As much as Gordon Brown is making a pig's ear of being Prime Minister, I worry that David Cameron has some even deeper personal issues that would prevent him from doing a better job.
I remember during the contest for the Tory leadership against David Davis, David Cameron was actually shaking during one of the Q&A's, sweat was pouring off the guy and he just generally looked a bit petrified and overwhelmed by the whole affair. I tried to imagine him walkng into a meeting with then-President George W Bush with any sort of gravitas or clout and I just couldn't do it. I had assumed, quite wrongly of course, that he had no chance of winning the contest.
These concerns were compounded when David Cameron went on the Jonathon Ross show in 2006. Upon receiving the ludicrous (and somewhat hilarious) suggestion that a teenage David Cameron used to 'enjoy himself' over posters of Margaret Thatcher, the best the Tory leader could do was laugh, then blush and then try (unsuccessfully) to change the subject.
What would Blair have done, or Churchill, or even Thatcher herself in the face of such brave impudence? All that would have been left of Ross at that moment would be a pair of shoes so eloquently and viciously would the man have been torn apart. Where have all the political heavyweights gone?
Cameron doesn't have the cojones for Number 10 I'm afraid. At G8 and international summits is the Tory leader really going to bring hard-fought deals back home to Britain? Is he going to lock horns with superstar Barack Obama on the big issues of the day? I really don't see it.
Yes, Brown is going to have some cringeworthy moments as he strives to hang on to Obama's coat-tails this week but at least this PM will be able to look the President in the eye, and keep his sweat glands in check.
17 comments:
bit af a weak post
Cameron may turn out dreadful, but from where im typing could not pssiby be worse than GB ( and who te fuck cares about a 2006 and six interview with JR, except you?)
And Obama's view - as If either of us know. But I give you my instinct . Given he's a broad brush sort of guy - hillary and three top repubicans in his team - i doubt hed have any issue with DC being a tory - the the of tory/progressive repubican he wants in his administration
Brown - he'll aready have him sussed. ( Hillary's guy in Londan, until the american peope turned the worm in Iowa) A sure fire loser in less than 18 months, one of the principal architects of the dereguated financial markets, a guy who sanction the war in iraq whist Barack and other anti-war demcorats had the knickers cut from under them by the britsh LABOUR party backing bush.
And washed out, so 20th century, so machine poitics, so eveything Barack aint.
Look him in the eye? Barak will be prverbialy counting his fingers afer GB's handshake.
And dont be fooled by the inevitable BBC led "two great minds meet" pish we'll hear between now and Tuesday visit
Barack will indeed rate GB - about one notch up from that Illinois Governor thast tried to sell his senate seat
DC a the way to DC I say - but as the first PM of England! I wish him well
I'm was thinking of going to Stobo Castle for a few days next week just to escape the drivel our media will produce on the saviour of the world's meeting with Obama. Unfortunately some nasty person's dented my car so the Stobo idea's off and the garage is on, again.
Jeff, David Cameron comes over as a 'softer' person to GB and I'm sure that is true. He also strikes me as a more considerate man compared with GB who has fallen out with most of his party over the years.
Another thing is that David Cameron will be well able to hold his own on the world stage. He's sure to have learnt a great deal since his days of trembling hands in 2006.
If I had to choose I'd choose DC as the one with the better character. Fortunately I don't have to choose either :)
Aye we can - did you read the same post that I just have?
I thought the post was less about David Cameron and Gordon Browns' politics and more about their perceived skills, or lack of, under pressure.
The Jonathan Ross interview illustrated the point about DC I thought so I was interested even if you weren't!
Maybe I'm being a bit hard on old DC, he does seem a genuinely nice guy which is generally my first (and often only) test for a person.
It was interesting in that recent poll that there were more "don't know" answers given when asked who makes for a better Prime Minister, GB or DC.
Basically, as bad as Brown is, we could be in danger of sleepwalking into having a suspect PM at the worst possible time.
When it comes to the coming debate over independence, having a weak UK PM up against Salmond could be very crucial.
Jeff,
I fear you have been suffering from sun stroke following your recent trip to lands afar!
The last few posts you've made seem awfie pro-brown. Clearly either Brown or Cameron will be PM come the next GE ... although Cameron must be the bookies favourite by a long shot.
I appreciate that you try to take a balanced view of politics, indeed it's been one of this blog's strengths, however, the idea that you can lend any sort of credence to Brown makes me wonder where you're going.
Your concerned (for your mental welfare) reader.
Alasdasir ;)
Thanks for your concern Alasdair, I shall offer a meek defence that it's only cos Brown is so utterly, utterly out of it that I can look to the next phase post-2010.
But maybe you're right, tipping things so far towards a coveted balance that I've gone too far past the other side!
I think the recent seemingly pro-Brown posts have stemmed from a frustration that I regrettably don't think the SNP will capitalise at the Westminster election despite a clear absence of a quality candidate for PM.
Thanks PJ!
I was confident I wasn't so far off the track with what I was trying to say. Nice to be backed up though I don't mind if people think I let a weak post through the net every now and again.
I try my best to keep the quality relatively high after all ;)
Can't say I recall the minutiae of the last Tory leadership election, but Cameron always struck me as being the uber-confident type - for example, his no-notes speech to the Tory faithful, and he certainly seems to handle PMQs well enough in that regard - but perhaps it depends on the precise scenario he's appearing in.
Amusing that you juxtapose his lack of gravitas and clout in relation to an appearance with George W Bush!!
