Happy 39th birthday David Cameron
October 9th, 2005UPDATED 0730
Tory leadership: RED Cameron, BLACK Davis, BLUE Clarke, GREEN Fox
-
Cameron now odds-on in all markets after YouGov poll boost
A YouGov poll of Tory party members has confirmed the betting trend of the past week that David Cameron, 39 today, looks in a very strong position to take the Tory leadership provided that his fellow MPs vote him onto the final short-list of two that will go to the national ballot next month.
-
In just seven days the implied probality of a Cameron win based on the best betting odds has moved from less than 10% to more than 50%.
The poll, which was restricted to the same paid up members of the party who took part in a similar survey in September has Cameron 39%: Clarke 26%: Davis 14%: Fox 13%. In head to heads Cameron beats Clarke by 60-33% and Davis by 66-27%.
If Cameron fails to come in the top two in the MPs ballot Clarke would beat Davis by 49-44% but Davis would beat Fox by 44-41%. We take the YouGov survey seriously because in a similar poll of Tory members in 2001 the company got the IDS-Clarke shares precisely right.
A poll of normal voters, by ICM for the BBC, finds that Ken Clarke remains their favourite candidate, with 27% naming him as their preferred leader. Cameron has moved up to 13% to put him joint second with David Davis. This reflects the relatively low name recognition of all but Ken Clarke amongst the public at large and is a sign of the immense challenge that the party faces.
With things moving so much to Cameron it is becoming harder to envisage MPs not being influenced by the membership to the extent that the young ex-Etonian is not included in the final line-up. But we cannot be certain and David Davis still has many more MPs pledging their support. We need to see more of them coming out for Cameron before we can say bet at these prices.
The conventional bookies now have a best price of 5/6 for Cameron, 7/4 Davis, 11/2 Clarke and 17/2 Fox. The betting exchanges have Cameron at 0.9/1 and Davis at 2.7/1.
As well as the MPs ballots the big uncertainty for Cameron now is whether these latest poll figures represent just a post-conference boost or whether they can be sustained. It will be two months before the final result is declared.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
One would have thought that this poll could certainly influence the MPs vote.
If certain MPs wanted to vote for Davis but definately did not want Clarke, they risk Clarke winning with the Tory membership, as in a head to head, Clarke looks likely to beat Davis.
The stop-Clarke vote among MPs, could shift massively to Cameron, if it looks like Davis can’t win anyway and has been tarnished, allowing Cameron and Clarke to go head to head.
I think this is a sorry story really that it has come down so much to presentation, based on one speech by each of the candidates, especially when millions are sick of presentation over substance with Blair and want a real alternative. But you can’t have leader that makes his own party faithful fall asleep.
I think the hustings could change things a bit next week. Not something made for Cameron’s strengths I would guess.
Alex 3 - I’m not sure that is entirely right. The delegates at the conference were not exactly bowled over by DD’s presentation or ability, he’s lost the aura of inevitability about him and frankly he looks as like a bit of a deflating balloon just now. His entire campaign before seemed to be predicated on the idea that he was the frontrunner and had all these endorsements so you should get on the bandwagon now if you want to back the winner - but that doesn’t work anymore. I don’t think it’s a given at all that he will be able to swing people behind him now. Indeed, the polls that we do have of the Tory membership have never shown him in front. He has always been behind Clarke and more recently Cameron or both.
I understand that the chairman of the 1922 committee, has under the rules, to conduct a ballot which offers the membership a choice. More than 2 names could go to the final ballot. Who would benefit, and how would they conduct it (I know they like FPTP, but surely a preference system would be best in that instance).
Fortunately I’m out & about most of to-day, or I’d be exhausting myself trying to discuss this poll on two sites at once :). Sean Fear’s made a good point on Anthony’s site - that no one (in the Party in the country) seems to want to vote against Cameron. Whether this is also true for MPs remains to be seen - I think if I were the campaign manager of any other candidate I’d definitely want to keep him out of the final ballot if I could.
3 - you don’t have to see a pro-DD point in everything, AHM. These hustings are about the Mps, and who gets into the final ballot, something which is not certain yet. Presumably Cameron is going to have show something that he hasn’t shown before in such an environment.
Fascinating, the aura of inevitability has definitely gone from Davis who is holed below the water line, and be shifting to Cameron, who as Mike says has to pick up some new endorsements next week to pull away from Clarke. The hustings could be very interesting indeed.
Does anybody know how Clarke and Davis did in the MP hustings in 2001 and whether they were seen to be significant? I would have thought that IDS’s obvious shortcomings would have shown up and would have counted against him.
Finally, Cameron on BBC1! I’ve missed him every single time he’s been on TV so far (TV appears to have Cameron-filter).
ICM/BBC Poll on the BBC website:
Ken Clarke 27% (was 40%)
David Davis 13% (10%)
David Cameron 13% (4%)
Liam Fox 7% (3%)
Malcolm Rifkind 3% (4%)
None of these 8% (4%)
Don’t know 30% (33%)
David Davis has gone up? Labour voters being michievous?
I’m not a Tory voters, and I hate to be negative about Tory leadership hopefuls, but what does David Cameron actually stand for? I agree he looks and sounds good, but whats the big idea…
Being elected
This latest poll is bad news for us supporting Ken. It looks like a final two of Cameron and Davis becoming ever more likely. I will be dissppointed if Cameron wins, not because I don’t like him, but because it is another case of the right man - wrong time. I also can’t see an election victory under a Cameron leadership, is he really ready to face Blair/Brown after only 5 years in Parliament? Various people have pointed me to the Newsnight poll conducted a few weeks ago, but I think the PB poll was a more acurate depiction. Clarke is the best candidate in my opinion and I think he is the leader who will appeal most strongly to my age group, where we are doing notoriously badly at present.
why doesn’t he just say that he smoked cannabis for christ’s sake?
Here are the 2001 MP results.
Round one
Portillo-49
IDS- 39
Clarke- 36
Ancram- 21
Davis- 21
Round 2
Portillo- 50
IDS- 42
Clarke- 39
Davis- 18
Ancram- 17
Round 3 (Though really the second ballot)
Clarke- 59
IDS- 54
Portillo- 53
Make of that what you will.
