Well sure we’re obsessed, but do you think the public at large is obsessed with Sir Ming? I bet they hardly even know who he is.

No-one is forcing you to read Paul Walter’s blog.

I know, but there’s a certain masochistic pleasure to be had in reading it.

And yes, the public can’t differentiate between knocking copy and groundless smears. That’s why smearing is such a disreputable tactic.

Better still would be to eschew knocking altogether. And when the party and leadership is strong, the temptation to do this naturally falls away.

And yes, the public can’t differentiate between knocking copy and groundless smears. That’s why smearing is such a disreputable tactic.

Yes, you’re probably right. I am failing to make a distinction – just the sort of distinction, in fact, which is so easily lost on the electorate. All the political parties recognise the danger of being inward looking and self-obsessed, but somehow this never seems to prevent them from unerringly falling into the trap. Every election campaign kicks off with high-minded statements about positive campaigning, and then the cat fight begins.

By a similar token, I’m tired of hearing hardcore Liberal Democrats praising Sir Ming to the skies. (Paul Walter seems to have made a particular habit of this.) It amounts to a perfect admission that the leadership is a problem. I think that Iain Dale is much closer to the truth. It’s not so much that Sir Ming is making a negative impact upon the electorate. He’s making virtually no impact at all.

I think you fail to understand the difference between a smear - i.e. a groundless accusation/insinuation intended to create doubt - and reporting a fact.

Grant Shapps’ accusation about poster lotteries is a smear, timed to coincide with a by-election rather than reported to the police at the time which would have been an appropriate course of action. Mentioning that Labour are in the grip of a civil war in Ealing and that a deputy chair of the Conservative Association has defected to the Lib Dems are facts that no-one disputes.

I think that is just a tad rich coming from us. Lib Dem Voice keeps up a steady stream of fifty word articles sniping at Tory or Labour, whether we are in election mode or not. In routinely defining ourselves in relation to the other parties, instead of confidently projecting our own narrative, we merely betray our insecurity. In the highly unlikely event that I will ever be allowed to take over the running of Lib Dem Voice, those articles will be relegated to a narrow column in a very small font. Say what you like about me, I generally reserve my venom for the Liberal Democrats!

The one thing he appears to have achieved is to make me think of Tom Watson as less of a shit in comparison.

And then you proceed to smear both sides yourself. Quaequam Blag!

It is notable at how worried the Tories clearly are about the Lib Dems at the moment.

That is a delusion right up there with the 72 virgins.

His obsession of trying to put Ming in as bad a light as possible gets the better of him too often.

But it’s a pity that Sir Ming feels obliged to feed the obsession with such an unswerving reliability.

It’s just such a shame that so many people within the Lib Dems seem to think it is objective analysis.

I formed my view of Sir Ming before I’d even heard of Iain Dale.

It does leave me wondering whether this blog is sustainable and whether discretion will force me eventually to stop.

Don’t do that. I still think this is the best Lib Dem Blog by miles.