[Mac Man]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5348630.stm

And they £40K for this?

Looks it should be the logo for the Green Party. Or a housing Association.

So who'se to blame - the Client or the Agency?

[Nobber22]

Client obviously. I'm sure the Agency came up with several designs, then the Tories picked one.

Although for 40K, they probably had the work experince kids on the job.

[buzlightyear]

looks more like a council logo than a major party logo.

[krish]

Dave's next going to rename them Consigniatives

The Labour rose wasn't duff imho, a bit dated now perhaps

But this green sqiggle looks like its more suited for a cheap ITV advert for a local conservatory company

[Singh400]

Good idea, real crap presentation.

[overkill]

Even Tory party members are saying it's naff. Yet we are told by Central office that 'they' approved the design? Someone being economic with the truth? Just not with the logo..............

[overkill]

Originally Posted by krish

Dave's next going to rename them Consigniatives

The Labour rose wasn't duff imho, a bit dated now perhaps

But this green sqiggle looks like its more suited for a cheap ITV advert for a local conservatory company

I thought it was going to be 'New age Conservatives'?

[JohnG]

I'd have thought a wetsuit, Satsuma and some rope would have been more appropriate

[overkill]

Originally Posted by JohnG

I'd have thought a wetsuit, Satsuma and some rope would have been more appropriate

Most of em' are too young to remember that one John.

[Jenn]

Who cares about a logo? It's the ideas the politicians have that count.

Apple's logo's just that, an apple, nothing special about it, a kid could have done it, but it's become famous.

[Miyazaki]

I think it is naff, but shows the tories how much they need an image change if they ever want to win an election.

Won't pull the wool over my eyes though.

[scrapbook]

I think it is ok...looks like I'm in a club of one

[la gran siete]

Originally Posted by Jenn

Who cares about a logo? It's the ideas the politicians have that count.

Apple's logo's just that, an apple, nothing special about it, a kid could have done it, but it's become famous.

trouble is they havent really come up with any viable ideas

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by la gran siete

trouble is they havent really come up with any viable ideas

They don't need to. I reckon most vote on personalities or the desire for a change.

Labour are currently doing more than enough to self destruct and give people enough reasons to vote for the Tories.

[krish]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

They don't need to. I reckon most vote on personalities or the desire for a change.

Labour are currently doing more than enough to self destruct and give people enough reasons to vote for the Tories.

Why on earth would they vote for a clone of Blair ???

[overkill]

Originally Posted by krish

Why on earth would they vote for a clone of Blair ???

Exactly. He's offering nothing new, just tons of spin, and a 'new image'. Worse, an image that will be dropped faster than a ten bob tarts knickers once he's in. Not one of his new policies on the environment et al will ever re-surface once he's in no.10.

Sadly, unlike Cameron will, Blair never dropped the 'New Labour' image...............

[Jenn]

Let's say I'd rather have a common farm pig in charge of the country rather than call Gordon Brown prime minister.
Tony Blair won't be PM again after next year so no point comparing others to him, he's no competition to anyone.

Just wait for the interest rate to rise once or twice again, thousands going bankrupt and many people will vote anyone but Labour. People react when it's touching their wallet and whoever's in power at the time will pay for it.

And when we talk about spin let's not forget that the Labour government is using tax money to pay for 3200 press officers. Apparently three times more than in 1997. They must need all the help they can get.

[GBDG1]

Originally Posted by Jenn

Just wait for the interest rate to rise once or twice again, thousands going bankrupt and many people will vote anyone but Labour. People react when it's touching their wallet and whoever's in power at the time will pay for it.

A little short sighted dont you think? 1992 anybody? 15%...

Although I can't imagine David Cameron in a donkey jacket...

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by krish

Why on earth would they vote for a clone of Blair ???

A lot of the vote will be an anti-blair vote, not a pro conservative vote.

Whether he is a clone of Blair is yet to be seen.

[krish]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

Whether he is a clone of Blair is yet to be seen.

not really since he's copying Blair to a tee
- has totally modelled himself on Blair as opposition leader 1994-97

[scrapbook]

Originally Posted by krish

not really since he's copying Blair to a tee
- has totally modelled himself on Blair as opposition leader 1994-97

That's because it is a popularist image that appeals to many middle of the road voters. What are the alternatives, modelling yourself on John Prescott, Gordon Brown, William Hague, Maggie, Iain Wotshisname.

Blair's problem was never his image of 1994, Blair's problem is his apparent arrogance, his refusal to listen, his pandering to the yanks, his refusal to admit he is wrong, giving the impression he is right up his own arse. All imho.

Whether Cameron is a clone of Blair is yet to be seen, and we won't find out until / if he takes office.

