Does Joe Biden have a point?
September 13th, 2008
-
Would Hillary have been a better choice for VP?
It’s been a rough couple of weeks for the Obama-Biden ticket. The stadium finale of the Denver Convention was overshadowed by the historic choice of Governor Sarah Palin by John McCain, the GOP has rediscovered some optimism, and the Republican ticket has taken a lead in the national polls. Much of this is attributed to Palin, who has both energised the Conservative base, and injected some glamour and hope into what was previously a stagnant campaign.
By comparison, Joe Biden has barely received any attention, except for a number of gaffes (a fault to which he is especially prone) including inviting a wheelchair-bound veteran to stand to receive applause, calling the Presidential Nominee ‘Barack America’, and describing his wife’s doctorate degree as ‘problematic’. Most recently, when asked a hostile question about Hillary Clinton, he tried to defend her by saying that she might have been a better choice for the Vice Presidential nomination.
Biden was always known for his malapropisms and off-the-cuff style - none of this should come as a surprise to the Democratic Party or the Obama campaign that chose him for the VP slot. What is disconcerting about his admission that Hillary might have been a better choice is that it vocalises what many in both the Party and the Country are thinking - should Obama have chosen Hillary Clinton instead?
I was very critical of the choice of Biden at the time (see comments 20 and 22 on this thread), though I have since warmed to him, and understand a little better the reasons he was chosen. However, that doesn’t undermine that there are some significant problems that are a direct result of the selection of the senior Senator from Delaware.
He is a long-time Washington politician, with plenty of experience - this undermines Obama’s message of ‘Change’ to the extent that McCain-Palin have managed to claim some of this territory with talk of being mavericks and outsiders, prepared to stand-up to Washington. Hillary has been an outsider in Washington herself, and has spent only a fraction of Biden’s 36 years in the US Senate.
Biden doesn’t excite the base, especially not when compared to Hillary. He was brought in to ’shore up’ the blue-collar, Catholic, industrial voting men whom Obama has struggled to reach, but he does not ‘excite’ voters. He garnered barely 1% in this year’s Iowa Caucus - compared to the 18 million voters who supported Hillary Clinton. The junior Senator from New York would have antagonised some of the conservatives so delighted by Palin’s elevation, but she would have brought plenty of her own die-hard supporters to the polling booths as well.
Then we have the debates. Biden is known for long rambling answers, and for going off-script. Whilst this is endearing, it was always assumed that as the nominated attack-dog, he would at least be able to throw fire at his Republican opposite number. This will be harder to do against Palin. I have no doubt that she is more than able to rise to the challenge of robust attacks, but it is difficult (even for highly skilled debaters like William Hague) for a male candidate to ‘demolish’ a female opponent without seeming either patronising or something of a bully. Hillary Clinton would have been far better able to unleash the dogs on Palin, without having to apologise or moderate her tone.
-
I never thought that Hillary Clinton was the best choice for Vice President, but there is no doubt that she would have made a formidable contribution to the ticket - uniting the party, raising huge sums of money, and igniting dispair in the Republican campaign. The choice of a candidate as ’safe’ as Biden - aimed, according to Markos Moulitsas, at appeasing the Washington and media elites - I believe forced McCain to take the gamble on Palin that has paid off so fruitfully.
Had Obama chosen Evan Bayh, I think the counter-play would have been Pawlenty (and that VP debate would have been like ‘Waiting for Godot and his economic stimulus package’); had Obama chosen Kaine or Schweitzer, I think Mitt Romney would have stood a better chance. By selecting Joe Biden, Obama ensured that McCain would respond in the only way that gave him a fighting chance - by putting a base-friendly woman on the Republican ticket for the first time. Now there is even talk of ‘PUMAs for Palin’, and Hillary Clinton continues to haunt the Obama campaign.
All tallied up, I wonder if Joe Biden has just made the truest statement of, if not his entire career, at least this whole campaign.
Morus
UPDATE: It would be remiss not to bring to our punters’ attention this story that was posted by HenryH last night. It claims there are negotiations for Biden to step down so that Hillary can join the ticket.
For what it’s worth, I don’t think there is anything in this. It would be solely Biden’s choice (I can’t think of any mechanism for removing him without his permission) and it would have to be for a better reason that just politics - ill health, for instance. This would, I think, also force him to retire from his Senate race also in November. He would not just be giving up the chance at the Vice-Presidency (and the polls are nowhere near that clear or that serious for him yet), but also his Senate career to ‘keep up appearances’. The last time a candidate retired from the ticket before the election was Thomas Eagleton in 1972 - which cost McGovern the election, losing 49 states to President Nixon. Unless Biden really is physically unable to continue, I cannot imagine that this story has even a grain of truth.
MessageSpace Advertising
I don’t know about Biden - I always thought that Hillary should have been on the ticket and Obama made a massive mistake when he did not select her.
But what about Palin? I was on holiday with limited internet access last week and I’ve only just caught up on this Frank Luntz focus group. It looks pretty devastating for McCain’s choice.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cnV1pS7qVD8
I’ve got a great respect for Luntz and normally he gets these things right.
The polls in the coming week should be really interesting now that the convention effect has worn off. If Obama is not back with leads of some sort a week today then his team should start to worry.
I don’t trust polling that’s immediately post-conference or post-convention. Remember the double digit Labour leads that YouGov found straight after Brown’s speech last year?
O/T from previous thread and Nick Palmer’s comments about the logistics of plotting:
Nick Palmer, I find the idea that you have only “around 10″ mobile numbers of our Westminster colleagues frankly astonishing. To be honest this must make readers on this website question the extent to which you are plugged in to the dynamics of the PLP - even whilst in session you must surely have reason to call or text more than this number on a daily basis?! This is 2008 we’re talking about, not 1997!It seems to be you are not only out-of-touch but actively happy to pull the wool over your own eyes in so doing. If this is the extent of internal Labour Party communication - amongst MPs - I think we can begin to see where some of the unfathomable and increasingly amusing missteps from the Bunker are coming from … I don’t know whether to hope what you say is true or not!
If Clinton were on the ticket, Obama would surely be measuring the curtains by now, as she’d have delivered a huge bloc of voters.
As it is, Biden looks a better match for McCain in terms of style and experience while Obama really does seem to be running against Palin.
It’s quite amusing that Nick seems to have slightly altered his line from “there is no mood among MPs for change” to “they couldn’t get organised”
BTW regardless of whether MPs should have more than ten mobile numbers available (I’m sure they could communicate by email, but maybe they wouldn’t want to put anything on paper), I don’t think this invalidates the point about the difficulty of organising rebellions in the summer recess. Hundreds of one-to-one conversations really aren’t going to lead anywhere, because there will be too many misunderstandings and it will be very difficult to draw in people who are happy to support any rebellion, provided that they’re nowhere near the head of it.
At Westminster you can have reasonably large group meetings (5 or 6 people) without drawing too much attention, and people can be co-erced in with instant confirmation of the sort of numbers that might be involved (eg. the oft referred to “letters”).
No. Oh, erm… yes. That sounds wrong. Isn’t it supposed to be “No”?
How ridiculous it is that people are saying that Sarah Palin has no experience. As she rightly points out, you can see Russia from Alaska, and that’s all you need for foreign policy experience. And as for Washington experience, well she’s already under investigation in her home state! Sheesh!
Sarah Palin is the distilled essence of wingnut. She has it all. She is dishonest. She is a religious nut. She is incurious. She is anti-science. She is inexperienced. She abuses her authority. She hides behind executive privilege. She is a big spender. She works from the gut and places a greater value on instinct than knowledge.
And most dangerous of all, she is supremely self-confident to the point of not recognizing how ill-equipped she is to lead the country.
George Bush in a dress.
John Cole, Republican blogger. http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=11290
Previous thread:
“I think there’s very little chance of the Labour Party deciding it wants to change its leader.” Balls.
An interesting video, Mike. Can I ask you to stick your neck out and say which way you think it’s going to go over the weeks leading up to and on November 4th?
Jonah Goldberg thinks Biden was a ‘terrible pick for Obama’.
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDY2YmY5NTg3MDVkYzQ1YTIwY2NlMzU2Mzg1OTFjMmE=
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmY5MWIzNGIzNjRiNjlkYjlhMzI1OWY0OWRiOGFlMWI=
The worrying thing about Palin in a foreign policy sense is the extent to which she might have bought into the caricature of current American policy in respect to things like Iran, rather than the actual reality. A lot of good work could be rapidly undone.
Mac on Ohio : +4
538.com: The University of Cincinnati’s highly-rated Ohio Poll has John McCain leading by 4 points in the Buckeye State.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
Personally i think Labour could do a lot worse than Peter Mandelson as their next leader. He actually looks quite electable compared to some of the others!
BTW Mr Palmer, that may have come across as more aggressive than intended - but I am nonetheless utterly shocked by your statement (I know non-MPs that have more than 10 MPs phone numbers) and of course I think it ludicrous to suggest that you cannot organise a back-bench rebellion from your constituency - or even from a villa in Tuscany. Of course you can.
On topic, Biden has a point but only up to a point. He may yet prove to be a significant asset to Obama, allowing the top name on the ticket to get the better coverage while performing relatively solidly as the support act (the odd gaffe notwithstanding - he covered up the wheelchair mistake pretty well). To be so requires Obama to up his game which has been subdued at best since the convention, and for the gloss to come off Palin.
Would Hillary have been better? Hard to say and certainly running different and probably larger risks. There would have been more questioning of ‘who’s the candidate?’ if Hillary was performing well at this stage (and she probably would be - the pressure’s off her), she would contrast very directly with Palin (if Palin had even been McCain’s choice - not certain), and in a lot of people’s eyes, not as well, she would undermine the ‘change’ message even more than Biden as she’d be both more visible than he is, and would also have her husband in tow.
14. I’d trust Nick on this one - politicians as a whole are often well behind the times when it comes to using technology, and away from the Commons, there’s often little need to have other MPs mobile numbers; they’re usually fairly contactable if necessary.
