Where are the votes in Brown’s Lib Dem job offers?
June 23rd, 2007
Isn’t he winning the battle for Ming’s supporters anyway?
The above chart shows how declared Lib Dem supporters in the regular monthly YouGov polls have responded to the pollster’s forced choice question of whether they would prefer a Cameron-led Tory government or a Brown-led Labour one.
This is not asking for voting intention; there is no option to choose the Lib Dems or one of the minor parties; but how the Lib Dem supporters split is regarded as a reasonable guide to possible tactical voting.
What the detailed data shows is that the sentiment amongst Lib Dem supporters has been moving progressively to Labour throughout 2007. At the end of last year LD supporters split virtually evenly on the question. By the end of May Gord’s Labour was the choice of 49% against 28% for Dave’s Tories.
So the potential market for Lib Dem switchers is now much greater for Brown than Cameron who might have almost exhausted the group as a source of new Tory support.
The question is whether the offers to Paddy Ashdown earlier in the week or to Lord Stevens, as reported this morning, will help Labour or not?
Could the manner of Brown’s approach by continuing with the offers in spite of Ming rejection be a turn-off to Lib Dem waverers or could it help? We’ll have to wait for further polling evidence.
Certainly if Brown’s objective was to screw his Fife neighbour and regular travelling companion, Ming Campbell, he appears to be succeeding. The Guardian carries reports of rumblings within the party and there’s news that a Lib Dem MP has recorded an interview for GMTV tomorrow being a touch critical.
There is a theory that replacing Ming with the young thrusting ex-elite public school boy and Cambridge graduate, Nick Clegg, would enable the party to win back votes from the Tories. That’s possible but a more dynamic Lib Dem party would have dangers for Labour as well.
Whatever it’s been a good week for Labour on the spread markets. The latest commons seats spreads are LAB 281-286 seats ahead of the Tories on 275-280 seats.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Is it not possible for the pollsters to adopt direct questions like:
Would you consider voting tactically to stop Labour being elected to government?
Would you consider voting tactically to stop the Conservatives being elected to government?
I’d like to see answers to that!
Apologies for going off-topic, but Alan Johnson was last traded on the Deputy Leader market at 1.13 (i.e. about 1/8). Either someone is very optimistic or inside information is leaking out. Admittedly, it’s not taken much money to move the price, but even so …
3 There were actually some fairly significant sums traded overnight, David; about a thousand by my reckoning.
Leak or not, it looks like Johnson.
So Blair and Brown has signed off on the revised EU Constitution, I see.
It’s going to be entertaining watching Brown explaining in interview after interview why the British people should be denied a referendum. Everyone knows it’s the same treaty with some cosmetic changes, made so the French and Dutch governments can bullshit to their own electorates. Even Giscard D’Estang, who drew up the original treaty, has confirmed this publicly.
The whole issue showcases Brown as stubborn, shifty and out of touch. I suspect the Tories will hammer the democracy point home from now until the next general election and if the Lib Dem are smart they’ll do the same.
If only Blair hadn’t conceded a referendum….
4. Interesting - that does make it a bit more significant. I was basing my comment on the histogram for Johnson, rather than the total market (as I didn’t know what it was at before the latest move).
I hope the Tories bang on about this treaty up until the next election. If anything shows the Tories are still the Party of old this does it. Even to people who vaguely agree with them it still makes them look like unattractive obsessives.
In answer to the question it does seem like the zeitgeist is moving in a different direction. Wathching Brown in his interview yesterday where he gave a solid if unspectacular performance you could see the thrust of the questions ‘are we going to get a new politics without spin PR stunts etc?’.
I kept being reminded of that wonderful VW commercial when a man leaves a casino and the voice over says “Here is the man who moved into gold when the smart money moved into platinum……….” and he ends up walking past a Rolls Royce and into his VW with the tag line “If only everything was as reliable” I’m afraid Dave and his performance art is one generation too late.
Stitch Up: while I don’t want to get into European politics, are you sure the “constitution” is the same? It seems that a number of the most objectionable things have gone; in particular, the”fundamental rights” no longer over-rule national (British) law, and the plans for an EU foreign minister have been basically dropped. While you might object to the end of vetoes, almost everything else has gone.
Personally, I don’t like the treaty, because it’s not particularly democratic. I would beef up the Parliament at the expense of the Commission. But then, that’s my view
I agree with Mike that LibDem voters (not necessarily activists) have been tactically rewinding, so to speak, as the switch to GB approaches. The Tories have snaffled some who were leaning to them before, leaving a party whose voters are predominantly on the Lib-Lab axis (just as most Labour voters see the LibDems as a reasonable second choice - I do too).
