The betting story of Blackpool 2005
March 30th, 2007
How the betting records show that Hitchens was wrong
What happened at the Tory conference at Blackpool in October 2005 has become one of those pivotal moments in UK politics and, as we saw, in the programme on Cameron on Channel 4 by Peter Hitchens, a number of myths have developed which don’t fit with the facts.
For the above chart shows the implied probabilities based on bets betting odds of the four leading candidates from the start of the party conference on October 3rd 2005 and for the following two weeks. The chronology is critical.
June - September 2005: David Davis hardens his position as firm favourite but for almost all of the period David Cameron is the second favourite. The big question is how the contest will take place - will it be MPs or the membership which have the final decision? Michael Howard pressed for the power to be returned to the parliamentary party which arguably would have benefited Davis most. Howard lost and the system stayed the same.
Monday October 3rd: An ICM online focus group in the Guardian shows the promise of Cameron and this is reinforced on Newsnight with the famous Frank Luntz televised focus group. Davis remains a firm odds-on favourite. Cameron’s price tightens a bit but he is still miles behind Davis.
Tuesday October 4th: The day of the famous Cameron speech which sees the markets move to the young old Etonian but Davis remains an odds-on favourite.
Wednesday October 5th: The David Davis speech which bombs. When he started speaking he was still odds on - by the end you could have got better than evens. This was not the media reaction but that of punters risking their money.
Thursday October 6th: Davis greeted by poor press coverage of his speech and comparisons with Cameron - but he finishes the day still in the favourite slot but only by a small margin.
Friday October 7th: The big news is a YouGov poll of Tory members which shows an overwhelming switch to Cameron who is now attracting getting on for two thirds of the potential vote in a membership ballot. Cameron becomes favourite but he could still be had at better than evens. The critical question is whether he would make the final two in the MPs ballot to decide which contenders be put to the mass vote.
So it wasn’t a media conspiracy or Frank Luntz which drove the markets but the Davis speech and the YouGov poll. The betting prices are important because they show graphically the collective perceptions of people prepared to back up their judgements with hard cash.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Peter Hitchens doesn’t like David Cameron - hold the front page.
Peter Hitchens in inaccurate story - hold the front page.
Peter Hitchens manipulates facts to fit his angle - hold the front page.
To be honest Mike, does anyone care what Peter Hitchens thinks? How many people even saw the (balanced) Channel 4 programme?
Some people would like the Conservatives to be an ideologically pure opposition party, with Labourites (I was going to use the S word but your spam filter won’t let me) in Government destroying the country. To be honest they have nowhere to go except the lunatic fringe - where they belong.
I’m not usually up at this hour having been woken by my dog barking at foxes. My irritation has been much smoothed by this “its all doom and gloom for Broon, poll in the Torygraph. So much for a budget bounce!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/03/30/npoll30.xml
Interesting YouGov in the Telegraph answers various questions we’ve debated:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2007/03/30/npoll130.pdf
Headline figure shows 39-32-17 (compared to the previous YouGov, Tories and LDs no change, Labour 1% down - the Telegraph compares to an earlier YouGov). A forced “Tories under DC or Labour under GB” choice gives a 10% Tory lead.
Asked how they’d feel if the Tories won, people who’d be delighted and people who’d be dismayed are *both* down over the Howard-led party in 2005, with lots more “wouldn’t mind” and “dn’t know”. TB is fractionally preferred to DC, DC slightly preferred to GB, LibDems slightly prefer Labour to Tories (21-16) but prefer Greens to either.
A whopping 30% of Tories have UKIP or BNP as their second choice, vs. 5% of Labour and 8% of LD voters, suggesting that the belief that BNP intervention hurts Labour may be misplaced. I’ve had some stick in the past for saying that this substantial sympathy for the far right still does exist among Tories but it needs to be accepted as a fact which none of us should be too happy about. Labour has more voters (27% vs 22% of Tories and 13% of LDs) who flatly refuse to give any second choice, but the LDs and Greens get more Labour second prefs.
Overall it seems to me the picture shows a steady medium-sized Tory lead without much positive enthusiasm and a significant risk of losing voters to the right. Floating voters are cheesed off with Labour but not too thrilled by anyone else.
Iain Dale has an interesting piece on defections:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/03/30/do3005.xml
I was told by two of the Tory->Labour defectors in the past that Tony Blair was notably considerate - one wanted to go ahead with it right away, but TB urged him to take his time and think through the likely reactions. The MP in question decided to go ahead and was always steadfastly loyal to TB thereafter even when he had doubts about his policies - sometimes the gentle personal touch pays off. This doesn’t seem to fit with the story about Campbell’s approach in the same piece - I’m sceptical about that from my personal conversations.
Interesting = made up? The bit about Mark Oaten was particularly funny. Mark is very liberal (as we all now know) - he doesn’t have a conservative bone in his body.
Is that the best spin you can put on it Nick,(”without much positive enthusiasm”) LOL. How do you justify “significant risk”. I dont think the risk is significant at all.. I would think the “significant risk”/ almost certainty was New Lab getting stuffed at the May Elections and in any forthcoming General election !
4. Yes, I’m afraid little Iain lives in a world of his own - Toryworld, many of whose inhabitants post here regularly.
Nick - sorry but you’re wrong. There’s nothing in the YouGov poll that suggests “a significant risk” of the Tories “losing voters to the right” unless one accepts the (spurious) contention that an expression of a second preference is also an indication of a predisposition to defect. Were that the case, the (greater) number of Tory supporters expressing a second preference for parties to the left (ie - Labour, Lib Dem and Green) would - applying the same logic - lead one to conclude that there was a significant risk of the Tories losing voters to the left.
What the YouGov poll tells us is that there has been no Tory bounce since the start of the year but a steady decline in support for Labour,especially on subsidiary indicators - ie. health and, now, the economy. What is definitely changing is a lessening of hostility to the Tories. We can argue about causation - fading of memories, rebranding, etc - but the facts speak for themselves.