As for it being possible to arrange a back-bench rebellion from Tuscany - yes, but it would be extremely courageous. While MPs are dispersed around the country, it is very difficult for any of them (including Nick) to gain much feeling as to how the whole PLP is thinking. To what degree is the party worried? How much do they blame Gordon? Do they think there are good alternatives? Unless they are out on a Clarke-like mission to raise a point and nothing more, there are huge risks involved if a rebellion goes off half-cock. Talking to even twenty or thirty other MPs doesn’t necessarily give a good feeling for the mood if they’re all likeminded colleagues in the first place. Only once they’re all back at Westminster or conference can they work out how the numbers game is playing. While they’re away they’re caught in a Catch-22: for the rebellion to be successful it needs numbers; the more MPs involved, the more likely the leadership will find out and they will always have the advantage of speed in such a situation.
14 - Why would MPs necessarily need lots of their colleagues phone numbers? Other than to plot rebellions, of course
At the end of the day, it’s a job, and socialising “out of hours” is not mandatory. Controversial view, maybe, but some people actually like to have a home life not constantly interrupted by people ringing them up. Many people might have more than ten MPs phone numbers - whether those MPs are happy that they have their numbers (and might actually use them!) is another matter.
And millions of ‘ordinary’ people will not have phone numbers of their work colleagues.
7. Can we please return the term ‘wingnut’ to its proper usage.
It is NOT shorthand for a ‘Right Wing Nut’ but the definition of a fan of the TV series ‘West Wing’. Someone who is ‘nuts’ about the ‘Wing’, a ‘wingnut’.
And since President Bartlett was Democrat, this makes the misappropriation, doubly in error.
Hillary may have improved the odds of a Democrat win, but at what price. If I was Obama, Hillary is the last person in the world I would want as my vice-President, knowing that all she wants in the world is the top job, that she is ruthless enough to do (almost) anything to get there, and that time is not on her side if she were to merely sit and wait.
He’d spend the whole four years looking over his shoulder.
18 - that is wrong.
Palin’s inexperience (Stephen Phelps @ 6)
Yes Palin is inexperienced. But can you see the problem with that line of attack? Who else is inexperienced in this race?
That is the beauty of the Palin pick. Her flaws are also Obama’s.
The idiocy of picking Biden is that the senator-since-1973 underscores Obama’s lack of experience, and undermines Obama’s change message.
19. I half agree with that. He would spend the four years looking over his shoulder but not because she’s that desperate for the job.
She’s really desperate for power, which is slightly different from office. She has a policy platform which is a good deal better fleshed out than Barack’s. A minimum deal for her to join the ticket would be that he’d have to sign up to most if not virtually all of it. She’d then want to be in charge of implementing the stuff - we’d have a US version of Blair/Brown. She couldn’t afford to wait: he’d definately stand again in 2012 if he won and 2016’s a long way down the line. She’d have to push things while they had the power and the chance.
AP-GfK poll on Experience
Eighty percent say McCain … has the right experience to be president. Just 46 percent say Obama… is experienced enough. Another 47 percent say Obama lacks the proper experience—an even worse reading than the 36 percent who had the same criticism about Palin, now in her second year as governor after serving as a small-town mayor in her state.
This site don’t allow me to post the link!
———
–>More people believe Obama lacks enough experience for the job than believe him suitably prepared…
Keep on hammering the experience issue with Palin, guys…
The AP-GfK Poll was conducted Sept. 5-10 and involved landline and cell phone interviews with 1,217 adults, including 812 considered likely voters. The margin of sampling error was plus or minus 2.8 percentage points for the entire sample and 3.4 points for likely voters.
Oh come now. I refuse to believe that it is simply in the nature of my own job that I have many colleagues’ numbers. If I were an MP I would make damned sure I had most of them and as a party leader I would make damned sure everyone had a central list - Christ, politics is not some sort of desk job done from cubicles as individuals, it is an inherently communicative role which constantly involves liasing with each other (and no, not just for plotting). When you add modern spin and media relations into the mix it would seem too far to suggest that constant communication is not a fact of life.
I say again if it turns out that Tory MPs have a similar level of mutual contact I would be distressed indeed for the party. Of course I take Blackberry’s into account - simply another form of constant communication which should exist.
Ad linking Wright to Obama…
http://freedomsdefensefund.com/videos.html
.. created by the group “Freedom’s Defense Fund”.
The ad is running in Michigan.
1. Mike, yourPrefereces are showing. Hows this as an answer to your Youtube carve-up?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article4740955.ece
21/23 - the worry is not inexperience. It is the self-confidence that presumes that instinctive views formed with a lack of basic knowledge are superior to those with experience. Now that may be a caricature, and it may be that reality would be very different, but that is the danger.
24 - no it’s not so simple IMO. We’ve all heard stories of MPs chucking away their pagers in the late nineties because they were fed up with the constant bombardment with the “line to take” on any issue under the sun. Sure MPs jobs are massively about communication, but this is communication with their electorates, not necessarily other MPs. I’m sure there are central lists, but that’s not the same as having 300 odd numbers stored on your phone!
On thread Yes! A Clinton brings dynamism, as for looking over his shoulder, what would Obama be afraid of, if he’s strong enough to be President, he should be strong enough to deal with Hillary.
Off thread, If the plotters are organised enough to overthrow Brown, they should be organised enough to get hold of a few telephone numbers.
I’m sure the airwaves are humming with conversation this morning.
‘It only takes one snowball to start an avalanche’
If the momentum continues to go McCain’s way then Obama may be forced into a game changing play himself.
Biden’s comment has invited focus on Obama’s “error” in not choosing Hillary. It’s possible we could get into a situation where there is an overwhelming clamour from the Democratic base to drop Biden and put Hillary on the ticket?
Biden could simply restate his opinion that he was not the best available choice to be the Democratic VP nominee and inform Obama he would like to step aside. Obama would thank Biden for this noble act, put Hillary on the ticket in and go on to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat.
And I win my £20 bet at 200/1 on Hillary being the next VP. Perhaps I should have doubled up with my other bet on Blair being the next Labour leader at 250/1?
Other than personal friends, I can’t really see much need of any individual MPs (as opposed to the central party/whips office etc) having others mobile phone numbers.
p.s.
If every Labour MP has ten numbers, provided they are not the same ten,(unlikely) you will soon link up with every MP!
31 - see 4. It takes more than just having a few phone numbers.
28. “It only takes one snowball to start an avalanche” - but only if the conditions are right.
Labour plotters don’t seem to have much in common apart from a desire for change. Other than Alan Milburn, most are talking in vague generalities about reconnecting with the base and taking the fight to the Tories.
Plotting against a PM is a serious matter - get involved in the wrong way and it could destroy the rest of your career if you get a bad reputation. To get serious momentum behind any plot people have got to be convinced that there won’t be any negative consequences for getting involved. And it’s very difficult to do that in 1-1 conversations, and it would be very few people prepared to be the one ringing round to drum up support.
In reality these things will be a step by step process. Once a plot is hatched, recruitment to it will be piecemeal and incremental - people will be scouted out as potential members, and there would probably be several conversations before they are formally recruited. You can’t do that over the phone, the subtleties don’t work - a rat would be instantly smelt if someone rang up out of the blue wanting a “quiet chat” about the direction of the government….
33 - “A butterfly flapping it’s wings in America might cause a sunny day in Europe”
32
But the conditions are right. Any Labour MP worth his/her salt who watched the C4 news discussion, (I think its on Conhome) the other night, would be spurred into action.
The man who probably more than any other convinced them of the need for change, was George Chambers, the sight of him waffling on about Gordon Brown, and how his retention was certain, would have convinced, them he had to go!
32
The mobile phone is the greates aid to conspiracy ever invented, its the modern equivalent to the dark corner in some medieval court.
On thread, sort of!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/13/uselections2008.sarahpalin
Interesting family the Palins!
During the primaries I questioned whether someone whose talent was for evangelical speech making would cut the mustard when scrutinized. ‘Yes We Can’ always sounded too glib and vacuous for a serious politician.
For obvious reasons those in the rest of the world with a brain are desperate for McCain and Co to lose but it’s easy to understand why Americans might be seeing it as a contest between Dr Strangelove and Chance the Gardener.
35 - “People have got to be convinced that there won’t be any negative consequences”
Not quite, people will gamble that the benefits of such an action will out-way the negatives.
I really do not understand your thinking Alex, is it really so inconceivable that MP’s do not have or could not obtain other MP’s mobile phone numbers?
Plots have been a factor of Government for generations, they even managed it with parchment and a Penny Black.
40
Thats the obvious answer, Sellers should have run for President and VP, he could have played all four parts!!
41 - No. I am saying two things.
1) It is not “astonishing” that MPs, a la Nick Palmer, don’t routinely have lots of mobile phone numbers on their phones. I have no doubt that it wouldn’t be too difficult to get hold of numbers if needed
2) It is very difficult to organise a rebellion on the scale required by mobile phone.
40. Careful Roger- that could be construed as stereotyping.
Charles Clarke could be leader of the plot. He has made his position clear and has nothing to lose. But as David Herdson argued in his excellent piece the other day, it requires a lot more than disquiet in the PLP to make this happen.
With no clearly better alternative to Brown and no willingness yet on Brown’s part to go quietly, I think it will be continuing drift until next May’s elections. Then it will become very interesting because we will be approaching the endgame, whatever the PLP may decide.
But as I stated on the previous thread, I think Labour are now damned if they do get rid of Brown and damned if they don’t.
Is the dismissal of a whip,the relaunch of another relaunch of a relaunched plot against the dear leader McBroon? Had someone slipped something into the tea at C4, the interviews did seem to be somewhat ‘aggressive’ as if a plot against the Great Unelected Gordon is wrong.
If S. McD was so inconsequential was on earth was she made a whip by GUG, but whips don’t often resign or get ‘resigned’ without good reason. But if Milliband is the antidote to GUG, heaven help the Labour Party, he is a paltry imitation of Blair, but without the charm or the deviousness.
40. Its all about character Roger and I don’t think a lot of people this side of the Atlantic get that. What many outside of the US see as Obama’s great strength, his oratary and vision thing is a serious potential weakness over there. A lot of people there think its its hot air from a man who doesnt get America, who doesnt want to change Anmerica he wants to change Americans.
The GOP have also created this maverick image around their two which is sticking so far, completely tearing away the Obama mantra of change and trying to making him look like a Washington insider asnd challenging the GWB II strategy of the Democrats.
re US: what i don’t understand with all these polls is how the national polls are more or level (mmcain slightly ahead) and yet look at the polls state by state, and he’s miles ahead in republican states, but also really close in obama strong states, therefore surely mccain should be further ahead in the national polls? very strange
45. Its surely about pushing the PLP to be uncontrollable by Brown, to a point where Gordon is effectively immobilised as a leader. Then he leaves.
