Just wanted to make a quick comment on Brown. I have been working all done on another project and Brown announcing to Andrew Marr that he's not going to hold an election is apparently the big news. However, Given I have said more than once that I didn't think it would happen I merely feel vindicated of my greatness than of anything else! The question and meme that is running right now of course is about Brown being weak, bottling it etc.
The other day I said I didn't really think it would damage him that much with the wider world that are not political obssessives, hacks etc. I still largely believe that to be honest. Yes, it has undoubtedly made him look weak. It has also, as David Cameron said, made him look indecisive. The Labour Party has spent the last few weeks fanning the flames, and the primary reason I stopped speculating was because I was told that all the speculation was in their interest to create a Tory split.
I expect that this "event", if it can really be called that, is one that will be looked at in political history as a tactical blunder, I have no doubt about that. However, I remain doubtful of its impact with the less politically interested population. News is a funny thing after all, and stories appear and die rapidly these days. I expect it won't be long before that happens with this one.
What will be interesting is whether Brown's next mistake is one where today's mistake can be resurrected and cited as evidence of a trend. If that happens then the meme could defintely take hold in the wider political consciousness of the nation. However, to be honest what I'm really wondering at the moment is what it must have been like to be a fly-on-wall in Connaught Square when Tony and Cherie heard the news.
Do you think they laughed?
Update: Have just watched Adam Boulton vs Jacqui Smith. Mr Boulton was errr... a little angry. Much bridge building required there for sure, but I stand by my general point.
25 comments:
I think you are wrong on this Dizzy, yes the election story will fade. However the media have been tearing lumps out of him. Andrew Marr has been described as a downing street "pet". So whilst the election bottle isn't going to do for him the fact that he has pissed off large swathes of the media over this is going to. This is going to be the death of a thousand cuts.
You can think I'm worng but I;m not. I;m not saying they won;t tear strips out of him now. I;m just saying th attention span for it will be short.
Your wrong. He has taken the piss out the of the media and they will remember this. Giving an exclusive to Marr will just add to the problem for Brown.
I'm not wrong at all. The media may be pissed me off, and yes they will rememeber it selectively. But we're not about to see a media meme dominating the headlines for the next two years about this, it's as simple as that. Plus of course, ordinary people couldn't give a fuck, and that is my point.
Well Dizzy we shall see. History proves that you are wrong. Look what happened to Callaghan in 1978. Cameron will win the next election and win well. Sorry mate you are calling this wrong. Read Rawnsley in the Observer who's judgement is always spot on. Brown's flaw's over this has been exposed for all to see. You have a very condescending view of the British people.
are you stupid?
no they won't keep this in the news for the next 2 years but yes they will pick on everything else
he's a gonner
"History proves that you are wrong."
That's a temporal impossibility unless you're saying that all events in the future have alreayd been determined by the events of the past.
"Look what happened to Callaghan in 1978."
In fairness I think the comparison is a tad flawed. It was an entirely different political situation with utterly different variables, and other events.
"Cameron will win the next election and win well."
What's that got to with the price of bread? It's not like I'm saying he's not going to. I think he will. I am merely saying that this thing that happened today, it's not going to be the one thing that can pinpointed in history as the defining moment that swung an election in 2009.
"Sorry mate you are calling this wrong."
You seem confused here. I agree that he is weakened, and I agree that there will be much talk of it. All I'm saying is that the talk won't last, and it will only come back if and when he makes a tactical blunder again and someone is able to link the two together because they have circumstantial comparisons between them.
"You have a very condescending view of the British people."
Err no, I have a _realistic_ view of the British people. Your average punter isn't turned on by this kind of political minutiae not unless it becomes a doinant meme. Currently, I don't think that todays events specifcally, represent a meme that is sustainable. As I have alreayd said, it may be that it can be resurrected if other events allow it too, but standing alone it is something for us people interested in politics to discuss, and little more.
"are you stupid?
no they won't keep this in the news for the next 2 years but yes they will pick on everything else"
Yeah, but I didn't actually say that wasn't going to happen. What I said, very specifically, was that this incident will weaken him, but that other events and how they play out will roll over this news very fast. So no I'm not stupid, you've just completely misintepretted what I've actually said.
