Could John Hutton be Labour’s John Major?
September 27th, 2006-
The Blair loyalist moves into the 4th favourite slot
In spite of all the focus on leadership issues in Manchester over the past three days there’ve been only two real moves in the betting on who will succeed Tony Blair.
The second favourite, Alan Johnson has now eased into the third place position at 10/1 with the Home secretary, John Reid, being backed down from 20/1 at the weekend to 8/1 this morning. Meanwhile of the outsiders the Works and Pension Secretary, John Hutton, has started to attract a bit of interest and is now the 39/1 fourth favourite on Betfair having been at 74/1 at the weekend.
Gordon Brown’s price has eased a touch but he is still, at 0.45/1, the rock solid favourite to take the crown. For while he wasn’t helped by the ICM or Frank Luntz focus groups his greatest strength is that, so far at least, no serious challenger has emerged.
Brown is very much helped by a mood in the party that after he gave up his chance in 1994 then the leadership is rightly his now that Blair is finally moving on
Hutton, meanwhile, seems to be popping up everywhere this week as the Blairite loyalist that the media likes to talk to.
Last November the Observer columnist, Will Hutton (no relation) tipped him as a possible “dark horse in the race”. In a Radio 5Live interview he said:“He’s somebody who could actually be a kind of dark horse. With Margaret Thatcher back in 1989 John Major came out of the shadows. If Gordon Brown ever gets challenged successfully it will be by somebody we haven’t expected.”
The effort to find someone acceptable to fill the “Anybody but Brown” position was boosted by Peter Mandelson’s comments yesterday. His suggestion in a BBC interview that Gordon Brown “never fully reconciled” himself to Tony Blair becoming Labour leader twelve years ago is hardly going to help the Chancellor. Such words, from the Great Schemer, were clearly deliberate and, perhaps, indicate an effort to stop Brown getting it.
A lot now depends on Tony Blair who can control the timing and many other things that could help a challenger. His influence has been boosted by yesterday’s speech and it’s an open question as to whether he will throw his weight behind a challenger to Brown. Certainly the reported comments from Cherie Blair indicate that he might.
If Hutton starts being given more prominent roles then he might be worth a bob or two.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I can’t see TB throwing his weight behind any candidate - it would do everyone involved far more harm than good. John Hutton would make a perfectly reasonable candidate and Mike may well be right that his odds will keep shortening. It would allow an interesting contested election, but GB will IMO still win easily.
Incidentally, one point about the leadership changeover timing. The main argument of those who sought a quick change was that they believed that the local elections would be frightful for Labour and changing from Blair would make a huge difference. Both parts of this now look a lot less convincing: the local elections are I suspect merely going to be averagely bad, as per usual for governing parties, and it’s now clear that a forced early change would do more harm than good, as the attempted coup did. So what’s the hurry?
I do take alex’s point from yesterday that the successor doesn’t want to take over in the dog days of August. So somewhere in the range May 31-July 1 looks right.
“Both parts of this now look a lot less convincing: the local elections are I suspect merely going to be averagely bad, as per usual for governing parties”
Er, what’s changed to inform this opinion?
On topic, Nobody since Bonar Law has become PM midterm without being either Chancellor or Foreign Sec first. Have to go back even further if you include Leader of the House.
John Major had been Chancellor of the Exchequer and Foreign Secretary (albeit not for very long). John Hutton is Secretary of State for Work and Pensions. It is not quite the same thing.
The last Tory and Liberal Democrat leadership elections, apart from their intrinsic political significance, provided excellent opportunities for betting for those who prepared to be sufficiently diligent. It doesn’t follow that Labour’s will be the same. As Mike says, the sense in the Party that it’s Gordon’s turn is what makes the difference. That’s why all the other names he mentions are men of Brown’s age - the next generation (and the women) are keeping their powder dry.
I will stick my neck out and say that just as the Party thinks it’s Gordon’s turn, so it would like to have a woman Deputy Leader (as it did in 1992). The betting opportunity is surely in this race - identifying who she is before anyone else does, backing her and then guaranteeing the profit by laying the bet off further down the road (and yes I did have to re-write that…)
I am still baffled by Nick Palmer’s insouciance about going into the Scottish and Welsh elections whilst being distracted by a Westminster leadership election - if I were a Labour candidate in either of those I would want the inner-Party election done and dusted by mid-March at the latest, thank you very much.
5 - I got the impression that Nick was deliberately ignoring the Scottish and Welsh elections. Maybe they are just irrelevant to him.
To be fair i think that the Labour leadership is largely irrelevant to the Welsh and especially the Scottish elections - there are a lot of people putting it about that this is not the case so that they don’t have to take the blame.
3. Bonar Law was chancellor from 1916-19, so you’d have to go back to Balfour - and he was just about ‘PM in the Commons’ on a job share with his uncle. Choosing a PM from a governing party almost always goes to someone in senior office with experience because the party needs to know they can do the job. It is different in opposition when the leader has a few years to prove themselves to the party and the electorate.
