Cameron keeps up the momentum
January 15th, 2006
-
ICM puts the Tories four points ahead
As the chart, reproduced from today’s News of the World shows, the first ICM poll of 2006 provides further evidence that the Tory turnaround which started with the election of David Cameron continues to gather force.
The voting intentions (with changes since ICM’s last poll in December) are CON 39%(+2): LAB 35%(-1): LD 20%(-1).
The poll is excellent news for the Tories and is also reassuring for the Lib Dems which had seen shares down to 16% in the recent Populus and BPIX surveys.
The phone interviews took place on Wednesday and Thursday after the coverage of the Kennedy departure had died down and after, also, the launch of Labour’s new “Respect” agenda. In the last ICM poll before the leadership result was announced it was CON 33: LAB 38: LD 19.
So in just two months the Tories have turned a 5% ICM deficit into a 4% lead - and the change has been at the expense of Labour with the Lib Dems more than holding their own
As with all polls I like to see the full data-set before coming to full conclusions but there is little doubt that the Tories will be cheered by their best position in an ICM poll since September 4-5 1992 - the week before Britain’s forced withdrawal from the ERM.
The “most seats at the General Election” market has seen further moves from Labour and the best price you can get is 0.9/1. You can still get 11/8 on the Tories from a conventional bookmaker.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Morning Mike,
Never been one to place too much emphasis on opinion polls when we’ve been losing, so it would be a bit hypocritical to sing from rooftops now, but the trend is undeniable.
Good rating for the LDs too under the circumstances.
Bit surprising under the circumstaces. Possible evidence that the Leadership contest issue is playing positive after all ??
OT Ruth Kelly is toast - can she even last the day ?
Maybe many Lib Dem voters dont care who the leader is and just vote for them regardless as a protest vote.
Very surprising result for us. Are we finally picking up a core vote? Still see this as the equivalent of 1993 where the only way is down for the Government (as Tory boy comments the cock-ups are still coming thick and fast).
Now all we have to do is avoid disaster. I’d be interested how Lab and Con activists would place our contenders to their own advantage. My guess is that they would prefer Hughes, who is probably easily stereotyped as a wet (though I’ve been impressed by him recently), or Huhnhe?
The Tory attack against Hughes if obvious. If Huhne were to win you can start a campaign (Beastly in Eastleigh?) now with a personable candidate in his seat, pay their salary from party funds so they can knock on every door and make sure you know the hopes and fears of every single elector by 2010. We can’t match the Tory resources and the only thing we could do would be to ensure our leader spent too much time on his own patch.
Not sure who Labour would prefer? I guess they have enough votes to be disruptive in Eastleigh, on other hand Ming might help them in some of the studenty seats.
3.”Now all we have to do is avoid disaster. I’d be interested how Lab and Con activists would place our contenders to their own advantage. My guess is that they would prefer Hughes, who is probably easily stereotyped as a wet (though I’ve been impressed by him recently), or Huhnhe?”
I think Labour could prefer a Orange Booker who will move the party to the right contending tory voters.
But such leader would have the potential to get Labour centrist vote too. So it’s not that simple.
I also think Hughes as a leader could be a problem for Labour (if he’ll be a good leader).
3 - Yes the Lib Dem core vote seemsto be much stronger these days than it used to be . Strong Conservative and Labour campaigns in Estleigh would not be a problem - remember the Cheadle byelection and the effect of strong and vitriolic Conservative campaign there and the collapse of the Labour vote despite them fighting a strong campaign .
From a Blue point of view I’d prefer to avoid an Orange Booker who would further blur the diminishing (at face value) differences between us.
Therefore a ‘left winger’ like Hughes or a ‘Euronutter’ like Hunhe would be easier to put into a box.
Tend to agree with Andrea re Hughes, despite hating his politics he has done well recently and is proving to be a man loyal to his beliefs.
He would be my preferred choice as I believe he would attract disillushioned Tory loathing Labour supporters on the one hand whilst losing ex disillusioned Conservatives back to us now we are
seen to be ‘nice’ again.
Jon (West Country) at 3:
With regards to perception of Governments and cock-ups, I’ve found this quote:
“In the life of any government, however safe its majority, there comes a moment when the social movements of which it had once been the expression turn inexorably against it … After that moment, every mistake it makes becomes magnified; indeed blunders multiply as if feeding on themselves; and both outwardly and inwardly the Government appears to be at the mercy of every wind”
Trivia points to anyone who knows the author and year.
Talking of core vote, the Canadian Conservatives seem well set now for victory, the sea change swell is developing into a storm.
How much are polls affected by publicity, “the only bad publicity is no publicity etc”.
On this basis looks like Conservative and Lib Dem gains at the General. May elections, interesting, Lib dems were about 18-20 in 2004, when they actually got 28% of the vote, if I recall. Also suggest the Labour party will get a major mauling in May, from everybody .
8.”Also suggest the Labour party will get a major mauling in May, from everybody . ”
in this case who will be the first to pop up on TV screens to ask for Blair’s resignations? Clare Short or Glenda Jackson?
6. Not sure about Hughes being of benefit to us. I agree he’d be easier to put into a box, but there are at least two problems for the Conservatives with him.
Firstly, he’s effective. Of the four candidates, he’s by far the most capable, if a bit of a loose cannon at times (although I don’t think this would be as much of a problem in the Lib Dems who won’t come near government as it would be in the other two parties). The other candidates are too old, dull or just lack charisma.
