YouGov: Fox in second place amongst members
October 20th, 2005
-
New poll blow to Team Davis
-
Cameron tightens to 1/10 on Betfair
With the final MP ballot due to take place this afternoon a YouGov poll of Tory party members in the Telegraph this morning has Cameron 59%: Fox 18%: Davis 15%.
This poll is taken very seriously because a similar survey ahead of the 2001 membership ballot predicted the final result to within one percent. Other findings:-
The poll shows a further move to Cameron since the last similar survey eleven days ago. Then the Cameron would beat Davis by 66-27%. In the summer Davis had a big lead amongst the membership.
In the betting on who will be eliminated today Fox is 0.5/1 on the betting exchange and 4/6 with a conventional bookmaker. Davis has a 1.64/1 exchange price and is 11/10 bookmaker price.
The suggestion that it might be all over tonight with the runner-up conceding has led to the Shadow Education Secretary’s price tightening even further. The idea that a bet today could see winnings tomorrow, even at 1/10, is appealing for punters wanting a quick and what they see as a sure return.
Best betting exchange prices; Cameron 0.14/1: Davis 11/1: Fox 14.5/1
Best bookmaker prices; Cameron 1/6: Davis 6/1: Fox 8/1
IG’s Binary spread-market. Cameron 80-88: Davis 5-11
Prediction Competition
Paul Maggs writes: David Cameron is the clear leader with all but two competitors saying he will win, and with an average score of 93.0 votes. However, the other two contenders are almost dead level, with Liam Fox on an average score of 52.8 votes, and David Davis averaging 52.2. Even if we add all the predictions together, Fox has a lead of just 29 votes, out of nearly 5,500 for the Fox and Davis predictions combined. Davis predictions split 25-25 between second and third place, with 27-24 for Fox.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I would expect Davis’s vote to be very soft to-day… and even if he does make the last two his only hope would seem to be to appoint Helmut Schroeder as his campaign manager :).
And why would Fox want to campaign on when second place would give him a combination of the positions enjoyed by the two Michaels - Heseltine in 1990 and Howard in 2001? (The de facto deputy leadership and choice of portfolio now, and the reversion later if Cameron does indeed turn out to be IDS with hair.) Talking of Howard, surely he is the happy man this morning - I wonder if he’s singing in the bath as I write ;-)?
I think this rumour could be enough to make the deserters come in droves. I think that everyone knows the game is up and the only way to beat Cameroon now is to shoot him (thanks to Billy Hague for that one).
Personally I’m supporting Mr Jackson (Peterborough) next time for his service to politics (can’t we petition to get him knighted)!
2.”Personally I’m supporting Mr Jackson (Peterborough) next time for his service to politics (can’t we petition to get him knighted)! ”
He has to pay for having defeated the venerable Helen!
3. Please god tell me you are talking tongue in cheek?
I heard two things last night, don’t know how true they are with all the rumours flying about.
1) The BBC story about the others stepping aside was being put about by Fox’s people, not Davis’.
2) Camerons team are keen to have a membership ballot whatever the result today.
Make of that what you will, but I read it that Fox is not confidant of beating DD.
IIRC the justification for having a membership ballot was that 300,000 heads were better than 198. I suspect whoever comes second will be keen to put it to the wider test, regardless of what the polls say, as it gives them a few weeks to outperform Cameron in the run up to the ballot.
… Or for something to go wrong for DC…
4. David, The venerable Helen ( of teh Gorgon of the Soke as Jack W calls her) is one of my personal favourites. A true source of entertainment!
I could post a picture now, but it’s too early in the morning and someone could have a shocking wake up…..
5/6. I think that teh membership ballot is always a good thing. The tories could have another mouth, they don’t need a leader tomorrow.
Another mouth??? But they’ve already got the lovely Helen, and Boris…
8 - I do think that there is a bit of impatience starting to kick in. It now seems clear that DC will be the next leader irrespective of whether the vote goes out to the membership or not.
Having originally been in favour of the MP’s having the final say I now wouldn’t mind if the members have a vote (and I wouldn’t deny that thats partially because it looks like my own favourite would win). As I said on another thread it may actually be quite a useful exercise for DC.
Fox in second place, Clarke out.. Macaroon to win… oh it just gets better…
9. Innocent Abroad, it should have been “the tories could wait another month”……. I don’t know what I was thing about whilst writing that comment.
Even yougov are claiming accuracy in the poll of members they did for the previous leadership election, am I the only one to be highly sceptical of this poll?
Essentially, and I really am not being ageist or willfully anti-tory (I’ll save that for other debates
- but, how typical of the wider tory membership are people who are heavy internet users and are signed up to things like you gov’s panel of respondents? And is the kind of tory member who is likely to be on a you gov panel, also much more likely to be a cameron supporter? I am not saying cameron won’t win with the membership, but I am casting doubt on these figures.
