Who’ll stand aside - Meacher or McDonnell?
April 27th, 2007
The main development in the Labour leadership this morning is the above story about a possible deal between the rival left-wing candidates, Michael Meacher and John McDonnell that only one of them would stand in the coming contest.
For punters the question is which. For whoever it is then the chances are that that person will get the nominations and be in a position to challenge. Almost certainly the agreed candidate would see a tightening of their price and that means there might be a profit opportunity.
Currently Meacher is at 199/1 and McDonnell is at 249/1. This is hard to read but McDonnell has been in the race for much longer and, unlike Meacher, did oppose the Iraq war.
No doubt we will know soon.
What do you think?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
If Bevan could have forseen this would he have walked out of Cabinet in 1950?
That’s news. A contest.
Labour’s hard Left by definition have lost the plot. To choose Meacher would be bad even for them. At least McD has the virtue of being consistently wrong, which will appeal to that constituency
McDonnel or Meacher; or Gordon Brown.
That’s it is it; the best Labour can muster.
How very exciting, no wonder their poll rating is flying so high.
Doesn’t seem to have moved the Betfair market £2 only matched at 1.09 and £217 available to back at 1.10 and £125 to lay at 1.11.
As some one who has made a few bob betting on Betfair in play horse racing (better on jump racing) as the winner at comes in (I like about 1.4), I should be taking this. But am happy to have a nice profit on Gordon at no risk.
Heard somewhere that Tony is going to resign next week to give publicity to the party for the election. Sounds a bit unlikely to me.
Parliament now talking about not giving dogs non-lethal electric shocks. I agree.
5. If the ABG candidate didn’t have to raise 44 signatures I would expect some trading price movement - but that is a big hurdle to even getting in the race.
Leave Meacher alone. This man is awesome, a colossus. Men want to be him, women want to be with him. Future generations will be telling their grandchildren about this moment.
I can’t believe that either will get on the ballot paper to be honest.
The best bets are on the Spreadfair 10-25 market where both Meacher and McDonnell are on 2. So if either is the only challenger you would be certain to win [(runner-up price 10) - (your buy level - 2)] multiplied by your stake. So its a 4-1 chance with either which don’t seem bad odds.
My guess is that it would be McDonnell simply because of the Iraq war.
What an ideal situation for Gordon?
5. Its the owners that need the electric shocks….
9. A contest against a lame opponent with no chance…and he might just get it.
Morning
I am intrigued by the Tory poll ratings. Rather surprised there is a dip across all polls (and just a five point gap to Lab on the latest is barely believable). I doubt it’s too do with a slightly sticky patch for national leadership. Perhaps more to do with the greater visibility of LD and other parties in the run-up to these near-GB wide elections. Seems no more than 40% would like to return to Tory rule. The future seems rosier for multi-party politics and, hence, a fairer voting system.
WA: Last nights/todays polls in Wales both show the same thing - but both were taken BEFORE the latest row about coalitions which can only have hurt Labour further.
I am not sure if Tony Blair’s resignation will have any impact on WA votes - especially as Rhodri Morgan has managed to sucessfully distance himself from Tony Blair.
A very interesting week ahead.
7
12 by fairer I assume you mean ‘ensure perpetual presence in government of Lib Dems’
GB’s only weakness to socialists is that, electorally, he could be seen to be ‘yesterday’s man’. Seeing as neither of the above candidates can address that issue, GB’s achilles heel (from his party’s view) will not be tested. So their putative leadership bid is immaterial. Scarcely worth a separate thread?
Here’s a mad thought.
Since the 50’s and the advent of TV - each election has been won by the best looking party leader, with Wilson and Heath being roughly equal in looks. As Cameron continues to need more of a comb over, should Labour stick with Brown or choose some pretty boy/girl.
Will be interesting to see how the voting public views a contest between Unelectable v Unelectable compared to the Tory contest of all the talents from across the Party in 2005. Does rather suggest that becoming Labour leader is viewed like being England football manager - the top job, but the hell would want it?
Sure to be Mcdonnell. Meacher has six too many houses for the taste of the aveage left-winger and then as Mike says there’s Iraq….and of course the libel case. All in all I reckon Tyson has a better chance!
re 14 No, I’m not an LD, never have been.
I said a while ago that I thought there might be some value in McDonnell and was laughed off the site.
He will beat Meacher to the nomination, not least because of Iraq, but also because he is more presentable. He will produce a raft of populist policies on trident, taxation etc - don’t underestimate these. Yes, he’ll get bashed by the Sun, but that isn’t as important as many think. He doesn’t talk like a Prescott class warrior and is the best spokesman the Labour Left has.
If Liberal Democrats get 20% of the votes they should get 20% of the MPs - no more!
I’ve just added a poll to the main article. Would McDonnell and Meacher working together be able to rustle up 44 nominations to challenge Gordon?
re 22 Nice innovation. Are several of us agreed it’s a YEs…or are there a number of ‘test’ votes?!
Mike, those Yougov numbers dont make sense! The percentages add up to 101% and the changes add up to +2… ??
I have just voted no - I am 10% of the votes!
But which 20%? The legs and ankles, the head or some random pieces of torso. Sorry not sure what I am on to day.
On a serious note, Meacher does not have a Snowflake5’s chance. As an ordinary Labour member I have been contacted more than once by the McDonnel road show. He has probably earned his chance. He has done all the work and only second to Gordon in the personal effort he has put into securing the support of members.
I still hope we have a right winger stand too. A second tier minister could seriously raise their profile - it must be an opportunity for the brave to grasp.
Meacher will win. He is a giant among statesmen, and has the backing of Conservative Home.