I watched Cameron during the election campaign and I was seriously unimpressed. And I didn’t particularly think his Blackpool speech was that good either. But since then in interviews particularly newsnight and this morning on Marr he has really shown another side. He IS impressive. I think the Tories would be taking a small chance but one worth taking. He’s not only better than the other candidates but a great antidote to the ghastly Michael Howard. Will he have enough time to repair the Tories image? I think he’s got the best chance of any of them
Interesting Christopher that Davis was rated no higher than Anchram. Has he done so much in the last five years that he now should be almost favourite in a stronger field?
It could be that whoever wins MPs ballot will get the other candidate withdrawing so leave a coronation it may not be two months
Having predicted here ten weeks ago almost precisely what would happen at the Tory conference and afterwards I now think that DC is going to get into the final run-off, probably against Davis, and will finish with a comfortable margin in the membership ballot. The biggest losers in the new environment will be the Lib Dems and I can see real pressure on its leadership.
A more interesting question is whether a Cameron leadership will hasten or defer Blair’s departure. I’ve got a feeling the he might like to stay on longer.
15 - because he needs the votes of the last remaining people in the country who care!
21 - I know that. But has he got such a close knit group of university friends that not one of them is going to rat on him at an unfortunate moment?
20. If the polls start turning in a viable fashion then the Labour awkward squad will start up their resignation calls. I think whatever happens the political climate is changing and fast and I think all parties have to judge the right response to that….
19. That would go down seriously badly in the voluntary party (I know they elected IDS last time, but the MP’s put him through so the blame goes both ways). Besides, I can’t see any candidate getting half the votes of the MP’s, so it’s not as if the leader at that point will have even a moral case to make.
I think you have it on the button Mike. As I watched Cameron and Marr this morning it occured to me that the first loser will be Kennedy. A fresh reasonable sounding Tory! Charlie’s only USP down the drain. It might be worth trying for a double on Cameron for the Tories and P45 for Charlie before Christmas!
But 25 Roger - but I bet Cameron is not as enjoyable company after a Scotch or two or three…
On reflection, (and it’s quite perverse because him staying in could potentially derail DC who is ‘my mans’ biggest threat)I can’t see Clarke pushing ahead with his bid.
Current trends are clearly unsettling for the DD supporters amongst us, for KC the message is indelible and unmistakable.
The ‘left’ berth has been taken by David Cameron
Don’t even see that he can do a deal with DC and become Shadow Chancellor (assuming he were to go on and win)with the likes of George Osbourne needing catering for.
Setting aside my on views on KC the man, he’s clearly not stupid and must see the way this is shaping up.
Does he need another slap round the face from either the Parliamentary Party or the membership ?
All things considered, I think he’s likely to withdraw (possibly after seeing MR elimnated in the first round)
20. The awkward squad has already started: Glenda said she will stand for the leadership next year if Blair hasn’t announced his departure’s date.
Btw, Hanky Dinky Dunky is due to attend Conway’s 25th wedding anniversary party today. Davis is there too. Will Dinky survive? He feels “horrible”, but Davis’ speech was “abysmal” (he especially didn’t like when DD mentioned he would like to build more prisons)
28 - It’s becoming clear that the Davis camp made an enormous tactical error in their conference speech (setting aside the way it was delivered). It was clear that they were rattled by the previous day and decided to try a traditional conference “crowd pleaser” with traditional right wing themes - thinking a good reception in the hall would guarantee a good press. Needless to say it was badly misjudged.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/10/09/do0903.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2005/10/09/ixop.html
Yes, Cameron will just crush the Lib Dems. I was in Lewes last summer and was astonished to find it was Lib Dem territory. The inhabitants of Lewes, middle class, affluent, ambitious - sincere but not sandal-wearing, compassionate but unbearded, fresh-pasta eating but not own-muesli-making - are just not natural Lib Dems.
The Lib Dem conference proved this. Give more money to the corrupt and wasteful EU? Insane, but telling. The leadership of the Lib Dems might be free-market and stuff, but the heart of the party is well to the Left of New Labour.
So why have all these Lewesites voted Lib Dem for two or three elections? Cause they are slightly narcissistic (or maybe just nice), the perceive themselves as caring, and they couldn’t bring themselves to vote for the NASTY party; but nor, of course, could they vote for Labour, especially after Iraq etc. They wanted an alternative to Labour, and the Lib Dems (or other fringe parties like the Greens) were the only choice.
If Cameron is elected - a nice kind caring Tory, posh but empathetic, the kind of guy you’d like as a neighbour - the floodgates will open and all these Lib Dems Tories will flock back to their natural home.
And places like Lewes will go back to being Conservative.
A few months ago, I told a good Lib Dem activist friend of mine that the last election might prove the highpoint of Lib Dem fortunes, for a generation. If Cameron gets the nod, I think my friend might be reluctantly admitting the truth of this.
To those of us non tories this race is only interesting because the result is completely unpredictable. Despite the odds I think it’s impossible to say which of the four will get into the final. Knowing the Tory party and their penchant for intrigue I’m sure the second ballot of the MP’s will have far more to do with who they don’t want than who they do. Hague’s method of choosing a leader isn’t the dogs dinner it’s been painted. It allows Tory MP’s to do what they do best. Plot!
Sorry but - I think a “reasonable” Tory will find it hard to get backing from the millionaires and may not believed in the country.
“We are going to do the same as Blair but do it a bit more efficently” is hardly an election winning slogan
Given the locals’ enthusiasm for burning the Pope in effigy, I’ve always thought Lewes is a very strange seat to be held by a Lib Dem.
32. I agree that would be a pathethic slogan for a great party to adopt. It is not the core of Cameron’s message and it never will be.
32 Quite so Icarus, qite so !
But his opponents will make it look as if it is.
Even in his meeting in Blaby you could see opposition to tuition fees amongst ordinary Tories. He will have a job selling the message of how important education is and therefore we must impose £20,000 debts on the students.
Yes, I can’t understand the enthusiasm for tuition fees among modernising Conservatives. Taxing people to provide a service (higher education) and then charging them on top of this doesn’t seem to me to be an popular policy. IDS and Michael Howard made the right decision on this issue.