To that end, the Gordon must still be by far the favourite - probably by more than the odds suggest (although after his lacklustre speech, I’d wait until after the conference in case anyone else ‘does a Cameron’ before backing him).
Mike
You’re flip flopping on the leadership. John Hutton looks like a wet blanket, stumbles and stutters his way through everything and has about as much chance of becoming prime minister as my cat.
Your comments yesterday on voice were hilariously off the mark -Major and Thatcher had two of the most nauseating voices in history.
Alan Johnson is still second favourite with most of the bookies and this is where he should be. No-one knows him (in the public) at the moment, but as soon as the campaign gets going properly, he’ll be all over the place. “From postman to prime minister” is an irresistible story for Britain (old bunch of softies we are…)
Rough
Rough Diamond. The bookmaker markets have a fraction of the liquidity of Betfair and attract far fewer bets. The latter is a live market where individual punters are backing and laying and gives a far far better view of punter sentiment.
I’ve made my call on Johnson’s chances and pulled out of my bets on him. We’ll see whether I’m right. His performance on Today this morning was not inspiring.
For Brown not to get it the party needs to be cnvinced that he’ll be an election liability and an attractive alternative is waiting in the wings.
Reid looks as though he could fulfill that role but I’m very concerned about his “back story”. There is a lot that needs explaining.
Mike Smithson
Rough Diamond - please don’t write off my chances so readily
Oh, and I’m sick of dry ‘crunchie’. Can’t you get me some of those posh Waitrose tins (tuna, preferably)?
Brown has lost something of his untouchableness over the last few weeks which is a shame. Everyone was saying how feeble he was not bidding for the leadership-so he did and is then denounced as a back-stabber!
Hutton would be a joke candidate. There are only two possibilities Johnson and Reid. Reid’s speech this Thursday should give us a clue. Brown fortunately has the chance to get his image back with this Novembers budget
& RD I do flip-flop with my betting going in and out as circumstances develop. The art is to be in profit at the end of the day. I’ve made something like 300 backs and lays on Betfair on this market along.
I try to anticipate events that might impact on the prices and arrange my positions accordingly. My thinking at the moment is that the Brown price will esse considerbly after Cameron’s speech next week. So a lay at current prices might turn into a profitable back next week.
Mike Smithson
the local elections are I suspect merely going to be averagely bad
I think Sean Fear’s more objective analysis suggests that, as with many English words, New Labour are applying a whole new meaning to ‘average’.
Goodness knows I’m no apologist for anyone in NuLab, but I don’t think it’s sensible to dismiss Hutton quite as readily as some on this board.
If the last few weeks have shown us anything, it is that Hutton has the best media skills of the chasing pack. He’s gone from a 500-1 nobody to 39-1 and bang on the radar of the media & opinion formers.
Still a long way for him to go - but the leadership contest won’t be before Summer 07. At this rate of progress, Hutton will be well-placed to be the mainstream challenger to Brown when the contest comes.
The Festival of of the Bbrothers of Narcissism progresses today in Manchester, with a walk on part for “I did not have sexual relations…” No doubt there will be a very narrow lectern for his speech just in case the audience suspect an intern sitting on his shoes. I presume his purpose here is to make Tony Blair appear (in comparison) less trithfully-challenged.
Of course, Tony Blair was only a originally meant to be a bit-player in all this, a vehicle in whose shadows the ‘able but personally-challenged’ Peter Mandelson would rise and rise. Gordon Brown was the only potential obstacle to the machiavelian plan. But a little dissembling in Granita and ‘ey presto’ all was lovely.
Did any of you see the Prince of Darkness on TV? made Cherie seem like Gordon’s greatest fan.
Peter ‘n’ Gordon. how did it go?
“Please lock me away……..
I won’t stay. . . in a world without love…”
14. Yes - who will perform the Mark Senior role and explain to us why 700-1000 Labour losses are actually a good result I wonder?
13. Morning Mike.
I couldn’t agree more about Brown being a lay at the current price. Apart from anything else, it would actually be quite difficult for his price to get much lower so the downside risk in a lay is minimal.
I’m also glad that you take the trouble to point out the art of timing in placing bets. I got berated on here the other day when somebody pointed out (correctly) that I had layed Brown despite the fact I regarded him as shoo-in for next PM. To some people, the price doesn’t seem to matter.
Finally, may I say how pleased I am that we have our own site Cat. I love animals and have often thought that a Cat would would help make the site more homely. Welcome, Puddy, and enjoy your stay.
Interesting article Mike, and interesting times.
I note the nu lab love fest, but you have to wonder what the effect of all this is going to be. We have not had the others speeches yet, but we also have not had Camerons speech yet.
Blair seems to have gone down well, whilst Browns speech was competent.
I don’t think Brown will get an easy ride.
RE 2 Nick Palmer. You are right that a coup, or even an attempted one, would be bad for the locals. It woud have been much better for them if Tony just went fairly queitly. He isn’t and the damage is done, leaving now would make little difference.
