The favourites to succeed Ming?
March 29th, 2006
-
Betting opens on the NEXT Lib Dem leader…really!
Less than four weeks after Sir Menzies Campbell was elected leader of the Liberal Democrats betting has opened on who will replace him.
The four in the picture - Chris Huhne (5/1), Nick Clegg (4/6) , David Laws (4/1) and Ed Davey (5/1) are heading the early prices. Next in line are Mike Moore and Sarah Teather on 14/1. Julia Goldsworthy is 20/1, Mark Oaten 25/1, while Simon Hughes and Vince Cable are at 33/1. The not-publicity shy Lembit Opik is priced at 50/1.
-
For a real long-shot Charles Kennedy is priced at 100/1 - which looks like a great value bet. If he could show that he has really conquered his problems he would have a good chance with the membership ballot if he stood.
Like Tony Blair and David Cameron the top four in the betting have a lot in common:-
An interesting aspect of the next race will be whether Clegg, Laws and Davey will benefit from having stood aside for Ming. Huhne did not and certainly increased his profile within the party.
Barring ill-health or accidents it is hard to see another Lib Dem contest taking place this side of the General Election and I cannot see why anybody would want to bet apart from, maybe, having a small flutter on Kennedy. The 4/6 on Nick Clegg is just ridiculous given the uncertainties over the time-scale and I have yet to be convinced by him.
It is worth recalling that betting on the last Lib Dem leader did not start until December 2005.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Put your money on Julia at that price.
If there’s one thing I’m pretty sure of now it’s that Huhne’s effectively “politically dead” now.
Firstly he’s isolated from the Campbell leadership and has earnt the distrust of many of the “Orange Bookers”.
Secondly he’s a failed libdem leadership candidate in a marginal seat just like Jackie Ballard in Taunton back in 2001, also unlike 2001 the Tories are going to be in a much stronger position locally and nationally than they where in Somerset in 2005 and Huhne’s majority is far smaller than Ballard’s.
And thirdly and finally, after Kent, if there is one area where Cameron should be able to bank on having a good election night its Hampshire, seats like Romsey, Winchester, Portsmouth North, Portsmouth South and Huhne’s Eastleigh should all be winnable and will be targeted very heavily.
As for the leadership itself I’d have though Clegg really will prosper under the Campbell leadership, however I’d also expect the likes of Laws (who is really rather impressive in his media presentations) and Davey to also continue to improve their prospects.
At the moment its really too early, what happens to the LibDems at the next election is probably the most important factor, if things continue along the same line as at the last election and they see loses in their rural/suburban seats to the Tories (perhaps on a bigger scale than in ’05) while winning further white-collar urban seats from Labour then I think the likes of Clegg-Davey-Laws etc… will remain the frontrunners.
If however ’05 is a very bad year for the LibDems, who knows… though Clegg would hold his seat in all be the very worst years for the LibDems, though that might not be the case for Davey and Laws could always look to keeping his “options open”
So ultimately I think it too early to say precisely who will replace Ming, however I think its likely to be one of the candidates Mike suggests though in all likelihood not Huhne who IMHO won’t be an MP after the next election and will have more time to devote the multi-million pound fortune he didn’t know he had
At present all the signs are that Labour in 3rd place in the Cons/Liberal Dem seats are polling very badly, in the south anyway. Net result is beneficial to the Lib Dems. The Eastleigh Labour 3rd place vote is quite large, that will probably switch significantly to Huhne and he could well return with a larger majority.
Some people are already questioning whether DC will be the leader in 3 years time, that apparent non prime ministerial short fuse is going to be tested and tested.
Whoever it is can’t come too soon as Ming is quite a disaster; far too patrician, stern and unbending, more like a trusted family accountant than a get up and go leader. I shudder to think what Bremner will do to him and us before the next election.
Who succeeds will probably depend on which of the possibles manages to impress Question Time, and on that rating I think Laws is very good with Teather as the front woman.
I’m not sure about Nick Clegg, lots of charm, but rather too laid back, he needs some missionary zeal and hasn’t done anything to deserve being odds-on. I don’t think Charles, unfortunately, will come back; no second chances in politics.
Beth
Seems a bit premature. I think it will probably be Nick Clegg or Michael Moore, but all the candidates will need to show what they can offer over the next few years.
Huhne will certainly hold on to his seat, and might well prove a stronger candidate next time around. Sarah Teather has her admiriers.
Good to see that Accenture, a key player in the NHS IT contract has just admitted massive failures in the development of the system. iSOFT their software partner (which has already massively profit warned) is seeing its stock get whacked today.
This issue will rumble around under Brown’s leadership for many years to come so get used to hearing about it. Originally costed at £6bn, could be £50bn at this rate.
If Accenture walks or iSOFT goes bust, not out of the question, the govt will have to step in and fork out shedloads of cash.
Sarah Teather has her admiriers.
LOL! Ridiculous.
5 - Who is this mysterious person (for surely there cannot be more than one) who sees Sarah Teather as a future Leader of the Liberal Deomcrats or even (god forbid) Prime Minister?
Mark Oaren 25/1 for the next leader,should be 25/1 that he will hold Winchester if selected to fight the seat.
6-paulky
Sounds par for the course with any project that New Labour gets involved with,this will look like petty cash when compared with the Olympic overspend!
9. Those are really… erm… BAD odds. Phew, nearly said something else.
Kennedy has come in to 33/1. Shows how people bet on faith not facts (same goes for anyone putting money on Oaten and Hughes. Incredible).