Nick may only have ten numbers of fellow MP’s in his phone. But I think he is being very disingenuous. Is he really asking us to believe that he does not have access to a central Labour Party directory or a regulalry updated and circulated e-mail that includes the name, home and/or constituency and/or London phone numbers (including mobile phone number), together with the e-mail address of each of its MP’s, MSP’s and MEP’s? If such a resource does not exist, then frankly I’m astonished. But it might help explain why Labour are so crap at running the country - if they don’t use the most basic of modern tools.
Any other lurking Tory or LibDem MP’s or party officials able to confirm whether your party has such a contact list?
Anyway, I think the whole debate is still being conducted in a bit of a fantasy land. I just don’t see how it is possible to have a leadership contest without Brown being forced to stand down first, thereby triggering the lower levels of nominations required. It just cannot happen under the current Labour Party rules.
The problem is that there is no mechanism for having a vote of confidence in the leader. A leadership election cannot happen without
1) Someone offering to stand
2) Them getting 70MPs to nominate them.
70MPs nominating someone does not “trigger” a multi individual contest - any other challenger must ALSO get 70 nominations. That leaves a problem for anyone wanting a change of leader, but doesn’t want the candidate proposed by any plotters. Because by agreeing to nominate their preferred candidate they rule out the possibility of them subsequently nominating somebody else who might throw their hats into the ring once it became clear that a contest will happen. Which means that the reality is that any rebellion would have to have the tacit support of several times those MPs who signed nomination papers - probably higher than any number that would be required under a notional “vote of confidence”.
OK, let’s back up a bit. McCain needed both his base and independents. Obama picking Hillary would have given him his base so he could have tapped a centrist and concentrated on independents, so he picked Biden who appealed to a lot of the same demographics and had more experience than her. That left the opening for the Palin pick, but at a very heavy cost:
- It’s much harder for him to run on experience, which was by far his greatest asset and Obama’s greatest weakness.
- Although she’s clearly talented, she’s obviously out of her depth and potentially an accident waiting to happen.
- As a new, shiny thing for most Americans, her popularity will probably follow the hype cycle, but we don’t know when and how fast it will go up and down. If she’s in the Trough of Disillusionment come early November, McCain is screwed.
Given the above, I don’t think picking Hillary would have been the right move for Obama at the time. But another question is whether he could make a switch now, since McCain has picked shoring up the base anyhow, so Hillary wouldn’t do that much harm (just a bit of damage with independents) compared to the good she might do. I think looking like he was changing his mind and running back to the Clintons would be fairly devastating for Obama, who’s supposed to be running on good judgement and reform.
The only way I could see a switch happen would be if something actually did happen to Biden personally - say his wife was diagnosed with a terminal illness or his son was wounded in Iraq and came home requiring constant care. Or if Biden himself got run over by the proverbial bus. In a situation like that, I think Obama might well pick Clinton as his replacement. But obviously a situation like that is very unlikely.
Furthermore, with no potential leaders prepared to put their head above the parapet, we are left with a situation where people are running around signing nomination papers for a candidate who might not even run!
Heres a question If the Labour Party had a simpler process (say a la the Tories did) to replace a leader, do you think Brown would be out?
54 - No. If the Labour Party had the process in place in the Conservative party in 1990, maybe.
I know it was a non political event, but I thought McCain just looked and acted very much more presidential at the Ground Zero ceremony. He seemed as far as I am concerned to have more empathy with the bereaved and others whereas Obama appeared to be aloof and stand-offish.
54 - 15% of the Parliamentary Party calling for a vote of confidence, without the requirement to coalesce around an alternative candidate? I think there’s a good chance! Don’t know if the rules vary when they’re in Govt though.
53. Quite. This isn’t a ‘plot’ in the proper sense, it’s just headless chickens stuff.
58 - It is quite funny in a way, the manufactured stuff these “rebels” are having to produce in the media. I mean come on, “outrage” that the Labour party didn’t send out nomination papers to every Labour MP in advance of Conference. Never mind that nobody interview thus far actually wants one of these nomination papers for themselves
49. Yokel. Yes, I think that is the strategy but it’s all too late in my view. With the economy in such a parlous state, this bottom up, half cocked revolution, just looks and feels desperate.
Labour MPs have only themselves to blame for their poor “choice” of leader. There was a window of opportunity when the mistake could have been rectified. That required Straw or Kinnock or a cabal of ministers to act. They lacked the courage or wisdom to do so and will now reap the consequences.
As one who has seen it all, I am astonished and dismayed at the anti Palin hatred and mis-information about her, rising like a miasma from the majority of post’s this morning.
Truly many of you have cought “US Liberal Media Desease”, and are whipping themeselves up in a fury.
Tell you what. If Obama becomes president, then the West as we no it will not survive this maggot in the apples core.
Of course if those Labour MP’s had any sense, they’d be asking the Tories how to do it! They’ve had lots of experience in getting rid of unwanted leaders.
‘The quiet man is hear to stay and he’s turning up the vol….aaaaagh!’
60. Spot on, I think.
Anyway i just heard the vice-chair of the PLP on the radio saying their was widespread desire on the backbenches for a leadership contest. Followed a minute later by the Chair of the PLP saying that there, er, wasn’t!
Someone might be losing their job at the next set of elections…
62 - I believe the current champions are the Lib Dems. Has anyone actually seen Ming Campbell in the last year?
There is a plot to oust Brown, of that I am in no doubt, in fact there are probably several….and that be the problem.
My two penny worth is that if Brown decides to stay then there simply is no viable alternative to him, not a single New Lab MP willing or able to unite the troops behind them to lead a challenge. And that just about sums up the pitifully low calibre of the present administration.
56. Richard. I thought that. McCain had the appropriate gravitas and filled his own shoes. Obama soft of lolloped along, appeared unsure where to look and did not seem or feel the part.
It appears that the Republicans are a bit concerned that Palin’s foreign policy views are based more on Republican propaganda circa 2003 than the reality of Republican policy now.
The failure of the rebels to articulate any vision of the changes they want — other than a debate on the future of the Labour Party — looks and feels like the acts of desperate people.
Joan Ryan seemed to me to be close to tears on Radio 4 this morning.
I get the impression the from the BBC that the Labour leadership issue is going drag on all weekend, possibly all week. Should overshadow what would have been a good LD conference for Clegg.
The big ace up the sleeve of the Democrats must be the potential for negative campaigning that Americans do so well and the fact that unlike here you can buy as much airtime as you can afford.
Someone posted a couple of minutes of Palin being asked what she thought of the ‘Bush doctrine’? She was so far out of her depth it was incredible and you wouldn’t need the talent of the Saatchi brothers to turn it into the most scary 30 seconds since Janet Leigh took a shower in Psycho.
Marquee Mark captures what I have been saying well. Nick Palmer’s original claim was, unbelievably, that MPs during the parliamentary recess would be find it logistically difficult / impossible to organise a rebellion. He then cited the number of MPs mobile numbers he had on his phone. I’m sorry but either he is being disingenuous, or it just smacks of unconscienable ineptitude and luddism. That lack of communication amongst MPs of the governing party of the world’s fifth largest economy … Well I think you can see what we’re getting at here!
72 - I just don’t understand what you think backbench MPs need other backbench MPs’ phone numbers FOR? Outside of personal friends and/or MPs in neighbouring constituencies why would they need them?
I bet a whip has every phone number of every MP in their party and the numbers of their mistresses and ‘friends’ and their boozing haunts, holiday homes, hidey-holes. If they haven’t they are a disgrace to the job.
Is Nick claiming that plotters would not have access to this list? That all whips were pure loyal praetorians?
And if the plotters did follow Niccolo’s sage advice they would have a core of less than ten to start with. So Nick has plenty of numbers to start a plot and if each brings in one friend……
71. Roger. I didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was before I heard the question. Did you?
Perhaps one of these “plotting is easy away from Westminster” advocates could give an outline of how they foresee such a plot developing? Just ring up a few people and “hey presto”, the revolution’s on!
70 - with Clegg overshadowed, his opportunity to pitch to liberal-conservativesis gone. A good week for Cammo even if no media coverage.
69 - now that Joan Ryan has come out, and we know there are 10-12 names, is the plan to release a name at the rate of one a day, possibly increasing to two a day just before the start of the conference?…..with the less obvious plotters first before the ball really gets rolling, ie releasing Charles Clarke and Frank Field and other well known suspects is hardly going to have any impact now is it? A clever way totally overshadowing the LibDem conference next week!
77 - The satisfaction in David Cameron’s house is overshadowed only by the incessant howls of maniacal laughter emanating from Connaught Square.
alex how many labour MPs have been in the Commons together for over ten years. They have met in bars, tea rooms, lobbies, had corridor discussions of all sorts in many locations from party conferences to book launches.
They will know who is like minded. They may not know all who are like minded, but they will have a mental list, and will have used that list to support their own pet projects or constituency business, perhaps even tried to use it to press for a government job.
So they are not starting from scratch while they are all away on their hols.
50. 72. I spent some time in CCHQ just before 97. They had a board up with all the numbers of the key players - off a list. A number of the senior people had multiple mobiles - often across different networks. I can’t believe that there isn’t an “MP” mailing list for the Labour party. The question is - how many will be genuinely uncontactable at the moment?
I think that Nicks comments speak to a different issue. He is a loyalist - to the office of The Leadership of The Labour Party. When Gordon is replaced, he will be loyal to the next leader as well. This isn’t to say that he is a bad person - just that his attitude is rather like that of many employees. In most places I have worked in, the number of people actually engaging in office politics, plotting and scheming to get ahead is usually less that 10%. Everyone else simply does their job and hopes that they will progress steadily due to what they do.
The later group are never clued in on what is happening - they don’t really want to know, regard it as stupid or are simply not included in the discussions/rumours.
I find it very probable that Dr Palmer is simply not being included in the loop(s) of those plotting. What would they have to gain? He will not vote with them to get rid of Gordon… why should they tell him their plans?
