Is Labour being complacent about the by elections?
July 25th, 2007
Can Brown really take much comfort from this?
With all the focus over the past five or six days being on the Tory failure in last Thursday’s by elections to make any progress there has been almost no scrutiny of the Labour numbers.
Reproduced above are the main party performances in the four by elections that Labour has had to defend since the general election. While not wanting to sound like William Rees-Mogg the votes from Sedgefield last Thursday were hardly a vote of confidence in the new Labour government under the new Prime Minister.
The drop in vote share was not that far behind what happened in Dunfermline in February 2006 when the Labour and the Tories were running neck and neck in the polls and the LD share had apparently collapsed. Ealing Southall was a better result for Labour than than Livingstone but not by that much.
At a time when Labour poll leads of 6-7% are being recorded you would have expected something better.
-
Now I don’t buy the “mid-term government” excuse that we’ve heard. This is not a mid-term government but something that is being presented as very new and should be judged as such.
The Tories did not do well last Thursday and neither did Labour. The Lib Dems also disappointed. The only party to come out of the day that can be pleased with itself was the BNP - and that’s something that has hardly received any attention.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Nearly a week late but that’s exactly what I said on the night! There wasn’t a single major party that could have been pleased with their results.
I’ll be interested to see which party actually does anything of note over the next 4-6 weeks, who is the most complacent at this stage?
Good points well made Mike.
I would like to spin (surely say?) that the Conservatives do have excuses here in that the battle was fought during the Brown bounce, however it was not really any good for any party.
BTW, is anyone as irritated by the BBC describing the Brown bounce as “long lasting? I certainly am. See here:
http://aconservatives.blogspot.com/2007/07/brown-bounce-long-lasting.html
Whatever one makes of the results, I would never accuse Labour of being ‘complacent’. GB and his advisors are too shrewd and too paranoid. Hence his mad rush to nick everybody else’s policies.
Another reason why an October election is unlikely and combined with the economic situation i.e. rising interest rates etc is why this parliament might well play long.
As i have said before this talk of early elections is just jesture politics no more no less. It is spin from the Labour camp to demonstrate that Brown has the power to make the decision to go to the polls and his predecesor has not put him in a tight box.
Think about it this way, over the years since PPERA we have watched how long it takes to raise X amount a year. Your really telling me that Brown (Who has been in office for 10 years) will suddenly get people contributing in goalith proportions to pay off the existing debt - meet the Labour parties running costs and hold a general election! Laugh my slides will split open!!!
Unless Lord Sainsbury suddenly decides to sell his shares and donate some of the proceeds i don’t see it happening!
It might present itself as a new administration, but everyone knows its not.
Thats why after 10 years in power, they will be pleased that a re-shuffle of the existing deck of cards, minus the ace, still gives them a good oppurtunity of getting an historic fourth victory, with a chance of a working majority.
4. Another point that comes from that is why would a wealthy person want to donate to the Labour party if they cannot recieve a quid pro-quo. It is hardly going to be because of ideology as the Labour party seems to have become unideological.
These by-elections were bad for Labour and maybe the smokescreen about Cameron came from the Brown camp?
Labour may well be being complacent. I saw in the last thread people talking about Labour targeting Tory marginals due to the Brown bounce, but even if Brown continues to do well, some of this at least will go away. There is no electoral evidence in terms of real votes that Labour can increase the majoirty (the Tory-Labour split in the by elections had a swing from Lab-Con) and if they begin to believe they can, they may find themselves vulnerable elsewhere.
I know we live in an age of what the polls say now, now, now. In the end I struggle to see areas that voted for Howard over Blair seriously voting for Brown over Cameron and Labour re-gaining such seats This is spin, like we had here in Newark in Notts where Labour were spinning at the last election they would regain this marginal (It is now a safe Tory seat after a big increase in the majoirty in 2005.) I believe it will be the other way, Labour trying to hold enough of their marginals to try and keep their majority, and the Tories and Lib Dems where they compete trying to take it away from them.
Didn’t Andrea try and highlight this point about the by elections a few days ago?
1. I don’t know entirely. I think the Tories should be pleased with Sedgefield. Given the near total lack of resources for their man vis a vis Ealing Southall, and a big Lib Dem effort I was quite surprised to see the Tory vote share hold firm, when you’d have thought embarrassment was potentially on the cards. Indeed many were predicting the BNP 3rd place finish ahead of them
BTW in August no part does anything of note. Way it is
Is the Defence Secretary not mic’d up properly on C4 news?
As has been said ad nauseum on this board, nothing in GB’s temperament indicates a risk taker. An early election is a risk. However, there are several elephants in the room, in no particular order:
-cooling economy, increase in interest rates
-EVEL
-Euro Constitution, non-referendum
-etc
Favourite seems to be Spring 2009 would coincide with Euro Elections, perhaps (early) Autumn 2008?
Oh yes, I forgot, the unknown unknowns.
1,
Ukpaul.
From previous thread.
I must admit I find the word scum a bit extreme.
If you called someone that in public, on most occassions you would get an extreme reaction.
As I said on an earlier thread don`t know the man or what he has supposed to have done, but can you explain, so at least I can understand the rational and your obvious rancour.
5 - Reply awaiting your perusal on the previous thread dez….
To save you the time, here it is (without typing mistakes)
For a start, those on the labour side know him as the man who tried to push Blair out and who visited Brown just before doing so. The comments about him on labourhome at the time were very choice.
He is part of a blogging cabal that seeks to blanket sites they don’t agree with with rants and attacks, whilst at the same time allowing no dissent on his own blog (any posts questioning him do not appear).
His by election campaigns have been ones that use personal attacks as their modus operandi, he clearly sanctions this as others don’t appear to be the same. He attacked Jody Dunn in Hartlepool, for example, because she did her job as a lawyer in defending people.