I think there is a via media on Further education funding which us where Cameron will want to get to. One that neither pledges the opportunistic abolition of fees where it can’t be reasonably acheived nor one that saddles students with crippling debts. Remember the need for finance reform is to guarentee the cash streams to the institutions not as an encouragement or disincentive to students.
12 - A voice from Lothian
Since when does a politician need to “stand for something” in order to be elected?
I tend to agree that ‘if’ he’s elected, and you always need to provide for the Tory Party F-ing up, Cameron up against Brown and Kennedy is going to hurt both.
Brown probably solidifies the Labour vote, which addresses some of the damage Labour suffered in its heartlands back in May, though not all, but with an economic slow down and against a likeable, English, moderate and media savy Tory leader like Cameron that solidification of the base is massively out weighed by the potential for Tory advances amongst moderate, middle class voters in the south and west midlands.
Cameron might make little head way in the North or indeed in the Urban Centres outside of London, but he doesn’t really need to, where it counts against Labour a Tory Party lead by Cameron probably bests Labour lead by Brown… though me saying any of this makes it all highly suspect to everyone here, but I assure you I’m not trying to play any political games here.
The news for the LibDems’ isn’t much better, despite the earnest hopes of the Laws-Oaten-Cable axis within the party the conference showed that the party’s base has little interest in shifting to the right and may indeed to shifting to the left, perhaps emboldened by the inroads made against Labour in May. Cameron takes up the mantle of media friendly and likeable Party leader that Kennedy has clung on to for some time and will probably carry with him a plausibility which Kennedy, partly because he is leader of the third party in British politics more than anything, lacks. Under Howard and with a generally disappointing campaign in May the Tories still made inroads against the LibDem’s in their predominantly rural and affluent seats and reinforced their own advantages in seats which they where defending such as Orpington or Dorset West… under Cameron such a trend is likely to get worse, and Kennedy will probably come under great pressure, though I don’t think it would become anything critical until after the next election.
Cameron has his weaknesses, but it is not his background as Brown seems to think (the weakest line in a general weak conference speech by Brown was his disparaging David Cameron as being educated at Eaton… quite frankly so what!) he is inexperienced and he has yet to be tested properly in the commons. But against this he has advantages that could be critical against both Brown’s Labour and Kennedy’s LibDems… then again he could suffer the fate of other Tory leaders and see his high hopes reduced to ashes and be forced into a core –vote strategy a-la William Hague or Michael Howard.
As for the effect on the Labour leadership I think it just means that Blair stays longer and there is the potential for the simmering weariness for the “Blair-Brown show” to come to the fore with the desire for a new leader from a new generation within the party, and potentially one better suited to taking on a Tory leader like Cameron… it might well not be enough to upset Brown when the contest finally comes but it could mean there is a fight and the most likely candidates could well be Hillary Benn or Alan Johnson, the candidate will not emerge IMO from the Blairite right, the factors mitigating against that remain revived Tory Party or no.
alex. Interesting line from the Telegraph article you posted;
“……. “Nobody can say any more that we are just a bunch of posh boys who sucked up to Howard,” one of their number told me….”.
If this is how the ‘Notting Hill Set’ (as they are called in the article) are thought of by their fellow Tory MP’s then there’s every chance Cameron wont be on the ballot which goes to the members however impressive his speech. The group sounds exclusive.
30. Unless there’re big boundary changes, I doubt the tories will win Lewes next time. The Libdems could perform bad in 2009, but I don’t think they’ll collapse.
30/33 - You clearly know little about Lewes or the constituency as a whole . Go into Newhaven for example which is part of the Lewes constituency and find the Conservative Association club The sign reads like Reg Perrin’s SU HINE DE ER S . The town of Lewes itself is also very strongly Lib Dem . The remaining Conservative strength in the Constituency is in the small villages and Peacehaven and part of Seaford .
28 Andrea. You mentioning Glenda Glad Rags jogged my impaired memory on an odd little slice of synchronicity last night. You noted Queen Elizabeth I (of England
) and in the same minute Max noted that Glad Rags might challenge Blair in the New Year…….. If I post about deranged eurosceptic headbangers perhaps someone else will announce that Bill Cash will stand for the Tory leadership !! …… or discuss facial grooming and then Viscount Thurso is implicated in a coup against Chaz Kennedy !!
26 Mike Smithson. Scotch … GGGgggggrrrr !!!! Whisky please
Icarus 36. Well Tony Blair’s first act in 1997 was to abolish all student grants - the higher education finance system that allowed people like me to go to university. Then fees came in at £1000 and now they are up to £3000 and what harm has it done Blair? Almost none.
It’s the consensual style of Cameron that makes him very dangerous for the Lib Dems.
…and what with his wife’s tatoo of a dolphin on her ankle. As someone said on Andrew Marr’s show - this brings the greens and pit bull man together.
39. I think I’m the only Brown’s support left on this website. I ask for an anti-discrimation act to protect minorities!
It is amusing that for the first time in more than 25 years there is excitement and dare I say intellectual curiosity if not engagement with the Conservative Party which is the backdrop to the most important leadership election in a generation….
Interesting Ben. I agree with most of it. I would only say that for the next two years Cameron would have to live with Blair and to describe him as Blair lite is to seriously overrate him. He might have qualities that shine against Brown but I cant see any contest between him and Blair that wouldn’t make him look very reduced indeed.
44. What harm has it done Blair?
Well 36% in a general election is a fair bit of harm
We have a son similar to DC’s Ivan, who is now 17. I want to tell you what its like, so if you are not interested, scroll down.
These sort of children are getting commoner. The reason for that is much improved post-natal care of very small and premature babies, who have a vastly incresed risk of problems.
When you realise your child is ‘not normal’, you do what you can. Because it is so demanding, you employ a carer if you can afford it (as we could, and DC can). This reduces some of the soul destroying drudgery. (We won’t consider the terrible position of those unable to afford help—the state simply does not want know).
Having a carer does create other problems. Somebody else is living in your house, and they eat with you. Their friends eat with you—you have to make the carer welcome–its not a fantastic job. The reason its an unattractive occupation is basically because you have to put in so much, for so little back (unlike normal children). The carer has boy(girl) friend issues, money/car problems; you have to help.
