One can only be pleased at a political situation that allows you to use a Marvin Gaye song as your theme.
Anyway. What is going on? We appear to be in the bizarre situation where David Cameron is trying to imitate Nick Clegg. Which is odd, because Nick Clegg is himself the Liberal Democrats attempt to imitate David Cameron imitating Tony Blair. Perhaps we should bring the original back from the Middle East to point out that third generation copies are always a bit degraded and unreliable?
Anyway, The most wonderful aspect of this election is that nobodly really knows what’s going on. I mean, here I am, with Labour in a tough spot in the polls, and my mood is not one of fear or distress, but optimism. To swerve from Marvin Gaye to Buffalo Springfield, something’s hapening here, but what it is ain’t exactly clear. This is significantly better than something hapening and it being very clear that the Conservatives are winning.
So, if we don’t know what’s going on, what to do? The answer to the questions that obsess the commentators, bloggers, journalists and party strategists are out there. Somebody, who has gone through the polling data with a fine toothed comb can give a confident answer as to whether the Liberal Democrat Surge comes from voters for one party or another, or from those who don’t normally vote, or represents a tactical anti-Labour or anti-Conservative movement (or both), or whether it represents a genuine outpouring of affection for the Liberal Demcrats, or simple disgust at politics as usual. That person is an unrecognised genius.
Unfortunately there will be quite a few people going through the same data, with the same intellectual firepower, and reaching very different conclusions. Those people are deluded sods and are completely and utterly wrong.
The problem is, no-one can tell which is which.
So you can take your pick on the theories behind the polling. The one major certainty for Labour is that if the Liberal Democrats take one or two net points from the Conservatives, then the bar for “success” (defined in narrowly parliamentary terms), becomes much lower. A 1992 level of vote support (31%) would be enough to secure largest party status in a hung parliament. A Liberal Democrat surge, also, of course, makes it harder to achieve that level of support.
When faced with an impasse like that, my suggestion is to go back to what matters. What will attract voters to Labour? A message of growth and renewal, a focus on economic growth and jobs, on fairness and reform for frontline public services and suppor for low and middle income families, alongside a renewal of our politics. Our enemy in this election are not just a party, but a set of ideas that opposes what Labour stands for.
In one sense, the current media obsession (of talking about the Liberals, and doing down David Cameron, who is increasingly beginning to resemble Thomas E Dewey, with his careful selection of powerfully delivered platitudes) affords Labour an opportunity. For the first time in several years, the right wing press is not focussed on doing us down. Instead, they are focussed on doing the Liberal Democrats down.
We have to sieze this chance to be the only party that appears to be talking about the economy, jobs and the future, while the media (unfairly) demand answers from Clegg on who he would support, and the Tories alternate between trying to be Nick Clegg, and trying to stone him to death without anyone noticing their stone flinging.* In that way, we can creat some clear political space between Camerona’s waffle, and Clegg’s avoidance of questions of deals and endorsements.
Will this work? Well, it certainly seems a better plan than the alternatives.
That is usually a good sign.
*Poor Tim Montgomerie. He appears to accepted the role of Liberal-Basher in Chief. Plausable deniability has never worn so thin
It is weird to feel optimism isn’t it? I see Labour third in the polls and think let’s get it on. The Tories have nowhere to run. And if Labour end up doing badly, well, it’s my party and I’ll cry if I want to and besides a coaltion might not be the worst thing ever, because sometimes it takes two. Baby.
‘ For the first time in several years, the right wing press is not focussed on doing us down.’
That’s an interesting observation, especially as a counterpoint to the Lib Dems’ belief that all they needed to be happy was for someone to listen to them.
Can I also suggest that one of the problems that the Tories have with sticking the boot in on the Lib Dems is that many of the obvious lines of attack – about the vacuity of change as a slogan, say – aren’t a million miles away from the case against Cameron. Oh for a friendly poll company to put the lines without the names through.
But I’m not clear on why it’s unfair that the media demand Clegg say what he means by supporting those with a moral right to form a government. Is it because he can’t answer it honestly without talking about the deals?
Simply because he can’t answer honestly without knowing what the other actors are going to be in a position to accept or offer. So he can’t answer because he can’t know. All he can do is set out what his priorities would be.
I suppose you’re right, it is a fair question, though. It’s just not a particularly enlightening one!
Ok it’s not enlightening on policy, but sometimes the way people don’t answer questions they can’t answer, or feel they can’t answer, can be illuminating. As Calvin observed, oftentimes ‘I don’t know’ is a correct answer.
How weird that both of us zero in on Marvin Gaye at the same time – spooky. And I don’t even have the album.
I’m impressed that you are so relaxed now – I must learn to jog as well as you do
“We have to sieze this chance to be the only party that appears to be talking about the economy, jobs and the future”
So difficult when you are in power – at every turn, people saying ‘then why didn’t you do this before?’
