- Latest Blog Post: The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world he did not exist. by Tabman
- Latest Comment: Exprepmc on Is the BBC hurting British politics?
Subscribe to our RSS feed here
Ed Vaizey: Pot or Kettle?
Excerpt: Ed Vaizey complains about Lib Dem election tactics in today's Guardian:
What, you may ask, is on the front page? Naturally, you would think, the main policies upon which the Lib Dems are campaigning, locally and nationally. No. Instead, a straightforward and highly personal attack on the excellent Conservative candidate, Bob Neill. The nature of the attack is pretty crude.
Ed Vaizey complains about Lib Dem election tactics in today's Guardian:
What, you may ask, is on the front page? Naturally, you would think, the main policies upon which the Lib Dems are campaigning, locally and nationally. No. Instead, a straightforward and highly personal attack on the excellent Conservative candidate, Bob Neill. The nature of the attack is pretty crude.
Now, we know for a fact that the Conservatives would never stooop this low. Crude personal attacks are most certainly not for them. For example in their Cheadle by-election literature their leaflet was not headlined "We don't want an unpopular outsider". Nor did it have a strapline "Mark Hunter is an unpopular outsider." And it never had these five points:
- He tried, and failed, to become the MP in Ashton-under-Lyne
- He even stood for election in a completely different council area
- He tried, and failed, to become the MP in Stockport
- He lives miles from most of Cheadle
- He came third in his own council ward election last year
As we thought, the Tories would never engage in "this sort of negative campaigning". Oh no.
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Google
The 'he came third in his own ward' line was hilarious.
He did come third, he was the third placed of the three Lib Dems who won, beating the other parties!
I'm surprised you cited that Cheadle leaflet when they ALSO put one out implying that Mark Hunter was a rapist, prompting the normally swivel-eyed ConservativeHome to condemn it.
I didn't have a copy of that one, James :-)
Vaizey's got the Lib Dems bang to rights on the hypocrisy of criticising a candidate for having more than one job when their own candidate also has more than one job, though.
There'a a bit of a difference between being a full time AM expected to attend daytime meetings, on a salary of c£50k, and a part-time local councillor who is unpaid and attends meeting in the evenings.
Although the cheadle campaign is undefendable it was just one by-election.
The complaints against the lib-dems - "only we can beat X here", misleading bar graphs, misuse of the word local, saying different things in different parts of the country etc, etc, - happen in every ward, every constituency in the country
It's fun to reminisce. I loved the Tory leaflet in the Brent East by-eletion, which had some damning things to say about the Labour candidate:
- Lives in "millionaires row" in Weybridge, Surrey!
- Works in Belgium!
Curiously, it also included a barchart showing the nunber of votes each party got in the most recent local elections...
AM's aren't full time, Jabez Clegg
And councillors aren't unpaid either. Two mistakes in one post. Well done, you are now qualified to write a Focus lieflet.
Anon says - it was 'only one by election'.
What about Tory Peter Griffiths (later Tory MP for Portsmouth North until 1997)who ran in the Birmingham Stechford by-election with the slogan 'If you want a nigger for a neighbour vote Labour'
Just another by-election?
I do hope nobody is tempted by a "two wrongs make a right" argument strategy on misleading campaigning. Have there been misleading Tory campaign leaflets? Yes, undoubtedly - you've given examples. Have there been misleading Labour campaign leaflets? Hasn't really been discussed on this thread, but certainly there have. Does that make it OK for the Lib Dems to put out misleading campaign leaflets - as they do, all over the place?
False statements on electoral literature are always wrong. The definition of a 'misleading' statement is more difficult though. For example, the frequent example of candidates claiming to be 'local' or that their rivals aren't 'local'; it might be true, but it's often an incredibly minor distinction. Two wrongs don't make a right, but if it's an argument that might sway voters, and it's an argument your opponent would use against you if he could, can anyone really say that they wouldn't use it?
That's the problem with Ed Vaizey's argument. He either ignores his own side's behaviour or thinks that higher standards should apply to other parties than his own. I'd actually welcome a much more civilised tone of debate, but if the first instinct of Conservative MPs is to blame the Lib Dems for something all parties do and have done, then we're not going to get anywhere.
You'll have seen this already, no doubt, but this piece on the Lib Dem candidate in Bromley and Chiselhurst and his anti-grafitti campaign is hilarious. They may all be just as bad as the Lib Dems, but this helps to show how bad that is.
Look carefully and you'll see that the graffiti on the "after" photo appears to be repainted.
Peter
http://pigeon-post.blogspot.com/
Ummm... it really doesn't. It does look like it's been a bit rubbed out at precisely the point where the candidate's sponge is in the first photo, but that's not the same thing. But if that's the rebuttal strategy you're going for, good luck.
You can see some spots that weren't painted in the first photo, but are in the second.
Peter
http://pigeon-post.blogspot.com/