What do these figures mean for Dave and Gord?
January 11th, 2008
Is the new leadership turning the party around?
I’ve long argued that the battle for the next election is about the centre ground and, in particular whether Labour can recover many of the votes that switched to the Lib Dems in 2005 and how far Cameron’s Tories can go in attracting and retaining supporters of Clegg’s party.
Reproduced above is from the full dataset of this month’s Populus poll and shows how support split based on what respondents said they did last time and what they are planning to do now.
To read the table the rows are what respondents say they are doing now and the columns are what they did in May 2005.
As can be seen the Tories are holding onto 91% of their 2005 vote, Labour 74% and the Lib Dems 80%. The latter figure is by far the biggest proportion that we have seen from the pollster and was a big factor in the boost in the party’s overall share. Thus back in September 2007 when the Brown bounce was at its height Ming’s Lib Dems were only retaining 58% of their 2005 voters.
On churn between the parties the Lib Dems are more than even when it comes to Labour and are holding the net switch to the Tories to just over 10%. Some polls in the autumn had that much higher.
There’s always a danger of dealing with small numbers and it will be very helpful when we have for comparison the first 2008 surveys from the other two telephone pollsters that operate in the same way, ICM and ComRes. But when you are betting you have to use the data that’s there - if you want absolute certainty you will never be in a position to take a plunge.
My betting. Many of the seats that the Tories are hoping to win next time are currently held by the Lib Dems. This suggests that the battle is going to be tougher than they think. In my spread-betting on Commons seats for the next election I have now closed down all my Tory buy positions and just retain a £50 a seat Labour buy contract which I got at the 273 seat level with IG before Christmas. If Labour can keep their losses down to 75 seats then this bet returns a profit.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
OT. The ITV1 Mayoral Debate last night: a balck lady in the front row asked Brian Paddick about rapists and murderers going in to speak in schools. Was that Lurleine Champagnie? She looked about the right age but I don’t think I’ve seen her for a while so I wasn’t sure.
Oh incidentally, by far the worst was Konnie Huq; the next worse was Bumbling Boris, the mediovre one was Brian Paddick and the best of a bad lot was Ken. I might even vote for Ken this time (reluctantly) to stop Boris.
In the seats the Lib-Dems won from the Conservatives 97-05, my understanding was this was more due to a fall in Conservative votes rather than a rise in Lib-Dem votes.
So Lib-Dems retaining their vote is not the issue, it’s Conservatives motivating Conservative-minded non-voters who abandoned them in 97.
Sorry to be O/T, but this is very, very important.
Following through from some posts a couple of days ago, which suggested that there was something very fishy about Hillary winning when all the evidence suggested that Obama would walk it, please, if you only look at one page about this, please make it this one:
http://checkthevotes.com/index.php?party=DEMOCRATS#Compare%20All%20Machine%20vs%20Hand%20Counts
If you want to know whose site it’s on, it’s Ron Paul’s. Nothing to do with any conspiracy theorist.
Where counting was by hand, Obama won by a margin of 4% (38.7% to 34.7%)
Where “counting” was by machine, Obama lost by a similar margin. Unfortunately, there were more votes “counted” by machine.
It’s 2004 all over again. HILLARY CLINTON DID NOT WIN THE VOTE.
No apologies for the shouting.
We at pb.com, which is now a significant political website, surely we need to make our presence felt, we need to take it to a higher level, not just pass it over.
Mayoral debate: yes, it was a bit stilted but so are the American ones and they have had a lot more practice. The partisan audience did not help when arguing with the candidates, and perhaps Konnie Huq should have questioned the politicians too.
And it should have been live. We viewers already knew there were no fireworks because we’d seen the (lack of) news and read the Evening Standard.
Stephen Phelps @ 3 re vote fraud and machine counts favouring Clinton.
If you look at the breakdowns on the web page you link to, the machines in the large towns favoured Obama.
On topic. Obviously good news for Clegg (and Gordon?), but way too early to make too much of it IMO. Most leaders get a bounce on taking office, and former Lib Dem voters coming back to have a look at the nice, new, presentable guy in charge isn’t a great surprise, especially with Cameron having been out of the news for a few weeks. The key question is whether, like Cameron, he can turn the bounce into a step change, or whether, like Brown, it turns out to be a flash in the pan.
In many ways, the answer to that lies in his own hands - not something that is always the case for Lib Dem leaders. He needs to either find a distinctive and popular voice on some issue or to capitalise on the unpopularity of one or both other major parties, to share in the anti- vote against it or them.
Finding an issue will be tough. There isn’t much spare ground that the Tories and Labour have left between them on issue the public care about and which is credible Lib Dem territory (I can’t see them advocating a return of capital punishment, for example!). The income tax proposals are fine as far as they go, but when it’s explained that they’ll be offset by ‘green’ taxes, the popularity of that policy will rapidly wane.
By contrast, hitting Labour repeatedly over delivery failures, Northern Rock (where Vince Cable has lead the assault and given the Lib Dems a lead), and a lack of ethical behaviour would seem to me a sensible way forward. The odd pot-shot in the Tories’ direction will keep the troops happy and provide ‘distance’, but the main aim has to be at an unpopular government. Clegg seems to be lining up the opposite strategy: getting into the government’s pocket. As a result, I expect the Lib Dem’s rise in the polls to be only temporary.
It’s only one poll. Let us wait until politics starts to get going properly this year and see if we can see a trend. This sort of finding was predictable from the moment we knew that this particular poll had the LDs up 3%.
re 7. SBS - yes it is only one poll but gamblers like me have to make decisions on the evidence that is available. If you wait until you are certain so will everybody else and the prices will have changed.
6 David Herdson
Yesterday was a fine example of an issue wide open for Lib Dems to exploit - The nuclear issue. Many people do care rather deeply about that - and with both other parties now lining up to support nuclear, then it should be an open goal.
3. Oh really - there are plenty of sites for loony conspiracy theorists already.
As for ‘We at pb.com, which is now a significant political website’…just a tad self-important, perhaps?