One last point. The Tories fear Blair as an election winner to an almost irrational degree, despite his national unpopularity. They can’t wait to see that particular Labour weapon “placed beyond use.” It has an uncanny echo of the way that many Labour MPs used to feel about Thatcher in the late 1980s - “Yes, we know the old bitch is unpopular but she’s beaten us three times and there’s something there that the public relates to.” We can see that, despite Iraq, Cash-for-Honours, etc, Blair is still ahead of Cameron as best PM. In the unlikely event of Brown self-destructing and Blair then announcing his intention of fighting a fourth election I have absolutely no doubt that Cameron and his inner circle would be thrown into a slough of despond.
On the main piece, I’ve got to say to Mike that it was the Cameron speech which was the main mover of opinion, and that the markets were playing catch-up. It’s one of my larger regrets that I didn’t start betting on politics until later that I missed out on the Conservative election. The mood at conference can be different to that of the wider party, but there’s no way that Cameron should have been out at more than 4/1 after the Tuesday; likewise, Davis’ speech was a killer for his campaign and for him to remain favourite at that point was another bit of market inertia. If the information was available, it would be interesting to see the money movement; I’d bet that hugely more money was going on Cameron than Davis.
The Friday YouGov poll was obviously conducted earlier in the week - presumably Wednesday and Thursday, possibly Thursday only - but was informed by the contributions from those who turned out to be the two finalists; it’s support for Cameron shouldn’t have been a complete surprise.
Only got one of the three local byelection results so far: a Conservative hold in Basingstoke, but with their majority cut from 99 to 34 and an 8% swing to the Liberal Democrats.
The result in Rooksdown ward, Basingstoke & Deane Council, was:
Conservative 156 (53%, -11%)
Liberal Democrat 122 (41%, +5%)
Labour 18 (6%, +6%)
Conservative hold
8% swing from Conservative to Liberal Democrat
34% turnout
Which idiot made Margaret Beckett Foreign Secretary?
Almost by definition, the greater a party’s support in the polls, the greater the predisposition of their supporters to “defect”, because their core vote will be a smaller percentage of their support.
The same idiot who demoted Yvette Cooper after the 01 election (to punish Ed Balls for shouting at the idiot over the election date), the same idiot who sacked Graham Allen from the Whips Office, the same idiot who replaced Gordon Brown with Alan Milburn as Chairman of the 05 GE campaign (with less than brilliant results), the same idiot who brought back the useless Beverley Hughes into government, the same idiot who appointed Andrew Smith and Stephen Timms to the post of Treasury Chief Secretary, and the same idiot who made Ruth Kelly Education Secretary.
There might be some things we miss about Blair in a few months (like the impression of Lauren) but his personnel policy won’t be one of them (unless, of course, Brown appoints all his cr*pper hangers-on, like the clueless Des Browne, a man with so little personality or intelligence that I’ve yet to be convinced he isn’t a hologram).
8 - it’s cause and effect isn’t it? Arguably, with hindsight, the real “turning point” was the campaign launches because that was the first time that people began to think differently about the choices on offer. The campaign launches created the atmosphere in which people were prepared to look at the various polls in the next week (in particular the famous Luntz programme), and as noted at the time, the media narrative was almost written in advance of the speeches.
That is not to say that what happened was inevitable, but from that point campaign strategies had to change dramatically for a different result to occur. And Davis and his team (Iain Dale - not the greatest political brain in history) clearly did not see the warning signs and tried to adapt too late.
12. Sky are reporting that Brown and Browne (sounds like a firm of solicitors) are currently on tour in Afghanistan. What it has to do with Gordon I don’t know exactly - it’s a long way outside his brief.
10. I assume Alex’s point is in reference to the latest cock-up over the Iran situation: namely, the watering down of the UN text. If so, I’d agree with it. A unanimously agreed (if weak) text would have increased the pressure on Tehran. By opening the bidding too high, we’ve simply revealed the lack of depth for our position.
14 - that and these statements that she keeps making to the media, which seem to have little purpose (other than a cack-handed effort to try and rally public opinion into anti-Iranian hostility).
I wasn’t around at the time, but how similar does this potentially feel to 1979 and Carter?
14 Steady on, David. Since he’s likely to be PM soon, it’s not a bad idea for him to find out something of what’s going on outside The Treasury.
(I only posted this because it made a change to disagree with you for once, however mildly.)
Possibly I’m dong Mike Smithson an injustice but hasn’t he - until today - always proclaimed that wretched Luntz panel as one of the most significant factors in Cameron’s success?
O/T France new polls
CSA
sarkozy 26 (=)
royal 24.5 (-1.5)
bayrou 19.5 (-1.5)
le pen 15 (+2)
2nd round sarkozy 52 (+2) royal 48 (-2)
Ipsos Tracking poll
sarkozy 31.5 (+0.5)
royal 25 (+0.5)
bayrou 17.5 (-0.5)
le pen 12 (-0.5)
2nd round
sarkozy 53.5/royal 46.5 (=)
sarkozy 49 (+0.5)/ bayrou 51 (-0.5)
CSA is becoming the most criticized pollster in this campaign, accused to “twist” its figures each week to find a story : the bayrou rise, the dead heat between the big two and now the le pen surge…
Ipsos is less criticized (and less quoted in the press) because of its daily basis. Its results are by far the best for sarkozy, especially in the first round (probably closer to raw data than other pollsters). the trend concerning a bayrou/sarkozy second round is quite neat and shows the socialist message “bayrou is right-wing” is beginning to settle in left-wing voters’ minds.
Update of my poll of polls
sarkozy 27,75 royal 25,83 bayrou 20,08 le pen 12.75
second round sarkozy 51.92 royal 48.08
[3] WRT Iain Dale’s article, I thought by far the most interesting point he made was that, in policy terms, all the parties are much of a muchness. That I think is why Nick Palmer is right to flag up the 30% of Tories whose second choice is UKIP/BNP - it won’t affect the way they vote at the next GE (Tory) but it does indicate that after he’s produced four years of Blairism with an Eton accent he may have some problems hanging on to them.
There is also a poll in the Telegrapgh WRT Scotland that would lead to the following result:
SNP - 46
Lab - 39
Lib Dems - 18
Tories - 18
Greens - 5
BrandIndex betting. We had a Gordon Brown buy this week. Given today’s YouGov poll which hasn’t showed anything movement to Gordon I’ve closed my position down - at a small profit!
