Buy Naltrexone South Africa Arthritis Herbal Pills Cialis Cheap Australia Kamagra Tablets For Sale Uk Where Can I Buy Nootropil

Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead?


9:01 am - January 21st 2010

by Guest    


      Share on Tumblr

contribution by Vinay Nair

At this Saturday’s Fabian Society annual conference, Vinay Nair made a presentation to the assembled audience arguing that both Labour and the Libdems should be aiming more directly at George Osborne, and asking whether the electorate were happy with him as Chancellor.

Vinay narrowly lost out to being voted the best policy idea to defeat the right. He used a presentation to make his point and we publish them below the fold.
—–
Slide 1

Slide 2

Slide 3

Slide 4

Slide 5

Slide 6

Slide 7

————-
Vinay Nair is an MPA Public Policy & Management student at LSE. Whilst not a member of any political party, he greatly fears how dangerous Tory policies would be for this country and already has a queasy 1937 feeling.

    Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
This is a guest post.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: Blog ,Conservative Party ,Westminster

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


The man has less economic knowledge than a GCSE student. The city even hates him. That says a lot for a Tory.

2. Sunder Katwala

For a bit of context. This was one of the pitches in the end of day ‘democracy den’ session on campaigning ideas to beat the right, with the ‘dragons’ being Deborah Mattinson, Mehdi Hasan and Ken Livingstone. Its a serious question but a deliberately quite light format.

Vinay pitched this one in a very amusing way – all of the dragons liked it a lot – and it won through to the final selection (despite some concerns from the audience about positive vs negative campaigning, and how to make Osborne the symbol of a contentful argument, etc) alongside a proposal for national civic service and one on the environment, A pitch on campaigning to keep the fox hunting ban was eliminated, and one on class

The overall winner was a pitch on a green new deal, making jobs and the economy central to a climate change argument.

All good stuff, but some of us thought the George pitch might still have edged it!

Even amongst the Tory faithful, I think its clear recognised that most of the shadow cabinet are not a media friendly bunch, which is why they wouldn’t play ball with the idea of having any TV debates other than the planned leaders showdown.

Had the three departmental debates gone ahead, which I’d assume would have been on the economy, home affairs and foreign policy, I strongly suspect that:

1. The Foreign Policy debate would most likely end up a no score draw – Miliband’s not the most convincing foreign secretary we’ve ever had and Davey’s a bit anonymous but Hague has never gotten over with the public despite being highly regarded in the House as a good performer.

2. Home Affairs would most likely go to Johnson, who’s laid back approach will play well, although Huhne could run him close on a good day. Grayling is just an arse.

3. As for a Treasury debate, I’d watch that one just for the entertainment value of seeing Cable chew both opponents into tiny little kibbles. It would have been the biggest mismatch since they gave Richard Dunn a title shot against Muhammed Ali.

Sunder

“All good stuff, but some of us thought the George pitch might still have edged it!”

Indeed. Not least because the “Green” proposal was a load of nonsense, mixing up the economy with the environment, and people appeared to be voting on it because they couldn’t keep the two thoughts “the environment is important” and “how to win an election” separate.

Thinking about it, Osborne’s only hope in a TV debate on the economy would have been to allow him to bring Ken Clarke as a wingman, but that would have allowed Labour to put Mandelson into the mix as well.

Now a three-way debate between Clarke, Mandelson and Cable… that would be well worth seeing but it would also really have showed up Darling and Osborne as lacking the right stuff.

As for a Treasury debate, I’d watch that one just for the entertainment value of seeing Cable chew both opponents into tiny little kibbles.

Did you see him interviewed by Andrew Neil? Cable has taken so many positions on the economy in the last year, that it would be a pretty effective debating technique to contradict his positions using his own previous positions.

‘You don’t agree Vince? But those were your words from…’

The beatification of Vince Cable has been among the laziest political phenomena of recent times.

Very funny slideshow and it did stir up a decent debate about negative campaigning – rather charming to see the sandal wearing brigade putting down their horlicks and saying “we on the left shouldn’t do this kind of thing”.

Seriously, I can see their point, but the fact is negative campaigning does work, its been proven to work and the new re-branded, hug-me-while-I-slip-you-some-ultra-right-wing-policies Conservative party is a prime target. But I wouldn’t focus on Osborne, most people outside of the political bubble barely know who this berk is – better to go for Cameron and the generally confused vomit feast that makes up the Tories policy platform.

