Was Obama making Kinnock’s Sheffield mistake?
July 29th, 2008
Did his foreign trip make him look too presumptuous?
Barack Obama has returned to the US after his whirlwind foreign tour to find that some polls are now going against him. Was it wise or not and should he have avoided the mass rally in Berlin?
We don’t know the long term impact but after sifting through the reports again I could not help being reminded of Labour’s famous Sheffield rally a week before the 1992 General Election. This came over in the media as though it had been arranged to celebrate Neil Kinnock’s victory over the Tories.
What he said that day and his whole demeanour did not go down with the voters. He gave the impression of taking the coming election for granted - he was being presumptuous. He was also reminding the public what a Kinnock-led government might look like which with the benefit of hindsight that was not wise.
Voters like to feel that what they are doing is important and if you act as though an election is a done deal then they might just bite back.
Ever since his nomination became a certainty Obama has looked as though he might fall into the Kinnock trap. The creation of an Obama “seal of office” was quickly withdrawn but the overseas tour went ahead in a form that could be portrayed as though he assumed he was in the White House already.
What should have been presented as a fact-finding mission to prepare himself came over as though he regarded the little matter of the election on November 4th as a minor inconvenience.
This is on top, of course, of middle America’s long-standing distrust of foreigners.
A full range of White House betting markets is here.
MessageSpace Advertising
No - because Neil Kinnock blew his chances is one swell foop after having had a reasonable chance of leading the Labour party to victory (i.e. being the largest party); whereas Obama is going to lose and was always going to lose.
1.
isin one swell foopYou’re right that many look upon it here as rather presumptuous and he is indeed risking people simply saying on election day “I don’t like him” as they have done in the last two elections with Democrats.
On the other hand there are lots of people who were rather impressed with his trip abroad (not me) and think it’s bolstered their opinion about his gravitas and experience so it’s a tough call to say whether he got a net gain out of his trip.
My own hunch is that it wasn’t much of a game changer. Might net him an extra point in the polls but it won’t change the minds of people who think he has no resume and won’t change the “change” people’s minds who probably couldn’t care less. Probably won’t have hurt him with swing voters but he won’t ever match McCain amongst worried soccer moms.
There are parallels. One imagines that Obama has been advised to “look presidential”, in the same way Kinnock was told to “look prime ministerial”, and it did the latter no good at all.
It will be interesting to see how Cameron reacts to the recent poll findings that he is not seen as a heavyweight politician. Will there be lots of photo ops with Cameron in a dark suit, and dull, serious questions replacing the knockabout at PMQs?
4 - I’m not sure that manically screeching into the microphone, “We’re alllllll rigghhhhhtttt” would altogether count as looking “Prime Ministerial”.
More important, the Sheffield Rally took place just days before the 1992 election whereas the Obama parade is 3 months before voting takes place.
And haven’t this week’s polls shown a modest increase in Obama’s lead?
The speech was dreadful. A List of random inspiration cliches. It could have been written by trained manatees.
5 re Kinnock looking PM material. It was the shadow government nonsense; and he also changed his PMQ style from the witty barbs that often had Mrs Thatcher on the ropes to a more serious and earnest style that cemented his reputation as the Welsh windbag and generally led to Thatcher winning their exchanges.
It may be a mistake for Cameron to take the same route.
6 - Who says it wasn’t!
this is ignoring all the polls though which have shown an obama bounce
Martin Day is going to adore this thread.
a full range of White betting markets?
9 - There is a Gallup/USA Today poll showing a McCain lead of 4%, his first lead since May. It looks out of line with other recent polls but remember Smithson’s Law on rogue polls.
I don’t think it is fair to compare Berlin to the Sheffield rally (or indeed something like the Dean scream). The trouble with those is they made the candidate look basically mental whereas at most the World tour makes Obama look ahead of himself.
11 White House poss?
Report this morning that Mccain has had a biopsy, a reminder of the dangers of electing a man in his seventies.
Interestingly, it was about this point (late July) that Bush got a lone lead in a poll after a month or so of Kerry dominance:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/bush_vs_kerry_hth.html
Somewhat off thread, if the government wants to win all of the Brummie seats, they should pass legislation banning the accent.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2467053/Birmingham-wishes-it-could-ditch-Brummie-accent.html
12.What is Smithson’s law on rogue polls?
Look, while I think that Obama will win, “all the polls” have not shown a bounce. I don’t know why Jack W posted the Gallup poll here with registered voters as his headline figure, among likely voters Gallup had McCain up 4 over Obama which is a ten point swing to McCain in a month.
I still assume Obama will win.
Here’s national review’s campaign spot on it (NR is to the right but respectable).
http://tinyurl.com/5edx7j
“So McCain is either trailing like he’s never trailed before, or he’s gained 10 points in the past month to retake the lead. This is one of the reasons I’m writing less about swings in the polls.”
The Campaign Spot guy, punters, says a source has told him Tim Pawlenty is McCain’s VEEP but he expresses caution.
16 But that would mean the end of the Kipper Tie joke.
Pray say it isn’t so.
5. “More important, the Sheffield Rally took place just days before the 1992 election whereas the Obama parade is 3 months before voting takes place”
Yes, that’s the key point. The Sheffield Rally was a defining moment of the 1992 campaign; this won’t be a defining moment of Obama’s 2008 campaign unless he makes it one. It should act as a backdrop to show that (a) he does have an awareness of foreign policy matters, and a grasp of detail that is often better than McCain and (b) it is not preordained that foreigners hold the US or its president in contempt for its/his actions; that is a situation that Bush/neo-Cons bear no small responsibility for.
But he has to make it a relatively small part of his election campaign. For most Americans, this will be decided on domestic matters, with a capable handling of foreign policy as a useful addition, not the other way round. By November, Obama should have put these two weeks into that context. Only if he makes too much of his overseas popularity, or if McCain manages to portray him as insufficiently defensive of America’s interests, and gets that to stick, will it damage him. I don’t believe he will: he is not the new Neil Kinnock.
17. Smithson’s Law (definition really) on Rogue Polls:
“A rogue poll is one you disagree with”.
re 17 & 21. We haven’t really been in this territory for a long time in the UK - certainly not since the budget. There may have been variations but all the polls have been showing the same general trend.
Just look at some of the comments on this thread -
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/03/15/yougov-puts-the-tories-at-16-ahead/
This was the first poll after the budget and the one that had Labour with a very big deficit from which it has not recovered. Yet on the thread you will see a number argue strongly that it was a rogue.
Odds on which Party will call for a windfall tax first Mike?
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article4420895.ece
No. The Rasmusen and Gallup daily trcker polling clearly shows Obama had a bounce from the overseas trip and specific polling by Rasmussen on the speech showed it was rated “good” or “excellent” by 55%, “fair” by 23% and “poor” by 18%. Even 32% of GOP voters rated the speech as either “excellent” or “good”
The Gallup/USA Today/WSJ poll is an outlier. The disparity between likely and registered voting intention is so large that it can only be accounted for by accepting that GOP voters are substantially more enthused to vote for McCain than Obama. That finding clearly is against all other polling that shows Obama voters almost 3/1 more enthusiastic in voting for Obama than McCain.
There will be some red faces at Gallup, their daily tracker shows Obama +8 yesterday and +9 on Sunday. The Research 2000 poll taken over the weekend also showed Obama +12.
The outlier Gallup poll may help to ease Obama’s price a tad and thus might be useful at the margin !!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/55_rate_obama_s_berlin_speech_good_or_excellent_46_think_europe_should_be_more_like_u_s
23
If Labour go down the windfall tax route, I expect an exodus of UK oil companies..
21
On that basis, Gordon will probably think every poll since his honeymoon has been a rogue poll. You can just imagine his henchmen explaining to Gordo, that it wasnt like this at all, and that the pollsters were just asking the wrong people!
But you must add in another of Smithson’s laws which is the most correct poll is the one with Labour in the worst position.
So a poll bad for the Tories and seen as an outlier is more likely to be rogue than an outlier poll for Labour. I’m still not convinced of the accuracy of those Brown honeymoon polls, summertime polls as they all were.