Secondly, he’d reinforce the tactical centre-left vote. He and that wing of the party still regard us as the enemy, despite going on for a decade of New Labour government. The London mayoral elections were a case in point. Although it won’t be disastrous, it’s an alignment we could do without.
Given a free run, I’d like Oaten. If there’s no or little difference in policy, then voters should vote for the party most likely to get the policies put into practice i.e. us. He’s uninspiring and has a poor speaking voice. He’d also create all sorts of internal difficulties for the Lib Dems.
8 - The Canadian Tories have luck shining down on them in this campaign. It was revealed a few days ago that one of their candidates was facing charges of smuggling. It was too late to withdraw the candidate, but Harper said he would not be allowed to join the CPC caucus in Parliament if elected. That was the sought of thing that could derail the campaign, but thankfully for them, the next day it was revealed that a Liberal candidate had alledgely attempted to bribe an NDP candidate to try and get his support.
Hello all after many months,
Things have really changed here since I left for South Africa a month ago. I heard several things from Cameron over the month and could not disagree with any of them.
Methinks if Cameron continues in this vein and the lib dems get an effective leader things like northern council tax subsidies being double southern subsidies and prescotts concrete over the countryside plans, together with the failure to undertake meaningful public sector reform will really come home to roost over the next few years and labour could find themsevles in third place in a general election in the not too distant future.
In south africa the ANC government is economically new labour but without the obsesssion with image - the obsesssion instead is with providing all dwellings with water. sewerage disposal and electricity within 10 years. Would that we could debate and discuss such real and momentous political issues here.
Despite DC’s apparent success at lifting the Tories out of their 30%-33% box, I suspect that they are still in a box, albeit a different one. I suspect that they will spent the next year in a 35%-39% box, which is still insufficient to make them the largest party in the HoC, let alone form a government.
I believe this to be the case because, DC has a long way to go before he wins over much of his own party. I attended a function on Saturday, and spoke to a dignified elderly Tory, who repeatedly told me that the Party would never have elected DC, if they had known what he intended. I am pretty sure that he was wrong, but the significance was his total inability to understand what DC is trying to do.
DC’s goal is nothing less than a complete rebranding of the Tory Party. As a poster on another thread pointed out, the Tories are genuinely detested by many voters. I tried to explain this to him, but he was simply incapable of grasping the concept. “But we’re nice people”, he kept saying.
“To many people, the Tory Party is the Nasty Party,” I told him. His reply was revealing, “People only say that because of that woman” (viz. Theresa May).
Clearly, he and many like him, are in denial. You can understand why they kept electing right-wingers with no hope of winning a GE, if they genuinely believe that the Blair victories are just a fluke, a temporary accident, that it just needs one more heave.
It is quite clear that the further DC moves towards the centre-ground, the bigger the gap between him and much of the core vote that sustained the Tories during their dark years. Like an elastic band stretching, that gap will pull DC harder and harder, as he approaches the electoral riches of the political centre. Each step leftwards will therefore become more risky and more difficult than the last one.
Eventually, the point will be reached where DC cannot go further without shedding disproportionate support from the Right. He will therefore be constrained by a new box; I suspect that the polls are already indicating where that box will be.
I am not saying that the Tories will sit in this new box for a decade, as they have in their earlier box. However, to escape this box, DC must find a way to carry his core supporters away from their comfort zone.
What DC has achieved so far is just a first step and relatively easy. Analysts have known what the Tories’ problem was for years; successive Tory Leaders have simply been unwilling to take the first step because they knew that the later steps were big, scary, and into the unknown. DC has taken the big gamble, but so far has not indicated how he expects to pull his right-wing tail after him.
My interview with that elderly Tory suggests that there are some who simply cannot follow DC; they are just too set in their ways. Escaping from the new box will therefore be a painful process and will need all the time left before the next GE.
I’d be interested hear what Rik, Sean and any other Tory posters feel about the theory that I have proposed above.
13. Where do the core Conservatives go in your scenario? Abstain? Vote Labour? Form a new party?
O/T: Chris Huhne wearing a tie on Sky News. Big faux pas. Also seems to be stealthily supressing burps, massive fry up this morning?
Blackadder,
I’m just off to give a speech to a gathering that is likely to be very similar in profile to the one you describe; older, Hampshire, military (Oaten’s constituency).
My speech is going to be on exactly the topic you address and will outline DC’s strategy and possible next steps. I’ll post here about the reaction I get during question.
[13] Blackadder’s geriatric mate has no where else to go. UKIP and the BNP are both single issue parties. DC doesn’t seem to be a europhile, and appears to be willing to listen to the damage that the EU does us all.
Of course, he may choose not to vote. But I think a commoner approach is the right-wing tories who think ‘half a loaf is better than no bread’.
I’m also surprised the Lib Dem vote is holding up so well. It’s significantly higher now (isn’t it?) than it was at this stage after 1997 or 2001, when people were swinging behind a popular government after an election, or more or less forgetting that the Lib Dems existed.
I think that those who did go Labour to Lib Dem are basically now there to stay. They’re fed up with Labour for different reasons from the people who might vote Tory. A few might be tempted to move back to Labour if Labour move left and / or elect Brown as leader. But by and large the swing is the other way. It also seems unlikely that the Cameron revival is having much effect on the Lib Dems.