And just before the knit ware wing goes crazy, of course this does not mean we shouldn’t also be positive and flag up our successes. But we also need to hit our enemies at the same time.

The beatification of Vince Cable has been among the laziest political phenomena of recent times.

Perhaps, but Cable does go over on TV is a way that neither of his direct counterparts can match and TV debates are as much, if not more, about about perception than reality.

To be honest, when it comes to the economy there’s been so much coverage in recent times that most people have a least picked up the idea that its area in which things can change rapidly to the extent that what might once have easily have been played out, detrimentally, as a politician constantly shifting position could, today, be accepted as honestly responding to changing events.

More and more people seem to be buying into the idea that the amount of control that politicians can exert on economic issues is very limited, which makes the old approach of arguing from fixed positions and pretending that you’re on top of everything much less credible.

8 – Maybe, but Cable has essentially stopped being treated like a politician. Note, for instance, the recent case where he stated Liberal Democrat policy on the economy (which, hell, is his portfolio) and then, casually, said that he personally thought that more would be required. Any other politician would have been crucified for that.

But Cable is a pundit, not a politician, so everyone passes by murmuring ‘I wish that man was in charge…’ People say that about Jeremy Clarkson too. And it has about as much significance for the prospects of the Liberal Democrats.

Keep it up a wonderful idea to help the tories get in at the election.
Underestimate “Gideon” at your peril. Cable is the most over-estimated “economics expert” in all the parties.

PG @ 7: But I wouldn’t focus on Osborne, most people outside of the political bubble barely know who this berk is

The same could have been said of Oliver Letwin in a past election, but if the supposed No. 2 in a putative government gets taken out of play, perhaps the over-reliance on Cameron becomes even more apparent.

Targeting Osborne is a pretty good idea IMO as there are plenty of clues that he really doesn’t have much feel for economics and is therefore apt to fall under the influence of whichever Tory nutcase he last talked with.

OTOH Vince Cable comes across as someone who does know what he is talking about, which isn’t too surprising as he’s a Cambridge grad in economics who went on to become chief economist for Shell.

Why don’t Labour put a picture of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling on their posters, with the subtitle “Consider if you really want five more years of these two men running the economy.”

Labour are deluded if they think trying to scare people away from voting Tory will work after they’ve made a mess of 13 years in government. Deluded.

Most people don’t know who Osborne is. Most don’t know who Darling is. These posters are aimed at the converted.

And if you even try to play the “experience” card against Dave or Boy George, it will be played ruthlessly against whichever young pup Labour puts forth as its leader in the future – Dave Miliband, Ed, whoever. So Labour will have to plop for another old crone.

Good luck with that.

Great idea. Focus on the chancellor to be (if the Conservatives win). Show his lack of experience. Focus on how we need proven hands to run the economy in this time.

Sit back in shock as the Conservatives counter by focussing on the chancellor that was. Show his experience of ‘ending boom and bust’. Focus on how we need a total change from the leadership that has brought about this level of debt.

Well, if that’s the second best idea available, I might have to go and put money on a Conservative victory. Yes, Vince Cable might come across well against George Osborne, but as other commentators point out this has not been put to the test yet. And it would present an open goal for the Conservatives against Labour (indeed, for the Liberal Democrats against Labour as well – why take the harder target?). An election focus on him might well reveal crack. Note also that targetting the Conservatives rather than the government is not likely to be a particularly rewarding stratergy for the Liberal Democrats.

Targeting Osborne is a pretty good idea IMO as there are plenty of clues that he really doesn’t have much feel for economics and is therefore apt to fall under the influence of whichever Tory nutcase he last talked with.

Example?

Example?

Flirting with Madsen Pirie on flat taxes and writing warmly about the Estonian flat tax in 2005
http://www.adamsmith.org/blog-archive/001491.php

“Labour are deluded if they think trying to scare people away from voting Tory will work after they’ve made a mess of 13 years in government. Deluded.”

At least Brown kept us from joining the Eurozone and I only recall hearing from the Conservatives about how the government should cut red tape and deregulate, which is what New Labour did and why we got the house-price bubble and the financial crisis as a result.

As best I can tell, up to the onset of the financial crisis in 2007, the UK economy was performing better than the Eurozone. Even with the financial crisis, several other G7 economies had bigger losses of GDP than did Britain.

