|
Campaign analysis: Wednesday April 27
Daniel Forman's daily diary of the election campaign.
Wednesday April 27, 11:48am
It's getting personal. Having exhausted the issues Michael Howard and Tony Blair have little left to attack but each other.
There is no doubt the Conservatives have gone in harder on "Mr Blair" - explicitly characterising him as a "liar" - but don't believe the prime minister's line that he will not resort to such tactics.
Labour has been heavily targeting Howard since the day he was elected Tory leader in 2003. His record in office, Ann Widdecombe's "something of the night about him" attack and his image have all been exploited.
The high (or low) point of this assault was the infamous poster campaign comparing him to a pig and hypnotist, prompting complaints about not-so-subtle anti-Semitism, even if it was not intentional.
The closing days of the race will also see further jibes, including a "nightmare on Howard Street" short film.
But alongside this advertising strategy he authorised, Blair will keep talking about the issues, specifically education, the economy and health, even though there are few new announcements now.
He believes a simple comparison of Labour and Tory policies will come down in favour of his plans in most voters' minds if the choice can be "crystallised" for them.
Set piece speeches, such as today's on education, will also show a contrast with Howard's direct, personal abuse of him.
The problem for the Conservatives is that while their campaign on Blair's economy with the truth, particularly when linked to Iraq, has resonance, personalising their strategy only puts the spotlight on Howard.
Both because of necessity (the unavailability of shadow Cabinet colleagues and lack of big hitters) and design (the need to project him as a potential prime minister) he has run a very presidential campaign.
Unfortunately he is one of the few politicians able to match Blair in the unpopularity stakes.
A choice of two leaders gets the Tories little further than a choice of two policy platforms and polls at least show the public respect Blair as a strong leader, even if they no longer like him.
The Liberal Democrats do have a figurehead who inspires genuine affection. But because Charles Kennedy is not seen as a normal politician he is neither seen as a potential PM.
In typical Lib Dem style he also refuses to be drawn on the "L" word, preferring instead to point to Blair's inconsistencies on Iraq without getting too negative or personal, despite the fact that he is best placed to exploit them.
It is a perfect example of the Kennedy paradox that so frustrates his colleagues at times: Popular because he is nice but unable to break through for the same reason.
However the more chunks Blair and Howard take out of each other, the shinier his halo will glow.
|
