…..Michigan…..Nevada…..South Carolina
January 14th, 2008
Is McCain becoming unstoppable?
With the next big battle in the GOP race taking place in the Michigan primary tomorrow new national polls have reported leads of 8% and 15% for John McCain - the 71 year old who in the run up to Christmas looked as though he was finished. He’s now the 1.38/1 favourite to take the prize.
Tomorrow all eyes will be focussed on Michigan which is really the last big chance for Mitt Romney to make an impact. His family are from the state and, indeed, his father was Governor. Two polls yesterday put him ahead with leads of 5% and 8%. Another survey had McCain in the lead by just one point.
There is a Democratic primary taking place tomorrow but it is not being rated as being very important. The state is holding the election in defiance of the time-table that the party nationally has tried to impose with sanctions. At the moment the vote will have no impact on the overall national decision because those delegates that are elected will not be able to take part in the national convention.
Sanctions were also threatened against any contender who campaigned in the state with the result that Obama and Edwards are not on the ballot. Hillary is there alongside names who are no longer important. Voters can register a vote against Hillary by opting to be “undecided”.
After that we have the Nevada caucuses on Saturday but the really big battle that everybody is looking towards is South Carolina, also on Saturday, where more than half the voters are black. This will be a big test for both Huckabee and Thompson in the GOP contest - both of whom need to chalk up victories there to maintain a momentum.
The Democratic contest in the state, a week later, could be crucial for Obama and a furious fight is developing between him and Hillary. There been a big slanging match about suggestions that the Clinton camp sought to diminish both the memory of Martin Luther King and Obama himself.
All the US betting markets are here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Poll: Obama, McCain Extend Leads In SC
http://www.raleigh2.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=Default&mad=No&sdetail=366&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=2502&hn=raleigh2&he=.com
test
Clinton cant win S.C. not with the race issue Obama camp have stirred up.
However, given that, I think she has now won the super-tuesday.
216 in last thread. How does standing for the Conservatives make him “an interested party” (i.e. part of special interests) in the nuclear power industry?
Aren’t Democrats in Michigan a bit miffed? Or are there no Democrats in Michigan?
5. It’s the Michigan Democrats own stupid fault for moving their primary so early.
will people please stop saying Romney is finished. or even in trouble. right now he has many more delegates than anyone else.
No, McCain is not becoming unstoppable. Giuliani and Huckabee are both viable candidates as well.
If McCain wins Michigan he will win the nomination.He will have momentum going into SC.He is already leading in the polls there.He also leads electability charts among GOP candidates.
If he doesnt win Michigan it will be harder for him.But I think it will still be a battle between him ung Guliani.
Romney is finished,win Michigan or not.He can not energise people and stands no chance of being elected President.
If McCain wins Michigan he will win the nomination.He will have momentum going into SC.He is already leading in the polls there.He also leads electability charts among GOP candidates.
If he doesnt win Michigan it will be harder for him.But I think it will still be a battle between him ung Guliani.
Romney is finished,win Michigan or not.He can not energise people and stands no chance of being elected President.
Just a minor stylistic point, but.. given the understandable prominence for the US primaries, would it not be an idea to temporarily Americanise the site’s banner? There are some great pictures there.
Good to see Brown is not hiding from those tough decisions:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7186473.stm
And good to see the Beeb STILL equating Osborne’s and Hain’s actions….
“Mr Osborne said that the party had got advice from Commons authorities which they thought suggested they did not need to declare it on the Register of Members’ Interest.”
Which they thought? Suggested? I’ve often sought advice from the Commons authorities and it is always unequivocal. If Mr Osborne would like to publish this advice we might understand a bit better. And in general the Commons is responsible to MPs, not to parties - it’s unusual for a political party to make enquiries of the Fees Office, the internal department responsible for such matters.
OT- Gordon Browns brilliant Gold sale on evidence today again. Now at a record $904 an ounce
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7186570.stm
Nick
You tried to argue yesterday that there was s similarity between Hain and Osborne in that they both relied on other people and, by implication, that it was that reliance that contributed to their difficulty.
You didn’t say, but I assume the people that Osborne shouldn’t have relied on are the very “Commons authorities” that today you say should only ever be consulted by individual members.
I’m confused, and rather disappointed that you repeat the flim flam arguments being deployed in the tabloids on this forum where your reputation deserves better.
13 As the donations were made to the Conservative Party, which funds the party offices, and not to Osborne as an individual why is it strange the Party asked - they wanted to ensure the rules were met. It seems the Commons authorities are having second thoughts which is why the Party politely says “thought” & “suggested”.
This compares to Abrahams case where the Prime Minister concedes laws were broken, we presume therefore a deliberate attempt not to follow the rules, and Peter Hain’s case where until now no attempt was made to follow the rules.
O/T
Will the bookies pay out now?
(Extract from Daily Telegraph)
£50bn bill to ‘nationalise’ Northern Rock
By Andrew Porter, Political Editor
Last Updated: 2:44am GMT 14/01/2008
Must be “curtains” for Gord now.
Northern Rock faces effective nationalisation by the end of the month at a potential cost to the taxpayer of over £50 billion
A BBC journalist on the Today programme said that he had seen the e-mail correspondence between Osborne and the HoC authorities, and in his view the advice from them was was “confusing”.