[klr10]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

Blair's problem is his apparent arrogance, his refusal to listen, his pandering to the yanks, his refusal to admit he is wrong, giving the impression he is right up his own arse. All imho.

Mmmm - reminds me of a certain woman we once had as PM....

[overkill]

Originally Posted by klr10

Mmmm - reminds me of a certain woman we once had as PM....

Exactly. How easily (or because they want to) that's been forgotten.

Krish is correct. Cameron is already a total clone of Blair. Yes his delivery is designed in that way to appeal to 'middle England', as Blair did, but, and this more important, his few policies that have any substance are exact copies of Blairite 'New Labour'. Do we really want just another bluer version of Blair? Policies and all?

[krish]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

That's because it is a popularist image that appeals to many middle of the road voters. What are the alternatives, modelling yourself on John Prescott, Gordon Brown, William Hague, Maggie, Iain Wotshisname.... Whether Cameron is a clone of Blair is yet to be seen, and we won't find out until / if he takes office.

Any opposition party changes radically once in government to a dull predictable bunch of faceless idiots with a lot of spin .... and Dave the Chameleon is indeed no different... Thats pretty much been a fact, worldwide for the last twenty or so years. Its therefore fairly easy to home in on personal characteristics, and spot every plagiarised moment.

One minute Dave's writing the Tory immigration scare-mongering 2005 manifesto, the next he's floating on melting ice caps, hugging a hoodie, or apologising to the Indian Prime Minister over remarks Churchill made about Mahatma Gandhi. He's the slick spin/soundbite-heavy, photo-opportunity grabbing policy-light style over substance media whore that Blair is in govt and was in opposition

Most political observers spotted this instantly; but the media in general, Tory press and most voters under thirty seem to have developed collective amnesia.

The guy's not particularly knowledgeable, which doesn't make him a great clone, so William Hague is possibly pulling many of the strings, as well as vast array of advisors and spin doctors (as you can expect it will be for him as PM).

He appoints his inexperienced best buddy (though allegedly fairly adept with coke and hookers) George Gideon Oliver Osborne as shadow chancellor - although both claim not to have made a Blair-Brown pact (which Blair and Brown also often claim not to have made )

Slightly more disturbing (non-clonish) background...
- as you may recall, he was one of Norman Lamont's advisors at the time of Black Wednesday. He's also known to be a bullcrapper and bully of the highest order - especially when he was in charge of corporate communications (= spin) at Carlton Communications (now ITV plc with Granada). Most financial journalists found him untruthful, untrustworthy, and deceitful and they all hated him. He left Carlton under a cloud before running for parliament. Not worth mentioning the alleged fondness for the old Columbian marching powder .
- but back to the clonish... one's a professional (but unsuccessful) spinner, the other a mediocre lawyer turned politician --- i.e. both bad liars

Anyway, here'a another chance to view this superb Time Trumpet clip:- www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdo0YurEG1Q
(look out for the England wristband incident)

P.S. btw Iain Wotshisname - that was the unsuccesful leadership by the twins Iain and Duncan Smith

[overkill]

Cheers Krish, saved me the bother. As for Blair, totally agree. I think it's taken Labour supporters a long time to fall out with him, hell, they've never seen a PM returned to office so the novelty was bound to last, but I would agree totally with that summation. Style over substance, bland over dynamic. However, what worries me, going on the comments about Cameron, is that what people want?

Not just in this country either. Wherever you look, where there's democracy there's faceless, media friendly, policy light leaders. In fact there's not much difference between them and the dictatorships. The leaders there are faceless automatons too..............

No, old fashioned, honest to goodness, brutal leaders anywhere anymore!

[scrapbook]

Which ever way you look at it you basically have two choices...

A (probably) Gordon Brown led Labour party
or
A David Cameron led Tory party

So what do you want at the next general election, who are you going to give a new 5 year mandate to?

[krish]

Originally Posted by scrapbook

..So what do you want at the next general election, who are you going to give a new 5 year mandate to?

Thats why a hung parliament looks like an attractive proposition
- more concensus grown-up common sense politics since landslide victories or tiny majorities in our first past the post system have not really done this country any favours, and the people get more and more disenchanted whoever's in power

I think party politics is so outdated when there are so many important issues that could be tackled so much more effiently and with true passion and foresight, rather than short term bribes and broken manifesto pledges by parties only looking at the next four or five years.

[Jenn]

Originally Posted by overkill

Not just in this country either. Wherever you look, where there's democracy there's faceless, media friendly, policy light leaders. In fact there's not much difference between them and the dictatorships. The leaders there are faceless automatons too..............

Yep, I think that's the sad reality. We can vote for one party one year and vote for another the next out of anger, nobody listens. The only difference is we're led to believe we have a choice.

[klr10]

Doesn't matter who you vote for the ba**ar*s still get in...