Government by clique?

Mitch

Think blair/mandelson and that drunken fellow who wrote porn.gang of 3 that went ok....oh.

frank goddard

See what I mean about Tory backbiting in the party.This sort of thing has to stop,people who write such crap especially now that opinion polls are in their favour for a big GE victory are stupid.As for A.Rawnsley he's the pits,and to say the legislative program is a blank piece of paper is a disgusting piece of journalism,he should look at DC's speach at the last Tory conference.But having said that,thank you for pointing these sort of idiots out.Its the same ith the BBC people complain of interviewing this Muslim Choudry.but it shows you the mind of these fanatics,and after seeing him I am now more a fundamentalist Christian,RICHARD !! Pass me my Sword and Armour!!!!
Frank G...English pensioner.

strapworld

Rawnsley is a towering political writer - or so he says to himself every day! His blog is full of his nonsense. And his own opinion poll of opinion makers!! is a farce. He should be forced to name these people. Or else the Speccy should create their own Wise 100 People Council who they can turn to for an instant opinion poll on whatever subject!!

Rawnsley is a legend in his own mind. I dismiss everything I happen to read with his name, as author, on it!

TGF UKIP

I read our Andrew's piece with considerable amusement but what he could and should have added is how the Cameron Clique has been assisted at every step by another clique - that of a small, tightly knit group of adoring, pompous, pretentious, youngish London based journalists.

However much amusement Mr Rawnsley's piece gave me can be nothing, though, compared to the guffaws it must have caused to come from Alastair Campbell at the description of Coulson as some sort of political spin meister. I'll bet there were tears of laughter pouring down Black Ali's face at that one.

Verity

This does not surprise me. I have noted all along that Cameron is not comfortable around people outside his own group. That is why he patronises us. That is why the trip to the Norwegian ice floe and the posing with the Huskies. A simple, graphic message that "the little people" could understand. It was the same when he posed with a paintbrush obviously just taken out of its plaster wrapper, holding it up to a wall that bore graffiti. An easily understandable message to show that he cares about graffiti. (Although why a future prime minister would involve himself in what is a matter for the local council is another issue entirely.) A simple message for the "little people", the patronising prat.

This inabiiity to relate to people outside his group is all the more suprising because he's an OE, and usually these men are completely at their ease anywhere, which is why they are always such a pleasure to be around. Princes Harry and William are typical OEs. At home with anyone, ready to muck in. Cameron is not. He just is not prime ministerial material and a lot of people sense this unease - including, apparently, members of the Shadow Cabinet.

Anan

Where were these dire warnings and pontifications of how to run a country when Labour were ripping the nation of all democracy and turning it into a Stalinist Neue Arbeiters theocracy, with Supreme Leader Grand Labourtollah Blair and the ruling Council of WorkingclassImams known as the British media? Rawnsley's wishful thinking and thinly veiled Labour sucking is plain to see. Get lost Rawnsley you idiot!

bill

Verity

Unlike a lot of people I usually agree with you. I reckon Cameron will be as big a negative for Conservatism and this country as Heath. Maybe worse. As for OEs I am not in that much agreement. Based on my experience at uni,socially, and professionally I think their talent and charm is often over-rated particularly amongst themselves.

TrevorsDen

TGF and Verity are as comfortable as ever in their own delusional world.

I am well outside Cameron's group and he relates to me.

Meantime ... "An important article in The Observer" .... are you kidding? Rawnsley? Verity and TGF are really desperate in their prejudice to rely on anything from his bigoted pen.

The latest poll in the Times gives him good figures.

Diswiss

Verity, you're wrong yet again.

Cameron is the best we've got.

Verity

Diswiss - I don't agree. He's not as good as either John Redwood or David Davis. A poster over on Iain's wrote that this statement was an attempt for Cameron to insert himself into the narrative.

Bill - Well, the ones I have been around have possessed all the legendary qualities. None of them ever gave the impression of being uncomfortable around their fellow citizens.

George Laird

Dear Strapworld

Please stop your jeaously because Andrew Rawnsley has become a force.

It is very disappointing to see an armchair warrior shout the odds.

The guy is doing his job producting material for consideration.

Peter Hoskins seems to think that Rawnsley has a point.

Rushing to judgement a bit soon aren't you?

Yours sincerely

George Laird
The Campaign for Human Rights at Glasgow University

David Ossitt

Diswiss writes;

Verity, you're wrong yet again.

No she is not but you are also right because this time round Cameron is all that we have got.

Some of us would much prefer a leader such as David Davis with a strong team behind him headed by John Redwood but if Cameron has any sense he will ensure that they will also sit at the head table.

Chuck Unsworth

Is David Davis capable of building teams? Always seemed to be a bit of loner to me - as did Redwood. But the issue of 'teams' is important. The fragmentation of the Government, indeed the Labour Party, is obvious. If the Conservatives can project an appearance of discipline - without control freakery - it'll certainly help their electoral prospects.

strapworld

George Laird.

Jealousy is a sin! I am no sinner.

You are abusing my human rights.

I reckon that Rawnsley is a Common Purpose trained journalist.

Now get back to your studies.

Simon Denis

Cameron has blundered from time to time but there is a logic in his general approach - low and machiavellian, to be sure but not entirely without merit. He hopes to divide the currently active political nation in a way favorable to his party, rather than trying to win back former, disillusioned Tories - Lord Tebbit's missing four million. Hence the wooing of liberals and liberalism. Hence the ghastly A-list and "sharing the proceeds". It is a prolonged exercise in toad-eating his way to power - Blair's way, except that Blair's brass neck could swallow anything. I am not at all sure that Cameron is made of the same sturdily cynical, self-interested and heartless stuff. Can he keep it up? Even he - the great moderniser - finally gagged a little over betraying the grammar schools. Still, I shall be lending my support to the Tories yet again. There is no force more likely to put some sort of a stop to socialism's wildest excesses. I fear that's as much as we can hope for at present. A kitchen cabinet is an inevitable part of so pragmatic a plan. Only an ideology can hold a party to its purpose otherwise and Cameron has foresworn it. As for Rawnsley - vanity is the beginning and end of his character.

Oh, and don't forget - the real problem with the alternative, Tebbit-style strategy is that many of those missing millions are now pushing up daisies, poor things.

Diswiss

David Davis had his chance during the leadership election
and DIDN'T win. Remember?

David Lewis

I have met him briefly and he seemed arrogant, distant and third rate to me. A terrible disappointment.

He should be replaced and the shadow chancellor should be replaced without delay.

Verity

David Lewis - Who is the "him" you refer to? If it's Cameron, he won't be replaced until he loses the next election for us.