Could my 200-1 long-shot come in?
January 21st, 2006-
The PB.C comment that could make me richer
At 7.39 am on January 11th Alex posted this short comment on the site. It read simply “Apparently 
Huhne has 5 certain backers among MPs. Why is he still 200-1?”
For gamblers like me there is something very seductive about a long-shot and within a few seconds of reading Alex’s comment I had taken the £20 bet at 200/1 that was available on the Betfair betting exchange as well as £22 at 150/1.
For those not familiar with betting exchanges Betfair is not a bookmaker laying bets itself. Rather it brings together people who went to back, like me on this occasion, and those who want to be like a bookmaker and lay bets. The layer is in effect betting against the proposition. So the maximum I could get on was that which other punters were prepared to lay.
In the ten days since then Chris Huhne’s challenge has gathered pace and now, with just three contenders left in the race, the Betfair price is at 6.2/1.
Maybe this is wishful thinking brought on by the prospect of being several thousand pounds richer but I am starting to think that he might have a realistic chance. Huhne seems to offer a freshness and an originality of thought not shared by Hughes and Campbell and this is very appealing.
-
There is little doubt that Campbell’s problems are his age, questions about his health, and the “Ming the Merciless” tag that he has acquired for his part in the downfall of Charles Kennedy.
Hughes, meanwhile, has a strong and committed following but he probably does not have the support to take him over the 50% mark in the first count. At that stage the second choice votes of those going for the third in the ballot will be redistributed. If Ming is the one who drops out my guess is that Huhne would pick up the lion’s share his first preferences.
If Hughes is in third place then Huhne is well set as well to get the second preferences. So if Huhne can avoid last place in the first round then his chances of taking it are high.
In the absence of a new Lib Dem members’ poll this is all guess work - but I think even Huhne’s current price tag is good value.
UPDATE: New Mori Poll: The January survey in today’s Sun has the following party shares with comparisons on the pollster’s December poll:- CON 39 (-1): LAB 39 (+8): LD 15 (-6).
Unlike the other pollsters carrying out monthly surveys Mori does not weight by past vote recall and so is much more vulnerable to sample error. As we point out repeatedly phone polls usually have a hit ratio 6-1 calls to successful interviews.
The pollster is thus reliant on those that it manages to reach using randomised unsolicited phone calls being representative. The heavy weight of data over many years shows that such respondents tend to be more Labour-inclined than the population as a whole.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Reposting this from the previous thread:
There is a MORI poll in The Sun this morning which reports the following result:
Con: 39%
Lab: 39%
LD: 15%
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2006030501,00.html
Good punt. Don’t forget you could just lay and take the profit anyway - at 6.2/1 you’ve still made over 10x your money.
1 AHM Don’t you just love feeding those figures into Baxter !!
2 Mike, tend to agree with Andrew - No matter how strong your view of Huhne’s prospects, you’d be mad to watch the paper profit you’re sitting on go to dust.
3 - Absolutely, TB. Though, I don’t believe the result it predicts for a second. Heartening, though.
4. And, well, we also know about MORI ;)…But at least we should now have no more of that nonsense about a “25% strategy”.
4-5. I’m surprised MORI hasn’t found a Green lead yet
The Mori poll in January 2002 (i.e. same time period after the last General Election) put the LibDems on… 16%
and the Mori poll in January 1998 (i.e. same time period after the General Election before last) put the LibDems on… 14%
LibDems always fall back for 6 months to a year after a GE; if it’s still around 15% at the end of this year, get back to us.
4 Likewise - heartening, but far to soon to get the indelible pencil out.
Although I’ve always rubbished polls at this stage of any electoral cycle and it would be hypocritical to change now, it certainly does ‘feel’ better looking down from the (joint in this case) top of the pack.
Certainly looking good for May as things stand.
Regards
7 James, fair comment, but you do smack a little of complacency?
Getting back to the main point - Hune has gathered pace over the last ten days . but not really the last seven (although he is now bound to come at least third). Full round up here.
Why should Conservatives be happy with a poll which if correct would give a 4th majority Labour Government .
It’s a minority view, but I think it’s better for the Conservatives that the Lib Dems should be on c.20% or so, and Labour down in the mid thirties.
The problem for us is, that even on 15%, the Lib Dems would probably still hang onto 40 or so seats, just because of the personal vote enjoyed by their sitting MPs.
Labour up 8, Tories down 2 (0r 1? - thought it was 40-31 in the last MORI poll in the Observer?), and Matlock and Tory Boy feel pleased? Masochism even more rampant in Tory ranks than I’d realised.
However, I think the previous MORI poll showing a 10% (9%?) Tory lead was a rogue - we all thought so at the time. The two parties remain essentially level. I don’t think the LDs will stay down unless their new leader proves unpopular.
7 - I think there are good reasons why Libdems tended to score badly in Mori polls in the past, a combination of lack of publicity for the third party outside election year, and Mori’s method of not prompting by party name.
The latter doesn’t apply now, and the former is mitigated somewhat by the fact that Kennedy and the leadership election has generated publicity that wouldn’t normally be there.
My overall view of current polling is that the Tories are on 39-40% with all the variation being between Labour and the Lib Dems. The big change since Cameron has been a decline of 5-6% in the LD/Lab aggregate and it is how this splits that determines the size of the Labour lead. I wrote a lot about this at the General Election when almost all the polls and the actual result had this in the 58-60% range.
The Tories have broken the 33% ceiling but they need to be on 42%+ to think of a return to Government.
An important indicator of how both Cameron’s Leadership of the Tories and how the public see the Liberal Democrats after Kennedys resignation will be the first Parliamentary by election of 2006 in Dunfermline and West Fife. The Liberal Democrats are fighting to win with local candidate, Willie Rennie.
11/ I don’t think anyone would be Mark
It’s just the trend remains very encouraging and from our perspective if your lot were to fall through the 15/16% trapdoor and go to dust it will make our job far easier moving forward.
Clearly you will get more than 6 MPs next time around but were you
to be reduced to (say) 10-15 it would be job done (unless by chance you held the balance of power)
14 I agree Mike (even though it could be achieved on say 38%
if the votes split the right way).