On the evidence, the Conservatives here who keeping posting up how badly New Labour ran the economy are plainly pretty ignorant folks.

Btw I didn’t vote in the 2005 election and as a habitual floating voter probably won’t vote in the next either.

On the evidence, the Conservatives here who keeping posting up how badly New Labour ran the economy are plainly pretty ignorant folks.

From my lofty position of ignorance, I would say that if Labour try and run their campaign based on how well they have managed the economy, they will get savaged.

20. Emma Burnell

Paul Sagar

[i]”Indeed. Not least because the “Green” proposal was a load of nonsense, mixing up the economy with the environment, and people appeared to be voting on it because they couldn’t keep the two thoughts “the environment is important” and “how to win an election” separate.”[/i]

The idea was focussing on a green new deal – i.e. deliberately mixing up the economy and the environment, and not leaving them in false silos.

Also the speaker deliberately spoke about the importance of focussing on the 50 or so seats where the Green vote could make all the difference, thus conflating “the environment is important” and “how to win an election”.

A green new deal is about jobs, rebuilding our manufacturing sector, energy security and the economic stability that could come from all these things as much as it’s about the vital importance of combating climate change. Ghettoising environmental policies only leads to a misunderstanding of their importance and a loss of the green vote to those less willing to implement environmental policies in a socially just way.

Myself, I was very pleased this policy won the day* but think that it would run well as the positive half of a campaign complimented by a focus on the negative aspects of who and what a Tory Government would bring.

* Full disclosure – I am Vice Chair of SERA – the organisation that proposed the policy.

From my lofty position of ignorance, I would say that if Labour try and run their campaign based on how well they have managed the economy, they will get savaged.

I suspect they will try and win the argument on how well they’ve managed the recession (even if it does mean pretending some other government was in charge beforehand), without (fingers crossed, Darling?) turning it into a slump.

21 – I can see the posters now:

“Look, things could have been even worse”

I suspect they’ll try and run their entire campaign on the Tories (rather as this thread, and countless others on LibCon suggest) and how posh, rich, Etonian, top-hatted, privileged and, um, posh they are.

“Vote Labour, cos that David Cameron’s a right flash git”. Says niece of the Countess of Longford.

“It’s unacceptable for the Chancellor of the Exchequer to have gone to a posh independent school” says Alistair Darling (Loretto, £25,500 pa)

I suspect they’ll try and run their entire campaign on the Tories

Rather like ‘New Labour, New Danger’ in 1997? The strategy seems to go with being a long-term incumbent government.

23 – exactly like that. Also (and to extend the gift of hope to Labour) like the Tories in 1992 – the strategy then was ‘Labour will be awful if they get into power’. But the Tories were rated ahead of Labour on the economy in 1992 (oddly, they were in 1997 as well), so it might be trickier for Labour to get a hearing on it now.

redpesto,

The strategy seems to go with having run out of ideas. What is more worrying is the fact that the top two ideas suggested at this event seem to have been a green new deal and an attack on an opposition spokesman in person. Neither exactly novel, and neither likely to rejuvenate a tired government.

Historical note (just to explain a view above). The original new deal was possible because prior to 1929 the federal government of the United States was very small, and could therefore expand. Our government is not small (somewhere just under 50% of GDP if memory serves me right, although this could be a confusion of figures) so cannot really expand much further.

@Bob B

Most voters will not look at the evidence you cite – what they will look at is the fact that we have been through a terrible recession, and Gordon Brown is a tired, clapped-out old shit of a leader -and this election is a chance to get rid of him.

On the face of it, there is no evidence that Cameron will do anything significantly worse than Brown will do. Both would make swinging cuts to services, potentially throwing us into a double dip recession.

Underestimate “Gideon” at your peril. Cable is the most over-estimated “economics expert” in all the parties.

hahahahaha!

Since Cable was appointed Treasury spokesman, the Lib Dems polling position has declined from 21 to 18.

Since Darling was appointed Chancellor, Labour’s polling position has fallen from 39 to 30

Since Osborne was appointed shadow Chancellor, the Tories polling position has increased from 31 to 40.

Osborne is clearly the weak link.

Osborne is clearly the weak link.

correlation does not equal causation, as you know. I wonder if there’s a poll asking ppl who they think will be the best Chancellor..

