Cabinet reshuffle

Let me try and get this out as quick as I can before I shoot off to Paris! Right, it’s 11.02am…

Prime Minister David Cameron has finally made his first major cabinet reshuffle – something that he’s always said he was largely against. But to be fair, this administration going against what they’ve previously said has become the norm.

One major change that was always likely but unwelcome is Ken Clarke relinquishing his post as Justice Secretary. Of the epoch where being a Tory actually stood for something, he provided his experience gained from the Thatcher and Major era, and was a moderate in terms of his political beliefs. As such, his work on the justice system and prison reform was refreshing from a Conservative standpoint. Being demoted to a “Minister without Portfolio” with a roving economic brief essentially means that Mr. Clarke has lost his job but not his salary and car.

In more thankful news, the mess that is Andrew Lansley has also been demoted from Health Secretary to Leader of the House of Commons. His disasterous stint at trying to pool together health reform by way of major privatisation saw a widespread backlash against him. His inability to speak up for himself has left many, clearly including Mr. Cameron, unimpressed. The bad thing is he’s been replaced by Jeremy Hunt – the moron who was a bit too chummy with the Murdoch’s during their bid for a greater grip on British television. Talk about the NHS having poor luck.

Unfortunately, other ministers who have cocked-up already during this administration were too valuable to the Prime Minister to be shuffled. Iain Duncan-Smith remains as Work and Pensions Secretary, overseeing the loss of millions of pounds in benefits to the poorest of people. Michael Gove remains as Education Secretary, having tried to wedge a class divide with his ‘free schools’ initiative and provide education on the cheap. And as for right at the top, it seems silly that we’ve stuck with a man who’s led us into a double-dip recession, observed a rise in unemployment and who is so blinded by his philosophy to embark on savage cuts to save the economy that he fails to see that it’s doing more harm than good. If we really want to get spending under control, shouldn’t Osborne be replaced by Arsène Wenger in this reshuffle? I mean, he’s shown fiscal prudence in every transfer window since he’s been Arsenal manager.

As for now, nothing else by way of major announcement has been made yet. Right now it’s 11.28am – it’ll all be coming out later during the day. David Laws is expected to make a return to frontline politics after his expenses scandal at the start of the coalition, which would be hugely welcomed by Nick Clegg. He’s a great strategist and has a strong economic basis to aid in policy-making, so that’s my guess as to where he’d end up.

It’s 11.29am.

For now, salut !

2012
09/04
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
TAGS









Leave a comment

Assange Asylum

The title sounds like something out of a horror film.

And whilst to senior politicians in the West this news story may appear to bear some resemblance to such a genre, in reality it’s no more than a petty dispute about a man who fights to provide “important news and information  to the public”.

The allegations against Julian Assange, founder of the whistle-blowing website Wikileaks, of sexual misconduct a night some years ago in Sweden seems dubious at best. The allegations never came about during the time – they were only made (very publicly) once Assange’s name became known worldwide. Governments across the West fear what his organisation might yet uncover; having already unleashed once classified documents of torture, killings and detention, most prominently concerning US actions in Iraq and Afghanistan. As such, this diplomatic fiasco is seen by Wikileaks as an extended attempt to have their leader extradited to the United States via Sweden, which they are strongly fighting against.

Fought they did, and lost they did.

So on they went to a rather smart Plan B. Assange was released on bail and used his (limited) freedom to run into the Ecuadorian Embassy in Kensington & Chelsea, where he had a good political relationship with the establishment and has the respect of leftist Rafael Correa, President of Ecuador. Assange successfully convinced the polity to grant him political asylum. As national embassies are granted diplomatic immunity and special privileges under the Vienna Convention, they provide the perfect hideout for individuals seeking to escape from their host nation. However, this is where diplomacy becomes a bitch.