It’s very early days yet and I wouldn’t rule out an LD bounce following the election of their new leader, but the current trend
is marked.
It’s interesting that there’s been relatively little Conservative disparagement of Huhne on here. As soon as it became clear that Campbell was a favourite, the attacks on his age etc. started - a clear sign of worry. However, I have the impression that Huhne may have overtaken Hughes as the Tories’ favourite candidate - are they silently hoping the LDs will go ahead and elect someone with a 568 majority?
14 - Mike,
Your assessment looks (and “feels”) right, although it’s still very early in the current political cycle.
It would be interesting to see the impact of weighting this MORI poll by past voting recall.
It would also be interesting to see if the Tory and Libdem leadership contests have had any impact on the percentage of voters who are certain to vote. (I.e. are voters becoming more interested in politics, after a period of electoral dominance by the Apathy Party?)
I think this is a good poll for the tories, and I doubt it’s much to do with a honeymoon period either. People keep saying that the Labour attack on Cameron is yet to come, but what about the Cameron attack? He’s barely said anything of substance on major issues which will strike a chord with voters, namely crime/beauracracy/tax and when this comes I think it may really hurt Labour. Remember, even with Howard the immigration policy announcement produced a decent poll boost.
19 Valerie, can only speak for myself, but I’m totally ambivalent whoever the LD’s choose.
Huhne is an accident waiting to happen over Europe
Campbell, despite a better PMQ this weak will be easily portrayed as to old, not dynamic etc etc
Whilst Hughes is easily boxed up as ‘a left winger’.
Even “week” !
What do you mean by ‘enter it into Baxter’? Where can you do that?
24. http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/
Looking at the Baxter calculation again, a result of Con 39% Lab 31%, Lib Dem 23% would be much better for the Conservatives. Destroying the Lib Dems is not really in our interests, even if it does bring some seats our way.
Cheers.
I just foresee a C govt. DC has the policies & the right tone, Lab will be squabbling from a leadership change, many Libs will come over to the turquoise Tories. 44% won’t surprise me one bit.
Huhne’s your daddy!
http://www.spreadshirt.net/shop.php?op=article&article_id=2354335#top
27 - Keep on dreaming!
28. This one is for Jack:
http://www.spreadshirt.net/shop.php?op=article&article_id=2358147#top
For Rik:
http://www.spreadshirt.net/image.php?type=image&partner_id=228995&product_id=2555001&img_id=1&size=huge&bgcolor_images=white
“44% won’t surprise me one bit. ”
It would certainly surprise me. Labour’s support has been more resilient in recent polls than I had anticipated, but if the Lib Dems recover, we should see Labour’s support fall.
Re 26 Sean, absolutely, somewhere as I keep saying, there seems to be a deep down anger from several poster to this site, about the Lib Dems because they have taken some Cons seats, and that anger clouds the reality of the situation, which you have so well explained. It is Labour, the Conservatives should be concerned about, not playing the media Con/Lib Dem game.
Re 8 Tory Boy, the present unexpected and strange pattern of local election results with the Cons apparently losing votes and seats to the Lib Dems is not good news for the Cons in May.
This change has been very sudden and to me unexplainable, except
perhaps due to the publicity the Lib Dems have received. It could easily switch back as suddenly but at the moment it cannot be ignored.
Re the Mori poll, do not forget at least one poll had the Lib Dems at 16%, 10 or so days before the last General Election.
Certainly it is completely out of cinque with the local elections results this month.
Another poll may determine which is right.
32 - I think that the Conservatives are doing the Lib Dems a favour by portraying them as their main challengers.
Turnout is very very important - before counting chickens - consider what will happen to turnout.
I think that there more are a lot of Labour voters who did not vote last time - rather than moving to another party. The next election will depend on how many of these return to good old Gordon or no longer consider themselves as “labour” and now feel free to move.
A pollster who published a won’t or unlikely to vote figure as well as the party percentages would make it easier to judge the public mood.
32 David (s)
Sorry but respectfully beg to differ particularly regarding the recent by elections where the LDs have outperformed the recent national trends.
Everyone acknowledges and accepts that the LDs are exceptional
‘one off’ performers who marshall their relatively meagre resources in a manner that puts the Cons and Nulab to shame.
Problem for them is (IMHO) that on a nationwide day, you are stretched far to thinly to replicate the ‘one off’ success stories.
Very recent canvassing in several Con/LD marginal (ish) wards locally strongly confirms this (locally at least)
I’m amazed Ming is still favourite. IDS with Gravitas? But even IDS has more energy.
Huhne is easily the best looking of the three, and he looks as though he has his own hair.
The only policy ‘problem’ he has is his euro-enthusism. This hardly matters. The tory/LD waverers have always been aware (if they cared) that the LDs were more pro-EU. The tories have tried to point out how the LDs are in favour the EU and federalism in the past 2/3 elections. It didn’t help them then, and won’t help them next time.
If GB stumbles/DC gets it right: that’ll make a difference. Where the LD leader is on Europe: immaterial. He has to look a nice guy, and normal. For LD members not to have CH has first choice means they are thinking what they like, rather than what the public likes.
26, 32 & 33 Sorry, simply take a different view on this.
Any General worth his salt would always avoid making his troops fight on two fronts at the same time.
37. Tory Boy, but you’ve to fight 2 fronts. All parties have to fight 2 fronts.
I agree. LDs always do OK in council elections and always falsely extrapolate this to nat results.
Tories will for sure have most seats in next Parlmt. If they do get a majority it will be slim. V. important therefore to select only candidates that truly share the new tory consensus on policies and priorities. Any Europhiles or hangers-n-floggers could hold disproportionate power as rebels in a slim majority govt, where discipline will be everything.
38 Hi Andrea,
With respect that’s exactly my point.If you don’t HAVE to
(sorry to shout can’t do italics !), you shouldn’t.
Ergo, close down one front if you can.
I think Valerie is right. An acquaintance of mine who is part of the Cameron dream team reckons only Ming would not present an easy target (though Hughes could be very strong against Labour I reckon).
