The week that punters turned to Boris
March 22nd, 2008
But should you be making a 75/1 insurance bet on Paddick?
The chart, using betting prices expressed as implied probabilities, shows the dramatic changes there have been in the London Mayoral race betting over the past week.
Last Saturday the Labour incumbent, Ken Livingstone, was the marginal odds-on favourite with his Tory challenger, Boris Johnson, not far behind. Then the came the national general election polls showing a huge move to the Tories in the aftermath of the budget.
This was followed on Monday with the first Mayoral poll of March giving Johnson a seeming unassailable 12% lead and the following day we had a further national poll from ICM suggesting that the Tory lead was getting larger.
The main hope for Ken is that the latest mayoral poll was taken straight after the budget which clearly bombed with the public but which might be a temporary phenomenon.
Ken loyalists usually argue that the pollster, YouGov, has a history of understating their man’s support - a notion that is based on the Evening Standard’s selective use of data just before polling day in 2004. The survey itself and the numbers most directly comparable with this week’s poll got it almost exactly right. In February Labour published details of is own private MORI survey to counter the first YouGov poll showing Boris ahead. That’s not happened this month suggesting that the pollster is now in the same area as YouGov.
An issue for the betting now is whether the Lib Dem, Brian Paddick, could be in with a shout. A number of figures on the left such as the writer Nick Cohen are promoting a vote for Paddick as the only way of stopping the Tory. If this catches hold and there’s a big move to the Lib Dem in the next polls then the notion might gain some traction. If he came second on the first count, the argument goes, he would pick up the lion’s share of Ken’s second preferences. Even then I don’t think that Paddick can overhaul Johnson but I’ve covered my betting position with a £30 punt on the Lib Dem at 75/1.
I cannot recall a Tory or the Tories ever losing an election when within six weeks a poll has shown them enjoying such a margin. There might be a precedent but I am not aware of it.
Latest mayoral betting prices are here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
OT - NCAA
Villanova 70 Clemson 66 with 1:14 left to play
NCAA Men’s Basketball
Villanova 75 Clemson 65
Yet another amazing upset, after a great game. At one point in first half, Villanova was losing the game 36-18. At the end of the game, made 12 of 13 baskets from the free throw line, as part of outstanding endgame.
In fact, for first time in history of college football that 4 lower-seeded teams in one regional - in this case, the Midwest - have advanced to the Sweet 16 for round two.
MIDWEST
Davidson University (Davidson, NC) (10th) beat Gonzaga (Seattle, WA) (7th) 82-76
Kansas State University (11th) beat University of Southern California (6th) 80-67
Villanova (Philadelphia, PA) (12th) beat Clemson University (Clemson, SC) (5th) 75-69
Siena University (Loudonville, NY) (13th) beat Vanderbilt University (Nashville, TN) (4th) 83-62
In addition, other upsets in other regionals include:
EASTERN
University of Arkansas (9th) beat Indiana University (8th) 86-72
SOUTHERN
Texas A&M University (College Station, TX) (9th) beat Brigham Young University (Provo, Utah) (8th) 67-62
University of San Diego (13th) beat University of Connecticut (4th) 70-69
Splitting the Labour vote between Ken and Brian Paddick seems like a recipe to give it to Boris on first preferences alone. And this was thought up by the left, you say?
re 3. The Lib Dem argument in the coming weeks will be that Ken is finished and the only way of stopping Boris is by putting Paddick as first choice. They can still ensure that their vote will count against the Tory by making Ken their second preference.
The situation changes if Ken is seen as a loser - which is what is happening at the moment.
In the YouGov poll only 38% of those identifying themselves as Lib Dems said they were putting Paddick first. This gives an idea of the potential for the party. If that rose to, say, 70% at Ken’s expense then you could see real traction behind the Paddick bid.
ON TOPIC
Sure does look like Boris Johnson really does have a chance to defeat Ken Livingstone.
And this from a guy who once said that Borish had as much chance of beating Red Ken as Dick Whittington’s dead cat.
And the Boss is right to flag the possibility that Brian Paddock could come up the middle to grab the prize, esp. if Red Ken does a nosedive in the weeks preceeding May Day.
Voter fatigue with Livingstonian London was a genie that the antics of his entourage helped let out of the bottle.
Plus Boris has done an amazing job of restraining his nearly irresitable tendency to play to type as the Clown Prince of Tory England. Instead, he’s actually coming across as a guy with some reasonable ideas and a fresh approach. Who already knows enough about multimodal transport and municipal infrastructure to Bore for Britain, and show capacity for further immersion in the nitty gritty of metropolitan governance.
Still enough time howver for Boris to blow it. And too early to write the obit of an old fox as wily as Red Ken.
If Boris does get elected, do you suppose he’ll still turn up on HIGNFY?
4 Mike - in the Guardian Kettle suggests Lib Dems get Paddick to withdraw and replace him with Vince Cable, the Lib Dems all-dancing champion of the moment. Can’t see it happening.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/mar/22/vincentcable.london08
Ted @ 7: it is not clear how coming third will benefit Cable or the LibDems.
Or even coming second. And it is too late to think about winning.
So what’s in it for Vince? The ghost of Frank Dobson’s career is surely passing before Cable’s eyes.
I wouldn’t any longer describe Nick Cohen as being ‘on the left’. He seems to have taken the same philosophical journey as Melanie Phillips. His promotion of Paddick is a fig leaf. He knows it’s a two horse race and he’s done everything he can-together with everyone else at ‘The Standard’-to get Boris elected.
Since he’s started on this rightward journey his articles in the Observer have become quite tortured.
Still having trouble seeing how Paddick moves up from third place. This is a two horse race - Ken v. Boris. It’s like suggesting Foreman could win the Ali v. Frasier fight. Even a mutual “second pref pact” signals weakness.
