Why Alan Johnson at 15/2 is great value
June 27th, 2006-
Is now the time to put more on?
The chart, based on best betting prices, shows how punters are rating in terms of implied probability the Labour leadership chances of the the Education Secretary, Alan Johnson. After tipping him when his leadership price was 18/1 I’ve now gone into the market again.
Johnson’s chances of winning are much better than 15/2 and as we see today with the Charles Clarke story, the pressure on Blair to go early is gathering momentum. This is a good bet because:-
Continuing Tory polls leads. Ultimately Labour will choose the leader most likely to beat Cameron. Sentiment about Brown’s role will count for little as the party faces the prospect of defeat. From where I sit Johnson looks better equipped than Brown. He’s likable, he’s sharp and, yes, he’s English.
It looks like there will be a contest. The big question mark was whether there would be an election at all. But all the talk about a Brown coronation has been put aside following the aggressive move to crank up the Trident replacement issue knowing how it touches raw nerves within the party. This makes it highly likely that there will be a challenge leaving the road open for Johnson to come in.
Johnson might be the best left-wing way to oppose Brown One of PB.C’s most long-standing Labour contributors, Richard, made this astute observation on Sunday “the more subtle of Brown’s disappointed left-wing followers might realise that they’re better off with a Blairite like Johnson (who has nothing to prove) than a Gordon Brown who, because of his Scottishness and his irresponsible previous sucking-up to the likes of Bob Marshall-Andrews (recorded in Rawnsley’s book Servants of the People), feels the need to be more Blairite than Blair.
Johnson’s recent recent appearances have been impressive. His defence of the criminal record check fiasco for teachers on the Today programme last Tuesday took the heat out of what could have been a difficult issue. And his style seemed to go down well with the Question Time audience last week. People respond to politicians who are self-deprecating, generous and lucid.
Take the 7.5/1 that’s currently available.
By-elections competition. Details of this will be posted here at about 6pm.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
‘Is he good value’ has two parts - is he going to win? and are his odds going to shorten?
The first part is the one Mike’s addressed in the intro, and I can’t fully agree with any of the points. “Ultimately Labour will choose the leader most likely to beat Cameron” - not necessarily: Foot, Hague, IDS. Leaders, especially leaders who immediately become PM get chosen for all sorts of reason. Besides, while an objective, dispassionate observer might see Johnson as more electorally appealing, the Labour electoral college is not made up of such people.
“Johnson might be the best left-wing way to oppose Brown” - possibly, but that may not stop another left-wing challenge with a true believer (or at least someone a bit closer to it). The more candidates in the field, the shorter Brown’s odds.
So if Brown is still pretty much a shoo-in (and I believe he is), the question from a betting viewpoint is: will Johnson’s odds shorten further to enable laying off further down the line? To do this, he will need to make himself the clear challenger to Brown. I agree with Mike’s assessment of Johnson’s quality - he has the potential, but is still pretty unknown to most of the public (and probably most voters in the electoral college), certainly in comparison to Brown.
Brown will remain in the news - he is chancellor and heir apparent - for Johnson’s odds to shorten further, he needs to maintain good media coverage. This is a tall ask. His odds may drop further, but short of (a) seriously bad news for GB or (b) Johnson becoming Deputy Leader of the Labour Party, I’d be surprised to see him any shorter than 5/1 at any point.
Come on Mike - this is absolute rubbish. You are just pushing this line to provoke controversy. Everybody knows that Gordon Brown is going to be leader and that he is far better equipped than anybody else to take on Cameron.
Sure - Johnson is a nice guy and a very able minister - but a Prime Minister. Never.
I think you are right that there will be a contest but it will be Michael Meacher or similar that will be the left’s candidate.
re 1 & 2. The world totally changes when Blair announces that he’s going. The media want a good narrative that will be an ongoing story. The Scottish issue has become code for being anti-Brown and that is getting raised more and more.
The examples of Foot, Hague, IDS are not comparable. They were in opposition and parties do funny things when they are out of power. When you are in Government that last thing you can contemplate is losing.
Labour’s track record with Blair is that it chose somebody the party thought to be a winner.
The details from the latest YouGov poll makes grim reading for Gordon. Only 88% of those saying they were Labour supporter said they would support the party with Gordon as leader. 88% !!! That’s crisis level for Gordon.
I’ve long had admiration for Johnson, but those odds seem tight to me, as Gordon must surely still be hot favourite? Definitely worth a punt for next Deputy Leader (did I just say that, what do I know about betting?!)
While he would likely make a better PM than Brown, Brown would have to make some serious mistakes to be seriously challenged by Johnson, aside from being Scottish.
Yes, Mike, but did YouGov ask how many would support the Party with Johnson or any other name?
3. The three examples I gave were to show that there’s more to it than electoral appeal. In government, I could have mentioned experience, seniority, risk-averseness, name recognition.
In each of the five successions since the War, the ‘establishment’ choice has won. OK, this will be the first time the choice will have been made by a wider electorate than MP’s, but I’m not sure that’s terribly significant. If anything, they’re more conservative in that respect than MPs are.
I agree Mike - Johnson’s recent media performances have been impressive. He comes across as having a far greater lightness of touch, and self-deprecating humour, than Brown (why does he still insist on eschewing Black Tie at functions? It just reinforces the parsimonious Scot stereotype south of the border: “I’ve got ma suit, this dinner jacket business is just waseful frippery.”). Furthermore, his careful choice of wording on Trident was a clear signal to the Labour Left who, judging by Clare Short’s comments, heard the dog-whistle.