13 Blackadder - a thoughtful post but I feel that it is wishful thinking rather than very likely.
There is no real evidence of any new box - rather there is a recent rise to the upper 30’s in the polls, which may continue into the 40’s over time, or may not. That does not in itself mean that we are “in a new box of 35-39%” anymore than the Lib Dems being in a 16-21% box. A box tends to be defined as a range in which a party remains come what may over a long period of time. I think it is way too early to be talking about new boxes after a couple of months worth of polls.
WRT to party attitudes to DC, there is truth in what you say about the membership. Some are very uncomfortable with what he is saying at present and fail to understand. So it is important for MPs and people like me to keep explaining to them. However, I think you draw a false conclusion that this will hold DC back at some point. He has already planned that he will lose some existing support by his efforts, in order to gain the electoral reward of the mass of floating voters. He will therefore not compromise unless there was a complete meltdown in our support. And as you have acknowledged, that is not happening now. If we do shed a few “head bangers” from the membership to UKIP, Veritas or whoever, no-one will care if we are at 42% in the polls as a consequence.
I think you overstate the impact of the next steps, without stating what you think they are. For the next few months there will be more repositioning from DC and then some general announcements in the summer. From the start of 2007 the more meaty policy announcements will start to emerge and I think most activists (elderly or otherwise) will follow along very happy to be led, as long as we are gaining Cllrs and Councils and by-elections along the way. Dont underestimate how much people are enjoying being more popular again and every poll like todays, serves to silence the doubters and make them question their own prejudices!
George H - nice to have you aboard. Good luck for your speech!
7. It was Christopher Booker in “The Neophiliacs” published in 1970.
And no, I haven’t read it.
Blackadder - I broadly agree with your theory. I understand your elederly correspondent’s point of view - when the people you know are so far from the top-hat-cigar-and-monocle stereotype, it’s difficult to comprehend that people can really believe that. But the fact is that they do. I’m sure DC will lose some votes by rebranding (as Tony Blair has lost many Labour votes), I believe however that there are more votes to be gained than lost. And keeping the same brand was a recipe for another four years at 33%.
Anyone have any pictures from last night’s party?
For those of you (Tories?) who aren’t likely to have read it, this piece on Simon Highes makes fascinating reading:
It seems that he is makeing explicit the acceptance that the Orange Bookers have at least partially won the argument.
When you couple this with Ming’s “Left of Labour” interview with the Guardian last week, its clear that both the Big Beasts of this contest are hedging towards the centre, albeit from different starting positions.
Obvious politics in terms of a leadership election, but reassuring in terms of where the party will go in the future to this activist.
Just talking about Ruth Kelly. Is it me or what. This article in the Sunday Telegraph seems to be a standard sort of Civil Service letter which often says the Sec of State has considered etc. But that does not mean she has personally, its a form of words, to add importance to the letter. Used to send them them reguarly myself!!! and I have never been a minister let alone an MP
Rik (post 18) said:
it is important for MPs and people like me to keep explaining to them.
Join the Tories and be patrronsied by Rik! Worra recruiting slogan!
I am surprised that the LD figure is so high. And imagine the Tories are more than a little disappointed.
I have just posted a longish piece on yesterdays hustings for those who are interested.
Andrew Rawnsley’s analysis of the LD leadership contest in today’s Obs is shrewd, fair and persuasive: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/columnist/story/0,9321,1686924,00.html
25 - Peter that is a rather silly comment. As the former candidate I get a lot of letters and emails from members of my association asking what is going on and why, on all sorts of subjects. I also speak at meetings as George H is doing. Thats what I am expected to do!
27 - Rik, sorry to have missed the party. Any gossip? Did Sophia persuade you to renationalise the railways?
The Lib Dems bleating on about how wonderfully they are doing getting 20% (wow!)in an opinion poll are very amusing. Talk about self-obsession and missing the point - there seems to be a big swing taking place from Labour to the Conservatives and that is the story. Whether the Lib Dems get 18%, 20%, or 22% is irrelevant if the Conservatives get 40%.
28 - lol - we missed you! No she was more sober this year
The only dramatic moment was JOhn O crashing to the floor at one point but he recovered and resumed the debate!
28. Tabman, I was told strange activities happened after the party!
30
I ’slipped’, honest guv!
Sorry to miss the party.
Re debate above, the old chap who doesnt understand what Cameron is doing to the Tories possibly wont have a vote in 4 years time. What Cameron should be doing is recruiting some new young voters.
That is why his obsession with education being so important that you have to charge students higher tuition fees is good news for Liberal Democrats - whoever the leader. Cameron is unlikely to recruit sufficient young voters to replace the old ones he is losing. Given a discredited labour party where will the voters turn? - Can turnout go even lower?
As we have seen from the Baxter model,a 4% lead for the Tories over Labour as indicated by today’s poll,is nowhere near enough to return a majority for Cameron - the only realistic way for this to happen would be for the Lib Dems to record at least 24% at the expense of Labour,thereby reducing their share to around the 30% mark, with the Tories capturing their present indicated level of 39%.Anything significantly less will almost certainly ensure a fourth term for Labour.It is simply insufficient for the Tories to poll well in isolation.
Cameron,therefore, still appears to have a mountain to climb and IMHO a bet on Labour to win the most seats at the next GE looks very attractive, especially at the recently improved odds.
