Are the Cleggies having second thoughts?
December 5th, 2007
-
Does the odds-on favourite need to do more than look good?
With only nine to to go before voting ends in the Lib Dem leadership there’s been a lot of questioning in the Lib Dem blogsphere over whether the odds-on and strong polling favourite, Nick Clegg is the right choice. He is also the candidate on whom I have bet £900.
One factor that has sparked off the concern was his lacklustre performance on Tuesday’s Today Programme on Radio 4. This was from prominent Lib Dem blogger James Graham and, up until then a strong Cleggie.
“I’ve just been listening to Nick Clegg and Chris Huhne’s head-to-head on the Today Programme. For a Cleggite, it made for pretty uncomfortable listening..the broadcast media is the real battleground in the struggle to win the hearts and minds of the public. And once again, Clegg came off as dramatically weaker than Huhne..The difference was obvious. Huhne trotted off a series of clear and concise soundbites while Clegg waffled. It isn’t as if this problem hasn’t been remarked upon before; why hasn’t Clegg sorted it out?
This provoked this comment on Graham’s site:-
“I now have serious misgivings about the possibility of young Mr Clegg being eaten alive if he does emerge victorious by whim of the nice-minded Lib Dem electorate. As one who had serious misgivings about the wisdom of electing Ming last time out (and therefore supported Chris Huhne then as well), I hope and pray I won’t have a second cause to go round moaning: “I told you so”.
Here on PBC Rob C made the following observation:-
I bet Clegg is glad most Lib Dem members voted straight away because imo Huhne has been the more impressive figure in the campaign, even before the revealing interview with the candidates on this morning’s Today programme. I have a feeling we have been spun a line, that docile and nice Lib Dem members have possibly swallowed, that Clegg is the one with potential and voter appeal while Huhne only speaks to the faithful. Well sorry what is required is someone who really knows his brief, can think on his feet, be combative if necessary and can deal with the media. Huhne has these qualities. Clegg by contrast comes across as pleasant but woolly and waffly.
Saturday’s YouGov poll of party members had Clegg with a reasonable lead but found that Huhne was rated significantly higher on competance and policy while Clegg was said to have “more voter appeal” whatever that means.
To command media attention you need the skills that Huhne has been showing. Many in the party think it’s simply about looking good which betrays a woeful ignorance about how the media works.
My guess is that these second thoughts are probably too late to affect the outcome and that my £900 is safe.
Help PBC. If you are buying political books this Christmas please use the link to Politicos below. Their prices are very competitive and the site gets a commission on each sale.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I’m pretty astonished that Clegg is still such an overwhelming favourite. From my vantage point outside the Lib Dems, he’s been pretty much invisible throughout the campaign, whereas Huhne is never off TV or out of the papers.
Plus Huhne at least has some views that are at odds with Labour and the Tories, most importantly on Trident. He’s not the most inspiring person in the world, but in a boring contest like this he ought to be a shoo-in. Clegg would just be a waste of everyone’s time.
How did Clegg ever become the “favourite” in the first place? I only “know” that he “is” the favourite, because the-media-said-so at the start of the campaign.
You need to bear in mind that 2 of the comments you quote in your piece are from people on Chris Huhne’s campaign team so they are not without bias!
James Graham obviously isn’t - but you need to read his full piece to put that comment in context.
It looks increasingly likely that we are set for the second Cathcart by-election in less than 3 years.
Result last time:
Glasgow Cathcart, Result: May 2007
1. Lab 39% (n/c)
2. SNP 29% (+13%)
3. Ind 13% (n/a)
4. Con 10% (-2%)
5. LD 8% (n/c)
http://news.scotsman.com/politics.cfm?id=1896542007
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.1881095.0.0.php
4. The SNP must be in with a good shout this time. Surely the voters of Cathcart are getting a bit sick of their Labour MSPs ending up in jail?
Any idea if the SNP candidate will be the same one from May, James Dornan? I only ask because he used to be my boss. If he gets in, my dreams of having an insider in the corridors of power will be one step closer to fruition. Mwa ha ha.
Who was the independent in Cathcart last time, by the way? If even half his/her vote transfers to the SNP, it starts to look very juicy indeed. The Labour deficit at Holyrood up to 3?
Hmmm. If Wendy Alexander had emails predating the scandal, why didn’t she just say so?
7 - Good question.
Well, I hope whoever wins the Liberal Democrats’ leadership election gets the Party to clean up their act.
Older readers will recall that I was recently involved in a successful local health-care campaign. Our friendly neighbourhood Focus Team have now put out a leaflet (or perhaps a little while back, I don’t live in the “target” ward) in which a member of the Team expresses her pleasure at this outcome. Pity they were all too busy to dirty their hands with actually helping us to do it. It would have been nice to say that our Action Group contained supporters of all major parties.
Fact. There are no Liberal Democrats on the local Council (Westminster City). AFAIK, they’ve never managed to elect even one since it was formed over forty years ago.
“Are the Cleggies have second thoughts?”
Too late… All your votes are belong to Clegg.
10 - yes, like Peter Welch pointed out in the Liberal Review”, most of those who will vote have probably already cast their vote.
As a Conservative I’d be more worried about Huhne than Clegg. Clegg is just a pale imitation of Cameron and offers nothing new, whereas Huhne strikes me as a staunch liberal with the oratory strength to make a real impact.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
A fine precis on the work of the hapless James Graham! They recently introduced a rule into film reviewing where “This film is the most spectacular garbage I have ever seen” cannot be abbreviated for publicity purposes into “This film is the most spectacular I have ever seen”
Obviously this rule has not yet been introduced into political betting!