18 Thanks Chris from Paris. I’d be lost on the French elections without you. As it is, I’m neutral on all but Sarko, who wins me £400. I’d say it’s looking likely I’ll collect although I havde been warned that French voters tend not to make their minds up until the last minute. Would you go along with that?
35 Labour and LD councillors defected to Tories since Cameron elected - Labour leader of Melton Mowbray Lab council group latest defection
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/article2405109.ece
Nick Palmer, O/T, but topical.
Isn’t the large Boots HQ actually in your constituency, rather than one of the neighbouring Nottingham ones?
Gordon Brown loves private equity firms, we know, but the deal for employees is rather rougher. So, how are you greeting the news that one of the most famous names associated with Nottingham will (most likely) be no longer publicly listed?
How many employees does Boots have in your constituency?
16. I can understand why it’s been done politically (and I don’t mean in party terms, but as PM training), but I’d be interested to know how it’s been justified as government expenditure, unless any member of the cabinet can up and off to Iraq and Afghanistan should the mood take them.
We’re supposed to have a civil service which is impartial - and that includes not making decisions about who the next PM is likely to be (with the exception of the leader of the opposition, who has a constitutional position as Shadow PM). So while many people know that Brown is likely to be the next PM, that shouldn’t really have any bearing on funding this sort of trip.
Besides, we still (theoretically) have cabinet government. Brown as PM would have his own Foreign Secretary and Defence Secretary; he doesn’t need to do all the jobs himself. And of course if Blair used the cabinet as it’s meant to be, all the members of it would be better briefed on matters outside their own brief - including the situation facing the forces in those countries anyway.
IA 19 - that was what I was going to say.
With all three parties clustered round the centre and declining voting as further proof, it has increasingly struck me that large swathes of voters are no longer caught in any of the major party’s net. Hitchens represents a range of opinion I hear more regularly than anything else - “the world has gone to the dogs party”. UKIP are their natural home, but UKIP = “Brewery in piss up organise could not a”
Can’t stand PH myself but he represents an opinion which is in effect unrepresented.
23 In the same period there have been at least 10 Conservative councillors defecting from Conservative to LibDem and more to Independents . Don’t know of any Con to Lab defections though .
22- yes indeed a part of the electorate makes its mind up during the last week or so.
the classic consequence of this was that supposedly “big” candidates got less votes than announced by the polls because a part of their electorate chose at the last minute to “send a message” by voting for small or extreme candidates.
one big question this year is to know if that will happen again, after the trauma of 2002, where the left-wing voters’ dispersion paved the way to Jospin’s elimination in the first round. The lesson has been learnt on the left and this is the reason I still think Royal will make it to the second round.
The right-wing vote is a bit more unpredictable : pollsters have to evaluate how much of people saying they support sarkozy will in fact vote le pen (raw data is generally around 35% sarkozy 7 le pen and is corrected in published figures as something like 28% sarkozy 14 le pen). Sarkozy’s job is to convince enough of them that the “useful vote” is a vote for him (le pen being sure to lose in the second round). I think the fact that he appears less favourite (with a small lead over royal in the first round) is good for this message : he does not appear a shoo-in for the second round which is useful for him.
But remember, our election has two very different rounds of voting, even in the way voters think and decide their vote : first round is a question of choice and adhesion to a candidate, second round is more a question of choice BETWEEN candidates, which is in fact easier. Therefore, paradoxically, 2nd round vote intentions are far more stable than first round ones. In fact, since 1974, there has never been any suspense concerning the eventual winner of the second round.
23 - No mention of how many Cons or Labour have gone over to the Lib Dems, I would say as many as 10 so all square.
As for Laws and Clegg this is just bolloc*s, as Laws said when asked “why” he would not defect he said simply “because I’m not a Tory” nuff said.
Put it this way for those of you who support Football or Rugby teams would you jump ship to another team just because yours where not winning? Not a bloody chance, you would be laughed at and not taken seriously by your “new” team’s fans and ridiculed by your “old” teams fans.
Simplistic argument (but most non-political junkies like us prefer that) but one with which I have had much success with explaining why more often that not “serious politicians don’t just defect. It would not be in the long term a good move and no matter how much we in the Lib Dems may want power unlike you Tories(bless you) we would not sell our souls for it.
From Howard to Cameron in under a year, my God it takes a teenage girl longer to chose what to wear in the morning that it does you lot completely changing your 30 year+ political views…sad really and while a defection may might you feel better about yourself (and justify both Rik’s and Ian Dales rantings) I really would not hold your breath!
(Maybe Laws was in talks to see if he could get Osborne to defect?)
28 Thanks CfP, that’s pretty much the way I was reading it. Sounds like I can safelt stick with my present position, which is pretty cosy all round.
30 - If Osborne came across I WOULD defect!!
25 DH
Ouch! I asked for that.
That’ll teach me to disagree with you, specially this early in the morning.
Time for a shower.
29 - Very few by comparison. WHat these figures dont take account of are the Lab and Lib Dem Cllrs who resign as Cllrs and then join the Conservatives - several of whom i am aware of in the couple of COuncils I know well!
You may think it is like supporting a football team and for many activists it is but in some areas the Lib Dems are very good at recruiting the lady who delivers the Parish magazine to stand for them, on the basis that she is “helping the community”. There is no strong party affiliation and when she subsequently discovers what some of us know that many Lib Dems are really like, she may then be open to crossing. A good example is the Woodley Town Council in Wokingham, where the Lib Dems hold all the seats. Many of their Cllrs stood only on the basis that they were serving the community and would not be opposed. Now this year the Conservatives are contesting most of the seats and some are having second thoughts, as they dont wish to face an open election.
A personal friend of mine in Bournemouth was a Conservative, then defected to the Lib Dems and has now defected back to Conservative again. It happens!
29 Seems there are now 2 rival Conservative groups in Stoke as well as in Tendring with half the membership ( 17 apparently ) in Stoke South resigning from the party . The link is too long for me to post but is on the thisisstaffordshire.co.uk site .