1. Mike - of all people, shouldn’t you be careful about selected electoral evidence? The video is evidence that at one focus group meeting, she did very badly. A focus group selected by unknown means, by unknown people. This is dangerously close to “I don’t know anyone who voted for x, so x must have won by fraud”. Or the way that journalists frame a story with interviews. When I used the Waterloo footbridge every day, quite often they had a TV crew at one end, interviewing passers by. It was amusing to watch them turn people away after a few seconds for having the “wrong” view.
78 - there was a classic piece of political analysis on the radio this morning.
PolCorr - We KNOW that there are upto 16 people…
BBCAnchor - So there are 16 people…
PolCorr - Upto16…
Ie. making it sound like there is a serious plot growing, whilst actually saying completely the opposite!
80 - I’m not saying that a plot is impossible - apparently there is one growing at the moment. But it is significantly more difficult away from Westminster.
12 philippe. Interesting Ohio poll there …. I think it’s the same one I posted on yesterday !!
However your repeat posting of the poll made me meander through the crosstabs whilst enjoying my first cup of breakfast tea …. and whoops what do I find ???
Arrrgggggggghhhhhhhhhhh
Again …. another pollster undersampling AA. A sample of 775 and their starred finding (*) and they polled fewer than 75 - around 9.5% of the total. AA are 13% of the electorate.
In most states this isn’t too great a problem as the margins are wider but in the battleground states where a percentage here or there may change the race it’s all important, the more so in a demographic that will likely poll around 90-95% for one candidate -Obama.
http://www.ipr.uc.edu/documents/op091208.pdf
65 - we had so few decent sprinters in the Olympics, I understand Ming, former British 100m record holder, was angling for a place at Beijing. Not sure if he qualified, but may explain his absence this last year.
Peter Oborne springs to Brown’s defence.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1055476/PETER-OBORNE-Treachery-cowardice-Blairs-assassins.html
Its the, ‘Mail’ again isn’t it!
alex it may be easier away from Westminster, away from the gaze of watchful whips. Meetings in remote corners of the Red Lion in Macclesfield are less obvious than cabals gathering in the Silver Star in Whitehall.
81 - Which is my point. The barrier to actually getting any serious plot going in the Labour Party is so high, that a fair number of the type of loyalists you describe (obviously lower than 10% in politics) will have to be involved. These people simply cannot be “worked upon” away from Westminster.
I’m getting even more confused, didn’t Oborne once support Cameron?
Fatal arrogance of the Tatler Party
David Cameron is currently enjoying the kind of empty popularity which can vanish overnight - something now being discovered by Democratic Presidential candidate Barack Obama.
Obama’s problem is, in part, a surfeit of self-confidence, and there are troubling signs that the same affliction is starting to affect David Cameron’s Conservative Party.
A very good example of this arrogance can be found in this month’s edition of Tatler - a magazine which normally concentrates on photo-coverage of polo matches and marriages of minor members of the British aristocracy.
In short, a Hello! magazine for posh people.
For its current edition, it has persuaded ten aspirant Tory MPs to pose in stylish outfits for a collective photograph.
Potentially, this could be a very damaging public relations disaster. A number of those young men and women featured - with such improbable names as Annunziata Rees-Mogg - are hereditary members of the Conservative establishment.
Their behaviour suggests that they think the Tory Party is some kind of enjoyable social club, rather than a great civil organisation dedicated to the nation’s moral, social and economic improvement.
69. Read all about it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7613701.stm
Here’s a link to the “Newsweek” poll that Mike L noted upthread :
http://www.newsweek.com/id/158627
Morning all, so we have 4 Labour MPs so far calling for a Leadership ballot. No doubt another 66 will not have the guts to join in so Gordon will lead Labour into the GE.
I wonder what it says about Dr Palmer or the PLP that they dont have more than 10 colleagues phone numbers!! It shows what an isolated buch of weirdos most of them must be. If I had worked with people for 11 years, I would have had the phone numbers for most of them and probably had coffee with many of them from time to time. I bet most Tory MPs have far more colleague’ numbers.
Nick Clegg have a good conference? This will be the Nick Clegg whose party is said to be on the point of descending into civil war by the media and is described in one newspaper today as being totally irrelevant to modern British politics.
The best thing the LibDems can hope for is that no-one notices their conference is taking place next week and then they might not lose almost all their seats at the GE and might even sneak a few from Labour. After all before the Gang of Four set up the SDP, the LibDems thought a good GE was one where they got more than a dozen seats. Hopefully those glorious days are on the way back for them! All the Social Democrats are returning to their natural home, a One Nation Tory Party led by David Cameron.
New Marist poll for New Jersey :
McCain 40% .. Obama 47%
Note - Sampled 5-8 Sep.
http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/
89. Oborne has a thin skin. I seem to remember a falling out between him and Cameron earlier during the year. Hence the Oborne bile.
re 23. The ONLY polling findings that matter are “How will you vote?”. This is asking people what they will do not what they think.
Thus last year we had survey after survey showing people rating Brown higher over Cameron for experience and strength etc - yet the same people saying they would vote Tory.
Those questions Phillipe are mere “puff”. As a political gambler I ignore them and so should you.
re 26. So I have my own views - so what. Everybody else has on this site. My overall view can be seen from my betting - I make exactly the same amount of money whatever the outcome and at the moment I’m sticking exactly where I am.
The critical elements are the voting intention findings once the conventions and VP pick novelty have worn off. At the moment I can’t predict that and will leave my betting where it.
The Nick Palmer Theory, that it is practically impossible for a Labour Party plot to be hatched BECAUSE THE MPS DONT KNOW HOW TO GET IN TOUCH WITH EACH OTHER is so utterly ludicrous it is, I’m afraid to say, within the vicinity of being an obvious and deliberate lie.
Palmer is a “stab myself in the knackers? yes Sir!” loyalist. Moreover he wants to keep his job. If there is a leadership election soon, there will be a General Election soon after, and Broxtowe will fall, and with it will go his career. Understandably, he wishes to avoid that.
So he’s doing his bit to try and calm things down and persuade any other Labourites looking in on this site, that it ain’t worth joining the plot cause there isn’t one, at least not a serious one.
Trouble is his explanation, as implied above, is absurd. Let’s just say it’s true that the average MP only has ten mobile phone numbers of other MPs (and for some bizarre reason they don’t have email addresses and Blackberrys etc etc).
It takes just half a dozen of these MPs to meet in a pub - or just call each other on those mobile phones. They say “let’s have a plot - we’ll all ring every MP we know. Let’s meet back here, or send a round robin email, in two days. And see how we’re getting on.”
Suddenly you’ve got sixty MPs in on the plot (six times ten). That’s in two days.
And that’s setting aside the notion that the Whips - as mentioned upthread - have ALL the details of EVERY MP and we now know one Whip is plotting, because she’s been sacked - and she knew she’d be sacked when she made her statement, and yet she didn’t care. That shows forethought.
There IS a plot. Question is, will it succeed. After having changed my mind and decided Brown would survive, I’m now minded to backtrack again. It is pretty difficult to see how Brown can survive this: even if he gets through the conference all this endless backbiting and internecine strife corrodes his authority even more.
It’s like when you break a piece of metal, you keep waggling and waggling, bending it back and forth, and then suddenly the molecular structure collapses - and snap.
If they lose Glenrothes that is probably it; my feeling as of now is it might even come before then.
Jolly exciting, what!
92. Clegg has a tough problem - the natural approach from his position, is to attack the corpse of Labour and become more friendly with the Tories. Unfortunately this would mean loosing the seats of a number of senior LibDems (though in exchange for rather more new ones), and there is a large group in his party of the death-to-the-tories tendency.
My personal guess is that tactical voting against Labour at the next election, and in favour of the challengers will give the Lib Dems a good result in seat numbers, compared with their proportion of the national vote. However, a number of their existing seats will go to the Tories.
re 81. Remember the our definition of a rogue opinion survey - This is one which produces findings that you don’t agree with.
I am not coming to a conclusion on this race but Frank Luntz - a long-standing GOP pollster - has a good record.
Anyone else see Newsnight? What a cretin Draper is. Usually the Labour chap is Peter Hyman[sp], who was a Blair advisor and makes decent points.
No wonder Labour are doing so badly if the likes of Draper are doing the ‘thinking’.
re 70 SBS - good to see you back posting. We assume everything went well.
96 - I’m still in the Brown survival camp. I hardly see that Glenrothes is the event that will do it - that loss has already been discounted in the political world, although the Labour spin doctors may be wise not to get attached to an SNP 5k majority.
Let’s hope the potential Labour revolt hasn’t fully developed by the start of the party conference. Then we can watch all the cabinet ministers biting their top lips as they tell conference how Gordon Brown is going to deliver ten more years of super duper growth and stability.
64 “Anyway i just heard the vice-chair of the PLP on the radio saying their was widespread desire on the backbenches for a leadership contest. Followed a minute later by the Chair of the PLP saying that there, er, wasn’t!”
Runnymede says its headless chickens stuff, and it sort of is due to the ridiculous rules about the leadership, which were put in by Blair and have had nasty consequences ever since. Labour will have to change its rules after this mess is sorted out, Brown type coronations must never be allowed to happen again.
IMHO There never will be an election, there never will be 71 votes, Gordo will go before that ignominy.
PS Is anyone running the county right now whilst Labour tears itself apart
100, ditto this:)
Hope everything went well.
98 - Your definition
103 - you can change the rules for changing leader, you can’t prevent a coronation! If only one person stands, only one person can be leader! Brown against Meacher really wouldn’t have made much difference to the current situation.
71 Interesting, Roger.
She obviously didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was and was briefly all at sea. A good answer would have been ‘what do you mean by the Bush doctrine?’. Instead, she questioned ‘which apects’ the interviewer had in mind, suggesting she did know what it was when she plainly didn’t. She was flannelling, like a job candidate whose lack of qualifications had suddenly become evident. It was her queasiest moment in an otherwise decent performance.
To you and me, this might be important, but Yokel is right in drawing attention to the chracter of the candidates. A lot of Republicans won’t care if she doesn’t know what George Bush said, or she has never been to Russia, or she thinks dinosaurs roamed the earth six thousand years ago. A lot of independents won’t either. What matters is that they think ’she is one of us’ and will stick up for us when we need it.
In short, she resonates with a large part of the electorate. Bush did the same during his campaigns (although much of the gloss has come off now.) The contrast with Obama is striking. He still comes across as an overeducated liberal with little empathy for Joe Public.
As Yokel put it, Obama appears to want to change Americans rather than America.