30. organic cheeseboard

osborne is a v big problem for cameron. Short term they can get away with not letting him anywhere near the press but once he gets to the treasury they won’t be able to muzzle him and he’ll last less than a year. He’s just no good at proper politics. Remember northern rock when his immediate response was to wank on about labour in the 70s before ultimately saying -about a fortnight later- that he’d have done exactly the same as labour? What he is good at is oxford union style back biting which means cameron will have to be nice to him forever-he’ll be a millstone round dave’s neck.

30 – well, the Tories are consistently ahead on all the ‘best to handle the economy’ questions, when the question is framed as Brown/Darling or Cameron/Osborne.

I think the last poll was a ComRes in December with a spilt of 33/26/16 for best placed. Ignoring don’t knows/none of the aboves, that gives a spilt of 44/35/21.

@ 28

Yeah right because using your experience and knowledge of society plus some political research, those figures you rustled up have nothing to do with the fact that we have just entered a stinging recession?

Do you want to rustle up some said figures after Maggie pissed off, Major took over and then New Labour won? Eh? Do you? Because in fact Major wasn’t that bad a PM and we had far greater consistency in terms of rich against poor with Major-the equality gap went higher with Major after Thatcher brought it really low and than went even lower with Blair but did people care? No! And they wanted to just get rid of the government that got them in that recession…

Both situations Tim are kneejerk and have NOTHING to do with the quality of the chancellor or even the PM who takes over at that short period of time, what an odd paragraph.

And yes, there was a huge campaign by the Daily Mail that showed, ahem, everyone wanted Cable as a chancellor but not nec the Libs as a govt. If anyone bothers to read what people feel, say 400 + comments on the Mail, they would see that 99% wanted Cable.

But it didn’t matter that he was with the Libs. The correlation did not occur in peoples prejudiced mindsets that maybe a party that has someone like that as such an important figure head would be any good to govern.

But hey even on this site with a load of intellectuals it all comes down to tribalism. My party is better than your party.

I’m a Lib Dem and consider myself left but even I can admit when I see the Tories come up with decent ideas or Labour because you know what, it ain’t personal, this isn’t about my ego but about trying to get some sort of sustainability to exist in this country and research/observe/analyse who are the best to do that.

Sigh, if we could only scrap the concept of political parties and actually have a system were you vote in for the best person to do the blimming job!

And yes, there was a huge campaign by the Daily Mail that showed, ahem, everyone wanted Cable as a chancellor but not nec the Libs as a govt. If anyone bothers to read what people feel, say 400 + comments on the Mail, they would see that 99% wanted Cable.

Well, when opinion pollsters ask which party people feel has the best economic policies, the Lib Dems do worst of all. Even when Cable is specifically name-checked in the question. And I may have mentioned before that looking at comment threads under newspaper articles is really not the best way of forming a judgement about anything.

The argument espoused by the piece here is that Osborne is unpopular and a weak link. And all I’m saying is that there is no evidence whatsoever to support this. Whether you look at the party as a whole, or specifically at Osborne’s job within the party, he and the Tories are way out in front. Conversely, despite the sage of Twickenham’s fabulous status, the Lib Dems have lost ground over the course of this Parliament. And that’s because people have stopped treating him as a politician, and started treating him as a pundit.

I believe that tens of thousands signed a petition to get Jeremy Clarkson as Prime Minister. It’s the same with Vince…

@3 Unity

I think that Hague could do well in a Foreign Secretary debate, but I think more likely to be a score draw.

However:

“3. As for a Treasury debate, I’d watch that one just for the entertainment value of seeing Cable chew both opponents into tiny little kibbles. ”

Perhaps last summer I would have agreed, but I think St Vince’s halo slipped somewhat during this interview with Andrew Neil:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00mzzwj/b00mzzks/Straight_Talk_19_09_2009/

(I saw this originally on Guido Fawkes site)

#6 oops, sorry, you made my point already

@ Tim J

I do agree that he has become more of a pundit but that doesn’t stop the fact that he was right about recession and personally when I see him talk in PMQ’s, I tend to agree with him 89%.

I also agree about newspaper comments but you were throwing around stats that didn’t make sense if you look at voting patterns and peoples reactions after a government takes them into a recession. The same kneejerk behaviour you see in voting polls is the same you see on Daily Mail or The Times commentary. They are both as suspect as each other in terms of rational and well thought opinions on a subject.