Tories already have a nice list of quotes from Huhne, which recently has a proud new addition. The fuel prices thing would make us look like total hypocrites.
Have Huhne supporters thought it through?
The betting markets currently imply Huhne losing his seat by miles.
Next election every press conference he tried to do would kick off with him being asked whether he was going to keep his seat. Forget any policies… the LibDem story would be whether we are going to be decapitated or not.
The markets also imply that the next Parliament will be hung. LDs have been looking for this for years - yet if we had just lost our leader, aside from looking like a complete joke, it would just be too tempting for the leader of the largest party to push for another dissolution while we were still leaderless. Even if they didn’t, who the hell would be negotiating on the shape of the future government on our behalf?
I think Huhne’s candidacy is strategic, rather than tactical.
I don’t know if anyone else has mentioned this, but Baxter hasn’t adjusted for the new seat boundaries. Is this because they are not formalised yet or is it because it would involve a large piece of ward-by-ward analysis looking at the new boundaries. I remember back in May people on here estimating that the changes would cost Labour to the tune of 30-40 seats. What do people think now?
PS I note the sites only known UKIPper thinks we should go for Huhne - can’t imagine why that would be
Huhne lose his seat if he were leader? When he’d be on the telly every day? Are you serious?
#42, is there any site similar to Baxter’s which has adjusted for the boundary changes and includes predictions of seat changes at the next GE?
If not how do we get baxter’s to update?
41 Chris is approaching campaigning in his constituency in the same way MPs such as Ed Davey, Norman Lamb and Steve Webb approach theirs. And remember he still has a sizeable Labour vote to squeeze.
He is not going to do a Brand or a Ballard.
If the betting markets and the opinion polls decided who should be MPs those three would have lost their seats by now!
43 - I don’t understand. Where UKIP gains, Conservatives generally lose Why should the LibDems object to that?
Some people IMO should get over the idea that every contributor here is somehow engaged on some sort of Machiavellian scheme to try and get their opponents to do things against their interests. There may be unconscious bias in many postings here, but in the majority of cases I think that the opinions that people put forward are truly held.
David… quite possibly. I happened to the Canadian PM after all who got a fair bit of airtime, not to mention Portillo etc in 1997 who had a load of publicity and 17k votes to play with! In this case it would suit both other parties for it to happen and we know Labour have no problem with helping the Conservatives (N Norfolk for starters)
But the real point is this - do we want to take the chance? Do we want the campaign dominated by something as negative as the fact our own head might fall off.
“Do you feel lucky” is what I would say to potential Huhne supporters.
If Huhne would be elected as leader, he could always choose to move to a safer constituency. But I think that he would be easily the most well-known candidate in his constituency, and would probably get a bounce, even though it is clear that the Conservatives would try to decapitate him. (It is BTW strange, that the Conservatives here say it is immoral and dirty, when the Lib Dems are trying to do it, but would themselves do it for Lib Dems without any scruples, if they could. Does different moral standards apply to Conservatives and Lib Dems?)
But even if there is a risk, that Huhne would lose his seat, Lib Dems shouldn’t think that, when they are choosing their leader. They should think, who of the candidates would win most seats for the party. If Hughes would become the leader, he would without any doubt retain his own seat, but would probably lose many others. If Huhne would become the leader, there is the risk that he might lose his own seat, but he would probably also win more seats for Lib Dems than Hughes would.
If the leader of the party would lose his seat, it would of course be a humiliation for the Lib Dems, but in four or five years time most of the voters would have forgotten it, and the Lib Dems would have a new leader (for instance Clegg), and would have retained most of their seats, or even won some more. And anyway, what would be more humiliating in the long run, to lose the seat of the leader and maybe at most a couple of others, or to lose most of the seats?
46 - it should be pointed out that the effects of boundary changes are only a rough guide anyway. Local election results do not correlate well brilliantly with General Election results. Relying on them in combination with Baxter’s model would be to pile an unreliable model on top of an unreliable model.
What would Lib Dems rather do? Have 60 seats and retain their leader or 40 and lose him? I would have thought it was a nobrainer, but perhaps not.
52 - Reverse as appropriate
45. The Boundary Commission has still to finalise the reconmendations in some areas.
Then the “experts” have to try to figure out the notional results (some are still doudting the notional result calculated for Dumfries and Galloway last year)
Sam - no they wouldn’t. All of these were favourites to retain their seats before polling day. He has a sizeable Labour vote which Labour can help to pass to the Tories. I know I would try to knee the LD leader in the electoral groin if I were in their shoes. “An urgent message to all Labour supporters - the best way you can help Labour is by voting Labour. That way you help us fight the LDs not only in Eastleigh but in other seats up and down the country.”
Can anyone anywhere find a combination of inputs to any of the major models which matches the current seat markets and has CH still an MP?
I’m guessing its impossible but would love to see how wacky they have to be to achieve it.
51.” it should be pointed out that the effects of boundary changes are only a rough guide anyway. Local election results do not correlate well brilliantly with General Election results”
Actually notional results well produced should take it in consideration.
Rather a false choice - in any event where we lost the leader we ain’t going to get 60 seats. And as I said there is quite a good chance there would be another GE very soon.
51, in this instance I was more interested in seat change predictions like Baxter’s but which take into account boundary changes and new seats, than local election results.
57.”in any event where we lost the leader we ain’t going to get 60 seats”
Unlikely, but it could be possible if there’ll be a little LD to Con swing, but a big Lab to LD swing in Lab/LD marginals.
Can I ask a rather novice betting question? Seeing as Huhne is now at 6.2 or whatever on Betfair and I can see it would be possible to make money just by laying money on him if you had previously bet £20 at 200-1, how much should you lay to maximize your profits?
I feel that I should be able to work this out quite simply but I’m interested to hear from some “old hands” as to the best strategy!
So far the Lib Dems have done well in two local by-elections this year. But you really need three months’ results, in different types of seats, before you can spot a trend.