13 - I’d be more sceptical if it wasn’t for the fact that when you speak to fellow members of different ages you get a very similar picture. And bare in mind the same polls did show Cameron trailing badly behind KC and DD so I don’t think it has an inbuilt pro-Cameron bias.
5 - I think the rumour could well persuade waverers to vote Cameron. At the end of the day a leader now instead of in December might be a good thing.
8 - I’ve seen plenty of pictures of Helen. My main memory of election night was bouncing round the office going “ding dong the witch is dead” when the Peterborough result was announced. And every time I felt like I was flagging on the Friday I cheered myself up by bringing up the Peterborough result.
Is it another 5.20-30pm announcement?
18. Yep….
Cheers
Thinking about the Tories this morning (which isn’t something I often do), my first thought was that Michael Howard must be delighted by how things have worked out. Six weeks ago, his rule changes were defeated and David Davis looked a strong favourite to be the next leader.
Now, Howard’s protege. for want of a better word, stands on the threshhold and Davis (who I expect Howard has little real time for) is finished to all intents and purposes. Cameron is the man Howard wanted, let’s not forget. I suppose some members could vote for Cameron as a way of “thanking” Howard.
Shaun Woodward is one of the “fall guys” too. I wonder, if he had stayed as a Tory MP in 2001 and crossed the floor before the last election, whether Cameron would only just be entering the Commons now. As the split in the Alliance in 1989 gave Hague HIS opportunity, so another man’s defection has given Cameron his. It’s a funny old world..
Other thoughts…this all hangs on one vote back in 2001. Had Portillo gone through to the members’ ballot, I suspect he’d have beaten IDS. Had he gone on to win the 2005 GE, he’d be Prime Minister now, had he lost, I suspect the Tories would have picked a more traditional Right-winger like Davis.
Cameron has garnered the “Portillista” vote and will pick up the “Clarke” vote. In 1997, the Parliamentary party was split roughly 60-40 in favour of the Eurosceptics. In 2001, the Parliamentary Party had three roughly equal factions - the traditional “Right”, the modernisers and the traditional “Left”. Now the modernisers and the traditional “Left” have joined forces and now outnumber the traditional “right” roughly 55-45. These are the people who would have backed Clarke in 1997, Portillo in 2001 and now Cameron. In some respects, the Thatcherites are set to get their come-uppance today and the Tory Party history will begin a new and interesting chapter..
And yet…Cameron has the lightest CV in terms of Parliamentary experience of anyone taking over a major political party in modern times. Even Kennedy and Hague look like old hands in comparison. It is still fascinating to see how one speech, one Newsnight piece with suspect methodology and the failings of others have paved the way for Cameron. My feeling is that many Tories and it’s clear from the postings of the activists on this Forum, have crossed a rubicon of sorts following the defeat of May.
Whatever they may say publically, I know from the few Tories I talk to that they believed they could win - it was the Tory equivalent of April 1992. In 2001, they knew they would lose - this time victory seemed achievable but they fell further short than Kinnock did thirteen years ago. For the activist, it is now a question of choosing a leader who will win them power rather than choosing a leader who says what they believe in. I suspect many Tories are uncertain about Cameron but he “seems” to be the only candidate who can reach out to voters beyond the core vote and bring them into or back to the Tory fold. If he can do that and win the Tories the next election then, as happened with Labour and Blair, they will follow wherever he chooses to take them and the Conservative Party will become the Cameron Party. If, however, he fails or appear to fail, then we also know the Tory Party is ruthless beyond comparison. The defenestration of Thatcher in 1990 was evidence that as soon as you become an electoral liability, you’re history.
My question to Tory activists is this: if, in the summer of 2008, you are ten points or more behind Labour in the polls with the LDs snapping at your heels and if Cameron’s ratings are in the doldrums, would you dump him in favour of a Davis or Fox who would shore up the core support but mean another election defeat ? I think that is how long Cameron has - eighteen months. If the Tories aren’t five or ten points AHEAD of Labour by then, the questions will be asked…
damn. another late shift
Excellent post Stodge. Cameron has played a good game by allowing himself to be the blank canvas on which the membership projects its ambition and prejudice. I don’t think they quite know what they are getting, but then Cameron isn’t the “lefty” that the press portray him to be either.
For what it’s worth I’m predicting Davis will still come in second this afternoon. Fox may have lulled the Right, but does the Right really extend past the 42 votes he’s already got? (and how many of those were anti-KC “Spite Votes” anyway?) Many Tory MPs are reluctant to let the Party be perceived as edging to the Right and granting Fox a leadership campaign would surely give him the platform to air these sentiments. A Davis-Cameron final, whilst perhaps a foregone conclusion, would reflect better with the electorate would it not?
21 - Well I am a Tory and I knew full well we couldn’t win. In fact I had the election pretty much predicted exactly as it happened 6 months before.
Howard was doing damage limitation and he did it very well indeed.
Cameron doesn’t need to be ahead of Labour in 18 months. He needs to be ahead in three years. Even if he’s not he’ll remain leader as long as we make ground.