13: Thanks for that objective ananlysis
13 Nick you are wrong on several counts. The “Fees Office” you refer to is the Dept of Finance and Administration and they do not give advice on these matters. Alda Barry who Osbourne sought advice from works for the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, as the Registrar of Standards. Her advise is accepted as definitive in these matters. (See http://www.parliament.uk/about_commons/pcfs.cfm )
There is no equivalence between Hain and Osbourne in these matters. The money Osbourne received HAS been declared to the Electoral Commission; Hains hasn’t. Osbourne sought and followed advise on declaration from the proper Parliamentary authorities; Hain didn’t.
13. Care to comment a bit more on Hain’s predicament? Or just Osbornes?
The Tories have released their “evidence”. It’s an email from the Registrar to the Conservative Chief Whip, in reply to an enquiry in December, almost 11 months after donations had been received. The Tories apparently sought to avoid having to register by arguing that the money was channelled through the party, although David Willetts declares income received in exactly the same way.
Why not register anyway to be on the safe side? And why invite suspicion by using indirect funding? The Tories have form with indirect funding streams (e.g. the Midlands Industrial Council), but in this case it seems completely unnecessary - unless there’s something we don’t yet know, I can’t see why they didn’t simply declare it openly.
How many MPs receive up to half a million quid and ponder for 11 months whether to check that if it needs to be registered? Not many, I think. Not, for instance, Peter Hain, who became aware of the issue on November 29, announced the problem in December and gave full details in January.
It doesn’t matter what the technicalities are, what the man on the Clapham Omnibus see is politicians either cocking-it-up, or cooking-the-books.
Hain is damaged goods, he’s lost all credibility he should resign.
Osborne, very rich people giving money to the Tory party, then saying, ‘Oh! could you give it to George please’ a bung is a bung is a bung. What does he need half a million a year for? to run his office, I dread to think what goes on there.
It’s interesting how these non stories in febrile times have a way of getting a life of there own. At the end of Osborne’s interview in which he seemed to be doing OK he said ‘these rules are designed specifically to find out what money is going to named MP’s rather than the party as a whole’ thus undoing his entire defense up until that point.
OT. Congratulations to ‘Atonement’ on winning the Golden Globe for best picture. Perhaps more a reflection on a thin year and an American liking for British period drama than anything else but an achievment nonetheless.
22 Nick Palmer MP asked, “Why not register anyway to be on the safe side?”
I think because if they did, the money would be “double counted”. Half a million given to the Conservative Party, and then half a million given to a Shadow Cabinet member to run his private office, would inevitably appear in the newspapers (and Labour Party press releases!) as donations amounting to £1 million - even though it was the same £500,000 on both occasions.
Apologies for going way off topic, but I was browsing idly on Youtube and unexpectedly found these two clips, which demonstrate excellently the contrast between the prevailing attitudes towards guns and gun crime in the UK and USA respectively.
British
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emP5D9Klssg
American
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZDpbpcvGAMI
(desperately trying to get on-topic): I wonder if the candidates’ attitudes to gun ownership is a significant determining factor in choosing between TweedleCain, Tweedliani, Tweedlebee and Tweedleney? Or are Republicans all monolithic on the issue?
20/21: I can see that we might have a heated discussion about this: the lengthy delay in raising the issue makes the Tory case the more problematic of the two, in my view. You obviously disagree, and I’ll leave it there.
22: pending redundancy often causes a loss of judgement and a tendency to lash out irrationally.
23 Funnily enough, Coldstone, I think I can see the need for Osborne to have half a bar for running his private office. As Shadow Chancellor, he is going to need a lot of research assistants, policy wonks and the like to cover the work done for the Chancellor by the Treasury (not by the Labour Party.) Government is a massive business these days, and highly complex, and even with £500,000 he would struggle to keep up.
(His lack of ability might have something to do with it as well, but that is another point altogether.)
22. Oh dear Nick. Pressure is starting to show.
22 If Peter Hain only “became aware of the issue” as late as November 29 it could only be because he had broken the law by signing incomplete declarations before then. (Ignorance being no excuse even for (especially for) a Cabinet Minister.) When the various enquiries take their course it will be fascinating to find out who made the call to Willie Nagel to lend £25K to the PPF in October so that it could be used the same day to pay some of Hain’s outstanding bills.
25: Augustus, I’m sure you’re right that the media would spin it like that. But there’s a simple remedy. The donors should give the money direct to the beneficiary, who should register it. Funnelling it through the party and hoping that that means that it doesn’t need to be declared just invites the sort of comments that they’re now getting. It’s too clever by half.
Nick care to comment on Mr Hain rather than Osborne. Does he have your full support? Any of your constituents been prosecuted by DWP for making a mistake on their benefit submissions? no ifs, no buts!
[26] Indeed, JL. If “guns don’t kill people, people kill people” as the American National Rifle Association says, logically, they should be happy for any of us to have a nuke in the garage.
i would also like to hear about Mr Palmers views on Hain, as he seems to have quite staunch views on Osborne’s far less problematic position, but has so far failed to say a single word on the Hain debacle. And by the way, Osborne needs that amount of money in order to conduct research etc (no, actual research, not like Mr Hain’s non-existant think tank) which the treasury has done by civil servants at no cost to the labour party.
29
As we are all being told to become more efficient and spend our money more wisely, perhaps, (now we know how much he spends) he should announce that in 2008 he will reduce his costs by 25%.
Then show us all how he managed it, it could start a trend!
32 Sorry, Nick, I don’t agree. It would be pretty unusual if money given to a Political Party could not then be given to its own MPs!
32. Funnelling through the party, which pays the bills not Osborne and declares the donations, is surely better than funnelling through a ghostly Think Tank?