Why no price for Susan Kramer, I wonder?
Interesting that Susan Kramer isn’t mentioned. I wouldn’t see her as a frontrunner, but she’s fairly popular in the Party, and she was the only female MP I heard discussed as a possible candidate this time. I’d certainly see her as a much more likely prospect than Teather or Goldsworthy.
Clegg at 4/6 has to be the worst bet I’ve come across for a long time.
3 - has DC been a bit “frayed” again?
So far have only seen one of those four in action (NC - who was very impressive and struck the right degree of informality and passion when he spoke). By tomorrow that will be up to 2. Laws is as Ben points out always an impressive media performer, but needs to rehabilitate himself with the activists some more - perhaps OB-2 will help.
Good analysis by Ben also on Huhne’s position in Eastleigh; for sure he will have to work hard but the Tories threw bucketloads of cash there in 2005.
What is the great attraction of Nick Clegg? What has he actually done?
Each time I see him on the tv he comes over as dry and boring. Everyone mentions his youth - but that doesn’t really distinguish him from other Lib Dem MPs.
He makes Ming seem quite dynamic.
14 - We’ll have bigger buckets to throw in 2009. They will be transparent buckets for sure, but they’ll be huge.
3. I wouldn’t be so confident about Huhne’s chances in Eastleigh next time around. Certainly there were signs of tactical voting in 2001, with Labour voters switching to the Lib Dems. But last year, the Labour vote dropped only slightly and if anything appeared to be edging toward the Conservatives. Given the kind of Labour voters you find in Eastleigh (not the polenta-munching sort) a Conservative campaign focusing on Huhne’s Europhilia and support for massive tax hikes on petrol could see this trend continue.
David(s)at 3.A brave but futile gesture. You must know that the Tory Mafia on here will be after you with their 12 bores!
….But I wonder how many of them must be yearning for the return of Michael Howard. Labour are lying dead on the battlefield and Cameron just wont attack. Surely there’s never been a better time to have the killer instinct of a Michael Howard not to mention the forensic skills. But what do we get? Windmills on the top of houses!
Cometh the hour cometh the man. Why is there never a Robin Cooke figure when you need one?
2 - Firstly, it was hunting more than a failed leadership bid that did for Ballard in 2001 although the latter didn’t help. A key difference, though, is that Ballard stood and was utterly humiliated with a derisory vote whereas Huhne came close and established himself as a player. Broadly, voters quite like having a reasonably high profile MP provided it is for the right reasons and the constituency work doesn’t suffer.
I would say it is right to have Clegg as warm favourite but the odds are terribly unattractive at this stage.
re 18. Howard’s “attack dog” style never did him any good. Just look at the mess he made of the Hutton Report in early 2004. He gambled on it being bad for Blair & co and it came out as a whitewash. Howard was made to look stupid and it was from then on that his credibility collapsed.
If anyone wants to back Mark Oaten at
re 17 Labour switches in Lib dems seats - I think this is a good point, it’s the politics of yesterday to assume that Labour voters automatically switch the Lib dems.
Many post 1997 Labour voters are people who in another circumstance would have been Conservative voters.
Sure, core lefties will vary between the two left wing parties, but Labour won because they pulled in millions of new supporters who are the voters Cameron is clearly aiming for.
If he succeeds these people will go straight to us.
Mike - a subject close to your heart (as it is mine); how do we rate them on the Follicular Index? Clegg should be reun-away favourite on this measure too, but he is only in his late 30s and there’s time for MPB to strike … Huhne’s hair has shown its resilience so far, and is “salt ‘n’ peppering” nicely.
(cont) 20-1 I’ll happily take all comers (to those of you with scurrilous minds, no that’s not what I meant)
18, 20 - I think david (s) is making reference to the fact that DC is rumoured to have a short fuse. Mostly he keeps this under control, but sometimes it surfaces when under pressure, such as his grilling by Humphreys recently.
The fact they’re all white males says more about the betting market’s bland identikit template for what makes a good leader than it does about the Lib Dems. IMHO, Featherstone, Kramer and Goldsworthy are all liklier than Laws (as is Cable and even Kennedy). Which is more a statement about Laws’ chances than it is about the others.
The other flaw with those odds is that they’re based on *now*, without consideration for which reputations are likely to wax and wane over the next few years.
22 - OTOH Marcus, in Con/Lib seats most of those voters will have made the tactical decision already, as “Labour can’t win here”
. I would expect the residual Labour vote to be of the more tribal variety. I note in your own seat (churn excepted) the decrease in Adrian Sander’s majority was almost entirely due to LD -> Lab switching which went against the trend of most other areas.
Mike. I agree. Howard chose the wrong subject at the wrong time. As Blair always said, Howard was an excellent advocate but a lousy tactician. At the moment HM’s opposition needs to go for the kill. Labour should be in utter disarray but are in fact regrouping at a pace.
Allowing the press to do the work for you never works. It just makes you look like a futile opposition. Remember the damage Robin Cooke and others did to the Tories? This is what the Conservatives need now more than ever. And if any Tory hand on heart will tell you they are happy with Cameron’s tactics then they are more than likely tofu eating Lib Dems at heart!
Tabman. Exactly the same thing happened here in Winchester as Lab based tactical LD votes unwound.
My feeling talking to people here during current canvassing is that many former C voters who switched to LD didn’t hear anything they liked from the 2005 campaign but like what they think they hear from DC. If DC confirms his apparent positions with solid policy, I’m convinced many of them will swing back to C.
