Worth flagging Anthony Wells assessment of the challenges facing Labour as 2008 dawns. Most worrying part for any Labour readers:
He goes on to say this doesn't mean Labour is finished and today's assessment of Tory fortunes isn't all plain sailing but there's little doubt that the 'character question' will be a defining one of Brown's premiership...
"I think Brown’s character, specifically the lack of charisma or warmth will prevent him being able to bring it back. When problems hit Brown will never be able get away with a winning smile and a “I’m a pretty straight sort of guy” or “well, John is John”, he can’t charm he was out of problems, can’t convince people that, whatever has gone wrong, he is fundamentally a decent chap doing his best. Neither has he yet shown any ability to project a vision or purpose for his government that the public can relate to, perhaps in other circumstances that wouldn’t matter, competence would be enough, but to differentiate himself from Blair he needs to. He also doesn’t seem to have the knack of keeping the press onside - from having Fleet Street at his feet he seems to have alienated them rapidly, without a turnaround in press attitude it will be difficult for Brown to turnaround the government’s position.
So putting my cards on the table, I think Brown is finished."
He goes on to say this doesn't mean Labour is finished and today's assessment of Tory fortunes isn't all plain sailing but there's little doubt that the 'character question' will be a defining one of Brown's premiership...
Labels: Politics
14 Comments:
What a sad commentary from Wells. So Brown can't be as transparent and insincere as Blair/Cameron, he won't suck up the the Westminster media, and he didn't call an election when they had told everyone there was going to be one, therefore he is finished. Garbage. Pure unadulterated, garbage.
Rot like this would have condemned Atlee on sight. A small man with a Chaplin 'tache and without an ounce of "charisma or warmth" (whatever that crap means) in his body, but the public knew he was a serious politician and he commanded a bigger vote to lose the 1951 election than Blair could command at his height. Why, because the electorate, who believe it or not don't spend all their waking hours poring over words of wisdom from the lobby fodder, trusted him to do the job.
I know, I know, you'll give me that guff about the opinion polss, about 'politics in the television age', well, I don't give a stuff. I don't want another flim flam waffling twerp as PM, nor do I believe the rest of the country do either. I want someone who gives me the impression he is serious, he can do the job, and who is going to get on with it whatever the Dail Mail hacks, the Guardian twitterati, Jeremy bleedin' Paxman or Anthony Wells think or say about it.
Brown isn't my ideal choice, but he isn't the barefaced Blair, nor the puffed up public schoolboy Cameron either. Between you, you stick to the flim flam, I'll carry on backing Brown to get it right, and fear for the state of British politics if we have to rely on the alternative.
What's more, when Brown does win, there's nothing more I will enjoy than waving two fingers to the likes of Anthony Wells.
Excuse the spelling and grammar errors... I've been reading too much Newmania I think.
Provided you grant me licence to wave a couple of fingers in your direction if he's right?
I probably want the same 'type' of politicians as you anyway Bob and it's appalling that Brown's intellect (far superior to Cameron or Clegg's) counts for so little. The sad reality is that it does though so I don't think Wells is far off the mark here...
Brown's intellect (far superior to Cameron or Clegg's) counts for so little
. There is far more to intellect than the sort of Monastic obfuscation Brown goes in for and I see no evidence of any ‘genius’ whatsoever . Not every fat girl has a lovely personality C , you are confusing the absence of charm with the presence of substance . A typically low church socialist confusion if I may say so. The world is full of furtively preening boffins that could not run a Burger van and Brown is really one of those. See tax credits ! There is something missing ,and people are right to be troubled by it ..aside from anything else he is a coward a liar by all accounts a bully as well as a cold cold fish
Are you Dorothy to Brown’s Casaubon ?