The next issue is schooling. Your instinct is to send your child to an ordinary school if you possibly can. The reason for the same for all ’special needs’ parents. You hope there is a ‘key’ to unlock your child’s potential. If one can be found, then he’s in the right place…
You then start learning about the system which through which you have to navigate. It hinges around his ’statement’. This is the shorthand for ’statement of special educational needs’, and is supposed to detail what you child needs. It is supposed to be reviewed each year. What many of these children need is 24 hour one-to-one care; and it simply is not available. As it is, the govt puts many more statuary demands on the local authority, through the statement, than it is prepared to pay for.
At some stage, you realise that your child will have to go to a special school. This scores you very badly in your new peer group–parents with special needs children. The most active in this group believe that you can’t be trying hard enough, and a special school is ‘an admission of defeat’. There are few special needs schools around, as the govt is hell bent on closing them for financial reasons (some in the govt will deny that. If they do, they are lying). The defence to their action is based on ‘inclusion’, a spurious benefit for anyone in this area. (’Anyone’ means the child himself, other children, parents with or without handicapped children, and especially teachers).
The next big step comes when you realise that it would be best for you if the child were in a residential school. (And the realisation may come at different speeds for each parent…) But is it best for the child? Well, it is certainly best for the other children. And if you can’t cope? Should you have to cope? In different, and older societies, the child would have been ‘left on a hillside’. If you express these views to a social worker, which I have, then you are ‘reported’. My wife (eventually) came to the same view as me. We wanted residential accommodation for our son (you have to call it a ’school’ because the govt has to provide schooling). I gave myself the task of finding somewhere suitable. This was tough. The total number of public and private 52 week placements available in Cambridgeshire is ….nil, nought, zero. And you need to have this wish supported by the statement. The parental inputs were made separately. The mother left open-ended concerns about the father in her contribution. Being ‘reported’ by social services actually helped here.
I eventually found somewhere suitable near Leeds (Hollybank in Muirfield, which is fabulous). They had a place, and would take him. The statement (which we had to get professionally re-written, including the non-parental bits) supported the applicaion for funds for this school. But none were forthcoming. However, we then had a bit of luck. I had given in his notice at his previous school. This actually matters plenty more than for normal children, as each child requires so much more support. I phoned the director of education for Cambridgeshire, and explained that our child was about to be out of school. That would get both her and me into trouble. But I had a solution. What she had to do was to short-circuit the system for approving funds, and all would well. She managed that within 24 hours. Hollybank were amazed at how quickly our son’s funding had been agreed–they’d never seen anything like it before. I tried not to take any credit for it, explaining the ‘fluke’, but they wouldn’t hear of it.
DC had a privileged childhood. Where he is now is no cakewalk. And it matters; Euan Blair’s flat in Bristol was an issue…
43. Jack, just for you: Glenda as Queen Elizabeth I:
http://www.shop4photos.net/graphics/169/169716.jpg
50 Andrea. Are you sure that’s not a picture of Glad Rags on the green benches. She’ll have to dress down to win a couple of votes in a leadership contest. On the other hand perhaps if she wins and becomes PM, she might wish to depose the present tenant of Buck House and reprise her role ….. one old Queen Elizabeth replacing another …… I’m sure the Beeb has the old costume !! ….. however it’d be a bit confusing … she’d be Elizabeth I and III (reincarnated) of England and Elizabeth II of Scotland …. what fun
51. I think the situation will have changed by the new year, if Cameron is conservative party leader, then I think the awkward squad in Labour would have to be very careful. The public are quite unforgiving of disunited parties, and Labour would not be able to get away with tearing itself to pieces before a strengthening Conservative opposition….
51. Jack, if you want I could post you a photo of Glenda nakes in “Women in Love”, but I’m not sure you want to see her.
I think that picture is from “Mary, Queen of Scotland”.
Now Glenda usually has an horrible fashion taste (and she’s not the only MP with horrible dresses).
53 Andrea. What a kind offer !!! However with Sunday lunch fast approaching, to be preceeded by a trip to the Fox (pub not Tory candidate) I’ll pass on the debagged Glenda thanks ! See you later ..
The next election is likely to show a further swing against Labour, time for a change, weariness , the swing of the pendulum etc. Both the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats will gain from that in respective areas. If the feeling is a change then tactical voting between Cons and Liberal Democrat may occur. It is not gaining a few seats from the Lib Dems that should be important to Conservatives it should be gaining heavily from Labour. Sometimes The Lib Dems seem to obsess some, why?
55. Because Conservative are no longer second to Labour in a sizeable number of Labour’s most vulnerable seats. Because in seats like cambridge which Conservatives held until 1992 it now has a Lib Dem…The Lib Dems can not prevent a Tory recovery but they can cause problems and delay the effect….
30 - SeanT
You are making one or two assumptions here!
- your description of Lewes people doesn’t sound too different to the residents of the council ward that I represent. Just add the phrases “taken for granted by the Conservatives”, “concerned about their local area” and “willing to give a Lib Dem a chance if he or she works hard enough”.
Last local election we held the ward with 74 percent of the vote.
How Cameron would play at a national level might be a different matter, but my instincts are that those natural Tories who are fair-minded enough to switch to the Lib Dems in the first place are likely to stay with an incumbent Lib Dem if he or she is a good constituency MP.
One can certainly point to examples like Cambridge, but, overall, the Conservatives are second in about 85 of Labour’s 100 most vulnerable seats.
52. Except Bob Marshall Andrews, the rest of the awkward squad MPs are not in seats where they should really worry about the tories. I think the next most marginal seat of a rebel is Linda Riordan’s Halifax (8.6% majority) and Halifax seems a “strange” seat (now with a big BNP vote and I’m not sure Cameron will be able to squeeze it).
If they all share Dennis Skinner’s opinion of Cameron, they won’t be careful.
Then John McDonnell is still convinced that capitalism is on the verge of a collapse!
58. if you want to win the next GE, you have to win seats back from the Libdems too.
58. But if you look at the number of seats Conservatives need to win in order to gain power the ratio drops significantly.
59 The Conservatives still had a net gain from the Liberal Democrats this year in their “best General Election ever”
61. well, I didn’t the say the opposite!
Btw, I think all this “big love” for Cameron is exaggerate.
I see the Mail on Sunday is trying to get the drugs thing going, and it’s being mentioned on the news channels.