Here’s lib dem Nich Starling on him - http://norfolkblogger.blogspot.com/2007/06/toxic-tom-watson-to-run-labour-by.html
Here’s a tory slant on the ES campaign -
http://timrollpickering.blogspot.com/2007/07/tom-watson-two-names-and-two-faces.html
From QueaQuam Blog (Lib dem) -
“If I wanted to sum up everything that I truly find deplorable about the Labour Party, it is Tom Watson. A dirty tricks campaigner par excellence, a House of Lords abolitionist (and simultaneously supporter of the status quo), anti-electoral reform, pro-compulsory voting, bemoans the civil liberty implications of RFID tags while voting enthusiastically for ID cards, die-hard Blairite loyalist right up until he can detect the wind has changed whereupon he attempts to orchestrate a coup for newfound best friend Gordon Brown, friends of even bigger moron Sion Simon… what it all adds up to is a nasty little man who is just a little bit too much in love with totalitarianism.”
I am by no means alone, in fact all sides of the political spectrum are in some agreement over Watson.
by ukpaul July 25th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
9.IRRC a few people were impressed with the Conservative candidate and how he came across in front of the camera?
14,
Thanks Paul sorry for the confusion, new thread came along so did not know if you had seen it.
12. Dez for me, just knowing that he was involved in that horrendous youtube effort which attempted to use Cameron’s wife and family in such a nasty tasteless way more than backs up what ukpaul is saying.
15 Yes. He did well during and post. Holding up his vote share in that seat with very little support, you’d expect a winnabler Northern seat as a reward being pushed his way now surely
Labour would, I think, win an Autumn election, but it would be a hollow victory, IMHO, with the party getting c.300-330 seats. Why would Brown want to exchange a majority of 64 for that.
The interesting thing about the high BNP vote in Sedgefield is that it wasn’t commented on. It’s almost as if a large BNP vote is taken for granted by political commentators, and thus attracts no attention unless it’s exceptional.
Peter 2 Calling an election at any time is a risk whether in October or otherwise. Not calling an election when you’re well ahead in the polls is also a risk!
Going in October if he maintains his lead( of course that’s the key proviso) is less of a risk than waiting until next Spring when his bounce might well have disappeared.
Going long he can be certain that any honeymoon will have long gone and it will feel a lot more like the end of Labour’s third term than the prologue to GB’s first term.
As for Mike’s point about by elections, Government candidates always suffer drops usually sharp drops in their share of the vote as the turn out drops. Actually Labour did slightly better in Sedgefield than in Hartlepool and they won a majority in 2005.
As for Ealing Labour did far better than anyone expected. Despite the huge efforts of the Opposition they managed collectively a mere 4% increase in their share of the vote. On a GE turnout I doubt they would have progressed at all. If that isn’t a good result for a Government candidate in a by election I don’t know what is.
17,
ChrisD,
From yourself and UKpaul I`m getting the impression he is quite a machiavellian character or is that too polite?
Afraid living in deepest Rydale North Yorkshire there isn`t any deep rivalaries,the Conservatives always win.
John Greenway is always very calm at election time, even had time to chat to me in 05.
Maybe it had an edge when in 86 when the liberals took it in a bye election, but I think not.
Here’s one of the Jody Dunn references -
“The two parties are waging a fierce battle in the contest triggered by the departure of Peter Mandelson. Sir Menzies Campbell has taken the unusual step of writing to Ian McCartney asking for Labour’s “personalised and misguided” attacks to stop.
Sir Menzies said it was unacceptable for Labour to accuse their candidate, Jody Dunn, of “making excuses for junkies” just because, as a barrister, she represented them in court.
He said: “This attack has gone beyond what is reasonable, even in a hard-fought by-election.”
Tom Watson, the Labour MP, who has been acting as the campaign manager in Hartlepool, has accused Ms Dunn of being “soft on drugs” because she represented a heroin addict in court four years ago. “How many other junkies has she made excuses for in court?” said Mr Watson.”
Nice man.
8. “Didn’t Andrea try and highlight this point about the by elections a few days ago? ”
Chris, I don’t think I’ve posted it…however I think you can find disappointments for everyone. The tories in Southall. Labour in Sedgefield* where their % dropped quite a lot. As for the LDs can in Southall they got a modest swign to them, but the seat had a majority lower than Dunfermline….in Sedgefield they went up but not by as much as Lab dropped (like it happened in Dunfermline, Hartlepool, Hodge Hill, Leicester South). So their performance this time has been less strong than in the recent past efforts
You can spin it in both ways…take Sedgefield:
Lab: good to have held with a comfortable majority. Bad to have dropped by 14%
LD: good to have had a good swing to them. Bad to have failed to get all 2005’s Keys vote, not to have squeezed tories and minor parties and not have got all Lab switchers.
Con: good to have held their %. Bad to have dropped in third.
* I think Southall result was indeed pretty good for Labour. As for comparison with Livingston, it wasn’t rally a mid term byelection in Livington either: the government didn’t much to disappoint people between their May election and Cook’s death considering there were the holidays in between…I think they just threw Walter Wolfgang out of the conference hall
Indeed, especially when it’s contrasted with the horrified reaction among the media and the three main parties to Derek Beacon’s election as the country’s only BNP councillor (for the Isle of Dogs) in 1993.
20. “Actually Labour did slightly better in Sedgefield than in Hartlepool and they won a majority in 2005″
When I noted that Sedgefield’s drop was less than Hartlepool’s drop, someone rightly pointed out that Lab was starting from a lower level in Sedgefield (2005 GE) than Hartlepool (2001 GE result)
Sean He would go in October because he didn’t agree with you and expected to win a working majority. That would give him his own mandate for another four to five years. If we are talking about a GB bounce why risk waiting for it to disappear as surely it eventually will?
