Scandal

Wednesday

Peter Hoskin

The shape of public sentiment

Silver medal in the Graph of the Day contest (we’ll have the gold medallist up on Coffee House later) goes to this effort from YouGov.  It’s just been published, with details, over at PoliticsHome, and tracks public “buzz” about the three party leaders during the course of the campaign.  I’m not sure how much to read into it, but the peaks and troughs do follow the contours of the election – so Clegg’s support rises after the first TV debate, Brown’s plummets after the Gillian Duffy incident, and Cameron pretty much flatlines it.  One striking feature is how much ground Brown has caught up since last week: the last few

Tuesday

Peter Hoskin

The Tories’ final onslaught

“Where’s the popcorn?” I thought, as I joined a bunch of journos to watch the Tories’ final broadcast of the election campaign. It was a good nine minutes long, and might as well have been titled The Downfall of New Labour. The opening shots were of Blair and Brown in 97: “a new dawn,” and all that. But Blair’s image soon faded to black-and-white, and we were bombarded with a montage of headlines, quotes and images which highlighted the failures of the Labour years. 10p tax. Falling education standards. MRSA. The misdemeanours of Peter Mandelson. Defence spending. Purnell’s resignation. Gillian Duffy. Even Manish Sood’s comments today. Depending on your disposition,

Friday

David Blackburn

Labour’s campaign implodes

Labour’s campaign has been dysfunctional. ‘Bigot-gate’, the concealed cuts, the absence of a spending review, open challenges to the leadership, infighting and a manifesto that read like the terms of surrender, it has been beset by gaffes and self-immolation. Last night, Gordon Brown personified the desperation at Labour’s core. He was negative – dour predictions accompanying an ashen expression. He defibrillated the old cuts versus investment line – a lurid grope for his core vote and one that is incredible in the current circumstances. We expected all of that; what we did not expect was that Brown no longer agrees with Nick. Pitching for what remains of his position on

Thursday

Ed Howker

Dubious Lib Dem tactics, continued…

Last week, I reported on dubious expenses scheming by two Liberal Democrat MPs – Paul Rowen in Rochdale and John Leech in Manchester Withington – and subsequently wrote a blog fdetailing Paul Rowen’s method of funding his political campaigning at public expense. Inevitably, having failed to respond to my questions, Rowen stated that the pieces were part of a “Tory smear campaign” – but that’s just not the case. In fact, in the last week, I’ve received a wodge of correspondence from constituents disgusted not just by the candidates’ questionable fundraising methods but also about the campaigns themselves. I thought I might share a few of them.   First up,

Peter Hoskin

To what extent should Cameron and Clegg use Brown’s gaffe against him?

Given the timing of Brown’s Mega Gaffe, you’ve got to wonder how it will play out in the TV debate tonight.  Will it, for instance, mean that he gets a hostile reception?  Will he try to defuse the situation by repeating his apologies, or perhaps by making some sort of light out of it (“Yesterday, I met a woman in Rochdale…”)?  Will it overwhelm the deeply serious economic questions which need asking and answering?  And so on. There’s one question, in particular, though, that I’d be keen to hear CoffeeHousers’ views on: how much should Cameron and Clegg use Brown’s gaffe against him?  My thinking is that they’ve played it

James Forsyth James Forsyth

The morning after the duffing up

It will be hard to isolate the influence of ‘bigot-gate’ on the polls as any taken after today will also include the effect of the final debate. But a few things are worth noting. First, this will be a ‘slow-burn’: Brown’s dismissal of such a large section of the electorate will take a while to sink in. It’s the kind of thing that is going to get discussed for days. I was doing a phone-in on Radio Five last night and those working on the programme told me that it was one of their highest ever volumes of calls.  Second, its ultimate result might be reduced Labour turnout—note how Mrs

Wednesday

James Forsyth

Brown’s apology to Labour members

This message has just been blasted out to Labour members: As you may know, I have apologised to Mrs Duffy for remarks I made in the back of the car after meeting her on the campaign trail in Rochdale today. I would also like to apologise to you. I know how hard you all work to fight for me and the Labour Party, and to ensure we get our case over to the public. So when the mistake I made today has so dominated the news, doubtless with some impact on your own campaigning activities, I want you to know I doubly appreciate the efforts you make. Many of you

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Ten reasons why this is a catastrophe for Brown and Labour

Every politician will be thinking “there but for the grace of God…” today – but the Gillian Duffy incident is not just a gaffe. It is bad for Gordon Brown and Labour on very many levels. Here are ten of them.   1. The image of the Politburo pulling away in the Jag, slagging off the proles. This confirms the idea of an elite, who sneer at voters in private but try to charm them in public. And the idea that politicians (of all parties) say one thing on camera, and another when they think no one is listening. 2. The is not just a gaffe, but the PM on

Peter Hoskin

The timing could not be worse

So Brown has now visited Gillian Duffy’s home to apologise to her in person.  Somehow, I think that’s not going to defuse this row.  Labour have, in the lingo of the The Thick of It, a major omnishambles on their hands.  And he’s called Gordon. The worst aspect of this for Labour, though, is the timing.  Sure, they wouldn’t have chosen this at any point the campaign.  But, with only a week left, it threatens to both obliterate eveything that’s gone before and overshadow whatever Brown does from now until polling day.   And then there’s the final TV debate.  The audience has been asked to listen to the participants

Fraser Nelson Fraser Nelson

Brown v The Voters

We have just witnessed the biggest moment of the 2010 election campaign. It wasn’t that Brown let off steam: it was that he instinctively described as “bigoted” a woman who represents what should be Labour’s core vote. Sure, she mentioned immigration – but just said “where are they coming from”? Her main concern was the national debt, and what her grandchildren will have to pay. Neither Cameron or Clegg would have thought these points bigoted – and neither would Tony Blair. The thought would not have crossed his mind. Nor that of Kinnock, Foot or Callaghan. Labour’s campaign is led by a man who dislikes campaigning, having to get down

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Deeper into the mire

It is just getting worse and worse for Brown. The woman he insulted is a widow whose husband died of cancer and who worked with handicapped children.  