Just to go O/T but a reply to what Nick Palmer said last night at comment 259 he stated. “Witan: if so, then to what do you attribute the fact that the Shadow Leader of the House welcomed the Hayden Phillips proposals when they were first made last spring? ”
If we look at what Theresa May actually said
We welcome the publication of Sir Hayden Phillips’ report. We accept his main recommendations. We want to have cleaner and cheaper politics, and we want to work with the other parties to achieve that goal. However, if cleaner and cheaper politics is the goal, we start a long way from that point. The cash for peerages scandal has pushed the public’s estimation of politicians to a new low. This issue is not just about our vanity, nor is it just a joke that can be easily written off. Public cynicism about our political process is deeply damaging to our democracy, so will the Leader of the House agree to hold cross-party talks on Sir Hayden’s recommendations as soon as possible?
There is much to welcome in Sir Hayden’s report. We support the moves towards a long-term cap on donations to political parties and a reduction in the general election campaigning cap, and we are happy to discuss spending caps on all year round non-election campaigning and proposals for tighter controls on third-party expenditure, greater transparency on donations, such as those by unincorporated associations, and new powers for the Electoral Commission. Does the Leader of the House share our support for those proposals?
Sir Hayden suggests that it might be desirable to control local campaign spending outside election times, but he rightly notes the difficulties in putting that into practice, such as the variance of constituency boundaries according to the type of election, the practice of targeting marginal constituencies which is inevitable in our electoral system, and the fact that local party officers tend to be volunteers. Despite our scepticism about the need for local limits, in order to secure agreement we are prepared to consider them, but subject to one condition: that any caps imposed at local level do not entrench incumbency. Does the right hon. Gentleman agree to that?
It has long been the position of the Conservative party that in order to restore public trust we must remove the dependency of the political parties on all large donors, regardless of whether they are individuals, businesses or trade unions. I am glad that Sir Hayden has reached the same conclusion. Does the Leader of the House agree with Sir Hayden’s proposal that caps on donations should apply across the board—to individuals, businesses and trade unions?
Sir Hayden’s report suggests that, despite the cap on donations, trade union affiliation fees could count as individual donations on the condition that
“it is possible to trace payments back to identifiable individuals”.
Does the Leader of the House agree that any such system must be free from abuse? Does he agree that if affiliation fees are to count as individual donations it is imperative that individual trade union members are able each year to opt in to political funds, rather than being left to opt out, as is currently the case? Given that more than half of all union members who pay affiliation fees do not vote Labour, should not members who opt in to political funds be able to choose annually to which party their fees should go?
These are very important questions because it is, of course, Labour’s financial links to the trade unions that have prevented reform until now. [Interruption.] The party’s national executive committee recently pledged to “vigorously oppose plans” for an across-the-board cap on donations, saying that
“the Labour Party cannot accept a statutory uniform donation cap…It would also undermine the Labour Party federal structure and seek to amend a system of Trade Union contributions”.
However, as Sir Hayden says,
“a limit on donations need not…challenge the Party’s constitutional relationship with the trade unions”.
See here for more details.
Typical Labour spin!
Couldn’t you find a link to spare us pages of Theresa May at this time of the morning?
Maginally o/t
Last week it emerged that Northern Rock had raised £71bn through a Jersey-registered trust called Granite, which issued a prospectus that told potential investors: “Any profits … will be paid for the benefit of the Down’s Syndrome North East Association (UK) and for other charitable purposes.”
Down’s Syndrome North East, a small charity run by volunteers from a semi-detached house on the outskirts of Newcastle, was told nothing about this and did not receive any money. During the period that Northern Rock was using its name to raise billions of pounds, volunteers were raising a few hundred pounds through sponsored slimming and cycling tours, and primary school children donating similarly small sums.
Alistair Darling needs to seek assurances that all is well with Northern Wreck,I’m so sorry Northern Rock
I’m not all that concerned about the prospect of Clegg as leader to be honest. I don’t see anything that he says that will differentiate him that much from the Lab or Tory, to get noticed in the media. That together with the pressure and expectation of taking over from the effective Vince Cable will make his 100 days tricky than some new leaders.
Fitaloon. Ending your post-which you thoughtfully posted last night as well-with the words “typical Labour spin” was presumably ironic?
3 - Well I’m not on his campaign team, in fact I’d have been unhappy if Huhne won last time but, now, if Clegg is elected I can foresee a real problem.
I realised this at the beginning of the campaign, my only concern is that it took people so long to figure out they were being misled.
18) I’m sure if you look at your comment 13) you will see that Nick’s comment was a very fine precis of what Theresa May had to say.
Will today see another PMQs with neither Huhne nor Clegg getting onto their hind legs?
The obviously solution is to make the Libdem leadership a, ‘Jobshare’ Alternate days Nick on Monday, Chris on Tuesday and so on. The advantage would also be you could split up the public holidays, ‘Ok Chris I’ll do Xmas day this year, you have Boxing day, next year the other way around’ It could catch on!!
Ahem early morning finger trouble, (washed my hands last night, can’t do a thing with ‘em) The obvious solution!!
James Graham is usually right about these things….
It’s not just the Lib Dem members that have bought the line about Clegg being the better media performer, though. Most of the media also seem to have bought it, which demonstrates a fairly shallow understanding of how their own profession works.
You at least Mike will have the satisfaction of knowing that you said all of this right at the start of the campaign in the post about the party being saddled with another problematical leader which I seem to remember was rather criticised at the time.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz………..
Last time round the Tories were making out that whoever leads the LDs was utterly irrelevant and would make no difference at all.
This time, on this site, they are discussin the merits of Huhne v Clegg. Why the change?