8. But equally if you bet on what turns out to be noise you will lose your money - so it’s a fine judgement.
7 / 8 Agree with Mike - if you are gambling, waiting for certainties will almost never make you money! The trouble at present is, I think, that Nick Clegg has not even started to make an impression publicly, except regarding his age. If the party with its new leader starts to claim more TV time and column inches, then Mike’s bet may have more substance. In one respect I have seen straws in the wind - one or two ordinary supporters (notactivists or members) have commented favourably. What had happened under Ming was that many at all levels had become demotivated, and they will now be back more actively. This, in itself, will get the message out on to the streets more effectively.
I don’t think these numbers are surprising at the end of a leadership contest. Those who voted LD last time were obviously the most likely to a. know there was a contest and b. pay attention to it. So, they would have been impressed that they had three credible leaders - NC, CH and VC - and been reassured accordingly.
As others have said, the proof of the pudding will be how those former LD voters stick or drift in the next 12 months.
1 and 4. Could we have a Mayoral thread later today, please? There are some betting points to make on both topics.
Ibstock By-election: full report at http://lancasteruaf.blogspot.com/2008/01/ibstock-and-heather-by-election-alarm.html
NW Leicestershire DC; Ibstock and Heather ward result (percentages in brackets):
Con 515 (22.47)
Lab 699 (30.50)
LD 441 (19.24)
BNP 637 (27.79)
Total 2292
Turnout 40.37%.
Can someone explain Populus’s weightings? The Tories ‘weighted base’ is down 7.5% on the unweighted, Labour’s down over 12.5% and the LDs up about 25%. Surely, this subjective weighting is more significant in judging the bottom line results. We know how MORI weight, by certainty to vote, but how do the others do it?
One minute it’s world peace. The next it’s sorting out his successor’s Rock problems. No really - it was Tony.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7182569.stm
Hope the link works folks.
With the Tories supporting Labour on the nuclear issue, the Libdems have been handed an issue they can exploit. The left/liberal voters who are totally opposed to nuclear and have been attracted to Dave, will realise the Tories aren’t their natural home.
Will Goldsmith resign from the Tory Party over this issue, and if not, why not?
3. If you want to know whose site it’s on, it’s Ron Paul’s. Nothing to do with any conspiracy theorist.
ROFL!
18. Coldstone, how many Labour MPs will resign from the party over this? How many resigned over Iraq, foundation hospitals, pensions, Euro referendum, etc. etc? Goldsmith isn’t even an MP, hasn’t stood on a manifesto of commitments, etc. etc.
Maybe interesting news regarding NR selling off a sliver of its mortgage book to JP Morgan. Would it like to sell more or can it?
20
Two wrongs don’t make a right, ‘cos a lot of Labour MP’s didn’t resign over issues that they should have done, doesn’t let Goldsmith off the hook.
Goldsmith has made his opposition to nuclear energy, fundemental to his whole political outlook. Goldsmith joined the Tory Party as part of Dave’s green crusade, now surely he must consider his position.
If we’re talking about resignations, surely Hain of Orange must top the list?
18 / 20 It always struck me as strange that Goldsmith got into bed with the Tories on the environment. As a PPC, and lead member of the Tory Commission on the environment, it has become ever clearer that he is not in sympathy with their driving forces on his key issue. It can only be a matter of time….
22. Why don’t you give him a ring and demand in person that he resigns, rather than posting these repetitive rants on a website?
Better still, write him a letter in green pen - just don’t get it mixed up with your regular missives to the Purbeck Mail/Western Gazette about the state of town centre public loos.
22 Resign from what? MPs & candidates are allowed to have opinions on particular policies that vary from the leadership. Goldsmith as a candidate & hopefully MP can continue to oppose nuclear and propose alternatives. He could of course look at his position in policy groups etc but there again isn’t it better to argue a policy within such a group rather than criticise from outside. Flouncing out and taking your toys home doesn’t achieve change - Blair & Brown changed Labour into a close relative of the SDP by staying inside.
Different matter when you have responsibility as a minister or SoS or where your personal behaviour is at fault. Peter Hain’s defence is that he didn’t mean to, it’s not a real crime (more like speeding or failing to return a tex return on time). The commentariat seem to accept that - I don’t because it wasn’t a single failure but one that lasted months. Iain Dales posting on his experience in David Davies campaign shows that Hain was culpable through failure of leadership or common sense. I think he should resign as a minister of the crown, not though as an MP.
Sorry to go OT but a possible explanation for yesterdays thread when Hillary went to 250/1 as seen in the spike in the graph.
Before the polls closed the usually reliable Henry said he’d heard unofficially from Union friends in NH that the first exit polls had put Obama 13% ahead. It coincided with someone else saying the odds on Obama were still reasonable. I remember thinking at the time (maybe 2.AM?) that this is as must be as close to free money as you can get.
I don’t know whether this site has that sort of influence when presumably the odds are coming from the States but it’s a theory anyway.
While I know we should “wait for the trend, blah blah blah…”, it does occur to me that without leadership problems, the Lib Dems may very well come back into serious contention. This would explain the punch up that has broken out in the blogosphere between Lib Dems and Tories
As for the Mayor of London debate last night- Boris was simply dreadful- boorish, crass and cringemaking- and Ken was unctious and slippery. I think that Brian Paddick looks pretty good between those two gargoyles, and he can only come up in the polls…
By-elections are also better too, as we saw last night in Thatcham- now David Rendel can campaign full time, perhaps he can even win back the Newbury Parliamentary seat.
As you see, Clegg is already improving morale in this Lib Dem.
22
“a lot of Labour MP’s didn’t resign over issues that they should have done”
With Hain, it’s not so much the illegal non-declaration of his deputy leadership funds. His fate in the Labour Party will be sealed by the fact that (a) he was so vain and personally ambitious that he willing to spend a fortune on his hopeless candidacy and (b) he went to some pretty strange places to get it. Regardless of the truth on the issue people will always use the phrase ‘bought and sold’. At least with Blair it was obvious whose pockets he was in from pretty much the start.
