William Hague's denials were actually not bad, as denials go...he was reasonably defiant, "I'm not going anywhere, so get used to it". The trouble is that most of us remember William Hague as the former Conservative Party leader...who quit. He said he wasn't going anywhere at that point as well. You kind of have to, in politics, especially with the Conservative Party - you can't show any weakness. That's what did for Bill last time...
One or two minor complaints, though. He insists he hasn't lost his "mojo". Now, being of a certain generation, that sends me straight to Austin Powers. Not a connection Bill essentially wants people making, I'd think...it smacks a little of him wanting to be 'cool' and 'down with the kids' (who are, to be fair, presently running his Party). I seem to remember his last attempt at that involving a log flume and a baseball cap that made him look about 14, and the 'quiet landslide' of 2001.
Whoops! There it is! When he says 'mojo', this is the image that springs to mind. The image of a lamb to the electoral slaughter. Bill has, obviously, attempted to build a slightly different image of late...
Yeah. Who's going to mess with that guy? He certainly doesn't have any worries about 'mojo'.
Anyway, we've become just slightly sidetracked. I think Bill's main let-down in his strenuous denial was what he probably thought was the strongest part. "The Prime Minister is extremely supportive [of me] and so are the vast majority of Conservative MPs." So...you've lost the support of some Conservative MPs, Bill? Which MPs are these rebels? How many of them are there? Even if they're a minority, it could still be like a third of the Party...what's their beef with you - the Libya cock-up, or is it just your mojo? These seem like the obvious questions, to me...Bill was obviously looking to lock down the situation, get on top of it before we got to the daily calls for his head in the Telegraph...but it seems to me like he's just opened a can of worms.
