Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Henry G Manson on Tony Blair’s criticism of Miliband’s elec
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Henry G Manson on Tony Blair’s criticism of Miliband’s election strategy
Tony Blair has not offered Ed Miliband the same courtesy It is a sign of desperation that Blair has intervened publicly with The Economist in this way. His ‘wing’ of the party is a ragged mess.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Mr Eagles, I've been reading about Operation Stovewood. They've set up an office and initially, they'll be looking at information provided by the local Plod. Sometime next year, they'll be doing something once they've had a good think.
I may be being unfair, but those terms of reference are something I'd write if I wanted to give the impression of doing something without treading on toes or exerting myself.
What about the information in Baroness Jay's report. Did she die in vain?
I too would vote for PC Specialist.
Also look into having an SSD hard drive (i.e. purely electronic like a large SD card, not spinning disks). They are quiet, cool, and can access so much faster particularly when loading up. Although they do cost more per Gb.
I think we can consign this sermon on leader loyalty to the dustbin.
I can tell you typed that with some passion!
Alanbrooke said:
» show previous quotes
Happy Hogmanay malc - have you a full house tonight ?
Same to you Alan, will be quiet night with just wife and myself. Had hectic Christmas at daughter's and been busy at work this week so looking forward to 4 lazy days. Hope you enjoy.
I therefore agree with Henry G that for whatever reason Tony Blair would prefer to see Ed Miliband lose. Perhaps he really does think that David Cameron is his heir.
Ed Miliband's inner circle think people with northern accents are stupid. That's the verdict of Labour MP Ian Lavery who has attacked a lack of working class MPs and 'frightening elite'
AndyJS says ... ''Petrol prices are about the same now as they were 30 years when you take inflation into account. Prices in 1984 were about 35 pence and inflation has tripled the value of the pound since then.''
You may be right - but inflation has slashed the value of the pound threefold since then. Shouldn't earnings and growth be taken into account as well.
The graph at the end of this paper (dated Jan '14) says that both in 1950 and 1990 petrol was about 75p/l or less. 1985 was nearer 100p. At 2012 prices. its what... 115p now?
file:///home/chronos/u-5bc2250e420291ab3e8bc6a318ad30f302dee10c/Downloads/sn04712.pdf
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11319420/Labour-elite-thinks-Northerners-are-stupid-MP-complains.html
" Because it's total crap "
Happy New Year.
"A senior Boeing 777 captain believes he has calculated where the missing Malaysia Airlines flight MH370 may have crashed into the Indian Ocean"
http://www.flightglobal.com/features/mh370
On topic, the article needs a bit of editing - the first sentence seems not to be the first sentence, as it were, and "leading to ridiculous" doesn't fit. Like Henry, I don't think Ed will be especially concerned - the Venn circle of people who really like Tony AND are hesitating between Labour and not-Labour is small.
But FWIW I think Tony is simply saying what he thinks, as he nearly always does (the criticism was always that he was wrong, not that he pretended to think something different from his real beliefs) - he wishes the party reasonably well but he believes it's somewhat harder (taking into account his carefully-worded clarification) to win from the left. I always find it hard to get upset about anyone expressing an honest opinion, even though I think he's mistaken in this case.
"Are Northerners stupid because they continue to elect Labour MPs, Mr Miliband?"
Where I would agree with Henry is that Blair has long since lost the ability to move a single vote in the UK and this attack, if that is what it was, will do Ed no harm at all. Indeed only the anoraks and the committed will even notice.
I still recall the speech he gave at the last election in his old constituency. It was still all there, the self deprecating joke, the slightly bizarre characterisation of the problem, the false choices, the ritual anti tory abuse his audience presumably wanted to hear and....the caravan moved on and no one noticed.
Mr. L, I disagree entirely. Blair still has the power to move votes, only now he drives voters away rather than enticing them to come hither.
He'll know that being the son of a Jewish mother gives him some immunity to the anti semitism charge that has been driving the left in Europe to distraction for a long time. Why Blair has this affinity with Israel is anyone's guess.
I heard on the radio today that the 30 year rule is being reduced to 20 which means we should start to see Blair papers in 2017. That should be the start of a whole new world of pain for him (if they can find any). Just possibly we might even have the outcome of the Chilcott Inquiry by then as well. But probably not.
........Mad Hatter calling March Hare come in please........
Chronie and Emelda Blair are like a broken clock; every now and again they get summing right. You, however, however choose to portray yourself as a sad bag of sputum who has achieved a lot but still look down on 'those' you consider 'inferior' to yourself.
It is very funny: It is also worrying. Larf' at yourself once and now: You will feel as good as the rest of us....
The voters to be won during this government's term were centre left and left wing voters, The Lib Dems going into the coaltiion gave Labour a free run to attract these voters and the fact Labour are still narrow favourites to get back into power having made such a hash of uniting the left with the Green surge and rise of the SNP shows Labour took the right path after 2010.
I've come to feel that he was often wrong on very central issues. But I still admire his reaction to opposition - not to evade it or pretend to concede to it, but to take it on - in TV debate, in Parliament, in direct discussion. We are very short of mainstream politicians who try to argue a case consistently against the general flow of thinking, which leaves the field open to fringe parties.
And if Blair's so into 'direct discussion' why has he had to be summoned by a Select Committee instead of attending during the months since they invited him?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-30423705
While it is a very fraught proposition to take lessons from one electorate to another, even within the same country - much less across the pond, I think lesson 3 is one worth bearing in mind for all who are involved in politics.