You see the problem?
Jolly good sport watching Labour fall apart. As mentioned on the last thread, for me it was epitomised by the appearance of Derek Draper on Newsnight, who looked like he was on his way to a fancy dress party as a tramp. His barely suppressed rage and despair were a true joy to behold.
His comment about Gordon Brown being an excellent chancellor but now having to deal with a really bad economic situation, said with no apparent irony, was priceless, I was laughing at the TV. What a shower the Labour party are turning into.
Joan Ryan attacking this morning as well. All very damaging, but there’s nothing to suggest that there really will be a plot, it seems the party does not have the collective will (or phone numbers ?
) to actually wield the knife. It’s the best possible situation for the tories, gaffe prone disasters aplenty for months and months, as a wounded Brown limps on and on with no serious challenger.
Just hope there’s a country worth governing at the end of it all.
Local Conservative difficulty in the Chancellor’s back yard.
http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/politics/Tory-candidate-for-Darling39s-seat.4481175.jp
106 fair point.
64: Alex are you really Martin Day?
“THEIR was widespread desire”?
Do I need to do English Gramamr 101 again…?
I don’t think anyone has yet mentioned the very recent living proof of the ability to organise a leadership plot during the Parliamentary recess.
And that was of course the orchestrated resignations of 9/10 PPSs plus one or two junior Ministers in 2006 (shortly after that famous hundreds of miles friendly dropping-off present visit by Tom Watson to Gordon Brown!!, that led Blair to announce his retirement.
But perhaps it was all spontaneous combustion.
111 - the question is, did it impair your understanding of the sentence?
75. Stjohn. No I didn’t but negative campaigning doesn’t have to be fair and she did look like a rabbit in headlights. I felt sorry for her but it indicated that as a politician she was out of her depth. ……..and that’s before they add the gentle voice-over.
50. Yes, parties do have directories of contact numbers.
On thread - how can Obama turn things around?
By doing to John McCain what McCain did to him.
McCain and Palin are running as candidates of “reform”. So just as McCain has tried to steal “change” from Obama, Obama needs to neutralize “reform” - that is, ethics reform - as a campaign issue.
Obama should come out and announce his own package of ethics reform measures, and should commit to bring this package to Congress in his first year of office. Further, he should promise to match every bona fide ethics reform proposal made by McCain, and challenge McCain to match his proposals. “Cleaning Washington up is not a task for the Democratic Party or the Republican Party; it’s the desire of the American people and must be a top priority of the next president.” Then he can attack McCain and Palin’s record on earmarks.
This strategy certainly has risks - namely, a new focus on the Rezko affair and on Biden’s past, and also the prospect of unseemly wrangling over what constitues a genuine ethics reform proposal. But at least it would enable Obama to regain the initiative and move the conversation on to the economy and health care.
Roger @ 71 re Palin not having heard of the Bush doctrine.
True, the negative adverts write themselves. Question is, how do you word it so voters come to believe Palin is too wet behind the ears to be vice-president, while not also turning the same voters off the equally inexperienced Obama? Especially as Obama is running for president, not the number two spot.
It would be a boomerang ad: not Palin, not Obama; so who has been around for more than five minutes? Oh, McCain!
What IS the Bush Doctrine?
108. But if they don’t get rid of TractorMan now, how is that going to look? He’ll be permanently damaged - even more damaged than he is already - yet they’ll still be stuck with him as leader. AND the Labour party will look like a bunch of pathetic cowardly pussies who couldn’t organise a coke purchase in Colombia.
At some point very very very very very very very very soon, NOT doing anything is going to be riskier and more damaging than just doing something.
I think the Times focus group has it right:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4743740.ece
They should throw caution to the breeze and go for Cruddas. He’s likeable, articulate, will shore up the core vote and be an intriguing opponent for Cameron.
If they installed Cruddas, and went for a swift GE in his honeymoon, I think they could limit the Tory majority to under 50 seats.
113: Not the point
uthawyze wy wood ennywun botha? It’s the thin end of the wedge, and in certain circumstances might convey the meaning you did not intend.
St John - See my reply (107) to Roger.
No, I too didn’t know what the Bush doctrine was. It didn’t matter that she didn’t either. What was revealing was that she tried to cover her ignorance by flannelling, none too successfully as it happens.
The tricky question for us punters is whether that kind of thing matters to the US electorate - or more specifically to those parts of it that will decide this election.
Very tricky.
It is great news for the Scots Tory Party that David Potts has gone. Now maybe we will get a decent candidate who can Darling a proper fight and take the seat. I dont expect there will be any shortage of good applicants because Darling must be potentially the biggest scalp to take at the GE.
116. IMHO, Palin’s weakest point is that she seems dependent on her advisors - on being coached. Obama may be inexperienced, but at least he has a mind of his own.
Surely what the “plotters” should be doing is forgetting about the leadership, and concentrate on changing the Leadership rules at the party conference? Then have a leadership election straight afterwards! Easy!
119 - ill right wot i want. if your trying to claim i dont understand inglish spelling and grammer then youd be very wrong. touchtyping just generates mistakes naturally and i cant be bovvered to cheque evry post.
121 - Easterross, what’s your latest view on Edinburgh S?, my brother and sister-in-law have just moved up to Newington. LibDems most likely to unseat Griffiths?
122 - Obama has been running for 18 months, Palin for a lot lot less than that. I think we are all in far too much danger of viewing the US polity from our European eyes. A lot of these things will play differently to a US audience than to a European one.
123. Is that do-able?
Nick Robinson has just made this point: that the plotters don’t need 70 MPs. They need maybe a couple of dozen to kick up a fuss, and it will happen. After all, that’s how they got rid of Blair.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2008/09/rebel_tactics.html
Politics is the art of the possible. It is very possible to get rid of Gordo. If twenty MPs (not the usual suspects) and a couple more whips and junior ministers make their strike THIS WEEK, then I think Brown is gone.
122 Jack P
This fear that you can’t point out Palin’s inexperience without doing the same re Obama has got out of proportion. His experience is vast compared to hers and perfectly adequate for the job for which he is applying. It may not be his longest suit, but is massively stronger than that of a lady who thinks being able to see Russia from her bedroom window gives her some sort of foreign policy expertise.
Of course, McCain has much more experience than Obama and just about anybody else, but then he is 72 years old, which carries with it certain DISadvantages.
Nobody has all the aces. They should attack Palin’s weak suit and be prepared to meet the counterplay head on.
119 - if you could give me an example of there/their producing an ambiguous meaning i’d be grateful - for future reference.
98. My point was that a video on You Tube of an event we don’t know the background to has little value.
A properly conducted poll/series of focus groups, using a verifiable methedology is where the smart money should be. It isn’t as if there aren’t enough polls. Wishful thinking looses money.
The current situation appears to be that Palin is quite popular and that the election is looking like a dead heat.
I notice that 2 Party Vice Chairs are part of the call for changes.
Joan Ryan MP Campaigns
Stephen Ladyman MP South East
These are listed on the Labour website page for “Government”.
Also listed on that page under “Manifesto” are 2 others….
Rt Hon Patricia Hewitt MP - Europe
Eric Joyce MP - International Security
http://tinyurl.com/3rfjzf
This challenge to Brown is wider than “one junior whip”.
117 - Boiled down, the right to pre-emptive defence against another nation. Why actually wait to be attacked before you have the right to respond?
129 Alex - I’m with you.
I don’t think a blog is the place for anybody to be handing out English lessons. Not everybody agrees though. Augustus Carp is PB’s Pedant-In-Chief-And-Keeper-Up-Of-Grammatical-Standards.
He hasn’t been seen much lately. Perhaps this exchange will bring him out again from wherever he currently lurks.
Is it just me or is the 2nd person going public on calling for a dialogue on the Labour leadership more senior party-wise than the first?
So if there is a number 3…will they be more more senior/heavyweight again?
127 - big difference. The anti-blair plotters had a candidate, who everyone knew had the support of a majority of the party when the time came. They also knew that they had the numbers to defeat the Govt if Brown gave the word (the nuclear option).
99. 108. The most disturbing thing about Draper’s pantomime performance last night was that yobs like him were ever anywhere near the centre of power, rather than mouthing off down the boozer where they properly belonged.
And listening to the remarkably inarticulate Ms.McDonagh was also a depressing reminder of the pond life that constitutes much of the governing party.
126. Far be it from me to blow my own trombone, but as soon as I saw Sarah Palin’s convention speech (a few days late) I said that she’d put in a terrific performance and that she would cause real problems for Obama. And I said she would attract feminists and Hillaryites despite her views on abortion and whatnot.
I can see her appeal to Americans even if silly Anglo lefties can’t. Americans like guts, they like folksy charm, they are very religious so they don’t mind religiosity, they admire people who come from nowhere, they like hunting so the moose thing was good value, they are very patriotic so they appreciate the fact her kids are in the army.
It’s a stark contrast with Michelle Obama’s “for the first time in my life I am proud of America”.
The more I think about it the more disastrous that line sounds. I’m no longer at all sure that Obama will win this.
133 - I’d never noticed before that all posts were fully justified until that post!
137. Just about the worst thing any candidate could appear to be in the US is ‘un-American’, and those comments by Obama’s wife certainly risk attracting that label - very unwise remarks indeed.
137 - Who do you want to win? (leaving aside the desire to “annoy lefties”)
100 no news yet. Operation in few days. Brain tumour unfotunately. Ten day nervous wait after then to get results. Your comments are appreciated. Getting fed up using the hospital dial up internet though. anybody back on topic, Biden crap choice….. have very good American friend in UK. Staunch democrat - getting worried.
Fascinating that the call for a leadership contest has been led by women - Polly Toynbee, Siobhain McDonagh and now Joan Ryan. Does Sarah Brown share their courage?
107. PtP. Hallo again!
I take your point and I thought Yokels line about ‘changing Americans not America’ was worthy of a copywriters award.
My point though is the one I made to Stjohn. Advertising doesn’t have to be fair it just has to resonate. If the Democrats can make the connection that McCain is 72 years old….. Palin could become President and the President has the power to blow up the world……..
….and the admen are given carte blanche with some footage of Palin sweating during an interview about foreign policy where she is clearly miles out of her depth……
Then I would say the game was up.
