Incumbents = Losers?



Damian McBride argues in The Times that political incumbents around the world are all getting a kicking from the voters although, in passing, he takes time out to praise his hero, Gordon Brown.

But this is fatuous nonsense as opposed to grown up political commentary if you ask me, because how does Damian's 'analysis' square with the ongoing popularity of the SNP Government in Scotland which has been in power since 2007 and is currently riding high in all the opinion polls.

And elsewhere Angela Merkel's Christian Democracts in Germany were returned with a bigger share of the popular vote while in Venezuela the 'Chavistas' were returned albeit under a new socialist leader, Victor Maduro.

So it's far too simplistic to say that the incumbents everywhere are doomed because a key factor is whether or not they are seen by voters as competent and trustworthy, compared to the competition at least.  

America to Cameron: get ready for a kicking

By Damian McBride - The Times

Voters on both sides of the Atlantic are furious at those in power. The Conservatives will need to reinvent themselves

A week today, we will wake up to the results from America’s midterm elections, as every seat in the House of Representatives and a third of seats in the Senate go up for grabs. Yet even before a single vote is counted the main verdict is clear: incumbency is death.

For Republican congressional contenders, it has been the easiest of elections to fight: just label their Democratic opponent as “Barack Obama’s candidate” and let the president’s rampant unpopularity do the rest. So toxic is association with the incumbent administration that the Democrats’ Kentucky senate hopeful, Alison Grimes, was recently reduced to recording a campaign advert saying “I’m not Barack Obama”, and refusing to say whether she voted to elect him president in 2008 and 2012.

Next week, most attention will inevitably be on whether the Republicans retake the Senate, what further gains they make in the House and exactly how lame a duck Mr Obama will become for his last two years in office.

If David Cameron wants some distraction from his European woes, he may take plenty of cheer from the advances of his Republican brethren next week and see in them a recipe for his own re-election. That, however, would be a colossal misreading of the American mood. Beyond the congressional races and the Obama factor that dominates them, there is a much stronger anti-incumbency movement sweeping the United States that should deeply worry Mr Cameron.

Next Tuesday 36 American states will also elect their governors. Usually, these races get little attention because — bar the election of the odd film star or the continued progress of a future presidential candidate — nothing much happens. In the past 50 years the greatest number of incumbent governors to be ousted in one year was six, back in 1990. In the 281 contests since then, incumbents have only been defeated on 23 occasions. But this year, things are different. One incumbent — Hawaii’s Democratic governor, Neil Abercrombie — has already been jettisoned by his own party; and about a dozen others from Alaska to Florida are considered vulnerable.

Republican and Democratic incumbents are equally at risk; the right-wing, tax-cutting, welfare-slashing governors of Wisconsin and Kansas are in just as much danger as the liberal, gun-controlling, tree-hugging chief executives of Colorado and Illinois. Indeed, what is striking about the governors under pressure is that the only thing they have in common is their incumbency, and the fact that all the problems their states face — from soaring deficits to struggling schools — are being firmly laid at their mansion doors.

They cannot even plead that they are up against opponents whose charisma, record or popular appeal makes defeat inevitable. With the exception of Georgia’s Democratic candidate, Jason Carter, no challenger is being spoken about as future presidential candidates, and even the young lawyer’s prospects rest mainly on him following in the footsteps of his grandfather, Jimmy.

The fact is that the incumbent governors are under pressure in unprecedented numbers simply because most people in charge right now, on either side of the Atlantic, are unpopular, and electorates are falling over themselves to give them a kicking. This is not just about politics. Whether it is the performance of our sports teams or the behaviour of contestants on The Great British Bake Off, we are ever quicker to become angry and opinionated about what we see happening in front of us; to cast blame and demand resignations.