Having obtained a full list of the seats most vunerable to a pro-Tory swing,and allowing for the Boundary Review creating 11 new Tory seats,whilst removing 7 Labour seats(I also assume Betnal Green and Blaenau Gwent revert to the Labour camp);Labour’s overall majority would disappear with Dorset South,3.7% maj-so a 1.85% swing required.
-9 Lib Dems would have lost their seats on this swing
Continuing the swing,the point at which (assuming the numbers remain constant),the 6 SNP and 4 Plaid Cymru MPs could no longer maintain a minority Labour govt without other parties involvement would be the fall of Carmarthen West and Pembrokeshire North,Labour 5.0% maj;a 2.5 %swing required-11 Lib Dems would have been ejected by this point.
Going on yet further,the point at which the Tories would have 1 more seat than the Labour Party would be their capturing Rossendale + Darwen,Labour majority 8.3%;4.15% swing required(At this point,16 Lib Dems would have been unseated)
Finally,the point at which the Tories would have 325 seats ina 650 seat chamber would be their taking of Dorset Mid+ Poole North.12.1% Lib Dem maj;6.05% swing required-by now,the Lib Dems would have dropped 25 seats.
Hope those figures are useful and of interest!
Spoke this morning to my local floating voter - for several months he has been bewailing the fact that the Conservatives won’t pick Ken - the only circumstance he could see himself voting Conservative. Having watched the party conferences, he has changed his mind - he now wants DC to win. I may be in danger of generalising from one example here - but this case gives succour to those who argued that Ken’s early lead in the polls was based purely on recognisability.
64.”Labour’s overall majority would disappear with Dorset South,3.7% maj-so a 1.85% swing required.
-9 Lib Dems would have lost their seats on this swing”
Not necessarly. The Tory/Libdem swing could go in the opposite direction.
I’m not sure that Blaenau Gwent will be back to Labour: they could re-elect Peter Law.
66. The Lib Dems performance will depend on how they comport themselves as the scenery changes around them. Do they go after Labour’s vote on the Left or do they try to tack to the right? Kennedy is not giving any real lead on this, and the danger is that they will revert to what they always were a repository for disaffected voters. This could see there vote share drop and their seat share collapse.
8. Mr Smithson, Mr Blobby could have been on the hustings V Ken in 2001 and it wouldn’t have made a difference although he may have donr better than IDS, The anti Ken movement was so virulent and strong nothing could stop it.
What are the odds now on Clarke V Cameron? Many MP’s are still desperately worried as Portillo makes the case on Cameron’s inexperience. The Sunday Times shows members want those two, hust 11% thought Davis was a vote winner the most impotant thing in Tory minds as opposed to majorities for Clarke and Cameron. Very, very few of Davis’s supporters pledged their support out of anything more than a desire to support the winner. With that fear dissipating, can even Conway hold them together?
Don’t write off Clarke just yet for this reason on show in Rome in April, young Cardinals have a habit of voting for old Popes.
Was there something against Fox in today’s papers?
Today’s Times reported that a rumour about him could emerge:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-1816625,00.html
(look at the last part)
65. I think Ken was over-estimated in the first polls and I think Cameron is a bit over-estimated at the moment (I don’t think he’ll beat DD 66%-27%)
Interesting snippet from Andrew Rawnsley this morning showing the difference between Cameron and Ken (but probably all the tory contenders). Cameron had clearly been practising his speech for days or even weeks, he had recognised how important it was and his whole campaign was geared towards this one event.
Ken was given the chance to practise his speech the night before, sidled up to the microphone and said “I haven’t written it yet”.
The risk with Cameron is probably not for the Tory party. The risk is for the Country.
70 - I don’t know if this counts against Fox but William Rees-Mogg gave him some very favourable coverage in the Mail on Sunday.
I admit my knowledge of Lewes is based on one drunken summer outing, not necessarily psephologically accurate… but what I do know is the KIND of people that live there, very well, cause they are somewhat like me, and certainly very much like many of my friends.
These people are weary of Labour, if they ever voted for them in the first place. They are sick of the spin; wary on Iraq; etc. The last two elections, or maybe the last election, they’ve voted Lib Dem as a kind of protest, but without that much conviction.
As with most people these days, they aren’t partisan, they aren’t Tories as such, they certainly aren’t party members - but they are is economically quite conservative but with a wide social conscience. NHS and low taxes is what they want… they might tell people they are prepared to pay more taxes but they are lying.
What they also want, and will definitely want by 2009, is to vote for some change - of faces and attitudes as much as policy. The Lib Dems are never going to be in power; the Tories who could be in power have been unelectable, because nasty. Cameron could be - could be - the crucial change the Tories need. Credible, not bald, sympathique, clever, genuine, young, “compassionate”. Mildly eurosceptic like most people. Wants lower taxes but not a headlong rush to them. Tough on crime and immigration cause he’s a Tory but doesn’t need or want to spell it out because he’s a one nation Tory.
That last bit is crucial. People like the tough-on-crime-and- immigration attitudes of the Tories, but they want to be sold them sugared and niced-up, by a nice young chap, so they don’t feel mean voting for the Tories. Everyone knows what the Tories think on this, so they don’t have to mention it any more. Cameron is the man to nice-up the nasty party.
So that’s why I think places like Lewes could go Tory if DC wins; not cause I know the town, but I do know the people, and what they want.
70 - someone on here mentioned they had heard that on Radio 5. Sounds like the usual trick of planting a “rumour about a rumour”
72. Uhm, good for the tory leadership race, but less good for the chances to win a GE
btw, didn’t “Nothing Hill” boy and Cameron’s friend Nicholas Boles run a beautiful, inclusive, trendy and young campaign in Hove?
The result was, uhm, a fall in the tory vote against a new Labour candidate, selec at the last minute and not even local!
75 - It’s too late now Andrea, the train has left the station, the media is its fuel. Next stop the General Election. It can’t be stopped and there’s no opportunity to test the brakes before we get there.
Actually that’s not strictly true, the MPs can still stop it but that’s the last chance.
77. I think Cameron as tory leader could go both ways: a huge success or a complete disaster.
This talk about baldness, a lot can happen in four years. What’s Cameron’s father’s hairline like, I wonder?
