of the Tories has revealed some suprises, call an election. Otherwise, Brown should step down, hopefully without being pushed. New caretaker leader until May 2010. I really dislike getting rid of leaders. It looks panic-y, vicious and in government, turns everything to shit. The Tories don't get any scrutiny, all the focus is on a collapsing government. No one listens to policy. But then the same can be said if you have a leader 20 pts down in the polls.
OOOO this is a learning curve for me. All very interesting, if depressing. Hopefully by the time I leave Uni, the cycle will be back round for Labour, and we can start afresh. Can't wait for some new blood in parliament.
A successful Tory conference? Lets admit it, its not going to be unsuccessful. Cameron is not about to wrongly read the situation. He knows how to grab at the public's heartstrings, and he's done it all before.
So what can Labour take from conference season? Well, firstly, the party doesn't hate Gordon. They're still worried, and still need convincing. A continuance of the last 3 months will not do. But they are there. And so is the Labour vote. Polls have shown some recovery (between 7 and 9 points recovered, better than nowt) The country hasn't gone Tory. In some polls, they trust GB and AD more than DC and GO, on the economy. [I find GO distinctly distrustful]
Labour hasn't collapsed, people will vote Labour again. This is not the end of Labour as a viable force in British politics as some rather melodramatic commentators have put it
While the economy is still precarious, moves against Gordon won't happen. I think we've pretty much learnt, the public doesn't like disunity. We stand together or nothing. So if the economy picks up...then we'll be fighting the 'change' ticket again. I don't see Labour winning this. Even with a new leader. We can limit the damage, maybe even a hung parliament. Depends on the Lib Dems too. Where its Labour vs Lib Dem, like in my constituency, can Cloggy get out of the wilderness? While its a two horse race, I don't see it. [ not with my local candidate]
In my limited experience. As a strategy. Keep GB until late 2009 at least. Show strength and experience. If, by then the scrutiny of the Tories has revealed some suprises, call an election. Otherwise, Brown should step down, hopefully without being pushed. New caretaker leader until May 2010. I really dislike getting rid of leaders. It looks panic-y, vicious and in government, turns everything to shit. The Tories don't get any scrutiny, all the focus is on a collapsing government. No one listens to policy. But then the same can be said if you have a leader 20 pts down in the polls.
OOOO this is a learning curve for me. All very interesting, if depressing. Hopefully by the time I leave Uni, the cycle will be back round for Labour, and we can start afresh. Can't wait for some new blood in parliament.
Sunday, 28 September 2008
1928-Why aren't we celebrating?
2008 has been a year of many anniversaries. The NHS, 1968 protests etc.
But why hasn't more been made of 1928? The year suffrage was finally universal, the year where electorally, women were finally equal to men. What, not even a Radio 4 programme?
Its been 80 years, that's a big milestone, unless they want to wait till 100?
But why hasn't more been made of 1928? The year suffrage was finally universal, the year where electorally, women were finally equal to men. What, not even a Radio 4 programme?
Its been 80 years, that's a big milestone, unless they want to wait till 100?
Change we can pocket.
Why have the Tories been so reluctant to tighten regulation on short-selling?
Couldn't possibly be because they're being funded by those same bankers that bet on HBOS failing?.
If Labour don't make the most of this, I will walk up to Downing street and personally bitch-slap Gordon in the face. Either that, or hope Dispatches make the most of it. Possible evidence of the media wanting to open up the race?
Update: Watched the Dispatches programme in full. Hmmm. Think it failed to hit that knockout punch. Nothing there that would really shock people. [depending how low people view the Tories] It would be nice, if every time someone interviewed DC they could ask him whether Ashcroft is on the register yet. Seems the one question (bar, did you snort coke in Eton) that he really don't like. Do it over and over and over again. We can't have a bloody peer not paying UK tax ffs.
Couldn't possibly be because they're being funded by those same bankers that bet on HBOS failing?.
If Labour don't make the most of this, I will walk up to Downing street and personally bitch-slap Gordon in the face. Either that, or hope Dispatches make the most of it. Possible evidence of the media wanting to open up the race?