29 - fred, I assure you it is very, very relevant.
30, 31, 32 - any photographic evidence? John O, much like Mr G in da BB house, are we to infer your are neglecting your constituents?
I suppose it could be due to the wording of the question.
“How would you vote in a general election tomorrow?” and
“How would you vote at the next general election?” are subtly different questions.
That could explain the difference between 16% and 20% in the Lib Dem figures.
The twist with the LibDem leadership contest from the point-of-view of we Tories is the spectre of a hung Parliament. There is a bit of a paradox here: given that Hughes is likely to cede more seats to the Tories in leafy suburbia and the South West, a majority Tory Government is a better prospect with him as LibDem leader. However, in the event of a hung Parliament, Ming is a better prospective coalition partner than Hughes, so a Tory-led coalition (and hence any form of Tory Government, minority or majority) seems a better bet with Ming as LD leader.
Blackadder - I broadly agree with your thesis, and I fully appreciate what Cameron is endeavouring to do. The main danger of a centrist strategy is leaving the party behind, as you rightly point out. Blair did so in 2005 (and, to a lesser extent, in 2001) and was fortunate that we had not sufficiently got our act together to punish him for doing so. On a broader point, it begs the question as to which policies we consider canonical to Conservatism and which we are prepared to jettison to get elected. I seem to recall that RikW and ToryBoy thought that Euroscepticism fell in the former category (viz. their absolute rejection of Ken Clarke, even were it a Clarke-Davis run-off) whereas, presumably from Rik’s posts here, public service deregulation falls into the latter. We need to retain some distinct policies: democracy is not a choice if it is a selection of three similar policy platforms with different coloured rosettes. The strategic decision is where to differ from Labour and where to steal their policies.
37 - Alex W I agree and I dont consider public service reform and deregulation as something that can be dumped. It is vital if we are to make the services better and reduce their cost so taxes can fall.
Very well put, Alex W.
Tony Blair inherited a starting point from which it was easier to alienate traditional Labour supporters, without losing too many seats. There are (were?) parts of the country in which voting Labour is seen almost as a religious obligation, and in which Labour could see huge numbers of its supporters abstain, and yet the effect was simply to have leads of 20,000 + reduced to 10,000 +. Labour has now lost 4 million votes since 1997, yet still has a working majority (admittedly, I think Labour has now reached the point at which it will suffer if it loses any more votes).
Our support, by contrast, is spread rather more evenly than Labour’s is. If we lose support, then it has the potential to hurt us more than it would hurt Labour. Cameron has been shrewd in not jettisoning euroscepticism, as it certainly closes off one reason for Conservative supporters to switch to UKIP. It’ll be interesting to see if UKIP can move away from being a single issue party to try and draw away Conservative voters on issues like immigration and taxation.
13-Blackadder
Two points:
Firstly,based on the last two elections there are approx. 4 million votes up for grabs,these are people that voted for Labour in 1997 and have not voted for them (or anyone else) since.
Presumably if they were happy with what they voted for in 97 they would have expressed their ‘thanks’ in terms of voting again for Labour in 2001 or more importantly in 2005 when Labour really needed their support.
This has not happened and presumably this substantial number of voters is a key target for Cameron.
Secondly,with your example of the elderly Tory voter,if you cast your mind back to 1970 many of these voters supported Heath who by anyone’s measurement was a very long way to the left of Blair.
Are you suggesting that this category of voters is suddenly going to change the habit of a lifetime and switch to Labour or the Liberals?Or abstain?
[40] Heath in 1970 was much more to the right than he became after 1972 - Selsdon Man, the Industrial Relations Act etc. Europe was not then a left-right issue.
On the pollsters’ woes, and I really don’t envy them their job, even before their clients in the press misrepresent their findings, I wonder if reporting just one share of the vote between the parties (as in the graphic at the head of the article) is still “best practice” - since “likelihood to vote” is also asked, it should be possible to produce party shares for different turn-outs, e.g. 55%, 65% and 75% (which surely the parties in their private polls want to know anyway)…
Tory Election Odds Slashed
TORIES CAN WIN ELECTION SAY PUNTERS….The Conservatives’ General Election have been slashed from 6/4 to 5/4 by bookmakers William Hill following opinion poll results putting hem ahead of Labour, and a surge of betting support from punters. ‘These are the shortest odds the Tories have been to regain power since they lost it in 1997′ said Hill’s spokesman Graham Sharpe,’At last punters seem to believe they have a genuine chance of winning the next Election.
Labour remain narrow favourites but their odds have been lengthened from 1/ 2 to 4/7 by Hills who have lengthened the Lib Dems from 66/1 to 100/1 following the departure of Charles Kennedy.
Further info…..graham sharpe..0780 3233702
http://www.williamhillmedia.com/index_template.asp?file=5274
39-Sean Fear
Good point regarding UKIP.
Certainly one common policy amongst many older Tory voters (and usually high on their priority list) is their eurosceptism which Cameron has supported with the proposed new independent status for Tory MEP’s and discussions of taking back poweres from Brussels.
39. “It’ll be interesting to see if UKIP can move away from being a single issue party to try and draw away Conservative voters on issues like immigration and taxation.”
Great idea, assuming they want to split the centre-right vote and have another decade of Nu Lab / Brown Lab.