Technically speaking, embassies do not fall under the category of extraterritorial sovereignty. That is to say, the land on which the embassy is built still belongs to the host nation – Britain. Whilst convention means that the host nation must ask permission to enter an embassy, it is not legally binding. With Foreign Secretary William Hague determined to arrest Assange and safe passage out of Britain to Ecuador made impossible, the diplomatic row between these two countries blew open. And Assange deepened the political hostility by standing on the first floor balcony of the embassy and delivering a speech berating the US in their stance against Wikileaks.

On and on the story goes. And will likely go on for some time. It’s like the boring third-quarter of a film, where they have to grind out the details for the story to make sense – but no doubt a big bang finale will be coming… eventually.

God, this country loves drama.

2012
08/22
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
World News
TAGS








Leave a comment

The XXX Olympiad

I’m sure the Roman numerals in the official name of the Olympic games has proved quite misleading for some – with single, middle-aged, balding men expecting something quite different after the 9pm watershed. In any case, the world was given quite a performance last night.

London 2012 is here.

Having had friends watch the technical rehearsals on Monday and Wednesday night and return absolutely buzzing, it was hard not to be excited. As an Olympic volunteer myself, just being around the athletes all week had the same effect. The secrecy surrounding the final Olympic flame, the final leg of the Olympic torch and rumours about James Bond’s entrance (which to the world’s delight was true) helped to create an even bigger hype. Whilst Danny Boyle has been heralded for his vision in cinema, many had silent reservations about his ability to do the same on the world’s greatest stage, in front of the world’s greatest audience.

But by God he did it.

It celebrated everything: Britain’s humble countryside beginnings, their rise as an economic power with the industrial revolution, the success of social welfare in the NHS, the best of British music, film and literature – everything. Now I’m not going to say it was a flawless show; I’m sure I wasn’t the only one who thought the intro was a bit slow to start, or that the depiction of the digital age was a bit too cheesy. But we all saw past it. It was brilliant.

And before the comparisons start pouring out, we need to pause. The 2012 Opening Ceremony has a completely different dynamic to that of Beijing four years ago.  In China, there was as much a political motive as there was a sporting and cultural one. In London, Boyle managed to succeed where politicians have failed: defining Britishness as an achievement, filled with rich cultural history – not the draconian political dogma that my generation seem to think it’s about today. And on that merit alone, ours was far better than 2008. Just saying.

And I write this exactly one year on since my first ever blogpost. Strange how such great occasions coincide…

Anyway, overall it’s been a success. Danny Boyle will no doubt have a knighthood in the post, the Queen will get an Oscar for her majestic performance as the latest Bond girl, the papers have gleaming reviews and most people have sensed that long-dormant patriotism re-awakening, even if only for three weeks.

But still, it’s sad to have left those single, middle-aged, balding men disappointed.

2012
07/28
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
TAGS










Leave a comment

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

I know I overuse the phrase a lot on Twitter. A friend has even gone so far as to say that it’s become my ‘seal of approval’.

I promise I’ll tone it down.

But at least I know what ‘LOL’ stands for.

Prime Minister David Cameron has been found guilty of being so out-of-touch that his ‘toff’ image will forever shadow him. So here’s how LOLgate started…

As the Leveson Inquiry reached a peak last week, with Rebekah Brooks offering herself for questioning, things started to get interesting. Finally, we’d all be able to pry (even if only a little) into the relationship she and Murdoch’s News Corp. empire held with No. 10. We’d be able to get the gossip on Brooks’ relationship with Prime Ministers Blair, Brown and Cameron – real juicy stuff. So, did it deliver?

Brooks’ undue influence on British politics was typified by her role in getting the Sun to switch allegiance to the Conservatives for the 2010 election. “Instrumental” in the switch by account of her own words, she boasted that she thought of the switch as early as March 2009, before approaching the Murdoch’s with the suggestion. Obviously this came as a huge blow to then incumbent Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who had just finished delivering his last Party Conference before news of the Sun’s switch broke. He was apparently aggressive on the phone – of which you can’t honestly expect anything less. Remember, this is the same woman who broke the headline that Brown’s 6-year old son was diagnosed with cystic fibrosis, with the family not yet having come to terms with the news themselves back in 2006. Bitch.