The Arsenal manager, Arsène Wenger, who knows a thing or two about incumbency after 18 years in the job, says we have moved “from a thinking society to an emotional society”, losing our sense of perspective on events because of the requirement for instant reactions and opinions. Worse still, when it comes to our elected representatives, we are increasingly succumbing to the nihilism that they all are the same and nothing we do will make a difference, hence it does not matter if we kick out the incumbents — and at least we can derive some passing pleasure from their pain.

Some in the Conservative party point to the result of Scotland’s independence referendum and persuade themselves that — faced with the risk and uncertainty of the unknown — people will get serious, play safe and stick with the status quo when they find themselves inside the polling booths next May.

That is simply not borne out by the figures from Scotland. Almost four fifths of those who voted “no” to independence decided to do so months before the ballot. The Yes campaign secured the votes of late deciders by a margin of almost two to one, and that devil-may-care momentum for change would have been unstoppable without the late intervention of Gordon Brown. Any Tory MPs relying on the forbearance of the electorate to give them another five years in office will get a very rude awakening.

All this should bode well for Ed Miliband, were it not for the fact that Labour is not long enough out of office to have shed its own incumbency stigma, and that — unlike in America — there is a third party on offer whose entire appeal is based on its outsider status.

Right now, Ukip is much better placed than Labour to exploit the anti-incumbent sentiment, including, crucially, picking up the votes of thousands who would otherwise stay at home. Indeed, every time the Tories say “Vote Farage: Get Miliband”, they further antagonise people sick of being told the only choice is between red and blue.

Some Tory strategists realise the fix they’re in and are urging the party almost to run against itself at the election. Forget the deficit; offer billions in unfunded tax cuts. Escalate the rhetoric on immigration, Europe and welfare. Say it will all be different once the shackles of coalition are off, and the Tories can be the party of radical change and reform.

The trouble is, as a semi-fictional American governor — the Coen Brothers’ Pappy O’Daniel — memorably said in O Brother, Where Art Thou? : “How we gonna run reform when we’re the damn incumbent?” Very few politicians in British or American history have ever solved that dilemma, but when David Cameron looks at the results of next week’s mid-terms, he will realise it’s time to start.



Advice and Advisers (18 October 2014)



I don't know why anyone pays attention to what Damian McBride has to say because he was once a media adviser to Gordon Brown, arguably the least effective Labour Prime Minister of modern times who developed a reverse 'Midas touch' when he finally made it to No 10 Downing Street.

But even Damian 'McPoison" McBride feels able to attack Ed Miliband's leadership of the Labour Party these days which he does in classic spin-doctor style via this opinion piece in  The Times in which he concludes that Ed has to either 'shape up' or 'ship out'.

Now I agree with Damian up to a point and it is certainly true that Ed Miliband's recent  'get tough' article on immigration was yet another damp squib and lacked a coherent message never mind a credible policy.

Yet for someone who is so free with his advice it's amazing to think that Damian was never so candid with his old boss, Gordon Brown, who stumbled from one terrible crisis to another including this disastrous 'rictus grin' announcement on the great MPs' expenses scandal, before going on to lose the 2010 general election.  

So where was Damian when he was needed to save Gordon from himself?

If Ed’s too stubborn to change, he has to go 

By Damian McBride - The Times


Isolated and unpopular, the Labour leader must realise that he will never win on his own

Four years ago, on the day Ed Miliband was elected Labour leader, I sent a congratulatory message to one of his key aides, with some advice: “Now get some fat men around him.”

Like Julius Caesar, I thought Mr Miliband needed some experienced allies at his side with no ambitions of their own: loyal, wise and alert for sharp objects aimed at his back.

To say my advice was ignored is an understatement. Four days later Nick Brown, Labour’s chief whip and Gordon Brown’s political bodyguard, was summoned by Mr Miliband and told his services were no longer required. It was a shabby way to treat a loyal friend, and short-sighted too; the action of a leader carried away by victory, forgetting his own mortality, convinced that he could govern the Labour party and win the next election on his own.

