Brown Supporters Panic After Surge in Tory Support--UK ('meltdown')

[Gloria]

From the new World Media Watch up now at http://www.zianet.com/insightanalytical,
tomorrow at Buzzflash.com


3//The Independent, UK Published: 12 December 2005

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article332505.ece



BROWN SUPPORTERS PANIC AFTER SURGE IN TORY SUPPORT

By Colin Brown and Marie Woolf



The surge in support for the new Conservative leader, David Cameron, has caused panic among allies of Gordon Brown who are renewing pressure on Tony Blair to hand over power at next year's party conference.

One senior minister close to Mr Brown said: "Our worry is that Blair's support is going to be transferred directly to Cameron. The longer that Gordon has to wait, the worse that will get. Blair will have to hand over to a new leader at the 2006 conference."

The minister added: "A few weeks ago, someone suggested that we could be facing a meltdown. Everyone laughed, but they would not be laughing now."

The Chancellor has told allies the Tories have been strengthened by a contest for their leadership, and he would prefer to win through a challenge for the Labour leadership, rather than as a "coronation".

John Reid, the Defence Secretary, is the favourite among cabinet colleagues to throw his hat in the ring, but Mr Brown's allies are growing more anxious about the inheritance, including the Prime Minister's drive for Tory-backed reform of public services such as education.



MORE

[Oversea Visitor]

1. Does Blair ever care

Same as bush
The real suckers are the party of both of them
They are destroying it.

[IndianaGreen]

2. New Labour must be destroyed!

They committed suicide when they decided to back Blair against the backbench insurgency. Blair has destroyed the Labour Party and Gordon Brown is just a Lite version of the Poodle.

I would rather have the Liberal Democrats win, but they have their own internal problems and they suffer from a disjointed message.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

8. So you would prefer a Tory government?

Because at this point in time that's the only viable alternative to New Labour.

[IndianaGreen]

11. I would prefer Tony Blair swinging at the end of a rope!

Labour has no one to blame but themselves but keeping Blair on for as long as they have. Considering all of the innocent blood that has been spilled in Iraq, and Gordon Brown's refusal to call for a total troops withdrawal from Iraq, then they deserved to be defeated at the polls!

It is not a question of preferring a Tory government, the bogey man that is often used to keep people in line on both sides of the Atlantic, it is a question of ending the status quo and stopping a criminal war by any means necessary.

I wouldn't vote Labour, I would vote Liberal Democrat, and let the chips fall where they may!

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

12. Surprising as this may be...

...there are bigger issues here than the war in Iraq. Few people are prepared to let the Tories destroy the economy. Again.

[KoKo]

3. I was hoping for Brown to take a stand and for Charles Kennedy to surge

but another DU'er informed me Kennedy has a drinking problem ad that Brown will never confont Blair because Blair is too powerful...

It's hard to know what the truth of it is over there. Many Brit DU'ers seemed to say that no one wants the Tories back in because of memories of Hatchet Thatcher...but maybe the mood has changed and there are so many new voters who don't remember Maggie Thatcher and Reagan and their "alliance." :shrug:

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

9. Here's my take.

The Lib Dems aren't really viable as a leadership party. Brown, whether he wants to or not, simply cannot confront Blair. It would be extremely bad for the party. Tony needs to leave (or at least appear to leave) of his own free will.

As for the newfound love for the Tories, I doubt it will have much longevity. It's exciting because it's new, but after that fades it's still the same old Tory party, regardless of their new younger face.

[woldnewton]

13. That's why they have such things as...

coalitions

The Lib Dems are quite viable as the junior partners in a Labour-led minority government. Oh, sure, Charles Kennedy may have said he refuses to join such a coalition, but just wait until Labour and the Tories have about the same number of seats in parliament and watch how quickly he'll backtrack on that. The Lib Dems can keep Labour from going too far to the right and can call a no-confidence vote, as has happened with the NDP in Canada. That will keep Labour remembering just who their true base constituents are.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

14. Labour's base is the urban and suburban middle class.

And the current bout of dissatisfaction has a lot more to do with Tony's personality than the politics of New Labour. I think there's a far higher likelihood of a LibDem-Tory alliance than a LibDem-Labour alliance. There are a disturbingly large number of areas in which Lib Dem policy is moving towards the Tory position, in large part because Lib Dems have decided that dissatisfied Tories are far easier pickings than Labour voters.

Anyway, I don't think the Tories' current popularity has much bearing on the reality of the next round of elections. They're enjoying a resurgence due to their new leadership, but that will likely be short-lived. Sooner or later Cameron is going to have to start taking real policy positions. So far he has managed to avoid doing this. Listening to him speak, he says nothing. He's expressed nearly no policy positions whatsoever. The only thing he has expressed is a desire for "change" in the Tory party, but he hasn't expressed what those changes might be. That's a far cry from what Blair did for Labour, because he actually had a platform and concrete ideas. Eventually Cameron's going to have a huge fight on his hands with the Tory back-benchers. Or he won't, in which case it'll still be the same Tory party and they'll do just as poorly next time.

[bluestateguy]

4. I'm torn here

On the one hand a Tory victory would be deserved justice for Blair, but I know I would regret rejoicing at a Tory win, because the Tories would embrace Bush even more than Blair has. Blair has at least taken on Bush on the Kyoto treaty

[rpannier]

5. Unfortunately he's been backing away from that stance

I read in a few places, I think the Times-London was one of them, that Bliar was backing away from his stance on global warming.

[newspeak]

6. Are you sure Blair isn't a Tory?

sounds like he's destroying his party-doing a right nice bang up job!

[rpannier]

7. I don't know what to think of bLIAR

I am pretty sure of this...he's more concerned with being scrubbies buddy, than being the leader of the Labour Party.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

10. Not so sure about that.

Blair is fairly addicted to being the leader of Labour.