Did anyone else just see

[MrsRuffdiamond]

The Party Political Broadcast for Labour on BBC1?

It was stunning, and kind of appalling, but I can't make my mind up whether it was in a good or a bad way!

It was certainly very funny, with Nick Clegg as the Incredible Shrinking Man in a spoof Cabinet meeting dominated by Tories:

"He's shrunk!"
"What shall we do with him?"
"Shall we hunt him?"

[TheHammaconda]

You're right, they should have had a clear message from the beginning of EM's leadership.

2015 will be a two horse race but neither party look like winners.

[bobthebuddha]

Apparently this is why they're gunning for Clegg. But I think Hodges pointed out that Milliband can hardly take the moral high ground now if he gets negative campaigning thrown back at him. That said, Labour's probably working on the assumption that that's exactly what's going to happen as such an easy target. Who could resist?

[TheHammaconda]

The LibDems have released their own . It's gets their "We're the party of integration" message across well.

I wouldn't have mentioned that only one leader is standing up to UKIP with a picture of Clegg (54secs) it'll just remind people of his performance in the debates.

[claig]

Bad video by the LibDems.

That video will only add to UKIP's support because it boosts UKIP by implying that UKIP are the only opposition to the establishment LibLabCon Oxbridge gang and that the gang should all try and stop UKIP.

Plus as TheHammaconda said, Cleggy's performance was abysmal in the debate with Farage, so there is no point banging the same drum and when you are in a hole, you should stop digging.

[ThinkAboutItTomorrow]

I am a labour supporter and so get a lot of emails etc from them and the level of over copy written spin in what they send is really starting to hack me off.

I want something more than a sound bite and they really aren't delivering it

[claig]

Dan Hodges is right to say that Labour's 35% of the vote strategy is wrong.

They are aiming too low and if they don't succeed, they are sure to fail. They should be confident and aim high and offer a real vision and if they fall short, then they will still get enough votes to succeed.

But instead they are aiming for the small part of the pie that is disgruntled LibDem voters while missing the fact that UKIP are eating some of their pie by taking their working class voters.

Labour are in opposition, so negative campaigning is not good enough for them, they have to offer something positive. But of course they have nothing positive because their record under Brown and Blair is like a chain around their neck. All they have left is a wing and a prayer, spin and Spitting Image.

[bobthebuddha]

ThinkAboutItTomorrow, this seems to be the deliberate direction Labour have taken. They have agreed soundbites that they think resonate with the electorate and must repeat them over and over and over. We had 'One Nation' and now 'cost of living crisis.' Milliband's stock response to Cameron is 'he just doesn't get it', 'same old Tories.' It's so fatuous and I'm sure most people find it annoying and tedious. And it's as if they think we all have the mental capacity of toddlers. No offence to toddlers

[Isitmebut]

Claig .... p-l-e-a-s-e stop accusing ALL mainstream parties of spin and then promoting Ukip when they have ONE POLICY on the EU/immigration they 100% CANNOT DELIVER, as they can't change British Law.

Although Mr Axelrod has been advising on the Labour campaign for over a year now, I doubt if this advert was his work - but if it was having analysed Labour’s record and policies - if that is the best Team America can do for a six-figure correspondence course, Douglas Alexander should get their money back. IMO

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/politics/2057186-Labour-signs-up-Obama-s-Axelrod-No-We-Can-t

[Viviennemary]

I haven't seen it but it does sound as if they have lost the plot. I agree Labour don't stand any chance at the next election. And rightly so. The lot of them are pathetic. Same old pie in the sky labour.

[HercShipwright]

Labour need to get the vote out. Recent polls (in which they are ahead) have shown that they have the highest support among the people who are less likely to vote. If they get the vote out, they stand a better chance of winning. That PPB has arguably more chance of getting the vote out than some I've seen in the past.

[claig]

Here is the advert together with Monty Pythonesque silly voices to patronise the public

[Isitmebut]

Labour WILL get back in due to the dodgy boundaries; in 2005 a 35% share of the votes gave Labour a 64-seat majority. In 2010 the Tories won 36% of votes but were 20 seats short of a majority.