Does he have any declared significant supporters?
re 5. IA. The detail from the YouGov poll is fascinating, particularly the comparison between Blair and Brown. Blair, for instance, is significantly better supported by Labour voters than Brown. If I get time today I’ll do a separate piece.
It was interesting that the Telegraph had no detail yesterday on the YouGov poll and no commentary from Anthony King as they would usually have. Anyone know why?
2. Flash Gordon. Mike Smithson is an openly Gordon “hater”. So he always finds bad things for Gordon and almost everyone is better and more impressive than GB.
Re Blaenau Gwent. Amicus wrote to all members to urge to vote Labour and not Trish Law. The letter written by Derek Simpson suggests that if trish Law wins, there’ll be a tory lead coalition in Cardiff
http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/newspolitics/tm_objectid=17296370&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=amicus-urges-blaenau-gwent–to-vote-for-labour–and-not-for-trish—name_page.html
“the more subtle of Brown’s disappointed left-wing followers might realise that they’re better off with a Blairite like Johnson (who has nothing to prove) than a Gordon Brown who, because of his Scottishness and his irresponsible previous sucking-up to the likes of Bob Marshall-Andrews (recorded in Rawnsley’s book Servants of the People), feels the need to be more Blairite than Blair.”
and, btw, Richard, who did you mean by “left”? The Labour Left seems a very heterogeneous thing usually with 100 different views!
The thing about Johnson is that he has the Cameron Factor. So just as the blimps in the Tory Party were sold Cameron on his ‘ant-Europe stand’ and the young gays have had their attention drawn to his performance on ‘Wossy’, so Johnson is a Blairite to the Blairites, a ‘left-winger’ to the left wingers etc etc. He is also a far more personable and media-savvy person than Gordon Brown and has little baggage. Remember in politcs the key thing is ‘my enemy’s enemy is my friend’. This has what has ****ed off Charles Clarke so much. As a basic mid-left soft Stalinist Brownite he sold his soul to Blair and is more than a bit miffed at now being painted as an ‘incompetent’ who now cannot be trusted by either camp. He is totally livid as being eclipsed in the pecking order by Reid who he thinks is intellectually somewhere below his own knes (and doesn’t have jug-ears and knows one end of a razor blade from the other.)
‘basic mid-left soft Stalinist Brownite’ - a bewildering label! please explain!
Fred, leave out the “Brownite” bit and in the immortal words of your last Leader but three - “it’s me, it’s me, it’s all me”
Not that I have any opinion on Mr Johnson one way or the other…
10 - Andrea, your link appears not to work - any chance of trying again?
8/9 - In the detail on the Yougov poll , there is again higher support for the Conservatives amongst women but the margin is not as great as before . More strange is that on the very small sample which may of course include part of Cumbria , it purports to show that the Conservatives would poll a higher % of votes in Scotland than all the other parties .
15. Lennon, http://icwales.icnetwork.co.uk/0100news/newspolitics/tm_objectid=17296370&method=full&siteid=50082&headline=amicus-urges-blaenau-gwent–to-vote-for-labour–and-not-for-trish—name_page.html
btw, was my comment at 10 harsh towards Mike S? I wanted to be a bit sarcastic, but it could read in another way. sorry.
Finally 2 other points about the sentence by Richard quoted in the main thread. He’s right in saying that GB is trying to be more blairite than Blair…but it’s probably because lots of commentators and 99% of posters here spent months to say he wouldn’t appeal to Middle England who just wants a centrist like Blair, that he’s someone who blocks reform and so on….so he tries to show that he’s not the left wing for not being blairites continue to criticize him now because he’s becoming too blairite!
And the “more subtle of Brown’s disappointed left-wing followers might realise that they’re better off with a Blairite like Johnson ” part….wouldn’t the ideal candidate for them be Hilary Benn? He’s someone who really any baggage and everyone could put their hopes in him.
Can’t Johnson and Brown work together?
17. Again! Lennon, sorry.
Go to the main page, then click on news and then it’s the 5th big news.
16 Mark. “… it purports to show that the Conservatives would poll a higher % of votes in Scotland than all the other parties.”
Now that is news !!!!!!!
Any other pearls Mark ?? …. perhaps Plaid sweeping Sutton and Cheam or the SWP rampant in Torbay …. I’d better check that Harpenden hasn’t been overrun by the yellow peril !!
17 That was a yellow card offence, Andrea. One more of those and you´ll find yourself restricted to the ARGUMENT thread.
My take on Brown is that he spins too much and is not enough of a team player - see
http://www.liberalreview.com/blogs/apollo/flash_gordon_and_the_uk_rebate
but despite this I think either Brwon or Johnson will give Labour a big boost.
This may not last for very long. But my prediction is that after the leadership change they will be leading in the polls for a while. Johnson represents the bigger change and therefore the greater threat.
16&20 – IIRC YouGov is based on the TV regions. Therefore Scotland includes Border TV. Which I think takes in seats like Penrith, Hexham, Barrow and Carlisle all of which have a decent Tory vote and a non-existent SNP vote.
14. I am now even more confused Innocent, sorry.
21. Peter, ok. I ask for a full pardon from our host!
Ah, Italians living in UK voted “yes” to the referendum….Alastair, did you try to rig the ballots again?!
I should look at how many were coming from Beaconsfield!
22 That is true Max though the SNP figure is quite credible given the Cumbria effect . The M of E around 7.5% is very high also on such a small sample but even so the Conservative figure is way too high and Labour’s too low .