The only heels LDs will snap at is each others.
To describe the election as our 1992 is frankly laughable.
23. It seems he’s almost a creation of the press (ok, I’m a bit exagerrating).
21. I suppose Cameron would have found a seat even if Shaun Woodward wouldn’t have left.
24 - Agreed. Though a public defeat of Fox’s brand of atlanticism might be a good thing for the party image?
25.”To describe the election as our 1992 is frankly laughable. ”
Infact it was worse……
25 - you could very well “make ground” once again by a switch Lab - LD (which Baxter shows as):
Party 2005 Votes 2005 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
CON 33.23% 198 33.50% 233
LAB 36.20% 356 32.00% 307
LIB 22.65% 62 27.00% 74
Without getting out of the 33% box. What’s interesting is in this scenario you get 2% more of the vote than Labour and 74 fewer seats.
21. “Whatever they may say publically, I know from the few Tories I talk to that they believed they could win - it was the Tory equivalent of April 1992″.
This Tory put half a month’s wages on a Labour win at 1-12! Good post overall though, especially the Woodward point.
David R - yuh, perhaps, but is it still publicises the atlanticist faction, and you know what they say about publicity.
25 - I agree, I know of almost no-one in the party who thought we would win the election. As you say it was about not taking to much of a kicking and gaining a few seats which is what was achieved.
Back to today’s vote. Sporting have DD a big favourite to beat LF for 2nd place. Are they right?
24 - Julian, I would put the hard right at around a quarter of the parliamentary party, but I would guess Fox’s Atlanticism would resonate with a greater proportion of the membership, certainly over half.
33. I don’t think this is correct (if by Atlanticism we are essentially referring to Fox’s admiration for the Republican/Neo-Con movement). At the time of the Bush-Kerry Election there were stats showing that only 19% of Tories would vote Bush over Kerry.
As I’ve previously posted here, my meeting with some local Tories the other night confirmed this; when I brought up Fox’s links with the Republicans there was a kind of communual groan in the room and the people who had said they’d vote for him suddenly expressed doubts.
Timothy Garton-Ash is bigging up our Dave in the Guardian today, in a rather deft assassination of the Blair ouevre.
30.”especially the Woodward point.”
Woodward defected in 1999. There were other seats for Cameron to get before 2001.
43. When I say “confirmed this” I mean only in an anecdotal sense. So not really confirmed. You know what I mean…
43? Sorry, 34.
32 - I think so. Fox losing any declarers (as he has) suggests his momentum is more fantasy than reality.
28 - You misunderstand me. The 1992 election was so bad for Labour because in the 1991/92 winter it looked like they couldn’t lose and they did. In comparison we ended up in 2005 much closer to Labour than we had looked in most opinion polls throughout the 2001 parliament.
29 - The boundary changes before the next election will get us 10 more than that (and Lab 10 less). But the maths is simple in that Labour win in inner city seats where people are too lazy/disinterested to vote. I know a lot of Tories get upset that the system is “unfair” to the Tories but people who don’t vote in a democracy deserve representing too. And most non-voters are in Labour seats.
34 - fair point, I was meaning it in the sense of admiration for things American over European.
29. Tabman, the Tories could do even better by squeezing the soft centre, even if Brown is able to shore up Labour’s core vote:
Party 2005 Votes 2005 Seats Pred Votes Pred Seats
CON 33.23% 198 44.00% 315
LAB 36.20% 356 36.00% 302
LIB 22.65% 62 12.00% 0
I wonder if some rightwing MPs will switch from Davis to Fox because Fox is less likely to pull out from the membership ballot if he becomes second, as I got the impression from this article http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-1834052,00.html
Cheers for the link, Tabman. I’m back on the Torygraph today (girlfriend wants the 2-for-1 trips on Eurostar voucher) so I would have missed that…
36. You’re probably right, Andrea, but I want to believe it ok? It’s a nice thought - let me rest in the delusion…
39. yes, I misunderstood you.
40. well, they dislike Europe!
43. Julian, think if Cameron will be a mess as leader. Will you go to St Helen South to get Woodward, becuase it was responsible for it?
21. “Whatever they may say publically, I know from the few Tories I talk to that they believed they could win - it was the Tory equivalent of April 1992. In 2001, they knew they would lose”
Not wholly true. A certainly former Conservative parliamentary candidate for Sutton and Cheam thought his party would win in 2001.
45. Andrea, as much as I dislike Woodward you don’t have to refer to the man as “it”.
Anyway, if Cameron does mess up I’ll re-align my delusions at the time…
[15] You got the drift re Macaroon- attactive on the ouside, soft, gooey mess on the inside and also very easy to overcook.
To our fellow posters I would say “He’s not the Messiah, He’s a very naughty boy”…
21: “they fell further short than Kinnock”
Kinnock was 7% behind Major, Howard less than 4% behind Blair.