In fact, it will probably be quite hard to spot a trend, because councils which will see elections on May 4th will most likely postpone any by-elections till May 4th (there will be no more by-elections in London now, for instance)
57 - You can’t have it both ways. You can’t reject someone who might be the best leader just because he might lose his seat in the process, whilst simulataneously arguing that if he does well then it’s impossible for him to lose his seat.
BTW LibDem leaders cannot choose to move to a safer seat. Quite apart from the extraordinary negative publicity is would generate - the most visible chicken run in history - there is no mechanism for such a thing to occur. Be rather hard to argue we were a credible candidate to win anywhere if our own leader couldn’t keep his seat….!
50.”If Huhne would be elected as leader, he could always choose to move to a safer constituency”
It would appear as a big chicken run!
I think the only ward his Eastleigh will lose is Chandler’s Ford West to Winchester.
55 Jon - They might have been odds on to win by the election, but not six months after they were elected. In Jan ‘98 and Jan ‘02 the Lib Dems were dipping in the polls and all the prediactions were that the lib Dems were going to lose marginal seats to the Tories.
57 - BTW when i said “get 60 seats” I didn’t mean gain 60 seats, which your post suggests might have been how you interpreted it.
51 - if you apply multiplier to local election results, you’ll get a reasonably accurate picture.
eg if constituency A votes 45% Conservative to 35% Labour in the last round of local elections, and 40% Conservative to 40% Labour in the general election, you’d assume a 5% swing to Labour in each ward, and adjust accordingly if one or more wards go into a neighbouring seat. That’s probably not entirely accurate, but it works well enough.
The only difficulty comes with some rural seats which have large numbers of independents contesting at local level.
62 Of course I can? There is no logical inconsistency there. I think the very fact that he might lose his seat makes him an awful choice which would probably result in other losses, but if he doesn’t lose many other seats then he is likely to keep his.
68 - so I guess you still believe that the “Decapitation strategy” (whether it was an actual strategy or not) was to the benefit of the LibDems in 2005.
Latest SES poll in Canada, 36-29 for Cons.
Stangely if they are right, there has been a swing back to the Libs in Ontario, ahead by 3% but they are falling back in Quebec. Dubious myself, as the Con loss in Ontario appears to have gone to NDP! Only 2 days to go, I feel there is a sea change about and that could get the Cons a majority.
It didn’t really exist and I certainly don’t believe it was beneficial. As you may remember I was arguing on this site before the last election that we wouldn’t gain more than 2 of the supposed targets, and even that turned out to be optmistic. Everyone knew that MH was perfectly safe. Of course if the opinion polls had had us close to the Tories it might have been different, but you have to be a bit of an optimist to see a situation where the polls are predicting a swing from Cons to the LDs next time. I’d be genuinely interested if any serious poster thinks otherise.
These things just feed on themselves.
70. The Conservative polls lead in Canada is starting to produce effects:
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/mini/CTVNews/20060118/elxn_gay_marriage_060118A/20060119?s_name=election2006&no_ads=
There are a lot of points about Huhne that I like. But Jon makes a strong argument.
The other reservation I have is the idea of the three party leaders having Eton, Winchester and Fettes on their cv. None of them can help where they went to school I know, but the message it sends about the UK is worrying.
69 - The evidence is that the so called ‘decapitation strategy made little difference one way or the other. There was no substantial difference in the results across the five so-called ‘decapitation seats’ compared to the LD/Con marginals as a whole. The only noticeable difference was that the squeeze on Labour was more effective - but the outcome of this didn’t appear to benefit the LDs.
71 - I think it’s far too early to tell what the polls will be saying in three years time!
69 - Sorry that was a bit unnecessary. But all the evidence is that party leaders gain enormously from the exposure generated during an election campaign. This will be especially true of someone who probably (unlike, say, Michael Howard) starts from a position of being relatively unknown in his own constituency. Because they do not attract a large tribal vote, leading liberal politicians are even better placed to exploit this than those in other parties - there are very few voters in their constituencies who they should consider “off-limits”. Just look at Paddy Ashdown, for example.
Worry about the leader’s own seat might be something to be taken into account but it shouldn’t be a decisive negative. Would you take such a view if you were completely non-plussed by the other candidates?
Mike, Good betting. It has always amazed me that people offer such odds on Betfair. Indeed the 1000-1 maximum is often available for things which won’t happen. But why bother - most bets won’t get taken and those that do surely yield less than even a savings account. And very occasionally one oculd lose big. Any ideas?
After seeing Huhne speak at the initial hustings on TV last weekend, I think he has serious presentational issues.
Whilst the content of the speech may have got Lib Dem sandled feet thumping the floor with joy, the tone in which he spoke was very ineffectual. I actually think Oaten had by far the most relaxed “I am nice guy” style of speaking. Up against Cameron Huhne may look the typical “grey haired, sterile, old MP” type.
Huhne would also be a huge contrast with Kennedy and would struggle to connect with the type of voter “Chat show Charlie” was so appealing to.
PS It may be worth keeping an eye on how the Carshalton Lib Dem Curry Night hustings go tonight (as reported in The Times) - Hope none of the activists get any Korma stuck in their beards……..
Alex in 52, I think it is clear that if Hughes would be elected leader, the Lib Dems would NOT retain 60 seats. Huhne, probably, Campbell, perhaps.
77 - You could lay hundreds of 100-1 + shots every day on Betfair. At 1% at time that’s a lot more than a savings account.
53 - OK.
79 - Well that was my point. Would you rather have Hughes/Campbell with 40 seats or no leader with 60 seats? Obviously if you are a supporter of Hughes/Campbell, or even opponent for other reasons of Huhne, you might not accept this scenario - but then you are moving away from the “you can’t elect Huhne because of his majority” argument.
Leaders doing well in their own seats is a “local man made good” effect. The longer you haave been around, the stronger the effect. And vice versa.
re 80 Not when you have to wait months for the money. Check out the odds for winning Premiership or Championship - some people will accept a 0.1% return paid in a couple of months!
84 - People doing it in the Premiership are probably tying up no money at all.
57 - Jon, I think that though Hughes might be more popular among the core supporters of the Lib Dems than Huhne or Campbell, he wouldn’t attract as many swing voters. He would retain his own seat, though, even if he would lose 20-30 seats for the Conservatives and Labour.
