Posh Boys in trouble?

[french frank]

I am so sorry to hear this news. Looking on the bright side, Eric Pickles has advised that you will now be able to trade on an equal basis with New York, Frankfurt and Milan. The power of the individual!

I am so pleased to learn this.

By a strange coincidence I was sitting next to Bristol's Returning Officer this evening at the concert, he who made the dread announcement. He said it was his understanding that if no one at all had turned out to vote, he would have then pulled the 'result' out of a hat. Democracy becomes curioser and curioser when the people need be given no say at all. Or if they don't say, it will be said for them. (And Leeds has done the dirty on us by voting No like all the rest.)

Ah well, Prima la Musica! It was an exceptional concert (the noisiest, most rapturous applause I've ever heard after a concert). The band and soloists had a practice run-through at somewhere or other last night, so they were really on form ...

[Lateralthinking1]

By a strange coincidence I was sitting next to Bristol's Returning Officer this evening at the concert

Name dropper.

Good news - Bristol has a twin. Doncaster has decided to keep its Mayor. Oh and the Greens came third in London.

The Latest

Boris Re-Elected as London Mayor

Boris Johnson wins in London by 3%, just 26 hours after the polling stations closed. The delay was caused by missing boxes and mangled papers from Brent where Ken is particularly popular. That though was purely a coincidence. Revelations about the latter avoiding tax almost certainly did for him. Great news. No so-called left wing socialist should be able to earn hundreds of thousands of pounds annually and pay tax at 18%. Ed Miliband is unusual. He was one of the few Labour saints in terms of expenses. There are lessons for him to learn here. He needs to clear out anyone who isn't a saint. Remote Shadow Cabinet members like this one - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emily_Thornberry - and his own PPS - http://www.dailyecho.co.uk/news/4446...xpense_claims/.

Option 1 - Prime Minister in 2025

Boris is expected to remain Mayor until after the General Election. If he gets a third term, it will take him through to the Conservative defeat at the 2020 election. He would be able to become leader at that point and then Prime Minister in 2025.

Option 2 - Prime Minister in 2020

Why though wait so long? If Ed does the impossible and gets Labour elected in 2015, Boris could oust Cameron in a coup. A bit like Ken did to the genteel Andrew McIntosh in the early eighties, not to mention in other places. This would make him PM in 2020.

Option 3 - President of the USA

So much for little old Britain. An Obama victory in 2012, followed by three years of poor performance by the Democrats, could see the big blonde brain leaving the office of London Mayor early. After all, this peculiar world is his oyster. There is not an obvious Republican candidate even for the 2015-16 campaign. New York born Boris is well-placed to secure that party's nomination for the US Presidency. He is viewed as a bit like Winston Churchill over there. They say we should be grateful. Many of us won't be and no doubt he will get the drift. Of course, he will need to campaign first unless a more straightforward procedure can be arranged at a secret international meeting in the Algarve. Or perhaps some sort of deal can be secured for him during the high profile Olympics?

Remember folks - Boris works hard on behalf of all Londoners while Ken earned up to a million pounds in just three years.

[french frank]

Name dropper.

I can't drop his name because I don't know what it is. The person on my right apologised for having a discussion with the person on my left (whom she knew), during the course of which the fact emerged. To have three people sitting in a row who had an interest in the mayoral referendum must have been an oddity. Two thirds of us voted No and the other third did not divulge his sympathies ...

By the way, LibDems also came fourth to the Greens in a, perhaps two, Euro elections. And to UKIP. Always a convenient scapegoat

When you see how the mobile vulgus sweeps back to Labour having been delighted to see the back of them two years ago, you realise how impossible it is to get a decent government under the current system. In fact, this is No Change, isn't it?

[MrGongGong]

.

By the way, LibDems also came fourth to the Greens in a, perhaps two, Euro elections. And to UKIP. Always a convenient scapegoat

Maybe in the past
but they (or rather their leadership) are totally responsible for all the justifiable anger.

no one to vote for I'm afraid ................
there is a danger that people might think that BNPLite (sorry UKIP) are not a load of delusional bigots, though they stand for what many Tories admit to after a few shandies

[french frank]

Maybe in the past
but they (or rather their leadership) are totally responsible for all the justifiable anger.

In a few years down the road this will be the past too. I see the LibDems still got 16% of the vote which would have been no disaster a few years ago. The problem with FPTP is that they start to get back into the area where votes and seats become even more disproportionate.

The psychology is interesting: there really is a two-party mentality when people can within two years forget Labour's broken promises, forget the Iraq war, forget the beginning of the privatisation of the NHS, forget the introduction of tuition fees, forget the relaxation in the banking regulations ... Where did the 'justifiable anger' go?