25 spot on. It would be madness.
Mike, I owe you a bottle of decent claret and a selection of nibbles. On the Sheffield rally. First look at this sketch from the great Daily Show in June. Jon Stewart makes gags about Obama and the audience is horrified. Stewart’s line to the audience ‘You are allowed to laugh at him you know’ has been picked up by journalists everywhere.
http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=174474
Now watch this rather crude sketch about the media bending its knee before Obama from last week’s Daily Show
http://www.comedy.com/embed/barack-o-boner
The audience is roaring with laughter.
Sometimes a star-struck media isn’t a help to a politician. Sometimes the voters say that they’re not going to be told how to vote by biased hackes. Not often, just sometimes.
22 that is a fascinating thread Mike. It was all Tories who were urging caution. There you were, piling in, betting on Boris… you are prescient.
Look at this typical comment “most tories on here are the same as myself, we think 16% is far too high but the 9% sounds about right. - Cuddles”
If we went back to 16% now we’be be disappointed. How politics has shifted.
26. Yes. And the armies are valiantly pushing back the Allies to the Atlantic and the Urals. Lab to gain Henley!
18 test. I reported both sets of figures because I was aware of the disparity. I “headlined” the registered figure because previously Gallup/USAToday/WSJ had reported that way. Of course the “news” in the poll is the McCain lead so it’s hardly surprising that the press change horses and report “likely voters” as the headline figure.
As I indicated yesterday the devil is in the detail of the cross tabs if the pollster provides it. One other factor to note is that the Gallup/USAToday/WSJ polls are rated by 538.com as one of the worst performers, I think 28/31 !
Dont know about Kinnock, but Boris is betting £100 that our Great Leader stays and stays till the end. See Borises blog on Politics Home.
33. Also in the Telegraph. Perhaps PB could offer him a sponsored slim/bet that the Great Leader stays?
Unfashionable view of little significance… I always really liked the backdrop of the Sheffield rally. The flags look great together.
Thought the election result had always more to do with Tax.
538.com’s take on the McCain +4 poll - Basically it’s crap !! :
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/07/about-that-mccain-4.html
33. A thread on the betting aspects for when Brown departs would be interesting. Betfair market on leaders for the next GE has Cameron only at 2.04
morning all, just popping in for a quick look at what you are all saying.
My heart says Obama winning is good for the world but my head says that a country which can leave 250,000 black people in New Orleans homeless and over 1000 dead while offering pilates classes at 3am for rich white Californians evacuuated from their burning homes in the Hollywood Hills are not going to elect a black man for President so any excuse by the Republicans to rubbish a good candidate will be taken.
If America cannot see that under Bush most of the rest of the world now holds the US in at best contempt and at worst utter hatred, then they cannot see that Obama is their best hope for rehabilitation within the world community.
Back here at home, watching Toynbee subject Gordon to the death of 1000 cuts last night was painful and then on Newsnight Scotland Lorraine Davidson did exactly the same.
34. 37. could be a big tie-up between Boris and Smithson.
Jack W what do you think of nro’s kerry spot guy saying he hears it’s Pawlenty?
does the BUTT have any rumblings on the veep score?
VP watch suggesting Obama will go for Tim Kaine via thw WaPo.
But the PH100 is shortening the odds that GB will be unseated before too long. What do these guys know that we don’t? Mind you they got it wrong on Glasgow East. LOL
Surely the headline of the day is here at Nick Cohen’s post @ 29.
Journalist buys bottle of booze ….. for someone else !!!!
What’s quite frustrating about this poll is that it allows the media to continue with their insistence that the election is “neck and neck” when the polls for a very long time now have continuously said that Obama is in the lead.
Yes, most leads are within the margin of error (5% or thereabouts) but when you get poll after poll over a very long period of time showing the same thing the odds of all of the polls being wrong are extremely small.
The election reminds me a bit of what I’ve read about the 1960 race. Kennedy was obviously the more charismatic, younger and dynamic candidate, and there was a tremendous ‘wind of chyange’ momentum behind him. He was up against Nixon, a wily operator who was respected but not really liked. But Kennedy only won by a whisker (some say a fraudulent whisker - it hinged on Chicago, then run by Mayor Daley).
I’m warming to Obama and hope he wins - I like what I can make out of his general themes and I like his calm and balanced approach to controversy. But the media often overrate charismatic candidates so if you’re betting on it I’d expect there to be opportunities - I can well imagine McCain taking a lead immediately after the Republican convention even if he loses in the end.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/29/do2901.xml
Nick and Boris in agreement - Brown staying as PM ?
25/28
Ah yes! windfall taxes, always sheer madness!!
1981 Budget (Sir Geoffrey Howe)
The budget speech of the 10th March 1981 delivered by Chancellor of the Exchequer, Geoffrey Howe, is seen by many commentators to have been the most significant of all those during Mrs Thatcher’s premiership. The nub of the budget was cuts in public expenditure and increases in personal and indirect taxation. Notably a windfall tax was levied on bank profits and North Sea Oil. The 25p lower rate of tax, introduced by Labour in 1978, was abolished.
40/41 test. There’s a whole industry of specualtion on the Veep. It reminds me of the Royal Hunt Cup - a bloody great cavalry charge and nobody has the faintest idea who’s going to cross the line first …. and if you’re not careful it becomes a benefit day for the bookies.
However Pawlenty and Kaine look as as good as any.
47. Wow - only 27 years ago ! How relevant.
49, why the surprise? Leftists are happy to quote figures from decades ago (often cherrypicking individual stats from years apart). Brown does it all the time, along with promoting Cameron to Norman Lamont’s chief economic adviser.
47
The world has changed in 30 yrs, Companies could be based anywhere, wer have already had large companies relocate because of high taxes in comparison to say Ireland. Gordo cannot afford to lose big company taxes, the economy is bad enough already. There will be no windfall tax grabs unless Darling/Labour want to commit hari kari.
The 81 budget is used by rightwing economists, (Alan Walters etc) as the moment everything started to come right with the British economy, if it worked then, why won’t it work now.
I’m sure, that John Redwood will be promoting something along those lines, when Cameron is in power and the economy needs correcting. Redwood won’t have forgotten the lesson of ‘81!
45 I certainly think McCain will have a spell in the lead at some stage in the campaign. I’m hoping this does not occur as they cross the finish line.
47
Yes, I thought of that last night when I heard some nutter labour MP calling for windfall taxes on oil companies AND banks (he qualified it to those that were still profitable).
Where or rather in what era do these people live? 25 years ago the banks were making money and companies did NOT move habitat - cos it was difficult and un British.
The world has changed a bit since then… (and if I have to spell it out!!!!)… but not to some Labour MPs obviously.
I balme the education system. Under Labour, sums and home economics are not fashionable.
Interesting article in the Guardian
“Many Labour party members are nervous about the general election that may well be necessary if Brown were to be unseated. One former senior adviser said there was no doubt his party faced a dilemma. “But put it like this: I suppose it’s the 50, 150, 250 dilemma. If Brown goes voluntarily we only lose by 50 seats; if he stays, we lose by 150; and if he is forced out, we lose by 250.”
In an atmosphere marked by the sheer quantity of anonymous briefings, yesterday”
47
And most UK based oil companies make most of their money from oilfields NOT in the North Sea. So HO location - for taxation purposes- could be easily changed.
In fact I will go further. BP and SHell are selling much of their N Sea interests..
Typical stoopid ignorance … but then I expect no different…
54
I balme them too, obviously spelling has gorn’ down hill as well!!
Rachel Sylvester on a Prosecco plot - note that Cabinet and junior ministers are both briefing her
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article4419231.ece
“One Cabinet minister believes that a challenge against the leader has gone from “possible” to “probable” in the past few days. There is talk of a “prosecco plot” - conducted via mobile phones from Tuscan farmhouses and Spanish villas - similar to the “curry coup” through which the Brownites pushed out Tony Blair.
I spoke to a junior minister yesterday who claims to be prepared to resign in September in protest at Mr Brown’s leadership and believes that nine other government members could follow suit - more if you include parliamentary private secretaries, the unpaid ministerial aides. “Somebody has to pull the trigger,” the minister said. “The risk of not changing the leader is now greater than the risk of changing him. We’ve got to be bold.””