25.For what its worth,
I heard from someone who works for GB ( not an MP …yet) who was pretty certain that the key date was next August. Which thinking about it gives 4-6 weeks for a leadership election prior to conference.
25- sorry ! i put the number in by accident
Can I just point out that John Major came from nowhere to lead the Conservatives after Thatcher which he turned in to an electoral advantage in 1992. Had we had any of the perceived old faces we would have lost that election. So I agree with Mike.
Incedently Tabman, I have now answered your question…
22/25 Max/Mark. Any figures for ZANU (pf) in Peebles…. let alone Vlad’s Drag Queens Alliance, who I understand are in prime position in Galashiels !!!
YouGov … don’t you just love em.
28 Not sure about that.
Hestletine would have had electoral appeal too. I reckon he could have won, if the Thatcherite Tories let him.
Before the last thread descended into a playground rant about how I am more British (English?) than you, with Nick P foolishly ignoring my advice to ignore SeanT, there were comments about the postals in Blaenau being “level”, and in Bromley being “surprising”.
Before giving any weight to such comments I would like to know where they came from, it may be in Labour’s interests to make it seem closer than it actually is in Blaenau for example. For what it is worth on Betfair - with very small amounts involved - they are neck and neck for the parliamentary seat and Trish Law is clear favourite for the assembly.
Mike
After doing a bit of early profit taking on my world cup bets (initially backing Italy- mostly 14’s, Spain 19’s and Portugal 30 and late 20’s)- but still leaving plenty in to maintain an interest, I detect that you are in for a healthy pay out on this one in the future.
From past recollection I think you started backing Johnson at 18’s, and he is likely to move to 4’s seamlessly enough over the next few months (with your continued backing).
Just a thought- but do you think this site reflects political trends, or creates them. If the latter- little wonder that Cohen, and Rentouil are referring to PBcom in recent articles, and would be extremely curious now on who accesses it.
RE 30, Jonathan, Hesaltine would have walked it. Furthermore he was such a good orator he could have got a standing ovation at a Labour party conference. He did not get the job because he was part of the rancour. With Brown needling all these years he will be seen in the same light by parts of the party.
BTW, that reference for tabman is an article on my blog which is linked to in my signature.
28 - True , but the difference with GB is his position of power within the Government which he has maintained since 97. When Thatcher was eventually going who was left ?
TB hasn’t been able to get rid of him , a comparison may be someone like Heseltine who didnt resign and kept on growing throughout the 80’s.
I imagine that to some extent ‘defeating’ GB feels to many Lab Mp’s like getting rid of a prime minister , the medicine may be worse than the illness.
People may be willing to eventually make that tough decision to ease Blair out but there must be little appetite for a repeat performance.
Mike at 5. I can’t see why you attach any importance to “Blair is significantly preferred by Labour voters”. It would be expecting a bit much for Yougov respondents who said they were going to vote Labour to then say “But we’d prefer Brown”!
Betting against Brown makes no sense whatever. Brown is considered one of the most sucessful and dynamic of the post war politicians respected throughout the world. For Labour to eschew this infavour of a personable ex-union leader would be political suicide.
….Talking of political suicide why do the BBC follow Charles Clarkes comments by asking Dobbo what this means for Blair? Is there anyone who doesn’t know -or who cares what Dobbo thinks?
29 - I’m down in Peebles seeing friends from school on Saturday so I’ll keep an eye out for any irate local farmers. Speaking of the Borders you’ll be delighted to know that another person who went to my school, the Lady Laird of Traquair, Catherine Maxwell-Stuart has been selected as the Labour candidate for Tweeddale, Ettrick and Lauderdale. From a good Jacobite family I’m sure you’ll agree!
RE 35, Roger, Thatcher was “considered one of the most sucessful and dynamic of the post war politicians respected throughout the world” that did not mean she was electable here.
35. Roger, what has Dobson done to you?
You always mention him, there’s must be a dark secret behind it….
And anyway, it was probably to balance their coverage after having showed last week Hazel Blears in her “it’s all great” dance!
Re 31 Does anyone know what “surprising” means? And I don’t mean the dictionary definition
Thanks.
Perhaps Labour got a vote in Bromley after all!
40. I still think they could lose their deposit.
Summary of today’s thread : “Blears (38), queers (12) and steers (MS)
I’ve been playing bridge in Verona for the last 2 weeks, and out of the loop. What has happened in that time to make Johnson at 15/2 ‘good value’?
43. Lots of ramping on this site!
43. Nothing apart that Brown is backing a Trident replacement and an outraged Clare Short won’t back him anymore
Andrea. I have no time for bitter sacked-ministers. and they don’t come any more bitter than Dobbo…..unless of course you include Claire……
Benedict. True but Maggie had had her day. Gordon’s is yet to come. i’ve just finished reading Morgans ghastly diary. But what is interesting is his reports of one to one chats with various politicians. Brown sounds both impressive and rather different from the image most have of him. I also think he’ll be the perfect antidote to the Cameron/Blair school of charm that is starting to look dated
46. Roger, but Clare has always comes across in that way…even when she was in government…
RE 46, Sorry Roger are we talking about Peirs “Morgan” Moron? Surely you can’t take a word he has written seriously?
On your other substantive point, I do not recall a leader in waiting so long, so we are in unchatered territory.
‘Brown is considered one of the most sucessful and dynamic of the post war politicians respected throughout the world’ - wilkommen zuruck, Herr Professor! wir haben sie vermisst!
Andrea- a belated thanks for your reply on Sunday, but any news on Italy referendum. What was the public reaction like to the football?
