Nick Robinson confirms CCHQ’s newspaper smear operation

Nick Robinson adds this tidbit to his blog tonight:

I now learn that political reporters from the Tory-backing papers were called in one by one to discuss how Team Cameron would deal with “Cleggmania” and to be offered Tory HQ’s favourite titbits about the Lib Dems – much of which appears in today’s papers.

The key personal allegation about payments from donors into Nick Clegg’s personal bank account came, however, from the Telegraph’s expenses files. Incidentally, the party has now published details of Nick Clegg’s bank statements and party accounts showing that Mr Clegg received payments totalling £19,690 from three businessmen (Neil Sherlock, Michael Young, Ian Wright) and then paid staff costs of £20,437.30 out of the same account. According to these figures, Mr Clegg actually paid £747.30 out of his own money towards staff costs.

Was this after testing some negative messages with YouGov?

Want to know Clegg’s Achilles heel? Here it is

Mark Pack over at Libdemvoice writes: Mad, mad, you’ve all gone mad, in response to the positive coverage Libdems are getting. He says: “But Guido producing a wholly positive film about Nick Clegg? That volcanic ash must be hallucogenic.”

I don’t quite see it that way. Anyone who thinks Paul Staines is not a fully paid-up member of the ‘get Cameron in as PM‘ crew is being naive. He’s been shilling for the Tories ar far back as I can remember. What Staines is doing actually with the video is trying to push the one narrative that could burst Clegg’s bubble.

In the US they called it the ‘Messiah complex’ – and it started with the ad produced of Obama and compared her to Britney Spears etc. Clegg is pushing himself as the change candidate: the one who will sort out British politics. Attacking the Libdems on policy won’t bring them down.

What could puncture Clegg’s persona is a mocking tone that says Clegg is painting himself as the saviour but he’s just the same as everyone else. The Daily Mail is already playing that line. The Tory surrogates will soon start mocking ‘Cleggmania’ as a media obsession holding him up on a pedestal even though he is as tainted as the rest.

I’m not saying this is what I believe. I’m merely pointing out that giddy Libdems need to get a reality-check and figure out how to deal with the media backlash when it comes. The Tories will intentionally build up ‘Cleggmania’ as a celebrity-driven-vacuous-politics and claim that they actually have some experience in changing the country. This guy is just a celebrity propped up by the media. He’s just running in a ‘beauty contest‘.

Clegg is lucky in that with more debates coming up, and the British public’s tendency to switch off from politics, even that line of attack is unlikely to shift the polls back in their favour by more than 3%. Still – it’s worth looking out for and countering, for the Libdems.

Watch: Do people really have a clue about politics?

It plugs Yahoo a bit too much but still an amusing video. I suspect people like this can be found everywhere, but I do keep saying its frightening how tuned-out most of the public generally is of politics.

Cameron’s new election plea: please vote for me you bastards!

The new Cameron election broadcast is out! I stopped counting how many times he said “change” after the 500th time.
The ‘Big Society’ makes a comeback though.

Boris doesn’t like Clegg’s rise; suggests “dissolving electorate”

In his column for the Telegraph today, London’s occasional Mayor Boris Johnson doesn’t like Clegg’s rise much.

He says:

As for Clegg, I remember thinking that it was indeed a historic debate – the moment when the idea of a third force in British politics finally shrivelled under the Manchester TV lights. He was by far the worst, with many of his answers seeming to be semi-masticated versions of something Cameron had already said. And so you can imagine my amazement when those polls started to come in, and the news that the punters overwhelmingly scored it for Cleggie. It was one of those times when there seems to be only one solution to the problems of British politics, and that is to dissolve the electorate and summon a new one.

What has happened to us all, when serious papers can start raving about “Prime Minister Clegg”? Has someone put something in the water supply? Has some sulphur yellow cloud descended imperceptibly from Iceland and addled our brains? These are Lib Dems we are talking about! They say anything to anyone.

You wish Boris, you wish. It seems Tories can never really comprehend it when they are out of touch with the electorate. Wonder why.

Update: Mark Thompson fisked this earlier

Election sexism watch (episode 6)

I’m not sure whether it’s down to Nick Clegg’s performance in Thursday’s Leaders’ Debate, and the subsequent sudden and entirely unexpected rise of the Lib Dems in the voting public’s affections; or whether it’s down to the eruption of the Icelandic volcano and the travel chaos that has since ensued, but believe it or not there’s actually very little to update you on as far as sexist shite* coverage of the election campaign goes.**

It’s bizarre I know, but it seems the meeja may have finally woken up to the fact that it needs to focus on more important things than what Sarah or “SamCam” have  been wearing. It may have finally got the message that people are tired/bored/thoughly pissed off with reading superficial nonsense about the latest “Cameron cutie” or about which party leader so-called “Lambrini Ladies” would prefer to snog.

But whatever the cause of this abrupt about-turn in the election coverage, whether it’s Clegg or Eyjafjallajokull,  I can honestly say, hand on heart, that I for one am immensely grateful. In fact I’ll be glad if I never have to write another election sexism post again.

I really hope I’m not being unduly optimistic here, counting my chickens before they’re hatched and all that. After all, there’s still a couple of weeks to go. But if things do carry on the way they have over the past few days, it looks as though my job here might actually be done.