The Sylvester article is essential reading. Who is the Cabinet minister loyal to Brown? Is her quote from Ed Balls?
“Even Downing Street advisers now concede that “momentum” - a crucial force in politics - is going away from them. One of Mr Brown’s closest Cabinet allies admitted: “If my party continues to fail to manage itself it could become impossible for Gordon to stay. Everyone has a terrible fever at the moment but no one is sure if it’s the plague or flu.”
The temperature may fall over the summer. But conditions are not ideal for a quick recovery. There is little residual loyalty towards the Prime Minister among his Cabinet. “I don’t think Gordon would die in a ditch for me so why should I die in a ditch for him?” one minister said.
Meanwhile, there is civil war in Downing Street, with the “old guard” class warriors and the “new guard” PR men barely on speaking terms. Civil servants - who can sink or save a politician - have not warmed to Mr Brown. “People say he’s charming in private but it’s completely untrue,” an official who has worked closely with him said. “He’s incredibly rude. He doesn’t remember names. His e-mails are brusque demands. And his defining characteristic is anger. I’ve seen him kicking furniture.””
58
This bit in the article is just so pertinent. Its GB all over
Mr Brown is planning a fightback in September, with a new “economic plan”. But not all those around him are convinced it will work. Downing Street has been begging Whitehall departments to come up with policies that fit into its “fairness” theme, with little luck. “It will be free kettles for old people, that sort of thing,” one insider said. “The strategy is great but there’s a great gaping hole in the middle where the policy should be.”
56
Well I can’t be that ignorant, my job for thirty years was directly involved with North Sea energy, it also pays my pension.
Gas after all was not directly linked to the oil price, until the early eighties, when the then minister of energy David Howell, (under pressure from the oil companies) forced British Gas to raise domestic gas prices by 9% above the rate of inflation for four years. The resulting 300 million pounds per year that was raised, was taken by the treasury. There is much comment now on the lack of storage, if that money had been spent on improving the gas transmission system particularly storage, the UK would be in a much stronger position than it is.
Strange, there are now Tory politicians berating the government for not intervening in the, ‘free market’ in energy that their predecessors imposed.
This government should certainly be ‘balmed’ for not reversing the disasterous system that the Tories imposed.
re 37 The trouble is that there is so little liquidity on Brown exit related markets on Betfair. It’s just pathetic and I can’t be bothered going to the site every hour or so to see if someone is prepared to risk a fiver on what I want to bet on.
Political punters seem to have given up on Betfair. The level of betting on Glasgow east was very light.
If I want to bet £100 I want to put it on now which is why the traditional bookies are now my first port of call.
It’s all falling apart for Brown:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/2466112/Gordon-Brown-in-public-spat-with-Harriet-Harman.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1039442/Labour-plotters-push-dream-ticket-Miliband-Johnson-lined-No10-coup.html
The momentum is building up, there’s no way back from all this for Brown IMO.
61 “This government should certainly be ‘balmed’”
Don’t you mean “embalmed”
61, er, what? Lack of storage is the fault of those in power in the early 80s? What about the past 11 years?
64, fits in with yesterday’s undead theme, with Brown being refleshed:p
64 Sorry, just noticed that’s an old joke from earlier in the thread!
How long before Nick Palmer comes on to say there is no plot to oust Gordon???
66 - All we need is Brian Blessed!
65
It isn’t a matter for the government now, storage is run by private companies, in a ‘free market’ it isn’t up to the government to interfere.
In fact the government should scrap the regulators and allow the market to run itself.
If you wan’t the government to take back, ‘Energy’ into public ownership, then please say so!
69, he’d make a great Speaker. Although they may have to rename the post Shouter.
68 - Well it is probably true, a plot would hint at some sort of coherent plan. What seems to be gripping Labour is mass hysteria.
70, you’ve convinced me. I’m never voting for Thatcher ever again.
‘There is talk of a “prosecco plot” - conducted via mobile phones from Tuscan farmhouses and Spanish villas’
Clearly these conspirators are perfectly placed to win back Labour’s evaporating working class support.
What News Milburn?
6
By your logic, we should blame (sp!) the Conservatives for not building new power stations….
Typical Labour: it’s always someone else’s fault: which why they repeat the same mistakes.. time after time after time…
Like Gordon Brown: there is NO WAY he will resign . ever. He does not do mistakes. he is omnicorrect. In his mind. Resignation would be proof of failure. He does not do failure. So he will not resign . Ever.
Anyone who suggests he will resign….does not read the man whose public persona is that of arrogance and refusal to accept he can be wrong or that someone else has a better idea.
When one or more of the cabinet finally get the backbone to come out publicly against Brown the floodgates will open and the clamour for him to go from within Labour will be deafening.
As soon as he sees the odds are against him, Brown will bottle it like the coward he is, and will run away without a fight. Don’t forget, this is the man who talks about courage but hasn’t got an ounce of it himself.
63 Telegraph and Mail spinning anti-Labour stories.
It’s a political earthquake.
76 He may be arrogant but he is also a dyed-in-the-wool coward.
Oddly - I think this is the third time that Brian Blessed has been linked with the Speakership on pb.com.
Is it Blessed, or Ming the Merciless who says with incredulity “Gordon’s ALIVE?” - I think John Redwood would be best placed to deliver that line at the opening of the next PMQs
Brown slaps down Harman. But why? When he needs friends, why not let her have a few weeks in charge? Very bad management.
“Gordon Brown has been dragged into an embarrassing public spat with Harriet Harman over who is in charge of the Government during the Prime Minister’s summer holiday.”
“Ms Harman, the Labour deputy leader, held a series of meetings at 10 Downing Street on Friday, prompting allies to claim that she was the first woman to take the helm of Government since the departure of Margaret Thatcher in 1990.
But Mr Brown - who is facing growing calls to step down as Labour leader - immediately used his spokesman to declare that he was running the country, despite being on a break in Suffolk. ”
http://tinyurl.com/5kdmwe
78
It’s unstoppable now. Brown will be out before the autumn IMO, and on that happy note I’m taking the dogs out
36- JackW- this poll gives McCain a lead because a much higher proportion of Obama voters said they would stay at home and not bother to vote. Hmmm.
Mike Smithson- liquidity on UK elections is poor, but the US presidential market is good.
80 - Definately Blessed!
No, not the same as Kinnock, because Americans are not the same as Brits. Americans arent put off by candidates playing grandeur.
81 - If your deputy looks after your work whilst your on holiday, and her friends start telling everyone she’s actually the boss, she’s probably not your friend.
If I were Brown, I would have taken her legs out from under her, by saying something off-the-cuff to the media like “The Deputy Leader is taking over my official and ceremonial functions over the coming weeks. If anything of significance arises, [insert name here] will be around to deal with it, and will call me back in if required.”
A firm smack-down for having the impertinence to pseudo challenge me in my absence - as a warning to the others that even thinking about it will result in being attacked publically by the PM.
80, Blessed.
It’s a great shame Ming left. The odds on having two political leaders called Gordon and Ming must be phenomenal.
Ian Gibson now on Sky suggesting policies that could turn it around; nationalising the railways, windfall taxes on oil companies……..
I will look out the window and see if there are any green fire engines, rubbish on the street etc will the power be going off later today?
its 1978 all over again
87 - The election literature would have been begging for a theme.
89. “Flash, ahah, he taxed every one of us.”
85. Grandeur and Kinnock are not two words that are obviously associated. Kinnock came over to many voters as a jumped-up yob. Obama by contrast does carry himself well, and speaks with genuine eloquence - even if the substance of his speeches amounts to little.
79. You’r right, but in the Great Leaders own mind he is a Hero. Thats why yesterdays thread on GB’s state of mind is pertinant - a paranoid loony leading the government. CHILLING.
90, hehe I hope someone does do a spoof of that track for the election.
86 Brown needs all the support he can find but he uses threats not persuasion.
Trying to step back from it all, we are now into day 5 of the plotting against Brown stories occupying the newspapers. If there is enough new material for another 5 days (Weds to Sunday) then there is a very good chance Brown will be gone. The same story on two Sundays meets Alastair Campbell’s rule.
