Can Sarah Palin be good for women?

I’ve picked up, via CIF America, on a very interesting blog compiled with material from women, both Democrat and Republican from across America called Women Against Sarah Palin. Apparently, to my great relief, Sarah Palin does not represent the every day ‘Hockey Mom’ that she says that she does. Phew! Although I’m still not sure what a ‘Hockey Mom’ is and I know that’s only because I haven’t been paying proper attention.

I have struggled to describe my feelings about Sarah Palin being selected to join McCain on the Republican ticket. What is not surprising is that she and I agree on practically nothing, apart from what constitutes a flattering pair of glasses. Her glasses may end up being the most popular thing about her.

So, I was never going to find much common ground with the anti-choice, pseudo feminist (boy, is she suffering from false consciousness!!) Republican VP choice. No, Sireee!

But, my real interest is not really in the lack of common political ground that she and I share but in the impact that a serious female vice presidential candidate will have on women, women in politics and any increase in women’s power.

Personally, a candidate being a woman has never been enough to secure my vote; she still has to be good enough. I am aware, though, that what and who I might consider the ‘best’ candidate and the ‘good enough’ candidate may be different from other people’s views. I suspect that my selection criteria are not all that traditional.

And I still think, on any set of criteria, it is far too easy for a mediocre man to win over a good woman in politics. It is my experience in work and politics that you have to work much harder and smarter to be taken seriously as a woman than you do as a man. I long for the day when there as many mediocre women in politics and boardrooms as there are men – then we will know we have real equality!

And even before you get to the point of trying to be taken seriously, there are still many de facto barriers to entry and participation and, let’s face it, good old fashioned prejudice. This ensures that we only attract and put a tiny proportion of the talented women out there into positions of real power. We are much better at discerning talented men from mediocre men than we are discerning talented women from mediocre men.

But would having a female VP be good for women in general? Would her breaking the glass ceiling as a serious VP candidate be good? In the same way that I believe Hillary being the first serious candidate for presidential nomination, has been good for women? In the way that Condoleezza Rice going around the world frowning at male presidents and leaders from all over the world has provided a role model for young black women? Whatever their politics, you have to admit that just having them on, doing their stuff on the TV in the background must impact the way people think about women’s abilities, surely?

Or would the fact that she has been pulled in as a vapid symbol, lacking in experience, knowledge and so lacking in any real comprehension of the complexities of life that she looks for her answers in religious dogma? And like Margaret Thatcher, it is perfectly possible for a woman in power to be no friend of other women. I was worried that because she is one of the most high profile women in the world all her personal failings would be translated into women’s failings, using the same logic as this rather brilliant cartoon from xkcd! (via Feministing)

This has been my major concern. Because she is not good enough, because she is a sort of anti-role model, I’m terrified that all women will be tarred with her brush.

And then I have also struggled with some of the sexism that has been meted out to her. Sexism that is flung at her may just stick on us all. Each time one woman suffers from sexism, we all do; whatever side we’re on.

So, ‘consternation’ is how I would best describe my feelings about Sarah Palin. One of the contributors to the women against Sarah Palin blog says:

“I am all about women stepping forward and taking our rightful place among the leadership of this great nation. However, not this woman, not this time”.

But surely, if we want women in power, we have to accept that we won’t always get to choose our favourite women, like when democracies choose governments and political parties that we ourselves wouldn’t choose? You can’t just throw out democracy because you don’t like the choices being made and perhaps you can’t just decide to wait for women to be in power until one comes along that you can agree with.

Urgh! I am in a dilemma and in a bind and what I really want to know is what sort of heuristic is Sarah Palin being (see the talented Mr Stockley for an explanation of that one!).

What will, come November 5^th, whether she is in the White House or not, be the gut feeling that Sarah Palin’s candidacy speaks to, the short cut that she helps us make?

Does the voter who does not have the time or inclination to sit down and look at policies, or will young people only just starting to become politically aware, look at her and think that it is reasonable and normal for women to be in positions of power and if she can do it so, then so can any woman.

Or, will the most memorable thing about the first serious female VP candidate be that is she a token woman only there because of her ability to procreate and still look good and the Republican’s cynical ploy to pick up the female voters who wanted Hillary to be the first woman president in the US? Will people think that we’d be better off with a more experienced man? Does she undermine not only women’s candidacy but also their role as voters?

What's happening with the Party Reform Commission?

aka the Bones commission: do any of my fellow Lib Dems know?

My undestanding is that they were going to report after the May elections and whilst I know there has been some additional consultation going on with local parties, is there an updated timetable?

Or did we decide to delay the strategic reform required to ensure a step change in our electoral success, to fight 2 by elections on a purely tactical basis? (Although if someone could tell me what the tactical advantage was, that'd be great). Maybe I should just go and find a wall to hit my head against.