36 Max. Ah yes … the good Baroness of Traquair … she brews a rather fine ale too :
http://pat.gourinel.free.fr/Biere/Ecosse/Jacobite.jpg
50. PJ, I posted it in yesterday’s thread. The no won with a confortble margina (61.3% for the no) in a higher than expected turnout. The yes won just in Veneto and Lombardia (and among Italians leaving abroad)
The responsibilities involved in selecting a new prime minister are very different from choosing a new leader of the opposition. Thus, the Tories could happily take a long view and select a leader in Dave who would have 3 or 4 years to build a base and a reputation. New Labour - just as with Thatcher/Major in 1990 - have to be able to look the country in the eye and say “this is the best man/woman for the job - we are not taking any risks with the running of the country”. Major had held the jobs of Chancellor and Foreign Secretary (albeit for not very long), which gives a tad more gravitas than Johnsone’s CV.
Mike seems to be searching for an acceptable ABG candidate - first Hilary Benn, now Johnson - but the political timing as well as the electoral arithmetic are against him.
Benedict at 48. I agree about the book but a lot of his conversations are written verbatim and over the couse of the 10 years the characters have a distinct style.
RE 54, You should have seen some of the write ups I’ve seen in places like Private eye, like about meetings with Prime minister Blaire in No 10… in 1996. (Did anyone tell our John?)
Andrea- thanks. 2 good results for the Italians yesterday. The polling figures are extroadinary, higher turnout than our UK general election.
55. He certainly seems a little dim. He didn’t know that front running shares was an offence, after all, did he?
25 ….Talking of political suicide why do the BBC follow Charles Clarkes comments by asking Dobbo what this means for Blair? Is there anyone who doesn’t know -or who cares what Dobbo thinks?
Well he’s a former Cabinet Minister and Labour Mayoral candidate for London.
That means he’s worked with Balir and Brown and presumably means that Blair thought him good enough to be in charge of our health service and to run London.
He’s therefore exactly the right sort of person to comment on such matters.
I just think the momentum that Gordon Brown has behind him makes him a certainty.
Mike is right in that he is unlikely to make any difference to Labours polling chances but sometimes in politics there is just an inevitability about events.
Like after Portillo was knocked out of our leadership contest in 2001, we knew IDS would be a disaster, but we also knew Clark would never win unless he retreated on Europe. Nothing could stop it happening though….
I just don’t think there are enough Labour MP’s with the stomach for anyone else. Take Nick P - clearly his seat is at risk if the polls on Brown are right, yet he is wholly and totally resigned to Gordon taking over.
Surely the best betting value is on when, not if, its Gordon.
Baskerville- I detect some deliberate mischief and (profit) making in Mike’s ABG approach. A tight and tightening market on GB presents little opportunities for betting. The money is made on market uncertainty, and I am sure that Mike is doing his level best to create this.
IMO Balanced teams not leaders win elections not just leaders. * * The 97 cabinet had depth.
* Cameron benefits from Hague and Davis.
Therefore Labour must go for Brown, promote its other talents, raise their profile AND create a sense of depth.
E Balls for Chancellor. (will make some news)
D Milliband in the FO. (Sybmbolises a fresh start)
Reid HO for now. (hasn’t used his politcal capital yet)
Johnson DPM/ PM’s Attack Dog. (good in the media)
PM Brown can then rise above Cameron.
52.PJ, turnout was at 53.7% on national territory (with Northern regions with a more than 60% turnout)
Anyone taking the Chancellorship after Brown is on hiding to nothing. How can you blame your predecessor?
Reid cant stay at the Home office - he needs to move on every 12 months - who was responsible for the under protected Land Rovers?
DPM - what for?
I agree that Brown is simply bound to take over, and that Johnson is, if anything, being oversold at 15/2.
Ignore the politics for a second - instead, imagine the emotional turmoil in Labour if Brown is refused the leadership. This poor chap has been waiting - doggedly, loyally - for ten years. To refuse him now would seem an act of cruelty, a spasm of sadistic careerism by some scared MPs. It’s the kind of thing Labour MPs believe only Tory MPs are capable of.
If they did knife Brown, it would take ‘em ten years to get over the guilt, the same way the Tories win into a decadal spasm of self-loathing, once they’d garotted Thatcher.
Also, whisper it who dares, Johnson ISN’T THAT GOOD. I saw him on Question Time - he was affable, twinkling, quite articulate, a nice enough guy. But PM? Why is he being hyped by so many people - even Tory commenters like Matthew Parris? And Lib Dem pundits like Mike S?
Weird.
Andrea- turnout not quite at our general election, but still comparable and very impressive.
Thanks for everyone who backed AJ today - I settled my position on him (backed at 16/1) and took a healthy profit.
Now - when does the next LD leader market open ?
Johnson is now about 11-2 on Betfair but there is only £66 available at better than 5-1. Someone has layed £250 at 5-2 (Mr Smithson perhaps?)
64 seanT: “imagine the emotional turmoil in Labour if Brown is refused the leadership… Why is [Johnson] being hyped by so many people - even Tory commenters like Matthew Parris?”
I think you answered your own question…
64.Seant, Johnson is actually quite good, to be honest. Compared to other blairites, it seems he lives on planet earth (even if he almost tried the “it’s all good” thing a couple of weeks ago)
69 Andrea - Which Alan are you supporting now?
70 Anna. Alan B’stard ??
Jamie- too early to cash in methinks. I haven’t got anything on this one yet, thinking that the early tips for Johnson were speculative rather than based on reliable evidence. Have been proved wrong. The price on Johnson will continue to tighten.
