So, after months of frenzied speculation, and a poll rating that has gone up and down like Casanova's underpants, Gordon Brown has ruled out a snap election. It says so as BREAKING NEWS on BBC News 24. Although, if the rest of the British Media is to be beleived, I should take everything said by the BBC with more than a pinch of salt. Obviously, if it were a cynic, I might be inclined to believe that the other outlets of the Media in the UK may have their own agendas when it comes to pepetuating their anti BBC bias. I might say that, if I were a cynic.
Oh hold on, the chaps and lady chaps on Sky News are saying it too. So it must be true.
Mind you, it seemed highly unlikely it was going to happen anyway.
The Labour Party have no money to fight another election so soon after the last one, the Tories have had enough of licking their -often self inflicted- wounds, and are putting on a united front. A report in the Sunday Telegraph on the eve of the Tory conference suggested Lord Ashcroft had already spend £10m on campaigning before the election had even started. Hoping to repeat the success of his previous campaign when in the first three months of 2005 he paid nearly £300,000 in donations to 33 candidates in marginal constituencies. The effects of this were clear for all to see: 11 of the candidates unseated Labour candidates and five vulnerable Conservative MPs were saved. This time around, he is refining the campaign to target an even smaller group of seats, and Brown knows the effects could be far more serious than in 2005.Gordon has been in the leader's chair for 101 days now, and probably doesn't want to run the risk of being turfed out of job he's waited so long to have.
So, has he bottled it?
Possibly. Or he could be the shrewd, prudent political power he clearly feels he is.
For a man who wrote such a fine selection of Political essays under the collective heading of "Courage" it is claimed he has, at times, been shown wanting when it's come to demonstarting the courage of his own convictions. When the whole of the UK fell out of love with Tony Blair, Gordon Brown didn't go for the kill, he stayed in the background, "brooding" if the media were to be believed. Maybe. Or he showed loyalty to his Party, and his leader, knowing that an all out civil war would do irrepairable damage to Labour. For many, the long dark years spent in the wilderness weren't all that long ago. If a week is a long time in politics, 18 years is akin to the rise and fall of the Mayan empire.
Only time will tell if PM Brown has shown weakness in ruling out an election now, or if he's shown great courage.
Politics is a fickle business. 7 days ago, Gordon Brown was hanging ten as he rode the crest of a wave, bouyed by a surge in the polls, this week it's "Just Call Me Dave" Cameron that's on a high, mind you, after all his years working for Carlton he should be used to that. That and talking unprompted for hour upon hour...
By which I mean, they were once a very successful Media organisation, with very impressive communication skills.
Personally, I'm quite glad that there isn't to be an election just yet.
It's Autumn and Hallowe'en is just around the corner, surely opening the door to ghoulish visions of the undead imploring you to choose between a trick or a treat, would only get in the way of Hallowe'en for the kids.
Boom, and if you will, tish... thank you very much, I'm here all week, try the soup.
3 comments:
Ha, ha, nice joke at the end there :-)
Its unlikely that someone who has fought so hard to get into the "top job" would risk losing it by holding a general election before he has had a chance to throw his weight about and get his name in the history books.
It is a bit of a "no brainer" really. Do I run the risk of being the shortest lasting PM, or do I carry on doing the job I've wanted all my life? Still, might happen...
Post a Comment