13. I’m sure I should know this but for a price to “ease” means it’s less favourable ie evens to 2 to 1 against? And a “lay” just means a bet?
If that’s right I don’t see why Cameron’s speech next week will make Brown’s price “ease considerably” in other words get worse?
Blair’s speech was really effective while I was actually watching it, but afterwards, I don’t like it. The ’stop Brown’ Blairites are annoying me, and I’m actually favouring Brown now. AFAIK he doesn’t go in for rebirthing ceremonies and hanging out with conmen.
There is no doubt that Brown can do the PM’s job and do it well. The only reason to pass him over is if people think he would be unattractive to the public - in which case Hutton is the last man you’d replace him with. He’s as dry as dust - he looks like some sort of middle manager. It’s hard to feel anything about him.
Brown at least excites big passions for and against. I also think that his ratings have dipped because of all the negative briefing against him these last three weeks - but that will stop. Brown is a mixture of strength and vulnerability, genuine power combined with shyness. You feel he would protect you in a crisis, but he also inspires protective feelings towards him in some of us - perhaps this is a female thing. Diane Abbott said he was a Mr Rochester type, and there’s something in that (even down to the blind thing).
Whatever you think, you do have to acknowledge that he has a connection to voters that other candidates like Hutton and Johnson, have not built at all. (John Reid does have a connection with the voters though, again inspiring feelings both for and against).
John Hutton would need to address his grumpy tendency if he wanted to even have an outside chance of the top job!
” His suggestion in a BBC interview that Gordon Brown “never fully reconciled” himself to Tony Blair becoming Labour leader twelve years ago is hardly going to help the Chancellor”
Peter Mandelson hasn’t reconciled from the fact he’s a twice failed minister who’s not in Europe trading to find an agreement with Brazil about bananas either
I really liked Simon Hoggart’s sketch about Blair’s speech:
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/backbench/comment/0,,1881912,00.html
Btw, are all Labour delegates out of their depth or just the ones interviewed by the media?
21. Roger
You are by no means alone in your uncertainty about the meaning of betting terms, which are often used ambiguously if not incorrectly.
You’ve got ease right - it just means the price gets bigger. I think it’s a play on ‘easy to back’, meaning that nobody wants to back that horse/dog/politician so there are plenty of bookmakers offering that price, causing an oversupply in the market and a consequent increase in the price.
Lay is the opposite of back. It means you are acting like a bookmaker and offering prices to others. Before the advent of Betting Exchanges, it was not possible for ordinary punters to lay horses/dogs etc. Only bookmakers were allowed to do that. Now everybody can be a bookmaker and lay whatever they want, as long as there is a market.
Btw, were you the 300,000 post?
[11] I would be perfectly happy to bung the Site Cat the odd tin of Waitrose Tuna if she’ll proof-read my posts, particularly the early morning ones… of course, this offer is void if she’s standing for election anywhere
snowflake5 yet again I agree with you. Brown will (as far as Labour can) make a competent PM, except of course that he will also be Chancellor, Foreign Secretary, Home Secretary, Secretary of State for Health, Secretary of State for Education and Skills, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, and all the other jobs in cabinet because he is a control freak.
John Reid incites far more passion in the electorate. Unfortunately for Labour it is all negative, everyone is terrified of the ugly Scottish bully. At least he’d drive up turnout.
Actually, on second thoughts, I’m now John Reid’s biggest fan for leader of the Labour Party. The comparison with David C would be immense - an aggressive bully versus a reasonable sensible person. I know who the public would choose to run the country. DC in a heartbeat.
Hutton as Major? Not sure. I think he could run just to push Gordon ideologically to the right.
Miliband is basically keeping his powder dry until after Gordon loses the election.
Reid is jockeying for a top job in Brown’s cabinet, Hutton would run not to necessarily win, though don’t underestimate the vanity of politicians, but to fly the flag of New Labour. A sort of ideological mirror image of John McDonnell.
Basically Hutton’s price should in the teens not 30/1.
Reid won’t run because he knows he won’t win, he just wants to secure from Brown his position. Hutton might run even if he thinks he won’t win to forward the agenda and because Brown will sack him ayway. The Blairites won’t run Milburn because they know everybody hates him.
Last night I posted this: “What is John Hutton up to? We’ve had the Times interview, talking about deprived childhood, the death of his young son etc. This morning on Today he talked about a challenger for Brown, but when pressed on whether it would be him, he resorted to a well-rehearsed soundbite which committed himself to nothing, nor ruled himself in or out.
Anytime he drifts above 60-1 on Betfair, it disappears very quickly. Ok it’s small amounts, but it seems many believe he could end up being the challenger, even though he will need to undergo a big transformation before the public (a la cameron) to stand a chance.”
Mike, I thought I was almost alone in spotting this trend. He could well come up on the outside, but he has a long way to go.