McDonnell has been beating the bushes since last summer, doesn’t have an Iraq vote hanging around his neck, so he’ll probably have more MPs behind him. On the other hand, according to a story in The Guardian last week, Brown doesn’t want ANY opposition and has his cronies browbeating MPs left and right.
Still, with the impending interest rate rise and the corresponding drop in Brown’s ratings, I’d bet McDonnell could get 44 signatures.
28. That will only encourage the awkward squad Kevin.
Its their lifeblood to appear to rebel.
26 “I still hope we have a right winger stand too. A second tier minister could seriously raise their profile”
Do you have anyone in mind? I’m not sure they would manage to get the 44 nominations anyway.
Re 30, Ian, well done on the marathon. Dissappointed you didn’t win
I’ve just voted NO too Icarus but we are in a significant minority. Great idea this poll Mike. Can we have more than these? Are you prevented from voting more than once?
Given the Nu-Labour obsession with presentation and appearance, I would have thought a Brown victory over a challenger would be vastly preferable to a coronation - assuming that Brown wins with at least 75-80% of the vote that is, as anything less would threaten his authority. So I can imagine his supporters privately offering assistance to ensure that either McDonnell or Meacher do make it on to the ballot.
re 32. Yes - you are prevented from voting more than once - but then, as I recall, you are a Labour party member from Birmingham
From Conservative home:
“In the last week the campaign trail for the Conservative Mayoral primaries has spanned the length of London, with candidates converging on Romford and Bromley.
The Romford hustings drew a wide audience with eight candidates making the journey to East London.
Victoria Borwick, Richard Barnes, Warwick Lightfoot, Andrew Boff, Lurline Champagnie, Dr Lee Rotherham, Simon Fawthrop and Winston Mckenzie all spoke about their vision for London.”
Shouldn’t the Tories go for someone better known than this lot - what about Greg Dyke? [This is what is known in the US as a three Martini idea!]
31. Thanks Benedict. I was expecting to stay with the leading group until we reached the Mall, and then trust my luck with a sprint finish. If I’m honest I was a little off that pace!
Was a great day, but incredibly hot.
re 35…right, that’s nearly sorted for the Tories then!
StJohn (32). Log out of your broadband connection and when you log in again you will have a new ip address (don’t ask me what it all means) then the poll wont recognise you - This is also how Benedict gets so may hits!
Got me there!
[32]
Re 36, an,
Yes it was hot!
Icarus, *cough* no, I am always on static IP’s for technical reasons.
O/T - calling Chris(from Paris).
I see the TV debate is back on and Bayrou has gone beserk, accusing Sarkozy of censorship and tarring him with the Berlusconi brush. Leaving aside your sympathies, how do you honestly think this will play in a 52/48% environment? Could this scare enough people to bring them over to what - let’s face it - is effectively a Royal/Bayrou tacit alliance? Is Sarkozy likely to deploy the 15-16 UDF deputies he’s won over to attack their party leader by name?
O/T Visited my friend Roger in St Georges Tooting. Has been in for 5 weeks, superb medical service and even good food. But his part of the ward (6 beds) is mixed. Mostly men but when I was there one women and there had been a younger Asian woman in with older men. I thought that had been sorted?
I took him a copy of Political Punter, to help him get to sleep.
Anyone who doesn’t think Brown should be compared to Stalin should read their Russian history. The man did everything he could after Lenin’s death to make sure he had NO rivals and was just able to take over the presidenc through assuming power rather than any sort of contest. Also worth noting that Lenin was strongly against Stalin succeeding him as he thought the Georgian was a dangerous character - though Joe managed to hide the information.
So here we are in 21st century Britain, with our next Prime Minister believeing he should take his rightful position uncontested. Still, we’ve known as much for some time. The really damaging question is why are Labour MPs so happy to oblige. Are they afraid of Brown’s Stalinist tendancies? Perhaps. But the more I listen to the likes of Diane Abbott telling us with a smirk how all Brown’s rivals will be steamrollered, the more the impression builds that they actually admire Stalinist leadership.
42 Indeed, things are hotting up over there. Was convinced that Bayrou was essentially anti Sarkozy. The stop Sarko cmapaign is gathering momentum, Sego has to look like a safe pair of hands and we’ll see a closer race. I wonder what mischief Chirac is up to behind the scenes.
44 This Brown Stalin stuff is yesterday’s yawn. Calm down
France: Ipsos is unchanged from yesterday 53-47, but more voters seems to be undecided/will not vote. This goes for 38% of Bayrou voters, up from 29% yesterday. Royal and Sarkozy losing same proportion of those. Le Pen voters: On Monday 81% said they would vote Sarkozy - only 57% today. Most of the balance now in the undecided/abstention camp.
I hope for a poll that will show Royal even or in the lead, so that I can buy more Sarkozy at better odds. If they are even before the 2 May debate, I cannot see him losing.
Would using this pic in the main article push up the views stats or depress it?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/media/images/38291000/jpg/_38291397_meacher300pa.jpg
The girls can help, but MM’s chest can have the opposite effect
46 - “I cannot see him losing”
I agree Jan but I’m looking for some comfort.
47 Thanks so much for that. To think I could have gone to my grave without seeing that. It should carry a health warning.
42-”accusing Sarkozy of censorship and tarring him with the Berlusconi brush”
Silvio is rooting for him. He has written an open letter to a paper to tell Italians he wants Sarko to win.
A feature of Italian politics is to take sides also in other countries’ elections and bitch about it
Sarkozy could do without Berlusconi’s support.
The FOI exemption bill has been delayed. More here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/
BTW, does any one think Meacher stands a cat in hells chance of getting on the ballot?