26
Goldsmith may not be an MP, but he has been a very high profile PPC, and his membership of the Tory Party has been used by Dave to give credibility to his ‘Green’ credentials.
Goldsmith should now realise he’s been made a fool of, and should resign and join either the Greens or the Libdems.
I also think Hain should resign!
For the Clegg Bounce to be converted into a genuine shift in the polls, Nick Clegg needs to take a position that appeals to those who voted Libdem in 2005. Essentially, this means being anti-Labour. Unfortunately for Clegg, it is very clear that most of his activists feel very uncomfortable attacking Labour.
Put another way, Clegg has a similar problem to Cameron: the policies that please his activists are not those that appeal to likely supporters.
So far Cameron has (mostly) managed to keep both groups quiescent, although he had several hiccups. (E.g. EU/EPP, Grammargate, etc.)
Vince Cable understood the task facing a Libdem Leader, and ridiculed Gordon Brown at every opportunity. If Clegg confirms that positioning, then his Bounce will become a step-change; if he retreats back a comfort zone of siding with Labour against the Tories, then he will have blown the Libdems chances of significant advance at the next Election.
28 Cicero, have you any details about that? I thought that David Rendel was already a councillor.
Technical question: the pattern of showing Labour losing more net votes among 2005 voters and gaining from 2005 non-voters is consistent. Was there any sign of this in 2001-2005? The conventional wisdom is that the non-voters concerned are Iraq protesters returning to the fold (who probably will vote) and young voters (who might not), but perhaps it’s a recurrent pattern.
Goldsmith has previously IIRC indicated that he could go laong with the ‘last resort’ nuclear position. Whether he can live with the ‘yes indeed, what kept you?’ position I wonder. But the ‘vote blue go green’ phase looks pretty much over - it was part of general detoxification of the image and is now being not repudiated but quietly de-emphasised.
coldstone is right that nuclear is a massive issue for some people, but ‘reluctance acquiescence’ has gained a lot of ground since it became more widely accepted (I won’t argue the case here) that it was otherwise likely we’d become more dependent on Russia and Iran. If one accepts that (though not everyone does), one has to be awfully green in every sense to feel it’s a good idea.
The point about Clegg’s strategy, as I understand it, is that there is only one big block of votes that’s shifted since 2005, and that’s soft Lab/Lib voters drifting to Cameron. It makes sense to focus on people who have shown themselves willing to shift around, rather than tribalists. My guess is that he reckons this group is already turned off Labour so he needs to turn them off the Tories too. But it’s very early days yet and there may well be further stages in his strategy.
Stephen Phelps at 3: obviously I don’t know, but I’d think that places that had machine counting will have different voting characteristics (e.g. large urban centres) than places where they counted by hand. But if Mr Paul feels he wuz robbed, a manual recount would be a good thing, to avoid a persistent myth. Perhaps some of his wealthy supporters would offer to pay for it.
28 - Agree about the Mayoral debate last night - Paddick sounded good and nicely contrasting to the other 2. Still think Ken has ‘it’, and the way the voting works really doesn’t help Paddick at all. The thing that irritated me more than anything though was the audience - all cheering ridiculously there own man, and booing and jeering the other 2 completely regardless of if they made a good, articulate point. Think that would have put a good few people watching completely off politics, and much more so than the disagreements between the candidates.
34 I suppose that one of the consequences of the voting system is that none of the candidates can afford to be too rude about the others, and no-one can afford to be rude at all about Brian Paddick! They have to keep their eye on the Second Preference vote, and Paddick could turn out to be the kingmaker.
As for the Mayor of London debate last night- Boris was simply dreadful- boorish, crass and cringemaking- and Ken was unctious and slippery. I think that Brian Paddick looks pretty good between those two gargoyles, and he can only come up in the polls…
None of the candidates performed well. Paddick was lightweight and wooden, and will simply be drowned out by the others.
‘it was part of general detoxification of the image and is now being not repudiated but quietly de-emphasised.’
Ah the Tory party strategy expert speaks again. What do you think of your friend Peter Hain’s dubious donations Nick? shouldm’t he resign? Do you feel embarassed to have been associated with his campaign - or were you just ‘green’ in every sense as well?
21. Its sold off some of its “equity release” mortgages - ie you can be sure they are
34 - Sadly, the truth is that the only way TV production companies feel they can get people to populate the audiences of these shows is to distribute them via political parties with obvious results. They are probably right (it isn’t just politics - apart from a few shows like HIGNFY and Graham Norton it is a real struggle to offload tickets). It would probably be better to have a much smaller, hand picked audience.
Hain referred to Parliamentary Standards Commissioner after complaint.
27. Herd instinct Roger, no one believed Hillary was near to Obama and everyone wanted to be on the anointed winner. He was expected to win, the exit polls were saying he was going to win, the pundits said so. Few people noticed that Obama’s pre poll leads didnt seem quite so large in some of these exit polls
The one signal most missed was from the Clinton’s own camp who said they expected it to be much closer than many thought. Given the fact they were playing down expectations that was a big signal this wouldnt be the imagined cakewalk.
If Hain is forced to go, would it be the earliest resignation in a calendar year?
I’d imagine Cameron would be delighted if Zac disappears. He was one of those early Cameron sketches that looked faintly ridiculous when he tried to put it onto canvas.
I know these things are rightly frowned on on here but that’s never stopped me before! I can report from my own little focus group (four advertising folk) that they still haven’t learn’t to love Gordon yet though the anger of last month’s lunch wasn’t there and one thought Cameron rather slippery which pleased me no end! I wouldn’t be surprised if the Populus figures don’t become the norm for a while
[32] http://paulwalter.blogspot.com/
The results were:
Thatcham North:- 27.7% turnout
Conservative 527
Sparkes - Liberal Democrat 625
Thatcham Central:- 28.1% turnout
Crumley - Conservative 515
Leake - Liberal Democrat 743
Smithson - Conservative 494
Steevenson - Liberal Democrat 762
44 Thanks Cicero. It was Town Council by elections, hence my confusion. Rendel is a sitting Councillor on West Berks District (for Thatcham North.)
