political commentator * author * publisher * bookseller * radio presenter * blogger * Conservative candidate * former lobbyist * Jack Russell owner * West Ham United fanatic * Email iain AT iaindale DOT com
Friday, June 27, 2008
LibDem Reaction to Henley
Two stories on LibDem Voice on the aftermath of Henley are worth linking to from Stephen Tall and then a somewhat defensive Lord Rennard. Draw your own conclusions, but it seems to me that more than a few knives are being sharpened...
Rennard's tactics are now old hat because the other parties have found a way to counter them. They are now counter productive and showing that the LibDems are an underhand faction of people who are interested in politics but have no central or core belief.
He knows his card is marked and he's desparetly trying (too hard) to justify his low type of politics.
I kinda disagree with you Iain - the Lib Dems are in a jam - but I can't see them ditching the leader. Chris Huhne might give them a marginal improvement, but there is a blip in support whenever there is a change.
If Clegg was showing as badly in the polls as Gordon Brown, there might be a big incentive to 'twist', but with Clegg, I think they will 'stick'.
Yes, the results are disappointing, but, hey, this is the Lib Dems we are talking about - their big big breakthrough is always just around the corner or just a little bit over the horizon...
The Lib Dems may be more than their national profile, but I bet they are ruing the day they elected Clegg and not Huhne as leader. He was on Question Time last night and was very impressive. Quite the best panelist with Anne Lesley aslo showing well.
Yvette Cooper was appalling . Every time she came came under pressure her accent thickened. She really is an overgrown schoolgirl pretending that she has something to say that might be important if only she could work out what it is.
A significant section of the Lib Dems, in my experience, suffer from a tendency to set their expectations way too high and then think they are justified in using *overwhelming force* in pursuit of their goals which were unattainable by legitimate means in the first place. Lord Rennard did try to make the point that expectations should be realistic. That needs to filter down to local level. However, they seem to prize the independence of their local parties so highly, I suppose unrealistic aspirations will continue to be allowed to run riot, at whatever cost sometimes. The fig leaf used is that activist enthusiasm should not be fettered from "on high". This is then used to justify a complete lack of accountability. I'd like to see Lib Dems debate at conference whether the end always and completely justifies the means. Also, how many of them have read On Liberty by J.S. Mill. I would think it is fewer than those who have studied what fonts are most persuasive in Focus leaflets.
I disagree with the commentary. From a quasi-military point of view, the "bury them with paper" type of campaign is exactly the kind of thing that the Tories are starting to learn to do, so to attack the Lib Dems for it is more than a little hypocritical.
The Liberal Democrats' problem in these by-elections has been that, with the media so keen to give Labour a kicking and to give Cameron a free ride, there is little ammunition left for to use against the Conservatives. Had the Henley campaign been run three years ago, with Howard as leader, the result may well have been quite different!
Anon 11.58. As far as I can see Iain is not censoring the Libs at all, but if he did it would be for their "bury them with half-truths, misquotings, little white 'uns, twisting, and general spivvery" than their paper.
The Libs had NO realistic chance of winning Henley- the seat voted for Heseltine (not exactly a popular figure- did the constituency party vote to deselect the ****?), and if they voted for a twat like that- just about ANY conservative would win. The Libbies campaign in Henley was too pushy/negative and that would have went against them and swamping the constituency with 'Losing Here' banners would not have helped either. It may be worth Conservatives swamping Oxford West and Abingdon next GElec- you never know!
The point of the Lib Dems is that they are not ZanuLabour. They ought to be on their way to becoming the opposition party and they ain't. Social Democracy has had two unsuccessful attempts in post-WWII Britain (the gang of 4 SDP and Blair/Mandelson entryism of Labour). It is currently homeless. ZanuLabour is now clearly headed for socialist oblivion and the Blairites (Milburn etc) ought to have a home with the LibDems but it isn't happening. Not obvious how it is going to be fixed.