43. Re. mixed wards it’s amusing to see even Lib Dems falling for New Labour spin.
Yes Meacher voted for the war on Iraq, but like many he was duped by Tony Blair, but he was the first and only MP to openly admit that 9/11 was a “convenient pretext” for a “bogus” war on terror. Meacher is the best candidate to stir up a debate among Labour and the voters about where the heart of the party should be. He is head and shoulders above nearly all other MPs of any party in being his own man.
42-45-48-50-51 …
Well Bayrou can sound out of his mind but his point is in fact quite clear : try to get the election as close as possible to be able to dismiss the mandate the new president will have as too narrow. This strategy is astute but it can (again) put him into trouble with his MPs. (his official spokesman endorsed sarkozy today)
He is clearly energizing some of his supporters in an anti-sarko attitude but his influence should not be overstated : 72% of his first round voters said in a poll that they would ignore any voting instruction from him.
The real question is how long this will go on : at one point the media will remember that there is a second round and that bayrou is not part of it. This is one reason for his strong language : he has to be more and more outrageous to stay in the news. The Sarkozy camp (who has mechanically 50% of speaking time in the media) loses no time in mocking his megalomaniac attitudes and denouncing his personal vendetta against Sarkozy.
All in all, whatever Bayrou imagines, the real key moment will be on wednesday night with the TV debate. This will be the moment undecided voters make their choices.
Frankly, I think this can have the following consequences :
- Royal can pick up a bit more bayrou voters (although the most recent polls were taken after his press conference on wednesday that expressed clearly his personal aversion towards sarkozy). This could be worth 1%.
- If Royal loses she will have all the left of her party demanding her head as soon as possible : allying with the centre would only be justified by victory…
- This will damage Bayrouist candidates in June, except the pro-sarkozy ones (”protected” from an UMP candidacy), because core centre-right voters are beginning to get annoyed by Bayrou’s attitude. So he could be back to its present situation : a group of Mps allied to the right and a personal position much more leftist. Remember : Sarkozy was in front in 409 constituencies, Royal in 164, Bayrou in only 4.
51- Well after all, Hugo Chavez supports Royal…
56- Chris, pay attention or someone can ask Alessandra Mussolini MEP who she would like to see winning!
55. Do you know how the debate will be staged? Will they be behind podiums or sitting round a table? The latter format allowed for some really confrontational debate between Mitterrand and Chirac. Mitterrand knew just how to patronise Chirac.
57- Regarding italian politics, leftists denounced the fact that the italian edition of Sarkozy’s book had a foreword from Gianfranco Fini (it was used as a “proof of sarkozy’s fascism” on some blogs).
No 10 formally denies that Blair will announce his resignation on Tuesday in a last ditch bid to save some Labour votes next Thursday.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6599619.stm
Must be announcing it on Monday then….!
55 - Thanks Chris, this is what I suspected but I wanted to hear you say it. I can see what Bayrou’s game is but I cannot believe it’s going to work. 2012 is a very long way off and, in the meantime, he is going to face a horribly vindictive president and ruling party and a bitter group of deputies. Okay, he’ll be setting up his own party but who will join other than a few well-known old socialists, a handful of UDFers and the likes of Begag? He has redefined himself as a leftist presidential candidate but, by 2012, he will have lost what novelty he had this time around. He will be up against a strong incumbent (who I suspect will surprise voters who didn’t trust him, just as Merkel has done) and a new generation of left and centre candidates.
Also, what are the odds on Besson getting the finance ministry?
Ruth Kelly has endorsed Blears for Deputy.
Why is there a double standard on extremists?
Everybody on PB.C would quite rightly condemn far-right extremists but left-wing extremists seem to have become warm & cuddly on this site.
McDonnell is an extremist and his policies would turn the stomachs of the vast majority of voters.
In May 2003 he praised the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA), saying “It’s about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA”.
According to an article in “Tamilnet”, John McDonnell signed a petition calling on the UK to lift a ban on LTTE (Tamil Tigers) - which is registered as a terrorist group by the European Union.
58- They will be sitting face to face with only 2 metres between them.
Views of a candidate’s reactions while the other is speaking will be authorized.
Journalists won’t intervene except to ask questions.
61- don’t bet on besson this time. he will have to wait a few years. It’s still not clear if he will run again in his constituency and what party he would represent if he does.
‘McDonnell is an extremist and his policies would turn the stomachs of the vast majority of voters’
Indee. Bring him on!
Does anyone know what are the areas that Blair, Brown, Cameron, McConnell, Salmond and Ming will visit in the next few days?
63. Look McDonnell needs a punch in the face for the bollocks he spouts, but he wouldnt be the first or last politician.
44. I recently read this famous political quotes book by a tory MP - one of the ones that made me laugh was said by Ronald Regan in relation to the soviet leadership - i think could be equated to Brown and possible wavering MP’s:
Brezhnev on his death bed says “make sure the people follow you”
Andropov said “don’t worry if they don’t follow me i will make sure that they follow you!”
68. Meacher is no less of a nutter. Or Tenny Tonge. Or Jackie Ballard.
LOL - O/T but did anybody read James Cleverly’s hysterical summation of the Milibandwagon fiasco?
“I can’t believe that so much newspaper space (and online coverage) has been given over to Miliband’s non standing as Labour leader.
Let us look at sequence of events. Firstly Miliband says that he will not stand, then in a shock move he confirms that he will not stand. Press speculation increases, fueled by a leak from a close political ally that he has no intention of standing. The whole debate was then blown open when Miliband himself said that he wasn’t going to stand.”
Ha ha ha!
http://jamescleverly.blogspot.com/
For what it’s worth….
TORIES FALTER AT LAST FENCE
By Chris Mead, PA Elections Editor
Tories won the last council by-election before next week’s marathon contests, but saw their majority slashed by Liberal Democrats.
