http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/3624 for more details.

http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/martin_kettle/2007/10/playing_with_political_fire.html for one perspective in The Guardian this week.

Wonder what Americans would make of a foreigner playing a similar role in US politics?

What I have said is that certain people in Washington have influenced the choice of political party leaders in recent years – Blair and Cameron being two notable examples (and possibly the only ones thus far).

I see that Mark Oaten has come out in support of a particular candidate – will that candidate want this known?

If you try Irwin Stelzer, you should have more luck! In short, he is an influential neocon adviser to Murdoch, who also writes in the Times quite often.

I’ve tried Google and Wikipedia, to no avail!!!
Help?

Peter Bancroft: I bet Irvine Seltzer does.

I think the media endorsements are interesting and need to be considered, but obviously we shouldn’t confuse what the newspapers think with what the country as a whole thinks (the kind of info we’d get from internal polling if we had the cash).

Be under no illusion. If a “Times” editorial says X on an important issue, the editor has been told to say X by Mr Rupert Murdoch, who has been told by Irvine Steltzer, who has been told by Dick Cheney.

If anyone reading this thread doesn’t find that worrying in the extreme, then wake up fast.

But I’ll say it again – stop thinking fewer words means more comprehensible politics. It doesn’t. It means one is more likely to sound bland. Just because you’ve thought very deeply about those words and chosen them over others, doesn’t mean the electorate will. Part of the “overhaul” you’re talking about should be evolving a less dull, predictable political language.

Simply, we need to work out how we can get to a stage where we are the official opposition and then how long it will take for us to become contenders for the corridors of power. The swift departure of Ming and the realisation that Media politics is here to stay means that our strategy, leader and picture for Britain our vital for our growth.

We are at the tipping point, head into self destruct mode then switch off the lights or be honest with ourselves and take the knife to whoever or whatever stands in the way of change.

Our future is bright and promising but we must act now, be bold and unrelenting. Party HQ and organisations across the country will face the biggest test of their times. The way ahead is tough, uncompromising and down right dirty but absolutely necessary. If we dont, then we will be lost in the field of a rising star, David Cameron. Make no mistake Gordon Brown knows he cannot not beat little dave so now, we must the suck the wind from his sails and open the wounds of Europe for the Conservatives. Attack is the best form of defence.

Our Name : The Democrats

Our values : Community, enterprise and freedom

The approach : Politics in your neighbourhood

Both Huhne and Clegg have experience internationally with PR systems and know that the only correct answer to coalition questions is “If we form a coalition at all, it will be with a party where we believe we can form a liberal coalition. If neither parties offer that prospect, we will not enter a coalition at all.”

Let’s ask our candidates to talk about what kind of liberal values they stand for and how they will communicate them to the country, rather than obsessing over political taboos like a Daily Mail reporter hoping to tear us apart.

I can’t resist the temptation to offer two alternative quotes:

1) “A free man will ask neither what his country can do for him nor what he can do for his country.” ― Milton Friedman

2) “Ask not what your government can do for you. Ask what your government is doing to you.” ― David Friedman

Not only are we a growing party, but we have grown to the level that we can make painful choices where serious decisions are required.

Not only are we loyal to our highest principles, but we increasingly recognise that there is a profound difference between bringing our ideas into action effectively from the opposition benches and from the office of government.

Not only have we shown our core resolve to be hardened under the strategic attacks as we felt the squeeze from all sides, but we have responded to the calls to give ‘em what they wanted.

We have survived in the wilderness and now we are tasting the serious fruits of the competition.

Now is the time to be clear-headed in our approach because we know politics is not meaningless entertainment for the simple gratification of players and audience – it far more serious than that: it is about real people, living real lives and it is about all of us, whether we like it or not.

This is news, because this is our opportunity to prove that we can build a constructive consensus through liberal democracy.

Excellent article Gareth!

I think I need to change my questions. Maybe to just this one single one..

Communicate the same message but do it better (and why do you feel you can succeed where the others have failed?), or communicate a different message?

<>
“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country.” We all need to improve the party’s finances. Go out and recruit new members, organise fundraising events. That is what I will be doing. That is what we all should be doing.

<>
Ming has driven forward many excellent internal party reforms and I will build on his legacy. I am clear that if any more reforms are needed, I will have the mandate from the membership once I am elected to implement any such reforms

<>
Transforming the ideas of Liberal philosophy into everyday language that people can understand and support has always been a challenge, despite the fact that many Liberal values are in the ascendency, such as gay rights. We need to continue to be a step ahead, for example over global warming, where people need to come to terms that they will have to change their lifestyle in order to mitigate the effects of this.
There never has been a quick headline or a magic formula. It really comes down to hard work and engaging with people and putting Liberal principles into pracatice, like in Liverpool and Newcastle.

<>
There is a creative tension between the 2. We need to be effective in generating wealth, but then we need to make sure it is distributed fairly and we cannot rely on market forces alone to do that. We also need to be concerned about the “externalities” (ie hidden cost, for example pollution) that a market economy generates.

Finally: What will the Lib Dems under your leadership offer that the others can’t steal or destroy?
It is funny in an odd kind of way. Many Labour people would love their party to support civil liberties, as they have done before. But New Labour prefer the Thatcherism of the SUn than to their 1980′s style LIberalism.

I wish more people in the party would realise that successful politics is about building wider coalitions built around shared values and common goals not turning yourself into an ever purer and purer little sect/ mini fan club.

Chris is someone I respect highly but I fear that on occasion he’s come over a bit dry.

Geordie Tory could also try peddling his message to Tory Councillors in Durham but, oh there aren’t any there either!