Brown has already lost the support of most of the left leaning journalists so if they want to be proved right, they will have a natural prediliction to find new material. However as each day goes by a greater % will be leaving for their holidays.
Here’s a thought.
Brown does a Blair.
He announces that he is not going to contest the next GE and preannounces his exit date for Autumn 2009. This will give him time to “get the job done” and to give a new leader a chance to prepare for the next GE.
Thank you, coldstone for this post at 8:50am (47):
1981 Budget (Sir Geoffrey Howe)
The budget speech of the 10th March 1981 delivered by Chancellor of the Exchequer, Geoffrey Howe, is seen by many commentators to have been the most significant of all those during Mrs Thatcher’s premiership. The nub of the budget was cuts in public expenditure and increases in personal and indirect taxation. Notably a windfall tax was levied on bank profits and North Sea Oil. The 25p lower rate of tax, introduced by Labour in 1978, was abolished.
What odds against the next budget (Autumn statement) cutting public expenditure while the Unions are holding the purse strings?
Windfall taxes, perhaps, increases in personal and stealth taxes almost certainly, but cuts in public expenditure?
88. As their support crumbles, Labour are reverting to type - another antediluvian figure was calling for higher taxes to help tackle the economic downturn yesterday.
It’s almost a religious thing - as their troubles mount, Labour are furiously fiddling with their worry beads, and mindlessly muttering their traditional prayers and hymns from dusty and long-neglected bibles.
95. Brown dosn’t do Blair. Ee’d shoot himself first. Here’s hoping.
97
One should not forget the civil service. The potential for damaging leaks is almost infinite
Would also give him a chance to arrange a post no10 job. World Bank IMF would suit. Clearly he’d have Obama’s backing.
O/T. The latest BoE figures show mortgage lending for house purchases has hit another record low - down 68% on last year.
http://www.bankofengland.co.uk/statistics/ms/2008/Jul/index.htm
98 - don’t get your hopes up too high. He’d probably miss.
The Sheffield rally was *quite dekliberately* meant to look like a victory party - think Hilary Clinton not Barack Obama. It was meant to give Labour momentum into the final week and show the Tories as losers.
I think the rally was mistaken but it subsequently suited some - Peter mandelson in particular - who wanted to settle old scores to blame the rally. Nobody much thought the rally a mistake until Mandelson went on the TV on the Friday monring and blamed it.
But labour didn’t lose in 1992 because of the rally - it lost because people couldn’t trust us with the economy.
The cunning Harperson is grabbing the headlines again; laying down new laws for murderers.
While Browns not about,
the Harperson will shout.
103. New laws for murderers? Well they are a persecuted minority. What’s wrong with a bit of positive discrimination?
102 post of the day!
103 - Yes, basically if you are a murderer the book will be thrown at you. If you are a murderess you will be ‘understood’ and your ‘victimhood’ will be taken into account. Aargh
100 - Where stand you on Gordon these days? Should he go?
The “NY Times” reports that Hillary is now unlikely to get Obama’s Veep spot :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/29/us/politics/29dems.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
104, True, why make them martyrs?
81- the problem is that in this febrile, paranoid atmosphere everyone is looking out for each other for tell tail signs. Harriett looks like she is positioning hereself. Where is Milipede? Why hasn’t Johnson spoken in public? Straw spoke, but look at what he said, some wriggle room. Every word, every action is examined for treacherous nuances.
In this environment you will see treachery and plotting everywhere, from every corner- the press will jump on it, Labour MP’s will whisper about it, Brown’s allies will wind each other up about it, but most importantly Brown will increasingly fail to see the wood through the trees as his judgement diminishes.
If we were living in a totalitarian dictaorship the purge would already have started. Eventually even loyal acoloytes like Ball’s would be taken outside and summarily shot in the dead of night as the suspicion goes out of control.
Looking at Brown today you can maybe understand a bit more why regimes like Stalin’s and Saddam’s turned the way they did.
Paranoia is a much destructive emotion than jealousy. Comes from the same part of the brain I guess.
The worst punishment for any criminal would surely be to be forced to listen to endless hectoring lectures from Harperson herself. Far worse than hanging, even.
63 — Miliband and Johnson a dream team? In whose nightmare? And by what mechanism do the plotters get to choose both leader and deputy?
112 - Indeed and Harperson will cling to the Deputy position like a limpet!
110: “If we were living in a totalitarian dictaorship…”
NuLab’s working on it.
110. I would like to see Balls shot in the dead of day.
114
ID cards and 42 days to come.
116 — Both to be scrapped by Cameron, I pray.
O/T - Very apposite article from Dominic Lawson in the Indy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/dominic-lawson/dominic-lawson-these-mps-only-really-care-about-one-thing-their–jobs-879425.html
This paragraph jumped out at me:-
“The Labour Member for Pendle is obviously right about Mr Brown’s inability to “sell” Labour’s message – whatever it is – to the public. This is also beyond irony, however. The Labour Party gets rid of Mr Blair partly out of the conviction that he is just a slick salesman; it continuously criticises David Cameron on exactly the same grounds – and yet it is having a collective nervous breakdown entirely because its current leader lacks the very skill it affects to despise.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/07/29/do2901.xml
Bozza comes to the same conclusion as Matthew Parris.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article4401757.ece
108 - “And in other political news, the Emperor Caligula tipped to promote horse to the Senate”
I spoke to a junior minister yesterday who claims to be prepared to resign in September in protest at Mr Brown’s leadership and believes that nine other government members could follow suit - more if you include parliamentary private secretaries, the unpaid ministerial aides.”
The first quote’s hardly surprising, but – after Bruce Anderson’s piece in yesterday’s Independent – it’s fascinating just how rapidly the mainstream narrative of “he’s a decent guy” is crumbling. Until recently, the attacks on Gordon Brown have largely been political. Now things are getting extremely personal indeed. I guess Brown’s reaping what he’s sown.
As for the second quote, the junior minister’s claims could – of course – be little more than bravado. But if they’re not, this could solve the dilemma of who might pull the trigger. You could say that Labour’s committing hari-kiri already – by retaining Brown as leader. But ministers falling on their swords in public could well be too much for the party to bear - and an opportunity for the would-be leaders to step out from the shadows.
The above is taken from Peter Hoskin writing in the “Coffe House” blog. How times change!
The Telegraph piece linked in 63 has these fascinating lines towards the end:
“Speculation is mounting among Labour MPs about the intentions of Alan Johnson, the Health Secretary.
Downing Street is said to be increasingly anxious that Mr Johnson has made no public gesture of support for the Prime Minister, despite No 10’s repeated requests for him to do so.”
Repeated requests, eh?
88 Sky News clearly recognised the entertainment value of Ian Gibson following his classic “The Voters are shouting at me in supermarkets” performance on Newsnight last Friday.
122. Breaking news - Alan Johnson makes public gesture for Brown: http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/images/alan_johnson_at_the_labour_conference.jpg
107 Let’s say something special would have to happen to stop it being a question of “not if, but when”.
Personally, I think GB has made some pretty devestating political mistakes for which he is personally responsible and put into question his position as PM.
But he is not to blame for the slowdown or oil prices, which is the primary reason Labour are paddling up sewage ravine. However, since he is Mr Economy he indirectly has brought all this to bear on the govt.
A double whammy.
Should he go? To be honest I am not sure. I can see arguments either way. I certainly have little respect for Machiavellian arguments to cut and run. Sorry if that is a bit of a shade of grey.
Alan Johnson would be a perfect choice for Labour. If they get rid of Brown for not being up to the job, they will replace him with a man who says he hasnt the capabilities to be Prime Minister.
Meltdown ensues…
McCain’s 4% lead over the “The Messiah”, is true,sez Guido. lol
Guido has a sideways take on the latest American poll
http://www.order-order.com/
Which cabinet minister:-
1. Has Union roots
2. Is from the South
3. Lots of contacts with other MPs
4. Comfortable in his own skin and does not fear the sack
5. Close to David Milliband
6. Has not come out this time supporting Gordon.
Ans: Alan Johnson
He maybe the one cabinet minister willing to lay down his career for the good of the party.