On the other hand, there is indeed at least in theory a risk, that Huhne would lose his own seats, even in the case he would keep 60 seats for the party, because his seat is one of the most marginal ones. But I don’t think that it is likely for several reason. He was able to keep the seat for Lib Dems in 2005, though he was a new, non-local candidate to replace a popular, retiring predessor. Despite this, his Conservative rival, who had much more money at his disposal, failed to win the seat already for the second time. If the Conservatives couldn’t win the seat in those circumstances, how could they hope to win it if the Lib Dem candidate would get all the free publicity that a leader of a party gets? Then there are of course those voters, who feel proud or flattered because a leader of a party stands in their constituency, and want to keep him. Has any leader of the three parties lost his seat since Thorpe, and in his case there was somewhat special circumstances?
But my point was actually, that Hughes would lose much more seats than Huhne, so the Lib Dems shouldn’t concentrate too much to what will happen to the seat of their leader particularly.
A few observations
No-one should get excited about one or two good or bad polls. As I am sure Mike S will agree, sensible analysis looks at a series of polls over a couple of months, and takes more account of trends than in changes of absolute figures between different polling organisations. On that basis I would suggest that the Tories are enjoying a “Cameron bounce” of about 5-6% at the moment, largely at the expense of the Lib Dems who are down about 4-6%; Labour however, are somewhat erratic in their ratings, about 1-2% down at the moment. Of course different organisations tell slightly different stories but I think that generally the above is fair.
As to whether that is good or bad depends on your perspective. It is true to say that historically for the Lib Dems 15-20% is a good rating but it is not what they have been used to in recent years and is down from the level at which their recent successes have been achieved. I am genuinely undecided as to whether a new leader will help the LDs or not. I cannot see any of the current 3 contenders setting the political map alight. Each comes with their own risks for the party. On a personal note I hope HUghes wins, I think Huhne would be the greatest risk for the Tories (but an easily manageable one) and I am indifferent to Campbell.
For the Conservatives it is a useful and encouraging improvement but not the instant (and IMHO unrealistic) huge bounce that sweeps all before, that some people seemed to think we would get. The absolute key is whether it is sustained. Posters are right to point to previous short lived bounces under previous new leaders. The difference this time as I see it is that the increase is supported strongly by the underlying polling on issues such as “preference for PM”, “perceptions of the party overall” and “likeability”. There is therefore nothing to suggest that this is a temporary bounce. Indeed the new MORI poll this morning support MIke S’s contention that there has been a shift of the Tories to about 39-40%. This is a good starting point for a 3-4 year campaign and a position on which the party will hope to build. One note of caution, in this new better environment for the Tories it would be silly to assume that Tory “real votes” will continue to outperform polling figures. With the shift in the polls we may see that the “shy Tories” are now no longer shy! That is why this May’s local elections will be an interesting test on several levels.
Labour can take some comfort from their current polling but not much. They became used to 20%+ leads in their early days in power but are now continually level pegging. It is true that their position is relatively strong at 35-39% but I cannot see things getting better for them in the next year or two. Back benchers have the smell of blood in their nostrils and the media are now prepared to report negative stories about the govt in a way that they wouldnt a few years ago. As troubles in Plmt mount and Blair seeks his legacy, I can see Labour slipping several points more in the polls. Whether or not Brown’s succession will help matters is open to question. I can imagine a small bounce as the relief that Blair has gone sinks in but it all very much depends how he governs. If he genuinely is new Labour, it will disappoint many of the people who are causing trouble for Blair now and they will be in no mood for compromise. If he does slide leftwards, he may claim some support back from the LDs but he will put at risk a lot of Southern marginals and he will risk defections to the Tories. Ambitious right wingers are unlikely to stay on a sinking ship if the Tories look like winning the GE.
On “Decapitation” strategies, the Lib Dems stupidity was to publicise the fact as they did, thus ensuring that the Tories brought resources in to defend the seats under threat. Now it is arguable that this meant that other seats did not get some of the resource that they could have done in a different world but looking at the outcome it was a complete failure - the Lib Dems made a net loss of seats to the party they were trying to decapitate and in most seats they held, where the Tories were second, the majorities were significantly reduced. Tim Collins was beaten more due to his own neglect of his seat and his wife’s refusal to have her child in a local hospital, preferring instead to have it in London, a decision that was not well received by many in Kendal, where the local maternity unit was under threat!
It is no way hypocritical for the Tories to try to unseat Huhne if he is leader. It is a seat we would be targetting anyway and it will divert his attention from the national campaign if he has to spend a lot of time in his own patch. It is eminent sense to target him. The Lib Dems made a huge pitch out of targetting top Tories in the Shadow Cabinet even though some had good majorities! That was not sensible strategy or politics. BTW I would think it highly likely that in that scenario Huhne would hold his seat. Leaders do seem to get a boost, as do first term LD MPs, so he would be likely to have 1,500-2,500 majority IMHO.
Anyway enough for now, work to do!
Rik W, great post!
History of January post-election Mori polls:
Jan 1998 Con 28/Lab 54/Lib 14
Labour lead 26 (17 points higher than next election result)
Jan 2002 Con 27/Lab 51/Lib 16
Labour lead 24 (21 points higher than next election result)
Jan 2006 Con 39/Lab 39/Lib 15
Labour Lead zero (25 points higher than next election, based on trend)
Therefore, Tories to win next election with 25 point lead!
Printz - I think MORI has changed its methodology at least once since 1998.
If Huhne was the candidate who would be the best leader and give a better general election result than the others would deliver, it would be a terrible mistake to reject him simply because of his majority. On balance, I don’t think he is the man for the job, but not at all because of his majority.
Past figures (aside from not prompting for party name) were of “all voters” - current figures are for “all those absolutely certain to vote”
“On “Decapitation” strategies, the Lib Dems stupidity was to publicise the fact as they did, thus ensuring that the Tories brought resources in to defend the seats under threat.”