Regarding Tabman’s post about Simon Hughes, I thought he (Hughes that is) did quite well on the Politics Show today and is clearly trying to play down his Left tag. I wouldn’t be at all surprised if this works and I end up losing all my Ming/Huhne money.
Good to meet you all last night; very glad I came along. One question though - who was the tall bloke from Finsbury Park I was talking to at the end?
44.”It’ll be interesting to see if UKIP can move away from being a single issue party to try and draw away Conservative voters on issues like immigration and taxation.”
Great idea, assuming they want to split the centre-right vote and have another decade of Nu Lab / Brown Lab.”
Their effect could mitigate by the presence of the Greens on the centre-left anyway.
I imagine UKIP are unconcerned by that. Many of them seemed to regard a Conservative defeat in a particular constituency as being an end in itself.
44 - One question though - who was the tall bloke from Finsbury Park I was talking to at the end?
I think that was “Michael” (not his real name!)
Good to meet you too. Maybe see you at the Policy Exchange / Centreforum thing.
37. Good points, AlexW.
Is Cameron ready to handle a hung-parliament situation in 2009?
“Talking the talk” of the liberal centre-ground is one thing. “Walking the walk” of putting this into operation in a Con/LD coalition would be entirely different. Could he carry the right-wing of the Tory party with him?
42 Rik - Martin Baxter (electoralcalculus) currently has Labour 84 seats ahead at 333 vs 249,albeit on polling figures only up to 2 Jan ‘05 - as I suggested in post #34, DC still has a mighty long way to go.
More proof that Cam is The Man!
Rik @ 38 - My apologies in that case…I had assumed that since you were enthusiastic about Cameron then it followed that you endorsed his recent policy pronouncement re grammar schools, school choice, Patient’s Passports etc.
Sean @ 39 - Interesting point re UKIP. Over at conservativehome, they are reporting that UKIP is taking on a lot of the radical flat tax/public service reform agenda to carve out a sort of “radical Right” niche. Fortunately (for us!), UKIP suffers from an image problem which is even worse than we had under Hague/IDS/Howard…the likes of Knapman, Farage, Godfrey Bloom et al. are not going to endear themselves to many voters. The danger is not a mass exodus, but either that they cream off activists or that they make a nuisance of themselves in marginal seats to split the right-wing vote and allow a Labour/LibDem candidate to win.
49 Sorry - that should read polling figures up to 2 Jan ‘06, of course!
Solid poll for both the Conservatives + Lib Dems. Conservatives because they’re finally climbing towards where they need to be, and Lib Dems because we haven’t sunk as low as I feared.
I formally joined the LibDems when I got home from the party last night, as it’s time for me to get involved more seriously and I want my vote to count in the contest. Great effort by Rik W to sign me up for the Tories though, and it was a pleasure to meet you last night. And everyone else in fact.
One thought: people are criticising Simon Hughes for his mayoral result. Don’t forget he was up against a) a left-wing, semi-protest vote Ken b)an incumbent Ken c) a strong Green party candidate d)a competent Christian People’s Alliance candidate, who would have all cost him votes. So I’m not convinced it’s a bad sign for his future campaigning.
53 - I formally joined the LibDems when I got home from the party last night
The times in future that you’ll curse last night
Welcome to the party!
51 Alex W - Camerons announcements do not mean that he is ruling out reforming the public services. I dont agree with him on Grammar schools or tuition fees as it happens!
53 - hmmm - after I try to get you to join the Tories you go straight off and join the Lib Dems - oh well!
55.”hmmm - after I try to get you to join the Tories you go straight off and join the Lib Dems - oh well”
Rik, you’ve to update your canvassing methods! The effects they produced yesterday weren’t great.
55 - As a floating voter maybe I should go to the next party and auction myself off to the highest bidder!
Would have liked to be there but I was, unfortunately, too busy, maybe next time……
Interesting idea ukPaul!
57-58. The “Cash for vote pb.com scandal”!
59 - Who cares, the food and booze were plentiful and FREE. That and my own, er, slight misfortune, were in no way connected…
60 John O you were the light of the party as always
59 - I’m in Guildford too so it could make a difference!
60- uhm, it was referred to ukpaul auctioning hinself to the highest bidder. The food has nothing to do with it.
Rik, Purr, Purr (GG copyright). Keep talking like that, and I’ll be over canvassing for you again
53 - I formally joined the LibDems when I got home from the party last night
The things we do when we’ve had one too many…
You wake up in the morning and discover who you’re in bed with, and you say to yourself “Oh he*l…what have I done? I hope to G*d I gave a false name…”
Then you try to slip away before anyone spots you….
62 If the Tories can’t hold onto Guildford next time,they’ve no chance!
64. Shouldn’t you busy writing something?
67 - I should and will…
65.”You wake up in the morning and discover who you’re in bed with, and you say to yourself “Oh he*l…what have I done? ”
well, it depends on who he has thought about this morning when thinking about having joined the LD….Jenny Tonge or Marina Pepper?
Guildford is just the sort of seat Cameron will go down very well in. In addition, the local Lib Dems in that part of Surrey have been tearing themselves to shreds of late (hence their dire GE election result in neighbouring SW Surrey). My prediction for 2009 - Tories to win by over 5000.
68. John, ok that I’m pretty esigent and I want all details, but you don’t have to write 50 pages!
69 Just googled Marina Pepper and I see what you mean Andrea,but it didn’t do her much good did it?
72. well, she had a decent result (a 6% increase if IIRC).
what pictures have you found googling? The page 3 and Playboy photos?