Your only hope is if Ken is absolutely 100% certain he is going to lose and then does something spiteful to rain on Boris’ parade - like withdraw. And what would Gordon make of Labour not having a candidate for the capital city? Ain’t going to happen.
I shouldn’t think the Conservatives will be too bothered by this idea. If Livingstone were seen as a loser to the extent that Paddick could overtake him, then the result will be a large number of Labour voters simply staying at home. Which in turn will increase Boris’ share of the vote to the extent that he is effectively uncatchable.
9 Roger I’ve no doubt that Nick Cohen can defend his political stance but neither as someone on the right do I doubt he is on the left. Not being keen on Livingstone’s 80’s type student socialism or on knee-jerk anti-Americanism doesn’t make someone less “progressive”.
O/T Sorry. Tony Harnden in Telegraph has an item on Fox News coverage of Rev Wright & Obama and the reaction of a couple of Fox commentators on air to “Obama bashing”. Can’t imagine a UK broadcaster having say Paxman come onto Marr and tear into Marr about his programme’s take on a political story.
http://tinyurl.com/3ygoob
“Politics were so very simple- believe no one,double cross everyone,keep a full treasury, and inveigle others to do the dirty work”. Mr. Bean might have got away with the other three, if he had the brains to keep a full treasury. Too late now-for Ken and a few other politicians.
There are so many aspects of the thinking behind Cohen’s article that I’ll start with the one thing that Mike’s got right: backing Paddick. I don’t usually advocate backing people who are going to lose - and he is - but there is an increasing chance that he could come second. As the possibility of that seeps into punters consciousness, his price should drift inwards. For people who like to make money on market movements, rather than by predicting actual results, this seems to me to offer some value.
However, for the bigger picture, the most obvious error of thinking is what we might term the ‘Mark Senior’ thinking: that people want to ’stop the Tory’. Well, for some on the left, that’s definately true, but as the last YouGov second preference poll showed, it doesn’t carry over to the electorate at large - in fact, Boris had a majority of Paddick’s second preferences. That would of course be nullified if Paddick made it to the second round and so his supporters’ second preferences don’t get counted. But if he did get to the second round, he’d probably be 20%+ behind Boris on something like a 45/25/20 split. Would he really take a 5:1 split of all the second preferences, which wouldn’t just be Ken’s, but all the minor parties too.
Also, the nature of the second vote means that there will probably be a lot wasted. This is not AV, where if the next preference on a ballot goes to someone already eliminated then there’s someone further down the list still to whom the vote can be allocated, once both the first and second preferences have gone, that’s game over for that vote. If it is close between Paddick and Ken for second, many of those voting for a minor candidate will find their second preferences not counting at all.
There’s also the question of how Ken’s campaign approaches this. To put the idea into practice, the Lib Dems would have to convince the public not only that Ken has no chance and Boris must be stopped - a hard enough double act in the first place as if the first part is true, the public can’t have bought the second part, and vice versa - but that Paddick is a better bet than either of them: again, an idea which the voters haven’t yet shown much enthusiasm for.
They would also need to convince Labour that Ken has no chance of winning but that they do - because it will only work if many Labour voters can be persuaded to vote Lib Dem. I very much doubt Ken accepts that he has lost yet, and even if he does, I doubt he is the sort of person to go without a fight. It also assumes that people can be told in such large numbers what to do with their vote: again, a dodgy assumption.
Mark’s point at [10], that such a pact signals weakness, is also true - and will lead to cross-contamination of both Ken’s and Paddick’s brand if put into action.
Finally, while I don’t expect this idea to gain any traction, if it did, there’s every prospect that Lib Dem and Labour activists and campaign teams could spend more time arguing between themselves as to how to put it into action, than they do promoting their candidates or bashing Boris, because some people are like that.
All in all, I’m feeling a little bit more confident about my pro-Boris stance in the betting (and after Pieterson’s century, about my pro-England stance at 5/2
).
The final nail in the coffin for Ken??
From the Daily Telegraph
Proving hard for Ken Livingstone to get cabs
Last Updated: 1:56am GMT 22/03/2008
Brave is the man who tries to tell a London cabbie to keep his political views to himself, but Mandrake hears that the apparatchiks at Transport for London have just ordered them to stop distributing receipts bearing the words “Back Boris”.
Our Mr Johnson is undoubtedly the cabbies’ favourite to replace Ken Livingstone as mayor of London when the election is held on May 1, and, what is more, a gentleman who conveyed me from Victoria to the West End said he and his colleagues are now refusing to stop for Ken.
“It’s against the rules I know but when we see him outside City Hall we just put our feet down,” he told me. “I have had him in the back of my cab once and that was only because I hadn’t recognised him. I slammed the partition shut because I couldn’t face listening to him.”
I am just about to have another £3,500 to win £2,000 on Boris,and it is still good value,I reckon 2/5 sometime early April.
15. Oops - missed some words out in the first sentance - it should read “There are so many aspects of the thinking behind Cohen’s article that are wrong …”
Ted.It’s not particularly his views on Ken or anti-Americanism but more the anti-Islam rants which have now reached the tone of Melanie Phillips. His attempts to paint Ken as an anti-Semite are also laughable but I don’t think we should carry this on any further or we’ll drag the ‘Al fresco’s’ and the ‘Don’s’ and the ‘Bolted Horses’ from under their rocks (or out of their stables) and ruin the thread
Thanks for that clip from Fox News. It’s brilliant!! I can’t remember seeing newsman squirm with such discomfort as those defending themselves from his attack.
14 That was Cardinal Ruffo of Naples, wasn’t it?
“Would he really take a 5:1 split of all the second preferences, which wouldn’t just be Ken’s, but all the minor parties too.”
No, he wouldn’t. 2004’s results suggest that if he can come second, and come within 13% of Johnson on first preferences, he could then overhaul him on second preferences, but that’s a long shot.