Andrew Whittam Smith has the most damning column on Hain that I’ve read, in which he says “something else happened on 29 November that was even more relevant than the conversation with Mr Mendelsohn. The Electoral Commission asked the Metropolitan Police to begin examining evidence about secret donations to the Labour Party after it emerged Labour had received more than £650,000 from David Abrahams via middlemen. That, I believe, is the significance of 29 November.”
http://comment.independent.co.uk/commentators/andreas_whittam_smith/article3336125.ece
[38] A newspaper that can’t even spell the name of the guy who founded it! (I know there’s short of money, but still…)
[39] Typo time… “they’re short of money” not “there’s”. Sorry.
22. I didn’t realize Osborne had waited eleven months or that he has been spurred into action by the Abrahams story-as had Hain. This then might have legs. There aren’t many things less attractive than the ‘holier than thou’ politician and the Tories under Grayling are now the worst. It was stupid of Cameron to join in yesterday and it could well come back and bite him on the bum!
22
‘ And why invite suspicion by using indirect funding? The Tories have form with indirect funding streams’
So setting up a fake think tank is not indirect funding?
If Osborne has broken the law then the police should be called in and an investigation undertaken. That seems only fair, have the police been involved in Hain blatant case of law breaking?
I am fairly well invested in McCain but worry about both MI & SC in particular.
Huckabee I think could take SC and perhaps represents the only value there tight now. It really depends on big Fred who has shown some overlap between him and Huckabee’s potential pools of support.
Whilst this wouldnt be fatal to McCain a loss in MI would be more danaging. With the polls all over the place I still McCain should win it but a sentimental vote and Democrat inclineds messing about give Romney a chance.
As for the Democrats. SC is Obama’s to lose, if he did I think he would say goodbye to the nomination. He should win that. Nevada is more interesting and I know a lot of talk has been about Obama and this union backing but I think Clinton could take the state. The major unknown is the vagaries of the caucus process itself.
On the overall Democrat nomination, its not over yet and I don’t think will be if results go as I expect in the proper races, ie Nevada & SC. FL & MI will provide some minor boost for Clinton but the false races that they are means that they are liable to be ignored.
re Hain and Osborne. Correct me if I am wrong - in Osborne’s case we are a) talking about Parliamentary declaration, not declaration to the Electoral Commission, which had taken place, so we understand, at thae proper time, and manner, b) Essentially a branch of Conservative Party research being carried out in the area of Treasury matters and finance generally. It strikes me that the fact of the Tory party declaring that to the EC is sufficient. It wouldn’t really matter that it is used in one area or another of Tory Party activity. I have posted previously that I don’t fully understand Parliamentary standards in this area - how far is it regarded that matters of Party management, rather than issues concerning an MP’s individual work on behalf of his/her constituents, should be subject to separate declaration. I suspect this is at the heart of the issue, and it seems that it is a grey area. Perhaps Nick Palmer can tell me I am wrong, but without extra info on this, I take the view that George Osborne (no ‘u’ btw) has done all he can be expected to do, and the relevant authorities should get their act together regards what declarations are required in this type of case!
And in Hain’s case, of course, we are dealing with a straight and admitted case of (very) late declaration to the Commission, and a possible breach of Parl standards as well.
43 The Osborne dontations have been declared to the Electoral Commission, so no question of the law being broken, unlike Hain’s.
What’s in question is whether they should also be declared in the Register of Members Interests which is a matter for the House of Commons, not the police.
Nice try
41 - “There aren’t many things less attractive than the ‘holier than thou’ politician”
Your constant stream of bile and half-formed arguments?
The obvious thing to do, is stop giving money direct to political parties.
All money intended for a party, would go through an independent body, (the electoral commission) to be screened and checked before passing on.
I know when you mention, ’state funding’ some posters get the screaming abdabs, but think its inevitable.
A £2.0? donation from every voter at the next GE, with a NO box on the voting slip if u don’t want to contribute. This money would go to the body, who would act as a bank for the parties. Parties would then set up, direct debits etc. to pay for day-to-day costs, all withdrawals would have to be justified and explained. Full accounts published every year, every in and out shown.
To qualify parties would have to register their constitutions, the first line of which must read: Membership is open to all British citizens, regardless of race, creed or colour. The party must also make clear, it is fully committed, to obtaining power, by constitutional and democratic means.
47 that was my point. Hain has clearly broken the law but is “carrying on with his job” and Osborne appears to have done nothing wrong.
48. If we could have sig’s on this thing that would be mine
There is nothing funnier than watching the Tories on this board close ranks’! And the language they use-’Care to comment on…’ is often so similar an occasional visitor might well believe they are all the same poster-or even a computer program-using CCO designated codes such as ‘Cuddles’ ’sp’ or ‘Adam Smith’!
Everyone said Obama was unstoppable until he was stopped by Hillary. McCain is still beatable and Guiliani is obviously holding a lot in reserve, so it certainly isn’t finished yet.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
[49] Coldstone suggests an intriguing idea for State funding, with a NO box on the voting slip if u don’t want to contribute
Coldy, I reckon you’ve just solved the turn-out problem. I can just see all the tabloids and the shock-jocks urging people to tick that box - wouldn’t fall foul of the impartiality rule on the airwaves, either!
BTW, I take it your last paragraph was sloppily drafted - you surely don’t wish to ban independent candidates who seek election to act as a check on the executive, rather than getting their snouts in the trough, do you?
52 No roger its because some of us are deeply upset that yet again a minister gets away with breaking the law whilst threatening the public with conviction. My father is about to start living on his state pension of 177 quid a week and strangely enough is less than impressed that the bloke paying him can get away with lying about 100,000!
