Douglas Alexander's Democratic Convention diary

On stage, Obama spoke truth from power - the essential task of a political leader.

How to win friends....

I arrive on Wednesday afternoon by direct flight from Gatwick to Douglas International Airport (honestly, that's its name!) in Charlotte, NC, just as Air Force One lands at the nearby Air National Guard Base.

In the sweltering line for a taxi - it's 86 degrees - I hear that all flights out of Charlotte have been delayed to allow the President's plane to land ... I guess that's all part of the plan for building broader support in this vital swing state!

The Come Back Kid returns.

One man who is famous for making friends in the Democratic Party - or anywhere - is Bill Clinton. Back in 2000, I sat with Ed Miliband high in the Staples Centre in Los Angeles as Clinton transfixed the crowd at what was supposed to be Al Gore's Convention. He hasn't lost his touch and his speech on Wednesday night once again had the delegates in raptures.

Its central theme - "We're all in this together" - was not unfamiliar to British ears, so the next morning I sought out the man with whom I first associated with those words - Frank Luntz. Frank is now a commentator for both CBS and Fox News, but you might also remember him from the focus groups he ran for Newsnight. Back in the spring of 2008, he gave a presentation to Republican Congressional Candidates that recommended the use of the line "We're all in this together".

Over breakfast in a downtown grill, he tells me he arrived at the phrase after much testing when his research showed hard pressed voters didn't welcome a politician talking about sacrifice...as they felt they were already making enough sacrifices, thank you very much. Luntz is genuinely effusive in his praise of Clinton's performance the night before: "It's the most effective political deconstruction I have ever seen. And it will matter," he tells me."It's given every Democrat their talking points for the next 8 weeks." He goes on, "It wasn't really an endorsement of Barack Obama, but an incredible indictment of Mitt Romney. Bill Clinton's a one man war room."

E Pluribus Unum

It's to one of the veterans of the original War Room in Little Rock that I turn next. Simon Rosenberg is an old friend who runs the Washington based centre-left think-tank The New Democratic Network. He's also a leading expert on the demographic shifts transforming American politics.

The contrast between the all-white crowd in Tampa last week and the hugely diverse delegations here in Charlotte tells a powerful story. In a bar crowded with delegates, donors, lobbyists, and journalists, Simon shouts his explanation for this, "Barack Obama whose slogan is 'Forward' is the first President of the new emerging demographics of the twenty first century. He's a symbol of transition from a country dominated by white Europeans to a country that'll be majority non-white within 30 years."

And this matters deeply to US politics. As Simon goes on to explain, in the 1960s, America was 90% white and 10% black. Today, it is 65% white and 35% people of colour, and it's on track to be majority non-white by 2040. "Not only did America's economy become globalised in recent decades, but so did its people," shouts my ever hoarser friend. Little wonder the growing diversity of the Democratic Party is on such glorious display on the Convention stage - and the Convention floor.

Following in Family Footsteps

Talking about the 1960s reminds me that while it's my first visit to North Carolina, it turns out I'm following in family footsteps. Back in Easter 1960, my mum and dad, then fresh out of Glasgow University and studying for a year in New York, also made the journey south to attend a special conference. There they queued to hear a young Baptist - and were spat at by white passersby for their trouble. The conference was a gathering of the Southern Christian Leadership, bringing civil rights protesters together, and the young Baptist preacher was Martin Luther King.

Little could my parents have imagined that, fifty years later, their son would return to North Carolina to hear another young African American .... who also just happens to be the 44th President of the United States.

My Kingdom for a Pass

By Thursday afternoon, all minds are turning to the finale of the Convention, the President's acceptance of the party's nomination. All has not gone smoothly for the campaign officials planning the event. The speech was due to be made at the Bank of America Stadium - which is outdoor and has a capacity of over 70,000 - but on Wednesday the venue is suddenly changed to the Time Warner Cable Centre, where the rest of the Convention has been taking place. The explanation that's given is the risk of rain, but nobody seems very sure why the decision has changed when apparently the forecast hasn't.