These are the links to the two amazing Fox news pieces -
http://www.redlasso.com/ClipPlayer.aspx?id=19ba5a61-9510-4da5-abeb-e9a546cdc33a
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiIK8jh3ZCE
I have had a paddick hedge on for some time - i see it as the main risk to my Boris position
16. So the Daily Telegraph informs their readers of London opinion by conversations with taxi drivers. Whatever next?
22
Why not Roger ???, as an indication of what Londoners are thinking, I would have thought Cabbies were a fair call. They talk to thousands of people every day…. (except Ken Livingstone)
22 - I don’t know, Roger informing us of national opinion by conversations at his dinner parties…?
22,23 — I’ve rarely if ever conversed with a black cab driver, and suspect this is an urban myth. You are three or four feet behind the driver who is often listening to LBC in any case. Minicab drivers often won’t shut up though.
Matthew Parris in peculiar mood.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/matthew_parris/article3599180.ece
“Should you be taking a 75-1 insurance bet with Paddick ?”
If you have to ask the question, the answer just has to be an emphatic ‘YES’.In fact I just took some 70.0.
In fact this is just adding to the green on Paddick obtained from laying bits of both the big guns.
It is inconceivable that at some point in the campaign you will be unable to take a profit of some kind, whether large or small.
At the moment when one of the big boys becomes a worthless proposition(Ken), the same thought will be occurring to those who are big green on his rival(Boris).
Some silly poll will come out showing Paddick in with a small shout,and given the esoteric nature of the event itself,this could lead to panic buying of a longshot.
Good tip Mike Smithson.
23. I have been criticized on this site several times for reporting conversations with London taxi drivers. Perhaps it’s acceptability depends on what you hear the taxi drivers say?
22 In the use of Taxi drivers (as in overall use of opinion sampling of People in Shops, Streets, Pubs or Trains) location has to be taken into account. Taxi drivers are of course also Seekers After Tips. Therefore their political opinions may vary considerably depending on whether the fare has been picked up - outside the Ivy (London soft left litteratti), Telegraph Towers (Disgusted of Tunbridge Wells) or from Kensington & Chelsea (newly in Congestion Charge Zone net yet reconciled to £25 for the Shogun).
This whole ‘Paddick can come through the middle’ story is pure fantasy.
I doubt you have done much Exchange betting in your life,john smith, or you would know that in order to make a profit you don’t need something to happen….just the thought that it could happen occurring to someone lower down the food-chain.
This is partly a sophisticated betting site for sophisticated betting people.
I thank you john smith for your 1-70 advice.
29. Though that goes some way to explain why me and the Telegraph have found contrary opinions in our home-spun ‘taxi-driver polling’ I still don’t believe a word of that Telegraph clip in post 16.
A startling proportion of the cabbies I have spoken to recently are only working to earn enough so they can leave Britain for good. Summed up as “this place ain’t wurf savin’ no more….”
I don’t think there’s any serious scope for making a profit backing Paddick. The reason for backing him is insurance, pure and simple. If his odds come in, say to 35-1, then lay off the stake and have a ‘free’ bet.
So i think it’s perfectly reasonable, even commenting from a betting viewpoint, to express the view that the Paddick story is pure fantasy, and the insurance not needed.
There’s always ways for the Govt to make money, however long term the damage to the country…
Clear nonsense to beieve cab drivers (the most right-wing Londoners you can find) or Nik Cohen in this case. The only way to stop the buffoon running London is to back Ken. Ken has done a great job for London, developing public transport and cycling, the economy, winning the Olympics and policing. A right-wing Tory buffoon will risk all of this.
alex-I didn’t back Paddick to WIN, I backed him to LAY.I am merely betting that his price will shorten and I can make a small profit or have a free useless bet.
To a certain extent you are correct to point out that this is just an exercise in futility but it rarely costs and now and again it produces dividends.
I remember reading a poll some years ago that suggested more people in London would rather not be living there than in any other of the towns and cities polled. I doubt that’s true anymore. Even then it was surprising. From memory there were some pretty grim places in the poll.
34. As insurance, I think you’re right - enough is known about Ken and Boris’ character flaws that it will take something beyond the normal to seriously disrupt their respective campaigns. I really don’t see how they could both lose to Paddick (and when it comes down to it, how heavyweight a candidate is he?). As a straightforward ‘buy now to sell later’ bet, it does seem like an attractive price, as I believe his poll share will increase over the next few weeks as he starts to get a bit more coverage, and he should close in on Ken for second, though Ken should still hold on to that position fairly comfortably in the end
re 36. Simon - the possibility of Ken winning looks remoter all the time. Once the inevitability of Ken’s defeat becomes clearer anti-Tories will be looking for an alternative.
can you recall any election every when a Tory or the Tories had a 12% lead at this stage and failed? It has certainly not happened for decades.
Could someone give me a brief synopsis as to how the London Mayoral election works? Does a candidate have to get over a certian percentage to avoid the second preferences being counted?
David Herdson@39-I expect to break level or lose a tiny amount on my £12 bet at 70.0.
It was cheap and cheerful and almost bound to shorten,with the added attraction that at some point Paddick could go ’single figures’, ie a 9-1 shot.
Looking back,I have Layed him at an average of 20.0 which includes some shorter prices so why should he not come in at 9-1 at some point ?
41: All voters get to make a first and second choice of candidate, and if nobody receives an absolute majority on the first count everyone bar the first two candidates are eliminated and the second choice votes are distributed in a second round.
41 Over 50%
41. “Does a candidate have to get over a certian percentage to avoid the second preferences being counted?”
Yes - 50%.
7 et al: Martin Kettle is a Blairite fool of the highest order who should (always) be ignored.