I have long thought that the Lib Dems best move was Huhne now and Clegg later. Later may be as soon as 2010 after the next GE.
The odds indicate that the Lib Dems are going to lose seat at the next GE. That is a brutal reality of the squeeze that has gone on with Cameron and Brown.
Could Clegg survive as Leader the loss of a 1/3rd of his MPs? 2010 could see Clegg gone and Huhne regarded as too old/failed candidate so he gets passed over for someone else.
Clegg clearly requires more parliamentary and media experience but according to the betting is going to get the Leadership now, which is too soon. Just like Hague, the Lib Dems look like wasting a potentially good Leader.
21, 22, No, it’s not going to happen. Vince is enjoying himself too much!
15. 18. Roger’s a bit batey again today. Wonder why?
Apart from concern at Mikes £900 - not much we can do about it all now. Nick has a sensible letter rubbishing Jackie Ashley in today’s Guardian.
http://tinyurl.com/2g97pq
I am confident that Nick will be good but one problem is that the result doesn’t come out until 15th December. I am not even sure that there are any PMQs before January after that so whoever wins will disappear until the new year.
Anyway what will Cameron (and Cable) lead on at PMQs?
Blair, Brown, Cameron, Campbell, Cable and now Clegg- all lends support to the theory that those higher in the alphabet have an unfair advantage in life. Icarus’s surname starts with a “W”!
O/T Good News for first time buyers. . .maybe.
“House prices dip 1.1% in November”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7128308.stm
“At the same time, the Bank of England has revealed that the number of mortgage approvals has fallen to a near three-year low.
The Bank’s latest report showed 88,000 new mortgages for home buyers were approved in October, 12% lower than in September and down 31% from October 2006. “
31. 1% lower prices don’t mean much if you can’t get a mortgage.
Well if even the excellent Paul Linford has only bothered to read Mike’s precis I better fill James Graham’s missing line
“While I think Clegg was significantly better than Huhne at the hustings last week……”
For what it’s worth as the early leader I don’t find Clegg’s reticence at all surprising and neither should Paul Linford with his history in marketing. Remember Avis’s famous slogan knowing they could never compete with Hertz “We try harder”? The market leader should never make a splash.
Interesting article Mike. I do hope Clegge wins and lives down to my expectations
Perhaps they will ditch him qucik and have a proper contest between Cable and Huhne? They have after all developed a keen talent for regicide.
Rather off topic perhaps, but that photo of Huhne is the image of Mr Bean
Poor Clegg. He has the support of Woger
I’ve supported Huhne from the start and only seen things to re-inforce that decision as time as gone by.
However, if Clegg does win my hope is that he can build a team around him that is seen to be solid and united so that he has support as he grows into the role.
In the last few weeks Clegg and Huhne have had more media time than they can probably expect as leader during a similar timespan. Hopefully Clegg can learn from his mistakes and become a more polished performer rather than a “waffler”.
Both Cameron and Brown were pretty poor in their first weeks as leaders, but have improved.
It’s going to be close, and if Clegg wins I can’t see him getting more that 55% of the votes.
John L @ 21.
Two points there John. Firstly Mr Cable is Acting Leader and is thus called by the Speaker. Secondly, it’s likely that both Mr Huhne and mr Clegg entered a period of PMQs purdah to avoid giving either an advantage. Of course they might have asked a question on alternate weeks.
On the main thread. I think it likely that Mr Clegg has played a safe hand and has felt he didn’t need to take undue risks. In contrast Mr Huhne, has it would appear, taken a more robust line as the challenger in the hope of gaining some traction.
However I believe, as appears likely, that the Liberal Democrats have made the correct decision in electing Mr Clegg and fear he will chip into our lead in the polls.
38 - Peter, it is very good to read an alternative view such as yours, rather than the usual “Gordon / Harriet / Ming / Clegg / Huhne will be an absolute disaster” that we often get presented with here.
33. Because complacency and a quiet sense of superiority are the key ingredients in being the leader of the third-biggest party, when you can’t get heard on the news!
Clegg might be the biggest fish in the small pond, and his laid-back ‘enjoying-being-the-favourite’ act might work to beat Huhne, but it is the precise opposite of what the LDs need when they go up against the big parties.
Mike for a man that has been banging on since day one about Clegg the article does not surprise me. Your selective picking on certain blogs is also no surprise, and while Nick may not have done so well on radio 4(I did not listen) he took Huhne apart on Newsnight and at the London hustings last week….I see not articles about that Mike….how very strange.
You would fit quite well in to the Labour spin machine, only half or less of a story hoping to turn a story…which frankly is while Chris may(and I say may) be more “policy heavy” is that what a leader should be.
Blair, Cameroon not really policy wonks and have done & are doing very nicely thank you very much. While some in the political village may want someone who is a walking policy booklet the average person does not.
I suggest you and all those bloggers get off your arses and actually talk to real people, you may find that they don’t give a stuff about either candidate but Chris being more intellectual means sweat fa.
Nick will win and he will do a good job, lets hope people like yourself Mike don’t spin against him for your own personal grudges(although that grudge does not extend to you betting on him…are you sure your in the right party??!)
32
As someone who tied himself to a large mortgage for all of his working life, and who went through the last crash, lets hope reality is at last returning.
One of the myths of the property owning democracy is that it makes you richer, really! makes you feel richer perhaps, the reality can be different.
Interesting article by Larry Elliot, on the property market.
http://tinyurl.com/yrtdlq
SBS @ 39.
I see no need to be a noisy cheerleader for my party. No party is short of them here!