Now I think it is deeply insulting to even put Osbourne in the same breath as Cable and yes, I do think he is the weak link.

And I actually think Cameron is also the weak link. Cam’s team are as unpopular as Howards team and I’m sorry, with the rubbish job that Brown is doing, is this good enough?

No one says’ Oh, wow, that Osbourne fella, what a brain? His fluent knowledge of macroeconomics and historical political economics is astounding…that speech he gave..so original..impassioned’ because it’s never happened and it’s not true. I have tried and tried to see what he has to him and there is nothing. That’s why you brought back Clarke!

I remember watching a PMQ and Osbourne was snarling and whining like a stupid little prick, he came out with rubbish and spent the whole time going over irrational stats. He was hysterical! And then Ken Clarke spoke and well…I’m not fan at all of Thatchers Regaenomics but he completely floored Osbourne when it just came to being bright and having any presence. Yes they are on the same team but it really showed how poor this Tory line up is.

And Cameron? Well no comment there.

Just admit things for what they are. You hardly have a team of all stars but hey something tells me these empty suits were put on course because they were ‘youthful and current’.

I mean Osbourne is just like us, he does a little coke and our man Dave is a geezer, who wears converse trainers! But you’ll more likey than not win because the Right will always be more unified in their dogma, than the Left-who like to discuss (gives too much room for disagreements!) and see themselves as pushing for equality and democracy.

Lol, we know that never works with society!

@26: “On the face of it, there is no evidence that Cameron will do anything significantly worse than Brown will do.”

Cameron is demonstrably clueless about economics.

On 2 Janauary last year, Cameron is quoted in his New Year’s message saying the VAT cut has failed:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7808634.stm

But the VAT cut had only been announced in the Pre-Budget Report on 9 December 2009. Less than a month later, Cameron already knows that the policy has failed – even before the umpteen business and economics research consultancies do.

Curiously, trace it back and it turns out that Kenneth Clarke first suggested a VAT cut as a fiscal means for boosting the economy in a recession (link to The Times available).

In April last year:

“The government’s much-criticised cut in VAT is working and has led to a big boost in consumer spending, according to a leading economics consultancy.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7995850.stm

Come the festive season last year and retail sales did especially well:

“Retailers HAVE shrugged off the downturn to record their best Christmas trading figures since December 2001, but store owners are warning that the buoyant sales may offer only temporary relief on the ‘painful road to recovery’.”
The Independent, Tuesday 12 Januery 2010 (link available).

QED – and I presume Cameron consulted Osborne before making that stupid claim.

Richard Blogger @34:

Thanks for that Hard Talk interview on the BBC with Vince Cable.

His halo may have slipped a little but he still comes across as impressive under pressure. For one thing, he clearly admits to “keynesian” influences and judging by the silly stuff churned out by Tories here and elsewhere, Keynes and all his works are usually dismissed as rubbish. Mind you, it usually becomes fairly obvious that they’ve not read Keynes and know little about macroeoconomics.

Hey! Who let this guy have access to my constituency organiser’s computer? That bottom slide looks spookily like a mock up we worked on for some of our campaign material.

Osborne’s an incredibly weak link for the Tories, but most voters know nothing about him. In weak campaigns without the ability to put out a coherent message over time, it’s hard to sell it, but in a fighting marginal, with lot’s of literature going out, consistency will get it across.

And the media spotlight in a GE campaign always points at more than just the leaders, they won’t be able to hide him when Vince is out fighting daily.

@Watchman and others–targetting the Tories will do very well in seats where either the Lib Dems are defending against them or in three-way seats where Labour has little to no chance. Sure, it won’t help them as much in other areas, but the election is a series of 500+ fights, not one big one.

Slightly amused to see those mocking this both a) saying no one knows who these people are (true) and b) saying the opinion polls say people still favour the Tories.

One of the reasons the polls favour the Tories is because little focus has been put on Osborne, who very few people know of, yet.

16. redpesto

‘ Targeting Osborne is a pretty good idea IMO as there are plenty of clues that he really doesn’t have much feel for economics and is therefore apt to fall under the influence of whichever Tory nutcase he last talked with.

