WAS VINCE TOO CONVINCING?

My story of last week was the response of senior Tories to the “Chancellor Show” when Messrs. Darling, Osborne and Cable debated the economy. They phone in infuriated allegedly that Vince was getting too much audience applause.
That’s like Mars complaining that Cadburys (now Kraft) is too popular or that Binns Minor got more marks in Maths than our grandson – a nasty example of Marxism.
The truth is none of the debaters was bad, that the debate, apart from one “wait till I get you outside” scowl from George Osborne, was courteous and well argued.
But on the night Vince got the applause because he was funnier, more interesting and thought better on his feet.
Had there been a job to get then Vince Cable would have got it.
So what did these senior Tories think they were playing at and why, in passing, are they so convinced that being unpleasant is a vote winner?
They have appointed M & C Saatchi “to work alongside incumbent” Euro RSCG assuring the latter this does not impinge on their relationship one whit – a bit like me saying to wife that I have asked the lovely Martina De Groot to share the marital bed because “we need all the flesh we can get at present and in no way does this impact on our marriage”.
And the Saatchi agency is there to stick it on the Labour Party. As we all know negative, attacking advertising always works (“Heinz Baked Beans could cause stomach upsets” claim Crosse and Blackwell; “Because it gives you acne” – a Clarins ad. attacking L’Oreal; “Would you trust a car Sarkozy loves?” – a Ford ad. attacking Renault).
But if the public seems not to like you very much maybe bullying is your only recourse.
It’s not fair is it?
 
Richard's Website