Both Liberal Democrat candidates appear capable but Mr Clegg does appear to have the X factor that may see him propel his party forward. Clearly my hope is that the Conservtaive cause is not unduly damaged by such an advance and in due course the nation rejects this wretched government and is replaced by Prime Minister Cameron.
Re 9, Innocent “Older readers will recall that I was recently involved in a successful local health-care campaign. Our friendly neighbourhood Focus Team have now put out a leaflet (or perhaps a little while back, I don’t live in the “target” ward) in which a member of the Team expresses her pleasure at this outcome. Pity they were all too busy to dirty their hands with actually helping us to do it. It would have been nice to say that our Action Group contained supporters of all major parties.”
They do the same with our local save the hospital campaign. That is when they put it on their leaflets they try and make it look like their effort when it is a cross party one primarily organised by the Conservative party simply because we have more resource but including Labour as well as many people not alligned in any party.
I’m not a LibDem, but as a casual observer I thought it was at least traditional to let the guy get his feet behind the Leader’s desk before the knives came out? It looks as though the next Stab-fest has started before the leader is even declared!
Maybe the LibDems should push for another knife amnesty…..
It is fair comment to say that Huhne is a finished article in terms of what you see is what you will get and that would make a good leader . Clegg is not yet a finished article but even so would be a good leader . What he has IMHO is the potential to quickly use the confidence that his new position will give him and develop and mature into a great leader .
The more Conservative posters such as Benedict and HF keep saying we are making a mistake , the more confident I am that we are making the correct choice .
And Mike - that title? “Are the Cleggies have second thoughts?”? Have you been replaced by a minimum-wage Eastern European with a strong work ethic but somewhat dodgy grasp of English? Has Stanislav the Young Polish Plumber transferred over from Guido perhaps?
Rereading Mike’s article after Big Mak’s go at him, I am afraid that the answer to the original question is probably no. But if Nick can look good the wider audience might warm to him and give him a chance to get our message across.
What does Abrahams think now that it looks like he wont get his money back? I hope that he wont be so p!ssed off at the incompetence of the Labour Party that he will feel obliged to talk about his meetings with Lord Levy and Tony and maybe even Gordon.
An interesting idea if they were to become joint leaders and alternate weeks at PMQs…a policy the Greens have just decided to abolish.
I’m in Germany all week, so to ensure it got there in time, my vote went in the post near Stansted airport, and in the end it was a straightforward choice for Huhne; it really came down to the fact that Huhne seems to want to take on the Government at every opportunity, and has campaigned well over the past few weeks, whereas Clegg seems to want to expose Cameron as much as anything.
However I was one of those calling for Ming to go (admittedly not on here) so cannot complain if Clegg makes it; I hope that Huhne will be promoted to one of the top positions (LD Shadow Home Sec?) and that Kennedy returns to the front bench. And if Clegg proves as good a leader as his fanbase believes, then he will take the party forward and make the Liberal case more strongly than ever.
I began this process leaning towards Clegg, I ended up casting my vote for Huhne. I do not think Clegg will be bad, I would just prefer someone who has such substantial life experience and who has demonstrated a clear policy narrative and a good level of political courage. As many have remarked, both are able, both intelligent, and both are reasonably media savvy: its just Chris in this campaign has been better.
Frankly it is also safer to go for the older guy, rather than risking doing a Hague and “skipping the generation” too soon. For those who say “Cameron seems to work”, I can only say that he and others of his generation have yet to be tested- and the various rumours around some members of his shadow cabinet suggest that “youthful indiscretions” may, of course, be not that long ago (not that I think Clegg has a skeleton in his cupboard, but there are others who may).
Re 26, SBS “This time, on this site, they are discussin the merits of Huhne v Clegg. Why the change?”
We can make out we are not rubber necking the car crash that is Labour, and enjoying it
43. “…..is replaced by Prime Minister Cameron”
It’s got a sort of Quasimodo ring to it
I don’t understand the need to send out voting papers before the campaign has ended. Surely this makes less relevant the efforts of Huhne and Clegg in the last few days. Why not state a date before which members are discouraged from voting, or send all the papers out on one date and tell Huhne and Clegg to stop campaigning on the next? The same applies to General Elections.
Second point - I think Huhne would have less chance of instant shouting down and ridicule from the Tory & Labour benches, during PMQs. At least he’s got something to say for himself and he’s achieved things in the real world.
Blimey Mike, based on the posters here - can you afford £900. The expected dividend from Peter’s Ten To Follow is not due until the Spring!
52. I’d get used to it, Roger. You’ll be hearing it a lot more in future.
One for Stuart and Marcia: Coffee House Blog reports:
“The Jersey based businessmen whose donation to Wendy Alexander’s leadership bid should not have been accepted, has revealed more about his contacts with the Alexander campaign. He alleges that Charlie Gordon, MSP assured him that he was allowed to donate the money despite not being on the electoral roll.”
Oh dear.
46 Mark Senior, go ahead choose Clegg, the betting market says that he will preside over a major loss of seats at the next GE. So he gets replaced in 2010 and Huhne will be overlooked = two more Leaders removed from the field of political combat.
52. If anyone is only ‘almost like’ a man, it’s surely baggy-eyed, slack-jowled, wrinkly, nose-picking Brown.
Re 46, Mark Senior “The more Conservative posters such as Benedict and HF keep saying we are making a mistake , the more confident I am that we are making the correct choice .”
We said the same about Gordon Brown and look at how wrong we were about that
58 - when Michael Portillo said that Ming was the right choice, I knew we were all DOOMED!
How have LibDem members that are regular posters here, voted?
I think SBS, Mark Senior, Icarus have all voted Clegg.
Big Mak I presume is also a member and Clegg voter?