I have a strong political feeling that plotting has gone too far to go back now.
It’s the big Mo (west wing) and it’s irresistible.
126
Well as John Prescott says there are no first raters for the job - and he should know - I reckon it’s:-
Meltdown with Gordon for 2 years
or
meltdown with ANOther for 2 years - after a HUGE bloodbath worth -5% points off Labour’s polling.
“Stuffed either way” sums it up.
Query regarding the bigot’s new proposal for murderers:
does it apply to men who are victims of domestic abuse? There are almost as many as women.
48/108 - I’ve just been checking out the dem veep runners & riders on wikipedia and it seems to me the Evan Bayh ticks more boxes than any other, despite the gossip on Kaine. Young and attractive; an experienced legislator but not really tarred with being too ‘Washinton’; foreign policy experience; socially and fiscally relatively conservative so could pull in some moderate dems/independents; from a marginal but historically republican state. What more would Obama want?!
122 - The key words in that sentence are “said to be”. There is a lot of froth at the moment and we get a wide variety of different types of statement:
1) Direct statements made on the record by named politicians
2) Direct statements made by unnamed politicians but whose rank is made clear by the context
3) Views attributed to “sources close to” named politicians
4) Views attributed to “sources close to” unnamed politicians whose rank is made clear by the context
5) Generic views attributed to “Labour politicians” or “bankbenchers” or “junior ministers” etc
6) Things that are “said to be” (ie passed on secondhand)
7)Journalists’ opinions
I put pretty much no value on anything below 4 (though 7 can be interesting in specific instances, eg Jackie Ashley’s abandonment of Gordon Brown yesterday), and not much value on 3 or 4 either in most circumstances.
110. From what I’ve heard there has been movements by Milliband, Straw and Harman.
Milliband was making speechs about issues other than foreign policy at warwick and was seen in a meeting with a union leader.
Straw has been highly visible, specially with a photo-op on sunday. Reportedly one of his allies has been sounding out MPs.
Harman; we have the furore over who was in charge and we have her out promoting this murderer thing.
132 - It looks quite a convoluted proposal, but if it does then the spin is atrocious!
93. My 5 minute effort - needs some work…
Flash - ah - Taxer of the universe
Flash - ah - He’ll tax ev’ry one of us
- Seemingly there is no reason for this
- Extraordinary intergalactical financial turnmoil
- What’s happening Flash ?
- Only Adam Applegarth
- Has provided any explanation
Flash - ah - he’s a miracle ! (economist)
- This morning’s unprecedented nationalisation of a bank
- Is no cause for alarm
Flash - ah - king of the impossible (growth)
He’s taxed ev’ry one of us
Squeezed ev’ry one of us
He statistically lifted out of poverty
Ev’ry man ev’ry woman ev’ry child
With a mighty flash
- General Harperson, Flash Gordon approaching
- What do you mean Flash Gordon approaching?
- Open fire - all weapons
- Despatch attack dog Clarke to bring back his fingernails..
Flash - ah
- Gordon’s alive!
Flash - ah - he’ll save ev’ry one of us
Just a man with a book on courage
He knows nothing but tractor production
But he has delivered unprecedented growth
We’re all up to are neck in debt
And our economy is about to fail
Oh oh - oh oh
- Flash Flash I love you
- but we only have fourteen hours to save the NHS(again)
Flash !
etc
108. The veep is a heartbeat away from the presidency. If it was my heartbeat, I’d never let Hillary get that close. Lay odds looked too expensive for me but it looked pretty sure-fire that she’s never going to get it. Team Obama might be vacuous but they ain’t daft.
101: Figures which are simultaneously shocking and unsurprising.
The debt binge is over, we are returning to a lending regime where you can borrow 3.5 or 4x salary maximum, and need a decent deposit. This is not a “crisis” or a massive “crunch” it is HOW IT ALWAYS USED TO BE.
The reported hare-brained scheme today (from the report by not-at-all-biased ex Chief-exceutive of HBOS) has called for the government to underwrite massive mortgage securitisation to start inflating the bubble again.
So he wants products which the market will not touch because they are worthless to be instead bought by taxpayers with no guarantee whatsoever of a payback. Disastrous.
The rather simpler alternative is to let house prices fall to where people don’t need to lie about their income, have no deposit, or borrow 6x their salary, then the risk of lending will be far lower, and there will be no problems. Banks are massively scared about defaults at the moment, and of the value of their mortgage books. But they have only themselves to blame, since they have spent years lending recklessly to anyone who was able to write their own name, and the idea that now somehow the taxpayer should pick up the bill for their greed (especially taxpayers who unlike our dear leader really HAVE been prudent) is abhorrent.
138, not a bad effort:)
At school me and two classmates rewrote Flash Gordon, with hash as the subject:p
I’ve long felt it was Alan Johnson or nothing for the Labour Party.
I’m sure that’s who the Tories fear most.
133 - There really aren’t. Female victims of domestic abuse outnumber male victims by about 6 to 1, though reported cases etc see women outnumber men by 9 to 1. There is a problem with men being abused by women, but there simply isn’t parity in the numbers.
134 - He a bit of a paint-by-numbers VP choice! Not popular with the netroots, a bit bland (not necessarily a bad thing), but the big thing is that it probably costs the Dems a Senate seat, when they are aiming for the magic 60. I think he’ll probably get it, but I hope he doesn’t.
138 - brilliant. Was worried there’d be no reference to tractor production, but you shoe-horned it in near the end…
143, hmm. At university (circa 4 years ago) my female feminist lecturer disagreed. No references to back it up, I’m afraid, but I doubt someone like that would pretend otherwise. (She didn’t say the levels were equal, but quite close to being so).
But you’re spot on with a big difference in reporting, hence the chronic underestimating of how much anti-male domestic violence occurs.
Aggressive women bullying men doesn’t really fit with the rabid brand of feminism bigot Harman likes.
If anyone else fancies a go..
http://www.queenwords.com/lyrics/songs/sng11_14.shtml
141 - One of the guys who did IB Higher Level Music the year above me wrote a full opera based on the children’s books, Captain Underpants.
One line (in repelling the attack of the “dreaded hoovermen from space”) was [in five part harmony of falsetto voices) ‘More Suction Than Monica Lewinsky!’
The tutor wanted to fail him outright, but the external examiners loved it.
It’s a stereotype I know, but I think there really is a higher proportion of upbeat, easily motivated, high-fiving type voters in the USA, and a higher proportion of cynics who like to take the lofty down a peg or two in the UK.
If it is a Sheffield moment for Obama, then it’s on a smaller scale, mostly likely a scale small enough to not impact the result.
Personally, I’d prefer it if Obama lost. I feel fairly strongly that the first Black President really ought to be a Republican, which would be historically apt, and would undo some of the dangerous political/cultural revisionism we’ve seen in recent years. (I read that something like 60% of black Americans now believe that the Democrats were an anti-slavery party and Republicans were pro. That is both very sad and deeply shocking.)
142. Johnson has a kind of homely appeal, but is he the right man to take over in the midst of a serious economic downturn? I fear he would look like a dunce.
130. Who cares if Alan Johnson is from the south? This isn’t America you know. His affability tends to hide the fact that he isn’t a particularly good political communicator. I still maintain that Labour’s best hope of avoiding meltdown is Jack Straw with John Reid back as Chancellor. May be impossible I know.
As for Obama, was it complacency? I think it may be more of a hubris thing. Perhaps people think he’s starting to believe his own publicity that he really is THAT good and could do with being bought down to earth and learning some humility. If he’s learned his lesson I’d still back him to win it.
142 …..and probably what Alan Johnson fears most too!
148. Americans are well known for re-writing history on a whole manner of subjects.
152 — “We solely won WW2″ being a good example.
153. Oh yes that is very tiresome
From the Speccie piece on Alan Johnson; extracts of negative comments.
salieri
July 27th, 2008 1:25pm
I beg to differ, James. Johnson can do the cheeky chappie routine all right but what else, pray? Find an unpoliticised civil servant in his department and ask whether AJ has even read one of his red boxes all the way through.
