Daily mail as a quality source??!!

wigglebeena

To balance my championing of my beloved Gridiron, I will say that Rachel Barton is THE worst music journalist I have ever, ever read. Jeez. And I've read some s**** by Simon Price back in the dawn of time.

But still, for variety, quality, coherent writing, and entertainment, the Guardian kicks the Mail's sad, sorry, elderly !!!!. Unless you are really obsessed with living forever via eating kale/brazil nuts/green tea/whatever it is this week, or how women are vile, nasty, bad, responsible for absolutely everything, and generally should have their pandies smacked by Nanny.

GeorgeHowell

StevieJ wrote: »

Unfortunately, you may well be correct, having said that the electorate are a fickle bunch this may all turn on the results of this recession.

That could be so, because it is very obvious that many, if not the majority, do vote with their pockets. Whether Labour's failures in areas such as education, criminal justice, the EU, and control of immigration, will outweigh the effect of any alleged post-recession mini-boom that they may be able to engineer, remains to be seen. My guess is that they are already irrevocably dead and buried in the majority of the marginal constituencies, almost whatever happens.

Rochdale_Pioneers

GeorgeHowell wrote: »

That could be so, because it is very obvious that many, if not the majority, do vote with their pockets. Whether Labour's failures in areas such as education, criminal justice, the EU, and control of immigration, will outweigh the effect of any alleged post-recession mini-boom that they may be able to engineer, remains to be seen. My guess is that they are already irrevocably dead and buried in the majority of the marginal constituencies, almost whatever happens.

In an ordinary election I'm certain that would be the case. I'm not sure now. I think that the economy will be the all-encompassing issue that focuses minds - as it was in 1992. And on that front there is still a lot up in the air. Once the usual mid-term protest vote against the government weakens - and it always does (even in 1997) - then people have to make an actual choice between policy platforms, and that is the area that worries the Tories the most.

By next May the election will be called they will have had to develop detailed plans as to what they would do - what spending to cut. they'll have to have a rationale as to why their position in contrast to that agreed and actioned by the rest of the developed world is wrong and why they are right.

And that will be a hard sell. Can be done, but cozy and comfortable the Tory lead feels now it can't survive through the next year without the Tories putting some substance behind their soundbites. A link to Paxman grilling Howard has been posted - I expect a similar grilling interrogating their claim that we are in more debt than anyone else. Make the Tories look like chancer liars who don't actually have any clear ideas what to do (their entire ideological world having failed) and things may look very different.

I personally think the Tories are most likely to win, but its not remotely clear cut by how much and a lot is going to hapen before the election that could swap things around. Remember how many 20 point swings in the polls we have had in the last 18 months and tell me that the Tories are a shoo-in.

GeorgeHowell

Some good points there. But despite the erratic swings of the polls I have a feeling that Labour has consistently been in big trouble in key marginals for over a year regardless of the national picture. That's why Brown bottled it in 2007 and why the party has an air of expectant defeat about it.

We are a very poorly governed country indeed, and have been for a very long time. People are beginning to realise more and more that a vote here is really a vote for the perceived lesser of the evils. That's why there's more political apathy, lower turnouts, and more floating voters.