Back to the vote. Please God Fox doesn’t get 2nd place, or if he does, let’s have a coronation. The thought of members electing IDS #2 is terrifying. Fox would have no chance of getting over the 33% discussed above. I still haven’t forgotten his appalling Spice Girls ‘joke’.
49. Was it him that said the blackbird one?
41. Just a tad far-fetched in terms of the Lib Dem ’soft vote’ don’t you think Lorcan? 12% is worse than the Liberal result in 1979, having since got between 18% and 26% (Alliance). I think you could safely say our core vote is at least 16%.
The Davis Camp this morning complaining of Black Propganda by others! I haven’t laughed so much in years.
41. The Lib Dems would get no seats on that model? Even when they were at those vote share levels they would always get enough seats to fill a London taxi at least.
Has anyone alerted Mr Smithson to the vile posts Banana on a previous thread. I think that may carry Legal risks for him, and should be deleted pronto.
50 - Yup - anything to get Anne Winterton’s vote!
51 should read *17%*
21 - ” Now the modernisers and the traditional “Left” have joined forces and now outnumber the traditional “right” roughly 55-45. These are the people who would have backed Clarke in 1997, Portillo in 2001 and now Cameron. ”
17 out of 43 of Portillo’s supporters last time backed DD this time, as least publically.
Cameron and Davis both have gained a mixed bag of supporters. A simple left - right analysis of the party doen’t really work. I think it is more a case that the parliamentary party is now in majority eurosceptic, modernising centre-right roughly 60% ( DD & DC ). Old left 20%, hard right 20%.
53. Is it true that when Winterton told her last racist joke a Tory MP in the audience was seen to drop his head into his hands flat on the table (out of despair)?
52. Even when we were picking up 3% of the vote we still managed to keep our taxi-load of MPs.
57 - Aye but Cyril filled a cab on his own. So you needed two
While Cameron has garnered the bulk of the modernising vote, I don’t think, in terms of basic policy, there’s a huge gulf between him and Davis: in fact, they seem closer to each other in these terms than either Fox or Clarke. The gap is in personality and in positioning.
47. With “it” I was referring to “Woodward defection”.
59. I think it’s hard to know exactly what DC’s policies really will be (and it is still a “will be”, not an “are” - he has no real influence yet). He has had to draw support from all areas of the Party so as to challenge Davis, so he’s surely been saying what certain people want to hear.
Given that the Notting Hill gang are generally on the liberal wing of the Party, I’m confident that will be their direction if ever in government. For this reason I can stomach the odd “family values”-type soundbite.
Guido is ascribing the “Coronation” rumour to the Fox Camp.
Thanks for the link to TGA’s article, Tabbers - shall we do a poll on whether we prefer Blameron or Camerair (despite TGA’s cogent pleading, I prefer the former - it’s just too close to “blather on” to let go of :))?
And thanks too to Julian for the phrase “delusional re-alignment” - I do it on a daily basis, especially about women…
51.-52. just a counterpoint to Tabman’s scenario which I think is almost as implausible. The Baxter model is not a straight UNS and is very harsh on the LibDems when their share falls back.
Is Lorcan cryptic for Lord Lucan?
64. yes.
61: True, but Cameron’s links with the established Eurosceptic right, most notably with Howard himself, seem fairly strong. It’s not implausible to see Cameron sticking to minimal policy change, while launching a revolution in presentation.
Thanks for the various responses to my morning musings:
Re: 36 - maybe so, Andrea, but Witney is a solid, safe Tory seat. It means that Cameron has a base “for life” if you like. It fitted the bill nicely - could he have got somewhere else ? Maybe, maybe not. He inherited a safe seat and presumably a large membership. One thought on that: did he fight anywhere in 1997 ? It’s often the case that an MP stands in an unwinnable seat first - “a baptism of fire” if you like. Blair’s was the Beaconsfield by-election in 1982.
Re: 49 - in terms of seats, Kinnock got much closer to Major than Howard did to Blair numerically. In terms of vote share, what you say is true.
Re: 55 - of course, the labels have changed and it’s not an exact fit. I still think Cameron is primarily the inheritor of the Portillo brand of modernisation. As to how MPs ACTUALLY voted, it’s like asking why Eric Sykes had no glass in his spectacles - “we’ll never know the answer to that one, baby !”
Re; 25 & 39: - ignoring your petty partisan posturing for a second, my argument was never that the Tories always thought they were going to win. I certainly agree that six months before the election, things looked bad but I well remember the first polls after Howard’s immigration onslaught and some polls at the start of the campaign that hinted at the Tories breaking above 35%. I also remember the reaction of some Tory activists when those polls came out. There were a couple of short-lived spells when some Tories believed they could win - I accept you were of a more rational disposition.
Re; back to 49: so in spite of a poll showing Cameron ahead by 40 points in a straight fight with Fox, you’re scared of a ballot. Unbelievable - so Cameron’s support is so soft it will crumble in six weeks - Labour and the LDs must be salivating in anticipation !!