Just to put it in perspective, the costs of just one by election could have been invested in employing a full time (maybe even two, depending on the level of experience that you want) organisational change professional for a year and you could implement the commissions findings (whatever they are) in a fraction of the time and actually enable allow us to deliver on Nick's objectives of 150 MPs within 2 elections.

Waiting

So, it looks like the blogosphere is calling it for Boris. How very depressing! All I can say is that I'm glad I'm not Labour...because not only have they lost the country, it looks like they've lost London. Not just unfortunate but rather careless, wouldn't you say?

So, I'm here, at the Sky News studio dropped off a little early by the car and just trying to contemplate what a potential Tory resurgence will feel like, because make no mistake if Boris wins tonight like everybody thinks he will it is far more significant for the Tories than a Livingstone win would have been for Labour. The last time the Tories put Labour out of power was in 1979. I remember it well because it was also the day I lost my red mickey mouse watch.

Still, it could have been worse as we, yes, we the Lib Dems did a lot better than expected; as I write we've got 29 extra councillors and depending on who you ask we have maintained or increased our vote share. Not bad and probably quite irritating for the other two parties who would probably have wanted to squeeze us out of existence. Well, they didn't! Ha! And we've got back Sheffield!

Back on Sky.com News tonight...

I'm back on Sky.com News tonight with two different bloggers this time: Shane Greer and Jag Singh. We're going to be covering the local election results and the producers are hoping that the Mayor and London Assembly election results are going to be annouced whilst we're on air.

As I have one of the world's most expressive faces ever it will be really easy to tell what I think before I get close to opening my mouth: relief, joy or absolute horror!

I've been trying to pull myself together from a feeling of impending doom for London and write a post, but I'm struggling. It's not just the thought of Boris in charge, it's all those really smug Tories out and about again. Gah!

The democratic case for Brian

My piece for Our Kingdom making the democratic case for Brian can be found here. It looks like Boris is not the only Tory that can't count, 'cos I swear I was asked to do a piece 300 words long!!

The Tories rated Brian above Boris as well

Just thought I'd bring this little article to your attention: apparently the Tories would have chosen the excellent Brian Paddick as their Mayoral Candidate as well.

"Mr Paddick, a former senior Metropolitan Police officer, sent David Cameron an email asking if speculation that the Tories wanted him to be their man was true. The Tory leader quickly dispatched Francis Maude, a Shadow Cabinet member, for talks."They promised me the Earth, all the money I could spend and professional back-up," said Mr Pad dick"

Just one little problem he was already a Liberal Democrat! Ha!

This goes to prove that the Tories were desperate when they picked Boris and our now playing a very cynical game of celebrity politics with our £11billion London budget. No, they're very far from being the party that you would trust with you're money.

So, if you want a really good first choice candidate running London then place Brian as your first preference tomorrow.

Don't forget to vote for Lib Dems in the London Assembly election to and keep the BNP out.

Sitting next to Rory Bremner

Ha! Well, that was a surreal experience sandwiched between Rory Bremner and Iain Dale on TV. He's rather funny that Rory Bremner.

I'm just back from the Sky News Unplugged session after having been a 'pundit' at the last Mayoral Hustings. My back is killing from spending hours perched on a bar stool and I have a massive headache but over all it was great fun.

I thought Brian Paddick had his best hustings yet and I was very proud of him. And apparently, my Mum's proud of me.

As I got only four hours sleep last night (dog is poorly) I'm off to bed but will give a more reasoned (and better spelt) review of the whole evening on the train to Leeds tomorow morning!

Should Brian Paddick express his second preference?

There are cries all over the place for Brian Paddick to come out and name his second preference and recommend the way all good thinking Lib Dem voters should vote. In fact, it has been claimed that it our duty and that our London MPs and Brian are failing in that duty if they do not recommend a second preference to us Lib Dem activists, members and voters. After all Sian Berry has done it for Ken and the BNP have come out for Boris.

Ha! Shows how much they know about the Liberal Democrats! The clue is in the name; we are a democratic party we don’t do top down dictates! Blimey, I can just imagine now the barney if one of our MPs came out for Ken or for Boris. It is fair to say that there are those like myself who cannot countenance Boris the Mayor who will therefore hold their nose and vote for Ken. There are those who feel Boris is the more liberal and will go for him (obviously ignoring the fact that his lack of experience will give him precious opportunity to act on any of this perceived liberalism – but frankly that’s their prerogative). And there have been plenty of people who have decided that they cannot bring themselves to vote for either and won’t use their preference; personally I feel that is a bit of a cop out.

For me it is very disappointing that my second preference places me between a rock and a hard place and I am having to go for the least worse rather than a second best; but there you go. But I am not the candidate.