29 35-10 = 25 so not quite all square but I’m sure you could produce a bar chart to show otherwise.
your second point tells us that no matter what the LD policy is on anything it is right and you will stick by your team. You then go on to say no LD would sell their soul to get power. This hasn’t been true in Scotland or large parts of the country, where LDs participate in coalition. In fact it’s a core part of LD tactics to tack and trim their principles to gain power. It’s not ’selling your soul’ therefore except if it’s another party.
You either clearly don’t understand the party you profess such undying devotion for or you are a typical hard core LD activist; easily the most unpleasant people in mainstream politics and typified by ColinW
3.”Headline figure shows 39-32-17 (compared to the previous YouGov, Tories and LDs no change, Labour 1% down - the Telegraph compares to an earlier YouGov). ”
Nick, I think that compared to last yougov Lab and LD are up 1% and Con unchanged (it was 39/31/16 last week)
The yougov Scottish poll is
SNP 35%
Lab 29%
Con 14%
LD 13%
List vote
SNP 33
Lab 27
LD 15
Con 12
33. Hope it didn’t come across as too harsh - as you say, it is early! No harm meant.
36 Your point about tribal loyalty no doubt applies equally to yourself and other Conservative posters on here . No matter how corrupt and incompetent the Major government was you still held your nose and went into the polling booth to vote for them .
39. Does the Major govt feel that incompetent and corrupt compared to the last 10 years ? Not really..
40 To those who remember it well - YES
36. It’s more than “a core part of LD tactics to tack and trim their principles to gain power” - it’s a fundamental part of their beliefs.
PR requires coalitions or minority goverments; neither can implement their full manifesto on which they fought an election without the support of a majority in their active electorate (I know it’s possible to get a majority with under 50% support, but that’s not in line with the principles of PR). As PR is more beneficial to smaller parties, the liklihood of any one party gaining 50% of the votes is reduced still further. So parties have to amend their policies after an election to gain power, which is one of the main reasons why I oppose PR.
39 - the major government was in no way “corrupt”! A few individuals may have been but it did not pervade the entire body politic as it does now under Labour.
Did Major politicise the civil service? No!
Was Major the subject of Police enquiries? No!
Did Major change policy in return for £1m donations? No!
Lets get some perspective here. Blair has taken British politics to depths not plumbed since the last Liberal government!
41 - To those who also remember it just as well - NO
36 - Kingbongo your last line sums your party up very well, thinking others are “easily the most unpleasant people in mainstream politics” according to who, you?
You really think Jon Blogs on the street will just fall in love with you guys because of Cameron? Your comment shows just how unpleasent you lot still are, below all that Cameron smarm are the same old Tories, hateful and thinking they are better than others, slowly people are catching on to this.
Now as for your comment about “sticking to your team” you make it sound dirty when in fact it should be viewed as strength.
What do you do if you disagree with a family member or friend, just walk out (typical selfish attitude of your type) or stay and try to work something out, some common ground and go forward as a team. Now I now you guys don’t give a flying monkey about anyone but yourselves but you comment really does reflect badly on you.
As for Scotland and some council, again it’s working things out like a grown up for the best of the community or country and not just picking up your ball and going home. We may compromise but never just shift our position as the Tories have to a complete (although only skin deep) position.
You slag me off for believing in my team and not being afraid to talk to others if that what voters have decided (as in Scotland) that no one party will win outright. In my eyes those are mature and responsible positions to take, you obviously change with the wind as I say just because of your lust for power.
Lastly my point on numbers was just Lib Dem to Tory and the other way, do you have exact figures? …..thought not.
41. In the Major govt any “corruption” was by the bottom feeders at the lower end of the food chain. Tone’s goverment stinks from the head down (and the heads wife).
40 If the whole of the last 10 years had been as corrupt as the last Major government then Labour would not have been reelects in 2001 and 2005 . Major may not have been subject to police enquiries but colleagues of his were and went to jail .
Have any Tories defected to UKIP in the last two years?
10 & 14.
I’d have to agree. I posted the other day that just as the Iranians looked to backing out, the UK government seem to decide to get bolshy and that I nearly had kittens.
The resolution at the UN was badly handled, and it will be seen as a British setback which is really not what we need.
There appears to be tactical mistakes being made by the government though it is hard to say.
There will be those that will see the delayed release of one of the sailors may also be seen as evidence of poor British tactics. It is hard to know to whether the Iranians were always going to pull the stunt of offerings something then taking it away or whether they were genuinely miffed at the British response. Im guessing it was the former.
Number 1 priority is to get the people out and No2 to ensure that it doesnt happen again. There are signs that we have been making some errors so far in a situation where certainly some elements in Iran are trying to get a way out. I couldn’t condemn the government because this is a difficult business and there is no perfect way of handling this. The UN resolution efforts, however, look like a joke. I woke up this morning and just shook my head.
What seems to be emerging is a lot of relief that the British troops didnt shoot it out, a thank god because who knows where we woudl be. That is a very stark indication to me that there is a very real and substantive fear of a major phyiscal flare up with the Iranians rather than a theoretical what if. I that is so, as much as it pains me to say it, we need our people out of Iraq and as quickly as safely possible. We are in a more vulnerable position than the Americans, we just don’t have the ability to support the forces on the ground as they do.
46 - Jonathan Aitkin wasn’t a ‘bottom feeder’ - well maybe he was in prison, I couldn’t speculate - he was a Cabinet Minister!!
The Iain Dale piece is pathetic. Tories have lost control of at least three Councils this year because of defections. Every other week we seem to hear about a Tory peer flirting with UKIP.
39. I see we are back to name calling again today.
Out here in the sticks, (soon to move to an even more in the sticks place) most Tories are more UKIP than Tory. The only reason they’ll be voting Tory, is to kick out Labour, but their views are much closer to UKIP than DC’s Tory party.
33 / PtheP and DH. There is no need for PtP to aplogise. DH is being, very unusually for him, a bit up his arse as it were.
GB is clearly number 2 in the govt. The war is a major cost. he has every right to want some idea of where the money is going. He is the FD of UK PLC. He is also the putative MD of UK PLC.
I have al;ways thought the notion of a politically neutral civil service was a tosh created by the now deposed ruling classes to ensure that who ever came into power, they were still looked after because “politically neutral” means “staus quo”. The distinction between party politics and government is a notional one in academics minds that should not exist
34 & 42 - Just read back what you have written and then think why people like Laws or Clegg would not come across to you.
