YouGov: Members divide 65-27 against Kennedy
January 7th, 2006
-
Survey has Campbell 49%: Oaten 14%: Hughes 21%
Any resididual hope that Lib Dem members might save the day for Charles Kennedy are dashed this morning in a YouGov poll in the Daily Telegraph. In a survey restricted to just members of the party the provisional results show that 65% want a new leader for the General Election with just 27% saying he should stay.
The poll is also a severe blow to leadership hopefuls Simon Hughes and Mark Oaten. To the question of who they would vote for the members divided: Sir Menzies Campbell 49%: Simon Hughes 21%: Mark Oaten 14%.
These findings have to be taken seriously. Similar surveys of Tory members during their leadership election proved to be extraordinarily accurate with YouGov’s final figures for David Cameron being within just one per cent of the actual result.
The poll was carried out yesterday both before and after the announcement that 25 MPs have signed a statement saying they will resign if he does not quit as Lib Dem leader by Monday. If anything, because of the timing factor, the YouGov poll probably overstates the leader’s position.
These numbers are a devastating blow for Charles Kennedy who had been pinning hopes on the party’s membership. His whole strategy had been based on by-passing his parliamentary colleagues in the belief that he was overwhelmingly popular amongst the party members - the body which ultimately decides who is leader.
The poll results on the preferred leader could act as a springboard for those who have been pressing for just one alternative to Kennedy to go forward. With Campbell enjoying such a lead amongst the members it is hard to see any other outcome and he has indicated that he will only put himself forward if he is unopposed.
Given YouGov’s record with the Tory members leadership ballot the message for punters is clear - get on Campbell while the prices are good. The latest prices are 13/8 with a conventional bookmaker and 1.04/1 on the Betfair betting exchange.
After making several thousand pounds on the Tory race I’m trying to put as much money as possible on Campbell. The prices will tighten this morning. The only concern is whether Campbell will stand.
BETTING UPDATE: IG BinaryBet has 30-36 on Campbell - to be leader on May 4th. Kennedy is at 4-8. I’ve put a spread bet on both because my view of the poll is that Hughes and Oaten are now out of it. With a 49% YouGov share it looks like Campbell but the main obstacle is Kennedy sticking there or perhaps saying he’ll hang on till after the local elections.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
A sample size of 280 and yougov has no track record with libdem members, so should be treated with caution (especially the “who should replace him” question)
The Ken is dead, long live the Ken.
The poll for who is going to take over is a bit more of a problem. Like Mike says Campbell may not stand. Hughes might not either, looking at these figures. But there are also names missing. Ed Davy and David Laws are both talented, experienced, yet young. Both have Orange Book connections, although Ed’s is far less divisive and would probably be a far more unifying prospect than David. He would also be a nice antidote to Cameron’s smooth as a fairtrade latte image, with his slightly gnarly yet intelligent style.
Assuming there is an election rather than a coronation, these figures have to be treated with some caution.
And i think Campbell is a terrible price. Why do you think it so unlikely that someone will emerge, Cameron like? Remember even taken at face value YouGov only has an “impressive track record” in the final two horse race a few days before close of polls. Their polls at the start of the campaign, however accurate they may have been at that time, bore no resemblance to the final result.
Ed Davey looks like a very attractive dark horse to me.
re 1-3. Alex - YouGov’s amazing performance in Tory membership polls in both 2001 and 2005 cannot be dismissed lightly - both final surveys getting the result within 1%.
I can see no reason why it should be any different with another party. Also in terms of a proportion of the total Lib Dem membership the YouGov 280 sample is bigger than the samples in YouGov’s Tory member polls.
Remember ICM with a sample of 215 got a reasonable prediction in the Cameron-Davis clash.
For me the issue on Campbell is whether he would stand given his stated desire of only wanting to do it if there was, in effect, a coronation.
My late father (a “one nation” Tory) only made one remark about party politics - that I remember - in my childhood. Time - the early ’sixties. My mother had suggested that the Liberals seemed “nice”. He replied: “if they ever got anywhere near power they wouldn’t.”
….also - YouGov picked up the move to Cameron very early on and did really well when more than two contestants were still in the race. In the week of the Tory conference they had DC on 39% well ahead of several rivals. By October 19th this had gone to 59% and on November 4th the pollster had a 68-32 split with Davis.
The actual votes split 67-33.
That is all one helluva record. I backed my judgement on that and did very well.
I think if MC gets below evens its time to lay plenty again. All the members I know bar none say the same thing… too old. Admittedly they are all activists rather than armchair people but can’t imagine it will be that different.
I’d have to agree with Paul Lloyd on this one… Ed Davey looks like the winner. You get much better odds on him too.
As one Libdem You-gov member who was not invited to vote, perhaps I can cast my vote here and say NO THANKS to all three. It is to be hoped that we will get a wider choice, otherwise I will go with CK who has after all outwitted his assassins so far.
Beth
Of course if there was a caretaker leader until an election after May it would be MC and the odds should be 10-1 on Ming if that happens.
I mean 10-1 on on Ming of course…
“With Campbell enjoying such a lead amongst the members it is hard to see any other outcome”
maybe someone not tested by yougov.
6 - You are missing the point. Aside from the technical point that a smallish sample size doesn’t necessarily mean that the results are wrong, merely that they have a large margin of error (a sample size of 40 can technically get an accurate result), the point is that (and you were proven totally right in Cameron’s case), a poll at this stage is as much a case of name recognition (and dependent on the choices that YouGov offered). Who would have backed Cameron pre-conference on the basis of the You Gov poll at that time?