Cameron is good, but we don’t know how good. He’s the Portillo option of 2005, the only leadeship candidate who “gets it” - undertstands that the Tories have to change in order to win the kind of broad coalition of support needed to form a government.
If, he wins and its still an if, then there is a big question as to whether a significant part of the party will follow him into the socially liberal centre ground. My bet is that he will be elected and manage to drag the Tories back to the centre. Noe-the-less as a LibDem I’m not overly worried.
The reason I’m not getting too over exited about the idea that Cameron will stuff the LibDems is that I’ve heard it all before. I remember the widespread belief that Blair would crush us after he was elected. A young, moderate, articulate Labour leader campaigning against a dsicredited tired Tory government would take away the LDs raison d’etre & they would be swept away in the New Labour tide. Well, ofcourse the reality was that the LibDems doubled their seats in 97 as Blair was elected.
The truth is those people expecting a return to traditional 2 party politics in the UK are whistling in the wind. Look at the election results since WW2.
Between 1945-1970 the heyday of the 2 party system - both Labour & Tories would each win over 40% of the vote, combined they would take over 80% & sometimes 90% of the vote.
Between 1970-1983, they would command over 75%, as the two party stranglehold started to loosen with the Liberal revival & the rise of nationalist politics.
From 1983-2005, the two parties could count on winning over 70% ( and occassionally over 75%, usually with one winning over 40% and the other struggling to get much over 30%.
This year together they failed to get past 70%. This is a longterm trend. Not just with the LibDems gradually consolidating their vote but with nationalists, and fringe parties like UKIP, RESPECT & the Greens gaining footholds.
Politics is not about to return to the old 2 party model even with Cameron & Brown leading their parties.
79. There’s always a wig!
Labour’s left is fielding Glenda Jackson as stalking horse only becuase she would wear Queen Elizabeth I’s wig during the leadership campaign.
80. Do you not feel the Rev Hughes is the right man now for you. Assuming the Tories avoid Fox/Davis, right leaning voters will drift back while economic difficulties may offer an opportunity to Lib Dems on the Left. Just as they were positioned on the right to catch defecting Tories in the 1990’s now the wise move is to catch disaffected Labour fish, to capture seats like Swansea West and Manchester Gorton to compensate for potential losses in places like Torbay and Romsey next time. Particularly as frustrated Tories in the former areas now seem inclined in a way not been previously to vote tactically to hurt Labour.
Just watched Cameron on Sunday AM, recorded earlier. Very impressed by him again, and he is slowly starting to add some flesh to the policy bones.
One thing I cannot understand is why he does not admit he has had some cannabis - unless he fears it will lose MP support and he wants to announce it once he is in. But at the moment it is looking a little silly.
It would be interesting to see if the average Tory member’s list of
“reasons why i hate Blair” has changed in the last week
83 - I don’t see what harm it would do, it’s just not that big a deal. It would also give him something in common with most under 40’s in this country I would have thought.
84. The biggest one is always the same: “becuase he wins elections”
But Bullseye - if DC or anyone took the Tories back to the centre, would it not just mean that the Lib Dems remain the protest party and struggle to gain much more in terms of seats?
85.Have the majority of British people under 40 tried cannabis? is this so common?
81 - Pity Tilbury isn’t in her constituency. But she has kindly furnished me an advance copy of her leadership speech ;):
“…My loving people, we have been persuaded by some that we are careful of our safety, to take heed how we commit ourselves to armed multitudes for fear of treachery; but, I do assure you, I do not desire to live to distrust my faithful and loving people.
Let New Labour tyrants fear, I have always so behaved myself, that under God I have placed my chiefest strength and safeguard in the loyal hearts and goodwill of my subjects; and, therefore, I am come amongst you as you see at this time, not for my recreation and disport, but being resolved, in the midst and heat of battle, to live or die amongst you all - to lay down for my God, and for my kingdoms, and for my people, my honour and my blood even in the dust.
I know I have the body of a weak, feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of Old Labour - and of Old Labour of England too, and think foul scorn that Brussels or Texas, or any prince of Europe, should dare to invade the borders of my realm; to which, rather than any dishonour should grow by me, I myself will take up arms - I myself will be your general, judge, and rewarder of every one of your virtues in the field.
I know already, for your forwardness, you have deserved rewards and crowns, and, we do assure you, on the word of a prince, they shall be duly paid you. For the meantime, my Lieutenant-General Marshall-Andrews shall be in my stead, than whom never prince commanded a more noble or worthy subject; not doubting but by your obedience to my General, by your concord in the camp, and your valour in the field, we shall shortly have a famous victory over these enemies of my God, of my kingdom and of my people.”
80. Agreed, but what Lib Dems have to be careful about is failing to react to a new situation. If the Conservatives give themselves a shot in the arm and begin to rise sharply up the opinion polls that will put pressure on the Lib Dems. How then do they carve out a niche and exploit it. How do they cope with the inevitable shifts in support?
82 - I’m not sure that voters really fit onto a left/right spectrum (I know we Lib Dems always say that parties can’t be classified that way either, but the point is more salient when you apply it to the voters in the street). The challenge for us is probably persuading people not to switch directly between Conservative and Labour - and just shifting ourselves up or down one dimension isn’t going to seem particularly compelling to them.
86 - No they don’t admit to that one.
88 - “Have the majority of British people under 40 tried cannabis? is this so common?”
I would have thought so - not that surveys are much to be trusted on the issue.
88 - I doubt it.
89. John O, Allister Campbell is one of her constituents. Should we expect a civil war?
Btw, look at Lieutenant-General Marshall-Andrews in “war clothes”: http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-images/Politics/Pix/pictures/2004/02/09/bobmandrews.jpg
The Sunday Tory graph is claiming it was Balfour that said that he would rather take advice from his valet than the Tory conference. I always thought that was Super Mac?
96 - google says balfour
83. Did you notice the line from Andrew Marr after he asked the direct cannabis question. The grin on his face was priceless.
Marr: “When you smoked the odd bit of dope, it wasn’t as strong as it is these days.”
Cameron: “That’s right…”
I certainly wasn’t suggesting that Cameron doesn’t present the LDs with a problem. His election would I suspect present an insurmountable roadblock to the LDs replacing the Tories, my point is that he would not be able to snuff the LDs out as some seem to expect.