39. Ted. Isn’t that what we now learn was also the spark that got Osborne also to make/check his declaration?
48. Are you the Aaron who has something to do with betting? If so I usually enjoy your short but knowledgeable posts. Sorry if I’ve written something that bothers you.
How do we take Gordon’s statement this morning?
Is he just stating a bland fact about Hain’s fate or is that not exactly a vote of confidence?
Some pundits on the Beeb this morning were of the view that Gordon could have been stronger.
52. I’d think a computer would think of a better username than cuddles, I’m only using it because it’s daft yet endearing, or so I’ve been told.
56 It was indeed the spark that led the Party (not Osborne) to ask for confirmation.
The base difference is that the Conservative Party donations were not secret but declared to Electoral Comission though, depending on Commons offices advice, they may find they should have registered Party costs against individuals. So no law broken but Commons Rules still an issue.
Mr Hain broke the law - he did not check the donations within 30 days and register them in another 30 with the Electoral Commission and he also broke Parliamentary rules (and as of Monday was still in breach) by not registering these on the Register. So both law and rules broken.
57 - I am, yes.
52. Lost that argument then Roger!!
Ted. I can only see a technical distinction between a donor giving money to the Party and specifying it must go to a particular MP and giving money directly to the MP. The rules on declarations are specifically to find out what money MP’s get not what money the party gets-assuming all the donors are legit. Whether either or both were trying to mislead is really the most interesting question whatever rules/laws have been broken.
24- Roger- I would have liked American Gangster to win; saw it again and just brilliant.
Nick Palmer is right on the money on Osbourne. Went a year without asking. He obviously didn’t want people to know that he is being funded 0.5 mill. With Ashcroft and the Midlands Trading Company they are a bunch of hypocrites. “Same old Tories, always cheating”.
49 I think your system could lead to a nightmare, Coldstone. Why should all parties be corralled into a one size fits all format?
Woody. I didn’t include you in my post 52 because even CCO couldn’t afford another 661 of you!
13. 22. Nick - you are embarassing yourself.
67 I agree
54
But there’s a Catch 22!
As the donation would be to the party you vote for, i.e. if a party got 5 million votes it would have an account worth ten million. Even if you didn’t agree with taxpayer funding, you wouldn’t tick NO, for risking that the parties that you didn’t vote for would get their full share.
63 The money went to fund the Shadow Chancellors office, not George Osborne’s parliamentary and constituency offices. In the former the employees, accomodation and other costs are met from party funds and the employment contracts held by the party; in the latter George Osborne directly employs his parliamentary staff and constituency costs are directly related to his job as MP.
I said yesterday that it would have been better to err on side of transparency but taken to its logical conclusion if the costs of party research departments or other party offices should be declared by MPs I’d expect all MPs to declare when their party has helped in any way. Perhaps Mr Palmer should declare 1/366th share of the accommodation costs for Labour HQ, any support he has received from Labour research, all his constituency costs and donations etc?
59- cuddles- “daft, but endearing”- describes the LD’s perfectly.
Judging by some of the personal backlash the genial Roger, and Nick are suffering from today I could think of more suitable posting names for a few of our Tory posters here.
[69] No, that wouldn’t work - it would destroy the secrecy of the ballot. You’d have to have two ballot papers, one as now and a wholly separate one for the funding question… in fact, the more I think about it the more I think it wouldn’t work at all.
I’ve always supposed State Funding would be done through tax returns, shouldn’t cost too much in these days of internet access. I mean, we trust government with our computerised personal data, don’t we?
Had a dream last night that it was John McClane (of Die Hard fame) running for the GOP nomination, rather than John McCain.
Weird.
I even pictured him on the campaign trail in Michigan yelling; “Yippee Kayyee Mother F**ker!!” and Hillary digging up some dirt on that provocative “sign” he wore in Harlem, as part of his police work in New York.
I wonder what his odds would be on Betfair?
72
No! it could be on the ballot paper, next too the candidate you’ve voted for, tick No if you don’t want to make a contribution, if you don’t the party you’ve voted for gets £2.0
After counting and being returned, all the slips with out a tick, would be considered a yes. The returning officer, would send the amount due to the body responsible, the Party’s account would be credited.
Then getting people out to vote, would become even more motivated, not only are party workers getting a vote their getting a contribution.
70- Ted- it is just obvious that Osborne didn’t want to draw attention to his departments personal expenditure. God only knows what he blows a cool half a mill on.
There again poor old Hain eh. A hundred grand to come bottom of a second rate contest.
Both these are hugely embarrassing for the individuals. To be honest I think Osborne is much worse because he is trying to conceal himself under technicalities to keep the high ground.
It is funny contrasting the characters of Osborne and Hain. Osborne- the guy who as a student wore “hang Mandela” badges and t-shirts. Hain who organised anti apartheid marches. Rather speaks for itself doesn’t it?
Florida as well?
February 5 controversy
Under Democratic National Committee rules, no state may hold their primaries or caucuses before February 5 with the exceptions of Iowa, Nevada, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.
The Florida legislature voted via House Bill 537 to move forward the date of their state’s primary to January 29th, causing a chain reaction which moved many other states’ primaries and caucuses to much earlier dates. The vote passed with bipartisan support 118 to 0 in the House, 37 to 2 in the Senate. Accordingly, the Democratic National Committee has ruled that Florida’s delegates will not be seated, or, if seated, will not be able to vote, at the National Convention. Furthermore, the DNC has also stated that it will forbid any candidate from receiving delegates should they campaign in the Florida primary. The DNC Rules Committee met on August 25, 2007 and ruled that Florida would have 30 days to move its primary date at least 7 days later than the current date of January 29, or else lose all of its delegates in the Democratic primary. Florida officials said they may challenge the ruling on legal grounds and protest the 2008 convention; additionally, the actual implementation of such a decision might prove to be difficult.