Perhaps the reason for Hutton shortening on Betfair is people laying off when they’ve already backed him at big prices. I’ve a small bet on him at 120-1…and would be in a good position to lay off.
Sorry if this has been mentioned before but did anyone see Tom Harris and Chris Bryant on Newsnight? I don’t think I’ve ever seen such an obnoxious humourless display from any politicians, Harris being particularly guilty. McDonnell on the other hand naturally saw the funny side and, furthermore, the justification of a journalist referring to who might be the country’s next PM. We deserve to be able to question the party on who they will select as our next Prime Minister - this is not an internal matter, it’s of public interest, and it’s all very well dodging the question by emphasising “policy” (I’d do the same) but actually turning on journalists for raising the issue is appalling, ugly, and will probably result in Labour MPs in marginals losing their jobs at the next election.
23. We’ve had many, many expositions of the art of arslikhan on pb.com but that effort was one of the best ever. Well done.
As a lapsed ex-pat Tory (libertarian wing) I have no dog in the fight when it comes to the NuLab leadership but they’ve got to get real. GB is box office poison and will, if saner minds prevail, have to be sadly and inevitably defenestrated if they want to win the next GE. I am strangely drawn to Reid despite how poorly he hides the fact that he’s a still a tankie.
30. Cheltboy - “Mike, I thought I was almost alone in spotting this trend.”
You are not alone. You and I were not the only ones to sneak off with some of the bigger prices. Note also that Andrea reported on a earlier thread of some interesting moves in connection with a possible Hutton leadership bid. I agree with GF at 29; the price should be in the teens.
Btw, if “people [are] laying off when they’ve already backed him at big prices”, wouldn’t that cause the price to stop shortening and begin to drift?
28. Ben, I know you are not a Reid fan, but some others are. But he won’t be PM.
Re David Cameron, what passions does he inspire? With Blair, men want to be him, he’s bold and adventurous. But where Blair is genuinely masculine, Cameron is a bit camp, a bit metrosexual. I’ve yet to come across a man who admires him. Brown inspires protective feelings in women. I feel protective towards Ming Campbell too, when he’s being attacked over his age. But David Cameron? Too smooth - he’s the type of man who’d cheat on you. You get the feeling he loves himself (Blair suffers from this too, but hides it better).
Many thanks Peter. Very informative. I don’t know about being the 300,000 poster. I probably better hope not. I once read that you have fifty times more chance of being struck by lightening than winning treble chance on the football pools(whatever that might be). It seriously put me off long shots!
34: I’m a man and I admire Cameron. I think he will make a fine Prime Minister.
John L (4) makes a good point - Major had held two of the three great offices of state, Hutton is Work and Pensions Secretary, and Blair can’t possibly now have a reshuffle to promote a favourite into a big job without blowing up the whole damned edifice.
Agree with Guido that the Blairites can’t run Milburn, but basically running Hutton would be a Milburn candidature by proxy, and most Labour MPs would have the sense to realise that.
I have already pointed out that Hutton has little support among MPs or the unions, but has anyone ever heard him speak? He makes Ming Campbell look like Bill Clinton.
And anyway, the John Major comparison is surely the kiss of death in this context. Every Labour MP knows the Tories would have been better off choosing Heseltine.
34, Snowflake, we have not as yet seen the Cameron speech. It would be best to comment then.
It seems to me that Labours infighting has more legs in it, and that will hit Labour in the polls. It wil also hit them in the activist base as well.
Moral will have picked up after Tony’s speech, but will also dip afterwards as party members internalise the divisions and bitterness.
RE 37, Paul, who do we think is there Heseltine? As in rable rousing public speaker etc.
35 - Snowflake if DC is so unnatractive to women why does he poll so well amongst them.
And do you think there is the slight - although unthinkable - possibility that you don’t speak for every womann in the United Kingdom?
The 300.000th poster was UKPaul over the weekend. If there had not been a minor distraction in Manchester I would have made more of it
Mike Smithson
Snowflake is wrong to claim that GB provokes ’strong passions’. He doesn’t, except with a very small band of fanatical admirers.
Most of his opponents concede he would be an adequate PM, as a stop-gap. At the same time, even labour party members are nervous (reasonably enough) that he would be a vote loser.
There are a few certainties about a GB premiership. He would work fantastically hard himself at doing the right things in all departments (undermining the minister concerned, and then leaving him to carry the can). He would throw money at a problem as a first reaction. And he would bequeath a much less healthy set of public finances than he inherited.
The problem with comparisons, ie Heseltine would have been better than Major is they’re unprovable, we know what happened with Major as PM, we’ll never know how Heseltine would have worked out as PM. What we now have in the Labour party are people putting out markers, (look at me I’m over here) but with no hope of getting the leadership, barring some unforseen catastrophe, its, (for good or not)Brown’s job: after all what would you do with him if he didn’t get it?