Tpfkar and presumably Mike Smithson will have voted Huhne? Is Mike Sole a member and a Huhne voter?
Augustus Carp and others? It would be interesting to complete this poll of PBC LibDem members. Can anyone expand and amend the above?
HF @ 56.
The present spread for the Liberal Democrats is 47-50 seats. So this far out from a general election I would caution Conservatives against undue hyperbole.
Re 59, SBS “58 - when Michael Portillo said that Ming was the right choice, I knew we were all DOOMED!”
58 and yet despite people thinking Brown is tained by sleaze , they still think him more capable as PM than Cameron .
50/60. Cicero one more for Huhne. Looking close here?
Re 63, Mark Senior, “58 and yet despite people thinking Brown is tained by sleaze , they still think him more capable as PM than Cameron .”
Only just and only for the moment.
61 the H in HF stands for hyperbole .
60. I voted for Huhne. As I said at the beginning of the campaign, I wanted to vote for the anti-establishment choice.
I am only an occasional poster: I voted Huhne, like all sensible members. I agree with #49: ‘ . . it really came down to the fact that Huhne seems to want to take on the Government at every opportunity, and has campaigned well over the past few weeks, . . ‘ That is the job and he is clearly up for it: why can’t our members see it? Perhaps as well as being ‘docile and nice’ they are a bit dim.
I voted for Huhne.
It’s a two horse race!!!!!
63: But Mark you forget that people in office have a built in advantage with that question. How well did Vince do?
The leader of the Lib Dems doesn’t have to be strong on policy - in fact, being so could actually a negative. Those endless discussions about the detail of income tax thresholds make the party seem like a self-obsessed joke.
Even if they were to form part of a coalition government, that level of detail is irrelevant. The party does has a huge opportunity to influence the direction of politics in the medium term - but I’m convinced that to do so it needs a) to concentrate on one or two broad issues, and, b) pick a capable “communicator” as leader.
The trouble with the current contest is that both Clegg and Huhne have roughly the same level of communication skills. Huhne is an effective attack dog, but he seems to lack any sort of planned strategy. Clegg is better at the mood music, but I fear that he’ll always be overshadowed by Cameron in this respect.
I’m not an LD member - if I was, I’d still be dithering over my vote.
60 I have voted Clegg. I reckon he has the contest in the bag. I also think he has run the best campaign. he was a clear winner at the London hustings, took on Huhne and Paxman successfully on Newsnight, and he has produced the best literature. So no second thoughts.
61. Down to 47-50 seats would be a ‘major loss’. About a quarter!
Mark Senior may be a Clegg supporter and a Lib Dem member but, emotionally, he’s first and foremost a Tory hater, to judge by the content of his posts.
Re 69, Augustus Carp, “It’s a two horse race!!!!!”
I thought it was a straight choice?
75. That was the Labour leadership election.
75 Er, Benedict, I think you missed off - “Liberal Democrat Winning Here!!”
After all, they don’t get much chance to use that slogan these days - outside of their annual Leadership contest!
Grind those knives boys, grind those knives….
68
I’m not a LibDem supporter and have no idea of whom I want to win.. I don’t care.:-)
But Huhne seems to speak well and raise his party’s profile. Clegg? Noticeable by his absence.
Since LibDems prefer being an ineffective opposition I expect whomever they choose will be the worst choice: their membership reminds me of the Conservative Party when it voted for IDS.. (who says turkeys don’t vote for Christmas?). They do not appear hungry to win. (ditto Labour and Michael Foot)
So if Clegg is elected, I shall be surprised if he is the “best” choice.
Albeit that I am only a very occasional contributor, the following perspective may help in terms of understanding how northern Lib Dems are thinking. LD/Liberal leaders since the war have emerged from celtic and rural outposts and, to a certain extent, may have been perceived as semi-detached from the day-to-day lives of the urban majority. Whilst our family of three LD members ( middle son is an anarchist!) appreciates he is not the finished article, Clegg is notionally ‘northern’, given his constituency base,whilst still being sufficiently posh that he won’t frighten the horses in crucial tory/LD battlegrounds. I have met a number of fellow LDs who have met Clegg and heard him speak on a wide range of bread-and-butter issues and have been seriously impressed, particularly as he sets his observations within the context of Sheffield constituency. The Observer leader on the Leadership election, link below, resonates well with northern LDs and given all other factors this household has gone with Clegg. http://observer.guardian.co.uk/leaders/story/0,,2220541,00.html
Benedict @75: ‘Only Chris Huhne or the Lib Dem’s man can win here!’
And Marquee Mark at 77, I read yesterday that all Labour MSPs were ‘right behind’ Wendy Alexander. I wonder if they are all carrying a variety of kitchen implements
Baskerville @ 73.
In the current market and political landscape I suspect most Liberals would settle for 50 seats or so and not look at it as a major loss. Historically it is also a very respectable score for a third party. It would also imply that the Conservatives would struggle to reach a majority.
I may be doing HF a disservice but I think the implication from his post today and on previous occasions was a scale of loss of around 30-40 seats for the Liberal Democrats.
Update Clegg: SBS, Mark Senior, Icarus, Big Mak, Peter Welch
Huhne: tpfkar, Mike Smithson, Mike Sole, Cicero, Cristo, Augustus Carp, (Khunanup).
This last name in brackets as I don’t recognise as a regular poster. Apologies if you are a regular here.
Tally Clegg 5.
Huhne 6. (7)
I am not a member, although considered it in order to get a vote. If I had done - would have been for Huhne - but happy with either as long the other is given a sensibly high profile role to continue doing the things they do best.
60. I’m an undecided, but I’m leaning towards Huhne - but I can’t yet commit to putting the cross on the ballot paper!!!!
