But I'm struggling to see any sense at all in some over-excited Tory Boys at campaign HQ boasting to The Times about establishing "air superiority" in the campaign over Labour.
"We've got more executive jets than you" is their rather testosterone-fuelled boast, contrasting their fancy campaign toys with Gordon Brown's plan to let the train mostly take the strain.
David Cameron’s campaign will exploit “air superiority” over Gordon Brown, as the Tories use their cash advantage to leave Labour grounded ... With Labour compelled to make a virtue out of the necessity imposed by their relative poverty, the Conservatives said the party had not leased a single aircraft but had booked a number of different ones ... It will be Mr Cameron’s use of executive jets that is likely to become a symbol of the campaigns’ contrasting styles, however.
That's a pretty bad call, isn't it?
Firstly, I am sure their candidate Rory Stewart would caution the Tories that you can't win a war from 20,000 feet; still less a General Election. Despite the Tories' reticience to roll back Labour's popular top rate tax hike, they have probably got a fair share of the executive jet owning classes.
Secondly, it brings back questions about political funding. If William Hague hadn't flown in Michael Ashcroft's private jet quite so often, he might have asked him some slightly more searching questions about his tax status. The Tory response to that is that Cameron isn't using Ashcroft's private plan: he's had lots of friends rich and willing enough to lend him their planes or pay for his flights, giving him many more people to whom he will of course be in no way beholden.
As the Times reports:
Since becoming Leader of the Opposition in December 2005, he has drawn on the support of 19 wealthy donors who have funded more than 160 helicopter and aircraft journeys, according to his entries in the Register of MPs’ Interests ... Those who have funded flights include a steel magnate, a financier, a hedge-fund manager, a philanthropist and a Premier League football director.
And, anyway, David Cameron has now got bags of cash donated to him too so he can pay for the campaign planes at commercial rates. Still, the Angry Middle won't like it. Perhaps boasting about the planes intended as an appeal to aspiration. That might be a bit too 'eighties. It doesn't scream "in touch" rather than "in a world of their own", does it? And whatever happened to General Well-Being? It won't make you happier, Dave.
Thirdly, the huskies won't like it either. So the Tories are at pains to stress that they will be carbon offsetting the excessive flying. Expect environmental groups and LibDems to also point out why believing that taking as many flights as you possibly can and then believing that off-setting is always the answer suggests a very pale shade of green.
As The Times said:
To date, he has clocked up about 25,000 miles. The shortest flight was an eight-mile helicopter ride from Bury to Manchester in April 2008, a journey that is ten miles by road.
But perhaps that two finger salute to the greens is aimed at the Jeremy Clarkson vote and the Tories' climate sceptic base. A tricky balancing act, to be sure.
Instead of laughing at Gordon Brown for mainly letting the train take the strain, perhaps David Cameron would do better to join him.