Andrea 11. I have the usual frustrations in examining this poll because the only data I have is that which has been reported in the Telegraph. It’s likely to be Wednesday before we see the full data-set and by that stage the whole issue could have been resolved.
I have no doubt that other potential candidates were put to those polled.
12. Alex. Re name recognition. yes, but they should have been able to recognize Hughes anyway. He’s pretty “famous”, I think.
13 Admin. Re Other potential candidate being put to those polled.
A risk which could effected the poll result could be the name recognition mentioned by Alex especially with relatively unknown (to mass audience) candidates.
14 - that is more thn sufficient explanation for him getting 21% of the vote.
15. What I was meaning is that Campbell is leading him big times and I doubt that those polled didn’t know who Hughes was.
I’m not suggesting that Hughes (or even Oaten!) is likely to be a serious challenger for the leadership.
Mr Smithson Sir,
Can I just ask you to clarify MC’s position on Coronation vs Contest. I’ve got a good position on him winning at the moment and want to run with it for as long as prudent.
I understood his position to be not that he sought a coronation per se, but that he wouldn’t enter a leadership contest against CK.
Certainly on the TV yesterday exiting his home he said that he would be interested “if there was a vacancy”
Kind regards/love the new website - Congrats all round.
“name recognition” is also a bit of an inadequate phrase for a more complicated phenomenom. I’m sure many LibDem members (although perhaps not as many as activists like to pretend) will have ‘heard’ of most Libdem MPs and certainly likely challengers. However they will have no more than superficial impressions of them filtered through the media outside of the context of a leadership race. You know the sort of thing - Hughes “left-winger”, Campbell “statemanlike”, Oaten “right-wing headbanger”, Davey “who knows?”, etc. These superficial impressions may be reinforced or completely altered in the course of a leadership race. Some lesser known candidates may even come out in favour of positions previously not attributed to them.
Beth at 8: “As one Libdem You-gov member who was not invited to vote, perhaps I can cast my vote here and say NO THANKS to all three. It is to be hoped that we will get a wider choice, otherwise I will go with CK who has after all outwitted his assassins so far.”
CK has been dragged along the whole while - he has been unable to outwit anyone or anything and is currently kept afloat only by his advisors. Actually, he’s not even afloat, he’s under and breathing through a straw poking out of the top of the surface. Over half his MPs want him out, the frontbench are threatening mass walkout, he can’t form a frontbench team and now the members have turned (well, so YouGov say). Kennedy is a dullard with only the constitution and Lembit Opik on his side. He remains in place thanks to stupidity rather than Blackadder cunning.
But at least, as one LD Councillors said to me, he can claim to be LibDem Leader 1999-2006 now, which makes it look longer than it really is!
BTW Mike, what happened to your rule about not betting on the Liberal Democrats?
20″Over half his MPs want him out”
did we have more additions to the list during the night?
22 - 33 on Newsnight, Andrea - on the assumption that those who think his position is “untenable” want him out.
re 18. I was basing my comments on Campbell on what has been reported. I do not think there has been an on the record statement to that effect.
The really interesting aspect of the YouGov poll is the extent to which Campbell beats Hughes and Oaten.
The IG Binary spread prices on who will be LD leader on May 4th are interesting. Campbell 30-36: Hughes 27-33: Oaten 10-15: Kennedy, Davey, Clegg and Laws all 4-8.
This is all out of 100. So a £10 Kennedy bet would give you a profit of £920 if he won and a loss of £80 if he was not leader on May 4th.
I’ve bought Campbell and I’ve covered myself buying Kennedy. So a winning £10 Campbell bet would give a profit of £640 and a loss of £80 on Kennedy. If Kennedy’s there the profit would be £920 less £360 for the losing Campbell bet.
My stake levels are for illustrative purposes only
It is also a reasonable assumption IMO, that people like Campbell “want him out”, but are not saying so as an electoral tactic. Ie. they think he will go but want to exploit the position (a la John Major) of having been loyal to the last.
23. Ah thanks. I was left to the 25 signatures. Couldn’t the other 8 reveal their name? It’s not that Charlie will survive that long to demote them!
24 - Let’s be clear Mike - are you backing Campbell because of the poll, because you think he is the best candidate, or both?
Slightly o-t, but there has been much discussion about Daisy McAndrew and the motives for her “scoop” on Thursday evening. The assumption though, seems to be that she did it to advance her own career - has there been any consideration that she might have been prompted by someone in the LibDems, with whom she must surely retain some informal links?
28. Alex, that sentence in The Times could point in that direction:
“Several had concluded that it was no longer sustainable to have an alcoholic at the party’s helm, lying about his condition. If he would not go quietly, the option remained that his critics could force the fact of his drink problem into the public domain.”
What some of these posts seem to be moving towards is that there is a Ken Clarke in these candidates, who polls high before the contest starts as he seems warm and cuddly with good name recognition, but that when the real thing starts clever new boys and girls may come to the fore.
Although in all other respcts the circumstances and the party divisions make this much more likely to be an IDS/Clarke election than a Cameron/Davis one.
So the fight will continue after the poll because the paper over the cracks will have been ripped off. Innocent’s dad was right.
Alex 27. My betting on anything does not imply that I am personally for or against but just is my assessment of what I think might happen. If the probability looks better than the price I might consider a bet.