67 - looking back I would ask that Phil/Mike delete it - although it wasn;t my intention I can see how it oculd be misconstrued.
There is a Guardian article pre-analysing likely results it suggests that if Cameron gets 100+ then it is Game, set and match….
70. “did he fight anywhere in 1997 ?”
Cameron lost in Stafford in 1997.
46 - Chrisco - you do talk rubbish. I did not expect to win in 2001, nor did I predict that we would! Where do you dig up this rubbish?
73. Do you have an encyclopedic memory or do you look this stuff up? As someone who struggles to remember details of anything, I’m quite amazed.
Sorry, that referred to 71
67 - done.
I seem to recall Nick Robinson being a member of the Tory Party, does anyone think he has ‘been got at’ in terms of him breaking the coronation story yesterday. Nick Robinson looks like a DC sort of guy.
Stafford in 1997 was had a notional Conservative majority of 7235 (13.14%), so Cameron would have been stuck in a marginal even if he had defied the national swing. A fairly good seat for a new candidate, though.
74 - someone (Wat Tyler?) did a piece linking Robinson, the American pollster from newsnight (forgot his name), Boris Johnson and Cameron together in Tory/Union politics in Oxford in the early/mid 1980s. The implication was that Robinson spun the Davis is Toast story at Blackpool even before he’d finished.
76 - American pollster = Luntz presumably
I’m not a tory, but I think it would quite shocking if the “men in grey suits” cut a deal that denies the tory members their chance to vote. Isn’t the current tory rules that the mps choose the run-off candidates and the members choose the final leader? By doing a deal…you know…back room deals etc….think it will look very bad. How could cameron attack blair’s government by two men on a sofa if he gets elected by avoiding the punters? so to speak.
Does anyone else think that Nick Robinson comes across as ‘impartial’ in this matter?
78. Even as a DC supporter, I agree. A 6-week debate within the Party is a crucial chance to discuss policy and add a bit of depth to the contest.
Nick Robinson is the most over-promoted man in politics today (since Estelle Morris left the cabinet).
I, personally, don’t think Nick Robinson comes across any more badly than Andrew Marr, who has his own leanings to the left, apart from a tendency to sound too worldly-wise and cynical.
The coronation story seemed a blatant spin to me, giving the impression that everyone was jumping on the DC bandwagon, and that DD was about to be humilitated, making DD supporters think twice?
81 - Wise words. Bring back John Cole!
I think what we have to watch for is significant movements of price in the betting once the poll has opened. That might give us a hint as to the veracity of the ‘coronation’ rumours….
49:
Yes. 3 dogs and…
Wintertonesque. Just what the tories need to attract their lost voters back don’t you think?
76 - Yes
http://daviddavisleader.blogspot.com/2005_10_02_daviddavisleader_archive.html
82 In general I think you are right, however in the matter of the tory leader election, Nick Robinson seems to be the apparent ‘Kingmaker’ or Sh*t Shoveller’ at least.
70. “By Richard Willis (193.130.234.20) on Friday, May 18, 2001 - 01:54 pm: Edit
The Conservatives are widely acknowledged to have “won” the first week of the campaign and the second week has been a disaster for Labour. Jack Straw’s slow hand-clap by the Police was sadly pushed off the news by Tony Blair’s first encounter with someone not a Labour activist, and by John Prescott’s over-reaction to an egg thrower. Tony Bliar’s face was a picture as he didnt know what to say to someone who doesnt agree with him!
Here in Reading East the Labour party has disappeared. There are virtually no posters in windows for our local Labour MP and none at all on stakes. She seems to have no literature at all and local activist have put out generic old budget stuff. She has resorted to paying canvassers from London to come and canvass for her and has abused the House of Commons mailing system to contact people. Even in Reading West where the MP is more popular he has a fraction of the posters up that he had in 1997.
So for the first time in my life I am convinced that the polls are simply wrong. We are close on Labour’s heels in this election and a few more screw ups by them and we WILL win.”
http://www.ukpol.co.uk/messages/messages/6/1331.html?991393359
How’d you like them apples?
41 - Tabman - that Torygraph Eurostar offer is a joke! I got the passwords and phoned up within 10 minutes of the booking lines opening last week on the first day of the offer and all the tickets to anywhere other than Lille midweek were gone! Total waste of time!
Good luck with it but I suspect you’ll have no joy!
89. That was me, not Tabman. Hmmm, Lille in midweek it is then. I can congratulate them for depriving ManUSA of 2 points on Tuesday…
88 - His brand of false cynicism doesn’t sit with me after watching his nauseating toadying up to Blunkett for that interview last year. He nearly made me vomit.
Apparently the Fox team are admitting they havent done enough to come second in an article in the Standard.
89 - some of those arguments (abuse of Commons Mail priveleges) were used this time round too IIRC.