Of course we have the Oaten factor here as well which clouds the issue somewhat.
28 - roger, as oposed to polenta-eating NuLabs?
Drop me aline tabman@thatsaid.co.uk
GeorgeH - Sorry, is that 20/1 on Oaten being an MP in the next parliament; him being MP for Winchester; or next LibDem Leader? One of those I might well be interested in…
I’m not sure why you’re all talking about DC - he hasn’t yet put a foot wrong. And frankly if I were being grilled by the obnoxious, rude and disrespectful Humphreys I’d get annoyed too - wouldn’t you?
Marcus at 22. is absolutely right about over-simplification of voter movement. At least 40% of all voters could at any time vote for any party. Floating voters really are that - they have no loyalty and change their mind regularly. He’s also right that a large group of previously Conservative voters switched to Blair in 97 and since and they’re precisely the people that Cameron is appealing to.
A question for the Tories on here that stems from that. I’ve always thought that our codes on canvass sheets were misleading to inexperienced canvassers. They condition you to expect a very hostile response when you knock on the door of an S - you think you’re about to meet a socialist when in fact you might be meeting someone who voted Conservative for years and is happy to come back now that we’re more competent.
Out of interest - how many posters are standing for election on May 4th?
Your Torbay analysis is not neccessarily true Tabman at 27. Some LD votes went to UKIP and lots more simply sat on their hands in disgust.
I think the switching aspect is totally overdone by all of us engaged in politics - we miss the point that with lower turnouts it’s less people changing their mind but more to do with who votes, and who doesn’t.
When we were in power you’d hear people on the doorstep in Tory areas say they were disillusioned with ‘all of you’ - code for we’re not voting.
Recently we hear this kind of thing much more in Labbour and Lib Dem areas.
29 - George, I’d have thought the Oaten Factor was a gold-plated gift horse for you!
To offset the “wayward Tories” you identifty you also have to factor in the “Tories not at any price” vote. If DC starts to look close to winning that might concentrate a few minds in the ballot box.
31. Sorry Lennon; on being Leader.
32 - Russell its more about the way he does it - he doesn’t smoulder and seeth with controlled anger/righteous indignation, he comes across as high-pitched and petulant, as if caught out.
Does the fact that the betting has opened on a new Lib Dem leader mean that they think Ming will go before the next election?.
28. “if any Tory hand on heart will tell you they are happy with Cameron’s tactics then they are more than likely tofu eating Lib Dems at heart”
I’ve been found out
33 - Marcus, I don’t necessarilly disagree (I did mention churn). Its just if you look at raw numbers of votes, IIRC (and I don;t have the figures to hand) the Tory vote in absolute numbers remained roughly the same; the LD vote went down, and the Lab vote up, by roughly the same amount.
37 - who are “they”, AnnaK? Just punters like most of us here (cery oaccasional in my case - 10-1 dead certs only!). Its all speculation and rumour and people seeking to leverage money out of it.
35. Tabman. I mention the Oaten factor only because it probably shifts things in our favour and might make things re. DC look better than they actually are.
With a near 75% turnout here I don’t think we’re going to find many more left leaning voters turning out, even if a Tory victory looks possible. You may well be right more generally of course.
32. Russell. I’m standing for re-election to the local District Council.
38 - I take it you 6 notes to Cowley Street is in the post?
“……if I were being grilled by the obnoxious, rude and disrespectful Humphreys I’d get annoyed too”
You must have missed his performance with Michael Crick the other night. A pity because it was really funny. Cameron said “Don’t you shout at me!” (unsaid ‘don’t you know who I am oik!’) at which point he flicked his head back pointed his nose into the air and in a deligtful strop stormed inside
41 - George, agreed re Winchester, although we have a new agent (
to LDs). Has the Con Club been painted yet?
37: I dont really know who “they” are but somebody somewhere thought they would open the betting after only a month.
45 - counter-intutively (but only at first glance) a substantial minority of city folk have Lib Dem leanings.
Why aren’t the names of Susan Kramer and Lynne Featherstone included? I’d think that they are much more likely female candidates next time than Sarah Teather or Julia Goldsworthy.
I doubt that Laws would stand. He is really bright, but not very popular among the membership, so I think that he would probably content to support a candidate who would employ him in the Lib Dem policy-making.
44. Con Club? What’s that? Nothing to do with us I’m afraid. Beer’s cheap though.
43. Roger I confess that I don’t watch TV - all my political information comes from the Guardian! So I do know (from Simon Hoggart’s sketches) that Labour MPs have decided that DC is camp - and your description of the Crick episode seems to confirm that! Before you know it he’ll be trading throws with William Hague to prove how manly he is!!!
48 - the one near the station.
I just think it’s brilliant that the betting has already opened on the next Lib Dem leader - tells you all you need to know about how they *really* feel about Ming doesn’t it?
I said ages ago that this leaderhip election was the Lib dems ‘IDS moment’ and it looks like I was right.
At some stage someone is going to deal with Crick’s questioning style by smacking him in the face. Now that would be a story.
27. Tabman. Labour increased their vote in a number of seats where they were in third place: Ryedale, Torbay, Kingston & Surbiton, Brentwood & Ongar, Islwyn, Cornwall North, Ribble Valley, Isle of Wight, Winchester, New Forest West, Tiverton & Honiton, Lewes, Hazel Grove, Skipton & Ripon, Harrogate & Knaresborough,,Aberdeenshire West & Kincardine, Stratford on Avon,Penrith & The Border,Berwick-upon-Tweed, Romsey,,Christchurch, Airdrie and Shotts, Wells, Sheffield Hallam.