Fingers crossed!

**Apart from The Daily Mail obviously, which will no doubt continue with its sexist shite coverage right up to polling day and beyond.

Here, for example, is Jan Moir on Cherie Blair:

“Just when the Labour Party start to claw back the Tory lead in the polls and entertain the idea that they might win again  -  enter the dragon.

Almost three years to the day since she left Downing Street for the last time, cackling to the British media that she would not miss them….”

And here’s Liz Jones being, well, Liz Jones, and hating on everyone but Liz Jones:

“Never mind David Cameron’s face on that poster, his life is airbrushed. Married life is not like this.

And I can’t help but wonder what is being left undone while these women wander about the countryside wearing navy LK Bennett courts.

Can’t you see Sarah Brown’s brain whirring away, wondering if she put the dark wash in the dryer?”

Oh, and here’s The Sun. Talking gibberish. Prizes for anyone who can tell me what the fuck this headline even means:

Sam ‘n get it while it’s hot

*If you see any glaring examples of sexist shite during the  General Election campaign that you think I may have missed,  feel free to email them to me at cathryne_1999 at hotmail.co.uk

____

Crossposted at Too Much to Say for Myself

Cameron’s anecdotal black man doesn’t back Tory Policy

David Cameron met a black man recently. Much mirth has been caused by his ridiculous statement that his anecdotal black man joined the Army Royal Navy at 10.

Of course he didn’t and according to This is Plymouth the man referred to was Neal Forde, aged 51 who served in the navy for six rather than 30 years.

But embarrassingly for Cameron, it appears that his idea for a cap migrants is not backed up by Mr Forde.

Mr Cameron said Neal Forde said “I’m so ashamed that we’ve had this out-of-control system with people abusing it so badly” and claims that Mr Forde backs his plans for a cap on migraiton.

But This is Plymouth has reported that Mr Forde has very different views to those ascribed to him.

In reality Mr Forde said none of the parties had the right answers on immigration. “Britain needs immigrants. It’s a rich and diverse country with a heritage to be proud of.”

That doesn’t sound an awful lot like what Cameron said.

I think a cap is necessary because we’re not going to control immigration unless we actually take some quite positive and concrete steps. I think we let down everyone if we don’t do this properly. I was in Plymouth recently, and a 40-year-old black man made the point to me. He said, “I came here when I was six, I’ve served in the Royal Navy for 30 years. I’m incredibly proud of my country. But I’m so ashamed that we’ve had this out-of-control system with people abusing it so badly.” If we don’t address immigration properly, we’re letting down immigrant communities, as well as everybody else. So we do need a cap.

In This is Plymouth, Mr Forde did in fact express some concern over migration and crime, but rather than stick to the facts, Cameron has embellished his position and embarrassed himself, again.

_______

Crossposted from Left Outside. Hat tip to James Graham.

Is this the worst MP re-election website…ever?

Ladies and gentlemen – behold! We give you Labour MP Phil Woolas’s website.

Be sure to wear shades or at least some form of protective gear before heading there.

From Jamie K at Blood & Treasure

Libdems claim 60,000 new members after debate

Libdems were last night claiming that up to 60,000 people have joined them as members within 24 hours of watching Nick Clegg trounce Cameron and Brown at the first debate.

Late last night activist Ben Stockman tweeted:

25,000 members in TWENTY-FOUR hours!! Join the first true revolution since the renaissance: http://www.libdem2010.com #gonick #libdem2010

That was later Retweeted by Libdem councillor Jon Ball who added:

60k now! RT @aatlae: 25,000 members in TWENTY-FOUR hours!! Join the first true revolution since the renaissance: http://www.libdem2010.com

The figures have yet to be officially confirmed by Libdem campaign HQ. But if confirmed to be that high, it may drive the whole weekend news-cycle in their favour.

Update: It seems the reference was to a Facebook page, not actual party membership. Ooops, sorry about that

Cameron wanted a taxpayer-funded Lexus for himself, but criticises police over it now

At the Leader’s Debates last night David Cameron said:

What matters is what comes out. I went to a Hull police station the other day. They had five different police cars, and they were just about to buy a £73,000 Lexus. There’s money that could be saved to get the police on the frontline. The Metropolitan Police have 400 uniformed officers in their human resources department. Our police officers should be crime fighters, not form-fillers, and that’s what needs to change.

But while Cameron criticised the police for opting for a Lexus model, he had no qualms doing the same. In 2006 he confirmed that he had opted for a large Lexus luxury car because it was necessary for his big entourage.

That was taxpayer funded.

But that isn’t the only problem with Cameron’s statement.

1) He didn’t go to Hull “the other day”. According to Channel 4 the last time he went was over eight months ago.

2) Cameron’s facts on the Lexus were wrong. The police aren’t about to buy a Lexus – they already have one. And it didn’t cost anywhere near £73,000, but closer to £50,000. And it included a lot of necessary computer equipment.

3) The Met Police today hit back saying the 400 “form-fillers” in their HR department weren’t doing that – many of them were actually training other police.

In other words pretty much every single fact Cameron cited in that was wrong.