![]() |
|
| |
|
Learning From Britain’s ConservativesPosted on Jul 31, 2008By E.J. Dionne It was a little-noticed episode during Barack Obama’s boffo foreign trip, but it was the moment most relevant to the American presidential campaign. On the final stop of his trip last Saturday, Obama dropped in on British Prime Minister Gordon Brown during the PM’s most stressful weekend since he replaced Tony Blair a year ago. Just two days earlier, Brown’s Labor Party had lost a special election for one of its safest seats, a working-class bastion in Glasgow. It was no comfort that the race was close (decided by 365 votes) or that the loss was to the Scottish Nationalists, a regional party, and not to the main opposition, the Conservative Party. To sense the size of the catastrophe for Brown, think of the Republicans losing an ultra-safe seat in a wealthy Dallas suburb. Immediately, the British papers were filled with reports about plots among Labor politicians to oust Brown from his job, lest the party’s 11-year hold on power slip to the Conservatives. Brown does not have to call an election until 2010, but Labor is petrified. The plot thickened this week with Thursday’s British papers highlighting the refusal of David Miliband, the foreign secretary, 43, to rule out a challenge to Brown, even as he professed a loyalty that was seen as lukewarm. Obama remained studiously neutral during his British visit, chatting warmly not only with Brown but also with the Conservative Party’s leader, David Cameron, 41—youth is definitely in this year—who might as well be running on a change-we-can-believe-in platform. Cameron has a huge lead over Brown in the public opinion polls. But Obama did try to buck up Brown, with whom he shares a broadly center-left worldview. “You’re always more popular before you’re actually in charge of things,” Obama told reporters after the meeting. “Once you’re responsible then you’re going to make some people unhappy. That’s just the nature of politics, and these things go in cycles.” The key word here is cycles, and Obama, like Cameron, is on the right side of the political cycle at a moment of distress all across the wealthy democracies. But there is a message to John McCain in Cameron’s rise: The British Conservatives didn’t get this close to power by sticking with their old ideas or confining themselves to assaults on the Labor Party. Cameron has entirely renovated British conservatism by acknowledging the party’s nasty public image, its seeming indifference to the economically deprived, and its aura of stuffy privilege. The new Conservatives are warm, up-to-date, environmentally conscious and socially concerned. McCain, on the other hand, is running a campaign straight out of the playbook that lost the Conservative Party the last three British elections. The old Conservatives thought that if they just kept attacking Labor, the citizens would see the error of their ways. It didn’t work, and it’s hard to imagine the American electorate buying McCain’s new advertising effort to undermine Obama by accusing him of being a “celebrity” and comparing him—OMG!—to Britney Spears and Paris Hilton. McCain has made matters worse by falsely accusing Obama of wanting to raise taxes on electricity and offering a phony account of why Obama decided not to visit wounded American soldiers in Europe. By running an attack campaign that is almost a parody of George W. Bush’s 2000 and 2004 exertions, McCain is chucking away his greatest opportunity, which is to show that he could reform Republicanism and offer voters an alternative way of breaking with a past they have come to loathe. Interestingly, Miliband put himself at the center of Britain’s torrid political speculation with an Op-Ed article in The Guardian on Wednesday suggesting that even an incumbent party can turn itself into a party of change if it understands the fix it’s in. “To get our message across, we must be more humble about our shortcomings but more compelling about our achievements,” he wrote, noting that Labor “won three elections by offering real change, not just in policy but in the way we do politics. We must do so again.” It’s true that Labor’s record in Britain is more compelling than Bush’s. That’s why it’s sad to see Brown, an intelligent and decent man, in such trouble. But Miliband and Cameron both have the right idea: Voters are in a mood to give the status quo a swift kick. Instead of offering puerile ads trashing Obama, McCain should show how he’d be the change we’ve been waiting for. Previous item: McCain's Evil Twin Next item: The 5 Best Political Comedies Elsewhere: . CommentsAre you a Truthdig member yet? Login now, or register with Truthdig. Add Your Comment
|
A Progressive Journal of News and Opinion. Editor, Robert Scheer. Publisher, Zuade Kaufman.
Copyright © 2009 Truthdig, L.L.C. All rights reserved. |
By G.Anderson, August 2, 2008 at 10:44 am #
I wonder if Ms. Spears or Ms. Hilton, gave permission for their images to appear in Mr. McCains ads?
Clearly Mr. McCain cannot tell us what he want’s to change, because he does not infact represent change. Rather he represents a continuation of the corporate thuggery, that the Neo Cons have perpetrated against working people.
Instead what he’ll do, is turn the campaign from an issues campaign, into one of Character Assassination, poison innuendo, and making liberalism the issue, rather than pursuing the issues themselves.
After all this is what got Bush elected wasn’t it?
While The Ice Pack keeps shrinking at the North and South Pole, Mr. McCain wants to pursue off shore oil drilling.
Does the Oil Industry really need more money?
They made 51 billion dollars profit last quarter. I wonder how much more money they will make once off shore oil drilling is expanded.