Labour got 34% of the vote in 1992, you are thinking of 1987 when they got 31% (although polling is closer to 27% in 1983…)
Perhaps a better way of thinking about it is the 1923 General Election when Labour got 31% and the Liberals 30%… or 1922 when Labour got 30% and Liberals/National Liberals got 30%….
you’re right- I was looking at the inc. NI figures.
Though the higher 4th party vote could have same effect anyway. (SNP/PC/UKIP/Ind/Grn/BNP)
I bagsy claiming the 1923 comparison 1st, by the way. I mentioned it on Twitter last week. I don’t think it will be, though. the dynamics are too different.
A more recent comparison (which only works up to a point, but is, I think, unusually useful up to that point) is the first 1974 election.
“Will this work? Well, it certainly seems a better plan than the alternatives.”
If the Tories were planning to cut spending on the NHS, and said that they planned £13 billion in spending cuts, but weren’t going to tell us where until after the election, do you think Labour might mention that?
If so, why aren’t we telling people that these are the Lib Dem policies? If we finish 3rd in the popular vote, that’s it, we are definitely out of office – we should at least make an effort rather than this complacency.
If so, why aren’t we telling people that these are the Lib Dem policies? If we finish 3rd in the popular vote, that’s it, we are definitely out of office – we should at least make an effort rather than this complacency.
Now that is about the first word of sense I have heard on the subject other than from me . That manifesto is a joke .
PS ….Do you think Hopi would prefer to be in a coalition with Liberals and not have to bother with all those unpleasant working class oiks and Unions ?
Would he like to shed Labour like an old skin and slither into new life as a sort of British Democrat …..
Just thinking out loud …so to speak
Labour down to 23%. Doesn’t matter, though – you guys are going to form a cuddly coalition with St Nick, right?
Self delusion is now replacing hopelessness in the ranks of Labour.
I thought you were ignoring the polls for a bit?
That didn’t last long.
Hopi, lol, how CAN I ignore them – I wish I could – but like you, my lot are feeling the pain too.
One thing – all this talk of lib/lab coalition will hurt the lib dems a lot – “change” becomes somewhat irrelevant if Brown remains PM.
Ooh, ooh, mindless historical analogy rolling right atcha: we’ve got a similar narrative but 90-odd years earlier and with parties reversed. One of the then two natural parties of government wins landslide against hapless divided Tories (New Liberals 1906, New Labour 1997), joins in stupid war (WW1, Iraq), watches other party slowly overtake it thanks to shifting composition of electorate and fundamental inability to adapt thereto (Labour, LibDems), sees very tight three-way elections (1923, 2010), followed by minority governments, electorate sees that upstart party isn’t so bad after all, upstart party supplants former non-Tory outfit as natural party of government.
Yes, yes, it doesn’t stand up to much scrutiny, not least because of the absence of radical change in electoral franchise this time round yet the possibility of reform in the voting system. But it could very well pass for a poignant analogy in the dark with the light behind it. (Gilbert & Sullivan, not Marvin Gaye).
Hi ho, hi ho. It’s off to work we go. Or not.
http://twitpic.com/1h32jb/full
It’s easy to work out the crap from the Libdems…. Just go through the old Orange book and the policies compare with the Yellow peril’s stuff now.
And if you really want to know how really crap they are have a look at Cornwall. It had five LD MP’s and a LD council up till last year, have now been sweped from office.
Coalition with Clegg..No way
Clegg will climb into bed with Cameron.
The Conservatives and their backers will make an offer the LD’s cannot refuse.
I’m beginning to think that this scenario might be likely. It would be very, very difficult for a “change” agenda to be justified if the Dems prop up Labour. Even if Brown stepped down, and say Milibana stepped in – that would be ANOTHER unelected PM without a scrap of legitimacy. It’s looking like a catastrophe for Labour – and secretly I guess Clegg would prefer the Tories to get the popular vote.
We are living in some seriously weird time, though, aren’t we? I still cannot believe that all these people who have flocked to the Yellows really know what they represent, or indeed, even know what a hung parliament is.
I just wonder about the disconnect with reality – a Facebook fad, or X Factor style win, propels a fairly whacky political party to unknown heights – on the back of absolutely no scrutiny. Or is that the reason WHY they are doing so well?
How many of them will even turn out to vote?
Two more debates to go – my prediction –
Cameron – expect a vast improvement – can’t see him bombing like he did last week (and he did bomb) – may feel liberated by less expectation. 31% in the polls even lower than John Major in ’97 – is that possible?
Clegg – will either confirm the hysteria, or the slow puncture will begin. His biggest weapon – surprise – has gone forever now. He MUST be pinned down on the details.
Brown – almost irrelevant what he does, in my view – there is no expectation either way. How can a sitting PM with a 60 odd seat majority make a plea to form an alliance with the Lib Dems be taken seriously? It may take physical force to remove this unbalanced man from Downing Street.