2004 Democratic Primary

[Michael Z]

I mostly agree with Pete Bell here. Barring a catastrophe, Gordon Brown is the favourite to succeed Blair. However, Robin Cook may be the backbenchers' choice, especially after his dignified exit over Iraq (also bearing in mind that his views on the war reflected those of the Party at large).

Claire Short would make a great foreign secretary in my opinion, but there's no way the electorate, or even the Labour Party in its current state, would accept a socialist PM.

I'll emigrate if David Blunkett becomes PM.

[Michael Z]

Sorry for breaking the flow of the conversation, but I think it speaks volumes that the only two senior Conservatives capable of winning a general election, Michael Portillo and Kenneth Clarke, are completely estranged from their own Party.

The "coronation" of Michael Howard also proves that the Tories haven't learned a thing. This is a man who symbolises the pomposity, arrogance, contempt and cynical populism of the Major era which made the Tories so despised in the first place.

As for the Lib Dems, I would be much more comfortable with Menzies Campbell as their leader. He truly looks like a Prime Minister in the making.

[Michael Z]

It's a shame Paddy Ashdown is no longer party leader; if he was I wouldn't hesitate putting money on the Lib Dems being the official opposition in 2005. A well-spoken, articulate man, and one of the few politicians I genuinely respect.

The London election next year will definitely be interesting. If I'm honest Simon Hughes doesn't really look "mayoral" to me (though of course it's early days so a well-organised campaign could still change my mind), but if Labour can come up with a credible candidate (Glenda Jackson perhaps) as opposed to a dead duck then they will get my vote. If not then I'll just have to hesitatingly vote Livingstone again.

[Michael Z]

That's exactly right, RP. Though it's somewhat ironic that Portillo, who (alongside people like Redwood, Howard, Bottomley, etc) was regarded as the source of anti-Tory contempt back in 1997 is now seen by many as the party's potential saviour.

But then his post-97 transformation did seem very sincere. It's obvious that he was quite shocked by what happened in Enfield, so much so he changed his entire political outlook. As opposed to other senior Tories he realised that the country had changed, the world had changed, and that far right politics no longer won elections.

Or maybe we're now seeing the 'real' Portillo, what went before having been a denial of his past like you mentioned. In a way there is something grimly Oedipal about the son of immigrants acting like a tough mean xenophobe. (Not dissimilar to a certain Tory MP with Romanian-Jewish heritage, come to think of it...)

Anyway, as I said before, it's telling that modernisers like Portillo do not stand a chance of leading the Conservatives. Try as they might, they just can't stop acting like a bunch of mean-spirited contemptous toffs. It's a culture the likes of Thatcher, Tebbitt, Powell et al drilled into the party thirty years ago and it may take another thirty years for them to get rid of it completely.

[Michael Z]

The LDP lost quite a few seats; not enough to suggest some form of distrust amongst the Japanese electorate, of course, but it does beg the question whether Koizumi's economic reforms really have the full public support which may be necessary for such a wide-reaching reform package. This question becomes even more pressing if you consider the seats gained by the DPJ (a full 40).

In other words, hardly a fully fledged endorsement for Koizumi.  As far as I know the LDP did even better than this under Mori (possibly the most unpopular PM in Japan's post-war history)... though I could be wrong.

[Michael Z]

Am I reading this correctly? The LDP got 237 seats with a 34.9% share of the vote whereas the DPJ only 177 with 37.4%?

[Michael Z]

Does anyone have a list of the states where members of the other party and/or independents can vote in either or both parties primaries??

Am I right in assuming that's an unfinished sentence which ends with "...so maybe I, as a Republican, can vote for Dean?"

I mean no disrespect to Howard, he's an awfully nice guy and would make a fantastic President in my opinion, but really I could have said the same about McGovern or Mondale. As uncomfortable as the reality of the situation is, this is the guy most Republicans want to see the Democrats nominate. I like Dean, but, realistically, can I see him beat Bush? No.

Either way, I'm slowly starting to veer towards the concensus that Edwards has the best chance of winning. I previously thought he'd be more suited as a running mate (in a way I still see him at the same stage Al Gore was in during the '88 primaries - "Yes, you look like a future President, but... please, not just yet."), but deep down I feel he's the only one who looks remotely Presidential out of the current selection.

So at the moment I would say Edwards, then maybe Gephardt. At the start I was rooting for Kerry, but frankly his campaign has been hapless beyond belief (Jim Jordan, etc). Honestly, he makes Bob Dole look suave. Fortunes can change of course, but even Bill Bradley looked better at this stage for 2000.