31 Julian. Very embarassing. I suspect he’ll be regretting his tiny moment in the sunshine. Perhaps he had gout?
Off topic. I wonder if Cameron will beat the number of standing ovations given to IDS for his barnstorming ‘Quiet Man’ speech. That’s got to be the Tory benchmark.
41. What happened to Roger? Unwell?
Hutton Watch…5.45 PM fringe meeting called: “Welfore Reform: empowering people to work or penalising poverty?” (refreshment offered)
Cruddas (for those who bet on him as deputy) watch:
“Fighting back against the BNP” fringe meeting
For the leftists: Campaign Group fringe meeting: Challenging Labour’s Future with John McDonnell, Tony Benn, Alan Simpson, Jeremy Corbyn, Bob Wareing, Mike Wood and Katy Clark
Alex 3. Surely Bonar Law had been Chancellor under Lloyd George? So you’d have to go back further than that.
Andrea. I saw your mate MacDonnel yesterday for the first time. He was very good and really quite likeable.
48. Roger, it’s not my mate! (I suppose people here think I’m a dangerous leftist on the verge to join SWP)
And don’t confure Mr McDonnell, MP for Hayes and Harlington with Mr McDonald, chairman of Hayes and Harlington CLP…I suppose they’re all called in that way in H&H Labour Party!
46 - I wonder if anyone will suggest gagging Margaret Hodge?
45. Peter. I wuz robbed…and by a nationalist who puts UK infront of their name
Peter at 33. Fair point about laying off. Was a bit sleepy when I wrote my comment
46. Thanks Andrea - big help.
50. Max, I think they’ve not invited her….Blears and Martin Salter will be there (so I suppose the Fugitive will cover the event)
52. LOL Cheltboy! Done it often enough myself, mate! And worse…much worse.
Btw, does your name signify any connection with Cheltenham, the home of National Hunt racing? (Be careful how you answer as it could lead to the unwelcome arrival of numerous inebriated punters on your doorstep next March.)
I notice dear old Simon Heffer in his piece on TB’s speech, has a dig at DC’s chances at winning the next GE. With friends like Heff, DC don’t need to many enemies.
Here’s a fun online poll!
http://snowflake5.blogspot.com/
56 - Hazel Blears and Martin Salter in the same room - what a treat!
I wonder what Hazel Blears advice is? Surely just to remind those considering voting BNP of the great debt they owe ‘Tony’ and the rest of the Labour Party.
That should do the trick.
At the weekend I Had some interesting conversations with the odd Campaign Group Mp and Union Rep. What suprised me was the show of Support for Alan Johnson over Gordon Brown.
This came down to two perceptions born out of experiences with both Men,
That Johnson was seen as both fair and inclusive in his style,both MP’s and the Unions (Unison in particular) viewed him as someone who while clearly representing the governments agenda was genuinly listening and not closed off.
That Brown’s interpersonal style was off putting ” he doesnt look at you , he stares down” and much less open to dialogue.
Adding up to the feeling that whereas Brown’s agenda might seem clearer and more ‘left friendly’ it was also percieved as more fixed -once voted for it would then be a case of watching it roll out.
Johnson’s agenda though less clear was a work in progress that could draw a range of opinion and interests.
57. Huge turnout…
58. Max, Blears’ advice would be “smile and tell them Tony is a great inspiration for all of us. And remember, smile!”
It seems that Mr Harris the foul mouthed MP last night is a now a Government Minister. Its not exactly appropriate for Alastair Campbell to talk like that let alone a Government Minister. The public have a right to know who the next labour leader will be. Mr Harris clearly represents the Thuggish side of Scottish Labour as seen through people like John Reid and formely George Galloway unlike the intellectual side as seen through people like Gordon Brown and the late John Smith, Donald Dewar and Robin Cook.
What a mess Labour have got themselves into! I just cannot get over the fact that there is no alternative to Gordon, the desperation among activists for anyone - anyone but Gordon Brown is palpable.
But there isn’t anyone, is there? The talent cupboard is bare.
The whole Nu Lab project has been built on just two men - one of whom has been brilliant in the background but will be useless ‘out front’ the other is brilliant ‘out front’ but will be hopeless as the ‘ex PM’ and there is just no talent anyhwere else to be found.
How did it come to this?
17 - Not me , At this stage I think 1,000 is a bit on the high side for a forecast in would say around 750 is what I expect and it will certainly be a bad result for Labour . If losses were around 400 - 500 then the Labour performance could be described as average .
The (second) Mrs Hutton aka Heather Rogers is rather attractive. Formerly a Department of Health civil servant, she spent an unprecedently long time in Private Office and was quite well liked in the Department. Now I believe she’s doing something parasitical in the lobbying world.
63. With both gone, Labour may well decline back to the antediluvian irrelevance they were in the 1980s.
65. She works for the lobby firm Edelman now
Even though I’m inclined to agree with you Marcus, I don’t think the present shadow fron bench has to much to boast about! I though Heffer in todays Telegraph summed up Cameron and the present day Tory party pretty well: didn’t you?
57, 60.