But perhaps three articles running on the issue overestimates its importance. It might be interesting to discuss whether there is going to a prolonged impact of the EU deal. So here’s a mini-article…
Speaking as a pro-European, I’m sorry that this has been seen primarily in defensive terms - can Britain stop some frightful imposition by those wicked foreigners? The Eurosceptics have been successful in pushing the debate into those terms, so that any change, however reasonable, is seen by mnay as a potential threat. That said, I don’t think the referendum demand has legs. I was talking about it yesterday to a large group of constituents (an expanded local CAT meeting to “talk to your MP”)), and the experience was a bit like here, where seanT has raised it a zillion times and most contributors have gone on talking about something else. One constituent felt really strongly and kept pressing me on it. Everyone else looked at him neutrally, not with evident disagreement but also without much interest: none expressed an oppinion either way.
In the evening, I had a debate with Roger Helmer MEP on climate change (he’s a sceptic) and we chatted a bit beforehand about the referendum issue. He said that he’d talked to 20 people who without exception either said they’d like a referendum or they didn’t care. I said I thought that most people, if asked in general if they’d like to be consulted on something controversial, said yes, but it wasn’t terribly important or vote-switching for them. He didn’t disagree, and said that was why Eurosceptic parties always did best at low-turnout Euro-elections: their supporters feel passinoately about it, others don’t.
This has interesting implications for the Tories. The leadership is pretty much bound to demand a referendum or their core supporters will kill them. But do they make a token one-day demand and then change the subject, or do they go on about it and make it a big campaign? I think we’ll find Cameron does the former, both now and when it comes up for Parliamentary approval in a few months’ time. There isn’t a sufficiently interesting issue in the changes to seize popular imagination - some vaguely controversial wording on the free market, a chap who coordinates EU foreign policy, some possible changes in EU Parliament numbers in 2013, yeah, whatever…
Simon Heffer has a photo of Ian (UDI)Smith displayed prominently on his mantlepiece.
Simon Heffer has a photo of Ian (UDI)Smith displayed prominently on his mantlepiece.
4. Part of me is still sure there are tally indications of some sorts coming through on this. Either that or someone has simply added up what they think are the spread of pledges and see Johnson as home and hosed.
Labour traded well over the Tories on spreadfair last week. Now the Tories are back in the mindset of inevitable vistory again I wonder if the seat markets will be overestimating them again (they always have this far out before). Still don’t think a Labour win is very likely though but 290-300 seats looks a good range.
9 - “frightful imposition by those wicked foreigners?”
What a concise and balanced interpretation of the eurosceptic position.
7 - No PR stunts. Like approaching Lord Stevens, the Lib Dems and maybe Alan Sugar to serve as ministers?
As for your comment about the man who misread the gold market!
I’ve just taken advantage of Hills’ 14/1 that Brown appoints anyone from outside of the Labour Party to his cabinet. Now that there is an Attorney-General sized hole to be filled, there is a massive chance he will fill it with a non-partisan appointment in the perfect position for one.
Had to ring them up - not on the website at the moment.
Another thread - “Has Labour saved the British sausage?”
15 Thanks Shadsy - I’ve just done the same - £50 @ 14/1. That’s very decent value in view of the AG situation.
13 And of course the Hung Parliament bet at 2.4 with Betfair remains a steal.
8
‘Stitch Up: while I don’t want to get into European politics, are you sure the “constitution” is the same? It seems that a number of the most objectionable things have gone; in particular, the”fundamental rights” no longer over-rule national (British) law, and the plans for an EU foreign minister have been basically dropped.’
All that’s happened is that the wording has changed,treaty instead of constitution,European High Foreign Representative instead of European Foreign Minister etc.etc.
The so called British ‘red lines’ were merely used as a distraction to focus the electorate away from the numerous other concessions that have been made.
Roger and Nick - Don’t woory, chaps. I doubt Cameron will fall into the Hague 2001 trap of “7 days to save the Pound”-style Euro-obsessiveness. It’s not his style.
Instead, the Tories will keep punching on Brown’s sore point - we were promised a referendum, the treaty contains most of the provisions of the Constitution yet we’re now being denied a say. All this mealy-mouthed nonsense about it being an amending treaty rather than a constitutional treaty fools no one.
All of us - Europhile and Eurosceptic alike - know that the Constitution was a bold attempt to break out of the Union-by-stealth strategy that has dominated the EU for decades. Giscard and co were up front about that. Sadly, the French and Dutch votes have convinced the Euro-elite that spin and dissembling are, after all, the only way forward.