How wonderful where the Bye-elections in the wake of Major taking over from Thatcher again?
ah yes - Ribble - tory drop of 22% and seat lost to LDs
Neath - tory drop of 8% (from 16%) - not one they were defending
Monmouth - tory drop of 13% and seat lost to Labour
23.Thanks Andrea, I should have gone and checked but I thought you found little comfort for any of the parties other than Labour obviously retaining both seats with a drop in vote.
26. I honestly think he has his best chance of an outright victory in the Autumn what ever the polls say. Whether he has the courage to take the gamble is another matter.
22 What is Mr Watson’s Majority
Andrea I don’t understand your point
Hartlepool 59.2 down to 40.7 (-18.5)
Sedgefield 58.9 down to 44.8 ( -14.1)
In my view Sedgefield was a better result quite clearly or have I missed something?
Andrea [from last thread]
I haven’t seen any coverage on Stockton North yet so can you send me any links Andrea?
22 I don’t like Tom Watson’s tactics but he very successfully used a photo of Tony Lit to undermine that candidature, the Lib Dems of course immediately attacked Labour for these personal attacks…sorry that was an alternative universe where Lib Dem by-election tactics don’t consist of Only LDs can Win Here and attacks on the opposition candidate (selected over the heads of the local party, not local, three jobs, parachuted in etc.). Tom Watson’s playing a less subtle version of the Lord Rennard playbook.
26 If you think the only way for Labour is down, after the Autumn, then yes he should go in the Autumn. I think Labour would emerge with fewer seats than they have now, following an Autumn election.
27 Those were several months, rather than a couple of weeks, after Major took over.
From a Labour point of view, the important thing is that both byes were comfortable holds. A defeat in either would have had a national impact.
In Ealing Southall the Labour vote held up very well. In the last 25 years only two by-elections defended by the governing party have seen a smaller fall in vote share - Kensington and Langbaurgh. This despite a slow start to the campaign, a controversial candidate selection process and serious jitters after five councillors defected to the Cnservatives.
30. Blue Moon, my point is that Hartlepool was faught on 2001 GE results and Sedgefield was fought on 2005 GE results, a year when Lab did worse overall than 2001 and so their starting point is lower. So they were starting from a lower point with some people who already switched in 2005. Not sure if I’ve been clear.
31. Henry, I didn’t see either. However on Cook’s website, there’s a long biography of him (very detailed) where he talks about his relationship with his CLP. After reading it, I’m not surprised by his loss of the trigger ballot
http://www.frankcookmp.com/biography2.shtml
24 Back in 1993, commentators would have ridiculed the idea that the BNP could win 300,000 votes in local elections, as they did this year. You’d have been considered a deluded Nazi fantasist if you made such a prediction.
I think that the media should stop looking at % change and concentrate on retained vote (as that is far more interesting):
Ealing, Southall: Con 104% Lab 85% Lib Dem 113% (Lib Dem)
Sedgefield: Con 101% Lab 76% Lib Dem 167% (Lib Dem)
Blaenau Gwent: Con 161% Lab 115% Lib Dem 126% Plaid 271% Ind 81% (Plaid)
Bromley: Con 78% Lab 30% Lib Dem 186% (Lib Dem)
Dunfermline: Con 76% Lab 65% Lib Dem 177% SNP 111% (Lib Dem)
Livingston: Con 67% Lab 82% Lib Dem 96% SNP 151% (SNP)
Cheadle: Con 105% Lab 52% Lib Dem 107% (Lib Dem)
Bromley: Con lose 22% of their 2005 vote
Labour: Labour lose on average 23% of their 2005 vote
Cheadle: Lib Dems gain 5% on their 2005 vote
Blaenau Gwent: Independents lose 19% of their 2005 vote
In other words, the winning party at the last election has seen their support fall away. Does this mean that by-election voters know that by-elections don’t affect national trends at all?
I agree with Mike that Labour is being complacent about the
by-election results. Despite that I see very little prospect of an election this October. It would need to be called by around end
August. Far too soon to see if the Brown bounce will survive, for Labour to appoint many of it’s canditates and to get in the necessary funding particularly as the Holiday period is starting.
What the polls show is that the Tories are pathetic and Labour are heading for a landslide.
The people are with us and we can do what we want!!
29. “What is Mr Watson’s Majority ”
Over 30%
37 300000 votes for the BNP means they would get MPs and MEPs under PR.
Democracy needs to be modified to exclude invalid opinions.
It isnt difficult. Any party with invalid opinions could be legally banned. With such irreversable laws true democracy can be protected.
41 In raw numbers and the Constituency. Thanks
Mike An election in October would be called at the end of September, not in August. There’s plenty of time. The trade unions will provide the money.
It is interesting all this talk about elections and whether people have overplayed or underplayed. In terms of Labour a telling thing was how quite they were about it really apart from feeding the media pictures of Tony Lit with Blair. I think it was a groung war!
It was a good tactic the Labour party had in emphasising ES and making that the key contest. I say this because it was widely predicted that there would be a large fall off in Labour vote in sedgefield. The result a big dip in a “trophy” seat like Huntingdon for the tories. Obviously if labour do not feel confident about an election they are not going to say so! Though all this move further to the right - whether real or percieved may just cause further trouble - If Labour supporters did not like Blair anymore and thought him too right wing. Why would Brown be any better? Indeed the people Brown aspires to court are the very people who he has irated the most with Pension raids, higher taxes, inheritance tax traps etc…..etc. Will traditional Labour voters not feel negleted?
In terms of Cameron, it may be the case that the media thought he was the best person to speed up the removal of Blair and so obviously was the change candidate, when Blair was around. Now Brown is here and flip floping on all the issues he can to distance himself from the Blair years - Cameron’s price has fallen.