You slag off our party like we are some lower bread, scum or worse.
Who the hell do you think you are? You both personally what have you done to make the country a better place?
“It’s a fundamental part of their beliefs” Dave says, well 2 things DAVE. First at least we have them, the Tories under Cameron have proved they will say anything for power, something you have accused us off many times.
Secondly “their” we are not some cult group and like any political party different people will believe different things.
Again unlike the Tories we don’t try to hide away/gag people at council level who still are working on the Howard manifesto.
Why such hate for the Lib Dems? Usually this is caused by jealousy, is that why you are trying to nick so many of our clothes?
Anyone thinking voting Tory need only to read posts like yours and others and they will never mark X for you again. Trust me I have logged on to the site to show family, friends and workmates what eager little beavers you are and not one found the over aggressive posturing a turn on.
Many have said it before by Mike may as well call this site Torybetting.com, everyone else is shouted down or bullied. I would say you are like an infestation…but that would be lowering myself to your level.
52 I presume you meant to refer to post 36 rather than post 39 .
56. Well maybe post 55. was a better example still
Interesting article Mike, I also echo Ben’s comments at 1 above.
Re: Brown in Afghanistan. It couldn’t be that with bad polls and a negative reaction to the budget, he’s doing one of his disappearing acts again?
I woke up to the “Today” programme and on “Yesterday in Parliament” the reporter made a point of saying how dishevelled Brown looked in the Commons yesterday when defending his budget; his hair was uncombed and his mauve tie was all askew.
I do feel that Brown and his campaign is starting to unravel.
[41][44] Well, I think I remember Major’s goverment as well as anyone, and I’m rather inclined to agree with both of you. Both Major and Blair, in rather different ways, promised a lot more honesty than they could deliver. I’m looking for a politician who will openly admit that politics is a dirty business & tells me I’m just being unrealistic in expecting clean government. I think I might be looking for some time.
The interesting thing about the yougov poll is the second choice amongst Tory voters. I hate to use terms like left and right, ‘cos their so imprecise, but even split left and right. Shows what a strange coalition DC is creating: can it be sustained?
Chill out all - its Friday.
At this point I don’t think we should second-guess what needs to be done about the kidnapped sailors: there is too much behind the scenes to be clear what the potential alternatives are. This isn’t to say the Government’s policy is good or bad, just that it’s difficult to judge from the limited information available.
24: Yes, Gwwynfa, looks as though a Boots takeover is now likely - management have recommended the latest offer, though an improved offer from other quarters is not impossible. The company is 2/3 in Nottingham, 1/3 in Broxtowe, and has significant numbers of staff in my constituency, though without access to comppany personnel files I obviously don’t know how many. The current bid is being led by a senior management figure (who brought his own company into merger with Boots a while back) and he’s said he wants to keep the management team in place, so although any ownership change has to cause concern, the implications are not yet clear or necessarily bad: I’ll obviously be wanting an early meeting with whoever emerges as the winner.
27: There have been defections in the last year from Independent to Labour in North Notts (there was a big surge of Indies there a few years ago but they’ve had difficulty staying together since they’re, well, independent).
Is the biggest mover in this poll not the “forced choice” question naming Brown v Cameron - Brown down 4% since the budget ?!?!
56 - just for the record I didn’t vote for Major and have voted both Conservative and Labour in the past; I usually make a personal vote based on my opinion of the local MP in a GE and usually independent in locals if there’s one to vote for.
As for Big Mak’s inane ramblings I can’t be bothered trawling through all the venomous spittle that passes for comment - but as a final point - yes I do believe hardcore LD activists are easily the most unpleasant group in mainstream politics and unlike Labour they can’t even throw a decent party.
John Wheatley will all and any other candidates for the Labour leadership have the same tour of the battle fronts at tax payers expense once they declare their candidacy?
i don’t think DH’s point is a minor one. The government seem to be to confusing the Labour party with government.
59. Quite right Charlotte, the man clearly lacks class and breeding, as the appalling nose picking incident demonstrates. Do the public really want such a slob as PM? I think the answer will be a resounding ‘non’.
63. How about getting them out, we can start there.
Presumably eighty plus years of consistent electoral failure means that Liberals are a little paranoid, but the personal abuse they tend to dish here, Colin W and Zebidee etc is excessive.
BTW as for a party with a corrupt “top” will old Etonian Thorpe ever reveal where the money came from to shoot that poor dog?
Took me a while, but worked out what a lower bread was (Big Mak 55).
Not the bottom of the loaf but a breed
Looking at Mike’s chart and the forthcoming Labour leadership contest I womder if Gordon will suffer same massive leakage of support as David Davies?
68. The government’s pathetic efforts on this crisis are depressingly reminiscent of the ‘Cod War’ in the 1970s. Labour’s reflexive cowardice toward foreign aggression, plus the gross incompetence of the Foreign Secretary make Britain look hopelessly weak.
72, So how would YOU deal with the crisis?
72
As I pointed out yesterday Tory Government’s do this sort of crisis so much better
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leila_Khaled
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yvonne_Fletcher
They never give in to terrorism, or rogue states do they!
70 Icarus. Wrong. We are after all dealing with LibDems here …. it wasn’t meant to be “lower bread” but lower beard !!
……………………
So as not to inflame the thread further on the merits of the Major Premiership … I’ll say no more !!
65 - “As for Big Mak’s inane ramblings I can’t be bothered trawling through all the venomous spittle that passes for comment - but as a final point - yes I do believe hardcore LD activists are easily the most unpleasant group in mainstream politics and unlike Labour they can’t even throw a decent party.”
Redemption and damnation in one paragraph, have you thought about voting Monster Raving Looney party? I hear they throw a great party.
Goupillon — the analogy between GB and DD is not precise. GB is a far more senior figure in party and government than DD ever was.
60 One can live with corrupt but competent. The problem is with corrupt and incompetent.
61 Yes it is interesting. I don’t doubt for one moment that among Conservative supporters, 30% would opt for further right parties as their second choice, while 23% would go for the Lib Dems - although I think the latter is much more likely at local than at Parliamentary level. Next year’s GLA elections will give some indication of where second preferences really lie among London Conservative voters.