Turnout has gone up 280% in the last three quarters of an hour!
Brown and Johnson neck-and-neck so far, all good stuff!
64 - I agree Mark. 1,000 seems a bit on the high side. 400-500 could be bad depending on where the losses occur. If they are overwhelmingly concentrated in marginal seats then Labour could be in a good deal of trouble.
63 Agree Marcus just as Cameron was the best of a poor bunch in the Conservative leadership contest and also with the LibDems because where the best potential leaders did not stand .
Benedict (39)
If we’re going to make comparisons, Brown is clearly the Heseltine figure, both in terms of being the most obvious successor, the best-known with the public, and the (alleged) assassin. And although he isn’t in the Blair class, he’s also the best public speaker.
RE 57 Mark, thanks for that. I voted for Alan Milburn, but only out of pity
71-Mark
I would have thought that four candidates (if you include Mark Oaten),standing for the leadership of a minor party was a reasonable choice,UKIP only had three candidates.
RE 72 Paul, that may be the case, but neither Blair or Brown are a patch on Hezza as a public speaker.
71 I was having a bad morning until this post made me laugh.
Thanks Mark.
OK time to lock up your daughters and cigar box ! Old Bill at the Labour Party Conference ….
Time to change my Monica too.
Can I just say a big thank you to Snowflake for provoking me into responding to her comment, otherwise I wouldn’t be post 300,000.
Roger at 51 - I’m more at home with the concept of no national borders at all, nevermind Nationalism (!?!). The UK bit in my name is there because I post on other boards (not politics ones) populated mainly by Americans.
72. Brown is more like Geoffery Howe than Michael Heseltine. Not in a parallel of the 1990 challenge / election but in his position in the party - very senior, there from the start, now has poor relations with the PM, also seen as competent but boring.
77. Perfectly in tune with the prevailing mood of sleaze and corruption.
Peter at 55. Yes I’m from Cheltenham. And yes, I can’t wait for the start of the proper racing season. Got my annual membership badge the other day so am starting to get excited about the prospects for another great year.
18 - prrr prrr prrr. I think I shall have to adopt the site as a whole rather than just being Rough Diamond’s owner (sorry, pet).
27 - done. I’ll do tips too if you’re offering chicken.
Today’s Times has a story from Bangkock about an elderly ghost called Ming ( first name poo)
“He was walking like an old man and spoke in an ancient quivering voice ”
80 PM. There’s nothing sleazy or corrupt about the Rik Willis Cane Club. It’s a perfectly respectable after school club enjoying extra-curricula gardening activity ranging from soft fruit to runner beans !
Rik has become especially able in the raspberry department and is hoping to show his considerable achievements at the next General Election show.
sorry should be Bangkok, i think the mention of poo reminded me that Mr Oaten is also there on holiday !
72. Heseltine failed because, although he was the obvious successor, he was perceived as just too divisive. Hurd, on paper well qualified and likeable, was perceived (wrongly) as too “aristocratic”. Major just came through as the man with fewer negatives.
There is no close parallel with Labour’s current leadership dilemma, but what kept the Tories in business after 1990 was their ability to think outside the box of obvious leadership candidates and to ask thhemselves “who is most likely to win the next G.E.?” I’m not sure whether enough of those who will choose the next Labour leader are yet doing this.
78. ukpaul - you’re welcome, and congrats!
Also, thanks to all participating in my poll, even if a suspiciously high amount are voting for Mcdonnell
(And yes, I’m aware I forgot to include Hutton - I set up the poll last night and he slipped my mind.)
[77] Change your Monica? I would suggest your moniker might then be Clinton?
For the avoidance of doubt you understand…
mmrcuvfbrx…
wztfgrlcq kfxtvhupc zsfrlgv…
89 - Hear Hear
82 - Okay, who forgot to put the cat out last night?
84
Do the extra-curricula activities include extreme sports?
If so you might be able to tempt Mark Oaten and boost your membership a bit.
Snowflake5 87.
I am a Hutton fan but I didn’t even notice he was missing. So I voted for Big Al Milburn. The surge for John McD may be because I put a link on LabourHome.
92 michael. Certainly not. Oaten was expelled for self fertilizing the produce !!
18 Pete the Punter
Whether to back or lay Gordon Brown at current odds? I know you have already addressed this point but I still sense a contradiction in your position.
You think that Brown’s current odds make him a good “LAY”. This is because you judge the market will move against Brown, giving you an opportunity to back him later at greater odds than you have laid him.
But you also see Brown as a shoo-in, 90% likely to win? Therefore you currently have a great opportunity to “BACK” Brown at his current “generous” odds. Odds currently available are close to 1/2 when you judge they should be nearer to 1/10?
If your view on Brown’s near certain victory is correct then surely laying him at odds which greatly overvalue his chance of winning is a risky strategy. You could quite easily end up in a significant negative position about an event whose outcome you had correctly forecast.
Surely in these situations your view on whether a bet is good value should override your view on which way the market is likely to move?
