Milliband was terrible on Today this morning...

[Chil1234]

... I'm not a fan at the best of times but I was honestly hoping for something better from the wunderkind this morning. I think politics is more interesting when the Opposition are up to the mark. His fondness for the glottal stop and dropped h were very reminiscent of Blair, unfortunately, and it still didn't make him sound like a regular bloke. He wasn't very convincing on 'what my Labour party stands for' or however Evan Davis started the question. His 'young people' slant a not-so-subtle bid to win the student vote away from the LibDems. He said he supported some of the cuts - which was nice - but was rather vague on money otherwise. And when he answered the bit about why he was getting married with the words 'love' and 'commitment' (not very original Ed) whilst getting into a bit of a PC pickle saying that other family structures were perfectly valid at the same time, it sounded rather forced. There must have been toes curling all over Millbank.

He was awful on radio 4 too this morning! I am not to involved with politics but he wouldn't sway me. He just couldn't answer where he would make cuts and it just seemed like he was saying,' I'll make a few cuts but just popular ones! '

Such a shame

Has he got a cold (mildly bunged up nose), or does he always sound like that?

I thought his delivery was poor, and that meant a negative impact on his message.

i heard some of his bumbelings..not pretty no gravitas or substance or much vision really

Not to good but then again Cameron is a slick PR man who is being found out for the fraud he is.

No one can accuse Ed of being false in his presentation.

Bear in mind he is learning "on the job".

In four or so years time it wont matter as to his persona all the country will want is to rid themselves of the Tories and the utter destruction they will have done to society.

Labour are trying to walk a tightrope between being on the side of those who are anti-cuts whilst remaining some degree of economic credibility by accepting that there do need to be cuts to eradicate the deficit. They've definitely got the wrong Miliband as leader though.

I think his lack of clarity makes it very hard for people to trust his party, I am unsure of which way i will vote tbh. I think if he just was more honest and spoke in real terms of where he would save money the choice would be easier.

@ newwave... if 'slick PR man' means we get someone that can communicate clearly and with conviction then I don't see why that's a negative. I think Ed's presentation is essentially false, unfortunately. Comparing the marchers last weekend with suffragettes and the US civil rights movement, for example. Crowd-pleasing hyperbole and soundbites provided by your spin team get a round of applause on the day, but no-one's any the wiser what he really stands for. Kinnock was a similarly unimpressive leader, desperately battling with internal back-stabbers. He failed to beat Thatcher because, even though she was unpopular with a certain section of society, few genuinely believed he was a realistic alternative.

The only way Ed et al can credibly oppose this cruel gov is by disowning totally New Labour and Blairism which would entail much donning of sackcloth and ashes and self flagellation. So not much chance of that happening then. Alternative is not to vote Labour but a real alternative to the vile ConDems - not a pretend, self serving one.

What would be your 'real alternative'?

Could be this IMO

Oh the Socialist Party... you do know it's 2011 and not 1911?

You're the one who's way behind Chil. Your rancid rightwing rubbish is old hat and socialism is the uber cool choice of political ideology for the discerning thinker. It's most curious your belief that anything leftwing is anachronistic. It's the future if we wanto save this planet from clapped out capitalist cons. (Dems).

I don't believe 'anything leftwing is anachronistic'. Some left-wing initiatives of the past have lasted because they've been a good thing. However, socialism of the pure type espoused by the Socialist Party is definitely something of the past. Tried, failed and abandoned by the very people that wanted it in the first place. In the early C20, a population that had experienced the depression, rationing and mass-sacrifice was willing to trust the government to own & run everything & everybody on their behalf. But these days we have higher expectations, are far less trusting of big government and don't want to be treated like an amorphous mass. You tell kids today that just 40 years ago you could only get one type of telephone from one organisation and they simply won't believe you.

I'm assuming it's all somehow organised to make sure that he can just hold the fort for a bit and at some point let Ed Balls take over.

"You tell kids today that just 40 years ago you could only get one type of telephone from one organisation and they simply won't believe you."

How many phones do they bloody want??! but also and a bit .

Seriously there's nothing to be said for rampant, manipulative consumerism.

Back to OP though. I agree with louvert. Ed M is no long term choice.

Ed Balls, Ed Miliband, Eddie the bloody Eagle Edwards - makes no difference. They're all serving the same masters of mammon. Keep up all of you, do.