Update: Watched the Dispatches programme in full. Hmmm. Think it failed to hit that knockout punch. Nothing there that would really shock people. [depending how low people view the Tories] It would be nice, if every time someone interviewed DC they could ask him whether Ashcroft is on the register yet. Seems the one question (bar, did you snort coke in Eton) that he really don't like. Do it over and over and over again. We can't have a bloody peer not paying UK tax ffs.
G'obama
As do the majority of Europeans, I support Obama. The last poll I saw, he was 9 points up, thank god.
Sarah Palin is the scariest thing I've seen in a while. I respect McCain, but he MUST have had his arm twisted on VP choice. No one with that much experience would pick her, surely. If it was a pandering to the female vote, could of chosen way, way better, Johnny. I mean come on. He's got some right arseholes in his campaign.
I've heard school debate answers better than this.
Can't quite believe she's still going along with the 'I live next to Russia' line. Her Israel comments seem equally misguided and Bushesque.
Sarah Palin is the scariest thing I've seen in a while. I respect McCain, but he MUST have had his arm twisted on VP choice. No one with that much experience would pick her, surely. If it was a pandering to the female vote, could of chosen way, way better, Johnny. I mean come on. He's got some right arseholes in his campaign.
I've heard school debate answers better than this.
Can't quite believe she's still going along with the 'I live next to Russia' line. Her Israel comments seem equally misguided and Bushesque.
Gordon Browns Speech.....oooo just
[bit late but hey]
Browns speech was good. I got back from work to watch it. It was a good 'Brown' speech. A good speech for the party. He sounded confident and principled. Cameron will probably react with policy. Not on ideology. I think right wing parties all around the west are struggling to wave the banner for the free market at the mo. People, rightly or wrongly, are pissed off with the banks. The populist line for politicians seems to be 'blame greed'. Is this the end of the Thatcherite/Reaganite consensus? For now? The shit hits the fan and vvvllllooop we all go left or really, everyone gets angry with no general ideological dispute.
Anyway, Tory conference starts today. They'll probably come out with some tax cuts. If they really wanted to grate Labour, cutting taxes for the poorest would certainly hurt. I guess they'll attach everything wrong with the economy with Brown.
There's a tendency at the moment to wholly blame someone else. We couldn't possibly blame the couple for getting a mortgage for 200+% x their income, or the young professional spending thousands on credit or the banks and lending companies profiting hugely from it. No, it was the governments fault for not stopping us. Of course there never would have been outrage at a Labour government trying to cut the fun in the middle of a 10 year boom. No screams of BLOODY SOCIALISM, if regulation was made tighter while the City of London grew into the financial centre of the world. Of course that never would have happened.
Of course this is partly bitterness on my part. Governments play a part. International this and that. But a lot of the attacks do seem very petty. At least the Party is relatively united behind Brown.
Two things to hope for over the Tory conference.
1) Global events overshadow it.
2) Meedja step up and do some scrutinising.
Browns speech was good. I got back from work to watch it. It was a good 'Brown' speech. A good speech for the party. He sounded confident and principled. Cameron will probably react with policy. Not on ideology. I think right wing parties all around the west are struggling to wave the banner for the free market at the mo. People, rightly or wrongly, are pissed off with the banks. The populist line for politicians seems to be 'blame greed'. Is this the end of the Thatcherite/Reaganite consensus? For now? The shit hits the fan and vvvllllooop we all go left or really, everyone gets angry with no general ideological dispute.
Anyway, Tory conference starts today. They'll probably come out with some tax cuts. If they really wanted to grate Labour, cutting taxes for the poorest would certainly hurt. I guess they'll attach everything wrong with the economy with Brown.
There's a tendency at the moment to wholly blame someone else. We couldn't possibly blame the couple for getting a mortgage for 200+% x their income, or the young professional spending thousands on credit or the banks and lending companies profiting hugely from it. No, it was the governments fault for not stopping us. Of course there never would have been outrage at a Labour government trying to cut the fun in the middle of a 10 year boom. No screams of BLOODY SOCIALISM, if regulation was made tighter while the City of London grew into the financial centre of the world. Of course that never would have happened.
Of course this is partly bitterness on my part. Governments play a part. International this and that. But a lot of the attacks do seem very petty. At least the Party is relatively united behind Brown.
Two things to hope for over the Tory conference.
1) Global events overshadow it.
2) Meedja step up and do some scrutinising.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