On a relatively high 38% turnout, their margin was more than halved at Chingford Green, Waltham Forest Borough, north London.
There was also a chink of light for Labour whose tiny vote mostly held up despite a big squeeze from Liberal Democrats.
There were only two comparable by-elections this month, but analysis of eight over both April and March suggests a projected nationwide Tory lead over Labour of 12.4%. Allowing for observed differences in party support between parliamentary and council elections this would mean less than 1% change since last May.
There would still be widespread Tory gains as most of the seats up this time were last fought in 2003 when Labour was trailing by 5%. However, it would not be good news for David Cameron to have peaked even before Tony Blair’s departure.
A calculation based on five seats fought both times by all three major parties gives a projected line-up of C 36.0%, Lib Dem 31.5%, Lab 26.5%.
RESULTS:
Waltham Forest London Borough - Chingford Green: C 1694, Lib Dem 1022, La
RESULTS:
Waltham Forest London Borough - Chingford Green: C 1694, Lib Dem 1022, Lab 208, Ukip 143. (May 2006 - Three seats C 2288, 2279, 2199, Lib Dem 622, 605, 573, Lab 359, 357, 345). C hold. Swing 14.8% C to Lib Dem.
Another punter…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/politics_show/6600013.stm
70 - What is old Jackie Ballard doing now? I’m sure I saw her on telly the other week - was it about animals or something?
Makes you wonder what MPs actually do after the crushing blow of loosing your seat. My god, people think politicians have it easy. But just imagine - every four years your entire career may be finished off in a matter of seconds on a stage in some provincial leisure centre in the early hours of the morning. THAT’s rough!
70. See, wouldnt be the first or last.
What price a serious incident in France in the run up to the final poll day?
75. She’s Director General of the RSPCA
Apologies for the long post, but here is what Michael Meacher said a couple of hours ago, in an interview to be transmitted on GMTV Sunday Programme on Sunday morning…
STEVE RICHARDS
Both you and John McDonnell are both adamant that you have sufficient backing to run for the Party leadership, could you clear this up? Have you got the numbers and has he not?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Well what I have said and I feel tempted to repeat the remark of Harold Wilson, I think ‘if you stop telling lies about me I’ll stop telling the truth about you’. The truth is that I have twenty four signed domination forms as I have already said and there are something above a dozen persons who I strongly believe will support me but who have said at this stage they don’t actually want to sign a paper, but as we get nearer the date they will; that’s one point. Secondly, there is a question that neither John McDonnell or I are going to get to forty four without the total votes which are available on the left, I think we both agree on that and that is perfectly clear. Now when it comes to second preferences when one of us drops out his supporters have made clear that I would get the overwhelming majority of his supporters to swing round and back me and that is indeed my experience when I’ve talked to them as well. On the other hand with regard to my supporters, if I were to drop out I would certainly be recommending support for a left candidate, a united left candidate whoever that was, but having talked to me supporters I know perfectly well that only a small number, perhaps three or five or something might be willing to support him and I think that’s a rather important consideration when we come to actually getting to forty four. So I think he would be struggling to get there but I am convinced that I can.
STEVE RICHARDS
Okay, there are reports of a deal in which his people back you and whatever, that from what you seem to be saying is not happening at the first ballot.
MICHAEL MEACHER
What I’m saying is that we need to meet and we have agreed to meet at a particular time in order to resolve this before the actual NEC meeting which sends out the nomination papers, we need to have one agreed candidate before that time, we’re both agreed on that, and that’s obviously sensible and I’m sure that’s exactly what we do. There may be one or two minor details of disagreements still to be sorted out but I think the broad agreement is clearly there, I think we both want it, we both agree it and everyone else wants that to happen and it will.
STEVE RICHARDS
So when will you be having that meeting?
MICHAEL MEACHER
About the time when Tony Blair makes his statement saying that he is resigning.
STEVE RICHARDS
And has he agreed to meet you to have this discussion?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Yes.
STEVE RICHARDS
Right, so if the meeting goes well only one of you will then go forward. That’s what you want to happen.
MICHAEL MEACHER
Correct.
STEVE RICHARDS
And is that what he wants to happen?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Correct. As I understand it yes.
STEVE RICHARDS
Now what would decide which one of you go forward?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Well the obvious basis of deciding is who has the most signed nominations, who has, I mean that’s the gold standard, it’s one thing for me to pledge my support to you, the question is whether I’m prepared to sign up and make it absolutely clear that this is real, valid and it’s going to happen. So that’s the gold standard and I think we’re agreed on that.
STEVE RICHARDS
You’ve got those twenty four, they’ve physically signed so you know you’ve got them?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Correct.
STEVE RICHARDS
Okay so those who say you haven’t are what’s the euphemistic phrase…?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Spinning I think is the word. There’s been a hell of a lot of spinning with ridiculous figures being thrown around, the only reason I came out with what I have long known to be my position, it isn’t just recently that this has happened it’s been in the can for a long time and the only reason that prompted this were the absurd figures put out, I suspect by the supporters of Gordon Brown who clearly want to bump me out of the contest. They would prefer, perfectly obviously, they’re trying to block a contest at all, which I think is very much against the interest of the electorate of the Labour Party and let me say of Gordon Brown himself, but they are clearly trying to prevent a contest but if there were to be a contest they clearly would much prefer it to be John McDonnell. So the figure they’ve been distributing to me is absolutely ridiculous and in order to prove that I came out and I’ve now told the truth.
STEVE RICHARDS
It is a significant statement because it looked as if there was a possibility that the left vote could be split and you both fall apart but what you’re saying does increase the likelihood of a contest because if one of you pull out that means that one of you will get it. Not inevitable but more than likely.
