Like many of my fellow Conservatives I rather feared that we might be eclipsed by the LibDems yesterday. I felt that disillusioned Labour voters, especially in London and the South East, might well have decided to Vote Yellow rather than Vote Blue. I was predicting that they would gain at least 100 councillors, but privately feared it could be much more than that. My fears proved to be unjustified. So what happened? Why did the LibDems fail so spectacularly to build on their relatively strong local government base? I suspect there are many reasons. The double edged sword of incumbency accounted for their massive losses in Islington and Lambeth, just as it also accounted for their win against an unpopular Tory Council in Richmond. But I think there was a bigger reason for their failure to get beyond a net gain of one Council and two Councillors. That reason was David Cameron. Or rather, it was the contrast between David Cameron and Ming Campbell. Campbell was largely anonymous throughout the campaign. In fact he has been an anonymous leader for weeks. His PMQ performances have been lamentable and his most reported public utterances have revolved around the tears he has shed over his yet to be sold Jaguar. Contrast this with the bright, vibrant and youthful appearance of the Conservative leader and it is not surprising that people have opted to vote for the latter. He's given people a reason to like the Conservatives again and not feel ashamed about voting for them. People may still think LibDems are nice, people but their Party has become a figure of fun. And their new leader is in danger of following his Party into that category.
There's nothing worse for a politician than being a figure of ridicule, as John Prescott is finding out. Not only have Ming's public comments bordered on the embarrassing, but his PR team really need to get a grip on his media interviews. Whoever allowed him to be filmed today in front of a cafe called John Prescott should be sacked. I haven't done a trawl through the world of LibDem blogdom yet today but I suspect there will be a certain amount of chuntering over what should be done now. I think the younger turks will now demand to be given more influence over the direction of the Party, which is fine as long as Sarah Teather is ignored. How that woman has got close to the LibDem front bench let along allowed onto it is quite beyond me. If the likes of the ever impressive Nick Clegg, David Laws and Chris Huhne can grab the initiative there is yet hope for the LibDems. But perhaps the most important role may yet be performed by my old North Norfolk nemesis Norman Lamb. Norman is now Ming's Chief of Staff. He needs to grip Ming and tell him how to both look like and act like a leader. I used to think that Ming could be a formidable leader and a real threat to us. But that was in early 2005. Somehow he seems, well, diminished. I know of no one who sees him as the figure of gravitas that I used to view him as. I'm not sure what has happened in little over a year, but he looks like an old man and that's how he's now portrayed. Just as all future John Prescott jokes will revolve around cocktail sausages (and I take full credit for that!) all the jokes about Ming revolve around his age. And that, I'm afraid to say, is something no amount of strategising or spin can do anything about.
Hat-tip for graphics to ConservativeHome
Like many of my fellow Conservatives I rather feared that we might be eclipsed by the LibDems yesterday. I felt that disillusioned Labour voters, especially in London and the South East, might well have decided to Vote Yellow rather than Vote Blue. I was predicting that they would gain at least 100 councillors, but privately feared it could be much more than that. My fears proved to be unjustified. So what happened? Why did the LibDems fail so spectacularly to build on their relatively strong local government base? I suspect there are many reasons. The double edged sword of incumbency accounted for their massive losses in Islington and Lambeth, just as it also accounted for their win against an unpopular Tory Council in Richmond. But I think there was a bigger reason for their failure to get beyond a net gain of one Council and two Councillors. That reason was David Cameron. Or rather, it was the contrast between David Cameron and Ming Campbell. Campbell was largely anonymous throughout the campaign. In fact he has been an anonymous leader for weeks. His PMQ performances have been lamentable and his most reported public utterances have revolved around the tears he has shed over his yet to be sold Jaguar. Contrast this with the bright, vibrant and youthful appearance of the Conservative leader and it is not surprising that people have opted to vote for the latter. He's given people a reason to like the Conservatives again and not feel ashamed about voting for them. People may still think LibDems are nice, people but their Party has become a figure of fun. And their new leader is in danger of following his Party into that category. 
7 comments:
Not withstanding my not winning my seat, we did exactly as most bar the most crazily optimistic people expected us to do in Oxford. Net 2 gains swapping with Labour as largest party in NOC council.
The Tories actually failed to get anywhere near in their two or three target seats in Oxford but oddly got their best vote in their paperless ward where I was standing - and almost certainly ensured the Labour incumbent's cling to power.
I mis-judged the electorate in these elections. I thought that the Lib Dems would do well on the grounds they've been virtually invisible nationally in recent weeks, and they would therefore yet again be viewed (wrongly) as the nice, middle-of-the-road party, who aren't like those 'nasty people in the two big parties'.
I'm amazed by how badly they've actually done.
I just posted this theory on the lib dem issue on Conservative Home.
Basically, they won alot of protest votes over the last couple of years because of the Iraq War.
In 2006, the main issues are the July 7 and 21 bombings, Danish Cartoons, etc.
The Lib Dems have no solutions to these problems. They barely even talk about them.
Parties such as the BNP, think they do, which is why overall they won more protest seats than the Libs.
Voting LibDem is what you do when you can't make up your mind.
Maybe if the Lib Dems hadn't elected themselves another Scottish leader they'd have found themselves getting more support in England.
Thats what you get for electing "Uncle Fluffy"
I was also delighted to see my similar fears about a good national Lib Dem performance unfounded. However, whilst we stopped the predicted Lib Dem takeover in Woking, they are now the largest party. Lib Dem local tatics were as usual shameless ... .. David Cameron has played well - but the time must come to take on the yellow peril more directly.
Agree so much about your comments on Ming. I also found him impressive as a foreign affairs spokesman in Radio interviews but now even here, let alone question time, he's lost his gravitas.
Post a Comment