I think the mistake labour has made (which the lib dems dont seem to have) is to not take Boris seriously. They assumed he would mess in some way and lose badly, instead he’s actually come off as more coherant than Ken, who has tried ridiculing him, and has now moved onto insulting him. It’s as if labour can’t believe that Boris is ahead, and that its only because they haven’t done much that he is. In fact, the nasty attacks from their spring conference, and from ken, have just boosted him. People don’t see Boris as a nasty righ winger, a bit of a twit perhaps, but a good hearted one who wants to make london better. It’s odd, I had him down as losing this election when they first announced him.
Also, anyone else think that Brown may get in to some hot water over this embryo bill? Having a three line whip may provoke resignations, although if it means Ruth Kelly getting the boot I don’t see any great loss.
Looks like we may have another ‘Bill moment’ in the Hillary campaign :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/another-bill-clinton-mome_n_92818.html
Huffington also indicates that Hillary is again strapped for cash :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/obama-has-clear-money-adv_n_92861.html
re 47. I think the real problem is Ken and the arrogant way he deals with any suggestions that he should be accountable for the billions of pounds of public expenditure that he is responsible for. To refuse to answer questions and his technique of smearing questioners simply is not good enough. Labour’s massive mistake was not to have ditched him.
Look at the ridiculous position that Brown, who fought long and hard against Ken being welcomed back into the Labour party in 2004, has got himself into. This week he was on a platform describing Ken as “an inspiration”.
In the words of Lord Acton’s famous quote “Power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
48 bill clinton really is the shit in the sewer! shame on the man.
47 Brown and New Labour’s relationship to the Scots Catholic Church is interesting - Gordon may no longer believe but he seems to retain the anti-papist streak of a son of the manse. Considering the dependency of Labour in and around Glasgow on RC support it’s an odd strategy to use when facing pressure from the SNP.
The tomatofish soup embryo row is stirring nicely.
http://www.newssniffer.co.uk/articles/108770/diff/0/1
I hope Ruth will make a speech as she is rather lovely.
52 There was quite an interesting thread on Con Home yesterday, about this.
What struck me as curious about some of the Labour posters was their contempt for the Catholic church - almost as if they were oblivious to the fact that Catholics have been a mainstay of the Labour vote for 100 years. If that is in any way representative of the attitude within Labour circles, then Labour is in real trouble in the long term. When you despise your own supporters, eventually they notice, and cease to be your supporters.
I knew that Brown had given Ken his backing but not that he had described him as an “inspiration”. And to also insist on a three line whip on the embryo vote which is an issue of individual morality.
Brown is elevating maladroitness to an art form.
In the words of Lord Jack W’s infamous quote “Easter eggs corrupts - absolute Easter eggs are yummy !!”
http://www.lisajanette.co.uk/communities/004/006/018/196/images/4518334899.gif
……………………
Meanwhile Obama launches new ads in Pennsylvania :
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/03/21/politics/horserace/entry3958941.shtml
55 Sean F. I think a distinction need to made between the Labour Party’s hostility to the RC hierarchy and catholic voters. Somewhat similiar to the distintion of the Spanish socialists.
Anyone want to give me odds that Hillary drops out before Pennsylvania? Unlikely I know but I just have a feeling she might. Any layers out there?
53. If you like 16 year old school boys..but lets not start that discussion again…whenever I hear her speak in the commons I am reminder of the Blackadder where Pitt the Younger calls on the leader of the opposition to test him on his Latin vocab..
Re taxis..we had this out some weeks ago..Roger’s view of the import of the Taxis drivers view was totally meaningless as is the piece in the Telegraph…Still I like getting all my Back Boris taxi receipts so its a shame if they stop those…
Mike I still cant help but feel that your basing too much on one You Gove poll..its clearly good for Boris as are the subsidiary points you make but I still cant quite beleieve it will be that easy to shift the rancid newt and his corrupt spawn from City Hall..
I bet Ken was fuming though that McBRoon decided to ‘back’ him in person alst week ..probably the first team Ken began to realise that with friends like that he might actually lose..
Sean F. Thanks for your Friday round-up yesterday. You mentioned three of the new Unitaries. Can you tell me if any progress if being made to ‘enhanced two-tier working’ in the Herts pathfinder?
57 Jack W - where there is a separation between the hierarchy and the congregation that may be true but many Catholics, even bad non-practising ones like myself, see this more as hostility to Catholic conscience and ethics than to the bishops. I personally have grave doubts on the Church involving itself in party politics but none on its right to oppose on ethical grounds - even though I in conscience disagree with its guidance on some areas (but I’m allowed to that’s what conscience is for). Labour is becoming less forgiving of private belief and too keen enforcing its public morality.
re 59. There have been three public polls in the past four weeks and other non public ones commissioned by the parties - so I am not basing my views on that alone.
Even the MORI one that had Ken 2% ahead was bad for the incumbent. The survey was based on a “certainty to vote” factor of 48%. This compares with turnouts in the mid-30s for the past two mayoral elections. There is a long-standing tendency for Labour voters to say they are certain when they are not - much more so than other parties. Indeed at the last general election MORI put a special adjustment in to deal with this.
54. Sean, I did a statistical analysis of religious voting in the 2001 election which produced some interesting results. The raw data is shown below. It used the British Election Study data, so the sample size was about 3,000, but the heavy over-representation of Scotland and Wales - mean that the Labour vote is exaggerated relative to the Tories. In any case the figures make for interesting comparisons:
Con Lab LD SNP Plaid
Anglican 35.7 43.1 17.6 0.6 1.5
Roman Catholic 19.7 68.0 9.2 1.8
Nonconformist 26.8 41.8 17.3 9.8 3.3
Other religion 18.1 54.3 16.4 4.3 5.2
No religion 18.4 48.0 21.8 7.1 1.7
Total 25.2 48.1 18.2 4.7 1.9
I.e. Labour support is almost 20% higher among Catholics than among the population as a whole. Nonconformist figures are heavily skewed towards Scots Presbyterians.