Now, after you saying that, I’m beginning to doubt whether they really targetted those seats seriously. Maybe it was a diversion to make Tories bring their resources to these seats, away from Lib Dems’ real targets? They didn’t get many from Tories, though.
Any markets yet on the Scottish parliamentary by-election in Feb?
Do you guys have to ruin my fun?
93 - Eric - I can assure you that they did! Bus loads of LDs were seen arriving to canvass and deliver etc and that is partly why so many LDs were so disappointed at, what on the surface, seemed like quite a good result for them at the GE.
Back on topic, I’m sure the current betting moves must be good news for Huhne backers. Do we have any canvass reports from LibDem insiders? I’m sure the recent improvement in Huhne’s price must be due to some insider knowledge of the way things are going. Now all we need is a poll…
Last backed at 4.8-1
It’s only part of the problem that he might lose his seat. The main problem is that because of this he is likely to lose other seats and be an ineffective leader, for the reasons above.
It’s worth noting that Norman Lamb was kept off the front bench for a long time despite evidently being a pretty formidable bloke because he had to build his majority.
60 - how to maximise your profit if you have had £10 at 200 on Betfair (or 199-1). Lock in may be a better term here than maximise.
To lock in the same profit whoever wins is a matter of simple algebra: winstake x winprice = laystake x layprice, so laystake = (winstake x winprice) / layprice. Now £10 x 200 = £2000 and if we assume you can lay at 8, you’d want to lay £2000/8 = £250.
Then if Huhne is beaten, you keep the £250 but lose your original £10 stake for a net profit of £240. If Huhne wins, you make £1,990 on your original bet (£2,000 less £10 stake) but have to pay out £1,750 (£2,000 less £250 stake) and £1,990 - £1,750 is £240. Less commission!
A more sophisticated player would skew the amount he layed back depending on whether he thought Huhne was more likely to win or lose.
87, 93,96 - Rik’s argument might stand up if it was the case that significant additional resources were put into the so-called ‘decapitation’ seats as a result of some kind of ‘decapitation strategy’.
The reality is that the five seats in question were on the LD target list as a result of their previous results - all were in the top 25 swing to win seats for the LDs. Folkestone, for example, was being targeted before Howard became leader.
And as for: ‘Bus loads of LDs were seen arriving to canvass and deliver etc’ - I think that is a bit of an exageration.
100. Thanks, that’s clear now.
97 - Pretty much a three way split amongst councillors & activists. Huhne has certainly got a lot of well known people backing him on his website (which you will be able to see when the server is back up and running) and twice as many as Hughes. He is doing very well on the blogs and internal party forums.
There is a bit of a feeling that Huhne’s supporters are more genuinly enthusiastic about him than the other camps supporters. A lot of Ming’s early support was ’stop Hughes’ or ’stop Oaten’ while a lot of Hughes’ early support was ’stop Orange Book’. Because he is less well known there is also less ‘anti’ feeling.
Assumption is that he starts behind with the armchair members and the question is whether he has time to catch up during the campaign. He is now getting a bit more media (good piece in Telegraph today).
My best guess is that he is still behnd te other two but steadily winning converts. I still feel the odds don’t reflect how well he will do. My spread bet becomes steadily more profitable!
You must remember that the amount of money involved in Huhne on Betfair is relatively small . Less than 300 pounds bet on all the currently available sums offered would put him temporarily as 2nd favourite although further lays would no doubt correct the situation fairly quickly .
It doesn’t really matter if the decapitation strategy did or did not exist in reality. Part of Jon W’s argument was that “every press conference would start with questions about whether the leader could hold his seat” - the implication that this would serve to blur any other message that the LibDems might have been putting out.
Well the “decapitation strategy” got an enormous amount of coverage in 2005, whether it existed or not.
And unless the argument is that the Tories benefit from not having any of their messages publicised, whereas the Libs don’t (maybe that is the argument?), I don’t see why being targeted should necessarily be any more of a problem for the Libs as for the Tories. Indeed, if they have confidence in their leader’s appeal, then having news crews camped in his own constituency digging up stories (to keep them occupied) of what a hard worker he is for his constituents then that can only be a good thing.
He’s been briefly profiled in the Telegraph.
105 - There is no doubt in my mind that if leader Huhne’s majority would sore in the same way that Ashdown’s did and even longer ago Thorpe’s .
Re the 2005 decapitation strategy , apart from Folkestone which was in my opinion a no-hoper because MH was bound to get his own leader bounce , the other targets were more than valid as the Conservatives had to and did put in considerable effort into those seats to defend them .
Great bet Mike - I feel that Huhne’s main hurdle will be in finishing 2nd in the first ballot - if he should succeed though, he will gain enormous momentum for having seen off one of the heavyweights and will then be viewed as the Cameron-style saviour of the party and may well then become the favourite to win.
Before laying off any part of your bet,I’d await new polling evidence - it’s noticable on this site that both MG and SH have a significant number of critics,whereas Huhne appears to have far fewer - if this is typical of the Lib Dem membership as a whole, he may already have more suppport that is currently appreciated.
108 - There’s only one ballot, Peter.
Mike - you didn’t say whether you would be retiring on your winnings!
109 Thanks for that, Alex - I had thought it was a Tory style elimination voting procedure.
For those interested in having a small wager on Huhne I would suggest Cantor Spreadfair’s 25-10 index,where his current buy price is 4.4. This means if he wins,this bet returns 20.6(25-4.4) x the stake, equivalent to 4.7/1,whereas if he comes second,it returns 5.6 (10-4.4) x the stake,equivalent to 1.3/1.
82. You’re giving us a false choice - it’s not a question of blanket seat losses or gains (and there’s no way we’d be making those seat losses) but of how heavily the other parties (Labour too, as someone pointed out - it’s in their interest as well) would target Eastleigh and whether the LDs want a leader who’s going to be tied down in his own constituency and tie down additional resources there. To have no head after an election would, as Jon said, be a disaster.
I think that in himself Huhne is a great asset to the LDs, but there’s no way that I want to run the risk of having him as leader. I’m not an expert on bank ratings, but it seems as if although the Eastleigh management may be excellent, the capital ratio is just too low.