116. And Others. Fact there is no true Bush Doctrine. It’s a Fantasy thought up by Gibson:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html?sub=new
Charles Krauhammer, the first to use the term “Bush doctrine”, explains in WaPo today the various uses of the term, and how it has evolved. Gibson was being both ill-informed and patronising when he tried to have his “gotcha-moment”.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/09/12/AR2008091202457.html
Whether you buy Krauthammer’s argument or not, it surely is the case that the term is not as clear as Gibson would have it, and that only partisan hacks could refer to Palin’s answer as a gaffe.
124: OK OK truce…
143 Well I don’t know about ‘game’s up’, Roger. Remember some of the howlers Dubya has come out with and he was elected twice. Nevertheless there’s a clear open goal for the Democrats to shoot at with Palin.
I mean, would you really want her taking that 3am call? Think about it. Really.
147. Many people would be far more worried about having a character (sic) like Hillary Clinton taking it.
146 - Truce
129 was a serious question though…
PtP @ 128: Obama’s experience really is not vast compared to Palin’s. Obama’s been senator since early 2005: Palin governor since late 2006.
Now, either that doesn’t matter, in which case don’t attack Palin, or it does, in which case you risk telling people to vote McCain.
Am still feeling slightly smug at being one of the very few to predict, on the day she was picked, that Palin would be a major hit. Many here still seem to be having trouble getting their head round this fact. Respectfully, I think too many mistake middle America for the entirely atypical places they know best: New York, Boston, California. Knowing flyover country rather better, it was clear to me that Palin was going to “connect”.
Her “not knowing” the Bush doctrine?
Krauthammer, who coined the phrase, says there are about four different definitions of it. Gibson, who raised the subject, is apparently unclear about its meaning himself. In fact, I’m rather doubtful that even Bush could articulate it…(cue obvious jokes).
Right now, Obama is running against Palin…and losing.
McCain floats above it all, while Biden - occasional gaffes aside - has become the Invisible Man.
I don’t buy the idea that Biden will contract a diplomatic illness and withdraw, but I am struck by one parallel to the 1972 campaign. (When Eagleton was dumped.) As anyone who has read Hunter Thompson’s book on the campaign - and, if you haven’t read it, do - McGovern’s brilliant primary campaign turned into a shambolic general election effort.
From the evidence of the past week, Obama’s campaign could be heading the same way.
137. I’m genuinely torn. I still like and admire Obama, even though he has seriously underperformed since the Nomination. I also think his presidency would be good for the world for all the reasons I’ve rehearsed on here ad nauseam (black guy, middle name Hussein ,etc etc).
However, I confess I don’t especially like his wife, and I’m not sure why (I don’t think it’s racism). I am distinctly unimpressed by his VP.
To confuse matters, I also like McCain: he’s a genuine war hero and a man of real integrity. I think maybe he’s a bit old for the job but they said that about Reagan, who turned out to be a great president.
What’s more the hysterically snobbish reaction to Palin has reminded me why I despise lefties, on both sides of the Atlantic.
So if Obama wins I’ll be pleased, and if McCain wins I’ll be pleased because it will SO annoy the lefties, who never seem to learn: Don’t Condescend to Religious Middle America.
i.e. it’s Win-win!
141. My profound and sincere sympathies, SBS. I had a horrible tumour scare, a fortnight ago, when I was in Bangkok - it just suddenly came out of nowhere. I am lucky, it seems it is probably benign (if there is anything at all) but it shook me up a lot. Life is so f***ing fragile: I hope you are in good hands and I trust you will be fine.
Best wishes, old sport.
Good luck with the brain tumour SBS. The three people I know personally who had one are all now completely recovered and back to normal. One was my sister and another was Martin Kemp
Er, the first part of my last comment was for 140, I wasn’t actually talking to myself.
I blame the jetlag.
48-That’s what I thought when I started doing UPMYASS but when you aggregte state polls the movement seems to have been from Obama +2 to McCain +1. I’ll probably refresh this evening but I expect McCain’s lead to grow slightly.
I’ve seen the light! I’m off to join the Tories!!
http://tinyurl.com/3kney4
150 - to be objective i think you would have to conclude that Obama’s pre Senate experience (both inside and outside politics) is somewhat more substantial than Palin’s.
Good luck SBS. Looking forward to your guest piece on health policy.
157-Being a State Senator? Most states (except Nebraska) have about 50-100, say 75 senators. So he’s up there with another 3674 people with the same “experience”. And that’s not counting seniority, ex-state senators, etc.
If there was a remotely sensible alternative candidate for PM, Brown would be overtly being pushed out by now. His party clearly has no faith in him. He remains in his job purely by default - in Number 10 solely because there is no concensus alternative. Brown’s legitimacy is shot through. The Party which appointed him -without asking the public to give him a mandate - must take the blame when he fails. It must be seen to act responsibly and correct that error.
The Labour Party needs to view this as about governing the country, not clinging to power like a super-glued limpet. Find an alternative. They can’t be worse* than the slide to oblivion you are on now.
*well, perhaps it could be worse - Labour could choose Ed Balls!
Scottish Labour Leader result due within the hour. The excitement that this contest has generated will stay with me for a very long time.
Anyway, thanks in part to Henry Manson making Jamieson the official pb.com tip, we are against her and will be cheering on Andy Kerr instead.
Ladbrokes’ closing prices;
Jamieson 11/8
Gray 6/4
Kerr 3/1
156. I’m sure Tyson-after the mother of all U-turns-will be there to salute your courage, your strength and your indefatigability.
143. It werent my line sadly, its the GOP’s strategists. If it hasnt appeared yet, it may well do very soon.
On topic - Hillary Clinton comes across to me as a bitter old hag. Obama made the right decision in not giving her VP, in office she would just spend her time building a power base and undermining him. Thats how the Clintons operate.
Off topic - Interesting to see another voice has been added to the growing chorus calling for a leadership contest. I quite agree with Nick Robinsons analysis posted by SeanT at 127. It may be in the Labour rules that 70 MP’s are nedded for Brown to go, but in practice a smaller number that could finish him off - Particularly if two or three senior Cabinet Ministers stick their heads above the parapet. That is how this will end, IMO, with three or so senior members of the Cabinet (probably Straw, Darling and Johnson) going into Number 10 and telling Brown he has lost their confidence and the confidence of the party.
162
Ahhh! how do you know that Tyson hadn’t got wind of this?
Could explain a-lot!!
141 SBS, often thinking of you, looking forward to many more of your thoughtful posts.
Best wishes SBS …. keep dialing up !!
………………
The “New York Times” on the McCain campaign coming under pressure for having a little problem with massaging the actuality :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/13/us/politics/13mccain.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1221300414-rF0sMltPANq8spK7evIPlQ
Harman at 15/1 on Betfair to be next PM.
SBS. Please accept my best wishes too.We are all rooting for you on “the blog”.
164. Most effective Democrat line delivered against John McCain.
‘No way, no how…’
Delivered by Hilary Rodham Clinton. Bitter but she can do a one liner better than most.
164. Come on! This ia a cabinet of wally’s and wimp’s. No minister is going to have an enraged Brown hurling his lecturn at them.
168. I honestly don’t see the point of replacing Brown with Harman. Hattie is my tip if Brown survives and goes down to defeat at the election, but if Brown goes while Labour are still in office, what is the point of relacing him with her?
172, but it’s not you or people like you who will decide.
Harman went down well with the unions recently, has the sisterhood in the PLP and must’ve had a fair smattering of the wider party to win the deputy leadership.
I agree, she’d be rubbish (hopefully Cameron would have the nerve to be as harsh with her as he can be with Brown) but Labour might well pick her.
171. True. However, the likes of Straw and Darling face the prospect of losing their seats at the next election - Unemployment can focus the mind, and people if their position aren’t going to want to face the humiliation of being given the sack by their constituents when it could be avoided by dumping Brown.
160. What’s also apparent is that despite all the calls for ‘change’ and ‘new direction’ Labour haven’t a clue what direction to take. They are utterly bereft of ideas, partly as a result of so many of their policies having been tested to destruction.
A couple of extra US markets available at ladbrokes.
Turnout
Under 60% 5/6
60%+ 5/6
Electoral College Votes
Obama wins 370 or over 8/1
Obama wins between 350-369 25/1
Obama wins between 330-349 20/1
Obama wins between 310-329 16/1
Obama wins between 290-309 6/1
Obama wins between 270-289 7/2
Tie 369-369 40/1
McCain wins between 270-289 3/1
McCain wins between 290-309 12/1
McCain wins between 310-329 25/1
McCain wins between 330-349 33/1
McCain wins between 350-369 33/1
McCain wins 370 or over 6/1
167. Jack. I don’t think that’s very impressive. Obama would be better to stop complaining and join the McCain in the musfest because I think he’s got better material
176 Bah. Tie should be 269 all, obviously
167. Jack, “The View” and similar programmes that are overtly pro democrat are giving McCain a hard time. Contrast this with the way they give and gave Obama a gentle love-fest.
If the 5 women on The view could shag Obama on screen, they would.
The sheer level of contempt and vitriol thrown at Brown is surely unprecedented. Major, at the height of his troubles, was personally liked, though he was almost universally derided as ineffectual. But Brown (unfairly IMO) seems hated.
It is clear that the downturn will last for at least another year, and there are no glib answers so beloved of New Labour. Some harsh and unpopular decisions will have to be taken, there will be a lot of machine-gun fire directed at the PM.
So, whoever challenges Brown will have to endure something like the same level of vitriol, before leading Labour to a heavy defeat. The challenger will have to be personally very tough.
If I was in the Cabinet, I’m not sure I’d want to take over right now. And if I was Straw or Darling, I’d certainly be more interested in cultivating my local association assiduously. Better to be there after the election, leading the rebuilding.
Another Labour MP. Howarth., asks for papers. The plot thickens.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Politics/Gordon-Brown-Under-More-Pressure-As-Vice-Chairman-Joan-Ryan-Calls-For-A-Leadership-Election/Article/200809215098601?lpos=Politics_7&lid=ARTICLE_15098601_Gordon%2BBrown%2BUnder%2BMore%2BPressure%2BAs%2BVice%2BChairman%2BJoan%2BRyan%2BCalls%2BFor%2BA%2BLeadership%2BElection
I see two more Labour MPs have said they have asked for leadership ballot papers which is the equivalent of calling for a leadership election.