I would not right Cameron off yet as people like me who encouraged others to join the Tories under Cameron are not as sparse in the tory party as people might think. To put it another way do we ever hear of the Labour party MP’s who refused to sign Brown’s corantion papers do we chuff! Or the same people who rebel on a delay basi - Do we chuff!
37 We know you’re worried about the BNP picking up seats on the London Assembly and EP thanks to PR. One of the beauties of FPTP as you point out though is the tendency of other Party voters to rally against them at Local Level and Westminster. At what point though would they threaten to overcome that. We know that you seriously worrieed about Barking. Anywhere else feature on your list. I think you should notice the BNP got an alarming 5% in Wales in May. They’d never really had any serious presence before now
44. Would the Conservatives not say that a Union paid for campaign be a blank cheque from Brown? It would certainly be a gift to the tories as it keeps party finance in the spotlight and Labour have form on this subject.
40. Great, just wait for some more tory proposals then you will have something to implement with your landslide!!!
45. delay basi = daily basis
41. “What is Mr Watson’s Majority ”. Far too much!
Of course Tom Watson does not personally have such a majority - his majority is for the Labour Party, not himself, and his constituency is one where neither of the other two main Parties has the organisation or other resources to even attempt to mount an effective challenge in recent campaigns. This allows him the freedom to spread his nastiness in other parts of the country without having to worry too much about what goes on at home. He is actually only the second worst such Labour propagandist in the country, but bad enough for all that and no doubt would like to displace the ultra-nasty top man.
There is a clear quantum gap between what Watson and his ilk will stoop to and even the toughest stuff which Ted (32) alludes to, which several ’sharp’ practitioners of all major parties (and nationalists too), utilise in local and national elections and by-elections. There is no continuity whatsoever between genuine attacks on selection processes which do, as we all know, trample over local sensitivities in all parties from time to time (in some more than in others), and the vicious and dishonest personal slurs made against Jody Dunn.
36 Fair point Andrea.
Actually the TB factor makes Sedgefield very difficult to assess. He had an extraordinary result in 1997 which has gradually unwound. However, the Hartlepool by election was a real contest with the LDs coming a very good second. That should have made it easier, though not easy, for Labour to get its vote out.
In Sedgefield the LDs never mounted any kind of threat, even choosing a candidate from Newcastle while Labour chose a local man.
Frankly I think the polls are far more important than these results except that Labour’s morale was given a big boost by Ealing, the LDs were relieved and the Tories ended up depressed.
Guido needed help to spot this, but not bad for a man in France with a hang over.
http://www.order-order.com/2007/07/guardianicm-poll-nobody-likes-dave-and.html
Martin Yes they would and will but I don’t see how Labour’s going to get its hands on £20 million in any other way whenever the election’s held although I suppose cheque books will be a little more open with the polls looking better for GB.
By the way I think Red Alternative is a p**s take. I wouldn’t bother to respond.
52. So that’s 18 + 25 = 43% and 26 cannot stand Tories or Cameron. 31% have not made their mind up yet!
It’s no smoking gun though is it. I am a member of the tories and like Cameron and the party does that make me statistically insignificant?
I can see why Labour and LD are so worried by him!
No it’s a loaded question:
If they had a result for do you like Cameron and the tory party…..:smile:
43. “In raw numbers and the Constituency”
West Bromwich East…pre boundary changes it was 11,652 (there aren’t great changes in his seat boundaries, so the notional one will be more or less the same)
51. Blue Moon, all valid points…it’s always difficult to asset these things
50. “He is actually only the second worst such Labour propagandist ”
zebedee, who is the first?
No doubt Cameron is not popular within his own party at the moment. Most Conservatives are bemused by him and don’t understand what he’s up to. Imagine how much he could power things up if he turns that around. He’s not doing that badly as it is overall.
Read your post again Tapestry. What are you saying?
55 Is that the successor Seat to Enoch Powell’s fiefdom
57. I like Cameron, best leader the tories have had for a very long time. I can identify with him and feel a lot of others can too. He has authority when he speaks, easy to follow and is a great act to watch.
See this is what i don’t get with Brown, at PMQ’s he mumbles about complete irrelevance and talks absolute nonsense and yet the “plaudits” rate him. It is no good being a great strategist if people can see right through it. The wearing of Blue ties etc, who is he trying to fool. Like all of Brown’s gimmicks - he will end up eating custard pie off himself!!!
I used to like John Major as PM but once Blair came to power whilst i still had a preference for Major - Blair was easily the better act. Some of the responces Major used to give were nearly as lementable as Brown’s are now. I remember the classic Major one of the tories being 4 - 0 up and he wanted to make it 5 - 0. We all know what happened then!!!
No seriously with Cameron this was always likely to happen as Cameron has similar gifts of being a great communicator as Blair. Brown is not and so he is getting a free ride. Depending on when Brown calls the next election, in theory it is likely to be edging back cameron’s way as Cameron is a *star* (Even to those uncharitable Labour triabilists!!!
):
My reaoning for this is Wilson - followed by Callaghen - followed by Thatcher - followed by Major - followed by Blair.
Of course their are anomilies but it is a trend that is remarkably consistant. THe only flaw is Major winning in 1992 but Kinnock was a special circumstance.
59 - I thought that was Wolverhampton SW
52:
That’s all a bit bizarre. Does anyone know how the questions were framed? Is it possible that the participants weren’t actually given a ‘Likes Cameron and likes the Tories’ option?
62. That was my point in 54. A boll*cks poll really!!!
62 The full questions and responses should be on the ICM site in the next day or so .
56. Andrea, I would not mention him by name because that would feed his ego too much. He is known by those who matter ‘in the field’ but his compass is not quite as great as Mr Watson’s. If you can imagine Tom Watson as a nasty piece of chewing gum you have just stood in and which you cannot get off your shoe, this guy is ’something else’ which gives the same problems and a few more.