44. These are town council results, for heaven’s sake. get a grip. About as relevant as Roger’s circle of four idiots.
The Hain stuff looks a bit murkier than previously reported. The re-allocation of funds (£25k donations, £25k loans) from the Progressive Reform Forum (no website, solicitors address) to Hain campaign involved Hain’s campaign treasurer who was also a trustee of the Forum. So why weren’t they declared?
re the vacancy in the Order of the Garter - what odd on “Arise, Sir Tony”?
40
Heard the end of a news report that some of the undeclared money in Hain’s campaign came from a think tank, which was also responsible for keeping track of Hain’s campaign expenditure.
Hain gone by monday?
re 48 that should be odds
Harry. Relax! You’ll give yourself a hernia.
48 - As the Order is in the personal gift of the Queen, I doubt she’d be likely to exert herself for him. There are two vacancies at the moment. It’s a long time since Garters and Thistles were vital counters in the political game, as the reward of choice for wealthy magnates with electoral power.
Poll in Scotsman, polls at this time of year, should carry a health warning, however, Salmond very popular, but Labour holding its own.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/politics?articleid=3662925
51. Perhaps you can give me an expert view on whether wearing a straitjacket helps ease such a condition?
48, 50, Chris A, maybe his KG could be announced in his resignation Honours List, which (like his Congressional medal) is now long overdue.
OK, some stuffy types would say it was Bad Form to give himself honours, but hey, Tony’s a pretty straightforward kind of guy, it’s no big deal.
Garter appointments are made on St George’s Day IIRC
47 as they say in the DWP advert on TV “no ifs, no buts”! failure to declare your correct income to DWP gets you an interview under caution and possibly a criminal record!
seems these rules dont apply to the wealthy minister in charge of the DWP yet he would be happy to jail some poor member of the public for not declaring a few hours of overtime.
55 Rumour has it that there will be no Resignation Honours, instead Tony’s nominees will be included in the New Years/Birthday lists over a period - already saw a few in last New Years lists. He can’t nominate himself for Garter and thats up to the Queeen - she tends to chose select few aristocratic friends (Carington, Ridley, Westminster), Bankers/Bank of England Governors, Army Chief of Staffs and Prime Ministers so imagine Sir Tony will be offered at some time, though Major had to wait 8 years.
One way or another I suspect Hain’s days are numbered. Whether he resigns or gets shuffled out of the pack in due course. It may take a while but he’ll likely go.
Lovely fella though, very concerned with the common man….
re 52 but it seems to become the honour of choice for ex-PM’s these days rather than the traditional earldom.
55 - The deadline for a Resignation Honours list passed long ago. Blair’s position was, apparently, that anyone named in the list would be tainted after the cash-for-honours scandal, so he decided to avoid further embarassment.
Besides, as the Garter isn’t conferred on the PM’s recommendation, it’s not a conventional Honour.
Hain’s pretty unlucky. It’s always a mytery how such bright driven people can get themselves into these kind of difficulties. There is no suggestion that this had anything to do with personal gain so it has to be simple lack of organization.
How could someone who in his early 20’s organized the anti apartheid movement so effectively that the South African government sent agents to frame him and later went on to hold several senior cabinet positions not do something as simple as declare a few donations?
22 - Applying the same logic, I assume that you’ll be demanding that Viscount Thurso should leave the Lib Dems on account of his support for nuclear power?
62. Unlucky?
I would say he’s been very lucky. Bearing in mind a number of the people in European anti apartheid movement tended to be subject killing attempts by means of organo phosphate on their clothes the worst he got was, apparently, framed.
Clearly wasn’t seen as that big a fish.
60 - If, as has been suggested, the Queen’s not particularly Blair-friendly, she might simply wait. Wilson got one about three weeks after he resigned. Callaghan had to wait until 1987, Heath until 1992, Thatcher until 1995, and Major until 2005, so there is high variability.
8 - point taken. What is telling is that only 13% of last times LDs have moved over to the Tories in this poll, whereas 3% have moved the other way. It puts pay to the lie trotted out on here that the Tories have swept up a third of the LD vote last time round.
In the survey, in fact, the LDs have a net loss of 1 voter overall to the other two parties (in aover 700).
I still feel this is a surprisingly good poll for the LDs, and there will be other less good ones around soon too. But for there to be bad news out there for the LDs, this would have to be the roguest of rogues.
32 - Rendell will have a real job on his hands to regain the seat. Richard Benyon is doing well. He is also very likeable, and gets on with people. He and Martin Salter often have kind words for each other. (Salter has a particularly sour relationship with his fellow Reading MP Rob Wilson.) There are far likelier gains for the LDs next time - Eastbourne?
OT. Yokel, reading through national review it appears old Fred had a big one at the Republican debate in SC last night. Worth another look perhaps or just his death throes?
http://corner.nationalreview.com/
62
Unlucky or just incompetent?
A cabinet minister responsible for a department with a budget of billions can’t keep track of £ 100,000 from a handful of people?
I see that Betfair has now extended the range of its US primary markets. There are about 15 of them here.
63 - that’s different. Thurso has not made his support for nuclear power his whole raison d’etre. Goldsmith has barely opened his mouth for the last five years with mentioning his opposition to nuclear.
66 Never claimed a third but polls for most of last year showed around a quarter were saying they would vote Tory (not a lie, but what the polls said) - that’s why Mike picked out this one, it shows that about half those who under Ming said they would vote Tory now say Lib Dem. Good result for Clegg. Lets see if it continues.
68. I’m trying to find a way of fitting him to the bets I already have in SC.
If the establishment want to sink Huckabee there then Fred is a useful tool, either to be the man to win it or to peel votes off Huckabee.