One backbench MP told me: “He’s as arrogant as his brother, just better at hiding it.” I didn’t accept that at the time because it was so out of kilter with the well-liked and collegiate character I knew at the Treasury.

I could understand why Mr Miliband kept his first shadow cabinet at a distance. It had been elected by Labour MPs under rules he promptly scrapped, all but three members were his senior and most were relics of the Blair-Brown years.

But even today, with a shadow cabinet of his own choosing, 11 of them younger than him, eight elected in 2010, little seems to have changed.

To the extent that there is any open discussion at their meetings about the critical policy issues or the big political strategy, there is no sense that Mr Miliband is listening, let alone acting on what he hears.

In good times, that might not matter. But these are not good times for Mr Miliband, and the lack of sensible counsel from senior colleagues is showing.

Loyalists such as John Denham, John Healey and Peter Hain have walked away in despair. Wise hands such as Alan Johnson and Peter Mandelson have not thus far been persuaded back, not least because Mr Miliband will not lower himself to ask.

Even Douglas Alexander, one of the leader’s few confidants, now finds himself ignored, clinging to his role of election co-ordinator in title alone.

Less than 30 weeks to polling day, and no one is actually managing Labour’s campaign; it’s certainly a novel approach.

Inevitably for someone as isolated as Mr Miliband, pressure is leading to panic, and panic to paranoia. In the wake of his disastrous conference speech and last week’s by-election fright in Heywood and Middleton, the panic is easy to spot: Mr Miliband’s Sunday newspaper article on immigration was so rushed he didn’t even bother to make it readable.

Reshuffles and radical policy lurches are considered not on merit but on whether they might secure a day’s respite from bad coverage.

The paranoia is less obvious but equally potent.

Perfectly rational people go to work in Mr Miliband’s office and, like victims of a cult, emerge a week later parroting crazed nonsense about the supposed manoeuvres of the shadow health secretary, Andy Burnham.

They forget that the Liverpudlian is the darling of party members precisely because he scorns the infighting of the Blair-Brown era. He would sooner see his beloved Everton run out in red than plot against Labour’s leader.

Yet the unfounded accusations persist and instead of Mr Burnham being handed the lead role in a campaign geared around the NHS he finds himself in internal exile. That illustrates why — before Labour can even think about fighting that campaign effectively — it must address the question of its leader and how he manages the top of the party.

If Mr Miliband continues to operate in isolation for the next seven months, refusing to listen and treating senior colleagues like strangers or rivals, Labour will lose.

To avoid that, either Labour must be willing to change its leader, or its leader must be willing to change himself.

The latter is obviously the better, less bloody course, but it relies on Ed Miliband having the courage and humility to seek his colleagues’ help.

Whether they are fat men, skinny women or handsome rogues like Andy Burnham, Mr Miliband must engage with all of the talented, experienced individuals in his shadow cabinet, and start treating them like a team.

When they meet this morning he should have the confidence to list all the biggest problems he and the party face, from the Ukip insurgency to his own unpopularity, ask his team’s advice and then listen.

For now, Mr Miliband remains master of his own fate, but the time has come when he must address his own faults.

Damian McBride was Gordon Brown’s media adviser



Labour Poison (22 September 2014)



My jaw dropped while reading this nonsense by Damian McBride in the arch-Tory Mail on Sunday newspaper - no wonder Gordon Brown's former spin doctor was known as 'McPoison' during his years working at the heart of the last Labour Government.

Now my immediate reaction was that it beggars belief that the Labour Government achieved during 1997 to 2010 with people like McBride spraying their venom at senior figures who were supposed to be running the country and whatever you can say about the SNP which has been in government in Scotland since 2007, I have certainly never witnessed this kind of vile behaviour.

I don't know what it is about the Labour Party, but lots of people within its ranks seem genuinely to hate each other instead of regarding politics as means of resolving difficult issues without resorting to personal abuse and divisive attacks.