82: Khunanup is a regular, stick him in the total!
Re 76, Harry, “75. That was the Labour leadership election.”
No, it was the Bermondsy by election against Peter Tatchell… and a joke.
Re 77, Marquee Mark “75 Er, Benedict, I think you missed off - “Liberal Democrat Winning Here!!””
re 80, tpfkar “And Marquee Mark at 77, I read yesterday that all Labour MSPs were ‘right behind’ Wendy Alexander. I wonder if they are all carrying a variety of kitchen implements :)”
85. Will do. Clegg 6. including Frank at 79. but not all his family. Huhne 7.
Lennon - just send a donation, say £600,000.
No answer to my question about PMQ’s - what does Cameron do to keep things going?
And Vince too of course. Sorry cannot find yesterdays Guardian cartoon of the family gathered round the Vince Cable Christmas special on the telly.
#48 What does Abrahams think now that it looks like he won’t get his money back.
As reported on the BBC it looks like this money will be forfeit to the Electoral Commission/Treasury.
…and it looks like Labour officials may be looking for terms to repay the £663,975!
Brown promised to return the money to Mr. Abrahams, so presumeably the Labour Party will be writing another cheque for £663,975, as Gordon is an honourable man.
88. I hope Cameron moves on to other government failings, including our latest plunge down educational league tables.
He is the Prime Minister in waiting and we have policy to attack on as well
89 “is an honourable man”
Shades of Mark Antony’s funeral oration there methinks
“and so they are, all honourable men…”
82 Khunanup is from Portsmouth so pretty local to Huhne , you should add Goupillon to the Huhne total to .
Re 81, Peter Jacques, a loss of a quarter of their MPs would be a major loss for any party, including the LDs that have become used to growth in each GE.
Clegg has said that his aim is to get into the 150+ MPs within 2 elections.
63 to 100 (2010) to 150 (2014) is the progress envisaged.
However if LDs fall to 47 then trebling it to 150 in one GE becomes a near impossibility.
But Clegg has promised growth. Hughes also promised a doubling in members and presided over a circa 30% drop.
For what it’s worth, this is the personal view of a Tory activist:
I would rather Clegg than Huhne won.
Huhne seems the sort of politician who would become known for a couple of headline policies/campaigns - say Trident and taxing all flights, doesn’t really matter. This would allow him to draw back all those LD voters who are fundamentally anti-establishment, pro-environment and none-of the-above types. This lot are currently being tempted by Cameron taking on a clearly discredited and incompetent administration. Huhne would reduce Tory chances in Lab-Con key marginals as past LD voters could say ‘plague on both their houses, I’m voting for something I care about’.
Clegg would be attractive and appealing, but bland, aiming to cover a lot of bases and not coming across as distinctive on any. This would mean all those LibDem voters who want a change would have little reason to coalesce around him. This would help the Tories in key Lab-Con marginals where LD voters would vote to get Labour out.
My estimate - totally unscientific - is that Huhne could deprive Cameron of 15-20 seats, not by winning them, but by preventing a Conservative victory.
Clegg as leader would allow Cameron to pick up an extra 15-20 seats as LD voters vote Conservative to ditch their Labour MP.
Overall, whoever they choose, the LDs will pick up between 38 and 50 seats.
That’s my view, based on TV and radio performances of the two men over the past three years, and my reading of voter behaviour.
If it’s of any relevance, I am a former councillor, former PPC and former spin doctor.
I have no money on the outcome.
92. Clegg 6, Huhne 8, including Goupillon.
Re post 3 from ‘Anthony’ I am not part of Huhne’s campaign team and never have been either in this or the previous leadership election.
Re 60 My vote has gone to Huhne as you might expect!
Incidentally it has been said Huhne is more of a threat to Labour and Clegg to the Tories. I don’t see it quite that way. It seems that many Tories prefer Huhne’s combative style and appreciate his background in business while many disillusioned Labour supporters could well be attracted to Clegg and vote Lib Dem as their way of rejecting the government while not having to go quite as far as voting for the Tories whom they still mistrust. Interesting times to come.
HF @ 93.
Neither should we be taken in by Liberal Democrat leadership candidate hyperbole!
Baskerville @ 94.
Thank you for that thoughtful insight.
95. I voted for Clegg, though I’m not a prolific poster.
Remember pb.c is not a reliable sample of the voting population - it is overwhelmingly male for a start.
46 - “The more Conservative posters such as Benedict and HF keep saying we are making a mistake , the more confident I am that we are making the correct choice . ”
If only labour had realised that, with Brown, they weren’t lying either.
Even in Wales the Conservatives gain new Councillors - http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/display.var.1881728.0.two_join_tories_on_council.php
Clegg 7. Huhne 9. Including Rob C and Alan J.
99. Point taken. I know this little poll is flawed but interesting nonetheless? I think it does indicate it will be quite close. I predict Clegg 54% Huhne 46% in the final ballot.
Alan J @ 99.
Are you sure? I seem to recall Jack W stating that he felt confident that most PB posters were transvestites. There was talk of Michelle Smithson and Patricia the Punter!
86
Peter Tatchell, Ah yes! when he was being slaughtered by the Tabloids for being gay, wouldn’t it have been nice if some politicians had the guts to come out of the closet to support him. Matthew Parris, has a lot to say for himself, funny! he was pretty quiet at that time
103
Transvestite, def. Someone who likes to eat, drink and be Mary, boom boom!!
Re 101, Defection, So now we have 12 councilors to Labour’s 30? Not so long ago we had considerably less on Crawley Council and now run it having decimated Labour.
Newport to be a Conservative gain?
