Miliband now 7.2/1 second favourite to be leader
December 28th, 2005
-
Will Labour elect Brown even if the opinion polls are against him?
From the way punters are reacting on the betting exchanges Labour’s big beneficiary from the emergence of David Cameron is that other Oxford-educated 2001 Commons’ entrant, David Miliband - the Minister of State for Communities and Local Government.
The chart showing the implied probability of success based on the best betting exchange price and illustrates the move to Miliiband in the past month. He’s now at 7.2/1 and is well ahead of the third favourite, Alan Milburn, at 17/1.
Gordon Brown, of course, is the very solid favourite to replace Tony Blair and the current best price is 0.45/1. This has tightened a bit in the past few days but is nowhere near the 0.35/1 that was the best you could have got at the end of last month.
Some of the confidence in the Brown camp has eroded because four opinion polls since Cameron’s election have shown Labour doing worse under the Chancellor’s leadership than under Blair. If this polling trend continues then we might see greater interest in possible alternatives to Brown.
This is a hard market because we do not know when there will be a contest. For all the pressures he is under Tony Blair does not look like a man about to leave office.
JUST OVER TWO WEEKS UNTIL THE PB.C PARTY. This will be on Saturday January 14, at the “Star Tavern” Belgrave Mews West, London SW1. Time - from 6 o’clock onwards. Please contact Innocent Abroad if you want to attend.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
A bit of gossip: David Miliband and Ruth Kelly have been a couple in the past.
Btw, what happened to the Deputy Labour Leader market?
I couldn’t find it anymore.
David Miliband, does not look a good bet to me.
Is there any price in Douglas Alexandre?
He looks a future leader to me.
There’s a fundamental difference. However much some Labour supporters may want to choose someone who has the best chance of winning an election, that must be subordinate to the best candidate for Prime Minister.
Cameron was very fortunate that this latter point was almost completely irrelevant to the majority of Tory members. This goes a long way towards explaining why his opponents had such little success with pushing his “lack of experience” as an election issue.
Re Dez 3. I have been very impressed by Douglas Alexander who, of course, is a strong Brown loyalist. He would only come forward if GB had to step aside for some reason.
re 4. Alex - I’m just reading Tom Bower’s biography of Gordon Brown and it’s making me increasingly uneasy that the Chancellor might be the next Prime Minister.
4. Just a quick bit of historical form: of the 11 people who became Prime Minister during the 20th century other than leading a party to victory at an election or in parliament, 4 (Asquith, Baldwin (1923), Macmillan, Major) were chancellors, 3 (Eden, Douglas-Home, Callaghan) were foreign secretaries and 4 (Balfour, Lloyd-George, Baldwin (1935), Churchill) were exceptions - two were almost co-prime ministers and the other two were in wartime (and three of these were former chancellors). When electing a prime minister rather than just a party leader, experience and office count. I cannot see it being anyone other than Brown unless Blair goes the distance, and as I’ve posted on the other thread, I don’t think he will.
5. Mike. Why uneasy about GB as PM ?
BTW the cult of youth as the leader of political parties has infected my own Jacobite Party …. Mrs Jack W indicates that I should hand over the reins of power to the gleam in Kinkell’s eye !! … I ask you!
5. Mike S, what in that biography is brothering you so much about Gordon?
I enjoyed the Bower book as a dirt-dishing character assassination, but I don’t have a great deal of trust in its objectivity - for example, when you look at any discussion of the economy under Brown it seems to be culled straight from a Tory press release.
8 Andrea. Stop nicking my questions ! ….. who do you think you are ?? …. the Labour party !!
Blimey, if Miliband is the answer, I do wonder about the question
Now if Big Gordie ain’t the man, might the fickle finger of fate not more suitably alight on Alan ‘Postman Pat’ Johnson, or the younger Mr. ‘Ishoos ‘R Us’ Benn?
Does it matter when we are looking at an inevitable Conservative landslide?
11. John, both of them are quite good. Johnson is a bit too Blairites for my tastes, but he seems a decent man.
Jack Straw is the best candidate IMO. He’s had a bad, and very unfair, press.
I must be drinking
15 Alex. ?
Have you already changes your mind about Straw?
Probably nobody is interested, but here’s an article by Diane Abbott about skipping a generation:
http://www.dianeabbott.org.uk/index.php?article=38&x=12&y=16
Miliband was the guest apeaker at a dinner I attended a couple of years ago and it was the most boring rambling speech I have heard at an event. If that is indicative of his oratory skills then God help us if he gets the leadership.
re 7 & 8. One thing that comes over strongly in the Bower book is how many enemies GB has created along the way. Peter Hain, John Reid and Charles Clarke just to name but a few. If there is a credible alternative to Brown then he’s got a fight on his hands.