MICHAEL MEACHER
No it isn’t inevitable, if you were to ask me ‘am I there at this moment?’ The answer is ‘No’ but I think I’m sufficiently close that I have very strong grounds for believing that I can get there. But the point is of course that this has been true for a long time, nothing has happened recently particularly that changes it, it’s just that the media attention has been entirely on David Milliband on Charles Clark or on John Reid, and the left has just been consigned to oblivion, well all that is now happening is the revelation that what was always the case is now becoming pretty salient, pretty clear and pretty powerful.
STEVE RICHARDS
And who are the type of people you’ve got signing up for you? Are they the campaign group? Have you got former ministers from outside the campaign group? I mean name names if you want but summarise the type of people.
MICHAEL MEACHER
I’m not going to, not because I can’t or not because I’m afraid to but because this is a private negotiation I’m going to have with John McDonnell. The fact is I have got some people from the campaign group.
STEVE RICHARDS
Just for viewers that’s the left wing Parliamentary group. And anyone else?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Twenty two members, I’ve got a significant proportion of them, the campaign group, but of course my main support is on the centre-left of the Party which is exactly the area that I represent, and there are really allsorts, there are a range of people they’re very different but they have all had this philosophy. I’ve known the for twenty, thirty years many of them.
STEVE RICHARDS
Are there any former ministers on this list?
MICHAEL MEACHER
I think there are one or two.
STEVE RICHARDS
Are there?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Yes.
STEVE RICHARDS
So when you say ‘I think’ I thought you said they’d signed up!
MICHAEL MEACHER
No no no of course I know exactly the numbers, that’s not the point, no I was trying to immediately to reflect…
STEVE RICHARDS
Whether they were former ministers.
MICHAEL MEACHER
Yes.
STEVE RICHARDS
Fair enough but you think you have got a couple of former ministers?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Yes.
He is absolutely adamant that he has the names. Make of that what you will.
75. You then get a job on a Qunago….
78.”He is absolutely adamant that he has the names. Make of that what you will. ”
Call a doctor?
75. I don’t know 4 years in a job is not too bad in this hire and fire culture!!!
I would agree that been fired on stage is particularly bad though!
Thankfully for the Labour party - The Tories are better behaved at these events. I doubt you would see many Tories clapping out …out ..out!!!! My memory serves me that this was particularly bad in 1997. You might despise the party but people still have feelings!!! LD’s in bath also get a mention(1992)! They chucked out a high calaber MP and got a boring monotoned individual!!!!
JT is a leading member i think of the RSPCA - she got a good pay rise on being chucked out and arguably more inflience?
I always remeber her leadership campaign line
“who cares wins” - I always thought that about the LIB Dem’s: WHo indeed does care who wins!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
STEVE RICHARDS
You’ve got those twenty four, they’ve physically signed so you know you’ve got them?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Correct.
…..
STEVE RICHARDS
Just for viewers that’s the left wing Parliamentary group. And anyone else?
MICHAEL MEACHER
Twenty two members, I’ve got a significant proportion of them, the campaign group, but of course my main support is on the centre-left of the Party
—————–
weren’t they 24 just a couple of questions earlier?
81,I could’nt agree more that the barracking of Dvaid Mellor at Putney in 1997 was utterly disgraceful (instigated by Jimmy Goldsmith,now gone to the political sphere in the sky) I did manage a smile re Patten in 1992,as a non-Tory it was one of the few bright moments in an extremely dark night-and lets face it,Chris Patten got a pretty nice consolation prize (as did Neil Kinnock,come to think of it:wink:)
82. I tell you what though Meacher comes across better than brown on the telly!
I always remember him trying to go on the countryside march in 1998, when he was the minister responsible. They obviously took him to one side and advised him not to do this on future issues whilst in office!
83. That’s true - it’s not very nice though!
Mind you the Thatcher party was alleged to have cheered when he lost!(Patten).
83. It is interesting that Zack has gone back to the tories after that!
83. I wonder if Zack did any clapping (Opps - may have dropped him in it there!!!)
86,Cheers for filling a gap in my knowledge
Re Meacher. He’s very articulate and does present himself quite well on TV. I’ve taken a small bet at 139/1 on Betfair to add to my portfolio! It is just about conceivable to me that if Brown did something catastrophic in the election contest that Meacher could sneak it. It’s inconceivable to me that McDonnell could win under any circumstances.
89. “It is just about conceivable to me that if Brown did something catastrophic in the election contest that Meacher could sneak it. It’s inconceivable to me that McDonnell could win under any circumstances”
I can’t see much difference between them. McDonnell can present himself well on TV too. McD has the IRA comment and Meacher has the 9/11 piece, so both of them with a negative baggage.
McDonnell has always been consistent in being a rebel, Meacher became critical of the government after being sacked as junior minister.
I think of Mcdonnell , Meacher then Brown in the assent of man context! I suppose it is weighted on there political beast score!!!
85-Martin Day
They cheered at Conrad Black’s election night Telegraph bonaza, and they booed him at the count. The sight of Chris and Lavender Patten facing down the Tory jeers at Bath, and the subsequent speech by Patten is one of the moments of political post war history, and a sympton that the Tories were starting to lose their marbles.
89 - Prime Minister Meacher. Imagine.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/g2/story/0,3604,1038215,00.html
92,Events of 1992-1997 certainly confirm your final sentence:lol:
92. Very true!
Mind you when ted heath became PM - Somebody stubbed there cirgrette out on his neck! If you watch the pictures the next day you can see a plaster on his neck! Bet the was a Labour supporter!
If I recall rightly, David Mellor blamed the whole “out out out” thing on James Goldsmith and gun fanatics! It was terribly vulgar.
90 - Ha both Meacher and McDonnell’s prices are tightening, we will know who will get there by who tightens most?