My vote was for Hughes last time and probably I will favour Ed Davey this time but that has no effect on my betting.
I do not have a good profit record with Lib Dem issues and probably should not be betting
Good Morning and belated Happy New Year to all . Just recovered from post New Year flu. I think as a caretaker candidate till post May elections Campbell would be long odds on but if he has longer term ambitions then other strong challengers would emerge . As I said many months ago , there would be a big plus for the Lib Dems to have a Woman leader and will be surprised if Kramer or possibly Featherstone do not mount a strong challenge .
If he’s elected and the current parliament goes at least 4 years, Ming Campbell will be the oldest person to lead one of the three parties into an election since 1955. And he looks even older than he is. Is this really the image the Lib Dems want to project?
Out of mild and increasingly academic interest, apart from Opik, who are CK’s main supporters in the Parliamentary party? No others appear to have surfaced to defend him before the cameras, have they?
32 That’s quite spooky Mark!
34.”As I said many months ago , there would be a big plus for the Lib Dems to have a Woman leader and will be surprised if Kramer or possibly Featherstone do not mount a strong challenge . ”
Mark Senior, I think just having a woman is not enough for a plus. A woman with certain qualities/characteristics could be a plus, but just a woman no. In the end even Jenny Tonge is a woman……
31 - that wasn’t what I was getting at Mike. My question was why do you think Campbell will win? (assuming no coronation - which may be part of your calculation, I don’t know).
When you backed Cameron early you made a very persuasive case, which was proven remarkably accurate, and cautioned your readers strongly to ignore the early polls. Maybe I missed it, but I haven’t seen you make a persuasive case for Ming to be the best candidate. Your betting, assuming no personal bias, seems to be based on two things:
1) polls
2) his perceived position as the favoured candidate among MPs.
The Tory contest showed that neither of these are enough to convincingly pile money into an even money favorite. Why is it that you believe that Labour may need to look away from Brown towards a younger “Cameron like” candidate, but the LibDems should go for the “elder statesman” approach, to offer a contrast with the young Conservative buck.
38 Andrea, someone less gallant than I might have an issue with your summary!
36 - Agreed Andrea to a large extent that certain qualities are needed in any leader female or male but given those a woman leader for reasons I have outlined on here before would have many advantages and give the Lib Dems a distinctive appeal .
I would agree there is an element of risk in going down that road but perhaps less so than the Conservatives electing my choice of Cameron as leader of their party .
All the gloating from non-lib dems, whilst understandable in the short term, might well come back and haunt them shortly - remember how the non-tories enjoyed the spectacle of the tories shredding themselves during their leadership election - the laughter dried up once it was over though didn’t it.
If this election lasts till March, there will be a series of news items on the LDs and - horror of horrors - some of those news items might show LDs talking about politics and advocating positions! After the election is finished, and provided they don’t pick a bogey leader, there will be a lot of coverage around the new man - all leading nicely into a honeymoon period through the local elections.
Rather than the worst timing possible, this could be CKs final gift to the party that has treated him so treacerously - massive gains in the locals, giving the new leader a fine springboard for the parties renewal.
Of course - they could get the Mighty Ming and none of this will apply
There is also a case for saying that an older man is even less appropriate for a third party. Because the third party must work extra hard to secure media exposure their leader must be much more energetic. Outside of Iraq they won’t automatically get media offers for interviews etc, and must actively go looking for it to make up the gap. That requires people with a great deal of energy.
38. which one, Tory Boy?
I’m not at all well up on Lib/Dem MP’s but apart from Ming I was impressed by Nick Clegg on a panel show a while ago. Could someone with knowledge tell me if he has a chance or would I be throwing my money away?
40 - was there another Tory leadership contest going on that i wasn’t aware of?
I bet none of the Liberal Democrat MPs could have got the numbers working again in IE… many many thanks Robert
45. IA, the test if they will work when we’ll be in 3 digit numbers.
Tying in Mark @ 40 & Pimpernel @ 41 I think both highlight
a potential strand of what has become a fascinating period in Politics. I certainly see and accept the possibilty they point
to (a medium term boost from short term chaos).
(Though not about the benefit of potential attraction of ending
up with a women leader - And no, I think the A list sucks too! -
I simply don’t believe anyone really cares either way.
If this were to happen (a medium term LD bounce) and it were to coincide with a fall back in our current revival (as opposed to
a weakening in Labour), there is no doubt where the pressure would be switched back to in short order.
38 Andrea - Mrs Tonge !
48. Tory Boy, I just said she’s a woman (and implied she won’t give a plus to the LD)
Beth. I’m not a Lib Dem member or even voter. I once worked with Paddy Ashdown on a PPB that he was doing and met Matthew Taylor who was his assistant or his helper at the time. Apart from being a very nice and couteous man he was also driven and an extaordinarily hard worker. He also took the trouble to hand write a thank you note to everyone involved in the project and a collegue who used to drop him a line about some silly political point would always get a full and researched answer to every frivolous question.
Don’t you think Kennedy’s collegues are entitled to be pissed off with his lazy indulgence after what they were accustomed to with Paddy?
As I said, someone less Gallant than I !
(Agree with your comments in brackets!!)
47 - TB, Are you try to write poetry?
Hi John,
No way man, that’s far too old school / not hip enough.
I’m far busy loading up the Smith’s and Radiohead onto my IPOD
and burning all my pin stripped suits.