It's actually quite funny really, because what I said, and what the comments have so far sai dI said have been two completely different things.
Agree with you entirely Dizzy. Average Joe Public has very little interest and this will disappear under the next story, provided those next stories aren't bad for Brown.
As for is impact on the next electiom, Five Live just had an excellent assessment of the whole affair from Lord Tebbit, and as he said if people think they personally have had a good year, and that they're going to have another, they'll vote the government back (regardless of incidents like this)
I disagree with your replies Dizzy. I suggest Brown's credibility has been shot through. Also having read the Sunday's, I am now more convinced that this will have a long term affect. I have also heard that Marr's interview was no push over and Brown looked very uncomfortable at some points. Whether the BBC show it all is another matter.
Dizzy,
That this won't win the next election is true. However, I think the point is that this *will* do damage to the only thing that Brown has going for him as a positive personally, that he is a serious politician who can make strong decisions for the country. That damage will make it more difficult for him.
I disagree with your replies Dizzy. I suggest Brown's credibility has been shot through.
Again I'm confused. You say you disagree with my replies and say that you think Brown's credibility is shot, thus implying that I have said the opposite which I haven't. I have said, more than once now, that he's been weakened by it. The only actual area with which you seem to disagree with me is (a) whether the impact will be short term or long term, and (b) how deep the penetration of that perception can penetrate the political consciousness of the non-politically interested part of the nation that is ever growing.
I, as a conservative (small c) don't think it would be very wise to make the assumptive leap of long term affect, simply because you cannot predict what is going to happen. For example, if there is a massive terrorist attack all bets would be off if he performed well in the face of it. I don't think it wise to view this incident in isolation and extrapolate it forward on the assumption that events in the future cannot repair the damage he has caused to himself. Those events might cause him more damage of course, which I also said, but they might not, and it is going to require more than just one event for his weakness to become a sustainable theme.
Bizarrely, for the most part, we are actually agreeing with each other. The only difference seems to be that I'm being cautious for fear of complacency on our part. But then I am a conservative in that sense.
I think the point is that this *will* do damage to the only thing that Brown has going for him as a positive personally, that he is a serious politician who can make strong decisions for the country. That damage will make it more difficult for him.
As with the last comment, I will say it again. I am not denying that he has been weakened, or that it is, in the immediate term damaging to him. What I am saying is that we cannot assume that all future events will mean that such a position is sustainable. My point, to quote Harold Macmillan, is that it's all about "events, dear boy, events".
I'm not saying that it is all just going to disappear tomorrow, what I am saying is that the news agenda plus events that we cannot possibly predict happen so fast that in order to sustain such a perception in the public consciousness it will require him to make such a mistake again and allow this incident to be resurrected. Basically I'm saying that to say "well he's finished" is nothing short of complacency, especially when he effectively said there won't be an election for 18 months. If a week is a long time in politics (as we've just witnessed, and have witnessed so many times before), then 18 months is an eternity. Being complacent is what Labour did with Major in 1992, and if you read Alastair Campbell's Diaries you'll see that they didn't make that mistake again in 1997.
Ok and fair enough. Let us move on. Also Cameron must not make any more blunders. As you say time will tell.
Dizzy,
I agree with your thinking that it is definitely not "all over" for Brown as some seem to think.
He has seriously damaged himself over this. Just watching Nick Robinson on the BBC last night shows that. That is the sort of thing that sticks in people's minds.
When you combine that with the fact that Cameron now seems to be resurgent and has the momentum behind him, it could be an interesting period in politics over the next few months.
However, Brown has not spent more than half his life craving the top job just to roll over now. Despite what has happened in the last few weeks, he is still a very good politician. He messed up here and I am sure he knows it.
Dizzy,
I agree with you but with a caveat. For along time I've believed that the pro Labour bias of the media has been worth several points in the polls. If recent events have taken the gloss off that cosy relationship then all the better. Maybe naively I'm hoping that we will see a bit more balanced reporting. I have never believed that the Tories were as bad as the polls suggested.