Brown (whose every control-freak instinct is against a referendum) will pay a heavy price for this when the treaty comes before the House of Commons. The really interesting question is what will the Lib Dems do. I know what West Country Tories are hoping!
ITN: Reports claim Gordon Brown has offered a Cabinet position to the former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Lord Stevens.
He’s desperate to get someone, anyone from outside of the party, just to prove a point.
I’m feeling very confident about the 14/1. Should be Evens.
15/17. It’s an interesting point, but one note of caution: the Attorney General has traditionally not been a member of the cabinet and IIRC, even under Blair has only ‘attended’ cabinet rather than being a member of it as such. How an external appointment as AG would be viewed is probably a matter of interpretation. With political betting being pretty small beer compared with Hills’ overall takings, the chances of a goodwill payout have to be higher even if the AG is not formally a cabinet member.
23. AOL News (probably under licence from somewhere, though that’s just a guess) reports that it was a junior ministerial position offered:
http://news.aol.co.uk/lord-stevens-rejects-brown-offer/article/20070622092109990002
The problem with all these ‘external’ appointments is that they would have to sit in the Lords which generally makes a cabinet place much more difficult to hold down.
22. Thank you for that warning David. I briefly pondered that point, but took Jonathan Freedland’s description that Goldsmith was “jumping from the cabinet before Gordon Brown could push” as a green light. I have no doubt that your reading is more accurate.
I can see a lengthy correspondence with Hills’ Customer Service dept looming…..
21
This must be offer number 5 or 6 with no takers so far,who wants to be part of a PR stunt?
Is there really such a lack of talent in the Labour party;whoever now gets the Northern Ireland job will know that they were a second / third choice.
So this Brown initiative is running out of steam already and looking ridiculous.
I Think David has it about right. It seems the AG might well be Lord Lester but it also seems likely it will no longer be a cabinet position. Nonetheless a good punt and at the risk of bringing the bet bad luck I’m going to have £50 myself!
OT. TH’s departure from Arsenal might throw up some value bets if the markets over react. 12/1 for the title seems a bit extreme - Man U just won the league after losing RvN & Keane - and at minimum will help if you’re building a book on the big 4.
Any other ideas - Robin van Pesie for top scorer?
It seems I’m too late. Hills are not taking any more bets on Gordon’s first cabinet
20 I remain optimistic that West Country Tories will be denied the gift they need. Fortunately there are relatively few Euro-unrealists amongst the LD parliamentary party and only one of those is from the West Country.
I don’t see what’s the point of this kind of polls. In reality, there are no forced choice for the Lib Dem supporters to choose either Labour or Conservative. :-/
7.”In answer to the question it does seem like the zeitgeist is moving in a different direction. Wathching Brown in his interview yesterday where he gave a solid if unspectacular performance you could see the thrust of the questions ‘are we going to get a new politics without spin PR stunts etc?’.” Roger, looking at the coordinated headlined this morning I would say that spin and PR stunts will be just as prevalent under a Brown government.
9.”That said, I don’t think the referendum demand has legs.” I thought that Brown promised one just like Blair did before him, is this the start of the campaign to make sure that Brown avoids a possible damaging contest and result on this issue? He really doesn’t like having debates that result in a real vote at the end?
How many times can you use the get out clause of a referendum to soothe the voters fears without actually giving them one? Look with interest to see if over the next couple of years some of the deals made this week don’t come back to bite Labour.
The problem with a referendum is that it will get hijacked. Whatever deal is secured, the Eurosceptics, and their allies in the press will push for a no vote before any detail is looked at. The content of any treaty will not even be looked at by the antis.
I cannot see how a referendum will lead to genuine debate. We will see lot stuff of the quality of Kilroy’s “I’m going to smash it.”
32.”I cannot see how a referendum will lead to genuine debate.” You have argued my point about Brown disliking debates which actually result in a vote at the end. You cannot see how a referendum will lead to a genuine debate so instead we should not have one at all in case the opposing view puts up a good campaign and argument.
33 - I have not said we should not have a referendum.
But if we do I think it will be seen by many as a chance so bash the EU, without studying the detail of what the referendum is actually on. We are in the the EU, like it or not. (We could have a referendum on that if there is demand.) But does this agreement enhance the EU for us, or are we better off carrying on in the EU without it? The debate, alas, is unlikely to get that far.
I fear “the German bombed our chip shop” approach may be the argument that carries the day.
If the Lib Dem voters’ second choice (between Labour and Conservative) is shifting more towards Labour, then it may meant that the first preferences of some Lib Dem voters are shifting more towards Conservative. In other words, the Two-Party-Preference between Con and Lab of the whole electorate (not just of the dwindling number of Lib Dem voters) is more stable.