Get with the programme dude.
(Help !!)
Regards
Pimpernel said some of those news items might show LDs talking about politics and advocating positions
Indeed horror of horrors, people might not like what they hear. They certainly will be confused by the competing and rather different tendencies that issue forth.
Perhaps, like tuning a video recorder, its best left to twelve year olds to explain? Is that the plan that is already going into action in the North of England, to go even younger than Dave?
Why not mention in your main post that IG binary is offering 36 - almost 2/1 - on Campbell?
Plus this is a spreadbet, so unlike a bet with a conventional bookmaker, one isn’t risking everything if Campbell pulled out tomorrow.
54.”Perhaps, like tuning a video recorder, its best left to twelve year olds to explain? Is that the plan that is already going into action in the North of England, to go even younger than Dave? ”
I think DC’s official nickname here is Commie-ron with the copyright paid to Tabman.
Actually, that’s a really stupid point. If Campbell ruled himself out in all cases, the sell price would of course drop to 0. What I meant was if you change your mind on a spreadbet, you can get out. That’s not true with a conventional bet.
I’ve just got really good odds on Nick Clegg with IG. Now I have to hope he stands! They didn’t offer odds on Kennedy if I remember so maybe his resignation is considered a certainty?
54. Or they just might not care. The Lib Dem’s USP has been that they were the nice party. They seem to be in danger of throwing that away.
55 - Mike mentions it in the comments. It’s not the same bet - the IG spread is “leader on May 4th”
58 - you can on betfair
54. The Lib Dems have 12 years olds guarding local party constitutions of course.
59. I’m already all green on betfair with Clegg so heres hoping.
Kennedy, should stand aside, and let the party have a fairly long leadership campaign.
Then the wider Public will see any potential they have.
If this happened surely they would`nt go for a short term fix in electing Menzies Campell.
They need this oppurtunity to position themselves for the next election.
Hopefully this position will be eventually shoring up moderate tories against their extremists.
[60] See my earlier comment at [5].
Those of you who wish to know more about alcoholism could do worse than read this (a “cribsheet” for the post-med exam of the Royal College of Psychiatrists): http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:Ffp5qER1eMoJ:www.trickcyclists.co.uk/pdf/Addictions.PDF+alcoholism+prevalence&hl=en
I’m back and like the new site
I think the MPs have treated CK absolutely terribly and they should be ashamed of themselves.
But putting that to one side ;), even though I’m not happy with his role as Brutus, I think Ed Davey will be worth a punt if I had any money left after Xmas
61 - yes, but it’s important enough to deserve a place on the main post.
62 - indeed, but with spreadbetting, you can also collect immediately, not on the day the bets are settled.
40 Pimpernel more or less summarises my own thoughts very well.
Up until last night, I wanted CK to stay as leader but now with the 33 ungrateful bastards, I think the game is up.
I think Ed Davey for leader
a) Is a good price.
b) Is of the modernising tendency but divisively so (given I’m one of the oft-quoted traditionalist grassroots)
c) Has good public appeal. Like Cameron, once the light is on him, he will look and sound really good. Just needs to shave a bit more
63 The local Tories once had a 10 year old as President
Sorry Peter, I thought you were talking to Mike, now I sense it’s me.
I fully take your point about Spreadbetting offering flexibility
that other markets don’t (nearly so much) which was why I mentioned (and had a small grizzle about) the spreads being ’so’wide.
If you bought Capmbell on 30/36 it would cost you 15/20% of your stake to trade out of a position in even if the Market was unchanged.
Presumably, if you did want to bail out though it would be because
something had happened to make you change your mind/become uneasy.
That presumably would be in the Market and the price would reflect the fact meaning far from 30/36 your price at IG might well then be significantly lower (say 18/22)at which point you have done half of your dough.
Add to that the Spread Bookies are excellent at spotting distressed trading trends (no complaints - thats the name of the game)and mark their books accordingly I don’t find using them as rewarding as I used to.
I would have thought the natural caretaker, for no more than a few months, was Alan Beith.
60 Nice party USP - I think you’re stuck in the past. I think we lost that tag sometime ago.
Just seen Nick Clegg on news 24.
How safe is Sheffield Hallam.?
Is he worth a punt for the leadership ?
73.”How safe is Sheffield Hallam.?”
21.3% before boundary changes. The changes shouldn’t change the situation so much.
73 Majority of 8,700 over the Conservatives
51% vs 30% of the vote respectively
74. ops, the LD majority is 21.5%
40-pimpernel
‘If this election lasts till March, there will be a series of news items on the LDs and - horror of horrors - some of those news items might show LDs talking about politics and advocating positions! After the election is finished, and provided they don’t pick a bogey leader, there will be a lot of coverage around the new man - all leading nicely into a honeymoon period through the local elections’.
Then maybe they should go for a caretaker leader now (Campbell) to cover until after the May elections and then have a full blown contest,that way they should get media coverage for many months?
Looks like Galloway has found a fan (I don’t know who the hell she’s):
http://www.channel4.com/bigbrother/news/newsstory.jsp?id=1086
78- Andrea
Dennis Waterman’s ex wife?
79. and who’s Dennis Waterman?
80-Andrea
A UK actor that used to be in TV detective series ‘The Sweeney’ with John Thaw and various other TV shows.