99: good point Alan J, and I’d guess that posters on this site are following the developing media narrative/the contest itself more closely than many voters.
O/T but I welcome the ruling that Mark Thompson/Auntie can’t be prosecuted for blasphemy over screening Jerry Springer. While clearly offensive to many, it would have been a dangerous dent on free speech had a prosecution gone ahead, and empowers Christians/member sof other faith groups and minorities to protest when their own free speech is threatened.
Re 104, Coldstone “Peter Tatchell, Ah yes! when he was being slaughtered by the Tabloids for being gay, wouldn’t it have been nice if some politicians had the guts to come out of the closet to support him. Matthew Parris, has a lot to say for himself, funny! he was pretty quiet at that time”
Quite right. He should have been bashed for being an Aussie instead. Disgusting
Re your 105, “Transvestite, def. Someone who likes to eat, drink and be Mary, boom boom!!”
If the Lib Dems want to make their “Hague” mistake so be it. It is a pity that they have not drawn up a clear job specification of the type of candidate they need to see them though this difficult period. I would suggest it requires:-
1. A strong campaigner able to seize the headlines.
2. A person with a clear understanding of what policies they want to pursue.
3. Someone with a range of experience in the public and private sectors.
4. Someone with a strong understanding of economics to capitalise on the downturn in the economy.
5. Someone with a strong understanding of our liberties.
6. Someone with energy.
Of these Huhne has the advantage in the first 4 and Clegg on the 5th. Both have the 6th point.
108
I may be wrong but think he’s a Kiwi!!
I concur with Peter’s Jacques’ view at 38 - I think Clegg has been playing it safe while Huhne has been trying to shake it up - I’d have done the same in both cases, and it’s not necessarily a guide to future behaviour. Too early to predict what impact he’ll have on either of the other parties, though.
65: Not your most powerful post ever, Benedict!
fitaloon: as your reprint shows, Teresa May welcomed all the main Hayden recommendations while still calling for opt-ins for union contributions. However, the Conservatives no longer accept year-round spending limits, which was a central Hayden recommendation - unless they’ve changed their minds again. And it’s not just Labour that have noticed - see Roger Heath’s speech in the Commons yesterday, and Ken Clarke is also being constructive.
We try not to debate the pros and cons here, but we do debate public mood, and insofar as the public have noticed the issue at all, I don’t think they buy the Tory holier-than-thou position - they think we’re all sleazy and a clean-up is needed to limit all parties’ spending. If there is a poll soon I think we will see a dip back from the double-figures lead.
Test (Mike was accused of getting Testy yesterday - did he?) - Cameron can’t mention Education (Grammar Schools) just as he cant mention Europe, Defence (need higher taxes) or any sort of tax or even Wind Mills these days.
Better to stick to Northern Rock (where he hasn’t any suggestions) or Labour Party Funding (Lord Ashcroft).
Oh dear - The weather, Foot and Mouth, Nick’s cats perhaps are all that is left.
The Lib Dems always claim they suffer because of lack of media attention,Huhne has demonstrated throughout the campaign and particularly over the last week, his ability to grab media attention and yet it would appear that Clegg,who has been invisible for parts of the campaign is going to win.
106 I doubt it, Benedict, but enjoy the “irony” of the situation. The defector represents Llanwern, which was the site of the largest steel rolling mill in South Wales a few years ago - the sort of heavy industrial place where the Labour vote was weighed, not counted.
112 lol let’s see shall we?
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, a commenter on Guido’s blog says city rumours state that Branson’s bid is falling apart and “a big wave of —- is heading Darling’s way”.
Whatever can it all mean?
Nick
“If there is a poll soon I think we will see a dip back from the double-figures lead.”
Well we could hardly get the lead into treble figures, could we?
Yes, you are at a low point and the only way is up. Personally, if I were a Labour Mp in a marginal I would find that cold comfort.
112: Icarus, my first question today would be: ‘Does the Prime Minister believe that individuals who break the law due to their ignorance of it should be released from responsibility?’
If yes, then hit hard on illegal funding in Labour.
If no, then aim towards not sending criminals to prison because the cells are too full.
Mike - I think you’re in danger of confusing the way you act in an internal selection with external profile.
Nick has done an exceptionally good job of improving the Lib Dems’ image on home affairs issues because he is good at attacking the other parties with a human face.
In an internal selection process he has been understandably reluctant to attack Chris - not least because they’ll have to work together in future. If you look at Nick’s performance against the other parties he has been successful in raising Lib Dem profile as the pre leadership list of media mentions below shows:
http://www.libdemvoice.org/top-lib-dem-media-tarts-of-the-year-1264.html
111: ‘I don’t think they buy the Tory holier-than-thou position’
And this from a member of a party that promised to be ‘whiter than white’.
Why not tell Gordon to stop trying to tar everyone with the same brush and do something about the sleaze in your party? If you keep telling everyone that all parties are sleazy it make believing that Harman, Hain, and Alexander acted honestly very hard to accept.
108. I’m watching you, White.
103 Look, what I wear whilst sitting here posting is my business, Jacques.
Whoever wins, getting airtime and the Libdem message into mainstream media will be key. The more that the Tories and Labour slug it out, the more risk there is that the new leader will make it hard to get his voice heard. It will be about policies, style and soundbites. Cable’s Mr Bean comment got more coverage than anything Ming did (other than resign).
Re transvestitism I am afraid Guido puts his finger on it: Re Huhne: “He has positioned himself on the cl!toris of the activist base, painted Clegg as inept, lightweight and Cameron-in-yellow. He has also smartly jumped on Donorgate”
Re 110, Coldstone “108
I may be wrong but think he’s a Kiwi!!”