The Blairites seems to have hit on a good wheeze here. Demand the ballot papers and make it a party constitutional issue as well as a political one. Difficult for Brown to say the papers should not be sent our or that they should not be asked for, as they are part of the regular process for the conference - rather they used to be until the PLP got complacent.
89. I largely agree with the line taken on that Tatler piece. The last thing the Conservative party needs is yet more metropolitan, entitled chinless wonders as candidates. The party will be energised in the long-term by salt of the earth Tories. There are enough of them out there in the ‘provinces’ and central office would do well to take notice of them.
176 40-1 the tie….mmmmmmmmmmmmmm……that might yet tempt me to have a flutter!
167 JackW - surely not! Republicans massaging the truth? How dare you suggest that?! They would never do that!
176 - I’ve had £20 on the tie!!
If I understand things correctly, Gordon’s ‘re-launch’ this week has been rather unorthodox in it’s approach.
1: If aged 70 or above and still alive after 7 days of freezing temperatures, we will give you some money.
2: We will insulate your loft maybe in a few years time, actually we won’t but someone will and pass the cost onto their other customers.
3: Sack a female whip and have it announced live on air before telling her!
4 : errr that’s it.
186. Another lost £20 Morus. Has there been a tie in living memory in US G. elections?
73. “I just don’t understand what you think backbench MPs need other backbench MPs’ phone numbers FOR?”
Come on Alex, surely you cannot be serious? You seem to think that MPs can be completely insulated from the “politics” of politics, as though they do some sort of normal desk job, spending their hours processing paperwork and acting as general bureacrats like some corporate mid-level management. As though their primary concern is to create and analyse materials (God knows what - “legislation” perhaps?!) or being good down in their constituencies.
They do not. They are politicians. They spend a good deal of time, out of interest and more importantly out of necessity, engaged in POLITICKING. Now ask yourself what you, as an MP and a politician at Westminster, would want in terms of communication?
You would want to be constantly in touch with what’s happening around you, in the village and outside of it; to know what’s happening with your party’s leadership; what new policies and initiatives are being mulled over; what’s changing and what dynamics exist between other MPs; what nuances are in the news and press releases; who’s saying what to whomm, appearing on what shows; what the press are reporting or thinking of reporting; what the polls say, about whom; whose star is rising and whose waning; what the opposition are doing; what the scandals are. In short, one of your prime objectives in life is to know the gossip and the interpersonal dynamics around you.
As such, outside of the basic work on committees and surgeries or in the chambre itself - very important though they are - you will be constantly chatting in the tea rooms, on your Blackberry and mobile, getting information from the internet; talking, listening, soliciting (when not actually on some programme sticking a knife into someone!). If you, as an MP in the British system sitting at Westminster, do NOT know or what to know that, you will be lucky indeed to survive and certainly to progress upwards.
I’m sorry if this bursts some sort of ideological bubble for you, and perhaps I am being too cynical in suggesting that 100% of all MPs including Nick Palmer do this. However if > 90% of MPs don’t live like this, I’ll eat my hat. Nick’s gallant effort to portray MPs as “normal” belies the fact that the vast majority of everyone involved in Westminster (nowadays) are anoraks, gimps and hacks, and will be for the foreseeable future.
187 Don’t forget “5. £900m that would have been paid out as dividends to pension funds will be grabbed - adding to my fine reputation for pensions management that will see all Britons making a continuing contribution to the economy until they drop dead in their office”
180 — vitriol against Brown.
Is it reflected in the country? Perhaps but I hear despair more than anger.
Its level on here makes me wonder whether Central Office is completely uninvolved, in the same way Labour encouraged its supporters to call radio phone-in programmes in the 1990s.
191 - pop along to Guardian CIF, I can assure you the vitriol is there and it is coming from the Left as much as anyone else.
Polly must be as sick as a parrot after every post.
Brown is toast. Which minister will speak tomorrow and define how burnt he is…?
I am sure Gordon Brown means well. Unfortunately he is out-of-his-depth as a Prime Minister (as was Anthony Eden). Time to retire back to SubsidyLand/Scotland…!
re 191. Last Sunday while waiting in the bar queue on the overnight motorail train to Calais I was quite shocked when four or five strangers suddenly went into collective mass hatred mode over Gordon after one of them had mentioned the pound’s collapse against the Euro. It was quite amazing. I just listened
150 John L
Listen to Obama talking about policy and then do the same with Palin. Then try telling me again there isn’t a massive difference in their experience.
179. Right-wingers see bias everywhere except Fox news don’t they?
189 - no ideological bubble burst. The fact is that 99% of that doesn’t require one to have 300 phone numbers stored on a mobile phone. Shocking concept, maybe, but i think that the majority of MPs, when on holiday, go on, er, holiday! It’s nothing to do with Luddhism. I just dispute that a mobile phone is a particularly important bit of kit for an MP to talk to other MPs! They all work in the same building for Christ’s sake! Probably half of them hate each other anyway.
197. But that’s the point, Nick Palmer’s comment was that it was logistically difficult to organise a coup during the recess, mobiles, Blackberrys or otherwise. Do you now disagree with that?
Also, most MPs do not tone down their level of neurosis during the summer break; they are thinking precisely about this!!
Ian Gray is now the new Scottish Group Leader of the MSP’s at Holyrood. Gray by name Gray by nature.
370, previous thread.
The Broxtowe debate this evening was good fun - is Broxtowe Cat out there, and did you enjoy it? About 60 attendees, though I think about half were members of one of the parties. Got three new volunteers out of it - people I’ve never met before who came up afterwards, said they’d liked what they heard and offered to help. I’ve challenged my Tory opponent to three more debates and she’s accepted.
by Nick Palmer MP September 12th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
Broxtowe Cat was lapping at a saucer of real ale in a nearby pub at the time of that post, but thoroughly enjoyed the debate, thanks. As all candidates agreed, a good contribution to democracy.
Nick made no comments, denials or otherwise, about any Labour plotting, but he did clearly state his own position of not wanting a leadership challenge. In fact, although his words were measured, I would say he gave the impression of genuinely liking, supporting and respecting Gordon Brown, in contrast with the insincere cliches and damning with faint praise we constantly hear from most of the cabinet.
Debate was standard Question Time format, and all three candidates came out pretty evenly in my view. And to my generally cynical furry ears, I believe both the standard of the debate, and the three politicians themselves were of a much higher standard than the nonsense we get fed through the mainstream media most of the time.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/2908719/Gordon-Brown-leadership-challenge-Joan-Ryan-and-Janet-Anderson-call-for-vote.html
There’s not two without three…
#296, chill!
Stopped watching FoxNews when their VP and Business Editor - Neil Cavuto - kept denying that the housing market would collapse. His sources: estate-agents!
Did love watching O’Reilly though. I am also extremely proud that William sent me a signed-copy of Who’s looking out for you…?, gratis!
191, 194 ” … Central Office is completely uninvolved….”.
Perhaps — but there’s a lot of personal criticism from the Guardian (the Toynbees and Ashleys), which must be personally very painful for Brown.
The Gordon Brown Downfall videos on youtube — though very, very funny — are the most vicious caricature I can remember of a UK politician.
#202
Oops! Should read #196!
Am I right in saying that Iain Gray is an excellent result for the Snippers?
197. Also, I would think that for 99% of what I wrote, the mobile continues to be the first port of call (as it were) for talking, discussing and gossiping.
205 - very much so. Labour made a mistake, they should have elected Cathy Jamieson who chimes with the voters far better than Iain Gray.
198 - yes i do. It is obviously much harder to organise a coup (involving large numbers of MPs) when there is no personal contact and people are spread geographically far and wide. Also when people who don’t want to know can simply ignore the whole thing (co-ercion is much easier at Westminster). I don’t understand why that isn’t common sense. It could probably be fairly easily done, logistically, using email, but i suspect that people would be very reluctant to put words to paper which makes that an unfortunate medium.
I do not dispute that once the critical mass is reached and everyone is signed up, the mobile phone would be a critical piece of kit. But it is the putting together of the critical mass in the first place that is the problem.
188 - What do you mean *another* £20?!
No, a tie has never happened, but the election has been thrown to the House of Representatives before.
40/1 is useless value, but there is a much higher possibility of a tie this year than for many, many years. The potential swing states are more numerous, they have smaller value and thus are easier to tesselate to this precise score.
There were only 11 vaguely plausible combinations in 2004 - I reckon there are a few hundred this time around.
197. In fact (sorry for the multiple posts) they are much more likely to use their mobiles then meet! You are hardly going to provoke questions by being seen together in small huddled groups; much more likely is the absurdity one sees elsewhere where two people in neighbouring rooms are still using their phones to each other, rather than talking …
199 Oh No. Labour really are not missing a single opportunity to make bad things worse.
Gray combines the charm of Ed Balls with the intelligence of Bob Ainsworth. And they’re putting him up against Alex Salmond.
It’s like putting an unusually stupid duck in a cage with a particularly aggressive and wily fox. Gray will get devoured alive.
Roger: “For obvious reasons those in the rest of the world with a brain are desperate for McCain and Co to lose”…
If that’s a shared European/British opinion, I begin to understand now why the betfair price on Mac.President are much much more generous than the intrade one…
@SBS
I would like to send you my best wishes for a full recovery
Just a lurker/occasional poster…..
If our esteemed host was to set up a donation fund, couldn’t we all chip in to get SBS some 3G connectivity device?
Interesting article on the Huffington Post about the way the polling “experts” may be overrepresenting Republican voters in their polls and unrepresenting the fact that the Democrats are running a clossal (global) voter registration operation.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/09/09/poll-madness-mccain-takes_n_125158.html
Could Mike write a piece on this? Would like his take on the American polling companies and whether he finds them realiable.
Robin Harper MSP will stand down as co-leader of of the Scottish Green Party. He also called for a single leader.
He also said he won’t seek re-election at next Holyrood elections (he will be over 70 by then)
84 — Thanks a lot for that, Jack. Very useful.
212 Yes, Philippe, I think it’s fair to say that the Betfair price reflects an element of prejudice by non-US punters.
Gray got 57.8 % in the run off against Jamieson. Kerr was third as expected.
Johann Lamont won the Deputy position
208. I’m confused as to what your position is. My post was to say that basically I expect, indeed demand, that MPs spend a good deal of their time on mobiles talking to each other or texting, about various things that are occurring in the village. This is exactly like in banking, consultancy or any other demanding job. My experience of those in the Tory party indicates that this is largely the case, particularly the more senior you get.