She also admitted that she had a “very close” relationship with the big boss Rupert Murdoch – which we all knew anyway, as he flew in to London as the News Corp crisis was unravelling, claiming she was his primary concern. Forget protecting the integrity of the News of the World – Rebekah Brooks was an asset, with all the political connections. She came before the paper. Brooks herself went on to say how Tony Blair, David Cameron and George Osborne sent her messages of support after she was forced to resign following the revolting Miller Dowler scandal; rather than question media ethics, these politicians were keen to make sure they had Murdoch’s baby-doll on their side. She may have left her position at the paper – but she still held considerable influence. As Blair learnt from Kinnock’s mistakes to set the precedent – never turn against the media giant.

And her resignation hasn’t delivered a severance of her political ties that people wished for. Which brings us back to old David Cameron. Our Prime Minister’s attended News International parties and even holidayed with the Murdochs’ and Rebekah Brooks in Santorini – even enjoying the luxury of being flown out by Rupert’s son-in-law’s private jet. Cosy much? Cameron claimed impartiality on the BSkyB deal, which Brooks rushed to confirm at the Leveson Inquiry – but something tells me that he had more than a light interest in seeing the deal approved.

Which all makes sense considering his loving text to Brooks after she resigned.

“Hope you’re okay. Keep your head up. LOL, DC”.

The irony of writing ‘LOL’ after she had to keep her head down away from the spotlight rather than up is what makes it so amusing. Besides the fact that it’s simply embarassing in this day and age for someone who thinks himself a young leader not to know what ‘LOL’ means. No offence to our generation, but I doubt we’re the type to use ‘Lots Of Love’ so frequently.

And with that outburst, I must return to revision. Alas, I probably won’t be blogging again until exams are over.

Take care,

LOL.

2012
05/13
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
TAGS












Leave a comment

Boris is Back.

Is it really the end of the world? Don’t be silly.

I registered my postal vote and sent it off last week – it’s hardly a surprise how I voted, if you read my blogs.

Ken’s campaign looked strong, but there were always reservations about his return. Having led the GLC before it was abolished under Thatcher, and being Mayor of London for 8 years, many felt his time of power in the city was over. Turning 67 this year, he surely hasn’t much political fight in him left. He announced in his election night speech that it was to be his last election – which is a pragmatic decision, but sad nonetheless. His impact on London as Mayor was huge: he brought in free child travel, helped clear up crime, won the city their bid for the Olympics and set up ‘London embassies’ across the world. What’s more, he was genuinely committed to his job, and passionately cared about the capital. With no further political ambitions, Ken was a compassionate leader who simply wanted to help his fellow Londoners.

The same cannot be said for Boris; many believe he is using the London Mayoralty as a platform to build his support base within the Conservative Party to mount a leadership challenge in the future, with a glinting eye towards Number 10. But Boris isn’t the worst Mayor in the world.

During his first term, he did get rid of the bendy-busses which were a nightmare in traffic (but great for free riders!), and bring back the classic routemaster – albeit reborn. He has driven forward essential upgrades to the London Underground, and thankfully has kept relatively distanced from his party’s politics in government. His lack of loyalty to the Tory leadership is refreshing – he does occasionally stand up for London against government feeling, like he has when championing a new airport at the Thames Estuary. And as much as it is not a viable basis on which to win an election, his scruffy hair and personality mannerisms make most people laugh and smile. Ken was seen as the old codger who held a paternalist mayoralty – Boris is more the fun-loving leader who attempts to look and act cool, openly embarrassing himself, taking being laughed at in his stride.

So what’s in store for the next four years? Automated tubes to rid the city of untimely strikes, significant emphasis on security and policing, and an attempt (however vain) to bring down council tax in real terms across London. All part of his 9-point plan, Boris feels he has the answers to keep the capital successful. Let’s hope, for London’s sake, he does. Irrespective of party politics.

No doubt I’ll still be seeing him cycling down Upper Street in Islington over his second term.

And if he doesn’t do a good job, I’ll kick him off his bike.

2012
05/06
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
TAGS








Leave a comment

François For France!

