Introducing the man Gord expects to be Mayor
March 27th, 2008
Should your betting be following the Prime Minister?
With just five weeks to go before five million Londoners vote on their Mayor there’s a report in the Times this morning that is hardly going to improve relations between the government and City Hall. Under the heading “Gordon Brown deserts Ken Livingstone..” the paper reports that the PM has “… all but written off Ken Livingstone’s chances of winning the London mayoral election, according to close allies.”
Brown, it is noted pointedly, will be visiting the US next month as the fight for City Hall reaches its climax.
The report goes on: “..Some Brown allies are already consoling themselves that a Johnson victory “would be a disaster” for Mr Cameron. Others, including senior Cabinet supporters, fear that a Johnson mayoralty would hand the Tories a prize platform for building bridges with the business community in the City.”
Certainly it’s the case that Brown and Livingstone have never been the best of friends but such a note of no confidence from Number 10 as the campaign just starts to open up is quite surprising. Negative comments ahead of an election should not be coming out like this. If Ken does, against the odds, make it then relations between the two men are going to be even colder.
The Times report is not going to go down well with the wider Labour movement as Ken faces his biggest challenge.
The betting, meanwhile, continues to move from Ken who is now getting close to the 2/1 level.
MessageSpace Advertising
I’m told that the Crosby-commissioned internal polling for the Boris campaign is ever more horrible for Ken than the YouGov results. Presumably, Ms Mattinson is finding the same thing in her private polling for Gordy - hence his very public distancing.
Once again Mike Smithson has proved to be a prophet (and a profit) by urging punters to get on Boris. Unless there is an extraordinary turn-around then Mayor Livingstone is toast.
Though I think Bozza would be great and, after two elections, would love to see the back of Ken (I vaguely supported him in 2000), I think the Bozza win is being overplayed a little. Sure he is likeable - very much so - but for executive elections I feel that in the voting booth a good number of people will switch back to he with the relevant experience. Ken’s real problem remains being unable to motivate Labour voters to come out, not losing voters to Boris. I think this will be closer than the odds suggest.
Boris is as much a disaster for Cameron as Ken is for Brown.
The Mayor plus the local elections will be a double whammy to Labour.
Casual observation, but surely the taming of the Boris barnet is going to require more than just three hairdressers?
If the earlier polls about Lib Dem voters’ second preference intentions are accurate (and I believe they are), then Gordon’s expectations are correct: Ken will not win this election. He could well receive most first-preference votes, and still not win. The second-preference votes he’ll receive from Green voters should be more than outweighed by Lib Dem second preferences, which will go predominantly to Boris rather than him.
I can’t write him off completely - he’s still in with a chance, of course. But it’s entirely right that Boris is the favourite in the betting.
Gordon The Gold Trader is already in damage limitation mode. Either that or he thinks Ken will do better without his support.
Either way, Boris will win.
For those that think he will be a disaster, I don’t agree. Boris can get away with anything, and will help the rehabilitation of the Conservative brand. If he wins, Tory odds should shorten.
Whoever it was in the Tory hierarchy that persuaded Boris to stand - take a bow. An inspired choice. Let’s face it, whether you are for him or against, you can’t say you aren’t curious about the job he will do….
I really am perplexed about Brown going down this route. Obviously the news was always likely to be Livingstone victory if Ken won, and Labour defeat if he lost and Brown like most leaders are fearful of the pervasive smell of defeat. However most leaders do not go into damage limitation mode until after the damage has been done. This just strikes as disloyal from Brown, disloyal to the interests of the wider Labour movement and one can’t help but view it as a selfish move.
7. That would be David Cameron.
The Labour establishment has always hated Ken, they look upon him as a stroppy, ‘cockney’(born in Streatham I think, so hardly a cockney)they’ll be glad to see the back of him.
Ken never really fitted in, to any political mould, which was always his real selling point, should have remained an independent.
Boris! I can’t wait, I wonder who the real, ‘Victor’ will be.
Surely this is the real, ‘political’ story of the day.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/27/ncatholic127.xml
8 If you ever get the chance to read Tom Bowers biography of Gordon Brown you should. It explains a lot about his behaviour in ‘challenging’ situations like this one. Inspiring leader, rallying the troops Tim Collins style, he ain’t.
He suffers from what HR people would call ‘poor people skills’.
In large businesses people with “Poor people skills” do tend to get found out eventually.
Labour will rue the day that Gordon was given a coronation.
Perhaps Gordon would like to enthuse his activists some more - by reeling off a list of councils he expects Labour to lose on May 1st? It would save us all a lot of bother….
This could be a deliberate strategy.
If GB distances himself and looks disloyal then the voters may not associate GB with Ken so pushing disaffected Labour Voters back yo ken.
Clever if it works.
14 - well almost anything can be considered “clever if it works”. It won’t though, so it’s academic.
Salmond in a little bit of, ‘trouble’.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3628721.ece
14. It won’t.
it might well be an advantage to Ken, Gordo is bad luck, Was he in Paris last night?!
Boris is showing a lot of discipline at the moment. More than most people for he was capable of. Waiting for Boris to mess up looks more and more like a hopeless cause.