Would appreciate a better insight on the French situation though (wishful request for an overview!). Having made an excellent return on Prodi (the fluctuations on election night were great) I think some informed betting here could be profitable.
68. Anna, you are more cynical than me! Not something I normally say.
Parris’s bigging-up of Johnson has been bizarrely overt. I think he’s now dedicated two or even three Times thinkpieces to the brilliance Johnson, saying what a nice guy he is, clever and deft, hugs orphaned puppies whenever he gets the chance, etc.
Yet I still find it hard to believe this is doublethink on Parris’s part. He’s a good and esteemed writer, and I think his justified reputation comes from saying how it really is. Maybe Parris hates Brown for some reason we don’t know, and that has fired his genuine enthusiasm for The Dorneywood Postman.
I can’t understand why Johnson is so tight to be next leader, but so long to be next chancellor (surely more likely?).
Perhaps Johnson should take Gordon to dinner at the Granita and then promise that, in exchange for GB’s backing, he’ll handover half way through his second term as PM. The daft git has fallen for it once already…
70. Anna, sorry, I haven’t used this computer for some days and it still had saved the Alan Simpson backing slogan!
David Davis aka Mumbly Joe now on Sky News with a very presidential new hair style. Gordon take note.
Sorry to rehash old ground, but can I just go over the Labour leadership rules again?
Is it that the unions get a third of the vote (is this a block vote, or do individual union members get to vote, and their votes allocated accordingly); membership gets a third, and MPs get a third (what of MEPS / MSPs / AMs)?
I can’t see the membership endorsing anyone but Brown. Admittedly, he has the same dull inevitability about him that did for David Davis, but the Conservatives were in a postion that needed a radical solution; Labour are not yet at that position. They certainly don’t seem to be panicking. I would imagine that the membership will heavily endorse Brown.
MPs too, will go for Brown. Partly this is the inevitability aspect - MPs tend to want to back the winner - and partly because “it’s his turn” - something the Labour Party seems to take quite seriously, and must be harder still to ignore if you know the players. There still seems to be a genuine respect for his abilities amongst the rank and file, and the ‘too Scottish’ element must be at least partially negated by the fact that a disproportionate element of this electorate shares that constituency. I don’t know what effect including the votes of MSPs, MEPs and AMs will be, but presumably MSPs who aren’t Jack McConnell wouldn’t be averse to a famously Scottish leader?
As to the unions - well Johnson is an old union man which may play well to the union leadership - but union members are people first and union members second. Most of them aren’t that political. If I’m right that individual union members get a vote, then this must be the most uninformed third of the electorate - and therefore (I would argue) the third most likely to go for a familiar name. So this lot too, I would expect to back Brown.
The Conservatives elected DC in response to a realisation that unless they changed they would remain deeply unpopular. I don’t think the Labour Party are in anything like this position yet - and even if it is true, I’m certain that the party as a whole don’t believe it to be so.
Conclusion - Gordon Brown is a certainty. But not, in my opinion, good enough value for me to be tying up my money for up to a year for.
Please let me know if any of my assumptions are faulty.
If I were a Labour voter I’d want Hillary Benn.
79 Why? Nice but dull. And the whole Benn thing won’t help - like it or not.
80. Why should the fact that his Dad was a commie be held against him? we have several ex-Bolsheviks in the Cabinet now.
73 Fair dos… Most reporters are probably just praising candidates other than Brown to make an interesting story. However Labour would be absolutely stupid to elect anyone other than Brown.
Brown is the key to LAbour’s reputation for economic competence. If they don’t elect him leader, and things go a bit pear-shaped then the new leader will have a big problem on economic issues. Even if things continued to go OK, the new leader would find it hard to oust Brown from the chancellorship, or to live with him there…
All of which is why, I personally would love to see someone else elected leader, and if any bloggers or journalists are giving credibility to other candidates, then good for them!
80. True enough, the Benn brand is inextricably associated with certain flavour of swivel eyed leftie madness.
http://ugandandiscussions.co.uk/covers/580_big.jpg
Cookie, I cannot help with the minutiae of how Labour fix their elections - and I suspect that the fix probably doesnt work as they expected in any case - Why Oh Why dont they have OMOV?
However your analysis seems spot on. IMO the book should be GB 1-10 (to allow for the bus or heart attack - though if he sticks to a scottish diet then perhaps slightly longer odds would be possible) with all the other runners at 25-1 or longer
Icarus - you forget the time-value when calculating your 1-10. Assume that there is an answer (and you thus get paid) in 2 years time then you could get odds of 1-10 risk free by putting your money in the bank.
84 Icarus: If you are regarding Brown as an absolute certainty (divine intervention aside…) Then the odds should probably be just a little bit better than putting your money in a savings account. Since you can get 4/5% by putting your money in the bank and Brown election looks (at best guess) to be a year away, odds of 1-10 would be very poor!
86 Sorry should have read “two years away (at best guess)” :blush:
64. Agreed, If Gordo didn’t get it, he would throw his rattle out of the pram!! It’s impossible, and everyone in the party must know it… He’s been waiting for it long than Eden, for Chrissakes…
My bank pays 0.8% I think - you will do well to get tax free 2.5%.
But I take the point. I do think that Brown will be PM by Sept 2007 at the latest.
Cookie- spot on anaylsis. Why I cannot help but thinking that PBcom is stirring up a contest when there isn’t a hope in hell of stopping Brown. As Baskerville (53) pointed out electing a PM (proven track record, gravitas, recognition factor) is completely different from electing a leader with a 3/4 year run at creating the above.