And a couple of others too.
51 - who are you backing, then, Marcus?
53 - yes, I was referring to the overall picture of the GE where of every 8 votes Labour lost, 7 went to the LDs.
Tony’s “vote Labour or get Howard” message was a shrewd one; equally it increases “squeeze” opportunities.
Of the noted candidates :
Huhne - The marginality of the seat is problematic. However Huhne will build up a personal vote and has enough cash to outspend the Tories if required. And as James indicated constituents like having a name as their MP. The Tories also threw the kitchen sink at the seat with knobs on in 05 and failed. Having said all that, I feel Huhne’s main chance has now passed, although he’ll remain a significant figure in the party for many years to come.
Clegg - Still something of a blank canvass IMO and desperately overpriced and overrated I believe. Has been built up to be “a natural heir” in many circles, but so far has flattered to deceive in the opporunities he’s had in the spotlight.
Laws - Cuts an authoratitive and informed figure and was handpicked by Ashdown as his successor in Yeovil. However, I’ve noticed in media spots he sometimes lacks warmth and empathy …. as if he’s directing traffic …. knowing where he wants people to go, but without enthusing.
Davey - A good performer with a clear grasp of policy that he’s able to put over well. Also always gives the impression of being a non politician …. always an asset. My main critisism is that he seems to lack the killer punch …. a little to consensual.
Of the other candidates :
Teather - Utterly
her supporters need to keep taking their medication.
Goldsworthy - Shaping up well .. decent long term prospect.
Featherstone - Very much the dark horse … certainly worth watching. Very ambitious.
Our Viscount - Now spending more time with his moustache … sadly
Oaten - Up sh*t creek without a paddle !!
[24] “Scurrilous” minds, George? Us? We leave that kind of thing to MPs and PPCs… you’ll have a Christian People’s Alliance candidate on the ballot paper in Winchester at this rate
Roger and other Labour supporters may find Cameron annoying for standing up to bullying interviewers but loads of people I know outide politics think it’s brilliant.
Crick and Humphries are definitely the worst - Camerons interview with Humphries was the subject of a large number of complaints - it was a truly dismal effort by the welsh windbag.
People say that politics is a turn off but these kind of aggressive political interviews are as much to do with it.
How much more do we learn by the cosy style of chat-show interviewers lik the much underrated Jimmy Young and more recntly TB on Parkinson?
When was the last time Humphries ‘revealed’ anything as interesting?
56.”And as James indicated constituents like having a name as their MP. ”
Jack, I could harsh and say that not everyone would consider the LD environment spokeman an “high profile” political player….at least not more high profile than what some of the 2005 losers were (like Tim Collins).
Having said that, I find Huhne quite good. He was good on Sky the day of the budget….ok, in one of his appearances that day he was up against Nick Brown (I failed to udnerstand what he was saying apart that Gordon is good) and Julie Kirkebride (who was dressed in pink and just said Cameron was “fresh”), so it wasn’t very difficult to find Huhne impressive.
58. I detest Paxman. Someone should throw something on his face one day.
I think Ming is the perfect choice at this time. It didn’t seem that way when he was chosen but politics is like that. There must be every possibility that Cameron will fall flat on his face. He doesn’t seem to know what he’s doing. The opposition parties need leadership and he’s giving them bycicle lessons. Those disaffected with Blair are most unlikely to turn to Cameron. I’m bored with the PR stunts and the press is starting to get restless. Who better to benefit from the fallout than cool reliable Ming.
Has Gordon Brown ever been subject to the Crick treatment?
50 (and then 46). We use the Con Club for meetings but there’s really no proper link. To be a member you have to pay a 50p sub to the Tories but most regulars are there for the cheap beer and have nothing to do with the party.
On topic (re your 46), I think you’re right about Lib Dem interest in the City, The bookmakers saw a heap of betting on the leadership election, much of it driven by attempts to manipulate the price.
It may be cynical of me, but I suspect that they realise that odds are now an important part of positioning / campaigning and are exploiting the capital flows generated by that. With Ming clealry a caretaker, business sense says they should keep these markets open to capture capital backing certain players politcally rather than for financial gain.
My personal choice would be Laws, he could hold his own easily in a debate with Cameron and Brown (or whoever succeeds them), teh only problem is, as Jack says, the lack of warmth. I did, however, find him more engaging and personable on the recent Question Time. Clegg I could cope with but, having checked out Davey, I wasn’t particularly impressed.
Update on teh loans situation via the BBC site, what sort of corruption would they be looking for?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4853986.stm
“The Metropolitan Police announced last week it was investigating four complaints about Labour’s loans from wealthy businessmen, under an act preventing the sale of honours.
It is now thought the inquiry could be widened to consider charges of corruption.
And a Scottish Nationalist MP, who made one of the original complaints, says the police have not ruled out investigating the Conservatives.
But a Scotland Yard spokeswoman said the complaints it was currently investigating all related to the Labour Party. “
33 Marcus - can you give us your analysis of what did happen in Torbay in the GE. I’ve always thought the result looked very odd all around. E.g compare to Teignbridge
I believe also local elections have been interesting here with both the LDs and Tories being turfed out in large numbers in recent (subsequent) elections. Is that right and why?