Of course, if the media sense that the public are turning away from Gordon and slagging him off sells papers then he will be gone within a year.
In short, Gordons fate lies with the media first, Opposition second
Dizzy,
You are right to think that the media will move on from this as soon as the next big thing comes along. However Brown will still have a tough week ahead and Brown has lost some credibility.
Also hopefully the media do remain annoyed and ask more questions of Brown and Co.
Finally, although the Tories still have a way to go, there is a good possibility that in 2 years time jo public will say to Brown that "we gave you a chance, having felt sorry for you and now it is time to give another party a chance". He needs to have a very good two years and that looks almost impossible given what he and Co have done over the last 10 and given the economic outline.
Trevor Kavanagh and Adam Boulton went nuclear on Brown, Kavanagh's contemptuous excoriation of Brown's history , character and political judgement on News 24 was truly extraordinary and great fun. I've no doubt now that there's no coming back from this for Brown. Making an enemy of Murdoch within a short 100 days is some feat.
Perhaps, Dizzy but the bottler tag they've saddled him with will undoubtedly get out and it's the type of thing easily remembered. this more than his performance might inevitably sink him. Remember the grey-man spoof of a particular PM?
i think you're wrong Dizzy - ITV and Sky are furious over the Marr exclusive. (see today's Mail on Sunday)
Newspaper headlines here:
Will he become known as Bottler Brown
Wrong on what exactly? I never said that journos were not annoyed. What I said was that news moves very fast and it could all change in a matter of weeks because of events.
The media is key and has been key with New Labour for the last 13 years. When Brown wanted a soft ride and sympathetic ear, he called on his old Scottish chum, Andrew Marrxist from the British Bullshit/Bias Corporation. By far the most influential broadcast news outlet. The BBC love Brown and have been spinning the Brownite line so heavily for months. They will spend the next 2.5 years, until the next election, doing the same thing,and attacking Cameron when possible. The floating vote in this country has proved very suseptible to Labour's media manipulation for the last 13 years, I don't see that stopping anytime soon. I doubt there is a long-lasting rift with the Murdoch media, because Brown will be grovelling like hell to Rupert, I'm sure. If the economy goes off a cliff next year, as even Darling is conceding slightly, then the tide will well and truly turn on this government, whatever the BBCs line is and if Murdoch jumps on the Cameron bandwagon when he knows that Labour are on the way out, Brown will be finished. That said, I don't believe it would be in News Corp interest to turn on Brown just yet, there is still time for Brown to act against them by taking up some of the EU's concerns with Sky's satelite monopoly. I suspect that Murdoch won't jump ship until very late in the day, maybe not until the end of 2009 if Brown is waits until 2010.
What will be interesting is whether Brown's next mistake is one where today's mistake can be resurrected and cited as evidence of a trend.
Well, his next "will he bottle it" decision (on which he has already made his intention quite clear) is coming right up!
Let's see if he keeps to his word on this one...
No Dizzy, the real problem is that Feartie has given the story to Marr, and not the other hacks as well, and that various people have been running the line"it's young inexperienced people who have been pushing for this..." The Great British Public may be easily led, but they are not entirely stupid. 1) Douglas Alexander and Ed Milliband ( OK they are young and twats) but they are ministers of the crown and ought to be responsible adults 2) What's all the crap about clearing diaries, booking advertising space, booking potential election tellers etc etc? That didn't just happen because the returning officers thought from the speculation they ought to get ready. 3)People will remember he bottled it, even if they don't remember what it was, especially after the non-announcement about the Iraq Troops.
As I said before, Iain Hyslop's remark to Ruthe Kelly ( she of the utter incompetence and large eyebrows) " You can lie to politicians and the public, but lying nto journalists ios very very dangerous." The meeja won't let the GBP forget
I don't disagree with much what you said Lear, mainly because it's beside the point I was making.
Dizzy - why do you use the word "meme" all the time? Its very annoying.
Can't think of a better one.
Post a Comment