NOTE: Some comments over the past 24 hours have now been deleted for legal reasons. When there are reasons to believe that particular contributors might make potentially defamatory statements then all their comments are held for moderation
89.”Here in Reading East the Labour party has disappeared.”
did she already have the habit to disappear?
ooh Mike’s got his red pen out
95. Mike, you may also want to review the predictions thread. The poster has made the same allegations in that thread also.
Morning Campers ! OK my last day on the site before I’m banged up with Printz and Nick Robinson in Pentonville for four weeks !
News from the Tory trenches is a little thin today. What movement there is continues to Cameroon. They are a little surprised that more of our Kens troops haven’t publicly declared for their man but are supremely confident of a “thumping win” come 5.20pm. A “trickle” of votes continues from DD but not a “significant haemorrhage”. They are working on a DD vote of around 58 +/- 2. This figure is also the one that the DD camp is privately looking at. They are relieved that Fox has failed to ramp up his vote much past 45. In contrast the Fox camp is still, even privately, confident that they will “push Davis harder than anyone expects”. They won’t give numbers.
Would Fox endorse DD or Cameron? While it’s not a point of decisive importance, if Fox endorses Cameron, then DD will appear to have the entire party, across the spectrum, ranged against his base.
99. Jack, behave well during your trip to the North!
Guido has some kind of garbled story about Fox on his website. Can anyone explain?
101 Andrea. I couldn’t possibly promise that ! It would be utterly out of character
103. Jack, pay attention not to spend too much time in Rutland’s tearooms and not the cold (the SNP said that many old people are risking to die this winter).
102 - Was it Simon Carr in the Independent who said that the biggest surprise of the Tory leadership contest was Liam Fox getting engaged?
102 - Well he is known to have invented girlfriends in the past and got engaged sharpish when running for leader, suspect it is a smear based on not much more.
102 - Just a mini-panic on conservativehome.com caused by someone posting, in a humourous manner, about Fox doing a Portillo and admitting having a gay past.
100 - Observer have you been able to get onto GU this morning?
Down for “operational issues”, Spohia. It was supposed to be up and running at 10.
105. Sophia, don’t be malicious!
107. I was going to have lunch, but the mental picture of Portillo and Fox together ruined it!
From Conservativehome:
“Fox: My forthcoming marriage will end rumours of gay past
“GAY SMEARS AND ME, BY TORY HOPEFUL”
That’s the front page headline in today’s Evening Standard. For many years Dr Fox, 44 and now engaged to Dr Jesme Baird, has been subject to rumours that he has had a gay past and that he has been a promiscuous heterosexual. Interviewed for today’s Standard Dr Fox refuses to discuss his past:
“If someone accused me of doing something against the law I might feel bound to answer it. Otherwise I would have no comment to make. If you start getting into that, all sorts of areas open up and I think you are entitled to a private life.”
Dr Fox continued:
“I know that some people use smears and I have heard them for many years. They say, ‘Why are you not married?’ You must be a playboy or a wild man or gay’, or whatever. Well I’m getting married in December and I’m perfectly happy with my private life and it remains my private life. It’s perfectly clear that Jesme and I are very much in love with each other. I’m not going into that smear territory.”
It’s not clear how this will play for Dr Fox ahead of today’s parliamentary vote. On the face of it, the story will slow any momentum he had. Elsewhere in The Standard an unnamed Fox aide is quoted as saying that they have not done enough to overtake Mr Davis. I have had that confirmed to me. There is also unhappiness, however, in the Commons Tea Room at the behaviour of two Davis supporters who have been ‘promoting’ the Evening Standard story to colleagues.”
108 - Thanks - at least it is not just me.
89. To be scrupulously fair, the Tories did win Reading East with a 7% swing, Labour vote down 10.5%.
113. Look at the date of that comment
113 - to correct you we damn well didn’t in 2001 (when that post refers to).
102/107 John/observer. A quick call, and Lord it just shows how febrile the Fox “camp” is when a comment on a site causes “sweaty palms”
74. I thought I was being paranoid about him. Glad to see it’s not just me who’s noticed his apparent bias.
89 - Chrisco are you deliberately stupid or just mischievous?
That post clearly refers to the READING EAST campaign last time, NOT the General Election overall. Sadly Labour did pull their campaign together nationally and locally and our national campaign was not good! Hence the result. It was always clear that Labour would win the 2001 GE overall, it was less clear that they would win in Reading East.
111 - allegations of a “gay past” being considered a “smear” says something, doesn’t it? To me, “smear” carries the connotation of having done something wrong.
111. It’s a bit tiresome the suggestion that if a man is not married, it must be gay.
Those people will be surprised that many single men are heterosexual and some married men not!