He is the most likely transfer point for current Huckabee support.
65 - Isn’t that due to the size restriction on the Order of the Garter in that you have to wait for someone to keel over before there is space to add someone in!
74 7 other people were appointed Garter Knights between 1997 and John Major’s appointment in 2005 so opportunity was there. Ted Heath didn’t get until 1992, lots of chances before then for him.
63
Yes! in fact I think the whole of the party political system in this country has reached the level of absurdity.
Voters are now totally confused as to what any political party stands for, if anything!
The example I always quote, (it happens to be Tory, but could apply to any party) is the Redwood/Gumsmith, (Goldsmith,Gummer)reports: Big Airports are really very good, said Redwood, Big Airports are really very bad said Gumsmith. Then Redwood and Gumsmith appeared on the TV and said they were both saying the same thing!
So tell me, why are voters not bothering? any ideas?
74 - Partly, although there were vacancies for all PMs since Wilson which would have allowed them to be slotted in earlier than they were. I suppose one factor is to make sure that ex-PMs are clearly not going to make a surprise comeback.
73. Interesting point. Ideally as mentioned in post 8 by Mike, you’d wait to see a bounce in the polls before moving back in but the value may have gone by then, and instead you have to make a subjective call on whether the performance (and the associated media commentary) is likely to impact polls.
I got a few quid matched on him at intrade for SC before the debate at 70/1 to cover my big JMac positionsfor that primary. However there may not need to be a rush to buy into him for the nomination as he’s available at 30+/1 almost everywhere.
Anyone wanting to see extracts of the debate including the Luntz verdicts can view at
http://hotair.com/
77 - Indeed and if Tony were given the Garter Cherie woudl be technically Lady Blair. Thats a thought to make a lot of people shudder.
78. How appropriate a website name is that…
I think the feeling out there is that Fred is dead in the big race so people are maybe underestimating him in SC.
Look, if the bookies can run markets in the longevity of GB’s premiership, can’t we have one on the length of time it takes (in months) from TB’s resignation until his KG is announced? Titles like that are rather useful in American banking circles, so I reckon it will be sooner trather than later. (And I don’t hold with this “personal gift of the Sovreign” thing - no doubt technically true, but pressure can be brought to bear, and favours called in, on behalf of a PM who served for 10 years.)
David Rendell has a very slim chance in Newbury as Richard Benyon will have an incumbency uplift at the next election as well as the overall improvement in Conservative support.
Re-selecting Rendell was therefore a mistake as the LDs needed to choose a new candidate and build them up for the 2013/14/15 GE. Rendell is 58 and would be between 63 and 66 then.
Caveman
Have you seen the latest two polls from Fox in particular on SC?
Fred would have no chance of coming back from those poll numbers which surprise me if I’m honest.
Maybe I should stick to leaving him out as originally planned.
PA reports:The BNP narrowly missed a shock by-election win as Labour defended a marginal North West Leicestershire District seat in this week’s only reported council poll.
The majority at Ibstock and Heather was just 62 votes.
But the biggest losers were the Tories, who were pushed into third place after winning two of the ward’s three seats last May.
The latest result comes after Conservatives’ vote tumbled at Welwyn Hatfield, Hertfordshire, last week.
No by-elections are reported for next Thursday.
RESULT:
North West Leicestershire District - Ibstock and Heather: Lab 699, BNP 637, C 515, Lib Dem 411. (May 2007 - Three seats C 737, 731, Lab 707, 620, C 599, Lab 559, Ukip 411, Lib Dem 225, 222). Lab hold. Swing 5.6% C to Lab.
Erm…
The Lib Dems won 62 seats in parliament at the 2007 election. Of those 13 were with a majority of 2,000 or less - my rough guide definition of ‘marginal’. Of the 13, 8 have the Conservatives in 2nd place.
Is winning back those 8 seats really going to make a decisive difference to a general election result?
There are many, many more Labour held marginals with the Tories in 2nd place.
81 - I don’t see any pressure Blair could seriously bring to bear on the Queen having a decisive effect. Even if he talks Gordon Brown into putting the clamps on the Queen, the Palace is skilled and experienced in protecting the Queen’s personal prerogatives, and could stonewall, or torpedo the proposal with a well-timed leak. In any event, Blair doesn’t seem greatly enamoured of the values of titles and honours - he could go to the current Lords any time he chose to ask No. 10, whoever is in office - and his prestige as an ex-PM is probably enough for foreigners.
Is Hain going to be the first cabinet casualty of 2008?
“Hain Still Has Campaign Debts of £41,200…..he owes the Labour Party £16,200.”
http://www.order-order.com/2008/01/hain-still-has-campaign-debts-of-41200.html
“Peter Hain has been reported to the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7182480.stm
IMHO Chris Grayling is on a par with David Davis at getting ministerial scalps through co-ordinated action. Hain attacked Grayling recently over his welfare to work ideas so no love lost there.
76 - I tend to agree with you and suspect that it is only activists that are able to think in terms of ‘the party line.’ For the rest of us, parties either tend to try to be all things to all men (and pleasing no-one) or voting is a choice of working out your least unprefered candidate. Or not bothering at all.
There is an interesting article here acting as a kind of hub for links speculating about the potential for a ‘the long tail’ in politics which sounds interesting in theory. However, I suspect the practice is that long tail politics merely makes explicit the coalitions that are our present parties and little would change in reality given these coalitions need to deal with reality and not a world as they might wish it to be.
86 Yes, I s’pose you’re right. The Palace has certainly upped its game re: political infighting over recent years, but I suppose they have had to!
81 Its surely a big & tough decision for Gordon Brown to make - should he pressure the Monarch to give Tony & Cherie titles? Surely this is a decision for the long not short term, so Gordon can say that he has set up an enquiry to decide whether Prime Ministers ought to be appointed to the Garter, a limited resource which the Conservative Party had wasted in those 18 years of power. He would in the long term look to increasing the availability of places and ensuring that the Garter was available to those most in need not just those few Oxbridge graduates, bankers and blueblooods currently occupying the stalls.