113 - You don’t think the LibDems could lose 20 seats? That’s nothing in the context of (your main challengers in most seats) a Conservative Party running 6% ahead of where they have been for 13 years.
The question for LibDems is whether they can afford to wait before taking radical action to combat the Conservatives. If they call it wrong, and the apparent Conservative revival is not a false dawn, then there could be no going back.
In some respects the Libs have ended up with the perfect three candidates for this race. I don’t believe all this stuff about “all candidates will make good leaders of the party” - all represent very stark choices, and they can’t all be good things.
Campbell is the “wait for the future” candidate - and is implicitly the candidate for those who are sceptical about Cameron’s appeal to the electorate. All this talk about him “providing contrast with Cameron’s youth and inexperience” is IMO just froth. He appears to have no clear policy platform or sense of direction, which is unsurprising - I thought his candicacy was summed up by his commitment to give up his Jag in the Sky debate.
Huhne is the candidate for those who take the renewed Conservative threat seriously, but think with the right action it can be beaten off. They may know that he represents a bit of a gamble, but think that it is a gamble that must be taken.
Finally Hughes is for those who similarly recognise the Conservative threat, but are not as optimistic as those above that they can be taken on directly. He is the candidate best placed to develop the trend started in 2005 of attacking the party which is in the weakest long term position - ie. Labour, and particularly the labour left. 2005 showed that there is fertile ground to be had there if that is the direction they choose to go.
Personally I see option 2 as the best, but i see merits (from a pragmatic viewpoint) in option 3. I think option 1 (playing safe) is the way to potential disaster. But then I’m not a LibDem member.
107 - Mark, Folkestone had nothing to do with Leader bounce and everything to do with Campaign strategy on our part - canvassing areas that no party had touched in 30 years.
The Lib Dem vote actually went backwards in Folkestone, and would have been a larger loss had it not been for certain underhanded tactics used against the Labour candidate in the constituency, as well as, to put it bluntly, contradicting Lib Dem national policy to try and win voters over in Lydd.
Based on current projections, with the Lydd issue now resolved with Conservative voters who switched for this single issue, I would expect the gap between LD and Con in Folkestone to increase further at the next election, without a leader bounce.
115.”I would expect the gap between LD and Con in Folkestone to increase further at the next election, without a leader bounce. ”
even without a new tory candidate (if Howard stands down next time)?
113 I think that’s right, Valerie.
Incidentally the FT are having mild fund with him
“A rise in taxes on petrol and a new levy on household energy are the key to electoral success, Chris Huhne, one of the three contenders for the Liberal Democrat leadership, has said.”
Values first, policies later is a better approach!
114. Campbell has focused on values and his concept of leadership, which I (and many others who want to see narrative and values emphasised more thoroughly) see as a very good thing. As I said yesterday, we’re in the middle of a policy review anyway.
He does very much have a sense of purpose - it’s been said x times, but he’s a gut liberal who projects a very clear idea of what he stands for.
114. cont. Although I concede it may not fit into your left/right schema.
Durham South County Council by election next Thursday. Conservatives are really trying there. Should be interesting to see what happens. May 2005, Labour 1526, Lib Dem 1429 & Con 328.
On paper a straight Lab / Lib Dem marginal but as I say Cons seem to be working quite hard. Good test of the strength of DC? The area takes in Shincliffe if I remember 20 years back, used to be heavy Cons ward. However the Lib Dems are strong in Durham City constituency area and of course the SDP nearly won it in 1983 and LD’s not far off 2005. On the basis of results this year the Lib Dems could win, depends on the Labour effort, and they are apparently making a big effort.
Also much closer to Scotland and DUNFERMALINE, when I lived in the area in the late 70’s, early 80’s, there seemed a much closer affinity with Edinburgh than London for much of the time, we even called our young baby, a bairn like everyone other. However the two Scottish council by elections coming up in the next 2 weeks offer a better insight into how Dunfermaline might go
Edinburgh was certainly better for a day trip and shopping. Pity about Sunderland FC this year.
116 - yes. MH has not said anything about the next election yet, so I am working on the assumption he will stand again.
However, if he doesn’t, there is at least one very good local candidate who is “Gold List” material, was key to the least election victory, and is known both on the doorstop and by the largest donors, whilst also having a life outside of politics (they are not a councillor)
They cover the extremes required for a local association, the local electorate, and are extremely media friendly - so I think they would have a good chance of extending the run of C in the seat (it has been C now for 83 years), and with an enhanced majority
Good afternoon campers. Well back from an exceptionally boozy brunch involving a pair of Kennedy like journos and a like-minded Lib Dem insider with a capacity for nosh and drink that would make Nick Soames appear a paragon of Benedictine self denial. Anyhow as I picked up the not inconsiderable tab you might consider yourselves privledged. So here’s the goss that’s fit to print :
On the Lib Dem front :
Oaten “devastated” that of MPs’ only Limpdick was prepared to support him fully. Oaten was fully expecting a “considerable” number of OB’s to flock to his banner, and frankly feels “let down” at the paucity of support outside of the nomination tarts. The more so as Huhne, after so little time served in the HoC has easily managed to get his campaign going.
Huhne has suprised the Lib Dem establishment at the depth of his support and although they do not expect him to win, he is in the “Fox” zone of campaign activity and expectation.
As expected the Hughes comet has flattered to deceive, but a decent second place beckons.
There is considerable relief that Ming’s wagon has retreived the lost wheel of the previous week. The good performance at PMQs and QT together with an upbeat and well received launch has put the omph back in the camp. Some private polling has also seen Ming with a “very comfortable” lead and they now reckon that short of being found handcuffed in bed with Robert Mugabe that this is a race has only time to run.
Overall the Lib Dems HQ are quietly pleased that despite recent problems the opinion polls both public and private are on average in the high teens and they expect a small bounce once Ming is in place. The one area of concern is dosh. Recent revealations about dodgy funding hasn’t helped. I get the impression the winning ticket in next weeks £100 Million Euro Lottery wouldn’t come amiss.