57 But increasingly, Labour seems hostile to the values of many Catholics, and not just to the Church hierarchy. And in Scotland at least, there is now an alternative they can vote for.
55 Absolutely. Labour will lose no votes by permitting a free vote on this legislation, but will certainly lose (if only a few) votes if it doesn’t. It’s not as if the bill represents some core part of Labour philosophy.
60 I doubt it.
18. His attempts to paint Ken as an anti-Semite are also laughable
err - not to most Jews they aren’t. Ken has certainly lost the Jewish vote. A friend works for a Jewish charity where most members (many of them elderly) have voted Labour all their lives. But not this time. They are nearly all voting Boris. And the remainder are voting Paddick.
61 Ted. Perhaps. I don’t think Labour, or for that matter any political party, is directly focused on an anti faith path, more that they they are aggressively secular and feel that they may generally ignore all church hierarchies with a level of impunity. Although the governments flirtation with faith schools is the exception that proves the rule.
62. Thanks Mike , I hear you and the fact that you hold no candle for Boris adds weight. I just have too much heart involved to be able to trust my head on this…back to the taxi drivers I guess!
55 “Brown is elevating maladroitness to an art form.”
Well put.
Great, isn’t it?!
I don’t think Hillary will be reading Mark Halperin’s ‘Time’ article anytime soon :
http://thepage.time.com/halperins-take-painful-things-hillary-clinton-knows-%E2%80%94-or-should-know/
‘Politico’ indicates that John Edwards is unlikely to endorse either Democrat candidate :
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9162.html
66 Agree it is more a case of aggressive secularism rather than anti-Catholicism - but the danger to Labour is that Gordon Brown does embody east of Scotland Presbyterianism. There is also the divergence between the secular attack on RC ethics while ministers try to placate Muslim clerics and ethics.
The problem is an alternative choice for the mainly Irish descended RCs of Lancashire and West of Scotland - the Lib Dems perhaps especially a Kennedy led Scots LD, but David Alton didn’t find that party a comfortable berth, SNP has more than a tint of the Kirk, Conservatives still associated with Unionism.
71 My guess is that the SNP will aim to woo those voters.
I agree with readingliberal at 46 about the improbability of the ‘draft Vince’ scenario, especially if it’s Martin Kettle’s idea; but is anyone tempted to go for the fiver available on Betfair at 140 on ‘Any other candidate’, just in case…?
Dear Auntie Mike
I asked my 22 year old daughter what she thought of the mayoral election. She doesn’t like Ken’s looks nor his voice. Likes Boris, especially his hair and has never heard of Paddick. She has a vote and intends to use it! Is this normal? And what do you suggest?
It’s clear the Ken’s camp are worried right now, you can tell by the number of “new” posters popping up and praising Ken. His researchers must be working overtime!
I can’t see that 75/1 is value in itself [it’s just a fancy price, and these have a habit of looking like value when they’re nothing of the sort], but you’ll be able to offload it to someone else a fair bit shorter as URW says.
“err - not to most Jews they aren’t. Ken has certainly lost the Jewish vote”
To even suggest there is such a thing as a ‘Jewish vote’ in London is misguided in my opinion and I’m not sure why you think you are speaking for them?
77
Roger provides solid evidence to back his ideas as usual.
President of the Board of Deputies of British Jews Henry Grunwald described Livingstone’s remarks as “appalling” and said his “insensitivity seems to know no bounds.
He should consider his position as mayor of this great city.” Karen Pollock, chief executive of the Holocaust Educational Trust, said it was “disgraceful to use a reference to the period of the Holocaust as a way of abusing people today. An apology is the very least I would expect.”
re 74. That’s how far more people than we would like to admit make their voting decisions - something that we often ignore on the site. Voice, looks, general personality etc. A vote on these grounds is worth precisely the same as someone who has weighed up all the options on the big issues and has come to a considered conclusion. Someone I used to work with who has voted Labour all her life is going with the Tories at the next election solely because she “likes Cameron’s voice”.
re 76. I’ve got about £2500 at risk in this race across three spread firms and Betfair and the only thing that I can foresee going wrong is the very unlikely possibility that Paddick could squeeze in. A £30 Paddick bet for a bit of insurance seems like a good deal and gives me some peace of mind.
I might lay it if the price moves in but so what. It’s not worth bothering about.
Just off to see Boris gladhanding in Sutton High Street.
I will report back on his reception as Sutton is Lib Dem
79 Let’s face it Mike, if Paddick gets in then something has gone completely haywire with British politics - and the resulting betting opportunities are going to be massive!
o/t but it seems someone from the Met police is going to give Cameron some cycling advice. If you’ve been burgled that day and the police are too busy to come out to you, wouldn’t you find this a strange use of police resources?
[74][79] Funny how the examples of voting on those grounds always involve anecdotes about women…
80
People don’t see BJ as a Conservative; just as the buffoon that is naively funny on HIGNFY. It’s similar to the way people saw Charlie Kennedy. I guess that they’d see BJ as a grand joke and a finger well placed in the eye of the body politic.
Once elected he’ll do little for Cameron; he’ll become even more of a joke and will be seen as an antidote to the young serious leader; he’ll probably become more popular in office. Many will want him to challenge Cameron for the leadership. But this is a London thing and as most of the population hate politicians. BJ will be seen as a refeshing change but will have little to do with the lives of those outside the hot house.
Clegg, Cameron and Brown are such a boring bunch of bastards; the three of them together are less interesting than John Major.
And even worse are London cabbies; never met one that I’d want to spend a minute more than the journey necessitated.
Malcolm
78. But is there evidence of Jewish people’s voting being influenced en masse? I live in one of the most Jewish parts of London and the vote in areas around here is split very closely between LD, Nu Lab and Tory. Leaders of Jewish ‘groups’ can provide their opinions but I’m sceptical as to whether this influences an entire demographic. No idea if there’s any data around to help uis out with this.