The biggest news story of the weekend was the resurgence of left-wing politics in Europe.

Okay, this is a slight over-exaggeration. I’m a bit too excited – I haven’t blogged in a while.

But François Hollande’s victory in the first round of the presidential election in France is a huge boost to the waning left-wing politicians who are coming to be termed as the “Old guard” of Europe. Right-wing policies on economics and immigration seem to be at the tip of a far deeper ideological battle taking place across the continent. But that’s the subject for a (very long, detailed, jargon-filled) feature another day.

Following Strauss-Kahn’s infamous arrest in New York, Hollande began to mount a serious challenge for the Socialist candidate for presidency. He underwent a tactical image makeover in order to sell himself to the French public. Image is definitely everything in modern politics – our very own Gordon Brown knows this all too well. His paternalistic manner was intentionally pronounced. The frame-less glasses, clean-shaven, sharp-suit look wasn’t by accident. And it’s definitely worked.

Whilst Hollande’s lead is only slight – 28.6% to Sarkozy’s 27.1% – he is in a far better position than his centre-right counterpart. As the election results prove, there is a sense of strong national unity on the left. The only other serious left-wing challenge came from Jean-Luc Mélenchon, who achieved a mere 11.1%. Whilst his voters are almost certainly going to back Hollande in the final two-horse race on the 6th May, the same cannot be said for France’s right-wing. Marine Le Penn, leader of the far-right National Front, did much better in Sunday’s election that polls had predicted, winning 18% of the vote. Disillusioned with unemployment at a 12 year high (and a president who can’t stand as tall as his wife let alone Germany’s Angela Merkel), the right wanted more from Nicolas Sarkozy. He just didn’t provide it. As a result, the vote on the right has completely split. Sarkozy has to concede much of the centre ground to Hollande, and must in the next two weeks fight to win over the National Front. He will most probably play an aggressive campaign on immigration to regain Le Penn’s votes – but he’d be playing a dangerous game. He cannot afford to alienate his more moderate voters. An impossible task, surely?

For 17 years, France has been governed by the same party. Such a monopoly on power has seen rising resentment towards them – just look at the Tories after 18 years in office, or the Labour party after 13. France’s ruling Union for a Popular Movement party made the decision to partake in the war against Afghanistan. They oversaw the financial crisis. They became junior partners in the Franco-German axis on account of their own actions. They played into the hands of religious prejudice and unjustified stigma. Actually, I reckon a tad more than resentment was boiling up amongst the moderates – and more like fury on the left.

And François Hollande has used ingenious tact to play on this. He countered Sarkozy’s rising racial insensitivity by releasing a (semi-official, controversial) campaign video, where he meets a varied range of ethnic minorities in the capital city to the backing track of Jay-Z and Kanye West’s ‘Ni**as in Paris’. Well played. He has also adopted policies that have huge appeal; troops out of Afghanistan by the end of the year; a deficit of 0% GDP by 2017; a reduction in nuclear energy reliance from 75% to 50% are just a handful. They have been calculated as feasible projections, adding substance to Hollande’s already appealing image.

The socialist candidate is undoubtedly in the driving seat to take the presidency on the 6th May. It’s his to lose.

It’s not quite the left-wing fightback revolution across Europe… yet.

But France is a start.

[Comprehensive coverage can be found on the BBC’s website.]

[Also edited and published on TheStudentJournals.com]

2012
04/25
CATEGORY
World News
TAGS









2 comments

Cam Dine With Me

It’s proving to be the most popular private version of the Channel 4 television series amongst Britain’s elite.

Prime Minister David Cameron has been caught up in a scandal with the Conservative party’s co-treasurer Peter Cruddas, who resigned from his post as soon as the furore arose. Secretly filmed by the Sunday Times, Cruddas was offering private dinners and the apparent opportunity to influence government policy if wealthy individuals would provide substantial “premier league” donations to the party over £200,000. Thus the ruckus over party funding, which once plagued the Labour party under the guise of “cash for honours”, fails to subside.