19. I think thats been Ken and Labours main weakness so far, the assumption that the people either wouldn’t want Boris, or that he would do something really bad and make them dislike him. Instead neither has happened, and the desperate smear campaign that started at the labour spring conference has also failed.
11 If you ever get the chance to read Tom Bowers biography of Gordon Brown you should.
Totally agree - I’ve said the same here myslf, it is an extraordinary read.
Has anyone worked out why Boris has that magazine covering his crotch? Bet I have!
There are certain people who you know, as David Niven said of Errol Flynn, ‘The one thing about Errol you could count on, he would always let you down’ Its only a matter of time!
18- No, that’s why France only beat England 1-0 (disappointing performance…)
21. His book ‘Maxwell, the outsider’ is even better.
24
Hmmm you havent mentioned his book, about Fayed, y’know where he mentions the 28 Tory MP’s on his payroll, Marcus wonder why??
The Bozzler has perked up his game in recent weeks, I am happy to say, after a very shaky start.
Suspect they’ve given him some good advisors, but so what - he’s looking good, whereas Ken looks increasingly “yesterday”.
I am particularly pleased as Boris is personally responsible for the resurrection of my “literary” career, when I hadn’t been published for yonks.
Go BoJo!
If he does win it will be bad for Labour, simple as that. A defeat is a defeat is a defeat.
The Spring conference attacks did not work as people have already formed an opinion of Boris. It will take more than a couple of speaches and pamphlets from the Compasss group to change that perception.
27. True. Labour waited ages and didn’t take Boris seriously, by the time they decided to something they were far too late and heavy handed, as usual.
23 If, as seems likely, Ken loses, there will inevitably be an enormous amount of blood letting as literally hundreds of his socialist acolytes and cronies face early dismissal and it could prove a very lonely place for Boris. For the sake of London and Londoners, I trust plans are already in hand to provide him with a capable support team as there will inevitably be seismic changes in terms of the entire political culture, out of all proportion to those normally seen when even a large city elsewhere changes hands politically.
Bleeding cheek of Gordon writing off Ken’s chances.
Ken has been fighting this election with the spectre of a clumsy, hamfisted, dithering, bottling, deeply unpopular and moreover unlikable, charmless, uncharismatic, calculating leader on his back weighing down his chances like a sack of spuds.
I am surprised that the person who got Ken in this mess realises this.
Maybe Gordon will be just as perceptive about his own electoral chances, and go.
“..Some Brown allies are already consoling themselves that a Johnson victory “would be a disaster” for Mr Cameron.”
As I noted the other day, planning on the basis that your opponent is going to screw up is a really poor strategy in politics.
26
I am particularly pleased as Boris is personally responsible for the resurrection of my “literary” career, when I hadn’t been published for yonks.
Another reason not to vote for him!!
Sorry seant that was too easy a target.
Tyson,
For a moment I thought you were refering to Boris!!
30. As if Brown would realise that, as the pointy haired boss from dilbert would say ‘I manage and I manage but do they get any better’.
30 Ken has been fighting this election with the spectre of a clumsy, hamfisted, dithering, bottling, deeply unpopular and moreover unlikable, charmless, uncharismatic, calculating leader
Say it like it is Tyson, don’t feel you have to hold back!
30. Juts think about how Ken wil lay into Brown blaming him for his loss after the election. Then there is Cherie’s book. Trouble ahead, and he won’t be able to runaway from it.
The trouble will come from Boris going through all the 8 years of detritus of the Ken Regime.
Boris has a nose for a story.
24/25 What price that Tom Bower’s next work will be “Ken Livingstone - London’s ******* Mayor”
If Brown has written Ken off, he must have seen some really bad private polls.
re 22. I hope that nobody rises to your comment Coldstone.
Maybe Brown writing off Ken and distancing himself from him will help Ken turn it around?
Never write off Ken Livingstone! He thrives on being the underdog. It’s going to be very close and as veterans know, voter turnout matters more than earlier polls. If anything the fact that it will be so competitive means that those who may have assumed months that Ken would certainly be re-elected against Johnson will realise the importance of their vote in deciding the contest. I think we can expect a very high turnout too. It’s going to be so close.
The Brown story sounds a bit odd, but as other posters have said Brown would be an electoral drag on Ken anyway. The most important thing is that the Labour Party apparatus is behind him and I’ve been amazed by how many people from the right of the Labour Party are solidly behind Ken’s bid.
Even if Brown chooses to ignore Ken’s campaign, there are surely plenty of Cabinet Ministers, not to mention all the usual Stage Luvvies, TV Soap “Stars” and Sports Personalities, etc who can be called upon to help, plus his many supporters on PB.com.
Come on let’s be ‘avin you!
31- spot on- you couldn’t imagine the left in Germany circa 1928 saying it’ll be good for the short bloke with the stupid moustache to have a go at PM to show what a baffoon he is.
It is the worst kind of politics to wish for someone to come into power hoping they mess things up. I hope that Boris makes a good job of London when elected- at the end of the day politics is about trying to improve the lives of the many, and if Brown hopes that Boris screws things up, shame on him. He is more caculating that I thought.
There again I do think there are many Tories around who are secretely very pleased about the global economic crisis. Shame on them too.