O/T - I find this a bit surprising:
http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0427/northpolitics.html
I know TB will want someone to tell the UK parliament what a brilliant job he has done in Northern Ireland before he leaves office but all the signs (and nearly 100% of people) expect that the date he has invited the Taoiseach to speak will be in the middle of a general election campaign in the Republic.
92 - …Except that I think you will find that the unlovely jeering in Bath emanated from the triumphalist hordes of singularly Illiberal Democrats
100——— What goes around comes around:
2009 / 2010:
Sheffield Hallam - Tories make ‘unexpected gain’
81 and 83 - Actually I thought the scenes from Wandsworth Town Hall were highly entertaining. Putney Conservatives should have deselected Mellor when they had the chance.
99. Well depends, will it be just before dail dissolution or in fact will it help Bertie’s statesman position given he is a bit worried by some shedding round the edges to SF. Bear in mind he’s turning up in Belfast on the 8th with Tony. I recommend him and Tony go get some fish and chips a few miles down the road at the new eating emporoium, For Cod & Ulster, which appears to be open last time I passed it.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/nickybe/422386620/
102.
But the bloke still has feeling’s? I thought the Bad breath scene on spitting image was tight but consoled myself he might not have seen it!
104 I also thought the bad breath scene was extreamley funny!
86. ‘It is interesting that Zack has gone back to the tories after that!’
So have a very great number of Referendum Party alumni (sic) and also a lot of UKIPers from the 1997 crowd (inc. yours truly), you will find.
106. Well they and you are better in a big tent. More inflience. Do you vote for UKIP in euro elections?
One thing I have noticed on Sego v Sarko is that there is a big drop in the certain-to-vote on Sarko, while there is a big rise in the certain-to-vote for Sego. Surprisingly she now has 91% certain-to-vote. If I was in the Sarko camp I would be very concerned. If we adjust be this percentage difference Sarko might already be behind Sego.
And the Bayrou/Sego debate only adds further problems.
Re 100, Except that I think you will find that the unlovely jeering in Bath emanated from the triumphalist hordes of singularly Illiberal Democrats
Who do it all the time down my way.
109 that is because they are ‘nice’ and you are ‘nasty’: them’s the rules in LibDemWorld
63
‘In May 2003 he praised the Provisional Irish Republican Army (IRA), saying “It’s about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA”.’
Wasn’t he voted slimmer of the year?
108 - Will L, you seem determined to push this theme and I’m not sure why. I posted my concerns - mostly focused on the renewed attempt to portray Sarkozy as a French Berlusconi rather than a French Bush - earlier in the thread and Chris(from Paris) put them into some useful context. But you don’t seem to respond to these.
In the Ipsos tracker, Royal’s “certainty to vote” rating is indeed 91% and she’s up from 87% on Sunday. Sarkozy has slipped from a high of 91% on Tuesday to 87% today. Equally, there seems to have been a slight rise in the Royal share of the Bayrou vote although pollsters’ estimates on this variable are all over the place.
This may be the beginning of a trend and a Royal victory but the moves are so small and so within the margins of error that I’m sceptical. I also agree with Chris that the critical moment will be the Sarkozy-Royal debate next week and this weekend’s Bayrou debate is a sideshow. She will not cope will in a head-to-head with Sarkozy. I also think Bayrou is overplaying his hand badly - four more UDF deputies declared for Sarkozy today, meaning that 19 out of his group of 29 has jumped ship.
107. I did in 1999 (just before I left UKIP) but not in 2004…and will not again.
:red:
99: That should be fun to watch. Bertie is a bad public speaker.
Re 110, kingbongo, are they equaly rude and nasty round your way? If so what council?
Re 113, Runnymede, Have you rejoined the Conservative party? If so, I am pleased. Heaven always rejoices when a sinner repents
I wonder if Brown will allow George Galloway to come back to Labour?
That is if GG wanted too?
112. Your points are interesting. The attempt to portray Sarkozy as another Berlsuconi may or may not have an impact - it is difficult to predict.
Was portraying Blair’s closeness to Bush an attempt to undermine him - most say yes. Yet every postwar British Prime Minister has benefitted politically from the friendship. It will probably continue for hundreds of years - regardless of what some on the hard-left desire.
The reason why I think Sego is holding and gaining so much is for two reasons.
Sego is doing well in spite of being the left candidate not because of it. The first time a woman stands she does well, and she is also reasonably presentable and well-spoken although having made a few gaffs (thinking there was a Taliban government in Afganistan - 8 years out-of-date!). Lack of experience is never a handicapp in politics - we all know we learn on the job. So I think many underestimate her strength for this reason. Although France has moved firmly to the right, Sego is portraying herself as the ’soft-right’ candidate in contrast to Sarko the ‘hard-right’.
(Blair won again and again in spite of being Labour leader not because of it. The public thought of him as a Conservative leader, who just happened to be leading the Labour party. Now he is seen as tainted with the left-wing agenda. He was quite simply a good leader, who would have won which ever party he led. Now Labour will find to their chagrin that having got rid of Blair every alternative is unelectable - on Newsnight Brown is rated as worse than Michael Foot! with Yougov showing the Conservatives on 45% against Brown. The Labour Party is frankly too stupid to elect the electable - that’s why they’re traditionally the ‘election-losing party’ - ‘the party of opposition’ - they have returned to type).
The second reason is that ‘everyone likes the underdog’. Especially in France where they have a strong tradition of rebellion. Sarko is being harmed by being the ‘obvious frontrunner’. Sarko is the subject of vehement attacks because ‘he is the man to beat’. We have all seen this in politics many time before, from local level to national and global. Inevitably this will affect people’s desire to vote and for whom. Front-runners find it hard to motivate their supporters. So Sarko’s certain to vote is falling when it was most crucial that it holds. This means he is slipping behind. We will see. Two weeks, and I suspect that in the last days too-close-to-call, and finally a photo-finish count. France has had too many close elections for this to be any different.