58 - It worked with Paxman but not Humphries - you have to choose your moment to say, “look, calm down and let me develop an answer” rather than being petulant, which he plainly was with Humphries who in fact was not at his hectoring worst that day.
59 - Huhne’s profile comes from the leadership bid not his spokesmanship - his local press would I suspect have been full of “hey, our MP’s a high flier” stuff for weeks. Tim Collins was lower profile and utterly hopeless.
61 - I agree, not least it is vital for him to teach us what a “bycicle” is before we wear/eat/ride it.
58 Marcus. I think Humphries, Paxman, Crick et al are priceless. Far too often politicians are not challenged enough and if they can’t stand upto robust, aggressive and sometimes rude interogration, then how will they fare in the harsher reality of government and international affairs !
59 Andrea. The Enviroment portfollio hold more sway in Lib Dem ranks that in the non tofu parties.
53 - Labour in third in Airdrie, islwyn? Shurely shome mishtake?
66. the next election is probably 3 years away from his leadership bid, so I wouldn’t be so sure that the local newspaper would still be carry “hey, our MP’s a high flier” stuff. It actually could, if he establish himself as a key player, but standing for the leadership itself is not enough IMO to keep it in the long term. He needs to work to keep the high profile he reached in the last months. I think he could do it, because he was very good in his campaign.
Good politicians don’t allow Crick to get under their skin. Blair had the treatment and just smiled at him like you would at a wayward spaniel. The result was his authority remained intact. Howard tried to argue with him which didn’t work but as Marcus said people don’t like rude interviewers so it was probably OK. Cameron just behaved like an insulted adolesent. and whatever anyone might have thought of Cricks rudeness they would be unlikely not to have been disappointed by Camerons reaction.
68. yes, David, it’s what happens when I cut and past an old comment I made (about Lab vote going up) without checking the contest where I made it!
58/60: I agree with max and andrea re the Paxman/Humphries approach - I think it does real damage to politics. Paxman’s book on politicians managed to write literately, amusingly and informatively over 150 pages without ever once betraying any understanding of what makes most politicians tick (that they want to change something in the country) - in fact he says several times that he can’t understand why anyone would want to do it. I don’t understand why people want to go bungee-jumping, and that’s one reason why I’ve never tried to be an interviewer of bungee-jumpers.
I see I get a mention in Robin Cook’s posthumous memoirs (quoting me as saying that people don’t join parties merely to support managerial change) - kindly but doubled-edged, it’s something like ‘too intelligent always to appear street-wise but able to produce penetrating insights’. Er…
ID card ping-pong today.
KJH at 65 “your analysis of what did happen in Torbay in the GE”.
It’s fair to say that we ran a campaign highlighting the -er- deficencies of the Lib dems in office since they won control of Torbay in 1990; in other words a negative campaign.
I make no apologies for it, the Lib dems won control and eventually won the seat through a relentless negative campaign that started in 1988 and carries on to this day.
Labour have polled about 14% in Torbay for yonks - the 2001 result (when they polled only about 9%) was an anomoly caused by much more tactical voting than usual (because the still new Lib Dem mp had a margin of just 12 votes to defend).
So in summary in 2005 - Labours vote returned to roughly normal; our vote stayed low, the UKIP vote went up and the Lib Dem vote dropped back to below the 1997 level.
Since the GE we have won indirect control of the council because we had a referendum for a directly elected mayor and then we went on to win the subsequent election in October.
We have also won string of nine by elections in the last eighteen months.
[74] So, given this string of successes of the Conservatives in Torbay, we may assume that perhaps the Conservative candidate was just rather weak then?
73.”Labour have polled about 14% in Torbay for yonks ”
I wouldn’t say they polled 14% “for yonks”…unless your “yonks” starts from 1997.
In 1983, they polled 7.2%, in 1987 8.4% and in 1992 9.6%. Then they jumped to 14.9%, whole in 2001 they dropped to 9.4%.
73.”the Lib Dem vote dropped back to below the 1997 level”
Sanders in 1997: 39.6%
Sanders in 2005: 40.8%
I have read the comments about possible women candidates and I’m surprised to not see Jo Swinson being mention, I mean she is very intelligent.
Another seat where the Lib Dems were confident of squeezing the residual Labour vote last time was dear old West Dorset. But again the voters refused to play ball - Labour’s vote fell 6%, but a third of this went to the Tories, a further third each to the Greens and UKIP.
73 Marcus. Do you get the feeling that winning the council will be a double edged sword for you in 2009 ?!?!
Interesting thread. Can’t really see it being Davey, who is very bright, but comes across as a bit of a geek - not a leader. Same goes for Laws to a lesser extent.
I was disappointed that Kramer did not run for the deputy leadership. She could run for leader next time. Jeremy Browne is one to watch too. As indeed is Goldsworthy.
My guess is that next time the candidates will be Laws, Clegg, Kramer, Moore. Probably Clegg to win. Moore is very good, but the view may be that 4 of the last 6 leaders have been Scottish (five counting MacLennan as interim leader in 1988) … so it may count against him.
Deputy leadership vote today?
77 - Swinson is also very good. Next leader but one?
78. there’re quite a number of seats where Lab went down, but LD didn’t go up (for ex Maidenhead). It could be that Lab voters directly went to other parties or maybe there were Lab to LD switchers, but counter-balanced by LD to Con switchers.
I think at times we all forget that the next GE isn’t going to happen before 2009 or even 2010 so what we feel “certain” to happen in 2006 may well look ridiculous by then. That applies both to Party leaderships and predictions as to what will or won’t happen in Torbay, East Ham etc.