I well remember the day I struck my charity bet with Nick Palmer - the slightly de haut en Bas ‘if you tories are so confident who’ll bet me Boris will beat Ken’ - he even gave me better odds because Boris had not been selected.
Helen House Hospice will welcome Nick’s donation and I’m sure knowing his cash is going to such a good cause will soften the blow!
Mike,
You could blame him (if he was standing to attention…)
There should really be NOT in there…
44. Actually, that’s what many in the Communist Party did think, and one reason they were happy to see the Weimar system fail, even if they didn’t get first shot at replacing it.
40
I feel a caption competition coming on, don’t you Mike?
Some of those on this site remind me of that comment by Sir Edward Grey? (memory) on seeing the throng in the Mall when war was declared in 1914, ‘They’re wringing their bells today, they’ll be wringing their hands tomorrow’
Boris Johnson is the living embodiment of Oscar Wilde’s statement, ‘I can resist everything but temptation’
Every tabloid journalist worth his/her salt will be watching Boris like hawks, the first one in with a ‘Bonking Boris’ story will get the Editor’s gold star.
Every tart in London will be putting Max Clifford’s number on her mobile, she’ll be hitting that dial button before her knickers are around her ankles.
42. Agreed. Ken Livingstone is an atonishingly good campaigner with a record thats second to none. I don’t doubt that Labour’s private polling is dire at the moment, but my suspicion is that if Ken Livingstone distances himself from Laboiur and pretty much becomes “Independent Ken” again, he could still pull out a win. Can he? I don’t know, but if Brown is going to keep his distance, then thats a start.
If I was a Conservative I wouldn’t be confident of Boris beating Ken no matter how big the poll lead was.
49. so, in conclusion, Boris is going to mess up? Hmmm, wonder where I’ve heard THAT before.
51
Time thats all.
After all if Boris is so good why did Michael Howard sack him, remind me??
49. On the other hand, if Boris does get in, expectations will be so low that even if he is only modestly successful that will look like a really good achievment. The same would be true of a Cameron government, I might add. Its kind of like the reverse of what happened with Blair, who was so popular and his win so expected, that all he could do was dissapoint.
People who go into politics should be aiming to make peoples lives better. All too often, the opposite happens.
O/T
Iain Duncan Smith was very forceful and spoke with a lot of passion on Radio 4 just after 5pm last night about the breakdown of marriage/stable relationships. He was wasted as leader of the Tories, he should have been doing social justice much sooner.
49,
Caption:
“Its not what Boris had in mind when he asked for a blow dry”
50 Agreed - IMO it’s that voters don’t put much thought into their second preference votes that swings it - its a soft vote that’s cast even more on character/perceived likeability than the first vote. I might be being too dismissive but I think many if not most voters find it hard enough to decide to support with their first vote and will not have given any thought to the second when they go into the polling booth.
So they look at the ballot and quickly weigh Ken (independent? rebellious? likeable rogue?) v Boris (HIGNFY? likeable rogue?bit of a toff? ) make their mark and leave. Ken has lost some of that anti-establishment lustre, Boris is unknown quantity but probably shades the match up enough to win.
39. I disagree - I think HenryG has it closer at [42]. Ken is a formidable politician, even if he is one prone to fighting battles he doesn’t need to. That means he loses rather more often than he should (and sometimes loses big, none more so than when he brought the GLC down with him), but it also means he’s resiliant.
I expect Boris to win and my betting reflects that, but Ken won’t go down without a fight - unlike Gordon, who seems incapable of fighting on anyone else’s behalf. On one level, Gordon not actively helping in Ken’s campaign is no bad thing for him - it’s not as if the PM is the most popular man in the country - but on another, it just adds to the impression that Livingstone is on his way out.
One thing that I was going to post on an earlier thread, but which I think applies just as well on this one is about the extent to which New Labour doesn’t ‘get’ the appeal of Boris or Cameron. I wonder whether some of this is a lingering class thing. It was noted long ago, at a time when these terms mattered a lot more, that the aristocracy has more in common with the working class than the middle class in terms of outlook on life and culture. I don’t think anything sums that up in the present world better than the way people approach political correctness. New Labour, especially when in Harriet Harman mode, can seem just so po-faced and anti-fun.
Cameron has trimmed his sails somewhat in this respect, but Boris remains much the same as the first time the public saw him - and has always been a more flamboyant character anyway. (Technically, neither of them are members of the aristocracy, but they’re close enough in background and outlook to count for these purposes).
I would be surprised if Boris doesn’t get some very big swings to him from traditionally Labour areas in the east of the city, where voters have been disillusioned with New Labour for some time but haven’t yet found an effective alternative.
54. Hopefully he’ll get a chance to do some good in the next Tory government. But it says a lot about our political system that serious politicians are marginalised in favour of buffoons like Ken Livingstone and smarmy ad-men like Blair.
42 Never write off Ken Livingstone! He thrives on being the underdog. It’s going to be very close
I am going to have to disagree with you on this one Henry.
My £20 says Boris will win by more than 5%, taking account of both first and second votes. Are you on?