…………………………………
The PM is said to be contemplating a Sinatra like farewell ….. long, lingering and with plenty of new Lab mood music. Blair thinks he’s got the measure of Cameroon ….. painting him as an inexperienced confused flip flopper in a dangerous world. He’s resigned to Gordon taking over in the fullness of time and is keen to promote young talent to bolster Gordon when he takes over. Blair also believes that Gordon will see off Cameroon and return Nu Labour to a historic fourth term albeit with a slightly reduced majority.
Iraq still weighs heavily and there have been some “tetchy” calls behind the scenes over US military gung ho and reckless tactics. The “festering problem of Iran” is ringing alarm bells big time, especially as Israel has told Bush they will not stand idly by as Iran build the bomb !!
……………………………………
Not too much news on the Tory front. Lots of activity under the Tory iceberg. Internal polling is promising but yet to pass the “glass ceiling” of support that will in the long term exit Nu Lab from office. Nevertheless such progress that has been made is seen as more that the honeymoon bounce and “more long term and strategic”. The only fly in the ointment is the right. Cameroon knows he may have to deal with them sooner or later. He hopes for a delayed battle that the voters might see as a “Tory militant moment”
…………………………………..
Hope you campers find that useful.
115 - contradicting Lib Dem national policy to try and win voters over in Lydd.
The LibDems have a national policy? I thought they decided policy ward by ward, telling people what they wanted to hear. If they start playing fair they’re gonna get their ars*s whupped.
121.”MH has not said anything about the next election yet, so I am working on the assumption he will stand again”
Milkybar Kid. IIRW, he said he’s thinking about what to do.
Mike - Just noticed that someone managed to back Huhne at 740-1!
114, 118. Fully agree with you Valerie! I think he came across very well in Questino Time, and to be honest (and i say this as a young voter) i think he does provide a “contrast with Cameron’s youth and inexperience”.
If the LDs let the arrival of Cameron dictate you should be their leader it would be foolish in the extreme. They should choose a leader who best represents what they believe in (and i think that is Ming) and run with him.
I think there was almost certainly a leader bounce in Folkestone & Hythe, but the self-destruction of the Lib Dems on Shepway council must also have helped enormously.
That whole stretch of South Kent coastline seems pretty run down and depressed to me. Where does the Tory vote come from in that part of the world?
122 Thanks for all that Jack, will look forward to you next briefing.
122 - And what’s going to happen with the Education bill? (to concentrate on matters that might actually come to ahead very soon ;))
124 - that’s the first I’ve heard about it, and my contacts are high up in the FHCA.
129 alex. Sorry alex it didn’t come up. Although I did miss out that TB is very relaxed about the reshuffle. It’s almost as if this retirement happy phase will last 2 or 3 years !!
131 - Why doesn’t he just appoint himself Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster?
87: Interesting and thoughtful post, Rik.
127: Folkestone and Hythe constituency is about half Folkestone and half outside, both inland and along the coast. The inland areas (Elham Valley) are growing in population, fuelled to some extent by the Tunnel, while Folkestone declines. The Conservatives are very strong in the inland areas, and in 2005 also made serious inroads in Folkestone town which as you say is a bit depressed and depressing. The rest of that coast from Thanet South round to Hastings has had a large long term swing to Labour. I wonder if there’s a bit of a feeling in Folkestone that it’s classier than Dover and Hastings and should vote accordingly? I used to think that about Hove, but Hove eventually swung into line with Brighton.
67: There are some different methodologies for notional results - there is imputing swing from local election results, as you say, and there is also the other which estimates each ward’s contribution to the constituency’s vote for that party in the local election and feeds that back into the general election result. I think one does have to be careful when the tactical position is different in the ward and the constituency - and particularly when there is no information from local elections because they are not contested by one or more parties.
Very interesting Jack, thanks. If TB thinks he can paint DC as an English John Kerry he’s got another think coming. DC comes across as decisive.
126 Tistoph - Do you really think a 68 year old will appeal to the electorate in ‘09? Whether Lib Dem supporters like it or not,DC is a major threat to their party’s support at the next GE and I imagine most Tories are hoping for a MC leadership victory, not only in terms of bolstering their own level of support, but also in possibly forging a coalition with him if necessary,which would be unthinkable were Hughes to win.
127 - Sean, trust me, Leader bounce was not really an issue - there were “died in the wool” conservatives who didn’t vote at all in 2005, they refused to vote C because of Iraq, but wouldn’t vote anything else either - leader bounce would have brought them kicking and screaming into the camp.
The votes we picked up in F&H were because of the campaign - it tapped areas noone had been into before. Michael was also out every Saturday for months running up to the election, including the final month itself - he would always come back so he could canvas his own patch, as well as hold his surgeries prior to dissolution.
As for the South Kent Coast, it only covers 3 associations - Folkestone & Hythe, Dover and Thanet South.
Thanet South includes areas such as Sandwich & Villages, Monkton, Minster, Kingsgate and Broadstairs - areas with properties running into the millions, as well as Pfizers having their main UK labs based there - big money, v middle class, even though there are areas of deprivation in Thanet itself, it is up and coming. Area has also traditionally been Conservative until 1997 - one of those “been that way for centuries”
Dover is probably more run down than Thanet because of the harbour and the hit it has taken in the past 8 years - until a couple of years ago it had one of the highest average salaries in Kent.
Folkestone is not as deprived an area as it may appear. Hythe (apart from Hythe South), the Marshes and chunks of Folkestone/Sandgate are extremely affluent, with a large amount of London Money being based in the area, as it has been for a while. Add in the de Haan money with Saga as the main local employer, a thriving creative community, and a high amount of suitable “isolated” property (suiting the likes of Julian Clary and Paul O’Grady who have bought in this area in the past 5 years), as well as a plethora of Lords and Ladies who live there, and it is far more Blue than you may perceive from the outside
130. Milkybar Kid, it was suggested in a BBC website article. But they’re usually so bad written that it’s sometimes difficult to understand what they’re talking about…so maybe they were meaning something else.
All the towns and villages on that coast strike me as being pretty dismal (eg Camber Sands, New Romney, Dymchurch). I think Michael Howard did well to hold the seat in 1997.