In that respect, I would no more entertain betting on the next LD leader than I would betting on the next Conservative leader. That’s not to say I would be confident that either Ming or DC will be in their current posts at the time of the next GE - you don’t know if Ming’s health will be an issue or what will happen if the Tory poll ratings fall and Cameron isn’t seen to be delivering. In addition, there may be some huge event which will completely re-shape our politics. After all, in June 2001, the big issue wasn’t international terrorism or invading Iraq but foot and mouth….
83- how about David Cameron to be the next leader of the Liberal Democrats - at 1000 / 1, say?
[74] So, given this string of successes of the Conservatives in Torbay, we may assume that perhaps the Conservative candidate was just rather weak then?
The successes came after the GE and our vote share has continued to grow.
(76) Sanders vote in 1997 21,000 Sanders vote in 2005 19,300
(79) No, if we win full control next year as I expect we will have set in train a proper recovery plan for Torbay, and we have some really talented people standing for council this time.
82 - Any geographical pattern to those seats, Andrea?
85.” Sanders vote in 1997 21,000 Sanders vote in 2005 19,300″
oh, please, come on. the turnout was more than 10% lower. Otherwise it should be mentioned you got one of the worst results for the tories in Torbay in terms of total votes. Even worse than in 2001 (because turnout fell again last year in Torbay).
but maybe you like to compare total votes now to when women weren’t allow to vote to show how much a party improved in terms of votes!
85 - we are back to the chestnut about vote being lower in 2005 than in 1997 again, aren’t we? In fact as turnout fell so much, in numerical terms almost every MP, for all parties (especially Labour) got fewer votes in 2005 than in 1997, even if they did increase their share of the vote, as Sanders did.
The Tory vote must numerically also have been lower in 2005 than in 1997 too (I have not checked). We had this discussion regarding Sutton and Cheam a few weeks ago.
74. Not very charming
Don’t understand the “Laws lacks warmth” his personal impact on the doorstep in the constiuency is remarkable converting a large percentage of those who he meets. The most frequent comment is “how genuine and interested he appears” My own deealings have always left me impressed. His problem is he is too short!
32 (long way back) Russell - Yup, I shall be awiting the judgement of the people on May 4th in seeking their renewed confidence
82. Yes Andrea there probably were the kind of cross currents you mention, which are masked by the raw changes in vote share. But canvassing did suggest that a certain kind of more traditional working class Labour voter (generally older and socially conservative) was more inclined to switch to the Tories than the Lib Dems because of issues like hunting, immigration, crime, and to a lesser extent Europe.
87 Andrea you are correct that my vote in 2005 was worse than the then Tory MP Rupert Allason got when he lost in 1997 - I never claimed otherwise.
But while our vote flatlined at 36% Adrian Sanders’ vote fell from 50.1% to 40%.
Our percentage of the vote marginally increased and the swing to us from the Lib dems was just under 5%.
I agree that a flutter on Ck is the only bet of any interest. The return of Bonnie Prince Charlie “over the sea from Skye” must be a distinct possibility.
I suspect Chris Huhne ran because he is older than Clegg and Laws, which might caount against him, but he definitely has recognition factor now
86. Observer, to be honest, I don’t know. There’re some of them in the South, but some are in the north too (like Davis’ seat). I haven’t looked carefully at then, it was just a thing I’ve noticed.
26 Rubbish, it tells you there are no obvious female or BME candidates
93. Marcus, I meant it’s not fair to compare total votes between 1997 and 2005 with the turnout being more than 10% lower.
90: I think your right about height. It will be a problem for george Osbourne as well.
I think Cameron and Ming will lead their parties in the next general election. You can’t elect leaders and then not let them fight elections. The longer Blair stays the more likely the Labour party will not pick Brown.
I think Newsnight should replace Crick with Guido.
96. Would be tricky for there to be any non-white candidates as well - don’t the Lib Dems only have one ethnic minority MP?
12 “Why no price for Susan Kramer, I wonder?”
cos she’s NFU?
Similarly I have heard disappointing reports of Nick Clegg as a public speaker. Laws is a non-starter for reasons which will be obvious to a few. Huhne and Davey are clearly there, but anyone who writes off Kennedy right now for somethingthree years off must need a head-shrinker. IF (and it is a big if) he beats the booze then, armed with his toddler, he could beat any of those pictured by a street and a half working a two day week. Might not want the hassle though.
99. Fred. I think they haven’t an ethnic minority MP at the moment. They lost Leicester South back to Labour.
100 NFU?? National Farmers Union??
67 Jack - Agree about the interviewers.
They are bloody rude, ignorant and plain obnoxious on occasions, but they seem to be the only one’s capable of drilling in to the ruling elite and getting (some) answers.
It’s always more entertaining when it’s ‘the other party’ getting filled in, but they serve a useful purpose.
If the politician being interviewed is intelligent, articulate and fully briefed with a viable argument/policy to defend there isn’t any reason why he can’t make them look stupid themselves for being so shrill and rude.
Since when did Jewish not constitute an ethnic minority?
82, and generally this thread wrt voting patterns, changes etc.
I think that what we are seeing is the emergence of the multi-dimensionality of politics. Historically, economics was the be-all and end-all of politics; if you wanted tax cuts and lower spending, you voted Tory; if you wanted a bigger welfare state and higher taxes, you voted Labour. However, the parties are now much closer on economic policy (certainly in the publics eyes) than ever before - yes there are discussions about implementation, but roughly speaking, no-one is advocating the scrapping of the NHS, or 70% tax rates for the rich.
