12 Comments

• Michael Heaver 12th Feb '10 - 1:53pm

  And I bet there will be more Gordon Brown pics in LibDems leaflets than pics of Nick Clegg.

• Dave Page 12th Feb '10 - 1:55pm

  I expect so, Michael – as a party we emphasise our local candidates far more than our party leader, but when attacking our opposition don’t want to promote their local candidate, so using Gordon to represent the well-known and disliked face of the Labour Party entirely makes sense.

• Michael Heaver 12th Feb '10 - 2:01pm

  Hmm, Mark’s comment came across as highlighting the unpopularity of Gordon Brown within his own Party. I simply am of the view that Clegg is an equally vacant weapon.

  I also think it promotes Punch and Judy style politics when parties attack and deride other parties on a national scale but then talk about yours on a local scale. I much prefer my own Party’s (usual) method of talking about both our national and local outline, rather than having pictures of Gordon Brown or anyone else. Surely your Party has enough to say and promote about itself, what with its struggle for any real identity to the electorate at large?

• Dave Page 12th Feb '10 - 2:11pm

  I disagree. To me, Punch and Judy politics is where you attack another party without promoting yourself. I don’t see that there’s anything wrong with pointing out how Labour have failed us, the Tories have no good ideas, and that the Liberal Democrats offer concrete, positive proposals for a fair change. You can do that and still promote yourself locally and nationally.

• The Orator 12th Feb '10 - 2:42pm

  Well if you need ideas on local campaigning, you can do worse than go here for tips:

  http://tinyurl.com/politicalgenius

• Sesenco 12th Feb '10 - 3:29pm

  Is Gordon Brown so deeply unpopular that putting him on a Lib Dem leaflet runs no risk whatsoever of raising his profile and boosting his credibility? I happen to think that Brown stomping about the country promoting himself as a no-nonsense “man of the people” might just work for him. Should we be helping him along?

  The problem with Nick Clegg is that for much of the electorate he is still a completely unknown quantity. The campaign itself will prove how much (or little) of a plus he is.

  As for Cameron, Labour is going for his jugular on the class issue, so there is no real need for us to join in (not just yet, at any rate). Besides which, Nick went to a posh school too, though not nearly as posh and elitist as Eton. What we have to show is that Nick, even though he did go to Westminster, is not a neo-con placeman and servant of the ultra-rich.

• Max Atkinson 12th Feb '10 - 4:08pm

  My rock solid election prediction is that the LibDems won’t abandon the boring Q-A ‘meet the people’ style of campaigning that proved such a disaster for the Alliance in 1987 – a video specimen of which can be inspected at http://bit.ly/a3AQ8R.

• Hywel 12th Feb '10 - 5:24pm

  It wasn’t the only thing wrong with the 87 campaign though Max 🙂

• Liberal Neil 12th Feb '10 - 6:13pm

  Lib Dems will be quite happy to have pictures of Nick in their leaflets, and indeed Vince. The leaflets I have seen from Lib Dem campaigns recenbtly have both of them in abundance.

  What is harder to predict is whether the picture of Brown with Bush or the one of brown with Thatcher will be used more often in Lib Dem leaflets!

• Liberal Neil 12th Feb '10 - 6:19pm

  Sesenco – Nick’s poll ratings are better than Kennedy’s were at this point in both 2001 and 2005. He has higher overall recognition, a higher positive score and a higher net positive score. In each of those campaigns Kennedy’s ratings rocketed due to the exposure of the campaign. I am sure Nick’s recognition will do the same this time. We obviously have to hope he comes over in a way that keeps the positives up too!

• iainm 12th Feb '10 - 8:02pm

  In each of those campaigns Kennedy’s ratings rocketed due to the exposure of the campaign. I am sure Nick’s recognition will do the same this time. We obviously have to hope he comes over in a way that keeps the positives up too!

  I wouldn’t count on Clegg receiving the same boost as Kennedy did. Kennedy was naturally likeable and came across as the very epitome of down-to-Earth, wheras Clegg is an overgrown public schoolboy who comes across as patronising, insincere and dull. Totally different situations.

• Anthony Aloysius St 12th Feb '10 - 8:32pm

  “Clegg is an overgrown public schoolboy who comes across as patronising, insincere and dull”

  You forgot his propensity to put his foot in his mouth whenever he’s interviewed…