[82] Well, if that is the case, the Conservatives should be winning and holding seats where people are voting, not losing them like they did last night. It may only be a Town Council, but around 2400 people voted and the Parliamentary majority is only about 3500. I have also heard that Benyon is regarded as a bit of a buffoon, so if things are more competitive next time, the first defence might still be quite hard against the well known and generally well liked David Rendel (one ‘l’ BTW).
83. Yeah, the Rasmussen poll before the debate has him way back as well
http://tinyurl.com/2qooxy
However, Romney looks to be giving up SC to focus on Michigan so that vote is up for grabs, and if you look into the Ras numbers his support is the most solid of all the candidates, and he is viewed both most favorably and as the most politically conservative. There’s not many markets on this primary up at the moment but I found Unibet have one for SC and just stuck £50 on at 19/1 as a complete flyer.
We might be missing the big story with Tony’s KG.
Now that JPM is paying him £500k/year, Cherie is no longer the main breadwinner so is free to park her bottom on the High Court bench. Does Betfair have a market on Mrs Justice Booth?
91 - Long before 1993, there was a strong LD presence in the area, and that’s likely to remain the case for some time - but the clearest way of judging movement in the area would be the West Berkshire council results, rather than town council results where local factors will be of major importance.
Richard Benyon has a clear local profile, and I don’t think he’s anymore buffoonish than Rendel, who certainly seemed odd at times.
91 Cicero, Richard Benyon is actually highly regarded locally having come up as a councillor (one time Leader of the Council) and fought the seat twice before eventually winning. He has deliberately declined a lot of national work to focus on his seat.
By contrast Rendel’s majority declined every time he fought the seat and he had no 1st time incumbent uplift.
Publicising parish by elections is desperate stuff.
92. HumanEvents, some sort of conservative/Reaganite publication just endorsed Fred. Never heard of it myself, but if anyone has heard of it and knows if it makes a difference I’d be interested to find out.
http://www.humanevents.com/index.php
92, Fred, the alternative candidate.
95 Benyon is also a representative of a dying breed – the local squire who has become the MP. He owns a large tract of the constituency at the Eastern (Reading) end of the A4, and his family have a good reputation locally as good farmers, good landlords and benevolent patrician types who care about their community. His political views (if h has any) certainly don’t get in the way of his popularity.
95 Hardly surprising that David Rendel’s majority declined gradually - his winning score in the 1993 byelection was high, and bearing in mind the true blue history of that area up till that time…
I won’t intrude on your and Cicero’s discussion of people’s opinion of Richard Benyon - I simply don’t know. But if there is even a hint of “buffoon” as a view, David would be in a perfect position, as a highly intelligent, thoughtful (in all senses of the word) candidate, who, when all said and done, does have a largely positive track record in the area, to take advantage at the next election. Benyon may or may not get incumbent bonus, but he will have a fight on his hands still.
I tend to agree with you re-over reporting of Town Council results, but having said that, bigger towns, esp in areas of Lib Dem breakthrough, have quite pronounced party political voting patterns, and trends can be seen here as well as in Councils with greater powers. Last night it appeared the trend was away from the Tories. And this is not unusual at present.
91: So we are now basing things on the results of town council elections on a very wet weekday?
91. Perhaps we can have a reminder of the West Berks local results from 2007 - a remarkably bad performance by the Lib Dems, as I recall. Con +9 Lib Dem -8, Con majority up to 20.
A fair bit of support for McCain to win in Michigan. At Ladbrokes we are now 4/6 from Evs. 9/4 Mitt, 10/3 Huck.
Well, yes, Ralph (100). It shows that people who are incllned to vote Tory ar currently not greatly motivated to do so. I am not much surprised by this. Support for Cameron is just so much froth.
Yokel, Caveman: I have trouble seeing Thompson coming all the way back to win SC. Rember the consensus on the American right was that Romney won the last debate before NH handily - it didn’t help him that much.
But I agree that if Romney loses badly to McCain in Michigan, it might free up some voters. On the other hand, it also adds to McCain’s momentum. I presently tend to view everything through my rosy-tinted McCain glasses, but a better performance for Thompson in SC will help McCain, as Thompson is targeting Huck voters. A second for Thompson, beaten clearly by McCain would be the end of Huck and nearly seal it for Mc.
Human Events is more hardline than the more important National Review, which endorsed Mitt Romney way back. It illustrates that very few in the organized right except the hardcord conservative christians supports Huck, and that they don’t trust Mitt and/or have given up on his chances already.
99. Much more chance of a five figure Tory majority in West Berks next time than any kind of comeback by the Lib Dems.
102. Logical, he’s got an almost free run at the independents since the Democrat contest there is non existent.
I’d like to give it a day or two and see if Mitt shows any signs of claw back but 9/4 at the moment is hard to justify a bet on.
104. If McCain skated it that would still leave Guiliani who could be tougher nut to crack than Mitt.
103: Basing anything on the actions of a very small sample of people in a very limited geographical is silly, and that’s forgetting the lack of importance most people put on such elections.
102.
Useful info,thnk you Shadsy
Have Ladbrokes opened a book on the Nevada caucas?
8. Mike - is it still your opinion that McCain is overrated and overpriced? I just can’t see him winning it either. He’s almost an odds on favourite, yet only won one race and only marginally leading in a couple of others.
I think the nomination will go to convention. His value is terrible.
92. £50 is a lot!!
My personal view is that this is a short-lived “debate bounce”. I watched Luntz this morning and whilst some were impressed with his performance, *fewer* said they’d changed their vote because of it. “Inconsistent performer” and “Too far behind” were some of the phrases cited.
Fred Thompson has little chance of coming second in SC, let alone winning it. As for Michigan - forget it.
I’d only back him (for insurance) at very long odds. 30/1 is still too expensive.
98/99 etc.