[78 et seq] Oh, how cruel is time… I prefer to remeber Rula like this - one of the forgotten classics of British television:
http://www.screenonline.org.uk/tv/id/1137338/
80. He likes singing theme tunes of programmes a lot. Was fantastic in a programme called Minder.
81 et seq. I don’t think I’ve never seen something with him.
UK cinema/TV productions usually struggle to get mainstream diffusion here, often overcame by US productions.
Just an aside, but for those detractors of Galloway in the BB House, as his chosen charity is InterPal - a Palestinian charity for Palestinains in need - I rather imagine he will be able to sell this quite easily to his constituents as a positive thing, especisally as the sum involved could be considerable…
Ah, GG and charities….
There a quite a few posters on here boosting Davey.
A pre-organised plan?
87 - If it’s organised it doesn’t include me! But I think Ed is well-respected across the party and has a better shout than the current odds suggest.
Now, is Davey a friend of Luntz?
I am a Lib Dem member and used to get regularly contacted by YouGov but have had no requests to answer a poll since last August.
I would also have voted for Campbell - found myself agreeing with Kelvin on Any Questions that I would rather have drunk Kennedy than a sober Hughes.
Whilst I think Charles is finished Michael White this morning on the Today Prog made me think - have a few over indulgencies (and which of us can cast the first stone on that one) been over blown by his enemies (everyone must have made some after 6 years). He may rightly feel hard done by but I am afraid that however unfair the party did need a new leader - it just didn’t need to get one like this!
Can I ask how well known to LibDem activists and, above all, the ordinary members are Davey, Huhne, Clegg, Laws etc?
The point of asking the question is the extent that any LibDem leadership contest will attract the same degree of massive media exposure that the Tories’ obtained. I’m sure that Cameron was a similar unknown, certainly to the non-active but still voting membership, back in June but he rapidly became a household name to them, almost entirely to the press and TV.
Perhaps that will also happen when the LibDem campaign commences. But if the coverage is rather less intense, wouldn’t that favour those with existing high name recognition within the party such as Hughes and Kennedy?
91 Ooops, Freudian slip there…I meant Campbell (not Kennedy)in the alst line
91 - If you are purely talking activists as opposed to members whose contribution to the party consists of not much more than paying an annual sub , then Ithink you will find that they have a very much above average knowledge of Lib Dem MPs including those you mention .
91 - I think you are exactly right, John. I was thinking exactly that about Cameron earlier this morning, in fact…
93 Thanks. Ultimately, I’m thinking of those who will actually be casting votes: I imagine, like the Conservatives, the turn-out will be high.
90 - More likely that a few serious overindulgences have been underplayed in the past. To the extent that any paper wanting to print has been threatened repeatedly with the libel laws.
Imagine the damage caused to the LibDems if one of them had called their bluff!
95 - I also think but do not have any solid facts to back it up that the Lib Dem membership has a much higher proportion of activists than the Conservatives . Perhaps book value or tabman could elucidate .
91 - a lot more will also depend this time, I suspect, on which candidate can attract the support of most MPs. Last time, this was less of an issue as the backdrop was far less messy. (And because CK was the runaway leader, though the result proved closer.)
97 - one of the complications is that quite a lot of people work on the ground as “volunteers” (Focus deliverers etc) without being members: perhaps because the local government base means that they feel less identification with the national party.
And historically I think the Tories have had a lot of “social” members who weren’t activists, though that may be much less true these days.
99 - Thanks b v . I would suspect that depending on the voting rules there could be a sudden upsurge in membership . I for one could be persuaded to sign up not having been an official member for over 20 years .
OT, I have sent details of next Saturday’s pb.com party in London to all those who contacted me or Innocent Abroad. If anyone has not got in touch yet but would like to join us, drop me a line at book_value@hotmail.co.uk.
Many thanks. But I’ve thought of another (albeit probably less relevant) point. DC’s name recognition among party members (and wider voters too) was significantly increased by the series of TV ‘debates’ with Davis. The format worked well because there were just two candidates - the others having been eliminated by the MPs - and so had the confrontational appeal so beloved of TV.
But the LibDem procedure is that all duly nominated candidates can stand and the election decided ‘at once’ by STV. If there were, say, four candidates standing, that might reduce media coverage. But a two-horse race….
To be honest Roger et al I think anyone who has only been in Parliament 8 months cannot be the leader, otherwise Nick would be the favourite and a number of women would be a shout.
My view now is that it will be between Ed Davey and Mark Oaten (who has shown commendable loyalty to Kennedy and will pick up many of the votes that would otherwise have been his). Both of course have pretty safe seats which helps.
I don’t see a coronation (unless just for 4 months) as these two would probably be eclipsed by newer younger rivals if they wait until after the next election.
David Laws is outstanding but I don’t think he would be best as leader (a bit like Willetts except David is rather smarter) - he works best on policy I feel. Mind you I think he is more personable than Brown and I don’t doubt for a second he will be the next PM.
I don’t think any of the others are serious candidates for long-term leadership.
BTW did anyone have an explanation for why Labour got hammered on Spreadfair.
101 - BV, thanks. Around how many have indicated a willingness to join the fray…
Mark - I think you would have to sign up pretty quickly. PPC selections work on the membership at the time the position is advertised which I presume will be this week. That’s assuming the leadership works the same way.
103-”Mind you I think he is more personable than Brown and I don’t doubt for a second he will be the next PM.”
who is the last “he” referring to? Laws or Brown?
I think you can probably guess Andrea. I don’t come from the deluded wing of the LDs.