80.. Lib Dem for now……. 10 seats lost in 2006…. Don’t count your chickens…
84 “Once elected he’ll do little for Cameron; he’ll become even more of a joke”
That’s it, you keep underestimating him. Of course, the alternative is that (working closely with Cameron) he comes in, puts some rigid financial discipline in place, highlights the massive waste of the former regime, becomes inclusive for all Londoners and not just a few cliques, puts the Olympics beano under some firm control - and generally shows what a forthcoming Conservative government in 2009/10 might look like. Solid, sensible, nothing to scare the horses - although it would scare the Downing Street Bunker witless.
When you despise your own supporters, eventually they notice, and cease to be your supporters
Hence Labour’s policy of mass immigration. New voters for old. Give it 20 years and they’ll have to start all over again…
Ok - dont know anything about London - not interested either - but did a straw poll with my friends in London - 23 of them and Paddick is winning - and most of them are usually Lab - I know…… but…
89. I asked my whippet who he was supporting and he said ‘woof’. I think he meant Paddick, but can’t be sure…
90 Maybe Woof Kelly? She can replace Ken - after she leaves the Cabinet following the embryo vote…..
84. what a sunny outlook on life!
85. I think that the Jewish vote, centred around communities like Golders Green etc is now rather more conservative than in 1997. In 1997 that group just didn’t turn out for the Tories. Now, since Ken’s interventions that group is mobilised more for the Tories. However, there is still a small”left wing intellectual” jewish vote out there in Golders Green, Hamsptead and highgate.
Cameron hasn’t necessarily endeared himself to jewish voters with his comments on the Israel Lebanon war last year and the recent gimmickgate stuff.
91.
:)
92. Of course I would say this, but I think the “liberal intellectual” faction is growing and possibly already more prominent than the champagne socialists.
The real danger for Brown if Boris wins is that he’ll be able to find where the bodies are buried within all the areas covered by the Mayor. Ken has operated for 8 years without effective scrutiny and you can see a whole host of “shock-horror” stories emerging. This won’t be good in the run-up to the general election
85 Julian
According to Pippa Norris’s database, the constituencies with the highest Jewish vote are all in North London
Hendon 18% (Labour)
Finchley and Golders Green 18% (Labour)
Ilford North 10% (Conservative)
Hackney North 9% (Labour)
Hampstead/Highgate 9% (Labour)
Harrow East 9% (Conservative)
I suspect you would have to look at the data on a ward level to get a proper understanding however as for instance in Hendon and Harrow the Asian vote would also be substantial and in any case the proportions are still fairly low.
I doubt the data would show Jewish voters are voting as a block for party purposes, but perhaps the Livingstone case could be an exception based on what my Jewish friends in London tell me.
95 And others. You saw Davis at Boris’s Crime launch. Expect him and his merry men to be given carte blanche to go through everything with the finest of toothcombs
96. Thanks Paul, interesting.
New Rasmussen Presidential Poll for Arkansas :
McCain 50% .. Clinton 43%
McCain 59% .. Obama 30%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/arkansas/arkansas_2008_presidential_election
o/t. Thanks to Henry G for Marty Fish tip. Very good surprise when I opened my Skybet account this morning.
Hope others followed his advice.
Obama makes the pitch for Oregon :
http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/oregonian/index.ssf?/base/news/1206158112231140.xml&coll=7
If Clinton can’t take Arkansas then what’s the point of Clinton?
The next phase of media chasing around looks likely to be about untruths regarding her ‘experience’ as shown by newly released documents. Apparently her assertions of being at the centre of world events is wide of the mark.
Surely Leavingsoon’s already scuppered Paddick’s chances by advising his voters to give their second preference to the Greenies?
102: Mrs Clinton is more associated with New York than Arkansas.
104 - sorry? You are aware of how long she lived in Arkansas? how she married a man from Hope?
99 102
Obama getting only 30% in Arkansas ? A generic Democrat would do better than that. Kerry got 45%
And a 62% dissaproval rating for Obama suggests that this Pastor Wright issue may have done more damage than thought.
Obama getting only 30% in Arkansas ? A N Other Democrat would do better than that. Kerry got 45%
And a 62% dissaproval rating for Obama suggests that this Pastor Wright issue may have done more damage than thought.
Just returned from the Boris walkabout in Sutton.
I was astonished at the warmth shown to him by everyone he met,
especially the youngsters he went up to.
I know it is only a snapshot but the CCHQ bods who were there said that this was the reaction he also got in Wimbledon and Kingston this morning.
If anything he looked a little overwhelmed by the support he found.
re 106. The national picture doesn’t seem a problem - see
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/poll_cbs_obamas_speech.php
“70% of say these events have made no difference in whether or not they would vote for Obama; 14% said it makes them more likely to vote for Obama, 14% say less likely.”
re 107. Clearly they are delighted in Sutton to meet a Tory who isn’t Rik.
103 I doubt it.
BTW Is anyone else amazed at Brown’s stance of this embryology bill. Even leaving aside the huge moral questions, why is he doing this. Does he really think it something of such Supreme importance he could sacrifice several Cabinet ministers cause uproar in Scotland and his Party and all for not any political credit at all. I can’t see why wants this car crash politically
103 I have been looking at the last mayoral election results and I think any candidate would be unwise to rest his hopes on the second preferences carrying him home. In 2004, out of 10 candidates the last 8 candidates polled 635k votes as first preferences. But the second preferences added to the top two was only 268k. I assume from this that either many voters did not put a second preference or put one of the bottom 8. So only about 40-45% of the possible second preferences really counted towards the result.
If BJ has a 5% lead over Livingstone on first preferences, then Livingstone would need about two thirds of the available second preferences to overhaul him.
IIRC, Fernando (11), most of the second preferences in 2004 went to Simon Hughes, and so were lost.