On Monday under intense media pressure, the Prime Minister released details of all the donors who attended events at Number 10 – a u-turn from his refusal to do so this weekend. Whilst the Conservative party defend ‘significant donors’ as anyone donating over £50,000 (as a member of the ‘Leader Group’ under the ridiculous Tory donor system), it seems a fallible defence, especially during times of austerity. The Labour party have called for an independent inquiry into the whole debacle. They mocked the government for placing a Conservative peer, Lord Gold, as the head of an internal inquiry into cash-for-access. Impartial much? They even dared compare the Tory party to the workings of News International, whose own ‘internal investigation’ was merely a cover-your-tracks exercise.

And Cameron’s words of 2010 will definitely come back to bite him. He sought to end the image of the Tories as being a party that simply helped the interests of their cronies by ceding to lobbying. The lobbying industry, he cried, was “the next big scandal waiting to happen”. It seems like he failed to listen to his own advice.

Cross-party talks of reform were tabled and a cap of private party funding of £50,000 was floated about, but nothing concrete was decided upon. That reform agenda, like politicians have done time and time again, was left to gather dust. The Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander has tried to reignite the reform movement, claiming that a “short, sharp series of discussions” would take place to plough ahead with reforming party funding. But with the Tories largely backed by wealthy individuals and Labour funded almost exclusively by trade unions, they have different interests respectively to protect. A clash of heads can only be forthcoming.

In a move to draw a line in the sand on the issue, Downing Street have undergone another U-turn in releasing the list of donors who have been guests at the Prime Minister’s Chequers country home. I doubt this will appease the media, the people, or the Opposition though. Downing Street haven’t realised that they just drew a line in quicksand.

Whilst David Cameron has managed to claim implicit ignorance to Cruddas’s dealings with donors, the frequency of dinner parties with key donors suggests otherwise. To paraphrase editor of ConservativeHome.com Tim Montgomerie, he concedes that a party in power attracts less ideologically committed donors, and more wealthy individuals who want influence at Britain’s top table.

An audience with the Prime Minister was what these donors wanted.

And like the television series, David Cameron duly obliged, flustering around (his luxury Downing Street apartment, rather than the kitchen) trying to make them all happy.

2012
03/28
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
TAGS









Leave a comment

“I wanna be a billionaire, so f***ing baaad…”

It’s had over 120,000,000 views. If you haven’t heard the song already, you’ve clearly been living in the mountains of Pakistan. Or in a hole in Iraq. Or Afghanistan. Whichever.

The song’s opening line is the only real link to this blog to be honest. It’s a poignant reminder of the real motives behind the UK budget 2012, announced this Wednesday.

George Osborne has announced a series of measures which (apparently) defend his claim that there is “no other road for recovery”. This is certainly true in political terms:  the budget had to please the Tory backbenchers enough to quell their dissatisfaction of coalition, or else the party could have been left permanently damaged. Economically however, the Chancellor is still blind to Keynesian policy, leaving his statement as a narrow, personal truth, not a logical one.

Now, to the features of the budget. Top of the list was the changes to tax. The top 1% earning over £150,000 annually are to pay less in income tax, with the top rate reduced from 50% to 45%. Ed Miliband lashed back at the government front bench, openly mocking how much they would personally benefit from this change in tax brackets – hilarious to watch. “Same. Old. Tories” he cried, from a (rare yet) brilliant performance at the dispatch box. Whilst the government defend this regressive move with a progressive increase in the personal allowance (up to £9,205), they have offset the cost of this increase by reducing the income threshold in qualifying for the 40% tax rate, meaning several thousand of the ‘squeezed middle’ will pay more in tax. Yes the Chancellor promises to close tax avoidance loopholes. Valiant. But he lacks common sense: if you’re rich enough to attempt tax avoidance in the first place, you’ll be wealthy enough to hire top accountants to find other loops. Whoops.