105 - Well they will have to work quicly then to sign me up LOL
107. I could guess, but it’s better to be completely sure here when a comment involves GB.
104 - somewhere in the mid-20s, if memory serves.
103 - And which David is smarter?
107. “I don’t come from the deluded wing of the LDs.” Isn’t that the whole party?
Well, another morning, another truckload of press coverage. As I recall when Paddy Ashdown (of whom more in a moment) got into trouble, it didn’t do us any serious harm. 1988-89 was much worse as the whole merger debacle dragged on for weeks and we finished up in competition with the SDP. History COULD repeat itself with a drawn-out bitter battle and the SDP (sorry, I mean the Cameron Conservative Party) in the wings…
I was thinking about CK this morning. We shouldn’t forget he has spent nearly half his life as an MP - he was elected in 1983 and entered Parliament with Paddy Ashdown and Tony Blair (four years before IDS and Ming, six years before Hague and eighteen before Cameron). He was, I believe, studying at a university in America when he won his seat off the Tories in 1983.
I think this explains his decision to hang on - he has known no other life than being an MP and I, for one, long regarded him as a potential Party leader. He and Bob MacLennan were the only two SDP MPs who came to the new party and of course MacLennan had been an ex-Labour MP. Once he ceases to be leader, how long will be stay on as an MP, how long before he’s on Celebrity Big Brother ?
Of course one could argue that neither Cameron nor Blair have had much real life experience outside politics. I also think that in the era of 24-hour rolling news, you are never “off duty” as a party leader. I also suspect that CK’s problems are shared by others in the Westminster goldfish bowl and I do wonder if we need to re-evaluate our expectations of our political leaders. We are all “flawed” (even Cameron) and we all make mistakes. We also have to try and make a life outside our work - I have that luxury and I suspect most of us on here do. MPs and party leaders don’t and it takes exceptional men and women to sustain that kind of commitment for any serious length of time.
So, what now ? I loathe the idea of dragging CK kicking and screaming from the leadership but, as the Tories have shown, there’s no prizes in being “nice” any more. Kennedy has shown the peril of overstaying your welcome just as Mrs T. did and arguably Blair has.
I re-iterate the obvious fact that while Ming may be much older chronologically, he came into Parliament after CK. Only Hughes and Beith probably pre-date CK now. If the LDs are to “skip a generation” that means, politically, looking at the 1997 or 2001 intake as CK is still only in his mid-40s.
Despite the obvious and predictable sneering of the Tory-inclined here, even Peter Oborne in the Mail yeaterday admitted there was a strong LD intake in those Parliaments. Oaten and Davey (along with Andrew George) represent the 1997 intake (Tories might like to consider that Davey won by 56 and Oaten by 2 in 1997). Laws is probably the favourite of the 2001 intake along with Holmes with Clegg the obvious 2005 candidate.
The poll mentioned does coincide with what anecdotal evidence I have. Like me, the LD supporters I’ve spoken to are desperately sad for what has happened to CK and wish him well but are pragmatic enough to know he cannot go on and want him to leave sooner rather than later. As for the successor, there is support for Ming as the “steady” candidate. I don’t share that support - for us, picking Ming would be the equivalent of the Tories picking Howard in autumn 2003. We are looking into the abyss now as the Tories were then - Howard and Ming represent in their different ways stability and maturity but that’s a world away from genuine progress. In 1989, we chose Paddy Ashdown because we needed a dynamic leader to pick us up and move us forward which, I would argue, he did in spades.
Now, as then, we need a dynamic, assertive leader prepared to tell us some unpopular but necessary truths and not afraid to face down Cameron and his pseudo-SDP “views”. In the same way that we didn’t know much about Cameron, we don’t really know that much about Davey, Oaten or the others. I fear that while I like Andrew George, he’s not the right man for the job at the moment.
If we go for Ming now, it must be on the understanding that he is a temporary leader as I expect the same was true with Howard. I would like to see what Davey, Oaten and possibly Laws are made of before I make any decision. One thing is regrettably certain - I can no longer support Charles and I hope he does not longer delay his departure from the stage - the audience is leaving, the curtain is falling and everyone else wants to go home.
Mark Senior - in my local party the ratio of activists to members is about 20%. I don’t know how this compares with other Lib Dem parties or with the Tories and Labour.
Stodge - that post sums up my own views most eloquently, particularly on the replacements.
114 - Thanks Tabman - a bit lower % than I would have expected
113 - A good post stodge much of which I agree with . Especially the point that Ming is acceptable but only has a temporary leader till May/June . As for CK’s future , a medium term option would be as leader of the Scottish MSP’s for the next Scottish Parliamentary elections provided his personal problems are overcome by then and he does not wish a quiet family life instead .
The Lib Dems cannot now complain of a lack of publicity!
These figures seem about right, however the poll suffer from a couple of big flaws, firstly as has already been mention early polls usually bear no real relationship to the shape of the vote at the end of a campaign.
Secondly it assumes Ming Campbell will stand in a contested election - he won’t, as I’ve posted before he would only do it as a coronation, and he won’t get that, both Oaten & Hughes would stand against him.
Assuming Oaten & Huges do stand, and those are safe working bets, who else will enter the ring. I suspect the only other serious candidate will be Ed Davey. Remember candidates now need to be nominate by 10% of the Parliamentary Party, thats 7 MPs, I can’t see any other candidates getting sufficient names, although Vince Cable might possiblt try.