[MrGongGong]

In a few years down the road this will be the past too.

I'm not so sure about that
I can't see much chance of many people of my daughters generation voting for the Libdems again after the student fees betrayal
in the same way that many of us who were the same age in the 1980's are unlikely to vote for the descendants of Thatcher

[french frank]

I'm not so sure about that
I can't see much chance of many people of my daughters generation voting for the Libdems again after the student fees betrayal
in the same way that many of us who were the same age in the 1980's are unlikely to vote for the descendants of Thatcher

I find a certain obtuseness in insisting that a promise over what would in the long run have been an empty gesture is all important. It was both Tories and Labour who intended to raise the fees (Labour revealed it by commissioning Browne, Tories actually proposed it). For me, the importance for the students now and in the future should be how much it's going to cost. To hold the hike in fees against the LibDems who wouldn't have been in any position to prevent it seems like scapegoating. Would it have been better if the deal had been to let the LibDems veto the rise first time round on the understanding that they'd agree in six months' time? Just to make things look good?

It still seems to me that leading the country into an illegal war which has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths was a less forgiveable act.

As for alternatives, let's face it, all politicians do and will make mistakes if they're put into positions where it's possible to do so.

[Serial_Apologist]

forget the Iraq war, forget the beginning of the privatisation of the NHS, forget the introduction of tuition fees, forget the relaxation in the banking regulations ... Where did the 'justifiable anger' go?

And forget the fact that neither did the Tories - with whom the LibDems went into coalition - foresee the consequences of freeing up banking regulations in the event of the banking crisis one probably had to be some kind of Marxist to have foreseen. Remember it was the leadership of the Labour party - not the grass roots - that started the NHS privatisation, the introduction of tuition fees, and the going to war - but I've already covered the narrative of that particular disempowerment elsewhere...

[MrGongGong]

I find a certain obtuseness in insisting that a promise over what would in the long run have been an empty gesture is all important. It was both Tories and Labour who intended to raise the fees (Labour revealed it by commissioning Browne, Tories actually proposed it). For me, the importance for the students now and in the future should be how much it's going to cost. To hold the hike in fees against the LibDems who wouldn't have been in any position to prevent it seems like scapegoating. Would it have been better if the deal had been to let the LibDems veto the rise first time round on the understanding that they'd agree in six months' time? Just to make things look good?

I don't think its "obtuse" to want someone you vote for to behave with integrity when that is probably one of the main reasons why you vote for them in the first place. Why can't Clegg understand this simple fact ? The way the Libdems go on about the details misses the point entirely ! If you tell lies don't be surprised if people loose their trust in you ! (see below)

It still seems to me that leading the country into an illegal war which has caused hundreds of thousands of deaths was a less forgiveable act.
.

Absolutely right there Frenchie it's totally unforgivable , end of as far as i'm concerned even if Labour promised (though that's not worth anything as we know !) to have a Ligeti festival in place of the olympics, replaced the queen with Michael Palin and gave Trevor Wishart a knighthood (one lives in hope !)

which is why , for many of us, there is no one to vote FOR (though there might be someone to vote against !)

[french frank]

Remember it was the leadership of the Labour party - not the grass roots - that started the NHS privatisation, the introduction of tuition fees, and the going to war - but I've already covered the narrative of that particular disempowerment elsewhere...

Yes. It usually is the leadership.

I suppose I feel, hmmm, well, I don't feel much really. But the idea that the LibDems betrayed the students seems unreal, since they never had the power to deliver anything in the first place, except, as I've said, the empty gesture.

[french frank]

I don't think its "obtuse" to want someone you vote for to behave with integrity when that is probably one of the main reasons why you vote for them in the first place. Why can't Clegg understand this simple fact ? The way the Libdems go on about the details misses the point entirely ! If you tell lies don't be surprised if people loose their trust in you ! (see below)

Well, I just don't believe that a significant number of voters round the country voted for the LibDems on the matter of tuition fees. It was way down all the parties' agendas, and all the voters', except the NUS who organised the pledge campaign. For most people there were far more important issues.

It was an awful blunder to have signed that pledge (which the wily Labour and Tory candidates realised). And a significant number of MPs actually did stick to it. Back to leaders again ...

[french frank]

And another thing, MrGG, you use loaded language like 'betrayal' and 'lie'. But making a promise which in the end you don't keep isn't a lie. The word 'lie' is used of saying something you knew wasn't true but you said it to deceive. You can say that you think that's the case with all the LibDem MPs. But you don't have evidence. In fact, no one could have predicted that there would be a coalition which was the crucial factor that bound all those holding ministerial posts. There's no reason to think that they didn't believe that voting against a rise in fees would be possible and that they would do so.