What I find implausible is just 3% of Labour supporters giving the BNP as their second choice. Last year, 22 out of 28 BNP gains came from Labour. While I don’t doubt that in many cases, the BNP will have hoovered up the residual Conservative vote in those wards, they couldn’t have won without significant switching from Labour. Perhaps there’s self-censorship here from Labour supporters.
****BREAKING NEWS******
British Primeminister Tony Blair criticized for seeking UN help.
Panned by press for not going to war.
EWR, there is only so much that can be done, the key issue is doing the possible correctly. They may be doing that but I’m having worries that they are not. So far the UN resolution is the first hard evidence of a tactical error, otherwise, what appears to be wrong could actually be right.
There is also a commander on a frigate who needs to be asked questions why he sat there and did nothing.
79. Wise up.
Very OT, but some peebles might be interested in this bizarre coincidence, explained in my blog:
http://toffeewomble.blogspot.com/2007/03/i-just-died-in-baghdad.html
Sorry for the Benedict White moment, normal service will soon be resumed.
54/55. Hmm. Seems a bit hot in here today - apologies if I’ve contributed to it inadvertently.
John - One of the dangers of long periods of one party rule - first the Conservatives and now Labour - is that the civil service becomes too close to the government. I do accept that there are dangers of going too far to the other extreme, but if we don’t keep the tradition of neutrality then any incoming government will have (even more) justified suspicions of the mandarins. Hasn’t Lord Butler said that he now thinks he went too far in letting Blair get his own way in 1997 with the way he ran his government - a way which didn’t allow for enough discussion or adequate administration. These failings were crucial in the way the decisions were taken to go to war in Iraq. At the time, he wanted to prove that the civil service was not a Conservative machine. Anyway, if it helps, I was probably a little over the top in my initial post at [14] which sparked off this mini-thread; my concern is that GB is being treated as PM-in-waiting - perhaps that was taking it a bit far.
Of course under PR, it’s perfectly possible to have even longer lasting governments in coalition, which brings me nicely on to Mak’s rather intemperate post.
The ‘their’ you take objection to was a perfectly good pronoun to use when replying to a post and referencing a third party plural. There’s nothing derogatory about it.
Still, if I might reply to your direct question. What have I done to make the country a better place? Well, last night I was at a school governors’ meeting - the school in question is an inner-city comprehensive with a 90%+ enthnic minority intake; it has a record as on of the top 200 in the country at academic improvement. I’ve been on the governing body since before it first opened its doors to pupils so have had some influence in its development. I was also a director of Shipley Housing Trust for a few years, the company which took over the council housing stock on transfer from the council (a debate in which I seconded the motion and spoke in favour) - that’s now delivered £200m worth of improvements to people living in some of the poorest areas of the district. I’m also 5th team captain (I know!) of a local cricket club, a team which does much to bring youngsters into the game.
What do you do, apart from hide behind a pseudonym?
80
If I had been the commander of the Frigate, I would have followed the same course of inaction. Far better, that your men/women suffer probably a short period of detention, (hopefully) than be dead. Of the two evils the Captain chose better.
81, You wise up.
The commander of the frigate did sit there and do nothing. Read the facts first. Not only would taking action have resulted in the death of our personel who were in a no-win situation, but also the fact that we would now be at war with Iran if that had occured.
76 well I’m much more likely to vote for them than the Joseph Rowntree Trust Party that you belong to.
86. Shouldn’t that be the Joseph Rowntree (formerly Michael Brown) Party?
84. We just don’t know that do we. Wer also dont know if procedures were followed correctly or there was poor mission planning or observation that allowed 15 heavily armed troops to be I assume surrounded and captured. Have no doubt there is an inquiry going on into it now.
83. David you have to understand that anyone who isn’t on the left (or appears not to be anyway) is essentially a money grabbing bastard who has no social conscience.
That fellow Millipede, who some on here think is going to do a kamikaze against Gordon is on Any Questions on the Home Service tonight. Stand by your Betfairs in case he repeats that he will not stand unless Gordon fails to return fom Afghanistan.
I am surprised the conspiracy theorists amongst us has not grasped the real reason that Tony is sending Gordon to such unhealthy places as Inverness and Afghanistan.
89. Lol !
85. Do you know if he was right? No one does yet because we havent had the results of any investigation.
He or others may well be panned for poor responses, poor mission planning and poor oversight.
And no we would probably not be at war with Iran. Yes a very real possibility of a flare up but a war, doubtful.
88. Sorry - you’re quite right: I forgot my place. It won’t happen again. Now, where’s my whip?
90 - OT Jamie - what do reckon about the cricket this afternoon? England to win (albeit unconvincingly) in my mind. Thoughts?
83 - David as many(if not the majority) I use a pseudonym so not going to explain that.
I accept what you list is indeed worthy and I have no problem with that but still the attitude of many Tory posters is “now your place” to the rest of us, most unpleasent.
It seems you have done much to help others(I will hold back from doing the same, protecting ones identity and all that) I just wish others posting took time to do what you do and less to sit and slag off their opposition….without having your CV so to speak.
I say most but not all, I fear some of our younger and keener posters use the “shout louder” method which I on (many)occasions get sucked in.
I will also accept that when you used “their” it was not ment in a derogatory way, but again but many posters it certainly is.
SeanT - very moving. I hope you will write to his family.
83 David H. An uncharacteristic barb at the end there.
There are many regular posters here who choose for one reason or other to remain anon. Several MPs, peers and party functionaries post here anon and are more open accordingly.
Quality not anonymity should be the priority, but the two are certainly not mutually exclusive.
Re. 72, ‘Labour’s reflexive cowardice towards foreign aggression’. Like Ernest Bevin helping to establish NATO, presumably.
I think Iain Dale’s revelation that Gideon Osborne was serious in his approach to David Laws shows just how incompetent Osborne is.
A two minute trawl of Google would have shown him that Laws was about the least likely defector.
It also shows the inate prejudices of the Tory party. Just because a man’s made a million or two by the time he’s thirty doesn’t mean he is a Conservative.
