Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A message to political leaders – Remember, you are mortal.
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » A message to political leaders – Remember, you are mortal.
Curiously, the reasons why some political leaders fall from office is linked to what was once their strengths rather than their weaknesses. Callaghan’s closeness to the unions was seen as one reason why he (rather than the confrontational Heath or strident Castle) would be better able to reach a workable accommodation with them, to the country’s benefit. Having undermined the “In Place of Strife” proposals it was poetic justice that it was the unions’ behaviour which destroyed his (and Labour’s) USP, forever associating the Callaghan premiership with the Winter of Discontent. Similarly, Thatcher – a politician priding herself on speaking up for ordinary taxpayers – was brought down her hubristic refusal to understand the outrage and sense of unfairness which the poll tax (an attempt to protect her beloved ratepayers) engendered.
Comments
After I go Cameron Bancroft on Scrapheap’s post.
Which leads to the rather startling conclusion that Blair and Campbell - having consistently and repeatedly lied all through their political careers, over education funding, tuition fees, inflation, unemployment, bank regulation, constitutional reform, to name only the ones that spring most readily to mind - actually for once told what they believed to be the truth, only to be proved brutally wrong.
And yet, ironically, nobody remembers their astonishing track record of dishonesty and deception that an Irving or Archer would blush at, and everyone remembers the time they were wrong - and as a result believes they were liars!
As the good witch of the south didn't quite say, 'Remember dear, karma's only a bitch if you are!'
I make this very parallel in the book I'm writing on new Labour - the irony that in seeking to regain their party's soul by electing Corbyn, Labour have elected a sort of stupid version of Blair.
I have to go. Have a good morning.
We can only hope the wretch never has his hands on power.
The boy who cried wolf was right in the end, though, I suppose. Brilliant. Perfect in pointing out the hypocrisy. I thought if there was going to ever be such a meeting we woukd find out the day before it happened . Announced in advanced gives do much time for one or the other to flounce out, or some external factor to get them to pull out.
If I was being generous I would say that Blair concluded that our strategic interest in being America's closest pal overrode everything else and meant we simply had to go along with it. But the truth? They wouldn't know what that was if they were hit over the head with it.
Selmayr case: the European Commission lies to Parliament
As Bob Dylan once said:
"Don't follow leaders!
Watch the parking meters."
"Labour have elected a sort of stupid version of Blair."
Unfortunately, I suspect you're correct. The old saying ... 'If he had brains, he'd be dangerous.'
True for Blair, I only hope it's true for Jezza too.
We've seen this with rocket boosters under Corbyn. Identity politics and the concept of being on a given side making you inherently good or bad. And if you are the goodies, some will argue that a good outcome can justify, dilute or mitigate bad things that happen along the way. That's happening right now with Corbyn and his comments and actions regarding anti-Semitism. He didn't see it properly. It was a long time ago. He's always been anti-racist.
The right isn't immune to hubris, of course. We need only look at May. But her earlier arrogance was rooted in fantastic polling evidence (large in quantity) and then vanquished by electoral reality. Whereas, whilst exceeding early expectations, Corbyn lost the election yet was feted as a hero.
Edited extra bit: more recently:
https://twitter.com/Welshracer/status/978532758208286720
In recent times May has managed to tack towards a soft Brexit and bring her party with her, she has done really well in response to Russia and she now has more control of her party than at any point since at least the election. It is hard to remember now the feebleness of the reshuffle where Minister after Minister refused to move and she was unable to do anything about it. She is now in control which means Hammond had better stop annoying her.
None of which means that she does not have obvious and serious limitations of course. It simply means that Corbyn's time will pass without even another opportunity to go for the prize. Thank goodness for that.
We’ve still got a trade deal to work on.
One that satisfies both the Jacob Rees-Moggs and Anna Soubrys of this world.
It's only a risk if you think the public will give him a lead after all. Who doesn't trust the public?
Whgat is true is slightly different. He'll talk to anyone, but until he became leader he saw his role as representing people who don't get a decent hearing because they are unpopular with the dominant Western view. It's not difficult to get a hearing if the Daily Mail or the Washington Post like you. It's harder to get one if they don't.
As leader, he's had to learn to balance a wider range of opinions, and it's significant that mot of the cricisms relate to things in the past before he took on the leadership role. Of course he still makes mistakes - who doesn't? - and he still takes views that are unfashionable (he's quite right that the Russians were provoked in Ukraine, for instance, though also that the Russian armed reaction wa grossly disproportionate). But it misreads him to think he only talks to people he likes.
(Replied to your personal query on he last thread, Cyclefree)
https://twitter.com/sadpankhurst/status/978381499715252224
I'm not entirely convinced he is open to other sides, but mindful of trying not to repeat that approach, I will take on board what you say.
