Saturday, August 19, 2017

Calamity Cable?

You may have heard that there's a new Britain-wide YouGov poll out showing a significant drop in Jeremy Corbyn's personal popularity.  For my money, though, the bigger revelation from the poll is that it suddenly looks like the Liberal Democrats have made a catastrophic mistake by electing Vince Cable as their new leader.  (In fairness they didn't have much choice, given that nobody else wanted the job, for a variety of implausible and pompous reasons.)  Cable's net rating is a dismal -27, which is exactly the same as Theresa May's.  Presumably that can be explained by his involvement in the Tory-led coalition between 2010 and 2015, but it's quite surprising that the passage of time hasn't succeeded in rehabilitating him.

Speaking for myself, I find it difficult to dislike Cable, and he's obviously a serious figure.  I reckoned it was probably in the Lib Dems' own best interests that Jo Swinson had allowed him to take the job (regardless of what her real reasons for doing so were), but it looks like I was wrong about that.  Swinson was in it up to her neck during the coalition period, but the public probably aren't as aware of her role as they are of Cable's.  She would have started with more of a clean slate, however undeservedly.

The Liberal Democrats' collective rating has slipped from -20 in the immediate aftermath of the general election to -33 now, and the obvious suspicion is that this has been caused by Tim Farron being replaced by Cable.  It's hard to see what else has changed for the worse in the intervening period.

34 comments:

  1. Could you give a link? Or the full figures? Thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Cables comments about the old shafting the young probably aren't helping matters. The ageism in politics has to stop. Older people have myriad reasons for voting the way they do - the main one of them probably being life experience.

    So, he's annoyed older folks and younger folks who are fair minded or who simply think "you can't talk about my granda that way".

    His transformation into Mr Bean is coming along nicely...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anon,
      Whatever the reasons for how they are voting it still remains true that the old are shafting the young. Tell me in what way they are not?
      As for your "life experience" argument it is more often hardened prejudice and unwillingness to hear arguments that shapes the actions of many older people, although by no means all.
      By the way, I'm an OAP, and observe this at close hand.

      Delete
    2. "More life experience" also means being more interested in the short-term and less invested in the long-term, since you may not live long enough to see the consequences (positive or negative). If you're retired and living in the home you've had for years, you don't care about continuing to have the right to live and work in the EU. When your education was completed decades ago, university tuition fees are no concern of yours. And in 20 or 30 years, when the true costs of these policies are being realised, you will mostly likely be long gone and untouched by the fall-out.

      To me, it seemed like what really hurt the Tories in the most recent general election (aside from calling it in the first place) was their suggestion that pensions might cease to be protected. As a group, older voters were apparently fine with Tory austerity ideology, until it looked like they might be one of the groups affected by it.

      This doesn't mean that there aren't exceptions to that trend (plenty of older people care that younger people won't be able to look across Europe for jobs, and worry about their grandchildren's ability to pay for uni) and that they aren't appreciated. But I've never seen such a unwittingly perfect encapsulation of the self-absorption and warped priorities of the older generation as a voting bloc as that first paragraph in the post of Anonymous August 19, 2017 at 4:15 AM.

      Delete
    3. The importance of the right to live and work in the EU is surely overblown, from our point of view as Brits? How many people actually take advantage of it? I'm university educated and am qualified in something highly sought after. But I have zero inclination to visit continental Europe unless it is for a holiday. Why would I? I can't speak any of the languages and have no family there. I have little to no interest in the place. Everything I need, want or care about is here, in Britain. I'm 34 so not a coffin dodger.

      But if someone is really seized with itchy feet and simply must go a wandering in foreign lands, they can do it anyway. How many Brits live and work in the USA? Yet we are not in political and economic union with them.

      The whole thing is overblown and simply an excuse for having a good moan.

      Delete
    4. I live in Belgium. I originally came for a fixed-term contract but decided to stay, partly because the UK has a disproportionate share of parochial types like the above poster who aren't interested in the world beyond their own wee street. For the most part, the continent is a much more varied and vibrant place.

      Delete
    5. I do like going on holiday and finding out about history, local culture etc. But I also like to get home as well. Even the shite weather is sweet relief after spending two weeks in the boiling cauldrons of the med.

      I'm not parochial at all. I just believe in countries controlling their own destiny. And if the price of that is filling in a bit more paperwork to take up a job in France well boo bloody hoo - get on with it.

      Delete
  3. The impression I have of many older voters on the doorsteps is an unwillingness to accept that that the life they experienced (when I was young....) has gone and many of them know contemporary life and issues only through the prejudices of the tabloids (all these young people are sitting idle and doing drugs.....).

    Leaving the EU isn't going to bing back a fishing fleet to every small Scottish harbour and if some of the old resent the presence of foreigners and the demise of many corner shops, they presumably haven't noticed that most of the small shops that remain are run by "foreigners".

    I am 75 and largely agree with Vince Cable on this matter if on little else. I sometimes feel ashamed of my generation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. So what's the solution then - stop older people voting? Or insist that they only vote based on approved reasoning after consulting approved media? That isn't democracy.

    Old people vote based on prejudice - and the young don't? Let's stick it to the Tories / the man / the establishment is often the rationale for how youngsters vote - isn't that a form of prejudice? Not every right winger is a fascist. Not every wealthy figure is a moustache twirling see you next Tuesday. Try telling this to the young.