In the highly unlikely event of Brown losing an election then the Labour leadership market could be interesting. I think PBcom has done well to create some uncertainty in the Blair succession market where there isn’t any (reflected in the tightening on Johnson), but the much more uncertain market is still the Blair departure date.
88. Well, Blair has always wanted to be compared to Churchill. Perhaps he’s managed it at last
Actually, I think it’s quite a good comparison. Despite misgivings as to whether Eden had the temperament for the top job, it was more or less impossible to consider anyone else. The way in which Eden kept the FO on a very tight leash well well mirror Brown’s relationship with his chancellor as well.
Although I also have money on Johnson I thought I better throw this into the mix…
A senior union figure I know has rubbished Johnson’s chances of getting in. “No chance” was his response. The only reason he would give me was that the unions have “long memories”.
Simon, Many thanks for the Ugandan discussions link
http://ugandandiscussions.co.uk
They will keep me amused for hours!
89 Icarus - You need to switch your bank!!! Isas and savings accounts paying 4.75% aren’t that hard to find… I even found one regular saver offering 10% gross pa (lots of conditions though).
Even if Blair goes by Sept 2007, you still need to take into account Betfair’s commission and the risks of Brown not being the one to takeover…
94 Anna. The Royal Jacobite Bank is offering all Hanovarian investors a 17.45% return. Exiled terms and conditions apply
…. namely the money is invested in the Jack W Three Legged Horse Stud Farm and the John Reid Branch of the Charles Clarke Appreciation Society.
A year ago I was arguing here that David Davis would not become Tory leader even though everything seemed to be going for him. I backed that view up with money risking a four figure sum and my judgement was proved right by events.
I am taking the same view of Brown’s chances and have more than £1,600 at risk.
Maybe I’ve got this wrong but my profits on both the Tory and Lib Dem races will cover many times the amount I could lose if Brown does it.
I take a view on events, back that with cash, and more often than not I win.
Anna - thanks but my motto is “Never a lender or a borrower be” Unfortunately I only seem to follow the first part of my own advice!!!
Thankfully Wimbledon tournment changed the clothes of judge this year! In past editions they were a contribution to the notion that British people’s dress code isn’t their best point.
I noticed Tony Blair wrote in the Guardian “if others feel they’re not the right policies, and some clearly do, let us debate them openly and candidly. That’s my point. The time for coded references and implied critiques is gone”
I know the message wasn’t for the usual brigade, but Clare Short could interpret it as a demand to be more candid when she talks about Blair….so maybe next time BBC would have to censure her
Btw, has Alan Simpson the right to candidly attack the leader without Jacqui Smith complaining?
96. Mike, no-one is criticizing you for not backing Brown…but let us Gordon fans to cheer him up a bit and hit back at you(always in civilised manners!)
96. You might be right Mike. I think it all depends on the timing and reasons for Blair’s departure. If Blair steps down at a time of his own choosing in 2008 onwards, then I could see someone other than Brown coming through to win the leadership. Especially if Labour’s poll ratings/prospects look poor going into the next GE.
But if “events” take hold and Blair is forced to stand down before then, I honestly think that the Labour party will choose the “steady/safe” option of Brown.
On the back of their last GE defeat the tories had the luxury that Labour as the governing party don’t have, they were able to have a long drawn out beauty contest and the option to “take a gamble”.
Personally I think no body likes a shoe in much and nearer the time things will look much more fluid.
This is very OT, but I thought I’d borrow the assembled brainpower of pb.com, during a slight lull….
I am being commissioned by Bloomsbury to write a second memoir - of How I Gave Up Being a Self-Indulgent Boozy Jerk and Became A Nice Dad (I know many will think this slightly presumptuous, if not a barefaced lie, but hey). the book is about the battle between the bourgeois and the bohemian, the yearning for parenthood versus the fear of the pram-in-the-hall.
So I’ve spent (literally) two weeks trying to think of a title. the ones I have at the moment are
Uppers & Diapers
When Babies Attack
Screaming in Supermarkets
Babies are Stupid
Bad to Dad
and
Burp
they would all be subtitled - ‘The Fight Between Fun and Fatherhood’ or ‘Fighting the Fear of Fatherhood’ or something equally cheesy.
Do any of these unbuckle anyone’s bra? Or are they all crap?
Forgive me for intruding on your valuable time, but I’m going spare and we need a title by the end of the week. Eek!
102 I like “when babies attack”,
but why not try… “Back to the bottle” or some such.
103. Hm…. Back to the Bottle is not bad! Ta!
Though Tescos might object to the hint of alcoholism. My publishers and my agent are obsessed with getting into Tescos, and on Richard & Judy.
Gone are the days when publishers would worry about getting a review in The Times. O tempora, o mores!
But thanks - I shall hand that idea to my agent, too… Expect a free copy is she likes it.
According to ConservativeHome the PM isn’t the only leader having a problem with a Clarke as our Ken says that Cameroon’s plan to repeal the Human Rights Act is “xenophobic and legal nonsense” !
Labour Odds On For Welsh By Election
WILL LABOUR WIN WELSH BY-ELECTION? YOU CAN BET ON IT…..
Bookmakers William Hill have installed Labour’s Owen Smith as 8/11 favourite to win the Blaenau-Gwent by-election this week, with Independent candidate, Dai Davies offered at Even money second favourite.
Hills also offer 33/1 Amy Kitcher of the Lib-Dems; Stefan Lewis of Plaid Cymru and 50/1 Margrit Williams of the Conservative Party.