Jose garcia
July 28th, 2008 1:42am
Alan jonhson,!!!!! ? the one who wanted to resign if catholic agencies refused on conscience grounds to send kids to homosexual couples?
Trumpeter Lanfried
July 27th, 2008 1:58pm
Isn’t Johnson the bloke who capitulated on civil service pension negotiations? The result, I seem to remember, is that civil servants now effectively pay no income tax. All their PAYE goes to fund their gold-plated final-salary pensions.
TGF UKIP
July 27th, 2008 3:01pm
Alan “irrefutable” Johnson’s greatest claim to fame must surely be for breaking the world record for the most expensive unsuccessful election campaign in history. Remember this is the man who, in his quest for the Labour Deputy Leadership, bribed the public sector comrades with countless taxpayer billions over the years to finance continuing public sector retirement at 60 at the same time as the rest of the population were being jacked up to 67 and then 68.
Unfortunately for him our bribe money went unrewarded when the rat bastards in the unions bestowed their favours on Harperson instead.
Anan
July 27th, 2008 4:05pm
Why would the Conervatives need to be worried about a postman who hasn’t been seen for the last 6 months (even with all the healthcare debate recently)?
The Times article by Rachel Sylvester is fascinating.
“At the same time - and perhaps most importantly - the Prime Minister’s potential rivals on what could be called the “modernising” wing of the party seem to be coalescing around David Miliband. I am told that James Purnell made clear to the Foreign Secretary a few weeks ago that he would not stand against him in a leadership contest if one takes place this year.”
150 John Reid as Chancellor? - Is he capable of turning down the spending tap? This is what is at the heart of Labour’s demise. The Great British Public aren’t fools - they know Brown & Darling have committed the country to unaccepable levels of taxing and borrowing.
Sort the economy out, stupid, and Labour once again become a force to be reckoned with.
155 - Gosh, that site seems infested with creatures!
Why does everyone say Gordon Brown was an excellent Chancellor? Is it because he was in it for so long and didn’t get sacked? Surely that only happened as Tony was afraid of sacking him. Was he actually a good Chancellor?
138, Nice one Ghost. Keep it up!
149. I don’t think that matters to the Labour party, internal voting by the PLP seems to split on the lines of how big the relative power bases are. Suitability and competence rarely applies, it’s all about alliances.
To be fair, the same applies in other parties. It’s only when the wider membership gets involved that the individual candidate has a chance to overcome the label that’s been stuck on him/her. Even then it can go wrong - Harman beating Johnson for deputy post, for example.
152, 153. Of course there were always twice as many Nazi troops on the Eastern Front as on the Western Front, but we won’t bother them about that.
That is what scares me about McCain - God forbid he win the election - if he chose Pawlenty - we get a raw deal both ways - the threat that Pawlenty could one day be president - we call him Mr Veto here - he has obstructed nearly everything our Democratic House and Senate have wanted to do here in Minnesota - and his Lieutenant Governor his worse than him - so we get two nasty surprises if McCain wins - so many reasons for Minnesotans to vote for Obama -
159 - Not really, he was just fortunate.
159. The same aura that infests the media that says Clinton was a good president of the USA.
165. The fact that both of their successors were even worse?
166.
162. Certainly the US didn’t win the war on its own. But you could argue they were the sole long-term winner from it. Britain was bankrupted (the US working hard to ensure this outcome in 1940-1941) and the USSR gained an empire it couldn’t sustain and in due course was also bankrupted. Does a subconscious realisation of this inform these efforts at historical revisionism, one wonders?
157. The premise that labour could run the economy without eventually destroying it, was always a Blair myth. Labour has always run the economy into the ground.
Under:
Attlee
Wilson
Calahan, and now
Brown.
Always failing and making life harder for the people; always making the tories pick up the the peices.
p.s. I will say however that Heath was a disaster.
168 — As perverse as it sounds, Japan ended up doing not too badly from the war.
134. I think Evan Bayh does tick a lot of boxes, but the guy is a scheming triangulator like Clinton. If I were in the Oval Office I would be worried about that guy in the White House. I’m really not sure how much chemistry they have. Personally think Kaine, Warner or even Schweitzer would be far more trustworthy.
148. To be fair, the Republicans were the party of continued segregation, so their complete u-turn on black emancipation is probably confusing a few people. Even Reagan used to refer to supporting “states’ rights” with a bit of a nod and a wink.
Incidentally, someone up above was comparing this race with Bush-Kerry. Bush came back through far superior message control and excellent organisation. Those things lie with Obama this time round. The McCain campaign is a slow trainwreck at this point. I’m thinking he might pick a VP like Romney as much for the organisational know-how than the money.
As for Obama’s tour, I think the bounce is less to him looking Presidential abroad, but purely the fact that he was widely supported most places he went. The American view of “who cares what the rest of the world thinks?” has been heavily repudiated by Bush’s presidency. I’d say at least 60% of Americans have a longing for their country to be looked to as a beacon of hope again. That’s why Obama’s reference to the Berlin airlift was so smart.
A quick question regarding betfair, if you are ‘all green’ on a market, say minumum +£10, will your account balance be ‘up’ £10 or do you have to wait until the market is settled to take any profits?
172 - wait until it’s settled (there’s often the possibility of the market being voided).
165. Clinton was certainly an above average President. He turned their finances around (something Bush has now wrecked) which should be supported by everyone claiming to be a fiscal conservative.
172. Depends whether the market is “in-play” or not.
168. The US worked hard to bankrupt Britain? This is typical anti-Americanism. It was shameful the US stayed out of the war so long, but it was down to internal political disagreement due to the country’s strong tradition of isolationism from European wars, not any conspiracy.
The only positive thing one can say about Obama’s VP pick, is that it will be a white man or woman. He dare not pick an ethnic, as main stream U.S.A. won’t stand it.
As for McCain anyone younger than 50 will do.
Short answer - No.
Also, it was McCain who goaded him into doing it, to see what things were like on the ground, this shooting himself in the foot. Yet another McCain mistake, given that this allowed Obama to appear presidential. The corollary is now for McCain to be goaded into talking about sconomic policy, something he studiously avoids.
The media have given McCain an easy ride so far, the bias has clearly been against Obama with much more critical coverage of him. It looke like that is slowly changing however.
176. You don’t think they were rather keen to see the disintegration of the British Empire as a serious rival to the US?
Okay, they had their political reasons, it is what every country does. But it’s about time we realised we don’t owe them a debt of gratitude. It was a debt of money and we’ve paid it off thank you.
159. I think he was a pretty good chancellor. Lowest ever unemployment figures, low inflation, low interest rates, 11 years of steady growth etc. etc. There’s a bit of revisionism that he had benign economic circumstances, France, Germany, USA, Italy and Japan all experienced recessions during the period 2001 - 2005. He also had to deal with the dot-com bubble bursting and the collapse in confidence in the stock market after 9/11 among other things.
However he had two major flaws;
1) Overspend
2) Failed to identify the housing bubble and prevent it from getting out of hand.
180. Lowest ever unemployment figures?(!). I trust it that there are large parts of the country you’ve never visited. The era of full employment in Britain is long over.
176. No I’m sorry, it’s simply reality. The US had a long-term strategic objective of crippling the British Empire and used the 1940-1941 period to achieve it, by forcing Britain to liquidate its overseas assets in order to enable it to keep fighting alone. This policy continued after the war too, culminating in Suez.
You don’t seem to appreciate that until quite recently there were deeply anti-British elements in the US, even at the very highest level of government. With Britain now relegated to a bit-part player in world affairs, attitudes have of course changed.
3 - The Soccer Moms are dead, that’s *so* last election…..
The pictures of Obama in Iraq. Afghanistan and Kuwait were worth their weight in gold for him - pictures that will be used again and again in in his campaign. Obama being cheered by troops, Obama in quiet discussion with Petraeus etc etc.
As for Berlin, the speech was well judged; simple enough for a live audience with English as their second language, sound-bitey enough for the networks, un-messianic (snark) enough not to have Fox frothing at the mouth, deliberately holding back the rhetoric.