Anyway, 70,000 just doesn't go in to 20,000, so it suddenly seems like everyone is cajoling, begging and pleading for a pass to get in for the big speech. Donna Brazille proves my saviour and I get there early. David Miliband is delayed at a dinner, and so has to queue during one of the temporary lock downs, which the Daily Mail gleefully show in a photo apparently taken on someone's mobile. Quite why anyone would care is beyond me.

In the hall, John Kerry tears into the Republicans on foreign policy. The biggest cheers he get from delegates - given the difficulty Democrats have had since Tampa in answering Ronald Reagan's old question - is when he asks "Is Osama Bin Laden better off than he was 4 years ago?"

Earlier in the day, I'd grabbed a cup of coffee with Madeleine Albright - Clinton's Secretary of State - and still well connected and wise in the arena of foreign policy. What she tells me convinces me that the new Secretary of State, if Obama wins (a contest widely thought, here in Charlotte, to be between John Kerry and UN Ambassador Susan Rice), will not have an empty inbox on day one.

Speaking to America

Obama takes to the stage timed precisely around the networks' coverage. There are 20,000 of us packed into the hall, but his real audience are the TV viewers scattered across battleground states like Iowa, Colorado, Ohio and Virginia. It is undecided voters in these states that will ultimately decide the outcome of a race that's been tight ever since Romney secured the Republican nomination in April

During the day, I'd chatted with Philip Kent, the chairman and chief executive of Turner Broadcasting, who own CNN. He's the man who brought Piers Morgan to the states and he tells me that the Convention should boost ratings for the network. For as well as the dial metering and the instant polling the other number the campaign staff will be studying anxiously will be the TV viewing figures.

Those figures weren't good for Romney and the Republicans last week in Tampa as his speech was watched by only 30.3million over eleven TV networks.....down from the 40milion over seven TV networks that watched John McCain deliver his acceptance speech four years ago.

A Speech....

In retrospect, it's clear that there was a powerful logic and a clear plan behind the main speeches here in Charlotte. Michelle's task was to defend Obama's character. Clinton's task was to defend Obama's record. And Obama's task was to set out his plan for America's future.

And that's exactly what he did. On stage, he wasn't just Commander-in-Chief; he was Educator-In-Chief, as he set out his vision for America's future success. It was a different and more sober speech than his acceptance address four years ago in a vast Denver Stadium - when his soaring rhetoric matched the mood of hope that would carry him all the way to the White House.

The main theme of the President's powerful speech was an effort to turn the focus of his re-election bid on the rebuilding of the economy. At a time of massive challenge for western economies and societies, he spoke truth from power - the essential task of a political leader.

By any measure, it has proved a strong Convention for the Democrats here in North Carolina. The speeches were strong and their messages clear. Today, as the delegates started their long trek home, they are, in the phrase Obama made famous four years ago, "Fired Up. Ready to Go!"

And a Taxi Ride...

When I look back on this week in Charlotte, however, I'll remember more than just the speeches and the schmaltz. I'll also remember Ephron, the taxi driver who gave me a ride back to my motel late one night after the speeches had finished. His family came originally from Ethiopia. He's 36 and has two kids almost the same age as mine. He works all week driving the cab, but he last saw a doctor three years ago. That's because he doesn't have any health insurance. And with quiet determination he told me "That's why I'm voting for Barack Obama".

Douglas Alexander is the shadow foreign secretary.

Barack Obama with Bill Clinton at the Democratic National Convention in North Carolina. Photograph: Getty Images.

Douglas Alexander is the shadow foreign secretary and Labour MP for Paisley and Renfrewshire South.

Getty
Show Hide image

Everyone's forgotten the one issue that united the Labour party

There was a time when Ed Miliband spoke at Momentum rallies.