The moral, of course, is to put the Lib Dem candidate first…
110 Brown on the embryo bill reminds me of a teacher we had at our school. He was utterly dogmatic about how things would be run in his classes. We did things HIS WAY because he SAID SO. As a result he lost the kids respect, they started rebelling, lessons fell apart - and the guy eventually had a nervous breakdown.
A message there, I think.
Do second prefs have an equal weighting to a first pref? ie Boris 10000 votes ahead on first but Ken 11000 ahead on second would be a Ken win?
111 Many voters didn’t understand that only second preferences cast for one of the leading two would be counted - so you got a large number of wasted second preferences.
77/85 - On most issues (and in GEs) I would agree there is no such thing as a ‘Jewish’ vote. When it comes to Ken Livingstone, however, I would say he has managed to unite the vast majority of those who identify as Jewish against him. Livingstone has offended Jewish people across the political spectrum. And BTW Roger - I’m not ’speaking’ for the Jewish community. I’m speaking for myself based on my own - well informed - observations.
112 How many of Simon Hughes’s second preferences were from Livingstone voters or Norris voters? They chose their preference which wasn’t Hughes.
117 continued - only worth voting for the top 2 anyway so a vote for Lib Dem if they are well in third place is a wasted vote, only worth voting for Paddick if he’s close to Ken in the polls.
112 I quite agree that if the LibDems were in the top two they would pick up a lot of second preferences and that this might be decisive. However, as the mostly likely course is that BJ and KL will be the top two, if either of these has more than a 5% lead on first preferences, then I don’t think second preferences will be crucial.
114 Yes.
What is the split going to be though between inner London and outer London between Ken and Boris.
It seems to me that Ken is almost exclusively going to campaign in Inner London whereas Boris will do the opposite.
If so can Boris win with just the outer london vote?
110 Yes, I agree - I just don’t understand why Brown is digging his heels in on this one - perhaps it’s just bloody-mindedness, having been challenged on at least two occasions by Dave at PMQs to allow a free vote.
Having said that, I doubt whether any cabinet ministers would actually resign over this - too fond of the money and kudos that goes with the job, although Ruth Kelly must be a distinct possibility.
71.”The problem is an alternative choice for the mainly Irish descended RCs of Lancashire and West of Scotland ”
Its those older Catholic voters in their heartlands that Labour is in danger of losing, younger voters in the same area are IMHO already more relaxed and do see the SNP as a credible alternative. Labour has always relied on those older voters turning out at elections….
72.”71 My guess is that the SNP will aim to woo those voters.”
Sean, they were already wooing those voters before the last election, IMHO successfully.
79.”Someone I used to work with who has voted Labour all her life is going with the Tories at the next election solely because she “likes Cameron’s voice”.
Mike, a life long Labour voter I know just about made me fall off my perch when they announced that it was time to give Cameron a shot at the next GE. I noted that it was Cameron rather than the Conservatives that gets her vote.
110.I am amazed at Brown’s stance simple because he is picking a fight within his party he does not need too. But on many occasions he thought that Blair was not tough enough and made too many concessions during his premiership. Maybe he just wants to stamp his authority on the Labour party in a way that would appear to make him tougher, brings back the Stalinist image rather than the *differer* Mr Bean tag?
122 Perhaps it’s because he’s fearful of the accusation that he is a ditherer. Once he has made up his mind he digs in his heels and he feels unable to reverse what is an obvious error of judgement.
107 Timmo - interesting to hear of the positive reception for Boris in Sutton, although it’s difficult to draw any meaningful conclusion from from this sort of “meet the people” event. I would think that were Livingstone to set foot in what was an inherently Labour London Borough, he would be assured of an equally warm reception.
121 Inner London has a population of 3 million. Outer London 4.5m. IMO turnout would be higher in outer London, older, whiter than Inner London, younger more immigrants and Outer more Boris than Inner. Remember though this is an all London election so a vote is a vote wherever it is.
124 Very astute. The classic sign of someone who is weak and lacks confidence. Always charting his course on the basis of second guessing what others will think of HIM rather than deciding on an objective and working towards it.
His aids have said he finds it difficult to give a straight answer because his brain is so busy working out the ways it could be interpreted. In the end, its always all about him.
A better politican would have approached the other leaders, done the maths and if the vote was home and dry, allowed some room for those in a spot. Too much of a stretch from a coward in a bunker.
125.BJ was a panelist on Question Time during the Tory leadersip contest. An audience member who had ‘never liked any Tory’ was quite taken with him. A proposal that he should stand for the leadership was met with quite afew cheers. Boris dealt with it in his usual way, chuckling… ‘I am sure you are all from opposing parties hoping I take over for all the wrong reasons…etc’ They liked him even more.
Being liked has never been an issue. If he gets elected and does a half decent job, Londoners might grow to really love him.
Alex Salmond & Co have been very careful not to upset Catholic sensibilities. I speak as a Scots Catholic myself.
The Scottish Catholic vote has overwhelmingly gone to Labour over the years, partly as a social class issue, since RC’s in the West Central belt have been and still are predominantly working class, and partly, since many are of Irish extraction, as a reaction to the Conservative Party’s historical attachment to Ulster Unionism and the Orange Order (which has now largely died out). Scots Catholics looked to the Union to protect them from what was seen as an aggressively anti-Catholic Presbyterian establishment, which inhibited them from voting SNP. Labour has long played on these fears.
Until the 1960s/70s, the Labour Party reflected the social conservatism of traditional working class views, but that has changed, although the perception had not permeated through the tribal loyalties of the majority of Catholic voters, who (as with most voters) take little interest in politics between elections. Brown’s maladroitness (definitely the mot juste) is now ramming it down their throats, while the SNP government’s attitude and actions are defusing their suspicions of the SNP.
