Dispatches on Channel 4 tonight at 8.00

[Pink Betty]

Cameron: Toff at the Top

It might be interesting...

[oldpunkette]

It does seem a bit like David Cameron simply expects to be P.M., that his life so far has been a story of David expecting things, and these things being delivered to him.

I think the British public appreciate more of a hard-luck story of their politicians, respecting the underdogs who fought hard battles to get to where they are.

For Cameron it all looks a bit effortless. And Hitchen makes a good point about Cameron's lack of ideology.

It would be daft to be prejudiced against somebody just because they were posh, but there is definitely something in this argument.

[Pink Betty]

I will endeavour to see it.

I wonder if there is any chance that he'd step aside for William Hague before the next General Election....then they might walk it.

[Daz Madrigal]

Yeah its done by Hitchens.

Of course there's something in what the detractors say. Too many gimmicks. Going for the Kennedy factor rather than political heaviness.

Why pick him?

Matthew Parris gave him constant backing saying Ken Clarke was a bit past it and had too many EU sympathies which would cause ructions (which is true) and that David Davis was too staid to really capture the - imo dumb - electorates imagination.

Its all about getting in power.

That doesn't apply just to Davie Boy but hey..don't ya think the Tory MPs want someone who will get them in power too?

So there is two sides to this.

1) Sure the naysayers - hi Arena and Exco - have a reasonable point. A bit lightweight and gimmicky. I'll give Hitchens and the moaners that sop of agreement.

2) This is my view which is willfully ignored by the likes of Hitchens, Piccione(?), Sandy, and the leftist Cheeses.

Is Cameron merely a Blair clone?

That reeks of any easy soudbite and will no doubt be the centrepiece of Hitchens Documentary. But its very lazy thinking to suggest that any politician is merely a clone of another. They are bound to have differences in traits and character.

Blair is a consummate actor. He always has been. From early schooldays to University he's been totally a showbiz character who wants to show off to the audience. His hand wringing act of whimpering after Pr. Diana's death - God Rest Her Soul! - is the example par excellence.

I'm afraid to airily throw in Davie Boy as some long lost younger brother of Tony's just doesn't ring true at all. I'm going some way to agreeing with the naysayers in suggesting a new softer approach here which may indicate a certain ineffectually. However, its noticeable that the Right-Wingers on JSG equally have no time for him.

Why is he there...unlike Blair he's not acting his way through the part. He is being what he is..an Old Etonian with a slightly touchy feely approach.

And here is the important part.

.........this will appeal to 50% of the Vote - and possibly a considerable number of liberals and ethnics. He is heading fro power and Blair and co know it and are panicking like hell.

And getting into power is all that matters...the fact that Davis is miles better is neither here not there. When the Tories gave their vote to Davie Boy they were voting out of self interest.

..and what could be more self-interested than a soft easy job, the smell of power and stepping into the Houses of Parliament and into the House of Commons for the first time.

[sandywinder]

Well that last bit rings true. They are only interested in getting into power and staying there. They do not care for the people.

Their policies are dictated mainly by the chances of winning power rather than any principles they might have.

But this is the first past the post system so what else can we expect?

So in that way at least Blair and Cameron are twins who have sold out their principles for the trappings of power.

[Daz Madrigal]

<< For Cameron it all looks a bit effortless. And Hitchen makes a good point about Cameron's lack of ideology. >>

You couldn't get more effortless than Blair and Brown. Cameron at least has some knowledge and concept of working rather than Blairs unstoppable and lucky rise to power.

As for Brown, he told everyone he would be the Prime Minister at 14 yrs old and seems to have set his sights on that at the neglect of everything else. A read a profile of a visist to Browns house and the lack of any interest in anything but politics. No records strewn around or patings hanging off walls. No interest in decor..the guests opinion for what its worth was that Brown hadnt even changed the wallpaper..some of which was hanging off the walls.

Wanting to be PM at 14 is a bad sign.

Lack of Ideology. Is that a bad thing?

Thatcher had an ideology. Fortuantely we are not on the JSG board so we needn't go on and on about the negatives and positives of that ideology. Cometh the Hour Cometh the err..Woman!..or Man (in Chruchills case).

These are different times though. Perhaps not having an ideology is a good thing.

[sandywinder]

If you want bland government run by spin and PR initiatives maybe but I do not want that.

[Daz Madrigal]

sandywinder said:

Well that last bit rings true. They are only interested in getting into power and staying there. They do not care for the people.

Their policies are dictated mainly by the chances of winning power rather than any principles they might have.

But this is the first past the post system so what else can we expect?

So in that way at least Blair and Cameron are twins who have sold out their principles for the trappings of power.

Thats debatable.

Blair was an anti-War, slightly left wing CND supporter. Lets not be too swift to tar Cameron with the same brush. He has the fact that he is the new boy in class on his side.

And as far as I know he hasn't abandoned everything he believed in on the way.

[Daz Madrigal]

sandywinder said:

If you want bland government run by spin and PR initiatives maybe but I do not want that.

Well you can't always get what you want, Sandy.

..that'd make a good song title!

[sandywinder]

madrigalman said:

sandywinder said:

If you want bland government run by spin and PR initiatives maybe but I do not want that.

Well you can't always get what you want, Sandy.

..that'd make a good song title!

Not if I sang it.

[Daz Madrigal]

sandywinder said:

madrigalman said:

Well you can't always get what you want, Sandy.

..that'd make a good song title!

Not if I sang it.

I'll draft in Chris Lord and the Deaf Aids.