12 comments:
What is the point of the Lib Dems ?
That's their problem, no one knows.
If only that sign above the wine merchants had been affixed more securely, the Libdems would now be going home and preparing for government.
Rennard's tactics are now old hat because the other parties have found a way to counter them. They are now counter productive and showing that the LibDems are an underhand faction of people who are interested in politics but have no central or core belief.
He knows his card is marked and he's desparetly trying (too hard) to justify his low type of politics.
man in a shed said...
"What is the point of the Lib Dems ?
That's their problem, no one knows."
This is exactly the question I am asking my self. I now consider myself to to an ex-LibDem voter.
I kinda disagree with you Iain - the Lib Dems are in a jam - but I can't see them ditching the leader. Chris Huhne might give them a marginal improvement, but there is a blip in support whenever there is a change.
If Clegg was showing as badly in the polls as Gordon Brown, there might be a big incentive to 'twist', but with Clegg, I think they will 'stick'.
Yes, the results are disappointing, but, hey, this is the Lib Dems we are talking about - their big big breakthrough is always just around the corner or just a little bit over the horizon...
The Lib Dems may be more than their national profile, but I bet they are ruing the day they elected Clegg and not Huhne as leader. He was on Question Time last night and was very impressive. Quite the best panelist with Anne Lesley aslo showing well.
Yvette Cooper was appalling . Every time she came came under pressure her accent thickened. She really is an overgrown schoolgirl pretending that she has something to say that might be important if only she could work out what it is.
Still no mention of the elephant.
A significant section of the Lib Dems, in my experience, suffer from a tendency to set their expectations way too high and then think they are justified in using *overwhelming force* in pursuit of their goals which were unattainable by legitimate means in the first place. Lord Rennard did try to make the point that expectations should be realistic. That needs to filter down to local level. However, they seem to prize the independence of their local parties so highly, I suppose unrealistic aspirations will continue to be allowed to run riot, at whatever cost sometimes. The fig leaf used is that activist enthusiasm should not be fettered from "on high". This is then used to justify a complete lack of accountability. I'd like to see Lib Dems debate at conference whether the end always and completely justifies the means. Also, how many of them have read On Liberty by J.S. Mill. I would think it is fewer than those who have studied what fonts are most persuasive in Focus leaflets.
I disagree with the commentary. From a quasi-military point of view, the "bury them with paper" type of campaign is exactly the kind of thing that the Tories are starting to learn to do, so to attack the Lib Dems for it is more than a little hypocritical.
The Liberal Democrats' problem in these by-elections has been that, with the media so keen to give Labour a kicking and to give Cameron a free ride, there is little ammunition left for to use against the Conservatives. Had the Henley campaign been run three years ago, with Howard as leader, the result may well have been quite different!
Anon 11.58. As far as I can see Iain is not censoring the Libs at all, but if he did it would be for their "bury them with half-truths, misquotings, little white 'uns, twisting, and general spivvery" than their paper.
The Libs had NO realistic chance of winning Henley- the seat voted for Heseltine (not exactly a popular figure- did the constituency party vote to deselect the ****?), and if they voted for a twat like that- just about ANY conservative would win. The Libbies campaign in Henley was too pushy/negative and that would have went against them and swamping the constituency with 'Losing Here' banners would not have helped either. It may be worth Conservatives swamping Oxford West and Abingdon next GElec- you never know!
The point of the Lib Dems is that they are not ZanuLabour. They ought to be on their way to becoming the opposition party and they ain't. Social Democracy has had two unsuccessful attempts in post-WWII Britain (the gang of 4 SDP and Blair/Mandelson entryism of Labour). It is currently homeless. ZanuLabour is now clearly headed for socialist oblivion and the Blairites (Milburn etc) ought to have a home with the LibDems but it isn't happening. Not obvious how it is going to be fixed.
What is the point of the Tories?
The lib dems got there first.
Post a Comment