It was inevitable that following the re-election of Mr Obama, met with gleeful whoops of delight from team Cameron that No 10 insiders would draw comparisons between their man and US President.
But
yesterday Mr Cameron’s right hand man, Chancellor George Osborne has picked up
this argument and declared that the party can win the next election by a
mixture of economic toughness and social liberalism.
And
it is easy to see, why Mr Osborne might think this. Messers Cameron and Obama,
both want to lead from the centre. They both inherited an economy in serious
trouble with a debt mountain and are desperately trying to turn it around. Both
lack a strong sense of ideology. In Mr Obama's case this is partly due to his
academic background and approach to politics and in Mr Cameron's case, the
naked pragmatic pursuit of power. Both have so far failed to deliver sustained
growth.
And
finally both face opponents who have failed to connect with the ordinary
voters.
Team
Cameron believe that the criticisms of Mitt Romney, wooden, remote and odd,
apply to Ed Miliband. It certainly is true that Mr Miliband is seen by many
voters as odd, not the sort of person you would want to have a drink with at a
pub as one commentator said.
But
Labour are very conscious of this attack line, hence the "no notes"
speech by the Labour Leader at their Conference and attempts to portray him as
just an 'ordinary guy' as Tony Blair might have put it.
It
is at this point that the rest of the tenuous similarities end.
To
start with, unlike the President who led in virtually every national poll, Mr
Cameron has trailed in every major poll this year by around 10 per cent. And
this lead has been amassed by the PM’s opponent in an electoral system that is
completely different to the US and biased towards Labour. Compounding this lead
is the increasing difficultly that the Conservative Party is having in raising
funds. By contrast both the Republicans and Democrats raised and spent billions
of dollars in the most expensive election in US history. And the fantastic
amounts spent by each party were further bolstered by various lobby groups and
super PACs.
Secondly
and most importantly, while Mr Obama was seen as in touch with ordinary voters
and their concerns, Mr Cameron is seen as out of touch. Looking at the break
down of who backed Mr Obama, he won a majority of the ethnic votes, including
94 per cent of the African American voters and crucially for states like
Florida, a clear majority of the Hispanic vote, 70 per cent to 30 per cent.
This small ‘C’ conservative group continue to favour the Democrats over the
Republicans.
Mr
Obama also won a majority of votes amongst women a lead of between 11-12 per
cent which rose to 38 per cent amongst unmarried women. He also won amongst
those aged 44 or below, winning 52 per cent of those aged 30-44 and 60 per cent
of those aged 18-29 and did well amongst blue collar voters.
Mr
Cameron, by contrast, does not enjoy such popularity among any of these groups.
He is seen as too rich and upper class by many voters. More damagingly the PM
he is increasingly seen as aloof and uncaring. This is why Nadine Dorries
withering attack on Mr Cameron, describing him as an arrogant posh boy who
doesn't know the cost of a pint of milk, was so devastating and refuses to go
away.
Thirdly
the decline of politics in the UK - Unlike our cousins across the pond we have
ditched the deference once showed to those in high office, or seeking high
office. Whereas once we treated our leaders with the up most respect, now we
treat them with mild contempt at best and outright hostility at worst.
So
cynicism towards politicians is increasingly with millions of ordinary people
voting with their feet and deciding not to engage in a system that is seen as
irrelevant or choosing not vote. And this depressing view has only worsened
following a succession of scandals on expenses, sexual misdemeanours and
dubious behaviour.
At
the same time politics is seen as less relevant to people. Decision making on a
how range of issues along with how taxpayers money is spent has become more
remote. This is not just due to the rise of the quangocracy and bureaucratic
red tape, but also a genuine failure of our political leaders to inspire voters
with big ideas, take decisions and get them implemented - A casing point being
the PM’s Big Society policy.
When
I grew up, in the 1980s there was a clear ideological divide with a political
discourse that really mattered. Today there is just a hair’s breadth between
the parties on a range of issues, hence the unedifying scramble by David
Cameron to be the Heir to Blair and Ed Miliband’s desperate attempt to capture
the One Nation title.
So
for these reasons the mass rallies we have enjoyed watching on our TVs, stadia
filled with party activists, cheering on the political stars of their party, is
never going to happen in the UK.
And
while the Americans hold huge show case events all the British parties struggle
to fill their annual conferences. Just look at party membership in this
country. In 1950 the Conservative Party had 2.8 million members, today,
according to report in the media, less than 130,000. The Labour Party has seen
a similar if less dramatic fall falling from 1 million members in 1950 to
roughly 185,000 today.
And
as for the Lib Dems, some reports say their membership has fallen to just
50,000. Is it any wonder that some speeches at their conference were listen to
by more journalist and lobbyists than party members.
Contrast
with the dynamic force of the caravan club, which has nearly half a million
members, or twice as many members as all the political parties put together.
Finally,
President Obama, has a political narrative, a vision that he was successful in
selling to the American public. Unfortunately this is something that is
completely absent from the PM’s campaign. “Not Red Ed” is not a narrative,
neither are isolated policies successes like reform of schools and the welfare
system, no matter how popular they are.
So
No 10 and Mr Osborne must not take any comfort from the President’s
re-election, because Mr Cameron is no Obama, and the UK is not the
US.