Some of course will always find fault because that is all they are seeking - they would have complained if he had set out policy after policy saying that it was inappropriate for example, as such they are just unfocused gabble.
181. Relying on anecdotal evidence is ridiculous.
@138: Brilliant, GoHF!. All you need now is to dub it onto the video, launch on youtube, and a smash hit awaits!
41/42 - Kaine/Pawlenty? Not very exciting, middle of the road choices, I suppose that makes sense.
179. No, not particularly. The US largely wasn’t interested at that point in the Eastern hemisphere, feeling that as long as they were top dog in the Americas they would be safe to trade freely and not get involved in great power wars. They also gave us very large amounts of money and military equipment via the lend-lease program to keep us going, without which it is unlikely we would have won the Battle of Britain. Let’s also not forget that when they did enter the war they contributed the vast bulk of their resources in the European theatre and put Japan - the people that actually attacked them - on the back burner. It is annoying when some Americans think they were the only ones who won the war, but its equally irritating when Britons refuse to acknowledge their huge contribution to halting both Naziism and Communism. It’s true that the UK would have survived after they defeated the Luftwaffe, but there would have been a totalitarian empire stretching to Calais without US help, whether it was German or Russian in character.
180:
3) Destroyed the best pension system in the world
4) Taxed us all to high heaven
5) Flogged all our gold for a couple of goats and a cabbage
180 - Does the G stand for Gordon? The reason that the UK didn’t tip into recession in the aftermath of the 9/11 issues is that it came just at the point that Brown opened the spending floodgates artificially boosting growth.
181. Why would you have to visit different parts of the country to get unemployment figures? Ridiculous point.
182. This is completely ridiculous. What evidence do you have for your claims? The US position on Suez was because they sure as hell weren’t going to risk a Franco-British colonial adventure causing the Arab world to hate them. Who was responsible for this long-term strategic aim? Which US leaders had anti-British sentiment?
187. Yes, but for too long we the British have acted like we owed them gratitude for their support. Blair used it as justification for his US fanaticism post 9/11. Unlike other countries the US has supported in military battles they insisted we pay back every penny, despite the strategic advantage the Allied victory gave the US. Some Special Relationship.
180.
3) maybe
4) subjective
5) Yes, in hindsight. Though you can’t criticise the decision based on knowledge that wasn’t available at the time.
189. So economic stimulus and counter cyclical spending are now bad ideas?
187. No-one is denying the massive contribution of the US to the ultimate defeat of Nazism. The point is that the US also used the war to finish off Britain as a world power. Interestingly, some US politicians later expressed regret for their actions in this regard - especially the undermining of Britain’s position in the Middle East.
Bayh annoys quite a lot of Democrats, I can see his appeal but some are nutty enough to let the GOP back in to preserve ‘purity’.
180: Unemployment is only low if you accept the massive numbers on disability benefit are genuine, which frankly even the government doesn’t (see recent report).
188 Yes, it’s remarkable how little is said about Brown’s Great Pensions Grab - I suppose that’s because most people don’t see its effects on a day-to-day basis, but by God they will over time.
One hundred and fifteen billion pounds to date, that’s £115,000,000,000, and counting.
@194:
Britain’s time as top nation was already doomed before WWII. We’d pretty much already come to the conclusion that the Empire was no longer feasible. Let the Yanks deal with the problems of being hated by the whole world.
If you visit places like Merthyr Tydfil you’ll see that unemployment there is about 10% and that most people don’t seem to have a job.
You can laugh at anecdotal evidence, but there’s not a lot of insight in the Government’s official statistics.
196. I don’t accept them. THis government have continued the policy that started under Thatcher of getting the unemployed to switch to incapacity benefits rather than job seekers. I was just using them as shorthand for the oft quoted tractor statistics that Brown uses.
198. The Empire may have been disintegrating, but we weren’t bankrupted!
As the numbers in employment have gone up since 1997 by less than the increase in population, can we infer that the number NOT in employment has gone up - whether that’s due to unemployment, incapacity or the particular age group the individual falls into?
193 - selling gold for euros was a needless gamble that Gordon got wrong. Why can’t we criticise him for it?
188
1) Actually low interest rates and higher life expectancy have done for final salary pension schemes
2) I haven’t noticed the pips squeeking - yes tax went up but the country did vote for higher spending on the NHS remember
3) Seeing as you knew the price was bad at the time I presume you have since retired on the killing you made playing the market?!
180: All the “growth” was paid for by borrowing from the future. That’s all it was. He did almost nothing constructive, much destructive, and even more to complicate tax and other financial regulations.
He could have been worse, but as time went on and he got more and nore Labour-like, borrowing and spending more, his performance deteriorated, to the point where we are now miles up you know where with no sign of a paddle.
An unequivocally bad chancellor, one of the worst in modern times. Don’t believe me? Stick around for 12-18 months.
193. Point 5 is valid even without hindsight, because of the way he did it: “Right, I’m going to sell lots of gold at any price some time soon” I’m sure you were surprised when the value of gold went down between that and actually selling the stuff. I seem to remember the mechanism of the auction appeared designed to get the lowest possible price
192. Actually we didn’t have to pay back every penny. Like most other Western European countries, a large chunk of our debt was written off in the 50s. And of course we should owe them thanks, just like the French owe us thanks (and even Chirac would mention this). Millions of Americans died to give this continent democracy and liberty. It’s pretty insulting to simply toss that aside. No wonder isolationism keeps on cropping back into US political life, if this is the thanks they get.
And don’t rubbish the American sacrifice because Blair had some sort evangelical messianism to sign up for Iraq. Germany and France mentioned their gratitude to America after 9/11 equally, but it didn’t make them go along with Bush’s mesopotamian adventure.
189. Don’t forget the 3G telecommunications sealed bid windfall, that was worth 1p on income tax to the treasury.
193 - You cannot buck the market, and frankly overstimulating the economy in 2001 to avoid a slowdown then is the reason that the UK is in the worst shape of any nation in the industrial world to deal with the current difficulties.
194. “The point is that the US also used the war to finish off Britain as a world power.”
Again, what evidence do you have for that? Just repeating the point doesn’t make it true.
“Interestingly, some US politicians later expressed regret for their actions in this regard”
Who? When?
“Especially the undermining of Britain’s position in the Middle East.”
That was done when Britain betrayed the Arabs to divide up the area with France. And further compounded by joining with Israel to restore control over Suez. Stop blaming the US for self-inflicted problems.
198. Yes - the irony is that America has now ended up in pretty much the same position as Britain a century ago, as an imperial power increasingly resented and even hated around the world - but yet utterly convinced of its own righteousness.
206 — Mesopotamian *mis*adventure, if you please. It has a nice ring to it and is more accurate.
With all the fevered speculation regarding Brown’s future, increasing each day, I think there is now value in backing both a 2008 and a 2009 election, or else laying 2010. Especially if you are sitting on a nice 2010 payout.
Ladbrokes go 2/1 2009. Paddy Power are 20/1 2008 and Stan James are 16/1 2008. I have bet accordingly.
Yeah, I’m with Socrates on this one. Of course the US was less than keen on the British Empire (for moral as much as political reasons I suspect), but it seems absurd to suggest that they secretly connived to bankrupt an Allied country that they would then have to bale out, before writing off much of the debt.
We all know ‘the Special Relationship’ is a British view of the relationship, but the fact remains that (in spite of some delays and disagreements) we have fought the major wars of recent history with the US, and could well have been defeated in btoh World Wars without that support. We gain nothing by responding with ill-grace.
This is international affairs - any country in the world would want the sort of alliance we have with the US, and that comes of long-standing mutual sacrifice on both sides. there might not be ‘friends’ in IR, but this is the close as it gets.
It’s curious how a single poll can change the perception of things. I think it would be very wise not to jump to any conclusion because McCain leads in US Today/Gallup. It was conducted over the weekend, by the way. I haven’t seen the crosstabs, but perhaps it’s simply that the sample has many older people.