There were of course measures to stimulate growth on a micro level. There are new ‘enterprise zones’ to be set up, and low interest rates to be passed on to small businesses via the National Loan Guarantee Scheme. UK export finance is to be expanded, blah blah blah… To be honest they’re not the headline-grabbers. Things like the “granny tax” are. Described by journalist Ian Cowie as an aspect of the budget to “bash baby-boomers”, it will effectively see pensioners pay £3.3bn more tax annually, with a freeze on age-related allowances. Poor granny.

And then there’s the change to the Sunday trading regulations. A temporary alleviation of the Sunday trading laws over the 8 weeks of the Olympics sounds sensible enough. Maximise the revenues generated from the millions of tourists arriving this summer, surely. True. And whilst there is no doubt that Sunday regulations will return after the end of the Games, I can’t help but feel uneasy about it. The Tories have sought an end to the restrictions for years, wanting to maximise UK trading hours. What’s to stop them using the likely success of these 8 weeks to vouch for an end to the culture of Sunday as a day of rest, of family? If they ever gain a majority in government again, watch this space.

Leader of the Opposition Ed Miliband was kind when he labelled Osborne’s plans as the “millionaires budget”. Millionaires and billionaires alike will see themselves with more cash-flow, whilst the majority will be even more cash-strapped.

No wonder we all want to be billionaires right about now.

So fucking bad.

For full coverage of the Budget 2012, I reccomend the BBC: ‘as it happened’.

2012
03/24
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
Economics
TAGS








2 comments

David Miliband.

The lecture hall was packed out half an hour before he arrived.

Everybody was excited (whether about Mr. Miliband or the free Domino’s pizzas all week, I’m not sure).

And then he arrived.

Everybody applauded him – as though his presence commanded it. Wearing a dark grey suit and a sharp purple tie, he chose to sit on the table rather than the chair; engineered to make him seem familiar perhaps, or maybe just a reflection of his less formal role in politics today. Who cares. The hour and a half session with the former foreign secretary began immediately, starting with a structured debate with Professor Andrew Russell, touching on domestic, European, and finally international issues. However it was the latter of these that David Miliband seemed most keen to engage with.

He outlined what he saw as the four major changes occurring in the world today:

1) Moving from resource plenty to resource scarcity. Whilst this is born out of the economic crisis and no doubt his role as Environment Secretary, it is something very real that we are all facing. From higher energy prices to consumerism on steroids, we haven’t been living sustainably – and we know it.

2) A huge shift in power between government and the people – the “civilian surge”. The rise of the internet and new technologies have allowed social movements to become organised, cohesive and flourish worldwide. This has obvious references to the Arab Spring and the protests in Moscow, but holds far wider implications. It has and will continue to change the way we do democracy; the rise of government e-petitions gives greater voice to the people, and media coverage of movements like Occupy are helping to keep governments in check. However, this “civilian surge” as David Miliband put it no doubt brings its problems too. Much of the old guard across Africa, the Middle East and Eastern Europe will stop at nothing to oppress it – which could see some parts in the world mired in bloodshed. Whilst recent movements like Kony2012 are admirable, they must watch their footing in handling their political strategy.

3) The surge of Muslim democracy. Pakistan and Indonesia already provide two Islamic powerhouses in Asia, with Turkey playing it’s role between the Middle East and Europe. Of course, the Arab spring has its part – and with political Islam rising, the Western world must not hide behind Islamophobia, but rather embrace dialogue and political relationships with these states.

4) The shift of economic power from the West to the East. This has long been foretold – however its pace has been unprecedented. It is the fastest shift in economic power the world has ever seen. That sentence alone encompasses the magnitude of change the world is going through, and how the West, Europe and Britain must adapt. There is no point in trying to punch above our clout any more; the likes of Thatcher and Reagan were the last generation who could get away with it.

It definitely set the tone for questions on international affairs. The Q&A kicked off with talks on Syrian intervention, moving on to the Israeli-Palestinian issue, solvency problems in Greece and a critique of Blair’s vision of being the ‘bridge’ between the USA and Europe. And then, right at the end, I got to ask my question.