One assumes Osborne only stays in a job because he know’s where the skeletons are buried…
The Iranian’s still have an airforce, aircraft could have been on standby, a Frigate in those waters, quite close to land, would have been easy meat from air attack. We could be in a much more difficult situation than we are in now!!
82 - well SeanT you can be a nice guy, why not try it more often.
Mmmmm, lets see, 15 British servicemen gunned down by Iranian forces in cold blood. I cant think of a better excuse for GW to sink the Iranian Navy, that sounds like a war to me.
WCCrick - England 1.07 to beat Ireland. They wont be that if they lose a wicket or two early. I’m waiting for the toss - maybe a good day for some in game trading.
95. Well, thanks - if that’s the right word. I’m actually thinking of doing a longer Telegraph magazine type piece on it - on this brave guy and his life, and his death, and the poignant coincidence of our names. It would be a unique prism with which to view the war.
Sometimes it’s the personal that brings home the political…
Anyhow. Enough maundering! Back to the memoirs.
Buckinghamshire County Council-Stoke Poges & Farnham Common
Con 875
Ind 283
LD 280
Lab 89
Plenty of armchair Admirals here this morning ….
Not forgetting the site has it’s own rum, sodomy and lash expert, namely Admiral Penketh.
On a purely technical note the reason the frigate wasn’t closer to the action is that it would have run aground in the shallow waters !!
99. Coldstone, in fact we would have had much more awareness of exactly what was out there than the Iranians.
There isnt a patch of airspace in that region that isn’t being monitored right now. Secondly, the Iranians have holes in their systems that the Americans could largely walk through.
The reality is that there are questions to be asked of the commander and those responsible for operation oiversight and planning. No one has said he was wrong, yet. What has been said is that questions need asking. They may have got their response right but they may not, equally there planning,execution and oversight may well have been inadequate.
96. Jack, it wasn’t a barb at you or the others who post anonymously. On occassion, I do myself when I’ve something to say which may not be good for me personally were it under my own name. And I accept that that reason applies to many others as well.
It’s just that I’d been asked a specific question about my commitment to society. The points I made can all be checked out as I post under my own name (mostly); indeed, they could be checked without my having posted at all. By contrast, I can’t return the question to Big Mak (whose post at [94] I welcome), or at least in any way that can be evidenced. For that reason, I didn’t think it was a very fair question.
98 - mAybe its because he’s a good shadow-chancellor….
Sorry i couldn’t resist that!
105. Jack it isnt a question of its phyiscal closeness its a question of its actions & procedures.
We weren’t there and hindsight is wonderful but how far away were these Iranian boats when they were first spotted? Couldn’t he have put the frigate between them and the boats our guys were in?
If the Iranians were 1 mile in Iraqi waters why didn’t he arrest them?
108. Christ, thats a 50-50 bet.
101 That reminds me of the theory that somehow the Conservatives engineered the Argentinian invasion of the Falklands.
Jack W should have read your bit (105) before posting my nonsense. Still no reason not to have him shot on his quarterdeck pour encourage les autres.
We are going to have to face up to this Iranian regime at some point - this crisis illustrates that perfectly. The Iranians have got the message from the shilly shallying about their nuclear programme that Britain is a soft touch and can be pushed around. They would not have dared to execute such an aggressive act against US forces.
I think I see a logical fallacy on the loose.
Iran kidnaps our troops at gun point on British naval vessels in Iraqi waters and holds them hostage, parades them on Tv, forces them to write propaganda letters and refuses to release them and their equipment and this doesn’t mean Iran is at war with us?
But if our people had resisted kidnap at gun point while conducting UN business that would have meant that we were at war with Iran?
I cannot judge, not having been there and not being a military person. But for me the situation raises some questions that might be asked in a inquiry that surely must be held at some time in the future, and raises questions about the level of armed force that we and the UN in the Gulf need.
One of those questions relates to the rules of engagement being appropriate for the mission and the forces available being suitable for the mission.
Would the Iranians have backed off if they had seen or been led to expect an aggressive response from the boarding party or the accompanying warships? Was the response dictated by the capacity to resist? If so why are we there, putting our forces in harms way, without the necessary capacity?
Would the Iranians have tried this with the US navy? I think we can guess that the answer is ‘no’. So are we asking our people to take on a mission they are not equipped or prepared for?
Saying that it was wise to surrender as it saved lives is certainly true and I would certainly not suggest our people went down in some suicidal last stand. But the other way of looking at this is that a military force exists to resist aggression not to give in to it. If it is not possible to do that with the forces available then this might all prove to be a strategic blunder, an overstretch too far.
The fact that DD’s speech (admittedly not that great) bombed was because the media painted it as an unmitigated disaster. That’s why he lost the leadership.
.10 Iranians were in fast speed boats, the Cornwall was someway off without visual contact. They were in and out within minutes and certainly the Cornwall could not have moved in time and as pointed out earlier she was in shallow waters.
110 Icarus. Stick to bar charts not sea charts !!
82/103 Sean T: Just like to agree with others - that was a moving piece. If you do a longer piece for the Telegraph please let us know. I often don’t agree with you but I’m always envious of your writing abilty.
87 Yellow Peril: Are you ever going to write a constructive comment here. You do come over as a very bitter person.
Although Kingbongo made the same point it was in the context of a lively discussion and he/she always expresses views and counter arguments. I have never seen you make one constructive point ever. Why not?
I agree with the general tone here re the Captives. Yes the frigate captain, or bosun, or whatever he is, was probably right in the precise moment not to intervene, but the general tenor throughout the whole mess has been one of shabby timidity from the UK and our Labour government. The frigate didn’t attempt to save the soldiers. The soldiers didn’t attempt to resist capture. The government started flapping its pinafores like an outraged Victorian spinster when the hostages were paraded.
It’s pathetic. And Witan is right - the Iranians would not have dared do this to the US Navy, instead they guessed, correctly, that we are a much softer touch. And that’s because our pitiful apology for a government, which would like to make the world a better place morally, hasn’t the heart, brain or the guts to actually will the means.
So instead it sends out brave men and women to die doing their stupid pointless bidding: with cheapskate equipment and idiotic lefty fighting rules and lawyers breathing over their khaki necks if they so much as punch an Arab on the nose.