This means that other factors (dimensions) are now becoming present in peoples voting decisions, as how people cast there vote will come to depend on what factors are most important to the voter. This can be seen to some extent at the last election, when the Iraq War was the largest factor for a large part of the electorate in Bethnal Green and Bow (and a number of other seats too, albeit less obviously). It can also been seen by the switching of votes from and to ‘unexpected’ places - ie Lib Dem voters in the West Country switching to UKIP as they think that Europe is now a more important factor for them than ‘Liberalism’. It also shows in a large number of Labour voters who are socially conservative / authoritarian in outlook switching to the Tories rather than the Lib Dems as they are far closer in outlook on things such as ID Cards.
The problem that some activists (and some posters on this site) seem to be having is a failure to recognise this fact, and assume that ‘the voters are irrational’, ‘all the labour voters will switch to the libs’ etc. without looking at the sort of voter in the seat in question, and thinking about the factors that will be important to that voter in casting there vote. It is precisely these sorts of things that lead to complacent activism and the swings seen in seats such as Manchester Withington, BG and Bow, Cambridge, etc.
99 Fred, I was trying to be inclusive !!
85 - You may well have a well thought out plan and talented people lined up to run the council but the sad fact is as I have pointed out before that running a council is a poisoned chalice with little or no chance of being able to do it successfully given the financial restraints and lack of powers local councils have these days . All gaining control will do is give the Lib Dems the opportunity to attack and criticise the ruling Conservative party just the same as you have done in the past few years .
101. Thks Andrea, you are of course correct.
104. SBS - you are surely pushing it a bit there but in any case I was responding to the original post at 26. that mentioned ‘white male’ candidates…
108 - accept what you are saying, and note your original post.
The reason for my comment is that I just recall Edwina Currie on QT a few years ago. A questioner had said that the Conservative party were racist and did not understand what it was like to be from an ethnic minority. Edwina retorted that she certainly understood, as she was from an ethnic minority. Left the questioner feeling rather deflated. Always liked Edwina on Question Time - shame the Tories don’t put her up for it any more.
104. SBS, just of curiosity how many LD MPs are jewish?
91 John O. As you’re an anarchist in the political melting pot and fellow traveller to moi ….. might I offer my services as your on-line agent !! …… dull it shouldn’t be.
103 Tory Boy. Agreed.
102 Mike S. Some farmers would say yes and yes !
I don’t know. Evan Harris is. There may be a couple of others. I don’t think it’s important; I was just making a point about the term “ethnic minority” being ambiguous.
Jo Swinson might be someone to watch for the future. She made a very favourable impact at conference a couple of years ago with a speech which helped defeat a leadership proposal for all women shortlists (seen by a lot of activists as an attempt by the leadership to interfere in local constituencies). I suspect she would need to show she could hold her seat fairly comfortably at the next GE before being seriously considered, but presumably there wouldn’t be a contest until after the next GE anyway.
There would be a lot of opposition to Laws as leader. Rightly or wrongly, he’s been seen as the face of the unacceptable right (along with Oaten) by a lot of activists for the last couple of years. The slogan “More Liberalism, less Laws” invented by one fairly senior party member probably sums up a lot of people’s feelings. That doesn’t mean he couldn’t win, but I’d expect a strong “Anyone but Laws” campaign if it looked as though he had any chance (in the same way as would have happened with Oaten, if he hadn’t managed to do the job pretty effectively himself).
67.” I think Humphries, Paxman, Crick et al are priceless. Far too often politicians are not challenged enough and if they can’t stand upto robust, aggressive and sometimes rude interogration, then how will they fare in the harsher reality of government and international affairs !”
Jack, but they sometimes ask stupic or useless questions in their search of being provocative (their ego is too large for the TV screen). For ex Paxman’s question to GG about defeating a black woman….for some strange reasons I doubt Paxman would have gone to Hackney’s count to ask candidates how they feel to try to oust UK’s first black female MP
112. yes, but now, you made me curious!
btw, when LDs won Leicester South, it was reported that Gill was their first ethnic minority MP (even on LD site), so it seems that they didn’t take in consideration jewish MPs.
04 Since forever - Judaism is a religion - there is far more diversity in the ethnic make-up of the Jewish element of the world’s population than many Jews would care to admit. A lot have little more to do with origins in ‘the Holy Land’ than George Bush has with the aboriginees.
114 Andrea. Of course Paxo et al sometimes get the tone wrong or miss the point, but generally they get it right. And if they are irritating politicians then broadly they’re doing something right.
Who can forget Howard being Paxoed …. 17 times …
115 - I thought there was an Indian Liberal MP in the 1890s. (No, I’m not joking!) I cannot recall his name but I remember the 100th anniversary of his election being marked. He was nicknamed Mr “Narrow-majority” which was a play on words of his name. He lost at the next election.
118 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dadabhai_Naoroji
Got him! MP for Central Finsbury 1892-1895.
118.SBS, yes, you’re right. Dadabhai Naoroji who was elected in 1892 by just 3 votes. His constituency covered the poor part of current Islington
re journo’s -
I think John Humphries tends to overdo his attacks and thereby create sympathy for whoever he’s shouting at.
I prefer inteviewers like James Nauchtie and Martha Kearney who still seem to give politicians space (to hang themselves), curtail the waffle and lull guests into becoming susceptible to a sudden swerve in the inteview.