Chris (from Paris) / Mister Chip:
A few questions:
Do you think Royal has any chance of winning the PS nomination for 2012 if she loses by a narrow margin (eg 48% +) or will the knives be out regardless of how close she gets to the Elysee?
If Sarkozy became unpopular as President, could you forsee Royal (assuming she was a stronger candidate after her 2007 loss) defeating him in 2012 in a repeat of the Giscard-Mitterrand rematch in 1981?
Is Bayrou’s new party essentially a recycled UDF in the way that the UMP was largely made up of the RPR?
Do you expect that one of Sarkozy’s first acts as President might be to visit the White House (& maybe even appear on talk shows, thus possibly transforming the US view of France overnight)?
Finally, assuming Sarkozy wins, do you predict the UMP winning a majority in the National Assembly elections?
Many thanks for your time.
The House today seemed to manage to avoid talking about the Freedom of Information (not) Bill, which is good news. Norman Baker, in an adjournment debate, puts a strong case against the Conservative Government in 1990 regarding BA 149 flight to Kuwait whilst the invasion was in progress. The Geoff Hoon (he is still alive!)for the present Government, presumably because they dont like to set precedents about governments being found out, gave a wishy washy reply.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/12.htm#hddr_1
Isn’t George Galloway the leader of the Respect Party! - with the sort of statements GG makes about Brown being ‘the left bum-cheek of the Blair-Brown duo’ on a daily basis, I am sure that Brown would rather be Prime Minister of Kazakhstan than colleague of George Galloway. George Galloway is too vulgar and crass to be in British politics. He is also a traitor, who should be tried for treason. If only MI5 would do the decent thing.
It’s a great idea to include a poll in the thread, Mike. Can you use that feature for posing multiple choice questions?
Is there any chance that we could have a poll here sometime to show the political make-up of the readership of this site?
It’d be quite interesting to see how we compare to the nation as a whole. Also it might give pause for thought to certain people (from all sides_ who keep on claiming that the site is dominated by a majority of posters from x party, y party or z party.
236 people have voted so far. How many hits a day does the site get?
Do you mean:
x marks the spot party
y oh y party
zzzzzzz party
Question: If Meacher has the support he says he has then it’s game over. So why isn’t he mentioning even one MP? Having read the GMTV transcript, why on earth didn’t Richards press him on this ? He “thinks” he has former Ministers on board……right.
123 - wouldn’t actually have noticed the poll had SW not mentioned it. Whoops. Anyway - it would be interesting, but how to differentiate the leanings of the site’s visitirs from those of the site’s posters?
119 - Will L,
Don’t get me wrong; I think she could win. If she does, it will not be because she’s a woman or a Blairite reformist but because the PS/Bayrou have learned the lesson of Gerhard Schröder’s victory in 2002: you can campaign against the US and win.
Royal is not comparable to Blair. By the time he won office in 1997, he had been party leader for three years and also benefited from Kinnock’s internal reforms and manifesto overhauls. He had a clear policy vision but also absolute control of a party that had been disciplined by repeated defeat. Royal is not the leader of the PS and has no control of the machine. Moreover, the party has never reformed and never isolated or seen off its dinosaurs. It is a wholly owned subsidiary of the teachers’ unions. You should read her policy programme or, even worse, the Congrès du Mans party positioning from November 2006. It’s Labour circa 1983.
I agree with you that lack of experience or even policy grasp (Chirac and Mitterrand are good examples of this) necessarily matter. What does matter is the combination of her inability to articulate a positive vision for France in any detail at all because she is lumbered with being the PS candidate when she is up against a superb communicator of policy to a mass audience.
Your “underdog” point is sound but Sarkozy doesn’t come across as the Establishment candidate at all. He could just as easily fit that mould. Besides, those who haven’t yet made up their minds will vote for the candidate most likely to reduce unemployment, raise purchasing power and fight crime. Every single poll puts him streets ahead of her on these issues.
So, I still think he’ll win.
Not much movement on Betfair re French presidency.
120 - Double Carpet,
I think Chris will do a better job on these but I’ll have a crack.
1. If Royal loses, by however slim a margin, she’s finished. She was selected to win and for no other reason. There will be civil war inside the PS once Sarkozy wins, defections to Bayrou’s new party and a resurgence by the Fabius left.
2. I think Sarkozy will be a popular president because, like Merkel, he will surprise those who fear him. I believe he will win a second mandate. If not, his challengers will be from the next generation of socialists and centrists. The big advantage they will have in 2012 is that they won’t have to make the difficult reforms and can run (like Blair and Zapatero did) on a making-capitalism-nicer ticket.
3. I think Bayrou’s party will lose a lot of the UDF base if Sarkozy wins. It will be a party dominated by the old PS right wing.
4. I think Sarkozy’s first foreign visits will be to Blair/Brown and Merkel. He wants to build a six-country coalition inside the EU including Zapatero, Prodi and the Kaczyński twins but the two Latins will have to be punished for campaigning for Royal at first. He will want to reach out to the US but won’t want to overdo it.
5. Whoever becomes president will go on to win the legislative elections.
Chris - feel free to say I’m talking crap.
122. Yes but the Labour party has a great allure to people like Galloway - He spent most of his life fighting Labour from inside it.
I would say the Labour party is probably the most tribal of parties and Galloway has been reduced to playing from a tiny party, which will go nowhere.