James Forsyth James Forsyth

Clegg will be hurt by this too

Brown calling Gillian Duffy that ‘bigoted woman’ from the safety of his car having ended his conversation with her cordially is, obviously, hugely damaging for Labour’s campaign. But I suspect Nick Clegg will also suffer some collateral damage as it will push immigration to the top of the political agenda, an area where the Lib Dems with their plan for an amnesty for illegal immigrants are on the wrong side of public opinion.

David Blackburn

“That was a disaster…”

… Well that ain’t the half of it. Brown has just made the most garbled apology imaginable on the Jeremy Vine show: “I apologise if I said anything like that.”  Well, unfortunately, Brown had, and Vine duly played the tape. Brown had to apologise again:  “I apologise if I’ve said anything remotely hurtful…there were comments about immigration…which I didn’t get the chance to reply to…that were annoying…you’ve got to remember, it’s a case of me being helpful to the broadcasters who have recorded and played my private conversation.” He might be cowering, but verbally Brown simply comes across as arrogant and unrepentant. Small wonder that politicians are loathed. PS: Now

Peter Hoskin

Brown calls woman a ‘bigot’

Wow. Just when you thought Labour’s campaign couldn’t get any worse, they go and wheel out Brown in front of ordinary voters.  And this is the result: he has been caught on mic describing a member of the public as a “bigoted woman”.  Speaking to one of his advisers, he added “you shouldn’t have put me with that woman. Whose idea was that?”  Classic. This may be trivial beside the big questions about the economy, etc. – but you can expect is to become one of the defining TV moments of the campaign.  It’s one thing to insult and attack the politicians who serve alongside you, but quite another to

Thursday

James Forsyth

Tonight’s tactical battle

If seven days ago, anyone had suggested that the first debate would propel Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems to the top of the polls we’d all have thought that their lunch had gone on rather too long. But that’s what happened. Tonight, the questions are whether Gordon Brown reprises his ‘I agree with Nick’ routine or tries to check Clegg’s momentum and whether Cameron can turn in the kind of performance that begins to turn things round for him.   Cameron shouldn’t be angry tonight. But he does need to bracket Brown and Clegg together at every opportunity. When three people are debating, the person who does the best

Peter Hoskin

People loathe politicians – but do they loathe the political media too?

One thing’s for certain: the Lib Dems are coming in for greater scrutiny and attention from the media.  The covers of the Telegraph, Sun, Mail, Express and, yes, The Spectator are testament to that – even if some are less substantial than others.  But the question is: will this derail the Clegg bandwagon?  And, like Iain Dale, I’m not so sure. Iain’s point is that some of the coverage is so spiteful that it will “serve to increase his popularity and position in the polls”.  He adds that this would be a “sure sign that the power of the press to influence an election is on the wane”.  He’s right,

Ed Howker

Paul Rowen and the anatomy of a Lib Dem expenses scam

Now the Lib Dems are riding high in the polls, they attract greater scrutiny – which, to put it mildly, they do not always stand up to. In this week’s Spectator, we look at what can be seen as the Lib Dem vice. They may not charge for duck houses, or mortgages. But they do specialise in taking money intended for MPs expenses, and finding “innovative” ways of putting it into their war chest. Here is a hard example that may interest CoffeeHousers and it stars Paul Rowen, whom Mr Clegg visited last week – and declared “has done a great job”. He certainly has: for filling the Lib Dem

Tuesday

David Blackburn

Not so squeaky clean

“All my life, I’ve opposed the old politics,” says Nick Clegg ad nauseam. Not so it seems. Peter Oborne’s Mail column reports that one youthful indiscretion has been omitted from Clegg’s CV: ‘In fact, he has a background as a Westminster lobbyist with the firm GJW, where he worked as an account executive for 18 months. (Something he has omitted from his curriculum vitae on the Lib Dem website).’ So, Clegg glosses over his stint of political kerb-crawling. Hypocrisy always makes a good story but the Tories should, and probably will, shun this story. They have lost the media narrative and the last thing Cameron needs is for the campaign

Sunday

Peter Hoskin

Dirtier tactics

I think we all expected this election campaign to be fought a few inches below the belt.  But, as Iain Dale and Dizzy say, Labour’s tactic of mailing scaremongering leaflets to cancer sufferers is some new kind of low.  I mean, just imagine how it would feel to receive, as a cancer patient or an immediate family member, a leaflet which politicises the problem to the point of suggesting that your care would be jeapordised by voting for another party.  And then imagine how it would feel if you have been specifically targeted because of your connections with the illness, as seems to have been the case here.  Well, it