Crick and Eddie Mair manage to mix killer instincts with a sense of the absurd.
Paxman I still generally like but the Galloway example andrea gave illustrates his tendency to wander into Humphries territory.
I also think that there is something about Galloway that large swathes of the media go crazy for - that he is somehow beyond the pail . Where are the complaints about Goldsworthy abandoning her constituency and party to be on telly ?
Re Parliament PMs Questions.
Doesn’t John Reid appear very tense, anxious and pre occupied. Is it the unofficial Deepcut Report or are there deeper cuts coming?
121 - It may not be right, but her excuse is “I was doing it for Cornish Air Ambulance”.
121.”Where are the complaints about Goldsworthy abandoning her constituency and party to be on telly ?”
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?menuID=1&subID=374
114. Andrea. A point very well made.
O/T but still interesting . Nulab are taking the first steps to controlling what we eat . Just as the first steps against smoking were restrictions on advertising they are now proposing to restrict advertising of what they consider as unhealthy food .
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4851642.stm
It’s all for your own good of course .
PMQs ….. shock !! Prezza tells a joke !! and a good one
Mark, so long as the Ever-Loving State relieves us of the need to think for ourselves, we can devote our time to praising our Dear Leader.
116 Zebidee. you make a very good point which has been doing the rounds for some time. As most people know the line goes through the mothers side and conversions which normally affect the female side are not accepted as legitimate by many of the orthodox. Added to that there are the differences in interpretation in what constitutes a “Jew”between various of the strands of orthodoxy, liberal and reform. I would suggest if a Jewish person complains to the police under the race relations act they had better get authentication from the Beth Din first!
Can’t get to a TV at the moment but checking out the Question Time ‘point by point’ on the BBC site makes it sound like a good knockabout!
19 - A point on Jackie Ballard, the hunting issue certainly didn’t help her, but perhaps the fact which undermined her the most was that she was a terrible consituency MP - her views were out of touch with the electorate, she was constantly getting lost in the consituency, turned up late to meetings - in short she was a crap MP and that’s why she lost.
131 - whereas Jeremy Browne was a very strong candidate to win it back from Flook. He looks a good politician; good constitency MP?
I noticed during PMQs that David Heath’s hands wern’t shaking…
127. Jack, which one?
The one about the tories being “so green they are even recycling their leaders” or the one about him being Mr Punch and Hague Judy?
134 Andrea. The latter ….. it wasn’t scripted and even Hague thought it very funny.
133 - Having they voted for deputy leader yet? This could do him some good.
Prescott even made me laugh. Hague good too.
It can’t fail to be a comedy classic when it’s Hague v Prescott. Looking forward to viewing it this evening.
136. They’ll vote at around 7pm
131/132 And presumably Flook was a c**p MP also which was why he lost the seat at his first defence even with the support of countryside alliance .
Still only able to check the BBC site but it sounds so slickly done it could almost be scripted between Hague and Prescott. I look forward to seeing it anyway.
111 - Jack,
I’ve never thought of myself as a kamikazee candidate but there’s always a first time…so yes, you hired and have herweith been deputed for the knock-ups on the Big Day (sort of droit du seigneur role ;)). Welcome a broad….
120. So the Lib Dems’ last non-white MP was 100 years ago. Very impressive.
Comparisons between Huhne and Ballard are unfair. For a start it was far easier for Ballard to stand in 2001 than it would have been in 2005. She would never have got the 10% of MPs backing (and Oaten’s demise shows that the multiple backers incident would have been exposed). There was a view in the party in 2001 for a woman to stand as leader to compensate for the lack of female MPs. I think Huhne will keep his seat, without particular problem. The thing with a lot of that south Hampshire area is that there is a strong Labour vote that is not easily squashed in LD/Con seats - it denied Hancock victory twice in Portsmouth South.
When I say 2001 - I mean 1999!
2 - Ben - in waht way exactly do you think that Huhne ‘losing the trust of the Orange Bookers’ in any way diminishes his chances?
And he is in no way comparable to Ballard. He is steadily building his local profile and building his local organisation.
I think he will benefit from having been the one with the balls to run this time.
142 John O. ” …. Welcome a broad …”
Which American lady is that ?!?
143. no, there was Parmijit (?) Gill who won Leicester South by-election, but then he lost in last year’s GE.
144. So the Labour vote in Eastleigh is hard to squash, but Huhne will keep his seat without any problems. Some contradiction here?
“131/132 And presumably Flook was a c**p MP also which was why he lost the seat at his first defence even with the support of countryside alliance ”
I doubt it. Flook increased his vote by 2,000 on 2001.
147 - Ah, that was a genuine ‘joke’ (sic) unlike the litany of other spelling errors in just 3 lines
143 - from my anthropological observations, the lib dems are by the far poshest, whitest, most upper-middle class party around. Of course, there’s lots of posh tories, but they also have their mike baldwin types, ‘umble roots, self made, draw the ladder up kind of chaps. Perhaps these posh liberals find themselves to the left of the tories, but couldn’t possibly join labour and rub shoulders with all those awfully common trade union types
152
Meeeoooowww, but very good!
140 - Nope, I think internal factors within his association didn’t help Flook, nor the attitude of Central Office
154 In other words it was everybody’s fault but his LOL as opposed to Ballard who had no one to blame but herself .
150/154 etc - Flook was an average MP who narrowly beat a weak sitting MP (I cannot speak for