Michigan has moved its primary to January 15, also in violation of party rules. On December 1, the Democratic National Committee voted to deny Michigan’s request to hold its primary on January 15 and declared that Michigan’s delegates will not count in the nominating contest unless Michigan moves its primary to a later date.
Roger, Nick and others. If I specify my donation is to be given to George Osborne to pay for Treasury research and staff, then I would expect this research work and staff to be transferred to the new Shadow Chancellor if he is replaced. Therefore, the benefit is to the position, not to the MP.
A sensible article on the funding issue from Jackie Ashley
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2240358,00.html
71 Tyson , many Conservative posters on here find it necessary to resort to personal abuse of anyone who challenges the propriety and behaviour of anyone in their party .
As Nick has said before, our MPs are remarkably uncorrupt and it is a shame that these sort of things serve to diminish all of them.
It is also understandable that politicians try to deflect attention away from themselves by pointing to (sometimes) superficially similar conduct by members of other parties.
Though it will be the source of the money that does for him, it is the fact that Hain saw fit to spend so much on his campaign that damages him. £100k+ on an internal election for a job that, to borrow Garner’s phrase, isn’t worth a pitcher of warm piss??? And then to finish fifth despite the money spent!!! Whereas, as our fishy friend Augustus points out, it is at least reasonable for a Shadow Chancellor to spend £500k over a year on his private office.
The commentators have been having fun at his expense (e.g. 38) and who c an blame them?
79. what personal attacks? Aaron called rogers arguements bile and half informed, thats it. Your acting like he’s been stuffed into a van, beaten with truncheons, then dumped at some traffic lights in hackney. When in fact one person has said one thing, and thats it. Stop trying to create a martyr out of a molehill.
75 Tyson, what it was spent on was in the Mail on Sunday - basically staff costs for 7 people coming to £359,000 for the year (balance carried over). Not badly paid staff but the party goes for quality
http://tinyurl.com/33l4pb
75. ‘Osborne- the guy who as a student wore “hang Mandela” badges and t-shirts.’
Do you have evidence of that?
81 Why Hackney?
Careful how you answer.
73. Casino, I thought Fred Thompson was the Die Hard, or should I say Die Hard 2 candidate….
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjXgS5lqqRQ&feature=related
79- mark Senior- I have noticed this. Only really ColinW (bless his cotton socks) went in for the anti Tory poster insults.
The character of the Tory leadership is important. Bullingdon Cameron who just loves shooting deer, and his partner “hang Mandela” Osborne preaching morality is a laugh. Flanked by Hilton and Coulson- 2 lovely characters, not.
As an observation though Cameron is becoming more reptile like, unlikable, balder, fatter and wrinkled by the minute. All that boyish, foppish charm has long gone, to leave what looks like just another middle aged uncharismatic Tory. In contrast Osborne is rapidly losing his whiny, boyish irritation, and rather aging into a much more handsome man who has stature and clout, and yes even a little charisma.
Maybe Howard was right and Osborne should have been his successor. I certainly think he is much more formidable and believable now than Cameron.
81 - I should say that I don’t think there has been any bile from Roger on this thread - I was referring more to the likes of:
Certain Tories on here dislike Hillary for the same reason they dislike Cherie and read the Daily Mail. They think a woman’s place is in the home where they can hold coffee mornings to keep themselves occupied. Hillary like Cherie are real professionals who have put in the miles…….
…….. In stark contrast to Cameron of course who after Eton Oxford and a stint as Carlton’s PR announces to Daddy over a port at Whites that he rather fancies being Prime minister………../
by Roger January 9th, 2008 at 10:33 am
When Roger posts his considered opinions I enjoy reading them and they contribute to the debate - but I do think it’s a pity that maybe 50% of his posts seem to have been written on autopilot
[However there are plenty of posters, from all sides, who seem to write 100% of their posts on autopilot]
80. Tony Blair has publicly said that he regrets much of the mid 1990’s mud-slinging over sleaze, he and Campbell admit that it came back to haunt them horribly.
I think the Cameron approach has been much more measured regarding the funding questions - especially over cash for honours and the Abrahams affair and it is the press who have been doing the running.
I suppose it goes with the territory that this kind of mud slinging goes on but it doesn’t help politics; the shame is that as you say we have amongst the most open and honest political system in the world.
Compare and contrast our petty squabbling over donations with the ‘vision thing’ going on the other side of the Atlantic and it’s a bit humbling.
We need to move on, on both sides of the political divide.
87 LOL
Three Shredded Wheat this morning, Aaron?
78 Agreed that Jackie Ashley is right about the need for clarity in rules but IMHO she dismisses the fact that Hain didn’t follow any rules all too easily- it wasn’t that he mis-reported or entered donations incorrectly but that after funding row after funding row he made no attempt, nor seems to take personal responsibility, following the rules at all. His unwillingness to be questioned raises doubts on his story - Mr Osborne did appear on Today for questioning.
Mr Brown seems to be getting ready to say goodbye to Hain after his half-hearted support today.
83
I’ve looked at that, G.O. was too young!
I certainly saw a couple of guys wearing the aforesaid teeshirt outside the ‘Silver Cross’
On the party funding, the body I envisage, would act as tapxpayers, (and party members) representative. It would have the right to look at how the Party is spending the money, could suggest cheaper alternatives, withold money if it felt that the party was being profligate.