Newbury: Rendell beating Beynon?? Hahaha!! Forget it.
Rendell is a busted flush. Benyon achieved one of the hightest LibDem-Con swings of 2005, in a seat which should never have been lost in the 1st place. A much easier nut to crack for the Libdems; Surrey South-West (Tory held in 2005 with less than 900 votes); wasn’t cracked despite a heavy deployment of Lib Dem resources. It is now safe again.
You can air your prejudicies on his background all you like, but Rendell has absolutely 0% chance of coming back here.
Forget it.
109. No. Might do after Michigan.
8. Mike - is it still your opinion that McCain is overrated and overpriced? I just can’t see him winning it either. He’s almost an odds on favourite, yet only won one race and only marginally leading in a couple of others.
I think the nomination will go to convention. His value is terrible.
92. £50 is a lot!!
My personal view is that this is a short-lived “debate bounce”. I watched Luntz this morning and whilst some were impressed with his performance, *fewer* said they’d changed their vote because of it. “Inconsistent performer” and “Too far behind” were some of the phrases cited.
Fred Thompson has little chance of coming second in SC, let alone winning it. As for Michigan - forget it.
I’d only back him (for insurance) at very long odds. 30/1 is still too expensive.
98/99 etc.
Newbury: Rendell beating Beynon?? Hahaha!! Forget it.
Rendell is a busted flush. Benyon achieved one of the hightest LibDem-Con swings of 2005, in a seat which should never have been lost in the 1st place. A much easier nut to crack for the Libdems; Surrey South-West (Tory held in 2005 with less than 900 votes); wasn’t cracked despite a heavy deployment of Lib Dem resources. It is now safe again.
You can air your prejudicies on his background all you like, but Rendell has absolutely 0% chance of coming back here.
Forget it.
91, 95, 98- Can I just add my penny worth to the Newbury debate,
1.Rendel’s majority consistently declined in favour of Benyon (97,01 etc) as has already been pointed out but I think the most important point here is that it declined in 01 when nationally the cons did badly (agian) and there was a significant swing away from them in favour of the Lib Dems (who won 6 seats from them). I think this is a testament to Benyon’s campaigning skills.
2. Rendell shot himself in the foot with his virulent opposition to hunting- he did not so much loose actual votes becuase of this- rather he handed Benyon a good way to recruit helpers- who came from the very large local hunts in droves. This negated the libdems usual advantage in terms of fit, able and willing leafleteers and canvasers.
3. Finally has it ever ocurred to those of you who are very willing to dismiss someone as a buffoon on the basis that they are a squire/landowner/upper class (shock horror) etc that they might just be as clever, hard working etc as the rest of us and thus as capable of getting themselves elected as AN Other.
75. IIRC, Heath was offered a KG during the 70s, but turned it down at the time as he wished to remain involved in front-line politics and hoped to return to the cabinet in the next Tory government, and saw a KG as symbolic of a move to ‘elder statesman’ territory. He later accepted one when it was obvious that his time had passed. That he waited until after Thatcher left office may not be wholly coincidental.
Heath’s apprenticeship in national politics was served under Churchill, for whom he was Chief Whip in the early 50s. Churchill also turned down a KG before later being more or less forced into accepting it. Churchill also turned down a peerage, as later did Heath. I wouldn’t be surprised if Churchill’s decisions with regard to honours had a significant effect on Heath’s opinions on them.
re 65 well there has to be a vacancy first so that might have been reason for a delay, but given that they’re usually elderly gentlemen they pop off at a much greater rate than MPs.
Obama is currently nudging 3-1 with Betfair for the Presidency, compared with the bookies’ best price of 9-4, quite a difference.
I remain enthused by his candidature and somehow can’t bring myself to bet on Hillary, she just seems so yesterday and I can’t think she’s going to be much of a winner outside NY/NJ & New England. Consequently, I’m green throughout, apart from on her winning either the Dem nomination or Presidency, and especially on either McCain and Huckabee winning the GOP nomination.
I’ve had a minor punt “saver” on Bloomberg at 33-1, but I see PP are offering 1/4 on his not even standing, so it’s probably time to lay that off, hopefully at no worse than B/E.
O/T Re: Permatan Hain - I see that a total of £186K was contributed towards his Deputy Leadership bid, an absolutely extraordinary amount compared with the other candidates and for such an inconsequential contest, but does anyone on PB know what happens to any monies left unspent, that is to say are they:
1. Returned to the donor(s)?
2. Paid into Labour’s central party funds?
3. To be spent at Mr Hain’s discretion?
BTW Does anyone else on PB.com, Labour Party fans included, believe his conduct in this matter to be an absolute disgrace (Nick Palmer apart, who equates it to the late filing of a tax return wyb) and that he should be summarily dismissed?
Whiter than White?
Ha-Ha! ROTFLOL
“It’s easy to make £100,000 sound a lot of money and, of course, for an individual to have it is … But you have got to look at the size of the task: if you are trying to campaign for the votes of 3 or 4 million people, even if you just wrote a letter to all of them it would cost half a million pounds.”
(Idiot Linton MP talking about Sleazy Hain MP, reported by The Guardian).
PfP @ 116 re Obama price. The two questions you need to answer are:
When will Edwards drop out?
To whom will Edwards’ supporters switch?
If your answers are soon and Obama, then 3/1 is a good price.
114
The reason why Heath turned down a peerage, was so he could sit and glower at his number one enemy Thatcher!!
Its time the whole nonsense was put where it belongs, ‘The dustbin of history’
Knight of the Garter, so called because some silly tart couldn’t keep her knickers up: come to think of it, most people who have titles, got ‘em ‘cos their female ancestors couldn’t keep their knickers up.
Its all arse, if grown ups want too wear silly clothes and call each other by silly names do what normal people do, join a club for transvestites.
119 Actually, that wasn’t the point of the Garter. It was very much a military order, when Edward III founded it. Edward was an outstanding general and warrior, possibly this country’s greatest.