But even if we discoverd unlimited supples of oil somewhere, we couldn’t use them, because to do so would destroy the Earth.
Mc Cains same rationalizations, have been before made over an over again in regard to the Auto Industry.
For the last 30 years the American Auto industry fought against higher gas mileage standards, in doing so they cut their own throats. Yet foreign car companies had no problem providing higher mileage in the their cars. If the American Auto Industry, hadn’t been so lazy, and greedy then they wouldn’t be in the fix they are now.
The same is true for Global warming. In less something is done now, in a few decades humanity will be in serious trouble.
Report thisBy thebeerdoctor, August 2, 2008 at 6:44 am #
re: troublesum
The only thing positive I saw in David Cameron was when he pointed out that when you take away the citizens’ liberty, the terrorists win. The debate in Great Britain over extending detention of suspects to 42 days without any charges, was quite heated. Cameron and liberal democratic members made Gordon Brown look very foolish.
Report thisBy troublesum, August 2, 2008 at 6:17 am #
It sounds like Cameron is a compassionate conservative. Does Dionne have amnesia?
Report thisBy troublesum, August 2, 2008 at 6:11 am #
Keith Fitzpatrick - there’s no such thing as a Labour
Report thisParty over there either, is there? Just one party with two wings, like here.
By thebeerdoctor, August 2, 2008 at 3:30 am #
John McCain, despite his wife’s fortune, simply does not have the muscle of the Bush crime family. So he can’t do the maverick thing when so much of his support depends on the usual crowd of republican goons. But, as I posted another thread, that is what all these attacks on doubting Obama are about. Here is the point: the people who swallow the propaganda would never vote for Senator Obama. But what is wanted is to agitate them enough, so they will go out and vote against him.
Report thisBy Aegrus, August 1, 2008 at 9:22 am #
EJ is right when he says the public in many countries, particularly America right now, is very ready for change and pushing out the status quo. It is a mistake, however, to say what John McCain should be doing because he is clearly acting out exactly what he is paid for doing.
Kind of hard to be a ‘Maverick’ when all your campaign finances come from less than five hundred people.
Report thisBy purplewolf, August 1, 2008 at 7:45 am #
Hey Purple Girl, doesn’t Cindy McCain seem more like the Brittany-Paris genre of a bubble headed, blonde, sex kitten? Maybe he likes them that way. After all he dumped his first wife for this one. Younger, richer. Maybe he is looking for wifey #3. Speaks volumes doesn’t it? Wasn’t it Clark Gable who only like 18 year olds?
Report thisBy Purple Girl, August 1, 2008 at 7:03 am #
dissing Britney for being just a bubble head bleach blond. that could reflect on th evoters who Love Britney and take offense to her being dipicted as a ‘nothing’. And for those who love Paris’ sex pot antics, it could also be a slap in the face to their Loved Sex Kitten. Could mac be trying to degrate this voting block Too. Remember the gal who had a crying fit over how Britney was being Treated- think she appreciated her idol being portrayed as unworthy of adoration?
Report thisso those who are running Mac’s campaign ( those controlling his strings) may want to consider how that Ad played to the voters who LOVE these two idols. they may have just given this block the idea Obama is worth look at more closely.Disenfranchised Voters from the Celebrity worship realm?
Gramm’s “Whiners ” certainly helped convince many in the Working class that Mac’s Candidacy was Out of Touch and dis interested in what is happening to the Working class.
The more Mac and his String Pullers Speak - the more voters move towards Obama. thanks for all the help CheneyCorp- You’ll make my Campaign Canvass efforts in MI much easier and more Pleasant!
Why not try to aim your insults toward Oprah Next, we’d LOVE a Landslide in Nov!
By VietnamVet, August 1, 2008 at 6:08 am #
Another point McCain could learn from the Brits is that Tony Blair’s star started to crash when he hitched it to Bush’s war of choice in Iraq. Once one of the most popular Prime Ministers in British history, he sunk to the point of almost loosing his own party’s support. McCain has supported the Iraq war and Bush 95% of the time, and it will surely be a consideration of any American tending to vote for McSame. He will loose, and probably by a significant margin!
Report thisBy Keith Fitzpatrick-Matthews, July 31, 2008 at 11:37 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Please, there’s no such thing as a Labor Party in the UK - it’s the Labour Party. It may seem an unimportant issue, but we speak and write English this side of the Atlantic, not American (despite the best efforts of the mass media)!
Report thisBy eliana, July 31, 2008 at 10:00 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Listen, anybody who’s against offshore drilling clearly hasn’t thought of the countless problems that it would solve. For example,
Report thisProblem: pollutants increase nationwide. Your kid has asthma attacks on a daily basis. On “bad air days” he cant go outside.
Solution: You’re going to need some cheap fuel to drive him back and forth to the hospital. Try drilling in the Alaskan Wildlife Refuge. Also, you should gut the clean air regulations. Actually, you have enough to worry about. Let us do it for you.
See more reasons why offshore drilling will save the world: http://www.236.com/news/2008/07/30/poor_depressed_impo tent_offsho_8035.php