I don’t think Brian should be expressing a second preference precisely because he is the candidate. Apart form the fact (see above) that it wouldn’t work as Liberal Democrats don’t like being told what to do, anti-establishment peeps that we are, it would also blow any hopes that Brian would have of pulling the discussion away from the Ken & Boris show and over to the very sensible things that he and the Lib Dems are saying about what London needs.

Sian Berry made a tactical error when she went into a pact with Ken; she made her and her message an irrelevance. I think the Greens will lose votes not only for the mayoralty but in the London Assembly as well.

This race has been very much one of personalities and being from the third party is a pretty poor place to start. To express a preference would be give up on any chance to make a difference and make the race even more of the two horse race that the media wants it to be.

London Debate Unplugged on Sky News

The last and largest hustings for London Mayor the London Debate Unplugged will be broadcast by Sky News on Monday evening. It will of course include the three front runners: Ken, Boris and our very own Brian Paddick.

Much more importantly though, I will be taking part in the 'unplugged' part of the programme, as part of a panel of expert bloggers. I will be joined by Iain Dale and Alex Hilton aka Recess Monkey. The first part of the programme at 7.30pm will take part both on line and be broadcast on Sky News, then the debate will start and we'll be online during the add breaks to give our insight. Then for an hour after the debate finishes there'll be a big discussion programme, online, where the three 'experts' will be joined by both members of the various campaign teams and the audience.

I'm off to town this afternoon to buy a new outfit; as I have discovered in the last 24 hours that I have nothing suitable to wear for a trip to Sky News. Honest, it's not an excuse for a shop at all.

In response to Jeremy's call to sacrifice London...aaargh!!!

Jeremy Hargreaves in his blog suggests that 2 years of Boris in charge of London will be enough to scare the country in the general election off the Tories forever; unfortunately the comments aren’t working on his blog so I can’t tell him what I think of that idea! So, I’m going to have to post my response here:

So, Jeremy, the thing is, I don't think Boris Johnson would act as a vaccination.

One of the things about Boris is that he has a distinct 'Boris' brand which is separate from the Conservatives. The Tories knew this when they chose him; it's similar to Ken's brand which is distinct from Labour.

This distinct brand means that Boris is far more attractive to Londoners than the Tories would be.

A Boris win would allow the Tories to capitalise on that heading to the General election, though.

I think Boris will screw up London because he is incompetent and inexperienced; but I’m not sure that this will come through in the 2 years between a Boris win in London in 2008 and a General election in 2010, firstly, because Boris will have a honeymoon period and, secondly, because it normally takes a couple of years for things to unravel.

In the event that he has no honeymoon period and his incompetence is shown up early enough to impact the General Election the Tories will be in a good position to distance themselves from him. Boris isn’t using the Tory brand to get into power and therefore the Tory brand will not be so contaminated by his failure as you may hope.

A win for Ken; well I don’t think that’s going to have any impact on Labour’s electoral chances.

Another reason why encouraging Boris Johnson is a really, really bad idea...

Sorry to keep on about this but I’m hoping this little comment from Iain Dale’s blog (not him but one of his commenters, Danvers Baillieu)shines some light on why giving any vote for Boris is still a really, really bad idea; even if the fact that he’s incompetent, pointed out yesterday, doesn’t persuade you:

"I have just spent an hour or so handing out "Back Boris" oyster card holders outside Bank tube station. In all my years of campaigning, I have never seen such a positive response for a candidate. The card holders flew out of my (and the other volunteers') hands so fast we had to call to HQ for additional supplies. I realise that the centre of the City is not exactly enemy territory for Boris, but I still got the strong feeling that he is a popular front runner. After 11 years in the political wilderness, on 1 May Boris will show that the Conservatives are back."

Do you see that bit at the end there? The bit about the Conservatives being back? So, that’s the other really, really horrific thing about giving your second preference vote (or God forbid, your first; not that I’m religious, but you might be) to Boris Johnson.

Do we really want to give the Tories this momentum?

I’m pretty sure that the Tories know he’s an incompetent too. They’re just happy to let his media persona do some work for them for once and sacrifice London so that they can build up momentum for the General Election. After all, there’ll be plenty of them ready to pull his puppet strings. And to those (thankfully now receding proportionately in the Lib Dem Voice poll) who think it might be a jolly wheeze to place your second vote for Boris, and then just think about what a boost this would give the Tories.

If the Tories get a comfortable majority in a General Election off the back of a win in London, not only could some of that majority be at the expense of Lib Dem MPs, but we can say bye-bye to electoral reform any time in the near future.

No votes are wasted, even second ones. I know that the best vote is a vote for Brian Paddick but it seems we still have a FPTP mentality; the second vote is still there to be used and not ignored or frittered away in a fit of hubris.

