Those people who hate Tony Blair have probably already decided that he isn't going to get their vote. The voters that the Conservative Party still needs to attract are those who have as many reservations about Michael Howard as they have about Labour's leader. As the Tories reflect on this difficulty they would do well to avoid the example of The Daily Mail. Today it screamed:
"Blair's credibility blown to shreds by bombshell leak of Attorney General's grave doubts over the legality of Iraq invasion."
and:
"Blair lied and lied again."
and:
"This will stain Blair for ever."
This kind of language isn't going to do anything to convince floating voters to support the Conservatives. Yes, The Mail is a successful newspaper but you could treble its circulation total and still not have enough people to elect a Tory government.
Whatever you may think about the LibDems, their rhetorical tone is nearly always perfectly-pitched. When they express their opposition to something they do so more in sorrow than anger. They don't trigger-happily attribute bad motives to people. They're not the sort of people who shout their views at you in the pub. In trying to garner anti-war votes they are so much better placed than the Conservatives who (rightly) supported the Iraqi stage of the GWOT (global war on terror).
But if the LibDems are very different from The Mail in tone, they share the Mail's inclination to appease dictators like Saddam. Today The Mail concluded:
"If Blair had told the truth about the legal reservations, it is very possible that Parliament would never have voted for war. The lives of 86 British troops and tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians might not have been lost."
Those 86 British soldiers died in a great cause. They helped bring democracy to a despotic corner of the world. They helped to liberate 25 million people and ridded the world of a regime that was funding terrorists and had the capacity to supply terrible weaponry to other terrorists.
Thousands of Iraqis have tragically died since Saddam was toppled but many, many more died under his dictatorship and many, many more would have been killed if the LibDems and The Mail had succeeded in stopping 'Operation Iraqi Freedom'.
The Daily Mail bills itself as a family newspaper and consistently gives space to pro-life and pro-family views (alongside its horoscopes and intrusive coverage of private lives). In climbing into bed with the LibDems on the Iraq war the newspaper has chosen the most unlikely of companions. In its views* on church schools, gay adoption, prostitution, sex shops and cannabis the LibDems stand for so much that the Mail despises. The danger for the Mail (and the Tories) is that the overwhelming beneficiary of any extended discussion of Iraq will be the LibDems. The Mail's campaign on Iraq may be helping to elect a siginificant band of LibDem MPs and their liberal left policies.
Comments