As for Jonathon Ross, if he'd "torn him apart" then he would have been torn apart himself for a gross overreaction, and in the context of Ross's light entertainment show would have looked a bit ridiculous.
His misjudgement was probably to appear with an overgrown schoolboy like Ross in the first place, but I doubt if any heavyweight politician will do so in future, unless they're of the 'all pubicity is good publicity' variety.
And don't necessarily take this as a criticism, Jeff, but after the events of the past week I'm surprised that you decided to make a critical post about David Cameron, and I suspect there's a point of sorts being made in this regard, thus it would be interesting to hear your thoughts on that.
A "point of sorts" Stuart? I fear you mean a hidden objective? And I'm afraid I haven't had a hidden objective since Primary School when I told Laura McDonald I didn't like her in a hideously unsuccessful attempt at playing hard to get.
I'm thick skinned (more so after my non-exercising 4 month break) so don't worry about lobbing criticism my way. I am, as I say, a big boy.
I'm glad you brought up the Tory leadership election. It always strikes me as an exercise in making sure the favourite doesn't win and you end up with someone rather random in the role. Wasn't the first round a 'stop Portillo' effort?
If you have 40% of the party who doesn't want Portillo and then 60% of the party who doesn't want Davis you end up with whoever is left. Perhaps that gave them Cameron, backed no doubt by 10% in the first place?
So no, I don't really have any point beyond the rather simple one's I am making. I am beginning to look past Gordon as a lame duck and I'm worried that the only current alternative might not be up to the job.
Yes Dave can deliver at FMQs when he is prepped, yes he can deliver a speech with no notes after weeks of practise but I don't think he has the natural ability for the role.
Not much I can do about it, just having a gripe I guess.
Also, if I was an ardent Scottish Nationalist in favour of independence I'd be rubbing my hands with glee I suppose. But I'd really rather someone got into Number 10 who could inspire and enthuse on a global stage and had our full confidence in the shady business of global politics.
Dare I say it, I miss Tony.
Jeff, I wasn't so much worried about your sensitivities as making the point that I didn't necessarily disagree with you making a critical post about David Cameron at this juncture - although as I said you seemed to be doing so to make a point or had a hidden objective - thus I was merely interested to hear your thoughts out loud, but I get the impression that you'd rather keep them to yourself.
Yes, David Cameron is to a large extent manufactured - and it's perhaps not surprising that he has a marketing background (I think) - but that's just modern politics, surely?
And if you think that's a shortcoming, then it's interesting that you juxtapose Cameron with Tony Blair.
BTW, I didn't bring up the Tory leadership election - you did ;0)
Sorry, but I have seen some cadaverous photographs of Gorgon recently.
He looks quite unwell though the pancake.
I suppose it depends on how many goldies he has consumed and Nokias he has bounced off the walls.
You are right though, Cameron is a makeweight.
He has had more open goals and missed more times than a eunuch in a harem.
Stuart,
I remain baffled, maybe I'm being a bit simple but what exactly do you want to hear my thoughts on "out loud" (a strange request on a blog I'm sure we can both agree!)
And with 1,100+ posts, there isn't too much I feel I have to keep to myself ;)
I don't think we should accept marketing in politics as quickly as you suggest. The beauty of democracy is modern politics can be anything we the people want it to be.
Salmond isn't particularly manufactured, neither Obama nor Sarkozy I would say. Even Blair, he may have had a glossy edge to him but I wager it has always been there. The fakeness is genuine if that makes sense? For Cameron, I still don't get the impression that he feels comfortable in his own political skin just yet.
He'll get properly put through his paces in the lead up to 2010 so I shouldn't be as concerned as I may seem.
Jeff, well personally I wouldn't make a critical post about DC until he'd buried his son at the earliest, and I'm sure many others think similarly.
Not that I think he'll be reading my blog and could thus be offended, but it just doesn't seem appropriate.
Anyway, since you will have considered the issue before posting then I was just interested to hear your thoughts, but since you clearly don't consider the issue worthy of discussion then I respect that. However, I would be interested to hear the views of others and have thus posted something on my own blog, but I doubt if it will elicit many responses.
As for the point about manufactured politicians, I don't accept that either, but to the extent that there's so much of it in politics then I don't think DC is much different from the rest of them.
I agree with you to the extent that he's more synthetic than Alex Salmond et al, but all the parties are too much marketing spiel for my liking, SNP included.
I see where you are going now Stuart.
You may choose to not believe me but I hadn't considered the sad situation with Ivan before or during putting the post up. Had I done so, I may have saved it for another time but even then not necessarily so. I honestly only worked out what you were getting at in your last comment there.
The situation is, of course, very tragic but, for me, it is a family concern far removed from the day-to-day discussions of politics. I didn't write a condolences post as, as you say, DC won't be reading it anytime soon so I didn't see the point, I would have found it silly regardless of how genuine and heartfelt any thoughts would have been.
I've not read any of the media articles on it since I saw the first headlines down in London. Not that I don't think they should be written, it's possibly just too sad a story for me to take.
So, there is the discussion you have so craved. I am relaxed about your eagerness to suggest I have been callous in my actions. I know it is just a coincidence and so I'll be leaving it there.
Fair enough, Jeff.
However, in my defence I wasn't suggesting you were being callous, but on the assumption you knew the full SP and that you post went against the grain - IMO - then I was just curious as to your thinking.
Nor did I 'crave' the discussion - my initial query was more of an afterthought to the substance of the discussion, but since your response seemed disengenuous I had another go.
I now realise, however, that we were at cross purposes.
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,酒店,
Post a Comment