[Michael Z]

Hmmm, perhaps something did get lost in the translation. I need to brush up on my Japanese. Konyaro! But to be honest I thought the reason the figures are so muddled are due to some bizarre idiosyncracy within the electoral system. After all, Japanese democracy is notorious for being muddled in bureaucracy and red tape; which, now that I think about it, is probably one of the reasons young people there tend to show such extreme political apathy. That, and the fact that Japan is effectively a one-party state.

[Michael Z]

I think it's more likely to be the result of Japan's WEIRD electoral system than anything else...

Definitely, although that's more or less what I was implying.

Still the Democrats polling 2 million more votes than the LDP(first time that the LDP have been out-polled I think) is a positive.

And yet the DPJ still lost. Makes you wonder whether the electoral system is geared to benefit the LDP in any specific way, doesn't it?

[Michael Z]

Absolutely true. Its the Dems who have forgotten this. His ideals of listening to the democratic will of the people above all and the dignity of man are now espoused by- prepare yourself- the Neocons!

Instead of arrogantly claiming that something just "is", perhaps you wish to evaluate exactly how and why this is the case?

[Michael Z]

I feel that the media leans neither left or right, but rather in favor of profits (since they are after all businesses). Sometimes the pursuit of profits leads them to temporarily lean left or right, but no media outlet can afford to let its political leanings consistently come ahead of profits.

I think that it leans left and it is noticable.

Please, let's not go there. Right-wingers think the media leans left and left-wingers think the media leans right. It's a debate that has been raging for decades and pigs will fly before both sides agree on this.

[Michael Z]

The Mail endorsed Oswald Mosley?!

On second thoughts, it shouldn't really surprise me...

[Michael Z]

Vladimir Zhiranovsky is truely a frightening prospect. Imagine him with his finger on the button?!

Wow, that is a frightening thought. He makes Kim Jong-Il look like the Pope.

[Michael Z]

He wants to conquer all the old U.S.S.R countries+Afghanistan+Iran+Poland+Finland+Most of the rest of Eastern Europe+Ex-East Germany+Alaska+Parts of the Yukon+Mongolia

I really do not see why he is considered that dangerous.  Sure he is a Russian nationalist with the creation of a Greater Russia as a goal.  But why is that so evil.  For me he is no different from French politicians before WWI that demanded the return of Alsase-Lorriane to France and right after WWI pushed for the annexation of Rhineland to France.  For sure he is no different from American politicans that demanded the annexation of California, Oregon, Florida, Cuba, Haiwai and so on into USA.  One could argue about those postions they took.  But I hardly seem them as evil or dangerous, or no more evil/dangerous than the others I mentioned.

You're totally right of course. I now declare that France, Holland, Belgium, Germany, Poland, the Czech Republic, Russia, India, China, Japan, Australia, Canada, the USA, Mexico and Brazil all belong to the United Kingdom. I will think of some half-baked "historic" reason, then start a war and kill millions of people to achieve my goal.

After all, there's nothing wrong with a little bit of imperialistic zeal, is there?

[Michael Z]

I think it will be a long time be for Blair is Re-placed.

I shouldn't be so certain. Saddam's capture has definitely lifted a weight off Blair's shoulders, but he is still facing rancour from within the Labour Party over tuition fees and the part-privatisation of hospitals.

In a recent survey 45% of those asked believe Blair will not be Prime Minister in twelve months' time.

[Michael Z]

In a recent survey 45% of those asked believe Blair will not be Prime Minister in twelve months' time.

But that means that 55% OF THOSE asked believe Blair will be PM in Twelve Months time.

Doesn't matter. 45% is still a high number.

[Michael Z]

Labour would be unwise to remove Tony Blair.  The UK is essentially a small-c conservative country.  Blair is the face of Labour acceptability and electability.  Remove Blair and Labour will make it that much harder for itself.

Not entirely true, as RP pointed out. It's primarily the Southeast that can be described as conservative, and that applies to rural areas only (as for London... well, look at our mayor). The rest of England, particularly the North, is more centre-left.

However, bearing in mind that this applies to voting patterns, not necessarily social attitudes.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yet another rightist statement which is somewhat detached from reality (you may face less rancour if you avoided using patronising terms like "lefties"). The person you're talking about is someone like Robin Cook, not one of the most popular Chancellors in modern political history.

[Michael Z]

"Leftie" ain't exactly a damning term.

Sorry, I'll admit I am quite sensitive about the term. It just reminds me of when The Sun were at their most slanderous. More of a connotation thing.

[Michael Z]

800x600.