The Labour Party in Scotland badly needs all the voters, friends and influence it can get, if it is to reestablish its former primacy. You would think the Party hierarchy would see this - it’s blindingly obvious - and not stick their necks out for, as Punter said in 110, no great political gain.
Brown talks about his own moral compass, but doesn’t see other people have theirs too.
O/T Tennis tip - Nadal to beat Djokovic in tonight’s Pacific Open semi in Indian Wells. You can get 7/5 with Victor Chandler on Nadal who has beaten Djokovic in 3 of their 5 meetings on hardcourt and 6 from 8 overall. Nadal is the reigning champ and has won his last ten matches at this tournament. He’s therefore also worth backing at smaller stakes at 6/1 with Chandlers for the title. He’ll likely face Federer in the final, but Nadal will be his equal on the softer spongey surface at Indian Wells.
110.
I am also bewildered at The P.M.’s stance over the embryology bill.
Gordon Brown rejects the Geneva Convention, and now the Nuremburg Code under which the participants of Genetic Tampering swung from the gallows.
The Nuremberg Code is a set of principles for human experimentation set as a result of the Subsequent Nuremberg Trials at the end of the Second World War. Specifically, they were in response to the inhumane Nazi human experimentation carried out during the war by individuals such as Dr. Josef Mengele.
In August 1947, the judges delivered their verdict in the “Doctors’ Trial” against Karl Brandt and several others. They also delivered their opinion on medical experimentation on human beings. Several of the accused had argued that their experiments differed little from pre-war ones and that there was no law that differentiated between legal and illegal experiments.
In April of the same year, Dr. Leo Alexander had submitted to the Counsel for War Crimes six points defining legitimate medical research. The trial verdict adopted these points and added an extra four. The ten points constituted the “Nuremberg Code”. Although the legal force of the document was not established and it was not incorporated directly into either the American or German law, the Nuremberg Code and the related Declaration of Helsinki are the basis for the Code of Federal Regulations Title 45 Volume 46[1], which are the regulations issued by the United States Department of Health and Human Services governing federally funded research in the United States. In addition, the Nuremberg code has also been incorporated into the law of individual states such as California, and other countries.
The Nuremberg code includes such principles as informed consent and absence of coercion; properly formulated scientific experimentation; and beneficence towards experiment participants.
127. Think your watching to much QT and reading gossip which confirms your view of the world, which at the moment is very predictable in its mindset.
128
Quite what Geoff Hoon is up to is also puzzling me !
But discussions between Labour MPs opposed to the Bill and Geoff Hoon, the party’s Chief Whip, are understood to have resulted in a stalemate.
Mr Hoon has offered them the option of writing to him asking him to be excused from the vote on ethical grounds, but he has made clear they must not vote against.
131 Predictable because it is right!
128 ‘Brown talks about his own moral compass, but doesn’t see other people have theirs too.’
Like that. Obviously his is the only one pointing in the right direction. Remember the words of the Great Leader, ‘We make the right decisions all the time’.
132 Ask permission to abstain?
Abstaining is really catching on as a principled stance!
128.Good analysis, and welcome FergusMac.
“Brown’s maladroitness (definitely the mot juste) is now ramming it down their throats, while the SNP government’s attitude and actions are defusing their suspicions of the SNP.
Brown talks about his own moral compass, but doesn’t see other people have theirs too.”
I think the SNP have been defusing their suspicions and wooing the Catholic vote for a while, I first started to recognise the sea change in the attitude of the Scottish Catholic church towards the Labour party both at Holyrood and at Westminster about 7/8 years ago.
I remember being shocked to hear a Catholic Bishop I had heard speak on many occasions go onto to launch a clearly political attack on the Labour party back in the early days of this present governments dominance in Holyrood and Westminster.
Growing up in the Highlands I was largely immune to the continued sectarian lines being drawn in the central belt. But, when I went out with a protestant lad from Belfast as a student, his family accepted my faith without a problem. It was my Irish catholic surname that they saw as the bigger problem!
132 As Ruth Kelly will be well aware, in the eyes of the Church failure to vote against is the same as voting for. Amazing language from Labour on this;
Ben Bradshaw ” He was wrong in fact, and I think rather intemperate and emotive in the way that he criticised this legislation” - Wrong in Fact? Intemperate?
Jim Devine (a Catholic Scot) “”The statements attributed to the Cardinal over the past few days highlight a lack of understanding of the process of stem cell biology.” - Cardinal Keith O’Brien BSc an ex science teacher and Cardinal of the Church understands the process and ethics less than Robin Cook’s ex agent, a union man and ex nurse?
Off topic
Mrs Clinton now leading in Rasmussen tracking poll, 46:44
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html
130. There is a clear difference between experimentation on embryos and experimentation on human beings. In a modern pluralist democracy, religious people are fully entitled to express their opposition, but they shouldn’t expect public policy to be decided on religious reasons.
What odds you think you would get right now on the Lib Dems to win a Henley by-election?
136. Surely individual Catholic MPs are allowed to make their own mind up?
140.Who is allowing them to that?
133 GB obviously doesn`t nor does anyone.
He is not my personal choice, but when you quote his aids who are they?
I am sure its not all about him.
Whatever his faults and they are many, he is in my opinion a very dedicated public servant to this country and his family.
Cameron is a better politician and will win the next election,without the need for character assassination.
36. Has there ever been a ppolitical poll of London cabbies?
I agree that their opinions generally seem to be to the right of Genghis Khan -perhaps even more to the right than golfers-alhough luckily most of those have already left the country!
rogerh
84 I must protest,albeit in good humour at ‘Clegg,Cameron and Brown together are less interesting than John Major’-generally I agree with you but that was overkill
142
Brown is a dud, I’m afraid to say.
I have never seen or heard any political leader manage to upset significant sectors of the electorate so quickly.
Not through prolonged actions but through one specific action which clearly offended his audience or a sector of them cos what he says flies in the fac