Technically, neither of them are members of the aristocracy, but they’re close enough in background and outlook to count for these purposes
I think your pushing it there. Cameron has genuine aristocratic connections on his mother’s side, but Johnson is just a hanger-on who went to school with some aristos. I went to university with several but that doesn’t make me in any way ‘close to them in background’
59 - I think it is at least possible that there will be no need to take account of second preferences.
Tyson 44.This is so typical of your posts.You make a conjecture that is total nonsense, followed by a comment that treats it as fact.Economic disaster affects all pensions,all cost of living,all house prices,all jobs,all public services - not just yours. Grow up.
So, not much interest here in Mr Paddick’s fortunes, then?
Remember New Hampshire.
I think if Ken cries in public he might get a last minute swing his way.
Remember New Hampshire.
I think if Ken cries in public he might get a last minute swing his way.
64, 65 - I don’t think the voters of Newham are as susceptible to waterworks as the voters of New Hampshire, plus it signifies different things in women as in men.
Any chance Paddick will come up through the middle
If the evening standard has some more revelations about Ken and his regime which are timed to come out later in the campaign could the anyone but Boris vote coalesce around Paddick ?
67 - Practically no chance of Paddick coming through the middle.
60. But as we’ve said so often, in politics, perception matters at least as much as reality - espeically in the short term. Boris looks, sounds and acts like a member of the upper class, and in social terms, if not genetic ones or in terms of titles, he surely comes close to counting as such.
in any case, my point was about attitude. Ken is undoubtedly closer to London’s ‘working-class’ voters in background - but does it sound like he is closer in policy or publicity terms? When he has his head on, yes, possibly so - but when acting in loony-left mode and opening liaison offices in favoured countries in South America? Perhaps not.
OT, but I think this just sums up Gordo perfectly, Sky news has just posted a clip of the Queen explaing to Princess Anne why the PM was late… He got lost apparently, a perfect metaphor.
http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/
67. Any chance Paddick will come up through the middle
No
67 - has the Evening Standard been a fan of Paddick over the years?
57. “One thing that I was going to post on an earlier thread, but which I think applies just as well on this one is about the extent to which New Labour doesn’t ‘get’ the appeal of Boris or Cameron. I wonder whether some of this is a lingering class thing”
I definatly agree with this. Labour absolutely loath Boris and Cameron and in that respect this London election is an early shot across the bows for the general election. Labour can’t understand why people don’t loath these toffs like they do. Moreover, it seems increasingly obvious to me that they have no effective way of attacking Boris and David Cameron. Clearly all the personal vitriol heaped on Johnson at Labours spring conference is having no beneficial effect. The public has moved from the Class War even if Labour have not and they had better start coming up with new lines of attack other than; “Don’t election this out of touch toff” which only appeals to Labour supporters but nobody else.
In a lot of ways, almost unoticed, Labour has moved to a core vote strategy in the same way that the Tories did in the mid 90’s with their; New Labour, New Danger campaign.
71 According to Tom Bower’s book, referred to above, Brown is always late
67. There is no realistic ‘anyone-but-Boris’ movement. If there was, Paddick would already be polling well into the 20s and Ken, for all his faults, would be doing better than he is, too.
Those who are of that mindset are almost certainly full-time anti-Tories, even if the party they do vote for changes from time to time. Boris doesn’t need their support as he can win with only Tories and floating voters, in the same way that Ken could win while not bothering about those who were of an anyone-but-Livingstone mind.
75 - anyone-but movements usually only have traction when the object of the movement has a bad record or is in office. For reference 1997 when the scale of tactical voting showed the application of an anyone-but the Tories movement.
Fast forward to, oh, autumn 2011… Boris is mired in love-children and financial scandal due to poor attention-to-detail skills rather than personal cupidity - although I wouldn’t expect him to read his own bank statements assiduously - William Hague pretty well admitted in his biography of Pitt that he (Hague) didn’t, so it doesn’t strike me as Borisish thing to do. Boris has also made some inept remarks about various “community” incidents…
The Assembly has a 2/3 majority to censure him only if the two BNP Assembly members vote for it - London’s future in the hands of the fascists…
67 No
It is my understanding that the seismic shift that has occured is that the Anyonebutken group is now much larger than the Anyonebutboris group. And Boris Johnson appears to have mopped up the former, hence the poll ratings. My London colleagues speak very negatively about the incumbent in a way they used to about the Tories.
71 good –I can put my mind at rest
In hindsight, the selection of Boris as a potential winning candidate was brilliant. In the London primary he did not have any quality opposition, and any of the others would probably be trailing Ken now.
However, brilliant candidates do not do a great job. If Boris is elected and is a crap mayor, as I suspect he could be, where will that leave the Tories in London?
Could Boris be Warren Gamaliel Harding in disguise? Have YOU ever seen them in the same room together?
When can we expect to see some winning/losing margin odds on the London Mayoralty election? Come on Shadsy & Aaron - fingers out.
“He writes the worst English that I have ever encountered. It reminds me of a string of wet sponges; it reminds me of tattered washing on the line; it reminds me of stale bean soup, of college yells, of dogs barking idiotically through endless nights. It is so bad that a sort of grandeur creeps into it. It drags itself out of the dark abysm of pish, and crawls insanely up the topmost pinnacle of posh. It is rumble and bumble. It is flap and doodle. It is balder and dash.”
