IDS: classic or dud?

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Oh dear oh dear oh dear. Sort of classic in a way.

― Fred Zed, Monday, 27 October 2003 16:21 (twenty-two years ago)

I always liked the IDS building in downtown Minneapolis, yes. why you ask?

― M Matos (M Matos), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:24 (twenty-two years ago)

rubbish, but i sympathise with him a little

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:26 (twenty-two years ago)

t/s: ids vs egos vs superegos

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:26 (twenty-two years ago)

His smile really scares me. He's got that same painted-on media spinsmile that Blair became physically incapable of doing without causing himself heart palpitations.

― kate (kate), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:26 (twenty-two years ago)

I don't get all this 'good for democracy' stuff coming from people who want a 'better' Tory leader. They objectively want a Tory revival. So: IDS = classic as he's driving the Tories off a cliff.

― Enrique (Enrique), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:28 (twenty-two years ago)

http://www.phidentity.com/images/uk%20id%20ft.jpg

― teeny (teeny), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:29 (twenty-two years ago)

Compared with William Hague, progress of sorts. Never going to be a PM, but who else in that party of freaks could do better?

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:29 (twenty-two years ago)

I suspect he's a decent politician, but... I don't know enough about political processes to speak with any real understanding. I certainly can't be arsed to discuss his c/dness using arbitrary meeja definitions.

William Hague = classic.

― Mark C (Mark C), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:29 (twenty-two years ago)

whaaat? Hague was rubarama

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:30 (twenty-two years ago)

The Tories are driving themselves off a cliff, I think the choice of leader is entirely incidental at this point.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:30 (twenty-two years ago)

T/S: "Tories vs Labour" vs "Lib Dems vs Labour"

― Andrew Farrell (afarrell), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:32 (twenty-two years ago)

IDS vs. IDM, fite!

― kate (kate), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:33 (twenty-two years ago)

I'm a bit sad that the Mirror blew their load about 12 months too soon with the whole In Deep Shit headline.

There was an awesome demolition of IDS in the Guardian a couple of weeks back, only flawed by the fact that a) it was written by David Mellor, and b) he ended with advocating the return of Dicky Hague to the leadership.

Actually, I think IDS from any point of view is a better leader than Hague in that being invisible is still better than being outright repulsive - he also understands the basic principle of 'when in a hole, stop digging' which Hague was so woeful at.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Oh, and Tom OTM.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Hague, however, is a very good parliamentarian, and by all accounts a good man. That is not to say he deserves the leadership, but credit where it's due.

― Mark C (Mark C), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:35 (twenty-two years ago)

I wouldn't write the Tories off. They'll lose the next election, with or without IDS, and win the one after that.

― H., Monday, 27 October 2003 16:35 (twenty-two years ago)

He pulls little weight at PM's questions (from what I've seen). This is a shame as in theory it's the ideal time to hold the government to account.

There's nothing slippery about him though (apart fom his head, obviously). What's the alternative?

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:35 (twenty-two years ago)

Tom TOM, surely?

― Mark C (Mark C), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:35 (twenty-two years ago)

a pastoral existence in which men in suits do not cool you out and go beep.

― stevem (blueski), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:36 (twenty-two years ago)

If Portillo wanted to be leader, and the Tories let him lead them, they'd have a sporting chance at the next election.

― H., Monday, 27 October 2003 16:37 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes but we all know they'll end up with Oliver Letwin or Michael Howard though, don't we?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:39 (twenty-two years ago)

Seems Letwin is in serious danger of losing his seat, though. Cunt.

― Mark C (Mark C), Monday, 27 October 2003 16:51 (twenty-two years ago)

Three things I like about IDS:

A couple of years ago when there was a bit of a fuss about the Conservative Party being seen as racist, he tried to show how un-racist he was by announcing that he is in fact one eighth japanese.

He said on his CV and on the Conservative Party website that he had attended the University of Perugia, which was a complete lie.

He sometimes wears a polka dot tie.

He's dud compared to William Hague though, who is indisputably classic. Portillo is classic too, but much better doing telly than politics. 'Dinner with Portillo' was fantastic.
How come Letwin might be losing his seat then?

― Cathy (Cathy), Monday, 27 October 2003 17:01 (twenty-two years ago)

Keep him in place, because it's reassuring to know that there's at least one person who's guaranteed to be having a worse day than me.

― Bob Six (bobbysix), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 13:19 (twenty-two years ago)

i am still oblivious to Hague's classicity

― stevem (blueski), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 13:27 (twenty-two years ago)

Notice how Mark C has been getting more tetchy later, that's because he is IDS and fears for his position.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 13:45 (twenty-two years ago)

Stevem OTM - Hague came across as a panicky fool - his playing the race card over asylum in the run up to the 2001 election was a disgrace, too.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 13:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Ditto Hague's opportunistic attack on the government's record on crime in the wake of the Damilola Taylor murder without uttering a word of sympathy for the kid's relatives. Above all else Hague was an abysmal diplomat.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 13:56 (twenty-two years ago)

Apparently they've got the 25 signatures now so roll on another few months of entertainingly bloody infighting.