He’s known to be petty to officials and a bit of a bully - there’s a touch of the David Davis about him. GB’s best chance is if the mood of the party is for a coronation. If they go for a contest then it could be hard, particularly as he is not polling very well.
As to Alex’s Jack Straw suggestion I am, to my surprise, very much in agreement.
12,
Are u joking, do`nt think we are in that territory yet.
I think its a fair bet you will not put any money on that outcome.
In 1979, Thatcher only had a majority of 44 after Labour lost a confidence vote, and the winter of discontent.
Anyone with a sense of objectivity, would say this Labour government, with the economy in a fair shape, is in a far stronger position.
I can’t really see the attraction of Straw. About the only way Labour could manage not to throw away some of Blair’s baggage is to elect Jack War.
21 - that was what my reference to “bad press” was all about. I don’t think Straw was nearly as positive about the war as he has been portrayed. I think he is the classic example of someone who is held back by instinctive loyalty (to Blair).
19,
Jack Straw could be the John Major candidate.
Not Heseltine who did the deed, or Douglas Hurd, who was not seen as electoral asset.
So if GB gets the knive out, and Reid stands against,Straw might be the man.
How`s his wisdom teeth?
As he might need an excuse to be out of the way.
21 book value. ” … is to elect Jack W(ar)…”
Kind of you, I’m sure !! …or is that a shortened Jack W (arse)!!
22 - I think the die is cast now, really. I can’t see how he’ll shake off the reputation, deserved or otherwise - and as he was happy to sit in the Foreign Office for the duration, it doesn’t seem particularly unfair to me.
19. There’ll be a contest, it has been reported Brown wants a contest. it’s just to be seen if it’ll be a real contest or a faux contest (something like Brown against Alan Simpson (or anyone else from the Left) where the result is obvious).
re enemies. I think it’s normal to have made enemies for someone in a so high position for a long time.
re being bully. well, it could be. But it’s not that Blairites are known to be “tender” either.
In the light of the previous point, a new figure with little baggage to carry could be the perferct candidate (so enemies just because he/she had no time to make them and no bully history, because he/she had no-one to bully except some left wing MP at PLP meetings)
Then if Bower says something it doesn’t mean it’s 100% true. Bob Marshall Andrews thinks Blair is a pyschotic and Brown a neurotic, but I doubt (at least hope for the sake of the UK) he’s right.
re 17 Good article Andrea by Diane Abbot. But what about her prediction in October that “Cameron may be ripped apart by Labour’s attack dogs before he even gets to the stage of being seriously compared to Gordon.”
What has happened to Labour’s attack dogs?
This was a common theme on the site a couple of months ago - Cameron was going to be torn apart. Yet Labour have not got close to landing a blow and the Tories are making the running.
27. I suppose their attack dog was Hilary Armstrong “shouting like a child”
Re. 21, Book Value, I agree. Having met Straw (at last year’s party conference), I’d say he’s very good in person (so much so I thought at the time I might vote for him in any contest against Brown), but very poor on TV (which is why I would vote for Brown in any Brown v Straw contest, despite having heard tales of Brown’s social ineptitude which never found their way into Bowyer’s resolute hatchet job).
Were Labour to skip a generation, Benn the Younger, Denham, Cooper or Alexander would be good. Miliband would be diabolical (if not quite as bad as his truly bizarre sibling).
29. With Benn you wouldn’t skip a generation. He’s just 2 years younger than Brown and he has the same age of Blair.
30. on reflection, maybe you were talking about skipping a “political” generation. in that sense you could skip a generation with Benn too.
The future is not looking too bright for Labour, the party seems bereft of charismatic figures and potential Prime Ministers. The Tories have quite a few clean-cut, ‘looks good on TV’ types on their benches. If Labour do go into opposition at the next election then they could spend a considerable time there - in finding a plausible leader the Tories had to pick someone who hadn’t even been an MP last time they were in power and this will probably be the case with Labour as well.
32. I wouldn’t be so drastic. As I said many times, it’s not that the shadow cabinet is any better than the real cabinet in terms of political abilities IMO. Maybe a problem for Labour is that it has many solid performers, but few shining stars.
It could a problem in today’s “presidential” politics.
It’s a bit “sad” when looking “good on TV’ seems to count more than being a solid politics, but this is the new evolution of the political world with a strong media presence.
Btw, who are the ‘looks good on TV’ types on Tory benches you were referring to?
I suppose Osborne, then who?
Among the new intake the potential good figures seem to be Michael Gove, Ed Vaizey (I recall someone mentioning here that he hasn’t performed very well in some Tv appearances) and Nick Herbert (never saw him on TV, so I don’t know if he looks “good”).
Among the “old” ones, David Davis isn’t a great performer (well I always fail to understand the end of his sentences). Theresa May usually looks good, while Alan Duncan always seems to be “over-excited”.