The fact that you don't believe that doesn't mean you're right.

[handsomefortune]

In a few years down the road this will be the past too. I see the LibDems still got 16% of the vote which would have been no disaster a few years ago. The problem with FPTP is that they start to get back into the area where votes and seats become even more disproportionate.

The psychology is interesting: there really is a two-party mentality when people can within two years forget Labour's broken promises, forget the Iraq war, forget the beginning of the privatisation of the NHS, forget the introduction of tuition fees, forget the relaxation in the banking regulations ... Where did the 'justifiable anger' go?

fptp?

i can see selective amnesia too french frank!

imv your post above relates to one of your previous posts, about the potential value of coalitions, offsetting the threat of a monopoly by bad apples within a government. also, the idea that any party is totally useless, or totally to blame, increasingly seems the key point. unfortunately, though i loathe the expression that 'the people get the political party they deserve' (since if you work with disadvantaged people, this can't possibly be the case, logically), there are two ways of reading the same statement. one positive (ie aiming to prompt higher participation, a stake etc); and one totally negative interpretation, in government conveniently redirecting blame totally on the electorate....directly mirrored by total apathy, as a response from the population. as you say, spoilt ballot papers, low attendance at polling stations etc garner little/no media attention ....they are a non event. so typically the media play their specific part in weakening the role of politics too, due to their own objectives.

locally, only 21% turn out in the whole constituency. the labour win requires acute amnesia + 20 x for anyone hoping to celebrate the 'landslide', in the specific circumstances of this election. that said, there are labour candidates worth their salt, just not enough with any power. ditto the other partys..(though personally, i have the least faith in torys). depressingly, evidently people still wont vote outside the main two, where independent candidates were available ...... but at least 'the posh boys in trouble' will have some opposition. even if it's a deeply hypocritical variety, and dished up by other slightly more galvanised, more focused posh boys after election 'success'. the relish for gorgeous george's attacks on the main two will doubtless 'spice up' tired promises and slogans, but that's all unfortunately. meanwhile, olde torys berate macaroon for participating in the rhetoric of identity politics - as though this is 'the problem'!! when the problem is actually the privatisation of the uk. it's no wonder people switch off, and compensate by shopping....though probably not for much longer, as far as the majority of the population is concerned. unless you can still shop, having been strangled....rater than 'squeezed' ?

regarding boris's win in london, what's he ever actually bought about? other than chats about bicycles? as far as allowing gove, and murdoch to run away with the plot about education and london land development deals..why didn't news of the bung stop boris winning, as tax avoidance did for ken? the timing on this news release looks suspect imo. i must say, it's very odd to hear martha kearney trotting out stuff about 'bungs' as though it's 'normal',,,,though evidently i suppose it is, in the current increasingly private political climate.

[Serial_Apologist]

And another thing, MrGG, you use loaded language like 'betrayal' and 'lie'. But making a promise which in the end you don't keep isn't a lie. The word 'lie' is used of saying something you knew wasn't true but you said it to deceive. You can say that you think that's the case with all the LibDem MPs. But you don't have evidence. In fact, no one could have predicted that there would be a coalition which was the crucial factor that bound all those holding ministerial posts. There's no reason to think that they didn't believe that voting against a rise in fees would be possible and that they would do so.

The fact that you don't believe that doesn't mean you're right.

Correct me if my memory's playing tricks, but I seem to remember that the comentariat had been predicting a close finish for several months; as third party the LibDems would surely have calculated for this possibility, especially with the LibLab Pact in the historical memory?

[handsomefortune]

seemingly lib dems are just a dumping ground for error imo - mainly courtesy of clegg, who has consistently featured as stool pigeon, or 'fag' in numerous cartoons, and 'serious' political writing alike, since the current coalition's beginning. this cancels all other lib dems, no matter what they've achieved in local communities.

evidently, all dominant leaders wanted to make education private ... clegg is just handy to blame their own personal 'aspirational' careerism on. fees were never going to be popular with the public - or uni lecturers - just uni managerial staff at universities, political leaders and business persons.

a shame they can't place all blame for privatisation of the nhs on clegg too (as yet) - but i'm sure they'll find a way round it, one way or another, when the back door schemes for the nhs become public knowledge .....the gutless toads.

bullying is really 'in' generally - from simon cowell, atos to political leaders alike. oddly, we wonder why children have taken to it as well, although they are less cunning about it, and actually kill each other....which is perhaps the main behavioural difference between greedy aspirational adults and feckless, depressed kids?