Was this said of Harding or Boris?
(I actually quite like Boris.)
72 The Evening Standard is not exactly pro-Paddick, but they are far from being hostile towards him. It’s an interesting line they are taking - they are talking up his managerial competence in having done a very important job for London, and doing it rather well, which they compare favourably with Johnson’s (lack of) track record. But I doubt very much if they will support him on the day.
67. “Any chance Paddick will come up through the middle.” That might have been better phrased.
77. Sounds like you had a Kleenex out thinking of that.
Hard as Ken might row, I still reckon he will be pushed backwards on the tide of sleaze allegations. Brown’s political judgment may not be great, but if he thinks that Ken is lost, then he is better placed than most to know (in terms of polls and canvass returns he’ll be seeing). Labour’s problem is, they don’t have a clue how to hurt him.
Boris, whether by luck or judgment, has positioned himself to a place where guys think of him as one of the lads - and women have the hots for him. And is there anyone in Westminster who does self-deprecation and humour better than Boris? He may be a toff, but he does come across as accessible. If you are going to have the upper class - then Boris is exactly how you want them to be like. That makes for a formidable political opponent.
80 However, brilliant candidates do not do a great job. If Boris is elected and is a crap mayor, as I suspect he could be, where will that leave the Tories in London?
In London?
Could Boris be Warren Gamaliel Harding in disguise? Have YOU ever seen them in the same room together?
Well now you come to mention it …
87 - my point is that a re-elected Ken and a tide of sleaze could bring greater dividends to the Tories come the next GE than a bumbling Boris regime.
SBS - Harding, the only man, woman or child who wrote a simple declarative sentence with seven grammatical errors.
83 Augustus - My guess is that the Evening Standard would really like to see Paddick achieve second place. Maybe then he’d have more of a chance in 2012.
88 - If Boris wins the election there is nothing to say that the discipline and sense of purpose he is showing in the campaign will disappear, it is likely to remain.
88. You appear, like many observers, to be a prisoner of your incorrect preconceptions.
If I was going to vote tactically to keep the BNP out of the London assembly,who should I vote for on the list?
I was thinking the either The Green party or UKIP.
[26] SeanT: there is such a thing as a pyrrhic victory. Boris is under pretty strong control right now, but should he end up as mayor then life will get a whole lot more interesting… in the Chinese sense… for Mr. Cameron
81. PfP, we’ll definitely have some more markets up on this one, but probably not for a couple of weeks.
I’m bemused by all the comment that Boris will mess-up at some point. Why? Because he says what he thinks, rather than what is politically correct or expedient? If that’s so then we need rather more of him.
57 “It was noted long ago, at a time when these terms mattered a lot more, that the aristocracy has more in common with the working class than the middle class.”
David- I think now it would be the similarity of the aristocracy to the underclass. Both have huge amounts of children that others pay for, the aristocracy- mummy and daddy, the underclass the state. Bloodsports and rampant substance abuse also figure large amongst both hobbies. Both have plenty of time on their hands to indulge big time in hedonism.
The middle classes are too knackered to have sex, and too broke to support children, have affairs, or get divorced, can’t indulge in rampant substance abuse because they have jobs to hold down. Life is just no fun for the working man.
you couldn’t imagine the left in Germany circa 1928 saying it’ll be good for the short bloke with the stupid moustache to have a go at PM to show what a baffoon he is.
Unfortunately - this is precisely what they did. After a decade of vicious street battles between the Communists and the Nazis, in which hundreds of workers were killed by Nazi thugs, Stalin argued that the correct revolutionary strategy for Germany was to allow Hitler to come to power on the theory that workers would be so appalled by him they would revolt against him, enabling a Communist uprising. The statistics on this are literally mind boggling - at that time the Communists could command a hundred thousand ARMED workers in Berlin alone - and Stalin ordered them to lay down their arms. In doing that they laid down their lives. Don’t want to extend this analogy too far (Boris is of course going to be great for London) - but the similarities between Brown and Stalin (at least in psychology) are closer than many people realise.
58- IDS came to see my project when he was leader of the Tories- never have I been more unimpressed by a politician. He was an imbecile. I never dilsiked IDS, just pitied him which is much, much worse.
The worry with Brown is that people are beginning to feel sorry for him. Doesn’t bode well.
Both Blair and Livingstone are formidable politicians, but politics has a life span. Blair reached his, Ken is rapidly coming to the finishing line. Way of things.
93 - A vote for UKIP could well be a disastrous tactical vote against the BNP as they are marginal to get on the Assembly at all and if they dont then you’ll just have lowered the threshold for the BNP. A Tory / Labour / Lib Dem / Green vote would seem to be equally beneficial as a tactical vote but it’s impossible to know who’ll be slogging it out for the last seats and whether any party (the Tories more likely than the others) wont get any list seats because they have so many FPTP ones (hence diluting the tactical anti-BNP effect of the list vote).
It’s a PR election and tactical voting clearly doesnt come into it so much.
44 Tyson “you couldn’t imagine the left in Germany circa 1928 saying it’ll be good for the short bloke with the stupid moustache to have a go at PM to show what a baffoon he is.”