If thats the line up, then Hughes will start in the lead among the membership, however he won’t stay there - his support is based on name recognition and deep affection, not on respect. He would not win.
Oaten is very interesting, he has now appeared on both Sky & BBC publicly backing Kennedy. He is CK’s chosen successor and will get the loyalty vote, with support from people like lembit Opik & Malcolm Bruce. With Ming not standing he will be the only viable Orange Booker, and get the right wing vote aswell. However to win he will need to build links across the centre and left of the party and gain support from people like Sarah Teather.
That leaves Ed Davey. Davey has a activist following, particularly having spearhead our pre-election anti-Council Tax campaign. However, his natural support comes from the same wing as Simon Hughes, as such he is largely restricted to people from the centre-left of the party who can’t bring themsleves to vote for the Revd. Also he has been a major ringleader against Charles which will play against him in any leadership race.
My advice is to put money on Oaten, not just because I’m a firm supporter but because I think he’s going to win any race to replace Kennedy
ok everyone, over a hundred comments and no mention i can see of the fantastic Thurso. he is by far and away the best lib dem there is. What odds can i get on him, with all the publicity that will happen with the leadership conteast, i dont see how he can not win.
you heard it here first, thurso has it in the bag
118 - A fair analysis Bullseye . I have never shared the antipathy of some posters on here to Oaten and would be happy enough to see him as leader . I still feel there is room for a woman candidate to get enough nominations and make it an interesting contest .
119 - I do hope so…we can then have a reprise of Tabman’s Eton days…And a REAL peer (a Viscount at a Discount) to boot.
Looking at what people are saying on, for example, the BBC News forum, the Lib Dems are engaging in a PR disaster- lots of ‘I won’t vote for them again after this’ on the site. Don’t know how much of this is a temporary emotional response, but it is damaging our unified, friendly, image.
I too would go for Davey. Young, good speaker, freindly and popular around here with grassroots. I don’t think Oaten has a chance, and Laws isn’t exactly a grassroots man. Both are greatly disliked by many members because they are perceived as Tories- rightly or wrongly.
I think we could see quite a drop in our poll ratings soon after looking at the public response- maybe 15% or 16%- if Kennedy stays we could see no chnge or a jump in the short term. The problem is that the public are seeing this as the Lib Dem MPs trying to sack him because he is a recovering alcohlic- not because he has been a poor leader in the last few months.
Even as a Lib Dem, it is quite amusing how sad all the MPs look. They all look as if they are about to cry when they talk about Charles. Must have been tough for Taylor to speak out, and Vince Cable still comes across as a very decent man to me, who took no pleasure in what he did.
313 - IDS was 1992 intake, not 1987. But an excellent post, especially of Kennedy’s longevity. Kennedy was the future of third-party politics from his early twenties onwards. It’s hard for him to recognise that he now belongs to the past, especially when the vista of potential government at the end of the Parliament is still there. In a sense, Kennedy has to realise how much he is damagin his own future prospects. As things stand now, he could very well receive a ministerial position in any coalition, or even stage a comeback if he really can demonstrate he’s capable of being teetotal.
118. The Telegraph is already rubbishing Oaten and saying he will struggle to attract 7 supporters on account of his loss of credibility amongst fellow MPs following his repeated pronouncements of support for Kennedy.
123 - As many posters have already mentioned , being teetotal has never been a qualification for minsterial or prime mninsterial office in this or other countries .
Tim @ 322, don’t confuse the views of the activists ( who are about 10% of the membership) and the wider members. There was a 60% turnout in the last Leadership election and Hughes won the activist vote comfortably then and lost the race.
A woman candidate? Aren’t the longest serving female Lib Dem MPs the treacherous Sandra Gidley and Sarah Teather, both dubbeed the Stiletto Queens in the telegraph for their disloyalty. The rest seem to have been first elected this time round! Spare us either of them.
can someone do a break down of all the potential lib dem young guns, saying their positives and negatives as well as there odds and their periceved odds
50. Roger. I’m not against a change of leader, properly done; it is the manner in which it has been done - Julius Caesar, 2006.
If they have all been covering up for years why has it suddenly become intolerable a few weeks after Cameron was elected? Why didn’t they ask Daisy Sampson to produce her special ITV report years ago by which THE PROBLEM would be made public? Why didn’t anyone stand against him in June when he was re-elected unopposed? If they had kept quiet for so long they could have waited until after the local elections when they might have been able to make a respectable case. And why has the Telegraph(T) and the Times(NL) been so anxious to see him off?
All the crocodile tears from MPs: “it really hurts, we are trying to spare him humiliation” really makes me sick when it is really about our political alignment.
If anyone is running a STOP MING and SIMON campaign I would like to donate; the only consolation is that if Ming gets the job, Mike will immediately be able to start a book on his survival until the next GE!
Beth, sick councillor.
124 - Surely the opposition of the telegraph should be seen as an endorsement
100 - Mark, please sign up again!
Others - I´ve formed the view that it should be Ming - at least until May.
Good to see Big Tall Tim back - but we should be careful when taking aim at the messengers.
Whoever takes over will do a better job of manading our impressive frobtbench and less-impressive HQ.
http://www.liberalreview.com/
O/T - liberal contributors (and lurkers) might want to have a look at this, after first loooking at Apollo of course
(Linked from my name below).