Yes the LDs would need to react 2 Cameron winning, and given the new young blood dominating the parliamentary party, like Laws, Oaten & Clegg I dont doubt that it would. At the very least it would shake the party’s campaign team out of the delusion that they can keep the same strategy against the Tories as they’ve been deploying for the last 10 years.
Moving to theleft is an option & wont happen. People who read the conference that way are wrong. The party is in transition, the itellectual agrument for a more pro-market approach has been won but the emotional one has not yet. A Cameron victory would speed that conversion.
I posted before the election that I thought the government that replaces Labour would be a liberal one, whether it would be made up of Conservatives or LibDems I didnt know. Today I’d go further, if Cameron wins the post-Labour Government will be a coalition between the Tories & LDs.
96 - Yes it was Balfour
98 - Well perceptions change over time, Woody. You get used to it, I guess
99
Very good point at the the end there, Bullseye.
Cameron may have a strong plus point that he won’t want to raise publicly “I’m the Tory that the Lib Dems could work with.”
99. Not necessarily advocating left switch, as you still need tactical Tory voting in those areas. But as Lab feels the unpopularity of Govt surely you should target those Seats mentioned, as at best assuming Fox/Davis is not Leader, you will probably trade seats with the Tories and the best chance for real gains is against Labour, as the Tories concentrate on seats they can win and sotto voce would ptobably be only too happy to see a few lost deposits in seats like Swansea West if it means Lab lose the seat and face the same Left-Right squeeze the Tories themselves faced in the 1990’s.
99 - very sensible analysis.
99. I hope you’re right and the Libdem will really and openly move to the right.
102. The scenarion is shaping up as at the start of the 20th Century where the fight is not to construct 3 party politics but is a re-alignment of the 2 major parties in 2 party politics. For a while it looked like the Lib Dems would usurp the Tories, now it is looking as though what coul happen is that Labour get caught between a Lib Dem-Tory vice and crushed leaving the Tories on the centre-right, Lib Dems on the centre-left and Labour out in the cold… That would almost certainly imply a hung parliament probably where genuine minority government was an issue…
Just watched the Politics Show - Davis beginning his re-brand to get back momentum.
A decent piece on him - he came across genuine, well respected etc - but can he make others think this about him?
105.”now it is looking as though what coul happen is that Labour get caught between a Lib Dem-Tory vice and crushed leaving the Tories on the centre-right, Lib Dems on the centre-left and Labour out in the cold…”
Actually if Libdem will follow the likes of Nick Clegg (and almost all Libdem’s posters here), it would leave Labour on the centre-left and the Libdem and Tories on the centre-right (now I wait for Tabman to tell me I should’t use the term “right”).
107. I don’t think that they will follow Nick Clegg et al. Kennedy shows no sympathy in that direction whatsoever and he is the leader.
I would not mind Clegg and Laws joining a new renewed Conservative Party
109. Now you should take Brian Sedgemore too
102 - Anon
That’s quite right. One debate in the LibDems is whther we should be targetting Tory seats with majorities under 5,000 or Labour one with majorities under 10,000. I think a Cameron victory would swiftly make the choice for us. Yes, I expect top continue trading seats with Tories and gaining seats from Labour. Jackie Ashley wrote an article recently in the Guardian speculating that there might be a Tory/LD pact, thats nonsense, but there might be a defacto one in that as the both fight Labour they will not be concentrating their resources against each other, particularly in those marginals seats where one or other is in third place.
We have 2 1/2 party politics today. The LibDems are not about to collapse, though Cameron looks set to block one way forward. The LDs have something apporaching a blockig majority if the Tories & the LibDems both move to the centre then they will have a lot of common ground and in circumstances when it is still extremely difficult for the Tories to win a mjority of their own a coalition becomes a real likelihood.
On that point one thing I would note, out of he 12 seats the LDs gained from Labour 10, were Tory in the 1980’s or 90s. That means they were NOT won by gaining leftwing core Labour votes, but rather the type of swing voters, who previously backed the Tories. Many of the next tier of seats the party needs to target from Labour are very similar deomgraphically.
So there is no real benefit in the LDs trying to win Labour votes by moving to the left.
108. “Kennedy shows no sympathy in that direction whatsoever” - how did they all get to the front bench?
112. Almost anyone that can produce a coherent thought gets to the Lib Dem front bench and many that can’t make it too…
111.”On that point one thing I would note, out of he 12 seats the LDs gained from Labour 10, were Tory in the 1980’s or 90s. That means they were NOT won by gaining leftwing core Labour votes, but rather the type of swing voters, who previously backed the Tories”
I repeat it for the 100th times. It’s obvious you took seast which weren’t Labour in the 80’s. Infact they were the seats with a narrow Labour majority.
This DOESN’T prove that you didn’t win left wing voters THIS year (I stress this yeat because it’s obvious that in the previous year you got former tory voters in too)
86 - Actually there was a semi-serious point in there, especially with respect to the MPs. Anyone who watches parliament will see that there are A LOT of Tory MPs who get very angry about much of the style of politics that surrounds Blair. They really detest his acting, the whole culture of style over substance, the whole deflecting of questions, playing to many audiences etc. It is perhaps no coincidence that his “popularity” among Tory MPs was at its highest during the debates about Iraq, when one detected far less of all that stuff (what has been revealed subsequently has actually made some of them EVEN angrier, but that is another matter). I think they respect Gordon Brown, who is really considered a politician of substance far more.
Among many Tory MPs, therefore, they are IMO going to have to take a lot of convincing that Cameron is not cut straight out of the Blair cloth and he is going to have to work very hard to dispell that image in the next ten days. He may manage it, but it is probably not a foregone conclusion. I think if he gets through that hurdle then it will probably be plain sailing from there.
114. Ops, sorry for all those spelling mistakes!
115. The only plain sailing that ever occurred in the Tory party was on Morning Cloud… Cameron will be difficult to get past if he gets to the member ballot, although I think he needs to show that he not only ‘gets it’ but that he has a core set of Conservative beliefs to draw on…..
106 - Unless Davis opens up a bit he’s not going to get anywhere. He just can’t stick rigidly to a “no touchy feely” policy. He should watch the final part of Michael Howard’s conference speech again and he will see that there is always a place for it if done right. It’s probably too late though - he presumably won’t get another opportunity and platform to make such a speech.