The Ukip vote in 2010 was 3.1% without Farage and meant the Conservatives needed a risky coalition, and likely to be between 6 and 10% with him in 2015.

Hence a vote for Ukip, is a vote for a Labour administration in 2015.

[Isitmebut]

P.S. Although what happens if/when Scotland gains independence this year, for the March 2016 start - when Labour currently has 41 seats in Scotland? This needs to be sorted as the YES/NO vote is so close.

[MrsRTea]

Fwiw, I've had to lobby my local tory MP on local issues, and as a result I get tory emails in my inbox regularly. They are very good. Their email strategy is imo superb.

[ironmaiden999]

This broadcast although IMO funny, was dreadful for the labour Party. Full of stereotypes. I don't like Clegg, but to portray the man in this manner was in very poor taste and childish. It certainly wouldn't make anyone vote Labour!

[UriGeller]

I thought it was funny. But then I generally think politics is the funniest thing on telly.

[ironmaiden999]

urigeller. I agree with you! They are all jokers!

[TheHammaconda]

In what way are the Tory emails so good MrsRTea?

[MrsRTea]

Well, if they weren't at least politically informative, I'd have fought to get off their email list. But I just scan them, then delete. They're always about new policies, though, so it's just a way of updating myself on what the Govt deems important. And, I dunno, they're well-written and presented, so not a pain to skim read. I suppose what I'm saying is that they consist of political information, not blatant propaganda. It would be of value if the other parties sent me similar. But propaganda and very overt lying would upset me.

[TheHammaconda]

Thanks Mrs

[thegambler]

Isitmebut, re boundaries etc. Is it not a strange system that gives anyone a majority of only 35% of the votes cast. Even less a percentage of the population able to vote ?

[Isitmebut]

Thegambler …. I think that “strange” is the probably wrong word as it could not always have been so, so I suspect (without checking) that after 13-years of a Labour administration, ‘loaded’ might be a better one. lol

Apparently it is seen to be ‘unfair’ and reforms to boundaries; an equal number of citizens within each boundary and a reduction of MP’s were all planned by the Coalition (see BBC link below).

But in their first disagreement it appears the Lib Dems tried to include a Lords reform somewhere during the process and withdrew support – thus pointing to the likelihood of a perpetual (Labour or Labour/Lib Dem coalition) socialist administration for years ahead. Fine for spending money we don’t have, a bugger when we need a political party to reign it in and rebalance the economy.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-21235169

And when you look at this electoral map on the right hand side of this link after the 2010 general election , it adds to the wonder why 35% of the vote gives Labour a honking large majority in parliament, and 36.1% in 2010, meant the Conservatives came up 20-seats short.

Although the 41 seats in Scotland to the ‘blue’s’ 1 seat, helps (for now), and maybe a uniform number of citizens in each constituency would reduce the blue mass over most of England.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_general_election,_2010

[thegambler]

You don't think it strange that a system that can give a majority of seats to a party that gets only 35% of the popular vote ?

Also given that the media and money in this country overwhelmingly back one side, maybe it's a balance ?

[Isitmebut]

What? And I've answered "strange".

Blair had Murdock's Sky (and arguably The Times), the BBC's left wing bias, The Sun, The Mirror, The Guardian and Observer etc etc.

Thats why with those heavyweights manipulated by Mandelson and Campbell etc, so many of Labour's rubbish policies, especially in the first several years (including selling our god, buggering pensions and immigration) were ignored until it was too late.

[thegambler]

You didn't answer the strange bit, you replied but didn't answer.

The Conservatives had The Mail, Express, Telegraph. So for a spell of about 5 yrs in my living memory things were evenish and I'd dispute the BBC bias, it's easier to critique those in power so they will always claim bias. A bit like claiming Private eye is biased against the Government as it criticises it more than the opposition.

I'm no Labour supporter by the way, I see them as incompetent where as the Conservatives are self serving thieves.