Obama’s trip was a gamble, and it could yet be exploited by a clever McCain campaign. Running an ad saying Obama rather goes to the gym than visiting wounded soldiers isn’t doing that especially well, especially if the Pentagon told Obama he shouldn’t go to the hospital on a campaign trip, and if McCain’s “gym” video evidence actually shows Obama playing Basketball with… soldiers. Without proper framing by McCain, I cannot see how the trip could be seen as negative by voters. World leaders basically scrambled to kiss Obama’s hand. I would argue that Obama is making a great move by running as if he’d already won. His biggest problem seems to be people who are not sure what to expect. They might be much more relaxed if he’s “been” president for a couple of months already.
Additionally, Obama is incredibly lucky. In the last two weeks, first Maliki, then Bush, and finally McCain have basically accepted his deadline for Iraq. Now Ahmedijenad and Bush are close to getting romantic. Finally, McCain himself made Afghanistan a higher priority. McCain can say “surge” all he wants, if he was to fall in line with Obama on every single issue regarding foreign policy, it won’t be difficult to say “judgment is better than having been around for a long time”, as Obama already did in the primaries.
#187
Small point: you mean the Battle of the Atlantic not the Battle of Britain viz-a-vis Lend-Lease…?
“Now Ahmedijenad and Bush are close to getting romantic. ”
I really, really, don’t want that vision in my head….
216 — Why not? Both populist, bellicose fundamentalists; surely a lot more in common than they’d ever admit.
213. ‘We all know the Special Relationship’ is a Britsh view of the relationship. Quite.
How can you have a special relationship, if it’s only seen as special by one side? It just doesn’t exist.
Socrates (various)
try
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/FDRlw95.htm
http://members.tripod.com/~american_almanac/lkffdr.htm
217 - Oh please.
209. Recommend Correlli Barnett’s ‘Pride and Fall’ series.
Four hefty books, heavily annotated, lots of references to source material.
Yep, Britain was a fading power, but many US politicians (including FDR) considered the British Empire as more abhorent than Soviet communism and constructed policies accordingly.
That’ll larn ‘em!
The ‘Sheffield Rally’ Labour Party is the Labour Party I want to see again. A party of industrial cities, trade unionists and brass bands. In other words, an anachronism than cannot win.
Please what? NeoConservatism and Christian fundamentalism pose more of a threat to my lifestyle and liberties, and those of my friends, than Iran does.
210. The US doesn’t have a policy of annexing land against the wishes of its population.
213. Luck maybe involved but there’s a lot of judgment there as well. Obama has long articulated more sensible positions than Bush was taking, meaning the administration had to come round to them in the end.
215. Yes, my mistake.
“Politico” reviews the race and states that much to McCain’s chagrin the contest is all about whether the voters are ready to elect Obama :
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/12131.html
223 - Suggesting comparisons between Bush and Ahmadinejad is facile, and intellectually vacuous.
223 - I suggest you go to the Guardian’s commentisfree page. I see that A C Grayling has produced his 1,979th article on why religion is a bad thing and I’m sure he needs the moral support.
213, 218. The special relationship exists, but it’s not as special as the British would like to think it is. However, along with Israel, Britain does have a closer and more prized relationship than most other powers. Part of the reason why Merkel and Sarkozy are so keen to join the party.
223. Unless Iran starts a nuclear war with Israel.
205. Shouldn’t the Tories have sold the gold reserves in 1980? I mean they must have known it would take 28 years before gold would reach as high as a price again.
Is it true that Gordon Brown reads the comments on pb.com
What name does he post under…Gabble? roger? Nick palmer MP?
Mike, do please give us a hint
10. You were correct! Wished i had seen it earlier!
I think Kinnocks problems went back to the sea slip! As Llyold Benson once said of Dan Qualye “you ain’t no Jack Kennedy”, I can say to you “Obama ain’t no Kinnock”!
The reasons are obvious and blatent - Obama has not gaffed by screaming into microphones, sliping into the sea rabbiting on relentlessly etc…etc (In true Kinnock fashion!).
Obama has a compact message encompassing - Change, the new, popular, dynamic, Yes-we-can, his visit to europe, Iraq and Afghanistan in the long-term may add reasurrance.
MacCain’s team has been deft in highlighting in TV adds that Obama had time to go to the gym but did not have time to see serving troops. Maybe sheduling could have been better for Obama but he can now check pictures of Mac visiting leaders in europe one of his only trump cards upto now. The other card Mac can play is of course experience.
231 - I was beginning to think that Mr Smithson had put a temporary ban on you to protect the purity of the thread.
I agree with one of your points in particular: the big gaffe at Sheffield wasn’t the presumption, it was the screaming into the microphone. Obama didn’t make Kinnock’s Sheffield mistake, that honour fell to Howard Dean.
230. No Brown posts under the name Mark Senoir
Incidentally, did everyone see the real reason for McCain’s drilling u-turn:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/26/AR2008072601891.html
233 - Brown wouldn’t be quick enough to post on here. By the time he had produced a turgid densely argued response to a post the topic would have moved on!
213. ‘The US has no friends, only interests’ - that just about sums things up re. the world wars and since. The US got involved in both because it believed it could further its long-term strategic interests, not because of any sentimental attachments.
The US navy was still running wargames which featured Britain as the ‘enemy’ in the early 20th century, and featured planned invasions of Canada. Admiral Benson, the U.S. Chief of Naval Operations said in 1917 “We would as soon fight the British as the Germans.”
Socrates - what are the big benefits we get from America that France and Germany miss out on?
234. Was public opinion also bought with cash? Is cash more important to a candidate than public opinion?
re 159 Absolutely not. See the tax credits fiasco for his epitaph as Chancellor.
New thread - Is Richards’s right about the Tory leads being “soft”?
232. I also think that who ever egged Major in 1992 also saved the Tories some seats as it was not a very pleasant site for people who are *reasonable* disposition. All these factors came together IMO to save the Tories in that election.
224. The US operates its imperialist policy differently than Britain did, with the emphasis on using puppet governments and financial leverage, but it is an imperial power nevertheless. Iraq should have removed any doubts about that.
In an earlier phase of its expansion, it used the tools then current - including forcible annexation and even genocide. It’s a question of moving with the times and using the methods most efficient to secure the desired aims.
237. The US benefits are related to a degree of trust in matters intelligence and nuclear.
Uh-ho. Brown trouser time for Darling (if he’s still there).
Maybe Gabble can ward him off with incantations of fiscal health:
http://anmblog.typepad.com/this_is_money_blog/2008/07/soros-ftse-shor.html
212 I sense that over the past 3 months the field has narrowed somewhat on the number of possible successors to Brown, especially if he/she were to take over prior to the GE, necessitating a “safer”, more “established” candidate, with some previously mentioned hopefuls having to stand aside on this occasion, in the party’s interest.
This short list numbering a maximum of 4 potential candidates would include, IMO, Straw, Miliband and, if I’m really pushed, Harperson - that’s probably it. From this trio, I’d have to go with Straw in terms of steadying the ship. Were Gordon somehow to survive to fight the next GE, I wouldn’t expect any of these three then to win, least of all Jack Straw who appears likely to lose his seat at Blackburn!
On the VP question. If there’s one thing the US campaign this year has shown: don’t trust rumours! As with the “mere” 30 million Obama was said to have received in July, only for the campaign to announce it were 50.
Still, Kaine and Pawlenty seem decent choices to me. Pawlenty would help invigorate McCain’s campaign and does not bring the massive negatives at least I see in Romney. Kaine might help put Virginia in the blue column.
I think that’s what it really comes down to as well. I just watched speeches by both. Kaine seems a bit - clumsy. Pawlenty is very convincing. Conversely, I can see Obama win Virginia, but I have my doubts about McCain’s chances in Minnesota, even with Pawlenty.
This wouldn’t seem to be much of a game changer at the moment, but I do think Pawlenty has more potential than Kaine. The increasing buzz suggest we will know before the Olympics whether this is true in the first place.
re 180 Low inflation under Labour is a complete myth, helped along by Gordon changing the index to suit him. Mean inflation (RPI) under Tories from 1992-97 was 2.62%, under Labour it’s currently 2.85% and rising