My only hope is that, given that Mr Baillieu was giving out the oyster card holders at Bank, many of the workers were commuters living outside of London or that they didn’t know who was on the oyster card holder and were just happy to get a new one. Personally, I think the oyster card holder from Mulberry is far more chic!

Why Boris Johnson is a really, really bad idea.

Boris Johnson terrifies me. Boris Johnson terrifies me because if he gets into power he will ruin our fantastic City.

So, it is with horror and disbelief that I see the polls that put Boris ahead and even on Lib Dem Voice so many people are putting Boris as their second preference; although perhaps they’re the ones that don’t actually live in London and so won’t have to live with so many of the consequences!

For sure, there is much to be done; our roads are still too congested, our public transport too expensive and inefficiently run, people are afraid of crime and we have teenagers killing each other with knives and guns; but it is still one of the best cities in the world to live in. I am so, so proud of being a Londoner and I reckon we knock the socks off all our great city rivals such as Paris, Berlin and New York.

We need a Mayor who is capable, who has a passion not just for power but running things and changing them where they have to be changed.

Nothing, nothing I have so far seen, in this man Boris Johnson, gives me any indication that he could do anything more than make a joke out of the job. No, really; because unless presenting ‘Have I got news for you?’ is the qualification required to run the best capital city in the world, as I’ve not seen him do anything else!

And he proved this on Newsnight, last night, as Lynne Featherstone so adroitly points out. Boris once more showed us that this is just an exercise in vanity for him; that he is so much more interested in just being someone than doing anything. Lynne points out:

“Boris was appalling - and Paxman nailed him on his waffle approach by asking him for a figure for something he was proposing re-replacing bendy buses. Boris was baffled. Boris was bamboozled. But Boris didn't answer the question. Boris was exposed as not knowing a thing really about bus costs.”

And this is the thing: if you are capable, if you are experienced at actually running things and you are really interested in something then understanding the costs of what you wanted to do is easy. It trips off your tongue; you have rehearsed all the arguments in favour of something because you have rehearsed them with yourself. You have thought it through.

I am, in my professional life a Projects & Programme Manager. I am responsible for spending millions pounds of my clients’ money and (obviously) ensuring that they either save as much or are able to bring in much, much more extra revenue as a result of the changes that I and my teams will make in their business and organisations. I can tell you right now, how much money I have spent, how much money I am going to spend, how much I should have spent and how much the extra thing that the MD asked us to do actually cost. I know how much money we’re going to save or earn, what that relies on, why it might not happen. I know all that stuff. Off by heart, without looking. If you woke me up at three in the morning and I was still half asleep I’d probably be able to give you that information before I could tell you my name. Or your name*.

I know, with passion, what the most important issues are, what the risks are and why we’re doing what we’re doing. Of course I do; for somebody charging what I do, you would expect no less. Indeed, if you wanted to employ someone for the job of spending millions of pounds on behalf of your organisation you’d probably look for a CV that proved they had done that sort of thing before, with some evidence of successful outcome.

Well, step forward Brian Paddick (tick), who has managed millions of pounds worth of policing and been so successful in Lambeth that when he left there was a grass roots campaign to bring him back – he made a difference, a positive difference. When asked about dealing with gun crime last night he was passionate and fluent in his response.

And even, though I have to hold my nose as I say this, step forward Ken Livingstone (tick). I don’t like Ken, I don’t like the company he keeps, the way he wastes money, the permanent self promotion that he undertakes and the dodgy deals and cronies that he keeps in work. But I have to concede that, although he has usually nicked the ideas of the Lib Dem Group at GLA, he can at least implement change and run a city. Not as well as I would like, but he has not been the disaster I thought he would be eight years ago (there, I can stop holding my breath now).

But Boris Johnson? Nothing, nada…no experience and, it looks pretty clear to me, no interest in and passion for running or doing anything. Is the mayoralty a Tory compensation prize for a man with the delusion that he could’ve have been something? You see, I don’t think Boris is stupid; I’m sure the man is very clever, writes a good column and even I concede that he can be amusing on telly; but he does not have the competence to be the Mayor of London. Frankly I wouldn’t employ Boris to answer the bleeding phone in my company, let alone run the bloody thing.

And so, I just do not understand why so many people would have Boris as their first or second choice on May 1^st.

If you care anything about London and the people who live and work in it, you will not put a cross anywhere near the name of Boris Johnson. Put your first choice for Brian Paddick, he is undoubtedly the best candidate; but whatever else you do, don’t let Boris Johnson ruin our beautiful, wonderful, vibrant city!

*Although, to be fair, if you woke me up to ask me that sort of stuff at three in the morning, you may no longer need a name as I may be tempted to commit some sort of ‘cide’ on you.