He was a Russophile leader, unlike the Orange Revolution chap (Yanukovic? Name escapes me) who was more pro-EU. I think the protesting crowds wanted more trade with the EU, or suchlike, and the EU/Ashton made supportive noises which was perhaps unwise. But not justification for invasion.
However, this did happen some time after the 2008 (ish) Russian invasion of Georgia, so it can't have been beyond the realm of possibility (maybe even probability).
/endramble
Not to mention Crimea, of course.
Owl causes chaos at wedding, attacking best man after delivering rings
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/03/26/owl-causes-chaos-wedding-attacking-best-man-delivering-rings/
If you have one that involves a mad conspiracy theory as your ad hominem might suggest, no need to share.
Who is advising them on PR ? it's diabolical - unless of course their aim is purely to signal their virtue to the dwindling band of continuity remainers.
http://www.cityam.com/282918/london-remains-top-world-global-financial-services-says/amp?__twitter_impression=true
Next EU city Frankfurt at number 20....
My son works as a falconer at a place that also happens to be a wedding venue, and he frequently curses whichever idiot dreamed up the idea of owls at weddings. Birds of prey are unpredictable at the best of times and owls are the most truculent of the lot.
Corbyn has said he will speak to anyone but he has actively demonstrated and campaigned against the Israeli Foreign Minister coming to the UK (and she was not on the nationalist far right of Israeli politics). When a recent Labour delegation went to Israel it refused to meet with any Israeli politicians. So that is why I wrote what I did. If he has spoken to them in private nothing has ever come out and you would have thought that it would have, if only to show him in a better more even-handed light.
I'm not a wedding expert, but I would've thought a winged Grim Reaper a less than auspicious guest.
https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2018/03/bike-share-oversupply-in-china-huge-piles-of-abandoned-and-broken-bicycles/556268/
Note carefully Boris Johnson.
I suppose it’s of a piece with the operation that Theresa May supervised before the election with Nick Timothy and Fiona Hill. It speaks very badly of Theresa May herself though.
Not sure if they allow them at church weddings. An owl would be more than a portent of death for the church mice.
And no, the fact that he has something of a bias due to his past employment and current pension is not a conspiracy theory. To even take the job requires you to meet ideological criteria in supporting ever closer union.
Thank you for the article, Cyclefree. Some interesting points and in essence they can and should be applied to any and every politician including Theresa May and perhaps the only lesson to come from it is the inevitability of the maxim that all political careers end in failure.
Blair was, until Iraq, a hugely successful Labour Prime Minister and in 2001 won as convincing a victory over the Conservatives as he had in 1997 with admittedly a derisory turnout but the fact was he was the dominant political figure of his time. Let's also not forget the psychological shock of September 11th 2001. The rationale, in the wake of those horrific events, for moving into Iraq seemed so much clearer to so many people (including many Conservatives).
Those of us who opposed it were subject to the kind of vilification reserved for Jeremy Corbyn on this forum and it's hard to argue against a Prime Minister who throws around "in the national interest" a lot (again, plenty of parallels with now).
Blair wasn't destroyed by Iraq per se but by the events of 9/11/01 and our need to respond to them.
As for Corbyn, were he genuinely even-handed in his dealings, his innate pacifism wouldn't be a disadvantage and indeed might even be beneficial. The problem for me comes with his association with and support for groups and individuals whose primary interest seems to be to harm the United Kingdom and its citizens. I'm all for talking and indeed dealing with groups who renounce or do not use violence even if their political views aren't ones with which I'm comfortable - plural democracy means a range of views.
I've never subscribed to the notion "my country, right or wrong". I want the right to question, to scrutinise, to criticise and to call my Government "wrong". That's my democratic right.
At the same time, I don't want ill to befall us and those whose clear and unequivocal intention is, by violence, to harm this country cannot be condoned or entertained however "noble" they may seem and that's where I part company with Corbyn.
The gruesome twosome tried to get a civil servant into trouble for breaking the civil service code’s rules on impartiality.
The civil servant’s crime ?
Clashing with Nick Timothy Sending a tweet from his personal account praising the performance on Strictly.
Yet Mrs May did nothing.
You can see Brexit shrivel the IQ of otherwise moderately intelligent posters. It’s utterly malign.
Can nobody on Remain make an argument without belittling the other side ?
In a political context, it should be career-ending.
From you, I suspect she'll take that as a compliment.
And at school, we had a Shakespeare play when it was decided it would be 'cool' to have the King holding some form of raptor (I cannot remember which bird). It was abandoned after the first night when it flew over the audience as planned, but left some rather unplanned deposits on some heads.
https://twitter.com/ianpaisleymp/status/978241036639236097
https://twitter.com/julianoneill/status/978233105298395136