    And who is to say that the young haven't shafted themselves and everybody else by forcing a hung parliament and a weak government at a time of historically important negotiations involving this country?

    If it is now acceptable to divide the populace up in this way and single out age groups for criticism, then I have plenty of criticisms of the younger voters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. And who is to say that the young haven't shafted themselves and everybody else by forcing a hung parliament and a weak government at a time of historically important negotiations involving this country?

      Even if we accept your weird premise that the country is more likely to be "shafted" by a hung parliament than a majority government, how are the young more responsible for that outcome than the old? There was no "hung parliament" option on the ballot.

      Delete
    2. But lots of young people turning out to vote Labour is what closed the gap between the two main parties, leading to a hung parliament.

      Quite simply, when you are negotiating with such a ruthless organisation as the EU you need a united front. A hung parliament denies Britain that. If we get a rubbish deal from the EU for this reason then it will be the young who caused it - and they who will be around longest to suffer the fallout (as they are never done pointing out when they think the blame lies with another demographic).

      Delete
    3. But lots of young people turning out to vote Labour is what closed the gap between the two main parties, leading to a hung parliament.

      Equally, old people voting for the Tories is what stopped Labour having a majority.

      Quite simply, when you are negotiating with such a ruthless organisation as the EU you need a united front. A hung parliament denies Britain that. If we get a rubbish deal from the EU for this reason then it will be the young who caused it - and they who will be around longest to suffer the fallout (as they are never done pointing out when they think the blame lies with another demographic).

      If you insist on blaming a demographic as a whole, then it seems reasonable to point out that we wouldn't need to worry about getting "a rubbish deal from the EU" if old people hadn't voted for Brexit in the first place.

      Delete
    4. I dislike this blame game that seems to go on between the generations. But it was the left / young people who started it so must be prepared to take what they dish out.

      You say if fewer old people had voted Tory there would have been a majority Labour government. But if fewer young people had abstained from voting in the EU ref, there would have been a remain vote. There wasn't - but instead of blaming their own laziness, young people have opted for blaming those older people who actually exercised their civic duty and voted out of principle and conviction.

      Delete
  5. I'm surprised by this as well, I (wrongly) thought Cable was generally liked and felt to be a 'serious' politician, bit of gravitas, reasonably thoughtful, etc.

    Maybe his Brexit stance is upsetting the glorious 52?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I lost all respect for Vince when he came north to tell us we're too wee, too poor, too stupid (and effectively used that exact phrase) during the indy ref. He can just get to as far as I'm concerned.

      Delete
  6. Has anybody seen the articless on Lib-Dem election spending?

    I thought they were so skint they couldn't afford to pay their Police Scotland bill for their conference.

    Where did they get the money?

    And how come they joined in the Tory-led "No 2nd Referendum" Campaign. I doubt if getting into bed with the Tories again did them any electoral favours.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They didn't "get into bed with the Tories". They agree on one issue.

      Meanwhile, Salmond parades the Brexit secretary as his dear old friend at the Edinburgh fringe.

      In bed with the Tories or are the rules different for the SNP?

      Delete
    2. If they only agree with the Tories on "one issue", why were they in full coalition with the Tories as recently as two-and-a-half years ago?

      Delete
    3. The country was in crisis in 2010. It needed a government. Only the Tories and Lib Dems could provide that government, due to parliamentary arithmetic.

      It's hard now to find any area of consensus between the Tories and Liberals. On the major issue of the EU they are completely opposed. Support for the union is about the only thing they have in common.

      Delete
    4. Rubbish. There were several viable options for government-formation in 2010. The Lib Dems chose a coalition with the Tories.

      Delete
    5. It's 'in crisis' in 2017 Aldo. What's your solution?

      Delete
    6. There were several viable options for government-formation in 2010.

      Much as I wish it was otherwise, there were only 2 that had any chance of lasting past the first argument. Tory coalition, or Tory confidence and supply.

      Why we plumped for coalition still baffles me. William Hague did a really good interview on this on Radio 4 this week actually, he couldn't believe it either.

      Delete
    7. The only realistic options for government in 2010 were all tory-led. The Lib Dems and the Tories formed a full coalition to give stability to the country, at a time when Labour's economic incompetence had almost wrecked it.

      Delete
    8. In other words, you're conceding my point - a Tory/Lib Dem coalition was not the only option. Thank you.

      Delete
    9. But it was the best option for the country.

      Delete
    10. As you've conceded there were other options, we can take your personal opinion as a Tory with a pinch of salt.

      Delete
    11. Personal opinion doesn't enter into it. Full coalition is inherently more stable than C&S or minority government. The country needed stability especially at that time.

      I suppose we should respect the Lib Dems for sacrificing themselves for the good of the country. History will be kind to them, for that, at least.

      Delete
    12. Ah, of course. In contrast with the rest of us, you do not have personal opinions. You merely impart Truth.

      Delete
  7. The Nat sis do not have policies but just spend the benefits from the UK taxpayer for their own benefit.... 129 MSP'S! Passing mail too anyone who has resposibility. Just as stupid as the EI

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Electricity supply. I mean how does electricity work its like magic

      Delete
    2. Impersonator, lick your fingers and put them in the prongs. You will get at least a buzz but death if you are lucky.

      Delete
    3. Stench of this.

      Delete
  8. Speak for yourself James. I find it easy to dislike Cable!

    ReplyDelete