56. Roger?
63: I think Mike should cast his sagacious eye over this. There could be serious betting implications if pollsters start using loaded questions.
67. My stomach turned then i thought i was in trouble for posting offensive material!
Another 2 things to bear in mind for Brown going to the polls:
1. Brown might fancy his chances of winning an election, but he must know that he has zero chance of winning a second after that. Therefore, if Brown goes to the polls soon, the most he can expect is 5.5 years as PM. However, if he goes long, he could get as much as 8 years as PM (like John Major did).
2. Brown currently has a comfortable majority of 66. A lot can be done in 3 years with a majority of 66. Perhaps, more even than can be done in 5 years with a majority of, say 20.
66. Henry, have you read the Cook’s link (the second part mainly, the first half is about him inb the 80’s)? Can you understand why I’m not surprised by the result after having read it?
65. Zebidee, “but his compass is not quite as great as Mr Watson’s”…is it a clue to say he’s less fat than TW?
Conhome or PB, not sure which I should be shadowing at the minit!
69 It has been hinted he only wants to “one full term.” Whether that is just like Tony only allegedly “wantin two full terms” and a way to ensure a clear path to the throne is of course a mystery
69. Another interesting point is the boundary changes.
Will it make it easy for Labour to pick off Tory seats for an increased Maj. off 47 or what ever it is? How many seats will it bring into play that is Tory / Labour / LD seats that could churn?
If Labour goes to the polls and it’s more competitive it won’t be one way traffic. You will have nibbles out of here and there!
70 I think he means the individual’s moral compass, i.e their scruples or lack of them
70. Yes, it’s a mad biography for an MP to put on your own website. Goodness knows what goes through their little minds.
72. I wonder if he cut the alledged deal with Milliband? Or even perhaps some more obscure figure?
One thing for sure i bet he did not dine out on it this time!!!
Maybe Milliband locked him in the toilet and haggled!!! 
But to get locked once in the toilet is unfortunate - twice!!!! 
:lol: 
Mboy fair point but I wouldn’t underestimate how badly a new PM wants his own mandate. Also he will go early only if he exopects a bigger majority than 20. If you read one of Nick’s recent posts Labour HQ is bullishly talking about gains not losses at the next GE.
http://the-tap.blogspot.com/2007/07/sedgfield-has-changed-electoral.html
77. Who was the Labour HQ contact: Comical ali?
Mike Smithson. Congrats on a nice little review for your book in Prospect magazine.
75. Who do you think is the favourite for the new selection? And do you have info on Easington? I think the selection process has officially started.
Some weeks ago I was reading about Bolton South East, but I think it’s outside “your area”
The idea that Labour is “complacent” is nuts. I lost count of the number of email reminders that I received about helping at Ealing Southall and about 60 activists took several hours out of a national forum the weekend beforehand to canvass and leaflet. Nobody was panicking or anything, but the circumstances were less than ideal. If you remember, there was an argy-bargy about Labour’s selection and some aggrieved councillors switched to the Tories. ES has a high ethnic minority population and Iraq is still in many peoples’ minds. So a mere loss of 7.5% seems to me a stunningly good result for Labour. It was bad for the Conservatives not just because the increase in their vote was pathetic but because they threw everything at it and Dave visited the constituency several times, thereby making himself look silly.
So I think there was relief and delight at the result but as far as complacency is concerned, you could hardly accuse the ultra-cautious, belt and braces Gordon of being complacent, I don’t think he knows what the word means.
And in particular no-one is complacent about the rise of the BNP. Quite typical though, that they did well in an overwhelmingly white constituency - there is nothing better for spreading myths about immigrants than their absence.
81. I don’t know who the Stockton North favourite is, or if Frank Cook will be contesting it. Barbara Roche will definately be in the mix, and Norma Stephenson from Unison is expected to run. Norma isn’t universally popular apparently and I think there will be at least one or two local councillors running - possible Alex Cunningham?
The Easington favourite is Grahame Morris who works for John Cummings, but Mike Routledge could be the one to watch. He’s a local councillor as well as the Amicus Regional Political Officer. David Taylor-Gooby hasn’t a real chance, but will probably make the shortlist and his second preferences could swing the result. I’m led to believe that among the applicants is ‘Blur’ drummer Dave Rowntree. He’ll almost certainly not make the cut. I think the shortlist is some time in August and the selection in September.
70. Below the neck, Andrea, yes. Is this 20 questions?
83. Thanks for the Easington info. Hustings are on Sept 1 and shortlist on August 15 (according to the timetable I saw on LabHome). Rowentree is also trying in Liverpool West Derby (where Wareing lost the trigger). I suppose he doesn’t have much chance there either.
Do you know if the trigger contest was close for Cook or did he lose by a big margin?
If you’re interested, in Bolton South East the local paper published the nomination situation last week (but not all branches had met to make their nomination at that point. For ex all affiliates had still to make it…they’ve time until July 31) and Phil Collins had just 1 nomination at that point (the one with more nominations was at 5 at that stage)
Re 84, Zebidee, if we don’t get ti find out who it is, yes
79 Nick always angrily denies spinning on this site. He claims that Labour MPs are being asked to help out in Tory held constituencies not just their own marginals. You’re free to think he’s lying but that’s what he posted. I think it’s fair to say that Labour MPs are leaving for their holidays with their tails up. That doesn’t mean that a few indifferent polls wouldn’t puncture the mood quite quickly of course.