Are you trying to have your cake and eat it?
94 Wasn’t he worried about hair loss? Perhaps he thought organic fertiliser would make his hair grow back.
Any odds on whether Cameron will mention the arctic monkeys next week ?
95 stjohn. I think it’s more pragmatic than that. Most punters don’t have limitless resources so better to hold out for better odds on the “certainty” than the meagre odds on offer.
IMO Brown is realistically 1/20 for the win, but I expect Gordon to drift in the actual betting to much better than 1/2 as the cut and thrust of the contest and determination of the media to have a meaningful contest comes into play.
I thought Bill Clinton was interesting as was Bob Geldhof. Infact all round a good conference. Have the Tories managed to get Jim Davidson again? I hope so. He always seems so appropriate for a Tory Conference.
Benedict. Heseltine was an entertaining speaker but I’m not sure many would put him ahead of Blair
Jim Davidson & Paul Daniels are doing a fringe meeting in Bournemouth, I hear
Coldstome. Interesting article by Heffer. It’s difficult to argue with his point that if the Tories are only four points ahead in the polls after the last few months of Labour troubles then they should save their energy worrying about them. Whether Cameron is “a vapid leader” or not I think we’ll find out next week
If the Tories book Jim Davidson again, they’ll have to pay his fare from Dubai he’s declared himself bankrupt. I should imagine dear old Jim (family values) Davidson is more UKIP these days.
Performing at a Tory Party Conference used to reduce the cashet of the performer so much thast only those without a future would appear. Hearing that Davidson is bancrupt just goes to prove the point!
101: I think that Labour’s modest recovery in the polls came about because it looked like Blair would be out on his ear any day, and there was a vague sense of Labour’s at least trying to put its house in order. The situation’s a bit different now though: Brown is looking more lightweight and shifty by the day, yet Labour seem obsessed with foisting him on the public. Once the realization sets in of what we’ve all got to look forward to, watch that Tory lead soar!
You may have a point there Roger do you remember Ted Rogers (321) he was a mainstay of Tory Party conferences for years, he went bankrupt! Not a party political point here (I don’t do those) but it is an interesting point, that what you might call the light entertainment risque end of the show bizz market has a tendency (I’m sure not exclusively) to support the Tories, the heavy weights normaly the left. That wonderful example to us all Peter Stingfellow, staunch Tory, as that King of Soho Paul Raymond was before him, Raymond of course sponsored Mark Thatcher’s motor racing career (almost), and is known as a Tory supporter. Its something that’s always interested me, political psychology.
As a Labour supporter. It’s really great to have few good news days. Feels like old times, great for morale. Clinton was inspired.
hutton has as much chance of becoming PM as Mike Smithson.
GB may suffer in the polls over the coming twelve months, and there may be a determination to find a ’stop GB’ candidate. It could even be John Hutton if AJ falls short, and Reid’s candidature is overcome with skeletons from his closet. However, the fact remains that with the electoral college system of voting, GB would have to seriously mess up to lose out amongst MP’s, Trade Unions and memebers.
Just read a great description of Alan Johnson
Alan Johnson - looks like a cheap suited 70’s car dealer.
Mike,
Are you sure you did not put up a picture of Stephen Tompkinson by mistake?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/faces/stephen_tompkinson.shtml
10. Brilliant!
Cruddas has confirmed he’ll stand for deputy leadership position.
It’s actually quite hard getting decent pictures of Hutton. There are very few available and those that do exist are very unflattering.
Interestingly all the decent pictures of Alan Johnson on tge new have suddenly become unavailable.
If anybody has decent pictures of an contender then I’d be grateful if you could send me them
Fantastic 109 - Swiss Tony Johnson!
“What you need to understand, Gordon, is that winning the leadership of the Labour Party is like making love to a beautiful woman…”
105. Cap’n Bob-bob-bob was a ‘heavyweight’ Labour supporter too, odf course.
109 …
“I’m Damien Day, reporting for Globelink News, here at the Labour Party convention, where I am apparently being asked to run for Prime Minister, as ..”
[transmission cut off due to cameraman being incapacitated by a flying Chancellor]
Sorry, 110.
An inspiring conference is not goint to change how people feel about…
…losing their pension, the state of the NHS, the immigration invasion, debts, house prices, sleaze, fighting wars overstretched underfunded, political correctness, police incompetence, Walter Wolfgang etc etc etc
102. Great news that that vile racist bigot is bankrupt.
210. I knew Hutton reminded me of someone. So we’ve got Swiss Tony for Alan Johnson, Damien Day for Hutton, The demon Headmaster for Straw
http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y223/FenricsGhost/b3ta/demon_headmaster.jpg
Who for Brown and Reid then. I suppose either of the Mitchell brothers will be Ok
119 What a truly vile individual you are ColinW
113 - Mike you always manage to get great pictures of our glorious Blair leader!
121 - ‘E’s still my boy, an’ I love ‘im, even if he’s a total toe rag.