Happy New Year to all.
http://www.politico.com/story/2014/12/2014-american-voter-elections-113883.html?hp=t1_r
Am looking forward to proceedings of Scots Plod v Twitter users.
But like many modern politicians he seemed to view getting elected as an end in itself and policy as something that had to be looked at through that prism. He was more interested in pushing his opponents to the extremes than he was in developing or implementing sensible policy. When he did find something to believe in things did not get any better.
The idea that it's Blair's New Labour that are a 'ragged mess,' is hilarious. They are pretty much the current Government. Love him or loathe him Tony Blair, like Thatcher before him, set the direction of an entire country for two decades.
Lets face it I think its generally accepted that Blair won because he understood that the center ground had to be won. Ed does not think this and has exited far left out of most peoples view and why the Labour supporters do imitations of Ostriches.
It's why Ed is going to lose........ and big.
Hope everyone has a very safe and happy new years evening. Happy New Year !!
If it wasn't for the massive increase in petrol taxes since then, the real cost of fuel would be much lower.
http://www.inquisitr.com/1717833/dna-from-dog-poop-could-be-used-to-punish-owners-who-dont-clean-up-after-their-pooches/
"@davyjo2111 Criminalising people you can catch is much easier than catching criminals. One of Blair's laws"
Maybe if the rozzers spent less time on this sort of bullshit and more time on other matters they'd find they aren't as short of resources.
Dan Hodges retweeted
Stephen Bush@stephenkb·2 hrs2 hours ago West Midlands, England
@allanholloway @MSmithsonPB Next with Political Betting: Fire is cold. Water flows uphill. The moon landings were faked.
2015
Conservative: infinity
Lib Dems: 30
Green: 2
Labour: minus infinity
UKIP: minus infinity
SNP: minus infinity
Others: 0
2020
United Gove-Barwell Alliance of Frenziedly Fanatical Quasi-Maoist Libertarians: infinity to the power of Graham's number
All other parties: ruthlessly exterminated
Fundamentally, all it says is that, to win, you need to reach out beyond your core vote.
If you think of the world as a simplistic left/right construct then the "mushy centre" is where the outreach needs to take place (assuming that Communistics/BNPetc don't provide enough potential on the left/right extremes). But this no longer works: both the right and the left have alternatives that prevent the main parties tacking too close to the middle ground.
But Thatcher didn't win based on her right-wing positioning or some appeal to the centre. She won by managing to reignite the Tory appeal to the C1/C2 group - the group that Baldwin and Disraeli both managed to win, while Cameron has rubbed them up the wrong way.
**dilemma**
But I'm still afraid that, no matter how hard I look, I really can't see how in terms of policies Ed has remotely departed from the New Labour playbook (unless we're counting departing from its playbook as "more Toryish policies on public spending than New Labour").
The change.org petition against Katie Hopkins (no relation) has already reached 17,000+ signatories.
Her comments were stupid, but were they any more offensive than certain "comedians" or even those who make rabid comments about Tories?
Interesting world we are heading towards.
Blair won elections because he inherited a good economic legacy with spending under control. He then proceeded to bribe us with our own money to cover up the great hole he (Brown) was building in the public finances.
"Its a Movie. The great Messiah claims from the mountain that the people cannot be saved."
Talking of which I thought it was brilliant (for what it was). I'm about the only person who did but for sheer scale and craft I've not seen its like before
Messrs Brown and Blair might have had a more left wing platform than Mr Miliband, but they also completely fecked the economy to the extent that some people were giving serious thought to calling in the IMF. Last time we called in the IMF, oddly enough after the previous Labour government fecked the economy, Denis Healey was forced to make double the cuts in ONE YEAR that the left is currently crying about Mr Osborne making in FIVE YEARS, and that Mr Balls will presumably make as well.
There would have been full support for the government's economic and foreign policies, more austerity and another war in the Middle East and utter contempt for Labour voters by the Labour leadership. Also with the torture scandal, David Miliband would have faced calls to resign.
The Greens would be scoring at UKIP levels, UKIP even higher, and the LD wouldn't had collapsed so much.
In short the Labour party would have faced collapse, besieged by UKIP eating it's working class, the Greens eating the affluent left, and without any LD voters switching to Labour to cushion the fall.
A Happy New Year to all.
Thatcher was more inclined to America, much like UKIP is, so essentially they are the same just UKIP being a more extreme version of Thacherism.
EdM has gone the other way and has seriously under-estimated middle England's distrust of people who describe themselves as Socialists, even if the policies they espouse have very little to do with socialism. This is because he has never bothered to engage with middle England. On top of that, though, he has done what Blair and Brown never managed - he has alienated great swathes of Labour's UK heartlands. If Labour win most seats next year it will be down to the toxicity of the Tories and our ludicrous electoral system, and it will be despite Ed, not because of him.
Henry's article is thoroughly depressing as it confirms, once again, that Labour is struggling to learn the lessons of the last few years. Until that changes, Labour will always depend on the crapness of others to govern. And that is never a good place to start from.
As others have pointed out, just appealing to the centre ground in itself is not good enough -- you need to have some red meat to keep your core vote happy as well. Blair and Brown, despite how much they sucked up to Middle England, ALWAYS had some red meat to make "core" poor Labour voters feel it was worth voting for them, via public spending programmes which would self-evidently help the poorest. That's something Miliband is dismally failing to do. I accept it's more politically difficult to propose public spending now than it was in Blair's time (but imo not impossible if a leader had the guts to try it and the panache to do it convincingly), but it doesn't change that, the context of the times notwithstanding, Blair's stances were more left-wing economically than Miliband's.