― Tico Tico (Tico Tico), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 14:04 (twenty-two years ago)

haha "I cannot lose I have the eloquent support of John Redwood oh wait..."

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

All this means that sandal wearing, muesli eating, Lib dems will be the official opposition come next general election. Blair will go for an earlier rather than later election April/May '05. Don't give them too much time to regroup, barely 14 months till an election campaign starts in earnest at new year 05, maybe under a year if the tories have to have a postal election with the party members rather than quickly deciding on a a new leader.

― Ed (dali), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

imagine John "The Vulcan" Redwood - as leader.

― DJ Martian (djmartian), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 15:28 (twenty-two years ago)

IDS’s appeals for unity and loyalty crack me up given he made his own reputation stabbing the last Tory PM in the back. And the alternatives? If I was a Tory L I’d want an interim leader, a damage limitation plan for the next election and hope to win in 7/8 years time.

- Michael Howard may have all the charisma of a sea urchin but at least has a brain and can speak in public without making you wince, unlike the current incumbent.

-David Davis is a nasty piece of work with very sharp elbows.

- Ken Clarke, the only potential leader Labour has reason to be frightened off, is a heavy hitter who’d spend most of his time fighting his own party on Europe, and probably knows his moment is gone.

- Tim Yeo I barely know

A more credible opposition leader would have dealt a few hard blows to this government. The Tories, as ever, seem more interested in quarrelling amongst themselves.

― stevo (stevo), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 15:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Seems to me that right now, we live in a country without a coherent opposition and IDS must be held partly accountable for this shambolic state of affairs. The man is Dud. His complete inability to recognise that he is quite clearly the wrong man for the job is damning enough and his spectacular failure to win over either the media or even members of his own party should have proved politically fatal by now.

That said, quite what the Tories can do to rectify this predicament is beyond me. Coming up with some reasonable policies and communicating a clear concise platform of prerogatives might be a start rather than staggering punch drunk and spouting reactionary tripe every time Blair pulls another fast one.

Don’t think for one moment I am championing the Tory party but for God’s sake, parliament doesn’t strike me as a particularly democratic symposium right now and the fact that the party supposedly in opposition is presently headed by a chap whose PR pitch as ‘the quiet man’ of UK politics merely compounds the problem. The Tories are a sick joke and IDS is the feeble punchline.

― Alex K (Alex K), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 16:03 (twenty-two years ago)

The fact that David Davis came LAST in the last load of Tory elections and is now being talked up as the potential winner speaks volumes I feel.

Thinking back, the 2001 Tory leadership elections felt significant in that the party was presented with three wildly different main personalities and ideologies. The party due to form plumped for the negative option - IDS was elected more because of what he wasn't than what he was. But at least they had a choice - surely this round of elections will be like bald men fighting over a comb?

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 22:50 (twenty-two years ago)

theresa may: "look, jeremy, i don't go round round saying people are charismatic or not!"
translation: "yes IDS is hopelessly dull but we're trying to convince ourselves and you that this is neither here nor there"

― mark s (mark s), Tuesday, 28 October 2003 22:56 (twenty-two years ago)

It seems that we must live without him from now on:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3225127.stm

― PJ Miller (PJ Miller), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 20:08 (twenty-two years ago)

But he'll defend his policies! Whatever they were.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 29 October 2003 20:10 (twenty-two years ago)

MICHAEL HOWARD???!!!! OMG WTF

out of the fire into the intensive burns unit

but will they threaten to over-rule him?

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 30 October 2003 13:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Scarific! Nineties revival.

― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 30 October 2003 13:50 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, the parliamentary Conservative party - they say dud.

― Matt DC (Matt DC), Thursday, 30 October 2003 13:52 (twenty-two years ago)

Did you threaten to overule him? (Repeat to fade)

I predict he will be christened Dracula by The Mirror.

― Dave B (daveb), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:03 (twenty-two years ago)

'something of the night' = quaintest insult of politician's repertoire ever?

― stevem (blueski), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:12 (twenty-two years ago)

I'd do his wife, innit.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Mikey Howard's wifey I mean. Not Betsy. Hell, no.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I wouldn't write the Tories off. They'll lose the next election, with or without IDS, and win the one after that.

This is probably true. Grrr.

I think it's a pity and a surprise that Ken Clarke isn't getting more support.

― CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:28 (twenty-two years ago)

He has v attractive daughters, Michael Howard. My best mate knows them. He's obviously pure evil, though.

Funny how a white man with dreads disses the libs for being sandal-wearing museli eaters...

― Mark C (Mark C), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:32 (twenty-two years ago)

Hm, Tory victory in 2008 - who will survive and what will become of them?
Is this going to happen? Is new Labour showing any signs of renewal?

― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:36 (twenty-two years ago)

i can't see how the tories can do without their present-day disraeli, a full-on anomalous charmer, at this stage - blairism is very vulnerable on EARNESTNESS, but the tory leadership, which has to keep the (remains of the) bufton tufton wing AND the ultra-thatcherite ideologues onside, merely batters the earnesteness it dislikes w.an equally full-on brand

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:39 (twenty-two years ago)

i like how they are all sitting behind howard on this one because they know its a poisoned chalice. the hope must be that howard will save them some face at next election, and then dutifully stand aside, giving the new guy a good clear run at the election afterwards

the question is, howard, the public dont like him, so why go for him? i guess the idea is that he'll land enough heavy blows to make the tories look at least noticeable again, and try and restore some credibility, and that its doesnt matter that he wont be able to take them across the threshold, but he might get them near

but do you think this will actually work? any minor inroads ids made into the general public seemed to be at the cost of support from own mp3

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:41 (twenty-two years ago)

We need more theatrical opposition?

When parliament becomes a bourgeois theatre
Then the bourgeois theatre must become parliament...

― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:41 (twenty-two years ago)

prediction: portillo will be leader in 2008, having successfully delivered the nu-tory makeover

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:41 (twenty-two years ago)

theatrical in the sense of dynamically media-savvy

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:42 (twenty-two years ago)

I think it's time for Back to Basics 2.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:43 (twenty-two years ago)

as opposed to passively media-savvy, which is nu-labour's current millstone, still effective but tremendously constraining in the long run

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:43 (twenty-two years ago)

mark OTM. I've said it before and I'll say it again, but it's a De Gaulle type move, but he has to time it right (ie during a rebellion in Algeria, erm...). Howard is the caretaker, obv. David Davis will never win an election.

― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:46 (twenty-two years ago)

Paxo to Stephen Dorrell last nite: Do you think the tory party is ready to be led by someone [ie michael howard] of transylvanian heritage?

best line ever!

― CarsmileSteve (CarsmileSteve), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:54 (twenty-two years ago)

haha wz dorrell stroppy, he has zero sense of humour?

de gaulle move = rescuing nation from threat of populist far right committing everything to "principled" policy which everyone knows wd wd be catastrophic but has gained tremendous (apparent) rhetorical momentum which the pragmatic centre and left don't know how to resist

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 14:57 (twenty-two years ago)

hah, i put mp3 instead of mps!

the danger for all the candidates passing it up, and lining up behind howard is that the tories often seem to get rid of the associates as well as the leader when they purge. it might be that if howard is too unsuccessful that potential cnadidates for the next leadership battle will be too tarred with the howard brush

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:09 (twenty-two years ago)

yes i think the candidates who were EXPECTED to stand and made a big thing of not doing so, this time, in the name of unity, have all just stuffed themselves

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:14 (twenty-two years ago)

Yeah but there isn’t exactly a surfeit of potential candidates that readily spring to mind. Purging the Tory front bench would only leave the door open to abominations such as Annie W.

― Alex K (Alex K), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:15 (twenty-two years ago)

but there might be one next leadership battle, and whoever that is, might be up against a selection of candidates who are too closely linked with a poor howard tenure to have a viable shot

― charltonlido (gareth), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:19 (twenty-two years ago)

Who might these bright young things be (one mention of dear Boris and I will unleash the 5th Panzer).

― Alex K (Alex K), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:22 (twenty-two years ago)

no, there'll be plenty new faces by then, alex (we're talking two or three years from now remember)

i wz drinking w.someone on monday eve who made a strong case for letwin and BORIS JOHNSON as ppl able to use their daffy charm increasingly ably, media-wise - being a seemingly harmless, slightly bonkers "character" so as not to scare off the punters afraid of intelligence - the latter i don't see, actually (i think he's a genuine idiot, it's not a mask) but the former is an intriguing idea

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:24 (twenty-two years ago)

haha x-post

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:26 (twenty-two years ago)

BJ's disraeli/de gaulle factor is vanishingly small

― mark s (mark s), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:27 (twenty-two years ago)

I've always thought unity was something the Tories worried about too much. It has becomes an obsession for them.

― Mikey G (Mikey G), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:30 (twenty-two years ago)

Wow, mark is frendz with MARK LAWSON!

http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1072893,00.html

I agree with mark's drinking partner on this -- and with mark on BJ. Just you read his Thursday columns in the Telegraph (or indeed the stuff he commissions for the Spectator -- it's no picnic).

― Enrique (Enrique), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:34 (twenty-two years ago)

Hmm, the notion of 'new faces' emerging at the forefront of the anachronism that is today's Tory party always strikes me as paradoxical, still, I take your point. Dr Lecktwin has been tipped for the crown before, and he could be media-friendly enough not to require a PR offenssive of Barbarossaean proprtions... Has he got the backing of the puppet masters though? As for Boris, yes, he is a buffoon.

― Alex K (Alex K), Thursday, 30 October 2003 15:36 (twenty-two years ago)

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.