119. Well that’s the head-banging Tory right for you….the same Tory right being assiduously courted by Dr Fox…
119. Tabman, I don’t think it’s something just limited to the tories. In other parties those tactics have been used too.
[84] Happy to oblige- “As it seemed to me”
Hoodootedlycavaleriarusticana risingtorystarmorrismen Macaroon faces secondvotein bouyantmood belishabeacon aardvark tired Daviscampaign treacletart hurricanewilma Real apprehension ofmore defections ethelredtheunready Doctor Fox-terwentogloster hoping to make progress nellietheelephant draculas bloodbank supported by American pollsters derangedscreams fraublucher stargazeypie right wingnutters. David Macaroon newfavouritemotherspride sellby date despite drugs issue silverspoon damagedseptum orthodontist subwaystop. Commons corridor batedbreath preparation h dubrovnik fivethirtytonight mammarycumulonimbus covendoubledouble toilandtrouble before moving to the wider membership twinsetand pearls mashieniblick pumpkin. still moretime before washedup aga woodblockflooring issue resolved.
120. These allegations are always coming out (so to speak) and are really rather pathetic.
113. Not quite. We were talking about 2001. There was a 2.7% swing from Conservative to Labour, increasing the majority by 1800. I believe in Reading West the swing was over 7%.
125. Will you be applying for a job with the labour ‘attack Cameron’ unit? Getting some good practise here.
37 - You are being a little optimistic when you say that the Boundary Changes will make Lab -10 Con + 10 . See the article The Conservatives and Electoral Reform written by a Conservative on http://www.electoral-reform.org.uk for a detailed look at the effects of the boundary changes . Whilst some of the finer conclusions re some seats are debatable a rough estimate net effect is Con + 7 Lab -8 Lib Dem + 2 PC -1
42-Correction to 40 ‘They dislike the EU’
Very differnt from disliking Europe!
127 - well I was going off the top of my head so I’m not feeling too bad about being 2 or 3 out.
125 - Reading West is a completely different kettle of fish and totally outside my domain. Reading East is the one we WON FROM LABOUR this time round, thanks to years of hard work on our part and a poor choice of Labour candidate. Reading West USED to be the more marginal seat with East being better for Labour.
46-Are you talking about Tony Blair??
49-What was the Liberal % vote in 1970 when they ended up with 6 MP’s ?
The comparison of DC to Blair is too simplistic, altho both are/were telegenic, youthful and charming persons offering a modern version of their political creed, Tony Blair had been on Labours frontbench team since 1984, and was on the Shadow Cabinet since 1988 a full six years before coming leader. Can anyone tell me DC’s sudden suitablity for leader of the opposition and possible PM in less than 4 years!
118. Yes Rik, of course it does.
I don’t believe that it is possible to be ‘deliberately stupid’ Rik, though perhaps your choice of words is revealing of your mindset.
130.”and a poor choice of Labour candidate”
I only read good things about the Labourt candidate.
132 John. 7.5%.
127. Mark. Is the PC lost seat a marginal? Do they have chances to win it back?
If DD is second with 50-something votes, why on earth would he want to traipse round the country on a lost cause?
Leave the man with some pride. The tory party–and parliament–need people like him. At least he has had proper jobs in the past. (Being a lawyer isn’t a proper job; the only people who think it is are jewish mothers).
135 - REALLY?
139. About this year’s candidate, yes.
129 - Rather more importantly , the article explains why the FPTP system is biased in favour of Labour and against the Conservatives and that the Boundary changes do not redress this . The Conservatives will still need to poll considerably more votes than Labour to achieve parity in seats .
Jeremy Vine doing a DC brown nose job on Radio 2.
141 - Why is it when the tories were in power, Labour claimed the FPTP system was against them and in favour of the tories, is the boot now on the other foot?
137 - Arfon (half Conwy half Caernarfon), given Plaid’s recent performance they would really struggle, it would also create the situation where the seat with the highest % of welsh speakers was Labour.
Funny new story of the day (of the year probably), Michael Jackson has been summoned for jury service - seriously!
144. Plaid’s performance could be totally different in 2009. I would not discount them just yet. Using this logic Labour will lose lots of seats in 2009 considering their recent performances.
137 - Hi Andrea , The -1 PC seat is perhaps debatable but relates to the changes in Conwy which are quite complex and depends whether the new seat of Arfon is Labour or PC .
143. Because the boundaries have changed
.They’re always out of date.
[138] It would b crazy to give Cameron a coronation- the biggest fears that the party have about him is that a) he is an unknown and b) he is untested. At least the campaign gives him time to introduce himself and season himslef with more campiagning. Of course if he is nbg then the election might reveal it…
147. Mark, so in the end the new seat will be a Lab/PC marginal with both parties having a chance to win it, right?
146 - The new seat basically takes the Plaid heartland out of the Caernarfon seat (Plaid majority 5,000) and adds the Labour heartland from Conwy (Labour majority 4,000). It basicallly creates a concentrated working class seat, which is welsh speaking. In return Plaid Cymru’s Meirionnydd Seat becomes much safer, and the Conwy seat becomes very Lab-Con marginal.
It is instructive thyat Dafydd Wigley, Plaid Cymru’s former leader and former Caernarfon MP has ruled out contesting the seat basically because he doesn’t think it is winnable - if he couldn’t win it I can think of who could.