You are wrong, he is an Aussie. See here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Tatchell
Re 114, Augustus, May be so, but then we are also making inroads into Millwall somewhere where we have never had anyone elected before.
test - “Well we could hardly get the lead into treble figures, could we?”
121. PtP. I think PJ’s slip is showing.
116 “If there is a poll soon I think we will see a dip back from the double-figures lead.”
Well we could hardly get the lead into treble figures, could we?”
You have just sent out the high-frequency signal which is guaranteed to summon the beast that is Ave It 07….
111 Nick Palmer
Your party is trying to spin that reform is the answer to your party’s illegal behaviour, and that negotiations for such reform were stopped by the evil Tories, where in fact they ground to a halt because of Labour’s intransigence in refusing to countenance any changes in union donations at all.
Now you spin that you will accept the 50k limit Cameron urged but only if you are allowed to distort the concept with a scheme that allows the unions to keep on giving in the same old way at the same old level of far more than the 50k limit for everyone else.
You would have more credibility if the Labour party were to propose that:
1 All union members could opt into (not out of) political subscriptions
2 that those that did could chose the party their subscriptions went to support.
3 the resulting money would be transfered directly to the parties concerned and not be put into a union political fund that is used to create clout for the union bosses in Labourland.
In reality you want to ensure that there is only an opt out and that the only party to get support through the unions is the Labour party.
102. St John - did you include Tim13 as a huhnatic?
126 Yes, StJohn. He’s got himself in a tight spot, and could face suspension.
Btw, StJohn, how’s the crossword going? I mentioned it to Mike the other day and he was keen.
129. Goupillon. No I didn’t. Clegg 7 Huhne 10. The Huhnites seem to be better at identfying their vote here.
I don’t think the tories are doing a holier than thou stance, in fact I don’t think they’ve made much of a stance, just let the press rip labour apart over the entire issue. The fact that labour want a 50k cap, just not for the unions (who just happy to be their biggest supporter) makes them look even worse.
Jenny Scott is looking rather hot in that short skirt today. Think I’d struggle to concentrate on the questions if I was David Ruffley.
131. I’d better get cracking!
Patricia the Punter? @ 121.
Just for the sake of clarity I hold no candle for Hattie Jacques!
This article today on Bloomberg paints a pretty disastrous short to mid-term future for both the UK economy, sterling, and Brown’s government. The pound is clearly overvalued and a major sterling crisis is in the offing for next year IMO.
Well worth reading in full even by you rose-tinted spec wearing Brownites:
Brown’s Future as Prime Minister Hangs on Pound: Matthew Lynn
By Matthew Lynn
Dec. 5 (Bloomberg) — It may become the most calamitous premiership for at least 100 years. Less than six months after taking over from Tony Blair as U.K. prime minister, Gordon Brown has already stumbled through a series of disasters. He is, to use a popular word in the financial markets, a subprime minister and he leads a subprime economy…..SNIP
…….It might well be the fragility of Brown’s government that provides the trigger for an attack on sterling. Brown’s problems are only just starting. It will be the foreign-exchange markets that finish him off.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=aoyU9AlR.YKI&refer=home
128 Useless partisan post.
If people want to club together to back a political party they should be able to. End of story. How they do that is essentially their business. The fact that working people in unions want to back a political party is a very good thing.
* No one is compelled to join a union.
* No one is compelled to contribute to a political fund.
If people want to act individually they are free to do so, but people should have the right to act together if they so wish.
Ree 120, Alexander “108. I’m watching you, White.”
Bugger cought out by an Aussie
Robert Preston indicating that Nationalisation seems the most likely prospect for Northern Rock.
He cites huge problems in a commercial deal among which:
(1) Who is deciding the future of NRK, the Board or the Treasury?
(2) Prospects for the UK housing market looking poor.
(3) Banks have made no firm commitment to provide the £11Bn to a potential suitor.
(4) The provision of £11Bn in funds will require security against the prime assets the BoE (Taxpayer) is holding, leaving the BoE (Taxpayer) outstanding £16-19Bn against poorer security.
(5) The removal of a further £11Bn in liquidity from the market to fund any proposal will complicate existing liquidity in the banking sector.
How about this scenario:
Clegg wins and poll ratings don’t move. Poor PMQs and lambasted for poor media presentation and lacks gravitas. This carries until May 08 and a dreadful set of council election results. With Libdems losing seats to the Tories and Labour. Mark Senior even calling the results “Average” on the influential PB.com website.
Simon Hughes and Vince Cable pick up the knife and plunge it in the back of Clegg. Another leadership contest is held between the fragrant Lynne Featherstone and the pugnacious Chris Huhne. Featherstone wins. Clegg defects…
Huhne becomes the David Davies of the Liberals -destined never to be leader.
It seems that on Sunday Cameron said that all the names of the members of MIC had been made public . Since then it has been revealed that entrepeneur David Grove had been a secret member for the last 3 months . Now if a Labour politician had made an incorrect statement such as that , Conservative posters on here would be howling liar in their faux outrage .
136 You hold what you like, Sweetie.
Any odds available just before the off(PMQ’S) that Our Prime Minister will be referred to as Mr Bean?
Go on Dr Cable,rattle Gord for the second week running.
139 Should have known better, Benedict. They’re everywhere.
111) Theresa said and we are happy to discuss spending caps on all year round non-election campaigning and proposals for tighter controls on third-party expenditure… Not quite the same as agreed!
The point I am making is that Jack Straw said Theresa had welcomed the Hayden Report which is true up to the point that these were the first words in a rather longer statement which then pointed out the problems. It is exactly this sort of statement which causes the public not to trust Politicians.