Politicians are odd, aren't they?

Cleaver

Politics and politicians. I just don't get it.

Did any of you see the news tonight? Gordon Brown was leaving some building he had been visiting on his campaign trail and a guy started heckling him, but in quite a reasonable, non-sweary and non-abusive way. He followed Mr Brown out of the building asking him quite firmly why his kids could not get in to the state school of their choice. He followed him from the building entrance around 30 metres to the car Mr Brown was getting into, asking him repeatedly about the issue of the school, but never once looked like he was going to cause any trouble or be abusive. This went on for about 30 seconds I think. The TV cameras caught the whole lot and it was the main news on News at Ten (don't normally watch Prole News, but it was on after the footie) tonight.

So what does Mr Brown do? He must have a legion of PR advisors. We know that Labour are the party of spin and PR. So he must have good advice, right? No one should have to train a 'man of the people' how to behave in this situation of course, but they must have been through with him what to do when a situation like this arises? Surely?

If I were Brown's PR here would be my advice for this situation. Guys like this, even if their issue isn't valid, is typical of the 'common man'. They feel alienated by politics and politicians ignoring them. The best thing for Mr Brown would have been to ask his driver to wait 10 minutes, walk over to the guy, shake his hand, tell him he wants to hear his problems away from the cameras and offer to go and buy the guy a coffee somewhere and listen to his issue. The result? The guy has to respect Brown for doing this, even if he still disagrees with him. The public see Brown having respect for someone and see him as someone willing to ditch his campagn for ten minutes to actually speak to someone about their issue. Fair play to him.

But no. Brown smiles all the way through it and acts as if the guy just doesn't exist. Just walks past him to the waiting car with his 'bouncers', like he's some sort of popstar. Grinning ear to ear with a fake smile, as if nothing whatsoever is going on. It's like the guy just isn't there. Utterly rude. It's completely disrespectful to the guy, but also a complete own-goal to the millions of people who then watch it on the news.

This isn't really an anti-Brown thing, more an anti-politician thing. I don't doubt that they'd all act in the same way in this situation. Completely clueless at both dealing with real people and understanding how real people want and expect them to behave.

Useless b*stards. I don't want to vote for any of them. Urgh.

treliac

That horrible sickly, fake smile Brown has. I remember it well when the Euro MP, Daniel Hannan, was getting the better of him a few months ago and he didn't seem to know how to react.

He seems very lacking in social skills and dealing with stuff that's unexpected/unscripted. At PMQ's he looks 'stuck' and goes off at a tangent when he can't think of an answer.

I don't think they're all as inept though. As dishonest?.... now that's a different matter!

LizEstelle

Personally, I'd rather have 'inept' if the alternative is 'smug and smarmy'.

As for 'dishonest', I believe that's now called 'doing an Ashcroft'...

Cleaver

LizEstelle wrote: »

Personally, I'd rather have 'inept' if the alternative is 'smug and smarmy'.

I really, really want to vote and show my feelings. But you're right, it's like picking your least worst favourite. The parties are all pretty much the same, sh*tty, self-serving, PR clones, so you're left chosing the leaders.

Do I pick a socially inept idiot who seems to dedicate their existance to controlling my life in every way possible and somehow manages to pick a cabinet of people I somehow hate with a passion?

Do I pick a posh, smarmy, point-scoring oily, nauseating moron who, in a pub of 100 people, would be the very last person I would want to spend any time with?

Do I pick, well, that bloke called Nick. Who, erm, well... is probably something. And stands for, erm, well, some things.

Why can't one of the main parties just appoint a decent bloke or lassy. Y'know, like that decent boss that everyone has probably experienced once in their career. Inspiring, genuine, can make mistakes and admit it, good sense of humour, speaks their mind yet is respectful of those they disagree with, innovative, pleasant, not always trying to please everyone as they know they can't, knows what to leave to others to do. These people exist, why aren't they standing as MPs and running political parties?

They whole system needs a shake up I tells ya!

Generali

One of the things that made both Mr Blair and Lady Thatcher great politicians was their willingness to confront people in these situations.

Blair got buttonholed by a woman who IIRC had a complaint about the treatment of someone by the NHS. He took her aside for a private conversation later.

Lady T just used to correct them firmly with a pithy comment or vaguely pertinent statistic.

If you stand there grinning like a loon you look ridiculous.

LizEstelle

Er... was someone saying something ...


http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/cameron-cycle-415x488.jpg


... about the 'party of spin and PR'...

... and how this could never, ever, heaven forfend, be an anti-Brown thread...?


Some posters are odd, aren't they..?

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

Cleaver wrote: »

The best thing for Mr Brown would have been to ask his driver to wait 10 minutes, walk over to the guy, shake his hand, tell him he wants to hear his problems away from the cameras and offer to go and buy the guy a coffee somewhere and listen to his issue. .

Nice in theory.

Until the point where it turns out "the guy" is actually an undercover reporter for The Sun. With a hidden audio/video recorder in his lapel. Who tricks Brown into saying something like "I agree it doesn't seem fair", which is then splashed all over tomorrows front page as "BROWN ADMITS LABOUR UNFAIR".......

The media have created a monster.

There's a reason why no top politician can have an informal, open and honest chat with anyone these days.

Cleaver

LizEstelle wrote: »

Er... was someone saying something ...


http://i.thisislondon.co.uk/i/pix/2009/05/cameron-cycle-415x488.jpg


... about the 'party of spin and PR'...

... and how this could never, ever, heaven forfend, be an anti-Brown thread...?


Some posters are odd, aren't they..?

I'm not really understanding what you're saying. Are you saying I put this up as a purely 'anti-brown' thread? I think I was quite clear in the post two or three down from my OP that I hate them all.

LizEstelle

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nice in theory.

Until the point where it turns out "the guy" is actually an undercover reporter for The Sun. With a hidden audio/video recorder in his lapel. Who tricks Brown into saying something like "I agree it doesn't seem fair", which is then splashed all over tomorrows front page as "BROWN ADMITS LABOUR UNFAIR".......

The media have created a monster.

There's a reason why no top politician can have an informal, open and honest chat with anyone these days.

Or a representative from your friendly, neighbourhood Al-Qaeda branch.

Methinks the OP has forgotten both that we are dealing with the Prime Minister and that the times we are living through are none too genteel...

LizEstelle

Cleaver wrote: »

I'm not really understanding what you're saying. Are you saying I put this up as a purely 'anti-brown' thread? I think I was quite clear in the post two or three down from my OP that I hate them all.

Good.

Shame that your eminently sensible feel for fair play does not manifest itself in the OP.

Cleaver

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Nice in theory.

Until the point where it turns out "the guy" is actually an undercover reporter for The Sun. With a hidden audio/video recorder in his lapel. Who tricks Brown into saying something like "I agree it doesn't seem fair", which is then splashed all over tomorrows front page as "BROWN ADMITS LABOUR UNFAIR".......

The media have created a monster.

There's a reason why no top politician can have an informal, open and honest chat with anyone these days.

Rubbish.

It doesn't matter if it's an undercover Sun reporter (although it clearly wasn't), if Brown is happy with what he's talking about then he can have a conversation about it. What are the two outcomes? Either Brown still disagrees with the man and tells him respectfully after hearing his issue that there isn't anything he can do, or he hears that the guy has genuinely been hard done by and promises to get someone to look in to the issue for him.

And if he did take the time to talk to him, and it turned out to be an undercover reporter, then Brown comes out and points out that he took the time to talk to someone about what he thought was a genuine issue and they turned out to be a liar. I think the public would sympathise with him on that.