60. John, if it’s any consolation those of us at the other end of the room just thought a chair had been knocked over. I can better that as well, having spilled orange juice over some woman’s arm at a party last weekend. She didn’t take too well to my blaming it on the barman (although it was his fault).
Do politicians take some kind of training courses to reduce the chance of these mishaps?
73- No, unfortunately I missed those.
75. Search for Marina Baker and you’ll find them.
Here’s one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Marina_Baker_headshot.jpg
I don’t link the others!
76 Wow!! I thought you were joking - are Marina Baker/Pepper really one and the same person?
Re. 13, 18, Blackadder, Rik W
Just back from giving the speech. Most people accepted the idea (its been well written up in the press) that with such a poisoned political name DC had to totally rebrand as a first task and sacred cows had to sacrificed as credible signals that the change was real. I pointed out that a lot of the language was very specific as to what was being ruled out and didn’t preclude the party from a great deal.
They got it and seemed on board. Some murmurs that if to win power we had to shed our beliefs then the journey wasn’t worthwhile but on the whole they didn’t baulk at anything I said.
So practical experience here in Winchester doesn’t suggest that a rump of right leaning activists are going anywhere anytime soon.
The above points re. DC’s position on Europe and Con. activists enjoying not being the pariahs make a lot of sense to me and were reflected in some of the conversations I had.
74 - You are truly a Gentleman, sir,
77. yes, Pepper is her husband’s surname:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marina_Baker
She dated Clement Freud’s son.
44 - Julian - that was me I think, good to talk to you and everyone else at the party. The first time I have ever had cause to say this, but many thanks to Philip Gould if you are reading! And thanks as always to the Smithsons and organisers of last night’s party.
The betting consensus from last night seemed to be
-free money by laying Oaten
-no-one quite knows whether it will be Simon or Ming, but Simon becomes a great value lay at evens. Don’t write Ming off.
Some of us were working this morning, thank you!
And no regrets after a good 14 hours.
Rik was very persuasive though, I think on easier material he’d have better results!
81. Ah yes, excuse me, I am appallingly bad with names.
I somehow have managed to form an “all-green” book on this LD race (except for on Oaten who I haven’t backed or layed). It’s not a heavily prosperous one though - I make a very small amount if it’s Hughes, twice as much (but still not a lot) if Ming, and a reasonable chunk if Huhne is victorious.
80 - I see she has also written books on witches for teenagers, Hmmm - clearly a multi-talented lady.
82″And no regrets after a good 14 hours.”
So I suppose you haven’t dreamed of Jenny Tonge…….
84.Peter from Putney. Her mother is a white witch.
RE: DC’s problems if he drifts too far to the left…..
TB got away with moving to the right as long as there was no credible alternative taking Labour’s place. Quite a few Labour voters simply stopped voting, but his lead was so high that he could live with it.
As has already been pointed out, there is a good reason to swap votes in your “tail” for votes at the centre. If you take a vote from the centre, you have probably taken it from an opponent; net result you are 2 votes better off in any contest with him.
By contrast, if you lose a vote in the tail, it is very unlikely to go to an serious opponent, so you are only 1 vote worse off in contest with you major opponent(s).
Thus, when TB lost votes to the Left, they either went to a fringe party or to abstention. (Net result, 1 vote down.) By contrast, a vote taken from the Tories in the centre was worth 2 votes in any Lab/Tory marginal. Hence, Labour did exceptionally well in 1997/2001 in the marginals.
Politics, like nature, abhors a vacuum, and the gap left by TB’s move to the centre attracted the Libdems, who have made a serious play for Labour’s lost votes. The predictable result was that the Libdems would pick up seats in Labour’s traditional heartland.
This has now left Labour with a problem: votes lost on the left are now as damaging as those lost on the right. Labour strategists are therefore toying with moving back into their comfort zone, i.e. drifting back to the left by selecting the Dour One as their next Leader. The polls have shown that this will have the obvious result of giving DC the centre to himself, and reducing Labour’s strength in the marginals.
DC has seen what TB has achieved by squatting in the centre, and has drawn the conclusion that he can gain the same electoral advantage. Unlike TB, he doesn’t have to worry about the Libdems jumping into the gap that he has vacated because they’ve already swung to the left. However, that does not leave him “home free”.
Initially, TB lost votes from the tail to abstentions. This will undoubtedly happen to the Tories. The will also lose some to UKIP BNP, and possibly other fringe parties. As long as he picks up a similar number of votes at the centre, he won’t mind. However, at some point, a tipping point will be reached, where either:
(1) the number of votes lost in the tail becomes significantly greater (i.e. double) the number gained at centre, or
(2) another major party starts to pick up votes from the Tories.
At the moment, (2) is not on the horizon, but (1) is. That is what will define DC’s new box.
Having said all this, we are still talking about a subject called “politics”, and “events dear boy events” have not gone away. E.g.
(a) If the Libdems continue to emulate the internecine assassination strategy beloved by the Tories from 1992 until DC’s election, the voters will eventually decide that we have a new “Nasty Party”. That would free Labour’s left flank and allow them to track back to the centre.
(b) Iraq could blow up big time.