Instinctively also, this is what I would do if I were an MP. In a party of 350 MPs, I would think I would regularly throughout the day contact, by mobile or otherwise, upwards of 50 of them at the very least, for party matters if not government. What would you envisage?
95 — Thanks Mike. I will certainly follow that advice.
I love this site!
From Scottish Labour website:
“The new leader secured 57.8 % of the final vote in a run off against Cathy Jamieson. Andy Kerr came third on the first ballot, and his/her votes were redistributed.”
are they undecided about Kerr’s gender?
SBS I hope all goes well.
Any distractions where you are: nurses, scenery, strange old men? They could all be part of the Jack W committee, of course, so do be careful.
I just watched the BBC 12 o’clock news while I had my lunch. Is it significant that the person put up from the Government to speak against a leadership election was a junior minister, Rosie Somebody, Transport Minister? Why aren’t the top Cabinet ministers speaking out? Is it because they’re keeping their powder dry and seeing which way the wind blows? (Sorry about the cliches!) Or is it because the Government is trying to prevent escalation by only putting up someone of similar seniority to Siobhan McGowan?
They interviewed Bob Marshall-Andrews, I thought he’d be interesting… he seemed to be saying that plotting to overthrow the leader was OK as long as it was in the interests of a change in policy. However, if it’s just to save your seat it’s not acceptable. Not sure exactly what to make of that, he didn’t seem to consider the idea that someone else might be more managerially competent.
Ladbrokes offering 1.83 on US election turnout being less than 60% - something that has happened every election since 1972 - value?
220 - 50 MPs a day? For discussion on “party matters”. In the summer recess?
Even if 50 a day on average were not, during the Parliamentary sitting, a ridiculous exaggeration for a humble backbench MP, they have offices with phones in. They have email.
Mobile phones are not even allowed in the Chamber. Ring someone up when they’re in there and they probably won’t speak to you for a week!
“Rosie Somebody, Transport Minister? ”
Rosie Winterton?
201… or four, George Howath requesting nomination papers…. or five Graham Marshall calls for open leadership election.
212 Roger ought to speak for himself. In terms of whom I would vote for if I was an American, I was leaning to McCain up to the point he picked Palin. I’m broadly a libertarian and although there are people in the Republicans I despise (bible bashers and social conservatives who apparently want to impose their worldview on everyone else) the Democrats don’t seem to be a home for anyone who believes in less government.
227 Yes I think so. I was wondering if I’d misremmebered her surname, as there are a couple of more notorious MPs with that name…
224
Bob M Andrews is correct imo. For any new Leader to succeed they need to changes policies.
Why Gorodn does not ditch ID cards is beyond me..(well it is not but any new Leader would I suggest)
If it was Rosie Winterton then Brown and Balls must be really scraping the bottom of the barrel if they’re reduced to using a nonentity like her.
Can anyone get further details from this meeting please?
I am about to wager heavily that Gord will be gone by November 2008.
eeds: Winning a fourth term: what’s the road to victory?
A debate about the future of the Labour party held jointly by Progress and Compass
13 September 2008
11:00 to 12:30
Speakers:
Rt Hon Caroline Flint MP, Minister of State for Housing & Planning
Rachel Reeves, PPC for Leeds West
Jon Cruddas MP
Jon Trickett MP
Kindly hosted by the Leeds Labour Group
226. Okay maybe that’s an exaggeration, but we’re getting muddled here. I’m saying MPs should have dozens of numbers for other MPs because they need to speak to them during normal parliamentary sessions, over weekends and late nights &c. Obviously they aren’t going to delete the numbers for the summer. So whilst in normal recesses when nothing is happening, you may not speak to your colleagues for a while, when things are in a critical situation like now, that’s highly unlikely.
Coming yet again back to the original proposition from Nick Palmer that he only has about 10 MPs numbers on his phone and therefore logistically it would be difficult to organise a rebellion during recess, that is clearly nonsense - I think most people here can agree on that?
At the end of the day, Anatole, maybe we just disagree about the amount of productive time MPs can spend gossiping
I’m reminded of the old Yes Minister sketch - “Of 300 MPs, 100 are too old and silly, 100 are too young and callow, which leaves 100 MPs for 100 Govt jobs”. Which 50 are you going to spend all day speaking to?
234 Anatole - Does it matter?
234 - what’s nonsense? That it would be difficult to organise rebellion, or that Nick is lying when he says he only has 10 numbers on his phone?
226. Look Alex what you’re basically seeming to imply is that MPs don’t use mobiles all that much, which is just utter boll***s. Nick Palmer even tried to imply that his first port of call in talking to another MP over the summer was to contact their constituency office?!??!
SBS: the very best of luck. My uncle had a brain tumour too - they took it out and he’s still with us, in excellent health with no after-effects, 20 years later.
Thanks to Broxtowe Cat for the friendly feedback - yes, I thought it was a pretty even debate too, and a good one.
Bemused to see the thread full of people debating how many mobile phone numbers I have. Of course the central party has a list of everyone’s contact details, but individual MPs neither have it nor need it, for the reasons Alex points out. We do have a list of everyone’s email address and if I want to write to the whole PLP about something that’s what I’ll use, but would anyone want to plot by unsolicited email circular?
I think that some people who’ve not been in Parliament like Anatole and Easterross really do have a distorted idea of how it works, not for partisan reasons but just as a misunderstanding. Certainly it’s normal for MPs to have a meal together or chat over a coffee, and there are countless occasions when MPs work together on one issue or another. But it’s one of the few jobs where every single person is based in a different part of the country to every other person. Apart from wanting Labour to win, I don’t really care what’s happening in, say, Llanelli, and I wouldn’t expect Llanelli’s MP to care about developments in Broxtowe. So when recess is on, it’s very unlikely that there will be a reason to talk to him. As for six of us meeting in a pub, as seanT hypothesises, I guess that’s feasible in London, but for most of us we’re talking about a significant organisational effort to arrange where to converge. Unless something has been arranged before recess (’let’s get together in August to talk about this’) it just won’t happen.
anon’s obviously right too - if there’s a tightly-knit plot at any point, the plotters are unlikely to tell me about it. What I’ve responded to in the past is speculation that MPs are feverishly meeting in conclaves all over the place. That sort of speculation leads people *regularly* to bet on leadership challenges that don’t materialise (folk here did it with with Tony B all the time), and they’re presumably losing money on it.
I don’t understand why BMA thinks that it is bad to vote for a new leader “through pure self interest”. If the new leader succeeds in winning an election - or losing less heavily - and hence saving more MPs’ jobs, then surely that is a success in electoral and democratic terms? The new leader has persuaded more voters. Does it matter if this is down to a quantum change in underlying policy, continuing with the same policy but delivering it better (or maybe different choices of “micro policies” when responding to events) or just presentation?
236. Yes sorry for going off on this tangent. However it matters insofar as we have had a Labour MP on this site trying to dampen down leadership speculation by citing the logistical difficulties. Brown may not be thrown out by his party; but the reasons for that are certainly not due to MPs not being able to get their act together in terms of communication!
234 MPs would need each others’ phone numbers if, for example they needed to discuss HoC debates with each other, how they were going to vote, what amendments to put up etc. However, they don’t need to do this as the whips tell them how to vote.
239. Nick I feel that too is disingenuous. More than 50% of your “job” has nothing to do with Broxtowe, and everything to do with sitting in Westminster.
Dear oh dear. Perhaps we won’t agree on this but I feel that an MP telling us he has but ten numbers for his colleagues tells us rather a lot about them, their party and their government …
I desist.
Qualifying odds for the winner seem a bit strange.
Hamilton’s 2/1, and the Ferraris are about 4/1 each. Probably possible to back them all (a slightly higher stake for Hamilton of course) and win if any of them come first.
243 LOL!
You desist with great charm, Anatole.
The whole idea of politics is, as Anatole says, POLITICKING. i.e. meeting up with likeminded people, hatching ideas and policies, gossipping about hated rivals, conspiring against others, climbing the greasy pole by standing on someone’s head, etc etc etc.
A very large part of what politicians do is, therefore, plotting, in some form or another. Nick Palmer’s idea that this plotting has now become “impossible” because of the advances in modern communication is just deliciously ridiculous.
Oh no, sorry, we can’t conspire against Gordon Brown because these days we have mobile phones, landlines, emails, Blackberrys, secretaries, research assistants, weblogs, internet bulletin boards, iPhones, text messages, fax machines, answerphones and, at a pinch, the Royal Mail.
I mean, MPs are just so isolated. There’s almost no method by which they can contact each other.
New Thread: was Iain Gray the right choice?
Cheers,
Morus
Reuters: Russians like Putin and Obama, polls find
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080910/pl_nm/russia_poll_dc
196
Left-winger Mark Penn has said:
“And I think that that’s a real problem growing out of this election. The media now, all of the media — not just Fox News, that was perceived as highly partisan — but all of the media is now being viewed as partisan in one way or another. And that is an unfortunate development. … This is an election in which the voters are going to decide for themselves. The media has lost credibility with them. ”
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/09/11/politics/politicalplayers/main4442492.shtml?source=RSSattr=HOME_4442492
239. Some time ago when i was involved in local politics, where the spoils are small and of little real consequence, i can sure, we all had each others mobile phone numbers and emails. Plots, gossips, secret dinners, conspiracy and general back stabbing was a weekly event. I cant believe that people who live and breath politics 24hrs a day in an intense atmosphere like Westminster are not much worse.
Labour spins that every other government is having same popularity problems due to global economic problems, however:-
BBC website:
“But the really bad news for Mr Brown comes when you turn to approval ratings.
The British prime minister appears to be more unpopular with voters in his own country than just about any of his peers in the major industrialised nations.
Even George Bush, one of the most unpopular US Presidents in history, had higher approval ratings than Mr Brown last month.
Mr Brown has suffered the fastest fall in personal approval ratings in British political history over the past 12 months, according to IPSOS/MORI.
The polling organisation’s latest research suggests 24% of voters were satisfied with Mr Brown’s performance as prime minister, while 71% were dissatisfied, a net approval rating of - 47%.
That compares to a net approval rating of +16% when he came to power in July last year.
George Bush, by comparison, scored - 33%, in a poll carried out by CNN/Opinion Research at the end of August”