[123] if you click on ColinW s signature you get the weather for Kent-
Don’t know if that is significant..
Perhaps it is because he is a complete Kent
Cruddas said he’ll open a campaign office within the next seven days and he’ll start to name the MPs, members and trade unions who back his bid in the coming weeks.
A pretty fast start!
Cruddas remains an outstanding bet at 25/1 with Hills. They apparently very nervous about a Cruddas win (I backed him at 100/1 ten days ago) and you may have to phone to get a reasonable bet on.
I’ve just returned from Manchester and I’ve spoken to 8 backbench MPs from 3 different regions (small sample I know!) but 5 would back Cruddas, 2 would back Johnson (if he stands) and 1 would back Hain. More importantly, his support from the trade unions is very strong. Harman’s husband Jack Dromey (Dep Gen Sec of TGWU) is not going to be able to deliver her the union and rumours are that they will almost certainly back Cruddas.
From a betting point of view what the unions do is very important since they hold a third of the electoral college votes, but party members in trade unions will get 2 votes, so the ripple effect behind Cruddas could well be significant. Unlike other contenders, because he’s not in Government he is going to have great freedom in discussing policy and the strengths and weaknesses of Govt. Other contenders are going to be bound by their role in Government and in particular their ministerial briefs. Peter Hain for example is going to have to be very careful in what he says due to the very sensitive nature of Northern Ireland politics.
Not much activity this afternoon!
Anyway I find this Derek Draper comment quite interesting about Blairites/ultra-Blairites/Blairites4Brown:
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/derek_draper/2006/09/the_enemy_within.html
124. You get the weather for Canterbury ( not Kent incidentally) because it’s one of my automatic weather stations.
Davidson, like all right wing scum,is a complete c*nt.
How charming Colin.
[124] Automatic weather station?? Whats that all about then?
I think ColinW has just proven how accurate Pot Kettle Black’s earlier assessment was. Surely that sort of posting deserves deletion and a ban for its author!?
131. As a floating voter I must say I find the offensive remarks of ColinW very off putting - no chance now I will vote for the Lib Dems, who are obviously the ‘nasty party’
131. Grow up little boy.
127 - Andrea - as I said this morning, the “stop Brown” Blairites are really annoying me, they seem happy to destroy half the party in order to destroy Brown. They look like a right evil bunch and just make me like Brown more (as did Cherie’s comments, I thought it made her look bad, not Brown). Blairites for Brown seem much more sane and sensible.
132. Yeah, right. Course you were a floating voter.
How dare anyone criticise Jim Davidson when he did so much to entertain and boost the morale of our boys during the Falklands conflict? I didn’t notice Eddie Izzard toddling along to Iraq or Afghanistan to do the same for the troops fighting the wars his great leader helped instigate.
135. What awful childhood experiences left ColinW so embittered and full of bile, one wonders? And so repetitive?
[136] Yeah but as an “out” transvestite Eddie might have had some uncomfortable encounters with a guardsman, so you can see his point really.
nick nick
136:
… or John Cleese to the Balkans conflict so beloved of Paddy Ashdown for that matter.
137. And I wonder what childhood experience left you unable to post under anything but a series of pseudonyms?
I don’t know what Colins problem is but ‘Psycologist’ using so many different names to back himself up surely ought to speak to one of his collegues about low self esteem!
AT at 134. I agree. An interesting article by Draper and one which rings true. I think these anti Brown characters have shot themselves in the foot by gathering round Mandelson. I’ve always quite liked him but yesterday he revealed the side of him that presumably has made him so despised within the party.
If Brown can ignore all that’s going on he’ll soon rebuild his reputation and if he could put himself in the hands of a good PR person he’ll not only sail through the leadership election but could become a very popular leader.
roger at 142 - it’d be interesting to know how Mandelson views his own position. Would he back Brown if the actions required to stop Brown meant serious harm to the Labour party, or perhaps he thinks Brown as leader would do such serious harm to the party that any price is worth paying to stop him? What are Mandelson’s motives?
I think his motives are personal bitterness and his loyalty is to Blair not the Party. He wont forgive Brown for knifing Blair because that’s the way he operates
43. I’m not sure what Mandelson’s motives are. I suppose his job as a commissioner is in the gift of the next PM - the appointment is only for five years, at which point the member state the commisioner belongs to needs to say whether they will renew his period in office, or replace him with someone else.
I think lots of people have let personal feelings get in the way of their good sense. Andrew Rawnsley said in the Observer that Blair had vowed not to be bitter like Thatcher and not to make decisions based on anger, but whether he is able to carry this out is another thing. Blair might, but am not sure those around him will. They probably think their careers are at an end anyway, so have nothing to lose.
45. PS I should have added that Brown’s position is a lot like Thatcher’s in 1979, when many of her colleagues didn’t really think she should have been holding the PM’s job, and she had many in cabinet whom she didn’t like or want, but she had to be “collegiate”. That ended once she won again in 1983.