In George Eliot's Middlemarch, Edward Casaubon spends his life in a futile attempt to find a comprehensive explanatory framework for the whole of mythology. He is writing a book which he calls the Key to all Mythologies. This is intended to show that all the mythologies of the world are corrupt fragments of an ancient corpus of knowledge, to which he alone has the key. Poor Mr Casaubon is, of course, deluded. His young wife Dorothea is at first dazzled by what she takes to be his brilliance and erudition, only to find, by the time he is on his deathbed, that the whole plan was absurd and she can do nothing with the fragments of the book that she is supposed to put into order for publication.
Anyway Bob likes him because he is the left wing of the Labour Party and I detest him for the same reason .His accession is the rout of the Blairites and if he gets any sort of mandate we will cease the be the country we are and become the socialist hell hole Bob Piper wants . Look at his friends if you want to know what he is . He will say anything , what’s the point of listening ? Noone in the Labour Party does …they know the score ..ask Bob.
'Won`t suck up' ...oh puleeez..he would if he could , he is just useless at it .Where does Piepr think he was for the last ten years.
I know newmania doesn't have a secretary, nor the time or inclination to read what he has just written (I can understand that, it's hell for the rest of us too though) but if he could learn some basic rules of punctuation, such as finishing sentences with full stops, not starting with them, it really would contribute to their coherence. I don't suppose it would do anything for the overall content though, which would remain jumbled and confused.
Including a passage in the middle which is well written and properly punctuated merely serves to emphasise this frailty I'm afraid.
I hope this is helpful.
Mr Piepr.
PS - If you do look at my friends, I would do so with care because they don't like people staring at them.
My punctuation is better than Shakespeare’s Bob so perhaps it’s a good job I quoted George Elliot who would be ‘thrilled’ at your approval no doubt .Do stop drivelling on about it, petty ad hominem sniping tells us more about your insecurities than anything else.
Shakespeare, however, was saved by creativity, imagination and wit, qualities which are sadly absent in your contributions, thereby exposing the grammar to a much harsher scrutiny. Petty ad hominem sniping, I know, but it also gives me great entertainment.
I should imagine solitary entertainment forms a large part of you life Bob. Shakespeare lived before there was such a thing as universally recognised standard in spelling punctuation or indeed the meaning of many words which he often used in quite new ways. The establishment of a recognised “orthography “really got going in the 18th century, which, I should explain, is later.Dummy
Your kindly estimation of his talents are therefore unnecessary to “save” him, although I `m sure he would have been every bit as delighted as George Elliot.
Churlish clay-brained coxcombe
Well, if a recognised "orthography" really got going in the 18th century you have had plenty of time to get used to it.
Do us all a favour and practice a bit, there's a good boy. Whatever you do though, in the immortal words of Peter Gabriel and Kate Bush... don't give up... you're far too much fun. Although you should stop trying to use words like inchoate
... in order to try to impress if you are not going to use them correctly.
(Sorry, Liam... the iMac cut me off in mid flow).
in·cho·ate
–adjective
1. not yet completed or fully developed; rudimentary.
2. just begun; incipient.
3. not organized; lacking order: an inchoate mass of ideas on the subject.
....so....
Inchoate bluster : A confused but superficially confident utterance intended to hide weakness. It has further associations of an inner confususion as in the phrase "inchoate rage" .The rage of Caliban for example .
.. I think thats about right.
Class dismissed.
Bring that class back and make the stupid buy from Lewes sit in the corner with his hands on his head....
In-choa-te
(adjective)
Just begun and so not fully formed or developed; rudimentary: a still inchoate democracy
ORIGIN: Mid 16th century. From Latin inchoatus, variant of incohare, to begin.
USAGE: Because inchoate means 'not fully formed or developed' a sense of 'disorder' may be implied. But to extend the use of inchoate to mean 'chaotic' 'confused' 'incoherent' (he speaks in an inchoate manner) is incorrect, although not uncommon.
Or... boy from Lewes...
Bloody hell. It's contagious.
I gave an example ,"the inchoate rage of Caliban". I assume you have no idea what that might mean and I can`t be bothered to explain....Anyway I was using bathos so your reaction is inappropriate from the start.
(Yes thats bathos with a B)
Tiring
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home