Anyway in the strange world that Damian McBride inhabits, Gordon Brown is 'master of the universe' instead of one of the worst Prime Ministers the UK has ever seen, while other more senior Labour figures are dismissed as political pygmies who all deserve to be sacked.

Little wonder then that with people like Damian McBride working in its 'engine room', that the Labour Government under Gordon Brown (2007 to 2010) developed a reverse 'Midas Touch' before being thrown out of office at the 2010 general election. 

I do believe that if Gordon invited Damian to eat a rat sandwich, the former Labour spin doctor would happily do so - with no questions asked.  

Dismissive Ed, serial loser Alexander... and how blood-and-guts Gordon came out of his shed to save them all (and the union)

By DAMIAN MCBRIDE - Mail on Sunday
  • Gordon Brown said Labour needed its own anti-independence platform
  • He said it was wrong to work alongside David Cameron and Nick Clegg
  • He believed joining with the 'hated Tories' would alienate Labour's core 
  • Brown warned that 'Better Together' needed a positive message 

Gordon Brown, pictured, is stubborn, impatient, quick-tempered and intolerant of failure

It is Hell to be on the sidelines.’ So wrote George Patton on D-Day, 1944; the greatest American general of his age, distraught to be left behind in England while the greatest invasion in history took place without him.

Gordon Brown has much in common with Patton: both stubborn, impatient, quick-tempered, and intolerant of failure. But also devoted family men; insatiable historians and master strategists, their every battle won in the planning.

Until a fortnight ago, Brown was experiencing his own year of hell on the sidelines. Scotland’s place in the Union was under threat, and he was not wanted in the fight.

Traipsing around his back garden in Kirkcaldy last summer, he would bark down his mobile phone about the mistakes being made.

The Labour Party must have its own campaign against independence, not join a platform with the hated Tories and discredited Liberal Democrats. Working with David Cameron and Nick Clegg would not just alienate uncommitted voters but Labour’s own core support.

The early polls, he warned, were totally misleading. At the outset, there were always more people firmly committed to the status quo than to independence; the race would tighten as more Scots made up their mind. He was right: voters who were undecided a year ago split 60:40 in favour of ‘Yes’.

Finally, Gordon warned, the ‘Better Together’ campaign must show how life would get better for Scottish people if they stayed in the Union, not just how it would get worse if they didn’t.

Every one of his warnings was resolutely ignored by Ed Miliband and Cameron, and their key advisers, Douglas Alexander and George Osborne.

For Cameron and Osborne, their long-standing hatred for Brown had turned into contempt. When they scuppered his bid to take over the IMF in 2011, Osborne taunted Brown publicly by saying he hadn’t ‘asked to be considered for the job’.

For Miliband and Alexander, having spent 20 years receiving instructions from Gordon, the reaction to his warnings was wearily dismissive. On occasion, their old mentor couldn’t even get them to answer his phone calls or emails.

So Gordon retired to his garden hut, not to sulk, but to write. If he couldn’t get his arguments heard in Westminster, he’d take them direct to the public in the form of a book, My Scotland, Our Britain, and a lecture tour.

Damian McBride, pictured was former Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown's spin doctor


Gordon Brown roars into life on the eve of historic Scottish vote

The ‘No’ campaign carried on under Alistair Darling’s leadership. Forget General Patton, this was like putting the D-Day landings in the hands of Dad’s Army. Alistair is a safe pair of hands if that’s what you need, but when the battle heats up, he combines the strategic insight of Private Pike with the crisis management of Corporal Jones.

As the months passed, every one of Gordon’s warnings came true, but even he didn’t predict the self-interested shambles that the ‘No’ campaign would become.

After Scottish Labour’s poor showing in May’s European elections, Douglas Alexander decamped to Scotland to take charge.