118. Precisely why he should have done something different in Blackpool….
111. It seems the Lib Dems are already anticpating what you say, particularly on the Celtic fringe. Here’s a dilemma for you, the creibility of Govt is priceless. The photos of Lib Dem ministers with red boxes means you could never again be dismissed as a wacky fringe. Precisely the fatal mistake the Liberals made in giving Labour that credibility, in briefly putting Labour in power in 1924. Would you trade that for long term gain, or is it PR or nothing?
109-’I would not mind Clegg and Laws joining a new renewed Conservative Party’
That and other posts here show how little the Tories understand these newer Lib Dem MP’s. Clegg, Laws etc are fundamentally anti-conservative (with a big C and a small c).
They are internationist, pro human rights (listen to Clegg castigating the Tories on asylum and immigration)and environmentalist (listen to Cable on the need for green taxes). Yes, they are support free trade and the free market, but the motivation and instincts are fundamentally different from the Tories.
Whether a change in either party opens up the opportunity for a Lib Dem/ Tory co-operation in a future parliament remains to be seen, but Clegg a Tory? forget it.
Richard Church
119. What should Davis have done that is different? Quite simply he should have understood his party well enough to know that the conference was going to be absolutely crucial in this election. He should have been aware that making speeches is an area where he’s only about average and he should have been working week in week out since May preparing himself for last Wednesday.
121 - I think you ignore the extent to which both the environmental and human rights agendas are rising among strands of Conservative Party opinion.
122…AND he should have avoided having in his campaign team people who are feared and disliked by many in the parliamentary party. For a number of Tory MPs a leadership that could have seen Derek Conway as Chief Whip was the worst possible scenario.
They may be rising up the agenda, but I suspect that Conservatives have a very different outlook to the Lib Dems on these issues.
Andrea @75, I think that’s a good point. Hove does show how a touchy-feely Conservative campaign might crash and burn horribly. Hove was one of very few seats in the South East where the Conservative vote actually fell on May 5th.
122 - to be fair it’s very easy to say that with hindsight and, even though you predicted that the Conference was likely to be Cameron’s strength, I don’t think anyone could have predicted the situation that Davis found himself in on Wednesday morning. And frankly one suspects, given the dramatically over-the-top media reaction (acknowledged by Liam Fox on the Politics show this morning - one senses that there might be some sympathy with him for what happened) then there was possibly nothing he could have done with any certainty of success.
The Davis campaign was clearly built upon basis that that threat would come from Ken (who wrote his speech the night before, so complacency can hardly just be applied to Davis) and was based around a win the MPs, win the country strategy (also remember we didn’t know until 2 weeks ago that he would have to even go to the membership). With hindsight it is clear that he played too safe, but nobody really began to sense that until Cameron’s launch speech.
125. Yes Conservatives will come up with different ideas on subjects to the Lib Dems, but never forget that it was Mrs T who first made a substantive speech on environmental issues back in the eighties….
125. In Hove and in the two Brighton seats the tories performed really bad.
Hove’s tory campaign was praised even by Celia Barlow during her speech after the declaration. I read the tories were really disappointed by the results, they thought they were going to win.
124. Fox’s most deadly appeal V Davis to MP’s was, “Look do you really want Derek Conway as your Chief Whip, and Andrew Mitchell as Party Chairman?” It may not help Fox but that appeal concentrated a few Tory MP minds as regards Davis. Not coincidentally both men have now been effectively sidelined from the Campaign.
125. I don’t think that means anything. The tone set was from the top, and would inevitably vastly overshadow anything a Local Tory Candidate could say or do in anyway.
126. The Tortoise and the Hare comes to mind, DD sped off hoovering up endorsements whilst DC plodded on making interesting and thoughtful contributions in speeches throughout the summer. DD thought that it was all over and took his eye off the ball, DC now has gained the momentum….
I think it’s a bit premature deciding what did and didn’t “concentrate Tory MPs minds” before they’ve voted
It is clearly a minor factor in the situation as it is at present.
129.”I don’t think that means anything. The tone set was from the top, and would inevitably vastly overshadow anything a Local Tory Candidate could say or do in anyway. ”
In other seats where the national campaign could have not go down very well, the results was a bit better.
A good local campaign usually helps anyway even if it naturally couldn’t move lots of votes.
Andrea @ 114
Of course we won leftwing votes, but if you look at the polls analysing how the various “social classes” voted you will see that the analysis that it was the middle classes but C1 and A/B who swung to the LibDems, rather than the more working class DE traditionally Labour core vote.
131. Whether it shifts votes is one thing, and we’ll see what happens. But has that idea helped Davis? Unquestionably no.
132. True and in Hove I think the result was an improvement V 2001. But the national campaign mobilised too much opposition to make victory possible in that particular area.
133. there could be left wing voters outside the working class too! Except if you agree with Dennis Skinner about Britain still being a class society.
Btw, just of curiosity here’s the list Libdem target list over Labour (before boundary changes):
1)Edinburgh South (0.9%)
2)Islington South 1.6%
3)Oxford East 2.3%
4)Watford 2.3%
5)Aberdeen South 3.2%
6)Edinburgh North and Leith 5%
7)City of Durham 7.4%
8)Oldham East 8.3%
9)Norwich South 8.7%
10)Leicester South 8.8%
11)Bradford North 10.2%
12)Newcastle Central 11.1%
13)Glasgow North 12%
14)Swansea West 12.9%
15)Derby South 13%
16)Blaydon 13.7%
17)Holborn and St Pancras 13.9%
18)Liverpool Wavertree 14.7%
19)Burnely 14.8%
20)Edinburgh East 15.6%
21)East Lothian 16.6%
22)Newcastle North 18.3%
23)Birmingham Hodge Hill 19.2%
24)Midlothian 19.3%
25)Manchester Gorton 19.9%
Which seats do you think are the best target (taking in consideration the type of seats they’re)?
134 - My point was that the current situation owes nothing to the MPs, and whether they weren’t or were not hacked off. Nothing that has happened in the past two weeks to turn the contest on its head can be traced back to MPs giving or being reluctant to give Davis support previously. It may harm his efforts to recover the situation, but that is a different matter.