Further information…graham sharpe…0208 918 3731
With Johnson looking more likely for leader, what does this mean about the possibility of Brown becoming deputy? I can’t find odds on this at the moment, yet surely he’s one of the favourites. It would be too presumptious for him to only to throw his hat into the race for leader and not deputy. And it’s not impossible for the party to then decide that his miserable, aggressive, vote losing style makes him a liability for top job - so to placate him he becomes formal bridesmaid, not bride?
I would laugh for weeks …
Guess who has said “David Cameron’s proposed bill of rights is Xenophobic and Nonsense”?
None other than the man asked to head up the Tory Task Force on constitutional issues - Ken Clarke. No wonder the Tories have been reluctant to have a policy on virtualy anything.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/politics
02. How about ‘From beer to paternity’?
109. LOL. Possibly a little jokey, but rather funny. Grazie! I’ll hand that one on, too…
Why not ask them on here SeanT? Seems more appropriate for you
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/
“Stormfront forum”? Seems a little outre for a book about babies.
Re 102, SeanT if you use Uppers and daipers I will have to have you shot for using American.
I do like “when babies attack” with the subtitle ‘Fighting the Fear of Fatherhood’
I like “When babies Attack” best as well!
Marcus at 59: you’re inadvertently misreprenting me there - I’m not “resigned” to Gordon being the successor, I’m in favour of it. I’m not too worried by hypothetical polls about how people would feel if he were leader - I think he’ll do well. But I agree that it’s a sure thing anyway, Acts of God excepted.
andrea at 98: Alan S got a heavy vote of confidence from his CLP, after explaining that he hadn’t meant in the Mail on Sunday interview that Blair and Brown were like Saddam and Uday Hussein, but only to criticise the idea that the succession should be automatic.
ApRhys at 108: Yes, remarkable savaging of the Tory proposals by Ken Clarke, and even of David Cameron’s “anti-foreigner” remarks. A bit difficult to see how Ken can continue to head the constitutional issues task force if he disagrees with this central proposal so strongly.
When Babies Attack seems to be getting the nod. Interesting.
The book WAS called ‘Too Beautiful To Burn - A Story of Fun, Guns and Fatherhood’. But my agent thinks this too poetic and not very “Tescos”, likesay.
When Babies Attack. Hmm…. Would guy and girls buy this? Guess they might… Ta..
105, 108: No problem for Dave with that. He can do with a bit of sniping from the Euro-dinosaur crowd from time to time to assure us that he’s not getting too cosy with the old Tory left. Fascinating politician Dave – impossible to pigeon hole, very difficult to attack in a sustained way.
Europervert Ken Clarke “attacks” Cameron days before a BE when the UKIP are a factor… hmmmm…
RE 115, 116, and 117, Just goes to show what a deft politician Dave is. Getting up the noses of all the right people to make himself look much more electable.
And a ‘bill of rights’ has long been a tenet of the liberal left, so Clarke is to Cameron’s right on this issue. Dave - what a genius. He can appear progressive and Eurosceptic with the same policy!
Camelot. Is your post meant to be ironic? Ken Clarke amongst the general public is almost certainly more popular than Cameron. Infact by some distance I would say he’s the country’s favourite Tory. To have him ridicule Cameron’s first and so far only policy announcement is not something they’ll be celebrating back at Tory PR HQ!
120. He’s the Beebs favourite Tory (except when Hezza is wheeled out) - says it all really.
He’s also the exactly the type of person to have onside to show the party has changed. Perhaps the changes are only cosmetic as so many have suggested?
“He’s also the exactly the type of person to have onside to show the party has changed.”
What a fat cigar smoking walking CV of global blue chip directorships still banging on about 80’s issues ?
Nick at 115. I wasn’t inadvertently misrepresenting you, I was being mischevious ….
You may not be worried about how GB polls but in your position I would be.
That is what is so interesting about the point New Labour have reached - the arrogance of power is perhaps too strong, but after three wins in a row you guys increasingly *expect* to remain in office, and tend to dismiss any evidence to the contrary as being wrong.
20 - pssst. Don’t tell them! They still think that *not* being like Ken Clarke is a vote winner
Benedict at 18- I think you give Cameron too much strategic nouse. More like making a meaningless, headline grabbing and populist, ill thought through statement without checking out his facts first.
And Jamie at 17 I think Clarke (a principled and decent man) attacked Cameron probably because he only came out with this “zenephobic nonsense” 2 days ago. When is he suppose to challenge it?
103. Jonathan… just thought I’d let you know that ‘Back to the Bottle’ is getting a big thumbs-up from my agents at William Morris.
Of course, the publishers might hate it and say it encourages heavy drinking in new dads, or somesuch, but so far so good. Gracias.
RE 126, PJ, I agree with your sentiment about being populist, etc, but that in no way means that this was the outcome he intended.
120: Camelot. Is your post meant to be ironic? Ken Clarke amongst the general public is almost certainly more popular than Cameron. Infact by some distance I would say he’s the country’s favourite Tory
No, my post was completely sincere. And I think if you look at the polls conducted during the Tory leadership contest they show that Clarke was nowhere near as popular as conventional wisdom has it.
Ken Clarke is someone who should know better than to criticise his leader in public. Ken could have demanded a meeting and expressed his views vehemently in PRIVATE. If he feels this strongly and he had more integrity he would resign from Chairing the policy group.
His behaviour is unacceptable.
I very much doubt (Roger 120) that KC is the most popular Tory with the public. That honour has been taken by DC and I think KC is now seen by many as something of a dinosaur!
KC is the Tory Frank Dobson..
130 That is low.
The Tory Frank Dobson is Frank Dobson.