It’s rubbish. This is a rubbish war, run by a rubbish government, for rubbish reasons. And our brave soldiers are being treated - like rubbish.
120 - SeanT while not wanting to make politics too much of the situation when you say “It’s rubbish. This is a rubbish war, run by a rubbish government, for rubbish reasons. And our brave soldiers are being treated - like rubbish” you do have to remember that your party past and present leader did vote with Blair.
No if’s or buts about if we knew then what we know now, they got it wrong and while you may all hate the Lib Dems you have to at least say on that we got it spot on, which for once is a shame that we did.
120. Quite. After the Falklands, I think many of us had hoped the days of craven British governments cowering before aggressive dictatorships were over. Labour are rewinding the reel back to the 1970s.
gingeral @ 116 — no, DD’s price drifted while he was still speaking. DD lost the leadership because he had not taken the elementary precaution of preparing for the most important speech of his career.
.22 So EWR, answer my earlier question, how would you resolve the crisis?
“His (George Osborne) recent trip to the Arctic Circle with Nick Clegg may not have resulted in a defection, but eight hours a night in an igloo can hardly have failed to bring them closer”
I thought this an interesting clip from Iain Dales article in the Telegraph about ‘political defections’. I wondered why eight hours in an igloo with a Tory would be any more likely to lead to a defection in that direction than the other? In fact when it comes to matters carnal-if that’s what he meant- the Lib Dems have got themselves quite a reputation for market leadership!
(SeanT-interesting and uncharacteristically humble article. You must be a Gemini)
121. I have never ever denied that. Indeed I have posted more than once that, while I may dislike the Lib Dems for a number reasons - such as your unthinking Europhila - You Guys were absolutely spot on when it came to Iraq, while the other parties, including the Tories, were tragically and comprehensively wrong.
For this the Lib Dems, and the other smaller antiwar parties, like the SNP, deserve all the credit going. Meanwhile the Tories deserve brickbats, and the Labour Cabinet deserve active prosecutions for corporate manslaughter.
I do, sometimes, suspect the motives of some of the antiwar people - the Stop-the-War pseudo-Islamist Respect bunch for instance, they turn my stomach. But I don’t think such motives tainted Lib Dem Opposition to the conflict. I think Charles Kennedy saw the war for what it was, from the off: a grotesque geopolitical mistake, founded on lies and vanity, that would lead to disaster. And so it has proved.
There. How fair is that!
78 - My experience is that the BNP takes non-voters and anti-Labour voters from Labour areas.
There is evidence they do well amoung young men, who are very unlikely to otherwise vote.
No PA results yet but story thus:
Labour’s hopes were boosted ahead of May’s Welsh Assembly election as it routed a Plaid Cymru challenge to hold a marginal council seat.
There was a swing of nearly 10% to the party at Treorchy, Rhondda Cynon Taf County Borough, south Wales, in contrast to its poor opinion poll showings in Scotland.
Plaid won the ward’s two other seats in the 2004 main elections.
The latest result comes after a Labour gain earlier this month from independent at Caerphilly.
Tories defended the overall control at Basingstoke and Deane Borough, Hampshire, which they gained in December but there was a swing to Liberal Democrats in the tiny Rooksdown ward.
120 Commodore seanT. Might be a good idea prior to you entering Def Con Rant 5 to note that the personnel involved are sailors and marines and not soldiers.
And if you think our military are shy of placing a “punch (on) an Arab” where appropriate you really have lost the plot.
On the hostage affair, I’m sad to say that I feel totally separated from it. Long ago I’d left Iraq and related actions to those who have cocked the whole thing up, I can’t do anything about it and, just as it is useless to apologise for something that happened hundreds of years ago, I can’t find any pity, anger or anything any more.
Dangerous I suppose for it to get to this stage, I’m just so inured to having my views unreflected that even the lives of others are as though they are now seen through a one way mirror.
Not very political sorry, just feeling a little more poetic today……..
116. Yes, let’s be honest, it was an uninspiring speech poorly delivered but far from a disaster. The fact was that by that point the media had got their alternative in Cameron and there just wasn’t the will to report the speech fairly impartially. It was a bit of a hatchet job, really, when you think back.
Ladbrokes, “The magic sign”, have shortened Miliband in from 7/1 to 11/2.
121 SeanT isn’t a tory he’s a libertarian.
whilst people’s contributioms to the good of society are being judged by you I would say my 10 hour days as a teacher are contributing to society, I feel my voluntary church work probably does a bit. Whether this outweighs the contribution I made when I was earning 4 times as much as I do now (teaching is a wealth reducing vocation but very rewarding) I’m not sure. So come on, David and I have come clean how have you made the country a better place?
SeanT re your piece about your namesake How will you explain the embarrassing fact that you were googling your own name? Do you have friend who can look you up and tell you about it?
63. Ahh Nick this gives me a warm nostalgic feeling thinking back to his very first bit of spin all those years ago as a fresh face candidate in broxtowe!
IIRC from a leaflet - “I work in the international pharmaceutical industry, one of Broxtowes biggest employers”
marvelous, but forgot to mention his employment was with one of Boots competitors - start as you mean to go on !
129. Er, Jack, note that I ironically called the the captain “a bosun”. This was a subtle and deliberate hint - that I know zip about Royal Naval affairs, and the military in general. I bow of course to your superior knowledge.
But I think you are wrong on the “punching on the nose” thing, and it may be you who is out of touch. I believe the ceaseless round of politically correct showtrials of British soldiers, for just trying to do their job, is surely having an effect on UK military morale in Iraq. It would certainly affect me if I was a soldier in Basra.
What must it be like, facing a howling mob of Shiite rioters, knowing that if you put a foot wrong you could be dragged through the courts, and even if you are acquitted, the Guardian readers will be tutting at you forever after?
It stinks. The government has put these boys into the firing line, with the wrong equipment, and the wrong rules, to do an impossible, stupid and pointless job. And when they make human errors they get arrested.
Arrest T Blair Esq, if anyone.
Re 129, JackW ““punch (on) an Arab”
Did he really say that? the Iranians won’t be impressed, there not Arabs!