33 - I think it is true though that image is what matters - experience in politics is now actually a disadvantage when it comes to be elected leader of a major party. I had a punt on Cameron back in June simply on the basis than the youngest/least experienced candidate always wins - since 1983 this has pretty much been the case, with the exception of Smith and Howard which were coronations (Gould never being in the running in 1992). With regard to the up and coming Tories, yes Osborne, Vaizey, Herbert, maybe Justine Greening and Adam Afriyie - probably all complete lightweights but they look and sound relatively normal whereas Labour only have policy wonks like Balls, Alexander and the Miliband brothers. I agree the Tories need to clear out the shadow cabinet but I suppose that will take a few reshuffles.
Surely Gordon Brown should do more interviews on television and radio.
34. yes, Adam Afriyie sounds ok (well, I’ve seen him only twice). Kirkbride is ok too.
Not agree very much about Greening. She looks tough a la Howard way.
Among Labour new intake, I havent’t seen the great majority of them. I think the most famous are Balls, Ed Miliband and Kitty Ussher (I dislike her).
I liked Katy Clark when I saw her interviews on Sky during the conference, but she’s a left wing (and already a serial rebel), so I doubt she will get a prominent role in the future.
I can’t imagine David Miliband becoming leader of the Labour Party. Cameron has charisma and the much vaunted ‘X factor’. Miliband has neither and he wouldn’t stack up very well against DC. I’m afraid Blair is the only Cameron that Labour have got. Such a pity he’s leaving
20. Then why did Labour poll a greater percentage of the overall vote in 1979 than in 2005? If that’s a strong position, I seriously need to update my understanding of “strong.”
19. I was a Brown man back in the day (when Labour wasn’t “New” — it was just “Labour”). I may not be now (not least because I consider a coronation a betrayal of the democratic ideals of the party). But “Peter Hain, John Reid and Charles Clarke”? You’ve got to admit, Gordon has excellent taste in enemies. You’d meet nicer people frozen in ice in the Ninth Circle of Dante’s Hell than you’ll find in the Gordon Brown Backstabbing Society.
I posted on David Miliband back in January. When our laws don’t suit David, it seems, he goes abroad. Bit like Gary Glitter really.
Hazel Blears set to join the Cabinet according to the Times (no suprise here). Blair allegedly would like an 8th woman in the cabinet.
Ian McCartney is likely to resign because of health reasons.
Prescott is apparently blocking Blears for the chairmanship, because she’s too Blairite.
Jacqui Smith and Beverly Hughes are the main contender to join the Cabinet as the 8th woman.
Darling could go to Department of Trade and Industry and Johson to the party chairmanship
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,17129-1961789,00.html
O/T Must confess to be being pleasantly surprised that the Geldof advisory role was the lead story in both the BBC and ITV news. And in tom orrow’s papers? The ‘boy Dave’ is is certainly impressing this old codger…I shall sound out more of the Surrey faithful over some stiff drinky-poos on Jan 2nd!
40.”And in tom orrow’s papers? ”
well, John, it’s in tomorrow’s Times too with Geldof saying it’s just a 3 hour job.
A good PR coup by DC anyway.
38 - 20. Then why did Labour poll a greater percentage of the overall vote in 1979 than in 2005? If that’s a strong position, I seriously need to update my understanding of “strong.”
BW - there is a very easy answer - 4% points of their voters voted for other parties. The reason they won was that 12% points of Tory voters voted for other parties.
The Liberals/Lib Dems of course gained 8% points over the period (but only 1 million voters).
40 - John. He certainly has been impressive! We’ve gotten more good publicity in the last 10 weeks or so, since the conference (almost entirely on his account), than we have had for the past 10 years before it. As Bruce Anderson wrote in The Times today, it’s nice to have a leader with the ‘gift of popularity’ for a change.
43. It’s easy to get good publicity when the media are desperate to give it
Having said that, as much I dislike Cameron, I’ve to adimit he’s a good PR operator. A giant in comparison to his predecessors.
Alastair, Incontrovertible, M’Lord! But I do tend to fret a little when the ghastly ‘Brute’ is adduced in evidence. ‘Gift of popularity’ eh? The last Tory leader to possess that was John Major ….. Hmmmm.
44 - Come along now, Andrea… I realise he’s no Dinky Duncan, but give the man a chance!
46. AHM, I couldn’t tell you what my mum said when he saw him at PMQT…..mostly because I’m not able to translate it!
Then I’ve already John who is trying to convert me to Conservative Future….too much, too soon
45 - According to his column today, the last Tory leader with the ‘gift of popularity’ was Harold MacMillan, which is probably true in terms of someone being genuinely liked by most voters. Mrs Thatcher was respected by most, and feared by some but, outside of diehard Tories like you and I, adulation would have been a rare commodity for her.
