So, the Liberal lads are learners. They have both noted that Cameron put on some horrible neckwear to catch attention when campaigning for party leadership. However neither of them have yet shown that they are fast enough on their feet and weighty enough in the fist to get the other parties off balance.

Come to think of it, I had the same question about Cameron until his Conference speech; and that still has the flavour of a possible one-off.

Today’s links were put together by Chris Huhne’s tie; after last night’s performance, this is the only work it can get.

Heh!
Nice round-up.

It was substance versus style, Clegg looked better and yes is the LibDem answer to Cameron (wonder if Camp David are concerned about that?), but Huhne came accross as more detailed with policy although a little bit on the wonkery side I thought.

Looking forward, it’s good to see the party looking like they’re really ready to get back in the game after the long drift post Kennedy. That can only be a good thing for British politics.

I wonder who’s watching this with more interest Brown or Cameron?

[…] seem to have been somewhere between a win for Huhne or a score draw, as the (relatively impartial) Liberal Conspiracy summary seems to […]

Why did you link “Norfolk Blogger”? I first came across that “ho ho ho” story somewhere else, which I don’t have time to find again right now, that makes it clear it’s a lie, as are most of those “political correctness gone mad” stories. Like E.U. straight banana stories, 99% of them are made up, either because somebody can’t be bothered to look for real news or to attack anti-oppression activists / minority groups / the E.U. or somebody else the writer has it in for; and propagated by people who can’t be bothered to check their sources.

[…] Clegg recovered well in the second half. In the interests of balance though, I have to agree with Aaron Heath at Liberal Conspiracy: Huhne’s tie should be tried at the Hague for crimes against […]

I think they were ill-advised at best to even go down the route of such a televised debate. The Labour party’s deputy leadership panel was an even worse decision (although as they were taking up a government post to a degree you could argue that it was more in the public interest) particularly with Dimbley chairing - he may toe the BBC’s impartial line to a point but anyone but a fule can see his sympathies are not to the left.
It won’t do any good for their party as whole - it merely advertises what disunity there might be - and while you might argue that any publicity is good publicity and the LibDems are in desperate need of it it has simply opened them up for sniping from unsympathetic quarters and, in the case of politics, I would argue that much publicity is damaging in so far as it illustrates the neccessary political realities which simply serve to further alienate the ‘ordinary voter’.
Of course, maybe I’m entirely wrong, but that’s my take on it. It would have been better done on a website of specialist LibDem interest.