(c) Angela Merkal could bring back the EU Constitution and push it through. (Not yet sure what the immediate domestic impact would be, but it would be significant.)
(d) A natural, economic or terrorist disaster could take ordinary policy considerations out of the electorate’s mind.
(e) etc.
Unless one of the above happens, I would be surprised to see the Tories break through the 40% mark in the next 12 months. However, that does not imply that they won’t do so before the next election.
Rik et al, I appreciate your comments. I don’t think that I being pessimistic or optimistic. I am simply trying to be objective.
13 - Blackadder. I tend to disagree with your theory as well. I won’t go into all the reasons behind that as I feel my colleagues Rik, Cookie, and john have covered most them off. As Sean Fear points out, there is some danger that UKIP may try peeling away votes from the right, if they can broaden their appeal beyond core euroscepticism (which Cameron has been steadfast on himself), but it is by no means certain they will be able to achieve this due to the image they have created for themselves over the years as a ‘One Note’ party. I think they will find it very difficult getting people to pay enough attention to them to shift it.
People tend also to forget the emotional attachment that older voters (such as myself) tend to have to their political party. I suspect this will override the concerns most of them may have over the direction DC is leading us, particularly if we look set to make good progress at the election.
“Labour strategists are therefore toying with moving back into their comfort zone, i.e. drifting back to the left by selecting the Dour One as their next Leader.”
Brown as a dangerous leftist? Please!
89 - Andrea
I didn’t say the Brown was a dangerous leftist.
What I said was that Labour activists “think” he’s well to the left of TB.
85: Thankfully I enjoyed a Tonge-free night. And I plan to keep it that way!
89. you talked about “strategists”, not “activists”.
91. tpfkar, well, if she’ll visit you in your dream in the future, it’s not a good reason to leave the LD anyway…in the tory you could get a visit by Widdy and in Labout party you can get Clare Short’s visit.
Thankfully I’ve never dreamed about any of them…just Dobson once.
“Can I sign you up to the Liberal Democrats?”
“Oh, all right then, but no Tonges.”
93 - “and a beard in your ear that tickled and said … ”
Welcome on board tpfkar.
Has anyone else noticed that now the Lib Dem leadership election has come on stream, Jack W has disappeared? Could the two be related? Who’s campaign is the ersatz aristo organising, i wonder???
96. Tabman, naturally the campaign of Monsieur Poirot for leader!
87 Re Labour’s “Comfort Zone” - Don’t you think Blackadder,that the large majority of those 80+ MPs with vulnerable seats will realise deep down what has enabled their party to win the last 3 General Elections - it’s not very “comfortable”,after all,losing your job.
98.”Don’t you think Blackadder,that the large majority of those 80+ MPs with vulnerable seats will realise deep down what has enabled their party to win the last 3 General Elections ”
Probably all except the Honourable Member for Medway and the Halifax’s ladies.
93 Andrea, Pray tell us what your dream about Dobson involved,or perhaps on further thoughts please don’t.
96 - Tabbers. He does seem to have a penchant for lost causes.
Following the interesting discussion prompted by Blackadder, I suppose someone has to be Baldrick, alas without the cunning plan, in noting that if the Tories continue to poll in the high 30s and conceivably cross the 40%, then, by definition, the influx of new support vastly outweighs the deserters.
And though technically possible that such a surge is concentrated in our currently hopeless seats and the decline is manifest in existing Tory areas, or worse still in the marginals, I just don’t see this being the case in practice. Indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised if the increase in our support is more apparent in the marginals (both Con-Lab and Con-Lib) than anywhere else.
87. “This has now left Labour with a problem: votes lost on the left are now as damaging as those lost on the right. Labour strategists are therefore toying with moving back into their comfort zone, i.e. drifting back to the left by selecting the Dour One as their next Leader.”
Does this mean that Brown will want to take over later rather than sooner? Since the longer he is leader before the next GE, the longer voters have to work out that he’s not actually left wing. If Cameron continues to hold the centre ground and Brown doesnt poll well amongst left wing voters Labour could be in some trouble.
103 - If the lib dems manage to maintain or cream off more of the left-ish vote in the meantime I doubt it would make much difference when Brown takes over.
Brown takes over early and, when he stays right, then the leftists jump ship, Brown takes over later and they’ve already jumped ship to the lib dems.
100.
It’s not what you’re thinking about!
Has anyone seen any polls on the Lib Dem contest since all four candidates declared? It seems strange that Ming could have lost his seemingly impregnable odds-on position to Hughes on the back of just one faux pas at PMQ, although I appreciate something very similar befell DD.
104 “Brown takes over later and they’ve already jumped ship to the lib dems.”
I dont think that voters who have already strayed to the LDs are necessarily going to stay there.I would expect to see a bump in left wing support for Brown when he takes over and left wingers realise that Blair is no longer PM. This bump will fall quickly as they realise he is not.
Plus if Brown takes over later there is less of a chance of something like Iran popping up and becoming an issue. If things go ugly there while Brown is PM it could really do it for him.
I think Brown himself would prefer to take over sooner rather than later, but this desire for power could be his downfall
106. In DD’s case, I think there were some polls registrating a move toward DC even before the speech, so after that speech the punters assumed the move away from him would continued (and very speedy).
108 I think you are correct about DD Andrea, which makes Ming’s situation all the more puzzling - could it perhaps be concerns about his health,to me he really does look to have aged.