Sadly that is exactly what some of the Junkers thought, that they had a useful fool who would be self expending.
98- someone else picked up on my comment earlier- I am sure you are right.
I was trying to be slightly rhetorical- point is that you should never wish anyone to screw up in politics. People need to win the arguments, not win because the other lot has messed things up so much.
There seems to be an awful lot of wishful thinking on the part of our LD posters this morning.
As ever, LD activists seem motivated much more by the idea of keeping out an amiable tory toff than a creepy Trot who is proud of running London as ‘a personal fiefdom’.
102 - the Revolutionary Communists, I understand, all used to support Thatcher, to set up the necessary preconditions for revolution.
103 - not a bit of it on my part. I can’t choose between the two. If I were a London it would be hard who to give my second preference too.
And is Ken really a Trot?
New NBC/Wall Street Journal Presidential and Primary Poll :
McCain 46% .. Clinton 44%
McCain 42% .. Obama 44%
Clinton 45% .. Obama 45%
http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/WSJ-20080326-poll.pdf
Brown is required to make a “serious choice” about our armed forces:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/25/nrecruit225.xml
That’s them buggered then…..
[103] No. I personally can’t stand Ken and would be delighted to see the back of him. The choice of Ken or Boris is the choice of being shot or being hanged. So- natch- I will vote for the guy who would actual do the best job: Paddick.
[107]
Summary report on the new poll :
http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/26/821438.aspx
108 - Paddick is so inconspicuous in this election he is giving the invisible man a run for his money!
106 - is every poll now within the MOE of a dead heat?
112- Rasmussen has McCain with a 9% lead over Obama- 50/41.
111 Inevitable, given the nature of the contest, and the track record of the other two main candidates, I would have thought.
Apologies in advance for the self-publicising, however, this is at least a thread concerning the London Mayoral election.
I seem to have a bit of an exclusive on my blog today about the Greens’ attack on Brian Paddick and open letter to Nick Clegg:
http://www.orangebyname.co.uk
Thanks all.
A good thread. Like others, I think it’s most unwise to assume that Boris Johnson will screw up as Mayor. He may very well not.
I think there are three problems with trying to whip up hostility to a candidate on the basis of social class.
(a) It’s hopelessly old-fashioned
(b) A section of the British working classes have always had a soft spot for toffs
(c) It doesn’t work when your’re as elitist as New Labour is.
114 - It was inevitable that this was going to be a personality election and so the Lib Dems chose a candidate that makes a block of ice seem warm. Not the brightest idea they have ever had.
99. ‘IDS came to see my project when he was leader of the Tories- never have I been more unimpressed by a politician..blah blah’
Perhaps he thought it was a cr*p project run by a self-important twerp. A reasonable assumption, based on your pitiful standard of posts on this site.
112 SBS. Broadly yes. The odd McCain/Clinton/Obama matchup shows a spike, but it’s all pretty tight.
One noteworthy point of the new NBC/WSJ poll is the significant fall in Hillary favourability score at 37%.
I see a shift here on the anti Boris front.
For sometime the theme was that Boris would be a crap candidate. bound to make a gaff, a toff out of tune with Londoners, a political pygmy to the experienced and talented Livingstone.
Well, that didn’t get traction, so now it is that Boris might win by a fluke but he will be a crap mayor who will alienate the voters and produce gaff after gaff, scandal after scandal.
I suppose in three years time the line will be Boris has been lucky as Mayor but he will come a cropper in his re-election campaign?
116. Sean, I seem to have lost your e-mail address. Do you think you could drop me one at julian.harris.81@googlemail.com ?
Many thanks.
O/T Wasn’t Sarkozy’s fawning and smarming yesterday wholly unconvincing? ‘France will never forget..never..never’.
Yeah right - the French don’t exhibit an ounce of genuine gratitude for the way we bailed them out in both world wars. Sullen resentment is more like it.
122 - I was just walking round Lewisham and saw a Ken poster. It took me a while to work it out being that there was no mention of Labour at all.
I find it amusing he has decided to attack Boris as a ‘loose cannon’ on his poster. Surely Ken realises that that is what HIS own appeal was for the mayoralty?
Or did he think he was voted in for his love of Newts and whisky?
Running through the thread many people throughout history understimate their oppnents - at their peril.
It is quite correct that the reason Hitler was initially appointed was politicians thought that; 1. he would be controlled by Hindenberg and the Cabinet and 2. That he would crash and burn because he was not up to the job. Well we know what happened there.
At the same time in the USA there were serious concerns that FDR and Garner were in the wrong positions on the 1932 Presidential ticket. Anyone remember Cactus Jack Garner?
Moving forward forty odd years, many Labour people thought that if the electorate didnt give Mrs T the heave ho then her Cabinet would.
After 1994 Conservative after Conservative said that Blair was too light weight. Er yes !!
The funniest mistake is the class war issue. Who in London takes any notice of the MP for Salford making personal attacks on Johnson at a meeting in Birmingham? Maguire is a Daily Mirror hack with a designer accent. Daily Mirror, ah yes Maxwell’s little plaything.
As for the luvvies - tens of thousands of voters in trains buses and tubes with realtively tiny salaries will have read the Heather Mills demands last week. Utterly sickmaking. Luvvies for Livingstone should shed quite a few more votes when they get in on the act, if Livingstone lets them.