85. I hope Phil Collins isn’t selected. Don’t know the margin Frank lost the trigger contest by I’m afraid.
84. “Below the neck, Andrea”
sorry
88. The contenders with nominations at that point were: Kevin Meagher (CLP chair), Yasmin Qureshi (Brent East 2005 candidate; her family lives in Bolton), Cllr Akhtar Zaman (Bolton councillor), Julie Hilling (vice-chair of Bolton West CLP), Phil Collins (Blair’s former speechwriter), Ian Stewart MP, Nargis Khan (Hackney councillor, originally from Bolton), Jane Lewis (from Bury North) and Joan Veitch (from Salford)
90. Didn’t Nargis Khan stand for Manchester Withington too?
90 - it will be Against All Odds if Phil Collins gets it
91, yes, I think so. She was on the shortlist too IIRC
Those of us who remember the previous thirty years, when governments lost by-elections with 20%plus swings against them, were amazed that Labour did so well. Some of the Tory posters have forgotten, how they were talking up their prospects in ES, a peruse of those posts would probably cause them some embarrassment. If there was a GE tomorrow, Labour would be returned with an increased majority, the pressure to go this autumn will grow and grow, by September it will be unstoppable.
“If there was a GE tomorrow, Labour would be returned with an increased majority, the pressure to go this autumn will grow and grow, by September it will be unstoppable.”
Wonder what turnout would be like though considering that half the country is under water and the other half is on holiday?
OT: There’s a new feature on facebook where you can sign up to which presidential candidate you support. It’s useful to know where the younger vote is going. Right now the figures are (for those over 5,000):
Clinton - 28,000
McCain - 6,000
Paul - 14,000
Romney - 12,000
Edwards - 11,000
Obama - 112,000
Thompson - 6,000
Gore and Giuliani aren’t listed.
95
Well as the part of the country that is under water, is mainly Tory, could be a good tactic!
I seem to recall some postings from people here betting on Tour de France in past days…well, Rasmussen has apparently left the race…
http://www.worldnewsaustralia.com.au/region.php?id=138684®ion=3
97. I wonder if the floods could actually be something which ends up derailing a possible Autumn election in the way that foot and mouth delayed the one in 2001?
99
Put the Labour landslide back a month y’mean. These things develop a momentum of their own, once the dynamic is established, it’ll just move, Brown won’t be able to halt it, he’ll have to call one whether he wants to or not.
94 and some were saying that these by-elections had so many ’special factors’ the results were meaningless… including you
the pant wetting excitement of some Labour posters over the past few days is on a par with some of the more excitable tory posts when we were at 40% - though no-one compares to icarus’ precipitous descent into fantasy posting about ‘the real opposition’.
for an objective view look at how the Sun has covered the last few days - If Cameron had any genuine problems the Sun would have been over him like a rash - it has spent the time bashing Gordon. In answer to the question of the thread then yes - a remarkable amount of Labour complaceny - not shared by Gordon I suspect.
92 - if it is to be Phil Collins at least it will stop him making that dreadful music. Can Labour select Celine Dion too for a nice safe seat?
All - Gordon knows that if he calls the election now, he will lose. So he will hold on and lose it later.
I thought “that” Phil Collins was going to leave the country when a Labour government arrived. They should have put that on their pledge card.
102 - Titanic - is that a song about Labour’s next election campaign?
52 & 54. Guido’s cited story is nonsense. It refer to a question that was never asked in the survey (who like both was never asked), and so is yet another bogus Guardian story. What do you expect from the Guardian. Only for for toilet paper really. Like much of the press right now.
The great irony is that what Mike has proven above is that the ES and Sedgefield results were the best Conservative by-election results since Cameron took over, and since the last General Election in 2005.
I actually went further back still. They are the best Conservative by-election results since the late 1980’s. Labour support did collapse in both by-elections. Not as dramatically as the Tories in the mid-1990’s but half-way there. No one is claiming the Conservatives will get a triple digit majority. Just that a hung parliament is likely. Will labour or Conservatives be the bigger party? This is uncertain.
We’d have to wait till next years locals, and a few more by-election to get a clearer picture. As things stand it looks bad for labour. The poll leads did not translate into positive support in these by-elections - there was still big collapse for labour. When it comes to actual voting, it looks like the labour poll lead is as fake as the Guardian story.
“What is Mr Watson’s Majority
Over 30%’”
Bugger
103. True enough.
People forget the basic facts.
What does Gordon gain if he goes now? At best, an extra two years in power but with a greatly reduced majority; on an average day, loses his majority; on a bad day, goes to opposition.
No way will he call an election.
tjm @ 96 re US elections. Ron Paul’s popularity, at least with web users, is remarkable. What it shows is there is room for a serious anti-Bush (for want of a better term) Republican to enter the race.
Charlie Gordon MSP is apparently considering to become a stalking horse to finally kick out a contest for Scottish Labour leadership as McConnell is still in place
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.1569824.0.0.php
Can someone just tell me what is the f***ing point in the Tour de France?
A bunch of skinny people arguing over who did the most drugs? I can see that at the end of Tottenham Court Road every night, and I don’t have to speak French to really enjoy it.
What an embarrassing sport.
Gordon’s going to Washington next week (or the week after), no? A picture of him with Bush, plus the news today that we’re not pulling out of Iraq any time soon, should be worth at least a couple points drop.
Re 112, SeanT, “A bunch of skinny people arguing over who did the most drugs? I can see that at the end of Tottenham Court Road every night, and I don’t have to speak French to really enjoy it.”
I enjoy cycling, though like most things doing it rather than watching it.
The Ealing Southall election result was excellent for Labour if pb.com predictions count for anything. Labour won 41% of the vote but only 7 of 74 competition entrants thought they would do this well or better. Similarly only 14 entries predicted that the Tories would do as bad or worse than they did in terms of vote share.
Predictions regarding how JohnLoony would perform were better with 36 expecting him to get fewer votes than he actually achieved and 38 over-estimating his performance.
Labour have every right to be pleased with their performance. It was better than expected. Whether or not that makes them complacent I don’t know but they’re fools if they are.