148 - Sorry No , This is not the main reason - Now you lot don’t be lazy go to the article referred to and read it . As it is written by a Conservative in a scholarly manner it is not Lib Dem pro PR propaganda
Sorry *can’t* not *can*.
149 - Exactly- and as everything since Conservative party conference has shown - suddenly the public have taken an interest in what HM Oppositio are saying. Good for the Conservative - and good for democracy.
The Evening Standard rumours are also in the Sun
TORY leadership contender Liam Fox today hit out at gay “smears” just hours before the critical ballot of MPs.
Dr Fox did not directly answer questions about his sexuality in an interview with London’s Evening Standard.
But he said his recent engagement to cancer specialist Jesme Baird should end any gossip about his private life.
Dr Fox also appeared to take a swipe at favourite David Cameron’s refusal to say whether he has taken hard drugs.
“There are all sorts of smears going around and politicians should stick to the issue,” he told the paper.
“If someone accused me of doing something against the law I might feel bound to answer it.
“Otherwise I would have no comment to make.
“If you start getting into that, all sorts of areas open up and I think you
are entitled to a private life.”
150 - See answer 151 - I agree in my view it favours Labour .
DCs PR man is on BBC2 now.
154 - the media have taken an interest, along (presumably) with 300,000 Tory members. Its a bit too early to see if the public are interested yet.
156 - this is an artefact of the system; it favours the party who can concentrate its vote the most. The most extreme example being Canada in 1993.
151/156. I still think it’s a mistake to already decide PC won’t have any chance.
David Cameron, a true man of the people, not that oiky fake David Davis.
David Cameron is the cousin of the Conservative political journalist and editor Ferdinand Mount and the grandson of Sir William Mount, 2nd Baronet. Through the Mounts, he is related to many British aristocratic families, being descended from the 7th Earl of Denbigh, the 1st Earl of Ducie, the 1st Earl of Carnarvon, the 2nd Earl of Egremont, the 6th Duke of Somerset and the 2nd Earl of Shrewsbury.
Of course a leadership ballot will destroy the myth we have 300000 members which is probably a concern to the grandees.
The truth DD is an oiky fake
Born to a single mother Betty Brown in Yorkshire, Davis was initially brought up by his grandparents in York. His grandfather Walter Harrison, was “the son of a wealthy trawlerman who was disinherited after joining the Communist Party” [1]. Contrary to Mr. Davis’ misleading insistances, Harrison had no part in the Jarrow March of 1936 though may have played a part in a separate march from North Shields later that year.
158.”it favours the party who can concentrate its vote the most.”
What favours Labour?
Could you tell me how many members do the Libdems have?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/10/20/uviewtory.xml
There are an awful lot of Cameron dissenters out there - especially the one who said:
“As a young Tory I am worried … Cameron is not the right man for the job. He is vacuous, rude, cruel (just ask anyone who has had the misfortune to work for him) and shallow. More worrying still is the fact that a large majority of the party don’t seem to mind. Watching him deliver his speech at the Party conference filled me with a sense of foreboding as he invited his wife on to stage and rubbed her stomach in a crassly embarrassing attempt to symbolise his commitment to family. Spin is a fact of life, but not like this. Please. Bring back William is all I can say. Anonymous”
163 - I believe 70,000
163 - I believe the Lib Dem membership is around 70,000.
165. Thanks. 70,000 members for a party with more thann 20% of the vote isn’t very good!
152 - I’m fully aware of the reasons for the electoral bias without reading that article. But out of interest I have done and it’s biased towards the Tories. Though of course it would be given the title.
The reason the system is currently biased towards Labour is that there is a low turnout in Labour areas primarily and secondly that Labour inner-city areas gradually depopulate in favour of suburbia and boundary reviews don’t keep up with that.
I’m sick of Tories whining about the electoral system I really am.
166 - look no hands! At least we can’t be accused of overinflating spin
It woz the Luntz wot won it !
This is the Wat Tyler article:
The Old Chums Connection
No complaints, because we live in the world as it is. But further investigation into the background of Frank Luntz reveals some very interesting connections from the past.
In the 1980s Frank was at Oxford, where he obtained a Doctorate in politics. He was also a member of the Oxford Union Standing Committee.
By a curious coincidence, Michael Gove MP was Union President at the time. He succeeded to the post shortly after the immortal Boris MP. And very shortly after that, Ed Vaizey MP arrived, becoming an OU Librarian (it’s one of those curious Oxford type posts that is more politico than literary).
So the guy that did such a splendid job for Dave C on Monday’s Newsnight is an old Union chum of three key Cameron supporters.
And there’s more. BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson- the one who enthused about DC’s speech and then told Conference viewers that DD’s speech just wasn’t good enough- he was President of the Oxford University Conservative Association during the same period.
Hmmm…I have a strong feeling that if I dug further I’d unearth a whole lot more.
To be truthful, I’m torn on how I feel about this. My inital reaction was screaming indignation. I don’t like the pungent whiff of cosy chumdom th