“Earlier, you said that the Israeli-Palestinian issue was the biggest diplomatic failure of the last 50 years. If diplomacy is so prone to failing in the region, how soon will it be before Israel goes to war with Iran?”

Rather than dance around the question as is increasingly usual with politicians, he was refreshingly direct.

He was convinced that there isn’t a majority chance of war. But the real high-risk danger was, in his words, “sleepwalking into war”. The inference here is uninspiring diplomacy. With both sides on their guard and fallible politicians surrounding the situation, without clear, honest, rational talks, there is a real danger of sliding towards another war, which can not be accepted. Whilst he outlined Iran’s destabilising effect in the region, he understood the difficulty of their position; stepping down on their nuclear programme could create political humiliation for President Ahmadi-Nejad, and may put them on the backfoot in the region. David Miliband even said one of his greatest regrets as Foreign Secretary was not visiting Iran and establishing better relations when he had the chance.

With that, the Q&A session was over. I left with a smile on my face. I’d always wanted to meet David Miliband – irrespective of the sibling rivalry or ‘Blairite’ tags, I always thought he was a brilliant politician. The manner in which he held himself showed that he still had it; being away from frontline politics hadn’t hampered his charisma, charm and short wit. And he didn’t even ‘umm’ or ‘err’ once.

God, I wish he was Prime Minister.

2012
03/08
CATEGORY
British News & Politics
Economics
World News
TAGS







Leave a comment

The battle to come second to Obama

The Republican Party base is in disarray.

Many thought they would rally behind the wealthy Mitt Romney; not an ideal candidate by a long shot, but the most likely to win. The major issue with that has been an internal divide. Not only does Romney’s Mormon beliefs unsettle the conservative Christians of the Republican Party, but his move to the left of the party (in an attempt to appeal to the middle ground) is counter-intuitive to the increasingly right-wing Republican base, especially following the rise of the Tea Party. Having endorsed a higher federal minimum wage (from $7.25p/h to being indexed with inflation), not only is he seen as too liberal, but also too indulgent of his own image; he’s trying to drop the ‘fat cat’ portrayal of himself, having been embrioiled in a tax evasion frenzy just months ago. It’s clear to see why the party base don’t trust him.

It is for these reasons that a candidate like the Catholic Rick Santorum – an anti-abortion, anti-contraception and anti-gay marriage politician – has been giving Mitt Romney a run for his money. Another odd turn to the race was Newt Gingrich winning the South Carolina Republican primary in mid-January. It was marauded as cementing his position in the race – he was the quirky underdog who (was wrongly seen to have) had the potential to make the big-time. In the end his disorganised, sporadic character came back to bite him. He’s all but out of the race.

And what of the other guy, Ron Paul? His fight in the race has been more of a run outside the ring. It’s safe to say he won’t be the next President of the United States.

And so amongst this dogfight, the bullish Mitt Romney will surely win the Republican ticket to the White House. His wins yesterday in the Arizona and Michigan primaries have given desperately needed momentum to his once faltering campaign. His experience of the race – having fought and lost to McCain in 2008 – will be invaluable this time around. His significant support from the Super-Pacs have already destroyed Newt Gingrich, and will no doubt work their magic on his other opponents. They’re an absurd tool in US politics – but seem to serve Romney rather well. His own personal fortune – estimated at over $200 million – will ensure money is not an issue in his campaign; a luxury the others cannot afford.

Even so, Super Tuesday on March 6th should be an interesting affair. 10 states will vote for their Republican candidate for office – and who knows, maybe I’ll be proven wrong; maybe this race has yet more twists and turns to come.

But one thing’s for sure: none of the Republican candidates will be good enough to stand against Obama. The race card may be wearing thin this time around, but Mr. Barack Obama has something nobody else has: he was the President that killed their nation’s Public Enemy No. 1 – Osama bin Laden. He will go down in the history books as one of the greatest American Presidents for that fact alone. And the American people will not forget this feat. In gratitude, they are bound to grant him a second term.

Besides, ‘President Barack Obama’ has a nicer ring to it.

2012
02/29
CATEGORY
World News
TAGS









Leave a comment