Not sure who the Labour one is yet. Depends on DC ’spose.
Does a day go by when some rubbish from Conservative.home doesn’t get dredged up, often hours after it has been posted there, and stuffed on here as evidence of ‘Tory turmoil’?
Re Johnson. Me thinks a bit of ramping is going on here with people profit taking as they close their positions
OK, Johnson’s personable, but doesn’t appear to have that X-factor. Then again, neither does Gordon.
134.
As a floating voter in Bromley I was all set to vote for Dave Cameron in the bye election - however as he has been shown up by Ken Clarke to be a nasty old school Tory I have decided to vote for the Lib Dem candidate.
136 Well…
Cameron’s been active at the top levels of the Tory party for about fifteen years.
He’s an “Old school Tory” through and through. Perhaps, the most “Old School Tory” leader the Conservatives have had in years/decades.
He’s not necessarily nasty though, but we’ll see.
Having been away for a few weeks under the expert care of those wonderful people in the NHS, it’s good to be back lurking on here. And what do I see upon returning - people seizing on Ken Clarke as evidence that Dave is going wrong? Priceless.
SeanT - I like “When Babies Attack” as well.
136 - I can only assume that yours is a tongue in cheek posting as I cant believe anyone would change their vote on such a superficial matter. Ken Clarke says and it must be true????!!!
136 - A posting with heavy irony in view of your good self at 124
138 That said.
According to Armando Iannucci in the Radio Times. DC’s nickname during his sabbatical at Calton media was “SATAN”.
Scary Dave.
102.
From Babe attack to Baby on Back?
Farty at Forty?
Vati Vierzig (International rights)
From Beer to Paternity….
Can we help writrt it collegiately too?
“When you wake up with your nightshirt covered in vomit it feels starngely better when it is not your own. . . .”
Ba
141 - If you play his party conferecne speech backwards you can clearly hear the words “The Devil will triumph”, followed by manic laughter.
115. Nick. I know about the backing, because I read it on Nottingham local paper. The Chief Whip didn’t arrive…so I suppose that the post service needs an urgent reform soon!
Zebidee - nice quote about the vomit. Very true. The other day I went out to the newsagent and the shops, and when I returned I noticed I had yellowy-orange baby cack all up my arm. Normally, the realisation that I had been shopping while covered in fecal matter would upset me - this time I just shrugged and unpacked the Pampers.
It’s a weird world, fatherhood.
Titlewise, my agent is superkeen on Back to the Bottle, as I say (thankyou Jonathan) - cause it neatly encapsulates the two themes of self indulgence and partying AND dealing with babies. The publishers have yet to give it the greenlight, but I think they will. Anyhow- thanks to all for the suggestions. Hugely useful. I knew pb.com would come good.
And yes - any more dad-anecdotes are very welcome!
98. (Andrea) T Blair: “if others feel they’re not the right policies, and some clearly do, let us debate them openly and candidly.. . . ”
AFTER I have already made the decision!!!!
“if others feel they’re not the right policies, and some clearly do, let us debate them openly and candidly.. . . ”
following which I shall totally ignore them.
“if others feel they’re not the right policies, and some clearly do, let us debate them openly and candidly.. . . ”
. . .so that we can further identify our REAL remaining enemies (in the style of Bulganin).
I thought Dobbo was an excellent choice for a quote on Blair’s troubles. Frank was, after all, the loyal Labour guy (sucker) who Blair put up to fly the flag against Livingstone.Who was thanked with a big smile and a somewhat longer knife than you will find in most inner city streets. And what did he do wrong at Health? Must have a lot in common with Clarke, who after all was really sacked for the errors of Straw, Blunkett and Howard rather than those of his own brief tenure. And thanked, of course in Tony’s inimitable fashion.
Perhaps the two Clarkes could form a new party? They could call it. . . .?
143 this explains why it makes little sense played forwards, I suppose.
144. “Chief Whip didn’t arrive”
ops, I left “letter” out…..
Excellent to see “our Ken” has instilled an element of common sense into the Cameron’s bonkers ideas about the repeal of the Human Rights Act.
Long may our Ken hush and puff away !!
It seems to me that for at least some of us to discuss Alan Johnson as a rival to Gordon Brown is potentially a self-fulfilling profecy. From time to time journalists pick up this site, and for that matter the odds on different candidates, and comment on it. It’s possible that we could be making a significant contribution to Johnson emerging.
That is, of course, except for the fact that a lot of people are hostile to Mike’s analysis.
For what it’s worth, Johnson is Education Secretary now isn’t he, so he’s going to get a significant number of headlines in any case. Nothing like what Brown will get of course, but more than all but the top four. And if the media decide he’s in the race for the leadership, with a bit of help from us, he’s likely to come forward.
For me, Mike’s position looks entirely tenable. And since I’ve been following this site, he’s been pretty spot on. That is, except when he loses his nerve and worries that he might be wrong after all …
136 I wasn’t aware that David Cameron was standing, which in turn, leads me to doubt that you really are a voter there.
150. Leaving aside who will win it and the “real” chances of potential players, I’ve to say Alan Johnson would make the contest more interesting than a Gordon/Michael Meacher battle. More or less like Chris Huhne made the LD contest more interesting than a Ming/Hughes straight fight.
So I would expect journalists to talk about AJ more in the hope he will decide to stand.
151 Sean. Leaders always stand at by-elections, if only by proxy.
149. Every time I see Ken Clarke I’m reminded of a great line David Starkey used to describe a corpulent C of E cleric - ‘doesn’t he mak