At the moment Labour are totally dependent on the Tories failing to get their act together: there’s just so much to get stuck into but instead the opposition are bickering amongst themselves. Surely, surely they can unite behind Cameron instead of conspiring to undermine him to the extent that only 8% of those asked by YouGov voters think he’s ’strong’. Labour should most definitely beware an outbreak of sanity on the opposition benches.
113
Tonights tv clips of flood victims in Oxford very hostile to Gordo,assume he won’t be going there in a hurry, seems the blame game has already started.
115.”At the moment Labour are totally dependent on the Tories failing to get their act together: there’s just so much to get stuck into but instead the opposition are bickering amongst themselves. Surely, surely they can unite behind Cameron instead of conspiring to undermine him to the extent that only 8% of those asked by YouGov voters think he’s ’strong’. Labour should most definitely beware an outbreak of sanity on the opposition benches.”
Interesting observation, but are they bickering amongst themselves or is there a lot of wishful thinking coming from Labour, the libdems and a few in the media? We tories have always shot ourselves in the foot in the past doing this, but what happens if all the conjecture comes to nothing?
104 - that Phil Collins did leave the country in 1997. He now resides in Switzerland. Mr Collins is one of the few people in the world I cannot stomach.
Paul Daniels and Andrew Lloyd Webber both failed to leave the country, despite having pledged to.
Seen Gordon Brown doing the rounds in Gloucester on the news. He seems to work the crowd in a rather sweet unassuming but very friendly way. Bit like Charles Kennedy actually.
I can imagine Blair doing it in a loud voice to make sure the TV crews heard every word, with silly smiles. Cameron too.
116 - the Oxford clips were hostile. But were they locals? I saw a lot of “Woodcraft folk” banners in the background.
What evidence is mustered to support the ‘Gordon has no balls’ theory that’s routinely trotted out here? He didn’t split the Labour party by launching a coup against Tony but with the benefit of hindsight it looks like he judged it perfectly. Is there anything else that he’s done or failed to do which suggests he’s a bottler?
If the floods don’t dampen people’s enthusiasm for him straight away, then boredom, other events and, increasingly, interest rates will do the same job fairly steadily. And he must realise it. He’ll go sooner rather than later. Next spring.
120
I don’t know,I was surprised at the number of banners etc and how well it seemed to be organised,so maybe stage managed?
I know it’s only wikipedia, but here is a link to show some more about the Woodcraft Folk.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Woodcraft_Folk#Philosophy
I don’t know a great deal about them.
123 - any organisation with a youth wing called “Pioneers” sounds a bit Soviet to me.
117. The grammar schools row was very damaging. The move away from the 2005 manifesto is proving consistently contentious - particularly, you’re right, from traditional supporters in the press rather than within the party. The recent, quickly smothered mumblings of discontent from within the parliamentary party. The grass-roots hostility to the imposition of a candidate. The refusal by the 1922 to accept that all statements should be cleared through the leader’s office. The defection. And Lord Kalms’ little outburst. All these things on their own might mean nothing but together they definitely suggest that all is not well.
125 that definitely deserves a spin alert.
ALl parties have some dissent or they die.
D Skinner anyone? And a few dozen more on the Labour benches as we see when there is a rebellion against the Tory policies that New Labour frequently adopts.
Apparently the Thames was tipped onto the streets of Oxford according to the BBC.
Do they not know that the Thames does not flow through Oxford?
It is called the Thames before and after but in Oxford is the Isis
A very good article in Tory Home entitled something like ‘we need to stop an autumn election not change the leader’. It exactly exemplifies my views.
Does it definitely deserve ‘a spin alert’?
I’ve been reading pb.com for ages and it does seem to me that if people point out truths which are difficult for the Tories they’re accused of spinning or astro-turfing. Whatever the merit of the point.
I was asked if the tories really were ‘bickering’. And I think the answer is definitely yes. That Davies and Hague have been sent out to calm nerves and assure the grass roots that Cameron is still Conservative, that Davies has been issuing a call for calm, the list of examples I gave in the previous post, the uproar on ContinuityIDS.com: all these things suggest that the Tories are suffering from more than their fair share of dissent.
Can I not say that and my position be taken at face value?
I enjoyed the discussion you were involved in this afternoon about Turkey by the way. The kind of thing which makes me dig past the stuff that I think of as spin and filler.
127:
Benedict, your post just prompted me to look at the Wikipedia entry for the the Thames/Isis distinction. Dear me, it’s complicated at this time of night:
‘The part of the Thames running through Oxford is often given the name the River Isis, although historically, and especially in Victorian times, gazetteers and cartographers insisted that the entire river was correctly named the River Isis from its source until Dorchester-on-Thames. Only at this point, where the river meets the River Thame and becomes the “Thame-isis” (subsequently abbreviated to Thames) should it be so-called; current Ordnance Survey maps still label the Thames as “River Thames or Isis” until Dorchester. However since the early 20th century, this distinction has been lost in common usage outside Oxford, and some historians suggest the name Isis - although possibly named after the Egyptian goddess of that name - is nothing more than a contraction of Tamesis, the Latin (or pre-Roman Celtic)name for the Thames.’
125.”The recent, quickly smothered mumblings of discontent from within the parliamentary party.” Were they smothered or was there no appetite for that kind of dissent?
Interestingly, the defection and even Lord Kalm’s criticism seemed to generate a more robust response from tory posters, the likes of David Davis giving such an unequivocal response to Lord Kalm’s criticism does bring into question the reports from some journalists. Is he still a donor or is it true as some have reported that he has not donated any money to the party since Cameron was elected? Reports suggest that donations to the party are on the increase?
The ironic thing about the grammar school row should be a lesson to some in the party who supported them, if it generates that much heated debate and rows amongst the party members then it is not a vote winning policy.