104. The revolutionatry communists actually once fielded candidates of their own - 4 in 1983, IIRC - with total votes ranging from around 10 to 36. Sadly the strategy of initiating the revolution using democratic means did not survive.
The reason why Rasmussen is showing a McCain lead is that all the other polls are focusing on registered voters or adults. Given that non-voters tend to be more left-wing than the people who actually vote, Rasmussen’s measure is far more accurate. This is why the polls here used to be so innacurate.
Greens suggest supporters of another party vote for them! Hardly news is it?
Ken’s only chance now is to ‘go positive’.
The negative attacks on Boris have, if anything, only boosted his ratings. The language of hate - literally in Sian Berry’s case - makes Ken look mean-spirited. They have also drowned out his policy announcements.
In contrast, Boris’s light touch attacks on Ken - ‘Leavingsoon’ and ‘King Newt’ - display no vitriol, and allow him to campaign positively on crime, housing and transport.
There simply is no point in branding someone an out of touch, racist, incompetent, pantsdowner who despises London and all its peoples when it is not true and voters can see it.
Ken has five weeks to push a message that the congestion charge, low emission zone and bendy buses have been a success and that London should ignore violent crime, high taxation, waste and corruption as a necessary evil in delivering this socialist, green heaven.
Bye-bye, Ken.
re 128. But Bendy buses have not been a success. They take up twice as much road space as normal buses and kill cyclists.
45/57: yes, I clearly did underestimate the possibility of Boris winning. But David H is mistaken to think there’s a class basis for it, I think - I suppose I’m from the same class background as Boris, but so what? Simiarly, relatively few Labour people have really pushed the Etonian/Bullingdon line about Cameron - it’s clearly not very relevant except insofar as he’s not subsequently tried to find out about how other people live.
I try not to slag off other MPs, but the fact is that many of us do suspect that Boris is lazy, reactionary and insensitive to minorities, which are odd perceived characteristics in the candidate for London. But we need to put aside our personal views - it’s evident that many voters either don’t share them (like many of you here) or they don’t mind. (I’m not mentioning them to persuade you, but to explain why Labour has campaigned on these lines up to now - it simply reflects what we think.)
Why don’t voters care? Some simply disagree and think he’s a pleasant chap and great fun. But it’s also partly because of the perception that the job isn’t very important, so it might be nice to have a change with a jolly new character, who cares what he thinks. Labour and the LibDems should be stressing the extent to which the job actually has practical effects on Londoners and questioning whether Boris is up to it, a point on which I think the electorate (and even the Evening Standard) do still harbour doubts.
127. Hello Icarus. To quote:
“We therefore urge you, your party and your supporters to back instead [Siân Berry]”
Thus they’re not just suggesting supporters of the LDs vote for Berry, but that Clegg and the Party desert Paddick.
Whilst we may question the purpose / substance of this, I didn’t think it was common for parties to urge other parties to drop their candidates in this kind of way.
129 - A bit simplistic, no? I really dont get the fervour of bendy bus critics, they work just fine. Getting on a bendy bus outside Waterloo station is much, much easier than getting on a normal bus and that is one of the reasons we have them on some routes.
re 126. I don’t follow your logic Matthew. If the Rasmussen approach of using automated phone calls with respondents simply tapping in their answers onto a key pad produces more left wing results then why is it favouring McCain?
Bendy buses are dodgy at best, they were removed from the only high traffic route in nottingham it was used on and are now only used as a shuttle bus for trent university. They broke down more often, got stuck on tight bends regularly, and people would nip on and off without paying. They were pretty much a failure.
131 - I’m sure it’s all a bit rhetorical. The Greens are far more interested in the Assembly elections than the Mayoral race and tying the Lib Dems to tube privatisation / LEZ abolition / 4X4 supporting policies will help them win over Green / Lib Dem waverers who perhaps were not aware of, and presumably dont support, this side of London Lib Dem policy.
re 132. Just go and look at the Gower Street/New Oxford street junction. This was always a bus bottle-neck but has now been made much worse because the bendy-buses are twice as long. The result is that only half the number can occupy the same road space.
Double deckers are much more efficient.
118- why is it that people on this site can throw out abuse at all politicians (all fair game in my opinion, except Nick P, and the Tory one forget his name- who post here personally and should be given the respect we give eachother), but as soon as you do it at a Tory politician you get these pretty silly personal attacks in reply.
You see it time, and time again on this site.
You know I have never once had someone criticise me personally for the stuff I have thrown at Brown, Blair, Balls, Harman- but as soon as I go for a Tory.
Why do you think this is the case? Is it just that lefties are much nicer people?
I have nothing to say, just testing my new itouch on the Dublin ferry.
131. I don’t understand the greens doing that, Berry has even less chance than Paddick of winning, and Berry has coupled her waggon to the increasingly bad looking Livingstone campagin.
The power of selective quotation to underscore a deeper truth: “people would nip on and off without paying. They were pretty much a failure.”
