Monday, January 10, 2011

Oncoming Oldham onslaught...

Sorry for 'old-news' posts but hey, I'm catching up on a lot after a "well deserved" break.

Just one thought about Thursday's Oldham East and Saddleworth by-election: this seat was won by Labour at the General election so, IMHO, anything but a WHOOPING victory for Labour now is to be expected. Nothing else; certainly not a blow for Clegg or the Coalition. In fact, more to the point, the most worried should be Labour and Ed Miliband: if it isn't a thumpingly clear margin of victory he may as well pack his bags now, especially after the weak and ill-judged defence of his shadow chancellor Alan Johnson: when the mistake is clear best surely to admit it and move on rather than spout pathetic partisan dross, "I take his judgements over George Osborne's any day". What, even when you know AJ is wrong?

Bookmark and Share


Paul said...

21% National Insurance would have been interesting!

Good to see you hedging your bets here, Labour win to be expected but small Labour win means Labour failure. All those years you've been telling me by-elections mean nothing, honestly, who can a man trust these days?

Span Ows said...

oooh you cheeky monkey! hehehe. Just putting myself in their shoes. Woolas won so I don't envisage any possible scenario where the Lib Dems gain (after their continued slagging and fall in the polls for the last 7/8 months) or how the Conservatives (way way way behind in May) can make up so much ground even if they hadn't been steamrolling the "evil cuts".

The Great Gildersleeve said...

I'm just sorry that the Government has such a large majority virtually all they want to do is passed unopposed. I wish the numbers were more even and that a few MP's are unable to switch sides and make a difference.

It's said that the coaltion will result in compromise and put the skates on some policies but that could have still happened if the situation was as I mention above. Possibly more so.

I think we are as disgruntled with our political scene as many other countries are including the US but the difference is that whether someone is unhinged or wants to be an anarchist and change things in vilolent way as in the latest shooting where the Congresswoaman and members of the public were injured or killed, we still are safer over here and public figures are still probably safer than in most countries.

Of course there are as in any country some incidents where an MP has been attacked by someone usually when holding their surgeries where they meet their constituents so we are not totally
safe. No one can condone such action.

We'll just have to see how much disruption is caused by public unrest in the next year and whether as the Government has a strong mandate it will take any notice.

And there will not be enough bye elections between now and the next official election to change the political landscape. And as the main parties are similar I am unsure we'd notice any difference anyhow.

Span Ows said...

Thanks for your comments Gildy. When you say unopposed you are more right than you think: yesterday Labour abstained en-mass in the EU Bill. There were 40 odd rebels despite this, had Labour not pre-announed their aim to abstain there could have well been more rebels emboldened by a possible upset.

Re the guns/safety etc well that is pr for the course in the US, what isn't is the blame game afterward.

Goodnight Vienna said...

The only vote that counts is ours. We can vote with our feet, at the ballot box or with our fists. Unfortunately, it seems the state is bent on trying our patience. This year is going to see more armed police on our streets, regardless of financial cutbacks.

The Great Gildersleeve said...

Ideally you are correct GV but when the main parties are similar, it is usually a case of just voting in one side and then the other...

And what you say is interesting Span...if they kept their own council more MP's might actually make a difference when voting on policies and more might switch sides and go against those in the cabinet or shadow cabinet but then again by threatening to go against they hope it may force or sway others who have not made up their mind.

Trouble is that can show how weak the opposition is and so you telegraph your intentions.

So I'm not sure which stragedy is best.

On different aspect of politics at a time when spin is so imprtant...I don't think that there are many public speakers who are capable of giving great speeches.

I think they were better years ago.

Span Ows said...

GV, I have no doubt that you are right. My only regret was that this increase in 'emotion' and direct action didn't happen when those that deserved a kick-in were at the helm. I'm sure there are many like me, desperately wanting "the right" change but unwilling to see Labour get away scot free - and even strengthened - so unwilling to "hound" the coalition.

Gildy, there are no "orators" now.

The Great Gildersleeve said...

You are so right Span about the lack of "Orators!"

And some who do speak these days could read a shopping list and you'd have the crowd applauding or whooping after every item.

In many cases it's obvious the audience are not listening.

I remember Bob Hope explaining how you delivery jokes and if you get into a certain rhythm often people will laugh but if you take apart what is being said it may not even be funny.

You are as we always knew being manipulated.