Example? ‘

During the worst of the financial crisis he was making statements about ‘ a run on the pound ‘. It is a well established principle that the government and the opposition do not comment on the currency. The Governor of the BoE does comment on the currency, which can act as verbal intervention but the politicians do not comment. The ‘ run on the pound’ was a stupid narrative. Sterling had been vastly overvalued and was finding a new level. Did he expect the government to intervene in the currency markets? Who was supposed to decide what the effective sterling rate should be? Incidentally, Governor King during the same period was subtly talking down the pound as the Bank knew it had to depreciate. I doubt whether the Shadow Chancellor noticed.

Other examples would be various statements about ‘ national bankruptcy’ or the ‘ government running out of money’ mark him out as clueless. The Shadow Chancellor does not seem to be aware that a sovereign issuer can’t run out of money nor can they be made bankrupt.

As Bob B covered the opposition to the VAT cut was economically illiterate. The economy was in a deep recession and we were in a liquidity trap. The quickest and best measure in such circumstances is a sales tax cut.

Maybe it is just all politics but lots of non-partisan people have formed an opinion that he does not understand his subject. I have noticed a subtle change in his statements over the last six months and it is obvious he is getting coached/advised by someone as he is less silly.

Vince Cable was really good but has now unfortunately become a populist.

Hey.. it’s Vinay Nair here. Thanks for all your feedback! Especially @fitaloon – thanks for the laugh!

I do think Osborne is an extremely weak link for the Tories – and I dispute that he’s not highly recognisable to the general public (@John Booth). Despite the best efforts of journos and others to discredit Cameron (e.g. http://tiny.cc/rlQG8), he does seem to have a teflon coat and it’s not a good enough strategy to just hope for ‘Cameron fatigue’ to set in.

This idea has to be run in conjunction with other positive Lab/Lib Dem campaign strategies… of course it does! But I do think one of the best ways to prevent a Tory victory is to try and get an image of Mr Osborne popping into people’s heads just before they mark the X on their ballot paper!!

What are we to make of this in a report by the Press Association?

“Tory leader David Cameron will warn that Britain is in a ‘social recession’ even deeper than its economic one as he steps up pre-election campaigning. And the Tory leader will point to the torture of two young boys as an extreme symptom of what he dubs Labour’s ‘moral failure’ as he launches a raft of social policies.”

If Gordon Brown is to blame for the two boys from South Edlington does that mean John Major was really responsible for the murder of James Bulger? I think we should know.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Bulger


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  2. Neil Fawcett

    RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  3. Ben Cooper

    RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ // Yes!

  4. Ellie Gellard

    YES!!! Best idea of #fab10 ! RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  5. Tim Swift

    It may not be positive campaigning, but I like it! http://bit.ly/7fXavk

  6. Lawrie Morgan-Klein

    RT @BevaniteEllie: YES!!! Best idea of #fab10 ! RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  7. Sunder Katwala

    #fab10 continues! funniest moment of the day RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  8. irene rukerebuka

    RT @libcon Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6UdqTK

  9. Tweets that mention Liberal Conspiracy » Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? -- Topsy.com

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Liberal Conspiracy, Neil Fawcett. Neil Fawcett said: RT @libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ […]

  10. uberVU - social comments

    Social comments and analytics for this post…

    This post was mentioned on Twitter by libcon: Should Labour / Libdems be targeting Osborne instead? http://bit.ly/6Gi6RJ

  11. What does the lastest economic news mean for Labour’s electoral chances? « Liberal Twitter Hound

    […] force George Osborne into the centre of the election campaign – as has been discussed over at Liberal Conspiracy he’s widely seen to be one of the weakest members of the Shadow Cabinet. He was found wanting […]

  12. Look Left – The Week in Fast Forward | Left Foot Forward

    […] You’re not the only one. It’s been some week for the Shadow Chancellor, ripped to shreds at the Fabian Society conference last Saturday, disappearing from public view – prompting […]

  13. Sunder Katwala

    Or indeed don't! http://bit.ly/4z0YYn RT @TimMontgomerie (1) Vote Conservative… because of George Osborne http://bit.ly/cyrmVN

  14. Tim Nicholls

    RT @nextleft Or indeed don't! http://bit.ly/4z0YYn RT @TimMontgomerie (1) Vote Conservative…because of George Osborne http://bit.ly/cyrmVN

  15. LabourguyUK

    RT @tim_nicholls: RT@nextleft Or indeed don't! http://bit.ly/4z0YYn RT@TimMontgomerie (1) Vote Tory…cos of G Osborne http://bit.ly/cyrmVN





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.