George Osborne, (I’m using him as an example) claims he needs 500,000 per annum to run his office, perhaps he does, perhaps he doesn’t, we shouldn’t accept his word.
On the Deputy Leader, of the Labour Party or of any party, what a pointless job, if there is a need for someone to stand in for the PM, rank the cabinet, 1.PM.2.C.of E.3.Foreign Sec. etc. Lets cut out waste.
84. I was going to say somewhere in nottingham, but none of you would know where it was, so hackney came to mind first.
86. so many stereotypes, and so much hyperbole in such a short post.
Dear me the leftie posters are getting very hot under the collar this morning - a remarkable volume of feeble bluster and pathetic insults.
83- woody- those of us who were familiar with the student politics of the 80’s and early 90’s remember well the young Tory generation of Thatcher. The hang Mandela t-shirts, the arrogance, the nastiness. Osborne and many others who have risen in the party from that era were typical of this group. Arrogant, highly active, ideologiocal, borderline racist, and nasty.
Funny enough Cameron wasn’t. Cameron’s pathway into the Tory party was borne from family connections not ideology. Cameron was a typical shire Tory, barber jackets, green wellies, tweeds and hunting whose only belief really is that the elite should rule.
Osborne and co are an entirely different ilk.
89 - I have enforced early morning starts on a Monday, PtP - they obviously make me irritable and belligerent!
I’ll go back to semi-lurking and only posting massive value bets…
92 Hyson Green?
(My grandfather was born there…)
[86] Tyson, you’ll get banned for saying Cameron is becoming more reptile like, unlikable, balder, fatter and wrinkled by the minute - there’s no baldism on this site, Our Genial Host is most particular…
92
In fact there is a stretch from Clapton Pond to Springfield Park, Cuddles, known as ‘murder mile’ and for very good reason. The Wick end, where I was born and brought up, was always fairly genteel, even in those days, and has now become quite gentrified.
You have to be careful what you say on PB.com. As I have often learned to my cost, there is always some bugger out there that knows the terrain better than you!
94. so, in conclusion, your proof is a vague rememberance of some people back then who wore that kind of stuff.
96. I was going to put Bulwell, I wouldn’t even dump Tony Blair in Hyson Green these days! And st annes or the meadows, wouldn’t last ten seconds!
79. what personal attacks? Aaron called rogers arguements bile and half informed, thats it. Your acting like he’s been stuffed into a van, beaten with truncheons, then dumped at some traffic lights in hackney. When in fact one person has said one thing, and thats it. Stop trying to create a martyr out of a molehill.
by cuddles January 14th, 2008 at 10:31 am
I think we’ll leave that sort of behaviour to Darius Guppy and his mate Boris…
99 My Auntie Joan lived in Bulwell (died last year). The Meadows has a long reputation - was said in the C19th to have had the second worse slums in the Empire (after Calcutta…)
94 - Oh dear, you’ve obviously offended your wife again. Be a man: stand up for yourself. You ARE a Tory; get out of that stultifying debilitating leftie closet, and be proud of it. You’ll win her back, I promise.
100. Calling Roger’s arguments half-formed sounds like flattery to me.
95 Yes, I thought you were uncharacteristically feisty, Aaron. I shall know not to mess with you on a Monday morning in future.
I do not think we should debate the demerits of the Hain and Osborne matters. The facts are that both are damaging their parties because it is in the MSM.
Labour has successfully used the media to balance out the far worse Hain affairs. The Mail, BBC and Sun have been spun by Labour. Osborne is unlucky in that there is a hapless/hopeless HoC administrator. It is unfair to Osborne, but so is life.
Nick P would be better off focusing on the betting implications than tarnishing his reputation on here by linking Osborne with the Hain stuff. Blair in opposition had foreign trusts spending millions to prop up the Labour opposition, little of which was reported.
Let it go Nick the key battle is in the MSM and they have adopted the Labour line. Spin 1 Facts 0.
We need to factor that into the betting. My guess is that it will open up opportunities for the LDs and “others” to improve their votes and polling figures.
Just a point on the Osborne money- the Shadow chancellor’s office would also presumably get a share of the Tories £3.8million in Short money (which is for research support for the front bench), so the £500k would be in addition to that.
Given that Cameron gets £600k in Short money alone, we could easiliy be talking about GO’s office costing a million quid a year to run. Wonder how much David Davis gets?
Link to Short money explanation here http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/notes/snpc-01663.pdf
and I’m from Hyson Green (well Forest, actually, not the actual Hyson green estate, which has been demolished now anyway)
91- coldstone- Mandela was released in 1990, about the time when the young Tories were raising the ante on the hang Mandela stuff. Osborne wasn’t too young then.
Did they abolish the young Tories in the end? They were a liability, but many of the activists involved then are in the mainstream party now.
Being somewhat circumspect you cannot hold what someone did when they were 17/18 against them for the rest of their lives. But the sheer horribleness of the Tories then still lingers- it comes out in the zenophobic clap trap on Europe, the hang em and flog em fraternity, the anti immigration lobby.
The paternalistic party of Hurd, Whitelaw, Heath, Clarke, Patten is long gone. Destroyed by Thatcher, Tebbit and the ideogues who flooded the party since. No matter how Cameron tries to re-brand the party you know the seething malcontents underneath are still there, and in large numbers.
99. the meadows are bad, gangs wander it now. st annes is bad too, but better then the meadows. It used to be quite a nice working class area (where my mum was brought up) but they were all moved out and troublemakers dumped into it. Bulwell has it’s good bits and it’s bad bits.