109. PP. He cerainly seems older than his real age. Last week someone commented a shot of him when he was young saying he looked already old back then. So he must be one of those people who have always looked a bit old. Like Celine Dion!
110 Ah, but that’s on account of Celine’s “busy lifestyle”
110. Here’s Ming in 1964 (so when he was 23):
http://cache.gettyimages.com/comp/56567162.jpg?x=x&dasite=GettyImages&ef=2&ev=1&dareq=C5D9F5AF1817E32BAFCE113852F91F6C
The big news today in the leadership contest must be Rawnsley’s article in the Observer. The Observer is read by a big proportion of lib dem activists.
113 I assume the dreadful hats were the mandatory headgear for the ‘64 Olympics.
114. well, the problem is that the hats haven’t changed so much since those days!
Re 109: Some numbers may be helpful. I used to practise clinical audit for cancer doctors so I have a more realistic view of what ‘beating cancer’ means than do most lay people. The 45 % ‘5-years survival rate’ quoted in the earlier thread equates to an annual risk of recurrence/death (regarded as the same outcome) for each of those five years = 17 %. MC has enjoyed 3 years of remission so far. The probability that he will enjoy 2 more = 0.83 x 0.83 = 69 %. This takes us to Jan ‘08. after the 5-years the risk falls but not to zero by any means. The cancer may be lurking unseen as a ‘micro-metastasis’, unable to establish a blood supply (’vascularise’) and so to grow until some favourable change in its circumstances occurs. I guess (I haven’t looked it up) that the risk may be halved to 8 % p.a. So the probability of MC being still in remission in Jan ‘09 = 63 %, and in Jan ‘10 = 58 %.
So if we pick MC we are taking on a significant risk of having to pick again at what may be an inconvenient moment. I will give my first pref to Huhne and my second to Hughes and expect the latter to win.
113 - Can’t find Rawnsley’s piece in today’s Observer, any chance of your kindly providing the link,please?
117. http://politics.guardian.co.uk/columnist/story/0,9321,1686924,00.html
118 Thanks Christo - sounds a bit cold and clinical expressed in such terms, but I’m sure every poster wishes Ming the very best for the future.
According to the chart at the top of the thread: Conservatives 39%, Labour 35%, Lib Dems 20%, others 5%. That only takes us to 99%. What are the other 1% planning on doing? Spoiling their ballot papers?
118 - I might have guessed you’d come up with it Andrea in one minute flat - you really are quite brilliant at this,many thanks.
121. Peter from Putney, I had searched for the article before your post to read it, so I already know where it was.
Then I was in a happy mood and I linked it to you…even if you wanted to prevent my mother from voting some days ago
To-day’s quiz question
- (since Simon Hughes is doing so well) who was the last leader of the Liberal Democrats (or a predecessor party) to sit for a London consitutency?
122 - As you well know Andrea that was a joke, on the back of your comment that your mother thought Cardiff Cental was in London.
Quiet on here this pm innit? Multiple hangovers perhaps.
123 - I think it may have been Gladstone in Greenwich…
124. The only 2 constituency name she knew at the time were Cardiff Central and Kettering. I’ve never dared to ask her where she thought Kettering was.
Am I right in thinking that there has been a little movement on Betfair on the Lib Dem candidates?
128 - Yes that’s correct less than 0.1/1 movement all day between the two main contenders,probably on account of there being no recent polling evidence.
Huhne’s drifted out notably though, and Oaten has come back in.
[126] Yup… too easy really…
I kind of feel like a whitebait supper now you’ve brought up the subject…
what is a whitebait supper?
Whitebait are very small fish that you fry in flour and eat whole. There used to be a tradition (in Gladstone’s day) of the cabinet going once a year to a tavern in Greenwich and having a great meal of them.
134. Ah, thanks.
have you taken some photos from the party?
I didn’t take any personally, but I believe there are some somewhere.
136. My spys told me something was taken….
137 - it’s like Celebrity Big Brother, there’s always an audience at home…
Never really took to whitebait myself - probably the thought of eating all those eyes, but thanks for the info - I suppose it was their equivalent of beer & sandwiches.
138. and could I vote for the winner?
140 … for bad behavior you mean?
141. it depends….
Yeah. I’m not sure what the prize is though!
Just a quick note to thank all those responsible for organising the party last night.
I really enjoyed the whole evening and getting to meet the people behind the web personas, I am only sorry I did not get around and introduce myself to more people.
At least I know where the pub is now though - 45 minutes walking around Belgravia at identical properties was really confusing!
144 Dinner for two with Simon Hughes, perhaps …..
2nd prize,two dinners for two with Simon Hughes
143/44. BV/PP.
1 Prize: A night with the Venerable Helen
2 Prize: Taking part to a trip (from the police) with The Fugitive
3 Prize: Playing the cat and mouse with Ann Widdecombe
4 Prize: watch all Glenda’s movie collection inlcuding the movies where she stripped naked.
4 Prize: David Davis’ speeches collection.
Hmmm - I think I will volunteer myself for eviction.
147. DD’s speeches are Prize 5, not 4.
Before trying to get evicted, don’t you want to know who is the cat and who the mouse between you and Widdy?
Certainly not!
149. well, if you really must choose, what prize will you choose? The DD’s speeches?
(I know you are secreatly hoping for the first one!)
I thought torture was banned in Italy, Andrea?