136 - Tell you what, I’ll look there if you go to Victoria and Waterloo stations and look there. I’m not sure what good it will do, I’ll still be inclined to trust the experts on this one…
130 One thing Boris Johnson could do if he wins, which would also help overcome his inexperience in such a position, would be to involve the London Assembly more in decision-making. Uniquely, from April 1st, the London Mayor will be able to take important planning decisions, on his own, in secret, and without reference to any other person. No other elected or unelected official in the country has that power.
Yet, the Mayor could delegate such decisions to a planning committee in the Assembly, most of whose members will be familiar with planning.
136 - try boarding the 207 at the start of its route at Shepherd’s Bush Green, Mike. Previously, 10 minutes to board everyone; now, 2 minutes max. It all depends on what measure of efficiency you use.
130 “I’m not mentioning them to persuade you, but to explain why Labour has campaigned on these lines up to now - it simply reflects what we think”
One sentence summing up just how out of touch the Labour Party actually are. One of my colleagues has brought in (on my request) the literature she received to date.
The rather dated looking “London’s Choice” newspaper from Livingstone’s campaign. Four pages and until you get to the reply box on the back page…
19 mentions of Tory/Tories
0 mentions of Labour
It is the most negative vitriolic piece of campaigning material I have seen for a long while. What is the first rule of poltics? Never mention your opponents.
In comparison the “Greater Londoner” from Johnson’s campaign looks modern, is full of positive ideas and generally quite an attractive bit of literature.
The “Green News” … quite frankly the dullest read ever.
Nothing from the Liberal Democrats. I assume they are too busy “winning here” to have time to speak to the electorate…
Nick Palmer I find your use of the old socialist standby criticism of Boris being ‘reactionary’ rather anachronistic.
At the moment the polls suggest that most of the country is, in terms of the New Labour project, reactionary and looking for an antidote.
133- Mike- I was going to ask that.
Rasmussen though was frighteningly close to the 2004 results both nationally, and state by state. Easily the best US pollster.
But as I have said before I do not think these polls at this stage tell us anything much at all, though if Mccain pulled out 20% plus leads may give cause for concern for the Democrats.
As I have said here before Dukakis carried significant double digit leads over Bush into October only to be trounced. From memory too Dole polled some good leads over Clinton.
118 - I have a relation who knew IDS professionally prior to his parliamentary days. This relation, a lifelong Tory, thought IDS was a bit of an idiot, and rather overpromoted.
IDS’s problem was that he was dull and not very bright. He is doing good work now, although I did not agree with his proposal that the price of alcohol should be raised above inflation. Alasdair Darling however did.
120 - I was wrong about thinking Bozza would come a cropper as a candidate. I am not convinced he will be a crap mayor. I just think he may be. But if he is a disciplined a mayor as he is candidate, he could indeed be very successful.
125 - I think the RCP actually ran candidates in that election under the banner of ‘Red Front’.
130 I suspect one of the attractions of Boris is that he doesn’t have much of an agenda and therefore will not push the green issue too hard. People get tired of dull, earnest or worthy types, especially when budgets are tight. Global warming is still a long way off for some.
In short, if Boris will win it will be because he is a c/Conservative. That is Ken’s real problem.
145. Yes, amusing to see Nick’s mask slipping there. Still he must be very concerned at the prospect of his ideological soulmates in Socialist Action being turfed out…
137,
I am definitely not a left and I don’t believe I have indulged in personal abuse of another poster on here - so I refute your allegation.
re 144. The point of being negative in a low turn-out election like this is not to get people to switch allegiance but to persuade your own side to actually come out and vote. So while wild anti-Boris anti-Tory rhetoric might have no appeal to non-Labour supporters it could do the job with those who support the party.
This election is about turn-out.
137 - “why is it that people on this site can throw out abuse at all politicians (all fair game in my opinion, except Nick P, and the Tory one forget his name- who post here personally and should be given the respect we give eachother)”
Whilst Nick P is pretty polite, Stewart Jackson MP’s postings here verge on the abusive.
149. Hello Jonathan, could I ask you to drop me an e-mail too? julian.harris.81@googlemail.com
Sorry all, last time I’ll do this, promise.
113 Rasmussen has McCain with a 9% lead over Obama- 50/41.
Wow! That makes Centrebet’s slightly trimmed but still stand-out odds on McCain of 1.85-1 look very attractive.
Hat tip again to Jan from Norway, who originally found this value.
153. Nick prefers snide digs while Stewart Jackson is more full-on. Actually I prefer the latter.
152 - For the first time in 11 years, Tory voters can go to the polls with the scent of significant victory in their nostrils. I predict that thousands of Tories who didn’t bother to vote in the last two elections will turn out for this one.
Nick does have a certain way with words, it does have too be said.
Describing Boris as Reactionary is a case in point. Thats not how most people see him.
158. Imagine the language he might have used in his communist days…
157 - I think there is something in that. I have just entered into a ‘fun’ transaction with a friend of mine in that I get bought dinner if Boris wins on round 1 and have to buy dinner if second preferences come into play.
160 Suggest a trip to McDonalds, you’re going to have to pay.
161 - Quite possibly but I certainly won’t be entertaining any friend of mine in a franchised burger bar.
If I lived in Peterborough,I would shift heaven and earth campaigning for the Labour candidate standing aginst Stweart Jackson