94
Ahem! Barber jackets are jackets worn by Barbers, I think you mean Barbour jackets.
The funniest thing I ever saw, (not really) was John Major wearing one, it was bloody hysterical, Paddy Ashdown on the other hand, there’s a man who can wear a Barbour
For further reading see below.
http://www.barbour.com/
108. Don’t worry - you’ll get your chance to be a seething malcontent soon enough. The practise you are putting in suggests you are really looking forward to it.
109. Lived in St Ann’s (apostrophe, noted!) as a young kid before moving to Forest. St Ann’s was nowhere near as tough as Forest/Hyson green (not a red light area for a start!).
When I went to university, I read Nick Davies’s “Dark Heart of Modern Britain”- about inner city decay under thatcher- Street I grew up on was mentioned twice in first ten pages! Went back last year. All gentrified now, loads of new houses, estate knocked down. Old school closed down and relplaced with shiny academy.
108 “No matter how Cameron tries to re-brand the party you know the seething malcontents underneath are still there, and in large numbers.”
Oh, you do so hope, don’t you Tyson? Obviously you have no actual insiders view, though - just rehashed and outmoded prejudices.
112. st annes still has a very high burglary rate and is not somewhere you’d walk through at night unless there was no other choice. hyson green can be bad, as can the forest, but the meadows is the worst by far still. The occasional gang war stills occurs with the st annes gangs.
102- john 0- my wife is a good Italian socialist who knows the Internationale by heart in both Italian and English. She taunts me with the Tory insult when all else fails.
Even flirting with the Tory party (god forbid) would be grounds for divorce. And rightly so. You cannot marry someone who then turns into a Tory. An unfekkenforgiveable crime.
94. I’ve been raised in the x factor plastic pop generation. That doesn’t mean to say that I destest it with every breath in my body. Unless you have evidence of Osbourne taking part in any ‘hang Mandela’ rally, then you really should withdraw that argument and not use it again.
A fast skimming this interwoven thread gives rise to the question “is it safe to walk through the dark heart of the Tory Party”. There are a lot of malcontents who walk the street at night, ready to pounce on the unsuspecting modernizer.
117. The only evidence of ‘malcontentment’ on this thread is surely the increasingly shrill and hysterical outpourings of the left wing posters on it, including sadly Nick Palmer. The Tories all seem pretty chipper.
re 94. I’ve said this before but the difference between Osborne and all other politicians of which ever party in the UK is that he is smarter than all of them. He is a giant amongst pygmies. He may not come over well, but that is getting better as he matures, but his strategic political abilities put him in a class way beyond anybody else including his own leader. If Labour can inflict damage that would be a major coup.
I had lunch with a very prominent NuLab figure in the summer and he shared my view of GO.
The “ditherer” description of Brown has GO’s fingerprints all over it.
78 It’s all very well Jackie Ashley calling for “simplification”, but does she mean by that that House of Commons cannot spell out rules of its own which applies specifically to MPs and Peers (and those that work for them)? My reading was that she was calling for a unified system with Electoral Commission (PPERA etc). The whole point about the EC is that it is there to regulate donations to parties, parts of parties and candidates in elections, not to work out what may be appropriate for those in Parliament or Councils for that matter, who need to declare interests.
FWIW, my view of the work of the Commission, is the underlying naive assumption (made explicit by the person whose report led to the system as it now is - sorry can’t remember his name) that parties will enthuse enough people to re-create a mass membership and large scale smallish donations. I remember now going off the deep end when I heard him spouting that rubbish. Unfortunately we live in an increasingly cynical society, where few people feel motivated to give to parties ( more so to their representatives if they feel they know and trust them.)
115 “You cannot marry someone who then turns into a Tory.” PMSL
:-) 
That’s got to be one of the funniest lines ever written on PB.com! A gay, a transvestite, a serial rapist maybe - but NOT a Tory!
71 Tyson.I suggest in future you look up the more difficult words likr “genial” before posting. “the genial Roger and Nick” !!”cheering-kindly-sympathetic” More like an advanced case of EHM I would say- obvious for a long time in Roger’s case but being linked now to Nick is disappointing - panic perhaps?
110- coldstone- not quite as funny as john major being reeled out nowadays to critique Lab’s corruption. This is the guy who brought us “back to basics” after strumping Edwina, and who managed to manipualte some rumours somewhere that he was shagging his cook as a smokescreen.
Simon Hoggart says that the Edwina rumours were all around the press when honest John was PM. The cook libel was a welcome distraction, and always clearly not true.
Hypocracy and the Tories appear to mould together rather seamlessly. T’was ever thus.
100. Dan. Certainly the funniest post on here since the departure of Jack W!
75. Tyson. Good to see you packing a punch again. I was also thinking of comparing the anti apartheid hero with the antics of Boy George but I flinched. But that’s why you’re heavy weight champ and I’m not even a contender!
Well, I once fell in with a bunch of reprobates who made me go canvassing in West Bridgford. THAT was hard!
To answer Mike’s question, “Is McCain becoming unstoppable?”, not yet according to this analysis.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/01/how_do_you_solve_a_problem_lik.html
119, 94 Well he wasn’t so smart to have a history of the sort of stuff Tyson mentions. Has he dissociated himself publicly from what he did and said then?
123. What does ‘hypocracy’ mean? rule by hypocrites, perhaps?
Isn’t that what we have now, e.g Peter Hain the hero (sic) of the anti-apartheid movement taking money from a former National Party supporter?