Interesting you say that Galloway should be done for treason but you could equally say thet Blair should be. He went to war on a false prospectus and cost other people’s lives. Galloway to my knowledge has not and i would caution anyone from putting anything to acidic on as he has a funny habit of winning libel actions!!! I think though that you correctly cite Brown in using Galloway’s cheek analagy about him having his hands blooded in the cup of death that has become Iraq.
Not much movement on betfair against gordo now that Meacher and McDonut are teaming up (lol)
Re Scotland Yougov poll
The full tables are now up on yougov website. The breakdown for others is Senior Citizens Unity Party 3%, SSP 3%, Solidarity 2%, Others 2%
Thanks, Andrea.
129 - Mister Chip - many thanks, much appreciated.
Michael Meacher has little charisma, but compared to Gordon Brown he is a lot more likable. His head isn’t half way up his rear end, he makes his points succinctly and has something to say that we haven’t already heard a thousand times by the boring neo-con Brown/Blairites. If anything he might help split the party a little bit more and make the traditional Labour voters even more disappointed when Brown becomes PM.
120 - Double carpet
“Do you think Royal has any chance of winning the PS nomination for 2012 if she loses by a narrow margin (eg 48% +) or will the knives be out regardless of how close she gets to the Elysee?”
The thing is she has no party position of which she could be thrown out of… However, her partner Hollade, the first secretary (leadre) of the party, would be endangered. A narrow defeat couls let him stay on at least for the legislative election. If the election is badly lost the fury of the left-wing will be huge and could play well for bayrou’s new party.
“If Sarkozy became unpopular as President, could you forsee Royal (assuming she was a stronger candidate after her 2007 loss) defeating him in 2012 in a repeat of the Giscard-Mitterrand rematch in 1981?”
I think she won’ be candidate again if she loses on May 6. As mister chip said, her main selling point was to be a winner. If she isn’t she will mainly be seen by her “comrades” as a dangerous and arrogant candidate that ignored and/or insulted them.
DSK would become the frontrunner for next time if he can unite the party.
“Is Bayrou’s new party essentially a recycled UDF in the way that the UMP was largely made up of the RPR?”
Well not exactly. UMP was RPR + most of UDF elected officials.
The Parti democrate or PD (an unfortunate choice of name, as “PD” is a very vulgar homophobic insult in French…) would be essentially present UDF + new activists and a few VIPs form the left. UDF had very few activists, so new ones, coming for at least a half from the left, could rapidly dominate the party, IF they saty for long.
The crucial point will be the number of votes they get in June because the results of the legislative vote partly determine public funding of parties (the other part is the name of MPs and senators).
“Do you expect that one of Sarkozy’s first acts as President might be to visit the White House (& maybe even appear on talk shows, thus possibly transforming the US view of France overnight)?”
He would certainly try to organize a high profile visit to the US but not before June elections (anti-americanism is very strong in France)
“Finally, assuming Sarkozy wins, do you predict the UMP winning a majority in the National Assembly elections?”
yes.
Actually it could be helped by Bayrouist candidates if they get big scores and stay in the second round. Candidates qualified for the second round of legislative elections are the two best candidates in the first round AND anyone getting more than 12.5% of registered voters. Thus 3-way or 4-way contests can happen and become “English style”first past the post elections. This is good for UMP has Sarkozy lead in 409 constituencies last sunday.
Today’s national assembly is :
365 UMP
147 PS
29 UDF
22 PC (communists)
14 Others
(the number needed for a majority is 289)
If Sarkozy wins I cannot see how he would win less than 320.
136- sorry for the horrible typos, i guess i’m a bit tired.
for example it’s the NUMBER of MPs and senators, of course…
136.
If Sarkozy loses do you think that would be the end of his political career? Or do you think like Chirac he will just keep on trying till he eventually get elected in his early 60’s?
138- Frankly, I don’t know.
I guess he would at least lead the right for the legislative elections because he has no ovious successor or replacement.
I certainly hope he won’have to make this kind of choice
The value right now is definitely with Sego at 3.75. She is closing the gap with Sarko and rising in her certainty-to-vote. Could be one of the greatest profit bonanzas we’ve had in a while.
136 - Chris - merci beaucoup a vous aussi.
140 - she’s still at 4.3 on Betfair!
139-chris (from paris)
I always like your postings, but have to gauge these with your obvious leanings. Personally I find Sarkosy an arrogant, odious, nasty, populist right winger. Against this I find Royal crass, disengenuous and conceited. I was kind of rooting for Bayrou- but had already put too much money on Royal (out of my left loyalty). I cannot think of a French politician I have admired, if ever. Robesepiere or Danton perhaps.
We shall see- Sarkozy if he fails now will live to fight another day, and at some point will be the French president, much like Chirac. The right are much more resilient. Royal has only this one opportunity- the left enjoy infighting more than anything else, are much too pompous and high brow, and never learn. Royal will be sacrificed.
I think though next Sunday will be a cliffhanger, much in the trend of many of our European elections of recent years, and for now am keeping my money tied in on Royal (very similar to my backing of Sri Lanka which I am loathed now to cash in because I think they can make it).
But Chris (paris)- that said I have really enjoyed your commentary!
142. Thats ok-ish odds for her. I do forsee a poll narrow because, although the Sarkozy bloc is strong, theres a big anyone but Sarkozy bloc as well.
Having said that I always felt Sarkozy would win this but there may be room to play some shifts in odds.
143. Populist..there’s a terrible sin in politics…..
140 - Will L, do you ever read anyone else’s posts?
143 - Tyson, Sarkozy has his faults but you’re very wrong about him. In the UK, he’d be New Labour.
121 The FOI bill comes back on the 18th May. The opponents made a tactical retreat on this occasion but I fear they are regrouping.
Should be fun!