Alex Wilcock has written a pretty comprehensive article about Ming’s leadership style and speech this weekend. Not much I can add to it, really.
A final thought – say what you like about this speech, but it is the first time in perhaps a decade that the actual content of a leader’s speech has provoked any debate, rather than the way it was delivered. It may have still been a little vacuous for my taste (I still yearn for Paddy’s fireside chats), but at least we are now debating what our leader stands for, not whether our leader stands for anything at all. If nothing else, then that fact alone proves that we are better off with Ming than we would have been sticking with Charlie.
My thoughts too. The first half of the speech (including the five tests) stayed in lib dem comfort zone. The second half was much more challenging, and showed the extent to which we have tackled some of our negatives.