Comments on: Is Camp Campbell worried?

By: Quaequam Blog! » Mea culpa

Quaequam Blog! » Mea culpa — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 14:47:36 +0000

[...] Yesterday I wrote: The fact that, for example, the Mingcasts are now all from people eulogising about the Great Man and not the Ming himself, is starting to become apparent. Aren’t we important enough for him to waste his time on? [...]

By: Paul Linford

Paul Linford — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 09:40:43 +0000

It’s not just Nick Clegg but the Guardian as a whole which is making a calculated attack on Chris Huhne.
Today’s piece comes hard on the heels of yesterday’s leader in which Huhne was described as “patronising.”
I think the Guardian has got it in for him for some reason - as often happens with ex-journalists who go into
politics and then find their success is resented by their old colleagues.

By: James

James — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:14:57 +0000

I didn’t say all of them had to be by Ming - indeed some of them are pretty effective. But he’s vanished altogether over the past fortnight. Most leaders disappear into their bunkers at least a couple of weeks after they’ve been elected.

And the reaons I don’t like the Team Ming approach is that it is a mythic construct (I know many prominent Ming supporters support him by default and for no better reason because I speak to them) and a divisive one. The party should be the team, and when leading supporters from one campaign declares that if any of the other candidates were to win they’d have to spend the next year “looking over their shoulders” we should view it as the blackmail that it is.

The campaign should be about Ming, because he is the candidate. I’m sorry if that is too radical a concept for half of the parliamentary party to deal with.

By: Stephen

Stephen — Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:08:09 +0000

“the Mingcasts are now all from people eulogising about the Great Man and not the Ming himself, is starting to become apparent. Aren’t we important enough for him to waste his time on?”

I think this pretty unfair, James. You can bet if Ming had made all the ‘casts himself, a load of bloggers (not necessarily you!) would have been decrying the fact that Ming thought it was “all about him”.

I know you slate the ‘Team Ming’ / ‘Bridge to the Future’ approach. I am still utterly baffled why. Liberals should be team-builders first and foremost (it was one of CK’s great strengths, though he took it to an extreme at times). I would be very worried if Ming was conducting the kind of ‘me-first’ campaign you seem to be urging on him.

To declare my interest: I’m a Ming supporter, who is happy to place Chris 2nd, and would be quite happy if he Chris were elected.

By: Valerie

Valerie — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 22:46:59 +0000

I find Ming easily the most likeable candidate - and I’ll admit that my opinion of him has risen and risen as I’ve heard his supporters wax lyrical about his good qualities. He’s straightforward, principled and grounded, and the best person to ensure that we don’t lose out in the likeability stakes now that Kennedy’s gone.

By: Antony Hook

Antony Hook — Tue, 07 Feb 2006 19:03:09 +0000

Nick’s piece is unlikely to disuade anyone from supporting Chris and is actually very useful for Chris as it provides a helpful recitation of all Chris policy positions, which have proved popular with the party.