« honestly, you just treat this country like it's a hotel | Main | many wonderful things »

February 10, 2006

Comments

Simon

Primarily, it's a healthy reminder to the national press that Mr Blair is really quite unpopular in the Labour heartlands these days (let alone outside them), and that he ought to pack himself off to the US lecture circuit sharpish. Unfortunately they seem to have decided it's actually a combination of the aforementioned 'local issues' and Gordon Brown.

Are there not enough anti-Blairistas in the media to get a 'doesn't he look tired' campaign going? They mention his weariness occasionally, but the public mood is that he should have retired gracefully at least three years ago, and they don't seem to be picking up on it. See also after the general election, where a couple of competent speeches on 7/7 and Europe respectively convinced the nation's commentators that he was 'revitalised' and 'still the best available Prime Minister' and 'definitely not a lame duck'. Oh well.

jamie

I think one point about Blair is that he's "of" the wider commentariat where previous prime ministers were of the autonomous culture of their own parties and movements. I think this holds true to a certain extent whether they're in favour of him or not. When he goes, they lose status.

It was interesting after 7/7 that there was a general attempt to mount a rallying round effort across the media, but that the country as a whole wasn't particularly interested.

dsquared

180 results, I was surprised

jamie

There's an amusing paradox here. You can get bruschetta and Rioja at Asda these days. the fact that the government think that it's limited to a small group of Elizabeth David cultists just shows how out of touch it is. And them being such supermarket groupies too...

MatGB

I had a bruchetta for lunch yesterday. In a cheap beachfront cafe in Bude. Rather nice. Us poor people can afford snobby food now.

And we're voting LibDem a lot, at least down here in t' Westcountry.

It does seem to confirm something that was clear in the last election, namely that people who are most willing to change their vote to Lib Dem are people who previously voted Labour, and in numbers that extend beyond the antiwar middle class cliché.
That should be obvious to anyone that can study psephology anyway. Why are they strong in the Westcountry outside the cities? Labour could never make headway, so the 'lower classes' voted LibDem instead.

That it's hapenning wherever they're now in second place is a good thing, just hope they recognise it properly to take advantage.

The comments to this entry are closed.

friends blogs

blobs

Blog powered by Typepad

my former home