125 - Certainly. I don’t think his problem would prevent him getting a ministerial post, even if there were suspicions he hadn’t conquered it. I was referring to the possibility of Kennedy returning to the leadership - something I think he certainly could do if he were determinedly dry for a long period.
117 - it’s just a shame the media can only be arsed when it gets down to personalities. (And that’s not a complaint of anti-LD bias: it’s true of political coverage of all parties.)
118 - I agree, the YouGov poll (I was one of the 280) is far too early to be anything other than indicative. I picked Ming as a “safe pair of hands” (horrible cliche: I apologise), but I’m by no means 100% committed.
However, Oaten is far too divisive a figure within the party (far more so than Laws). I cannot for a moment see him winning.
I have no brief for Davey (he’s not wowed me as our education spokesman), but STV means he could easily emerge as the more acceptable alternative to Hughes.
Could CK resign from the party and sit as an independent?
127 - Agreed that neither of thetwo mentioned would be good candidates but Susan Kramer has been mentioned for many months as a future potential leader . Although relatively new to the House Of Commons she has rather more political experience than many .
John Thurso! [smacks forehead] - of course! That would secure Jack W’s vote at the very least
130. Well at first glance it did seem to me as a deliberate tactic to undermine Oaten, but having read the rest of their analysis of who they deem to be the contenders, it seems they’re attempting to be even-handed. Strangely no mention of Davey (despite him being the ringleader of the rebellion), with Clegg being considered the dark horse.
131 - Hi Peter Happy New Year to you . Let’s see if the local Lib Dems show the initiative to contact me .
Kennedy to make statement at 3pm.
O/T but three polls in a row have given the Canadian Conservatives a lead of between 1 and 6%. The sting in the tail for the Conservatives is that the Liberals are still leading in Ontario, whereas the Conservatives are seeing a big rise in support in Quebec, where it will do them very little good.
If they have all been covering up for years why has it suddenly become intolerable a few weeks after Cameron was elected? Why didn’t they ask Daisy Sampson to produce her special ITV report years ago by which THE PROBLEM would be made public?
You would have looked more favorably upon the MPs a few years ago? When he was clearly an electoral asset and the libdems were flying high in the polls? Frankly it seems to me the activists should be chiding the MPs for being too soft and indulgent in the past, not blaming them for finally losing patience now. They gave him enough chances but it seems he has continued to mislead and ignore their representations, knowing that under the LibDem electoral system it was very difficult for the MPs to force him out, indeed technically impossible - since even after losing a vote of confidence he has the right (with seven backers) to stand in any subsequent election. And his continued public statements on the matter only seem to confirm that impression.
137 - and presumably the feudal vote in the botten borough of Kinkell.
130 - Seeing as the Telegraph’s recent record of knowing what is best for the Tories is not great, the opposition of the Telegraph should probably indeed be seen as a bad thing. They think he’s bad for the Tories… so he’s probably good!
Looking at what people are saying on, for example, the BBC News forum, the Lib Dems are engaging in a PR disaster- lots of ‘I won’t vote for them again after this’ on the site. Don’t know how much of this is a temporary emotional response, but it is damaging our unified, friendly, image.
An inevitable problem for a party that thrives on a large number of “anti-politics” votes. When they start behaving like politicians people start to change there views, and Kennedy probably has a large personal, as opposed to strictly Liberal, following in the country.
re 130. Bullseye - you cannot be serious about Oaten? He is so lightweight. He was a good group leader on Watford council but anything more than that and he appears over-promoted. His performance on University Challenge last weekend summed him up.
This looks like the end. We’ll probably have the first of the big three announcing their candidatures later today.
103, jon: “David Laws is outstanding but I don’t think he would be best as leader (a bit like Willetts except David is rather smarter)”
Which David is smarter - Laws or Willetts?
is it official ck is making a statement at 3?
149-Yes
re 142. The people I blame for allowing someone who was clearly medically unfit to stay in office are Chris Rennard and Tim Razzell. The former, as Chief Executive, had duty to do something about it.
After the 2004 Budget debate non-appearance he should have intervened - particularly given the reports that are starting to emerge about what Kennedy was really like and what happened on that day.
Rennard’s inaction is unforgivable.
BBC reporting he will resign
I think Ming Campbell will be prevailed upon to stand, if only to stop Hughes. If he doesn’t the young orange bookers have to decide which of them should at least plant a standard. Nick Clegg is by far the most charismatic and ought to be given a run. As a Tory I hope Simon Hughes wins.
Further to the comments re Telegraph/Oaten, Nick Robinson has just cast doubt on Oaten’s ability to attract enough support to get through to the membership ballot.
In opposing Cameron,are the Lib Dems really likely to elect someone who will be 65 in May,68 by the next General Election and 72 by the end of the next parliament? I think not and in this context even Hughes is probably too old.
I’m surprised that Mike goes so strong on MC - this contest hasn’t yet started and I’d be very surprised if the membership go for anyone over 50 - but if they do it’s Goodnight Vienna in ‘09.
PP
I sometimes think Nick Robinson’s making it up as he goes along. He’s more akin to a newspaper columnist, saying whatever comes to him in any situation if it sounds good. Sometimes he hits the nail on the head, but is far too keen on recounting gossip and thinking he can report anything an interested party has said to him.
His first comment on the likely contestants was: “Certainly Menzies Campbell”. Well that’s not certain at all.
155. It’s clear that pretty much everybody considers Campbell to be a caretaker candidate only.