48. I had an interesting experience last week. I met up with a fellow Tory and we were talking about possible green policy and a woman asked who we were as it was the most interesting conversation she had heard for a long time (she thought we were friends of the earth), and I proclaimed myself to be a conservative without that twinge of embarressment I subconsciously used to have. Times are changing.
49 - And what was the woman’s reaction, Woody?
Are David Miliband and John Redwood related? Has the Search for Spock finally ended?
Its the economy stupid is a hackneyed anorakism. But what is it about the economy that is so important?
Clinton’s campaign which coined this aphorism was against the backdrop of an economy that was perceived as failing. UK 1997 was on the up. Nulab saw this and realised that it was trusting them to keep it going steadily that was the key issue not the economy itself. What used to be called a ‘hygiene’ factor, that essential characteristic that made for acceptability.
The electorate wanted a change but not at the price of the MArx Brothers economic policies of the Labour 80’s. So a long campaign was mounted to convince us that it was safe to put the economy in their hands, and this included smarming the city and making straight faced promises on tax rates and following Ken’s budget plans for four years (and cleverly sticking to it when they finally got the chance - they had a longer perspective than one election).
In short they promised to be New Tories on the economic management front.
The issue was Labour not the government and in the same way the issue now is the Tories and and not the government. Are they to be trusted with the that ragbag of hopes and fears into which we personalise the economy?
Psychologically that has little to do with direct expertise in managing the national purse, but much more about being the right sort of people. People like us. For Nulab it worked a charm. After all what track record did Blair and Brown have to back up claims to competence. Er, well, er, none actually.
Like any good salesmen, the Blair Brown team knew they had to be presentable enough to have tea with mother, ’cause if they did that right and got her support as ‘nice’ boys they would be home and dry against a tired government that was running out of steam and fighting itself (sound familiar?).
Now what is it that Basher’s Boss is doing ………? He’s apologised for the ERM and it barely raised a ripple because he is at mother’s for tea at the moment and she has already made him take extra cake and is smiling sweetly and patting him on the knee.
It seems that at a certain hour of the night, all tories posters start to appear! It could be that they simply are the only ones here who actually work during the day or they all have Howard’s something of the night (copyright to Widdy paid)!
52 - It’s feeding time, Andrea.
53. AHM, I know your “secret”
Andrea As it is even later at night for you are you sure that you are directing yor suspicions in the right direction. Is that a bee sting on your neck… no its two stings side by side, er, isn’t it?
54 - Whatever it is, I deny it categorically!
33. Nick Herbert came over well in his interviews on police reform last week, I thought - relaxed and straightforward but forceful.
Conservative spokesmen are getting a very easy ride at the moment because of a combination of tiredness with Labour, and the fact that it is very difficult to trip them up with a convincing line of questioning. (because any questions about past contradictions with present policies can simply be answered by “we’ve changed”). They have also finally discovered that one thing the media are institutionally incapable of doing is attacking them from the right.
55. Blue2Win. I fall in the first category (people who has anything to do all day)
56.AHM. It’s something that has to do with sleeping…..
Though I’m almost certain to vote Labour at the next election I wouldn’t be too disappointed if we got a Labour government led by Cameron. Sorry if I’ve missed something but so far everything he has done which has been acclaimed including the Geldof stunt is pure New Labour. Even die-hards on this board who used to fawn all over the ultra right-wing Mr Howard have been converted to the rather more red than pink New Labour message soothingly delivered by Cameron.
Keep it up Dave!
“we got a Labour government led by Cameron”
“stunt is pure New Labour”
Roger, you’ve already solved the mistery…it’s the “new” added before Labour
Roger 60. In our competition you do not indicate a plus or minus sign with your estimate of seat changes in the local elections. Do I assume that you expect Labour and LD gains?
Sorry Mike-should be minus in both cases.
Given that “New” Labour’s message was simply that “it’s okay to be Thatcherite, with a few little smoothing of the rough edges”, it would be very surprising if Cameron was not to follow that line.
I attended a local gov assoc conference recently at which Miliband spoke. the speech itself was not bad, but the q and a session left the minister looking foolish to say the least. He couldn’t answer the final question and ended by saying words to the effect of - well whatever my colleague said I agree with him - the questioner retorted, no you don’t you’ve contradicted every word he said, to which Miliband shrugged his shoulders, picked up his papers and left. Much to the amusement of his audience, oh apart from the Labour Cllrs that is!
I might be a bit premature, but I disagree that Ian McCartney will stand down for health reasons. i saw him bouncing around on fine form just three weeks after his huge op. He has made an astonishing recovery. Sad though this is to say, I think he’s the kind of man who will ignore such warnings from his own body and would rather carry on serving in cabinet, regardless of personal risks to his own health.
I also think with prezza on the way out, they can’t afford to lose another union man from the cabinet.
My money remains definitely on Alan Johnson. Immense personality that the great british public will find infinitely preferable to glum, dull, insecure brown.