With Gaza, Ukraine, and Iraq in flames, this was no time for Labour’s shadow foreign secretary and 2015 General Election coordinator to take a sabbatical.

But Douglas’s first and last priority in life is himself, and if Scotland was lost, so was his career.

Jim Murphy, shadow minister for international development, is cut from the same cloth. He has a gymnastic approach to politics, adopting any position that will impress the judges.

And this summer, he decided to position himself as Labour’s next leader in Scotland, braving SNP mobs by day, and schmoozing Labour members by night.

As for Alistair Darling, his first debate with Alex Salmond was a triumph, calmly repeating questions that the SNP leader refused to answer. Carried away by that first success, he naively tried to repeat it word for word against a better-prepared Salmond in a more hostile arena, and was eaten alive.

At this point, no one in the highest echelons of the Labour Party even knew who was in charge of the ‘No’ campaign.

Such was the vacuum that it was just two weeks before the vote until any serious attempt was made to get the country’s unions to support the ‘No’ campaign. Even then, a series of panicky phone calls from Miliband fell on deaf ears; Scotland’s biggest unions Unite and Unison stayed neutral.

As soon as Alex Salmond had managed to take the lead, the Labour Party picked up the phone for Gordon

And wherever there is a vacuum in politics, mistakes happen.

A hideously patronising TV advert was proposed featuring a fictional working mum deciding to vote ‘No’. Even the advert’s creators had severe doubts. But Douglas loved it, Alistair didn’t even look at it, and the resulting derision compounded the impact of the second debate.

Suddenly, a buoyant SNP wasn’t just narrowing the polls, it was threatening to take the lead. In panic, the ‘No’ campaign not only summoned every local Labour Party organiser in the country to spend the week in Scotland, but – equally desperately – they picked up the phone to Gordon.

Asked to take charge, he didn’t disappoint. The package of extra powers he announced for Holyrood may have looked hastily assembled, but Gordon had been working on them for months.

And if Cameron, Miliband and Clegg felt bounced in to the ‘vow’ they made to honour those extra powers and preserve the Barnett formula, they should have known that, like General Patton, Gordon has a habit of jumping ahead: usually by the time you’ve read his proposals, he’s already announced them.

Whether or not those announcements were necessary to clinch the referendum result, we may never know.

But this is for sure: they stopped the SNP’s momentum at the crucial moment, and they transformed the ‘No’ campaign from a divided, chaotic, leaderless shambles into a focused election machine.

They also paved the way for the brilliantly orchestrated, perfectly delivered speech that Gordon made on the day before the vote, telling undecided voters to think of their children before making such an irrevocable choice.

It may have differed in content and context to Patton’s famous address to the Third Army on the eve of D-Day, but for passion, inspiration and emotion, the two speeches bear fine comparison. When Labour staffers heard Gordon happily humming to himself on the morning of polling day, they knew the battle was won. His mood told not just of a fortnight’s work well done, but the crowning glory of 30 years in politics.

Where does Gordon go now? He would be an obvious candidate to take over Scottish Labour and run for First Minister in 2016, but I doubt he will see much attraction in a bitter fight with Jim Murphy.

Labour also needs someone to manage its 2015 Election campaign. Having presided over the near-disaster of the ‘No’ campaign, Douglas Alexander’s position is now untenable. Dating back to David Miliband’s leadership campaign, he is a serial loser, and Labour cannot give him a last chance with five more years of opposition at stake.

Would Ed Miliband ask Gordon to take over? Sadly, I doubt it. He has made too much of his break from New Labour to turn to one of its key architects, and his deputy Harriet Harman has still not apologised for publicly branding the former PM a ‘sexist’.

Instead, I fear that – like George Patton – Old ‘Blood and Guts’ Brown will remain one of those generals that no one ever knows what to do with. Until the next battle they fear they can’t win.

Popular posts from this blog

SNP - Conspiracy of Silence

LGB Rights - Hijacked By Intolerant Zealots!