To label the row over the EU at Thursday’s Labour leadership hustings "fireworks" would be to endow it with more beauty than it deserves. Owen Smith’s dogged condemnation of John McDonnell’s absence from a Remain rally – only for Corbyn to point out that his absence was for medical reasons – ought to go down as a cringing new low point in the campaign. 

Not so long ago, we were all friends. In the course of the EU referendum, almost all of the protagonists in the current debacle spoke alongside each other and praised one another’s efforts. At a local level, party activists of all stripes joined forces. Two days before polling day, Momentum activists helped organise an impromptu rally. Ed Miliband was the headline speaker, and was cheered on. 

If you take the simple version of the debate, Labour’s schism on the EU appears as an aberration of the usual dynamics of left and right in the party. Labour's left is supposedly cheering a position which avoids advocating what it believes in (Remain), because it would lose votes. Meanwhile, the right claims to be dying in a ditch for its principles - no matter what the consequences for Labour’s support in Leave-voting heartlands.

Smith wants to oppose Brexit, even after the vote, on the basis of using every available procedural mechanism. He would whip MPs against the invocation of Article 50, refuse to implement it in government, and run on a manifesto of staying in the EU. For the die-hard Europhiles on the left – and I count myself among these, having run the Another Europe is Possible campaign during the referendum – there ought to be no contest as to who to support. On a result that is so damaging to people’s lives and so rooted in prejudice, how could we ever accept that there is such a thing as a "final word"? 

And yet, on the basic principles that lie behind a progressive version of EU membership, such as freedom of movement, Smith seems to contradict himself. Right at the outset of the Labour leadership, Smith took to Newsnight to express his view – typical of many politicians moulded in the era of New Labour – that Labour needed to “listen” to the views Leave voters by simply adopting them, regardless of whether or not they were right. There were, he said, “too many” immigrants in some parts of the country. 

Unlike Smith, Corbyn has not made his post-Brexit policy a headline feature of the campaign, and it is less widely understood. But it is clear, via the five "red lines" outlined by John McDonnell at the end of June:

  1. full access to the single market
  2. membership of the European investment bank
  3. access to trading rights for financial services sector
  4. full residency rights for all EU nationals in the UK and all UK nationals in the EU, and
  5. the enshrinement of EU protections for workers. 

Without these five conditions being met, Labour would presumably not support the invocation of Article 50. So if, as seems likely, a Conservative government would never meet these five conditions, would there be any real difference in how a Corbyn leadership would handle the situation? 

The fight over the legacy of the referendum is theatrical at times. The mutual mistrust last week played out on the stage in front of a mass televised audience. Some Corbyn supporters jeered Smith as he made the case for another referendum. Smith accused Corbyn of not even voting for Remain, and wouldn’t let it go. But, deep down, the division is really about a difference of emphasis. 

It speaks to a deeper truth about the future of Britain in Europe. During the referendum, the establishment case for Remain floundered because it refused to make the case that unemployment and declining public services were the result of austerity, not immigrants. Being spearheaded by Conservatives, it couldn’t. It fell to the left to offer the ideological counter attack that was needed – and we failed to reach enough people. 

As a result, what we got was a popular mandate for petty racism and a potentially long-term shift to the right in British politics, endangering a whole raft of workplace and legal protections along the way. Now that it has happened, anyone who really hopes to overcome either Brexit, or the meaning of Brexit, has to address the core attitudes and debates at their root. Then as now, it is only clear left-wing ideas – free from any attempt to triangulate towards anti-migrant sentiment– that can have any hope of success. 

The real dividing lines in Labour are not about the EU. If they were, the Eurosceptic Frank Field would not be backing Smith. For all that it may be convenient to deny it, Europe was once, briefly, the issue that united the Labour Party. One day, the issues at stake in the referendum may do so again – but only if Labour consolidates itself around a strategy for convincing people of ideas, rather than simply reaching for procedural levers.