Re 130, Robusticus, There I was with a semi flippant point…
(Actually I am considering going to the BBC and punching a few reporters for gross inaccuracy like constantly talking about flooding at a power station rather than a sub station and so on, or describing Gordon Brown’s bounce as long lasting despite the fact it is only a month old!)
131. I think you’re right that there’s some evidence that very many Conservative MPs are desperate to avoid washing dirty linen in public. Maybe tonight’s meeting will have put paid to further lapses.
But don’t tell me that the Tories have looked good recently because they just haven’t.
The ICM details are up:
http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Politics/documents/2007/07/25/ICMPoll_new.pdf
but the mystery highlighted by Guido is not resolved: in the table, the ‘dislike both’ options are missing for all three parties. So the Guardian report on this question misrepresents the table, which in turn itself makes no sense. I think we might all avert our eyes from that question altogether.
Re 134, Nick Palmer, yes the dislike both is missing though the do like both, is there which was missing from the graphic produced on Guido’s blog.
Has anyone seen the actual paper and can they confirm that Guido’s graphic is what appeared?
AS another observation the questions look almost ideal to give a Brown bounce almost begging for him to be given a chance. Or is that just my perception?
134. It looks as if “dislike both” was not an option. There were only the 5 possibilities:
Like / dislike
Like / like
Dislike / like
Refused
Don’t Know
The sum of the 5 answers comes to 100% in each case.
One of the reasons Cameron may be having a hard time, according to
Nick Robinson, is that Gordon has lurched to the right and is pandering to the baser instincts readers of the Daily Mail and Sun.
He launched his campaign strutting in front of the Union Jack and hired a former head of the CBI and former head of the Navy for a ‘government of all the talents’.
He’s adopted the Daily Nail’s agenda on Gambling and Cannabis and has been reassuring the Spun about foreign prisoner deportations. Now it seems he’s come round to the Tory proposal of border police.
Nick winds his analysis up with The left meanwhile have been given very little to celebrate save for a man they trust replacing a man they’d come to loathe. Clever isn’t it
123 - Woodcraft Folk are sort of a socialist version of the scouts, I used to teach some students who were involved in it.
I agree that the Sedgefield result was somewhat bleak for Labour considering how far its share of the vote fell but my guess is that it will return to super safe Labour status at the next general election.
However, Ealing Southall was a very good result for Labour considering the local fall-out from Sharma’s selection. The Conservatives were only 5 or 6% behind Labour in last years locals here, which should have given them a decent shot at winning this seat. There were those who were relishing the prospect of Labour coming in third! It didn’t happen; while a 5070 Lab majority came as a very pleasant surprise.
The real test for Cameron, and Brown for that matter, will come should there be a by-election in a Lab-Con marginal, with a majority of 5000 or less. Were the Tories to fall short there, then the ‘malcontents’ within the Conservative Party will have something to grumble about.
134:
Yes, it looks like it was just a dodgy graphic in the end (a misprint in the Guardian? I never thought I’d live to see the day). I suppose it’s fair enough not to bother with the ‘Dislike both leader and party’ question as the amount of people, say, intending to vote Tory who don’t actually like the party or it’s leader would surely be a bit on the low side.
Has ICM asked this question before, does anyone know? It might be interesting to see what happened with previous leaders. Could be that Howard, IDS etc. were even less liked amongst Tory voters than Dave is.
140:
Oooh, forgive the “it’s” in the above post - one of the worst punctuation mistakes there is!
135.”AS another observation the questions look almost ideal to give a Brown bounce almost begging for him to be given a chance. Or is that just my perception?”
According to sky interactive tonight they are reporting that 6 MP’s wrote to the 1922 committee, as they did earlier today. Can someone point me to the evidence that confirms that report?
I did a message a few hours ago which seems to have disappeared. The gist of it is that the opposition to Labour is split among various parties instead of being tactically concentrated on one party in by-elections.
Folks - Labour is rightly chuffed about it’s byelection performance.
Brent East, Hodge Hill, Hartlepool, Leicester South all demonstrated massive swings to Labour where similar majorities than the Ealing majority were lost, or nearly lost. To win with 5000 votes to spare, nearly 8,000 in Sedgefield, is simply far far better than Labour could have expected.
At mid-term this is fantastic news. The point about byelections is that over time they display a pattern because they happen in diverse enough areas that you can start to say things about what they mean. Two on the same night, at different ends of the country in phenomenally different places showing the same pattern says something.
That the vote is split is not evidence that therefore the opposition to Labour is GREATER than it seems but that it is LESS than it seems. If there were genuine, strong “anyone but Labour” feelings out there (as there needs to be to oust the government) then voters would coalesce around the main opposition party - the Tories. Unless a clear signal was given by either Tory or Lib Dems that one or other was the main opposition in a given seat (see some of the mid 1990s byeelections that the Libs won where Labour opted out effectively).
If voters are clamouring to get rid of Labour they know they need to put momentum behind Cameron’s conservatives - not only did they not do this in any great numbers this time round - they completely failed to do it at all.
Byelections are an opportunity to send a message to the government - and that’s never going to be a simply “we love you!”:
A proportion will always drift from the governing party to others - including the libs - in order to send some message or other
Only iF the message is “we want a change of government” do people go heavily for the main opposition party. This wasn’t happening in the mid 1980s when the SDP were on the charge - and labour got stuffed all over the place.
Labour were favourites in 92 because after 1989 it did start happening - without a massive sustained press barrage and Labour mismanagement, 1992 was there for the taking. By 1997 the byelections were pointing, with swings direct from government to main opposition of well over 20%, to a mood of “we want change” that was irreversible.
That mid term in this term the results are better than mid term last term for Labour - and not much better for the Tories (better in percentage terms - worse in that there was little appetite in the electorate for a stop labour coalition unlike in 2004 byelections)is obviously excellent