119 Brilliant! Post of the day, without doubt.
re 90 5 of the current 22 members, five never went to university at all, and if I’ve counted correctly Oxford leads Cambridge by 11 to 1.
BBC Wales have an interesting update on Haingate:
“Mae Ysgrifennydd Cymru, Peter Hain, wedi gwneud datganiad llawn i’r Comisiwn Etholiadol yn datgelu faint o gyfraniadau ariannol y cafodd ymgyrch aflwyddiannus am ddirprwy arweinyddiaeth y Blaid Lafur. Pwysau gwaith sydd wedi cael y bai gan Mr Hain, y Gweinidog Gwaith a phensiynau, am fethu cadw llygad ar drefniadaeth ariannol ei ymgyrch.”
I think we can safely conclude, things aren’t looking good for old tangerine face.
87 - can I just say that as a Tory voter, nothing would give me greater pleasure than to see the odious Hain brought down by a sleaze scandal after the sanctimonious guff he’s come out with in the past re Tory so-called sleaze?
Take your sunbed and eff off back to the Valleys…
119. Perhaps you could suggest a few (ad)dresses?
123 Maybe the chap who produced “Hey Mister Tangerine Man” for Kilroy could do something similar for Hain.
123 Correction - post of the day!
Oh God, I’m so fickle!
116 - yes I do Peter from Putney, but perhaps there is an element of personal dislike of the guy in there.
sp’s point at 57 stands out - it is the DWP saying that anyone caught lying about income will be interviewed under caution and face a criminal record. Hain is therefore in a very embarassing position.
It might not be his fault, but it’s his responsibility to ensure that everything done in his name is above board. Following these revelations, I perhaps think that the Labour party got it right in not electing this man to such a high office. Instead they went for squeaky clean erm…… Harriet.
123 - Is there an English translation for those of us who do not speak Welsh?
119. Shame on him who thinks evil of it!
129 You could try John Redwood or failing him Dictionary.com
129 - yep. “Peter Hain, First Minister - f…ed”
123. No. I don’t speak Welsh either. But you don’t have to speak the language of the mountain men to see how bad it is. You can just tell from the words, can’t you?
I mean, any minister who is “aflwyddiannus”, “cadw llygad” AND “arweinyddiaeth” is pretty much a goner, I’d have thought.
And of course Hain is also accused of “ddirprwy”. I don’t know a single minister who has ever been accused of “ddirprwy” and survived.
Rendell should go to the Lords and make a contribution there rather than chasing pipe dreams of being relected. There are a handful of Conservative seats where we *might* see unusual against the national swing Lib Dem gains from the tories but I really can’t see Newbury being one of them. Its a plausible target sometime into the next Conservative government if some one keeps the engine ticking over but you need a younger person for that.
David has enormous respect in the party and we have sent less weighty ex MP’s to the Lords. I could even see him as an effective party president.
128. Hain’s conduct suggests a ‘we are the masters now’ attitude, whereby great men (sic) like himself should not be bothered with trifling matters of legality. The same hubristic attitude is visible in many other Labour figures, front and back bench.
It’s the clearest indication of all of a government that has been in office too long.
116
‘O/T Re: Permatan Hain - I see that a total of £186K was contributed towards his Deputy Leadership bid, an absolutely extraordinary amount compared with the other candidates and for such an inconsequential contest, but does anyone on PB know what happens to any monies left unspent, that is to say are they:’
After spending almost double that of other candidates and coming last,maybe he was just too embarressed to reveal how much he had spent.
It could also be a case of money not being as influential in campaigns as people claim or maybe Permatan is just as unpopular inside the Labour party as he is outside it.
133 Yes and ymgyrch just has to be the last word.
113 - I’m no expert on Newbury and the relative merits of Benyon and Rendel, but I do know that Rendel’s choice of agent in 2005 might have had something to do with the bigger than average swing against him…
133 - I’m sure you are right but a translation would still help!
On a personal level i feel a degree of sympathy for Hain. Having a career ended over an administrative eroor seems harsh to me. However its the price we pay for the “scalp culture”. No one ever resigns anymore over policy or delivery cock ups but its the minor stuff like nannygate or Mandelsons mortgage.
Given what they have had thrown at them I can’t blame the Conservatives for hounding him out. Its a rough old trade as major rightly said.
When looking at the new betfair primary and caucus markets make sure you check where independents can vote, it’s going to matter a lot (e.g. for the GOP in Michigan because the Dem race is a non event or for the dems in California because the GOP have frozen independents out of their race.
Another article about the independents and how they hold the key to who wins and how -
“Several of the GOP candidates have qualities that might appeal to independent voters: Rudy Giuliani’s successful record as mayor of New York City, Mitt Romney’s intelligence and competence, Mike Huckabee’s concern for the poor. But McCain just won more independent voters than the others in the swing state of New Hampshire. And he is the only candidate with a platform that might attract them.”
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1702347,00.html
140 It’s not a question of hounding him out - he should have had the honour to resign.
117. Votes of 3 or 4 million people? How many members does the fool Linton think the party has?
Say 100,000? That’d be about £30,000 for personal letter, printing, second class post, all in. Just for reference, the budgets for the Tory leadership contestents were capped at £100,000 each. And that was for twice the number of members.
142 - Indeed, and if he didn’t Brown should have had the courage to sack him, but Gordon only preaches about courage doesn’t he.
142. ‘Honour’? hahahahaha nice thought but could you seriously expect anything like that from Hain or others of his ilk?
118. The answer now that Hillary is firmly back in is probably sooner than if she lost and it won’t heavily break for Obama.
If anything Edwards presence is perhaps doing more damage to her than Obama from what I can see.
Interesting that people think that Town Council elections shouldn’t be taken seriously. The Tories badly lost my local Town Council to the Lib Dems last May (13-5) and seem to have taken it very seriously. I guess it’s like all elections on PB; they are only serious if your side wins!
PfP @ 116 re Obama price. Sorry, 118 was right for a long term investment. For a short term trading