125 Including the late lamented Tabman of this parish, no doubt!
127. Tysons just mud slinging, he hasn’t yet come up with any actual evidence to suggest Osborne ever did anything along those lines, just his own supposition and prejudices. He’s basically saying it to prove his point, if he has one.
127 - Can we provide evidence that he did and said anything to dissociate himself from? That he was young and Tory at a time that young Tories were not distinguishing themselves doesn’t mean that he engaged in the same behaviour. If you cannot furnish your argument with evidence then desist.
Fishy 128. Should have realised - Tyson’s spelling is so bad, he almost certainly doesn’t have a dictionary.
119- Mike- see post 86.
“As an observation though Cameron is becoming more reptile like, unlikable, balder, fatter and wrinkled by the minute. All that boyish, foppish charm has long gone, to leave what looks like just another middle aged uncharismatic Tory. In contrast Osborne is rapidly losing his whiny, boyish irritation, and rather aging into a much more handsome man who has stature and clout, and yes even a little charisma”.
Sorry about the balding jibe, but I agree with you on Osborne. He is becoming much more accomplished as a presenter, and performer. I think he is possibly the leading political strategist in the UK today, and is looking much more the part to boot. He is also extremely hard working unlike the others, i.e Hague. That said he is a Tory.
Thanks 121 Peter the Punter.
And thanks for the spell check Mr svelck at 122- perhaps you can monitor and correct all my posts in the future.
119 Mike
Can you expand on your thoughts on GO. I know you sat next to him on a train once. What leads you to say that he is a giant amongst pygmies and the cleverest UK politician?
On the face of it his performance as shadow chancellor has been at best mixed. He also seems to have a bit of a nasty side.
Any thoughts much appreciated.
125 Pah! That’s nothing, Mr Carp. John O regularly canvasses in Cobham and East Molesey without the benefit of armed guards. That takes balls.
134 - ooh, meeeooww, are you related to any of Nick Palmer’s felines? I think we should be told.
Tyson, so you have no evidence at all that George Osborne wore a “hang Nelson Mandela t-shirt?”
I was an active member of Exeter University Conservative Association at the time, and neither I nor any of my colleagues wore one, in a university which probably had the most right wing student body in the country.
The “paternalistic party” you describe contained some pretty right wing people. Europe aside (and it’s debateable if that’s a right or left wing issue) I’d say the Conservative Party of the late seventies was more right wing than its modern day counterpart.
135
and again!
Dear boy, I’m actually canvassing the armed guards protecting the Russian billionaires in their Cobham MacMansions
137 - Don’t tell me: you were a ‘moderate’ there
138
LOL, John O. Pleased to find you in good spirits.
Btw, are you able to attend this year’s party? It would be grand to meet up with you again.
138
LOL, John O. Pleased to find you in good spirits.
Btw, are you able to attend this year’s party? It would be grand to meet up with you again.
139 LOL!. We weren’t that ideological, though we were all supportive of Margaret Thatcher’s government. Our best act was to overturn the student union’s boycott of Barclays Bank (because it had branches in South Africa). Nearly 900 students turned up for that vote, and we got 500 of them.
94
So Osborne was involved in student politics in the early 80’s when he was 10!
‘Funny enough Cameron wasn’t. Cameron’s pathway into the Tory party was borne from family connections not ideology’
How do you know that,what’s your source?
75. “Osborne- the guy who as a student wore “hang Mandela” badges and t-shirts.”
Tyson - Do you not accept that there is a whole world of difference between saying that *some* young Tory activists in the 1980s wore “Hang Mandela” t-shirts, and saying that because George Osbourne was a young Conservative then, he *must* have been won of them?
Rather like saying *anyone* active in the Labour party in the early 1980s must, by implication, have also been part of the militant tendency. Like accusing… oooh.. Tony Blair, of it for example?
I’m sure I don’t need to remind you that the laws of libel apply to the internet too.
AFAIK, there were no “Hang Nelson Mandela” t-shirts. There was, however, an FCS activist called Michael Dark, from Wales, who called for the hanging of Nelson Mandela, when he stood for NUS President, and started a riot at their conference.
I thought Woger had given up on the Osborne smear ages ago (he peddled it regularly) when it was pointed out that Osborne was in his mid teens at the time.
Never mind Woger, we can guess taht Hain didnt want every one to know that he was accepting cash from one of the people who bankrolled Apartheid, but lets have your view on this proven little misconception. After all this is fact and your Osborne smear is a product of your genial imagination.
94. “those of us who were familiar with the student politics of the 80’s and early 90’s remember well the young Tory generation of Thatcher. The hang Mandela t-shirts, the arrogance, the nastiness. Osborne and many others who have risen in the party from that era were typical of this group. Arrogant, highly active, ideologiocal, borderline racist, and nasty.”
Sean Fear was a student activist in the 1980s.
Would you associate him with these sentiments?
136 No meow intended at all JohnO. I am genuinely interested in Mike’s opinion. It would be fascinating to know how and why he is so good. I have huge respect for genuinely gifted political operators on either side of the divide. I want to know why I need to find out more about GO.
I may have sounded catty, but GO’s public performances have been very weak compared to Cameron’s. If I was on the Labour front bench I would see GO’s as tantalisingly vulnerable (perhaps as the current events have showed).
148 - The most common tactic/strategy is misdirection and it wouldn’t be beyond the wit of Osborne to cultivate an image of being less than he is, it would certainly make him more capable of staying largely sub-radar in his effectiveness.
138 - Peter, Oh yes…after all, you’ve promised me a drink!