Is Ken trying to do a Hillary?
April 24th, 2008
Why should he be so candid about the prospect of defeat?
Above is the front page of tonight’s Evening Standard which seems to break all the rules of elections. Candidates are “never” supposed to contemplate the prospect of defeat because it’s thought it will demoralise their own supporters.
So why is Ken saying this - assuming the quotes in the paper are accurate? It raises a whole pile of questions.
My guess is the last one. The move reminds me of Hillary’s tearful comments a couple of days before the New Hampshire primary last January. The polls, it will be recalled, were suggesting a near certain defeat and her demeanour that day became front page news throughout the world. The effect, as many have suggested, was to galvanise her vote so it turned out allowing her to sweep to victory and stay in the race.
Tonight we’ll get a chance to see the main candidates in action on BBC 1 Question Time debate. This will probably be the most watched event of the campaign and all the contenders must be hoping that they can get through it without making a gaffe.
Although Boris has improved quite a lot since the Jeremy Paxman debate a couple of weeks ago he never looks totally at ease. Ken can appear arrogant if he’s not careful.
There will be a lot of betting tonight - so all eyes on the changing prices.
I’m at a local party event this evening with Lembit Opik so I might miss the start.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Pass on pb.coms congrats to Lembit on his impending* nuptuals.
* circa 2025
Sorry to re-post from previous thread, but something for Morus
148- Morus- what about California coming into play in a McCain/ Obama showdown?
What would be intriguing would be GOP and Dem having to defend hard natural states, with unexpected states becoming potential flippers, and previous swing states- i.e Colorado becoming safe.
McCain versus Obama could change the political landscape
* To put the willies up his Guardian shills, to be even more shrill and obnoxious than heretofore.
* To try to lure us into complacency
* Because he’s looking forward to his retirement
* Because he’s suddenly realised how lucrative that book deal will actually be.
1. Who can blame Lembit for wanting to get his ring on her finger!
3- of course it is part of Ken’s strategy. He is staring defeat and the end of his political career in the face, and he is throwing his last dice.
Come on Ken my boy. “Yes you can”
Going back to the thread article it depends what context Ken said it. I remeber Major was aksed into the run upto polling day that “Blair did not deserve to win”…… So whilst there is merit in what you say it could backfire - why bother voting at all or for him if he thinks he cannot win - you could always pack a spoiler or failing that Paddick if you were a ken supporter. I think it was probably a gaffe by livingstone as i cannot imagine Ken shedding a tear will win many votes!
On my first read of the introduction I understood “Lembit Opik will be covering for me…”
If he’s planning a full-on Hillaryblubbing, maybe he’ll do it on Question Time tonight.
Boris could run over and give him a little kiss on the forehead to make it all better.
Mike - Can you pass on my contact details to her sister?
Thanks
Old fox indeed. I don’t trust him. It would be ironic if his old nemesis The Evening Standard were lulled into making moves on his behalf.
@9:
Cheeky.
11. It will be “Peter the cheeky punter” from now on!
You boys don’t get out enough.
My advice for those watching tonite is to get a bit long on Ken before the programme starts. Boris is the more accident prone in this kind of format. If he escapes unscathed, you will have lost little. If he stuffs up, you have a bargain price on Ken.
3…* because he wants to spend more time with his 3 families.
13 True, Sally. Were it not for PB.com and my battered old copy of FHM my life would be totally barren.
@13:
There’s barely a day this month where I haven’t been out, walking the streets for Boris.
Yes, that’s right. Boris has sold me into prostitution*.
*This is a lie.
It’s a risky but quite clever political move, in my view.
Kens problem is going to be getting his voters out against a background of the utterly embarrassing headlines from the national Labour camp.
This is an attempt to say in terms ‘if you punish me for the errors of the national party but not turning out next week the last laugh will be on you because I will lose and you will get Boris’.
It won’t work because I don’t think many Labour supporting people are all that worried about ending up with BJ; but lets see.
Tonight - Boris will play very safe - only risk is playing it too safe.
Ken might pull out an ace from sleeve - but more likely to go negative.
Paddick - lucky to be on the show on his polling.
As I said when I first posted the link to the article now on the front page of the Evening Standard - Ken is going for the sympathy vote. He knows from his own polls that he is behind - if that was not the case, he would publish his private polls. Of course, he has also done this at just the tim You Gov will be polling electors for Monday’s opinion poll.
To call in Tony Blair, more than proves that he is losing - I always thought they hated one another.
17 - Hence your autodescriptive surname?
Maybe Livingstone is going to deploy Neil Kinnock into London to get the Labour troops out. I can just imagine Kinnock on an open top bus with a band appealing to the masses of London to vote Labour - ney - Vote Ken! Kinnock will punctuate the bands music by punching the air and saying “AWWRRRIGGGHHT” and “Yes Ken Can”, if nobody sees Kinnock on the bus they may even think he is pakistan rather than wales.
Peter the Punter is not a good call sign on a thread discussing walking the streets and cheeky women.
Sort of sorry to go O/T early, though Mike keeps changing threads quickly, so I can’t keep up!
To explain some of the more far-fetched ’swingables’and my reasoning for saying they are possible -
Indiana for Evan Bayh as VP
Connecticut for Independents and Lieberman’s support
Vermont for independents and general unpredictability
Kansas for Kathleen Sibelius as VP
Montana has two Democratic Senators and a Dem Governor and could have Dem AL Congressman in January
North Dakota also has a completely Democratic congressional delegation.
None of these are likely to swing, but all are possible. I’m playing safe, and want to make sure I’ve not left any out - that means loose tolerances.
REPOSTED FROM LAST THREAD
154 - Socrates on how a VP choice could add to the list:
Yes I was thinking about that. I think I’ve got the major ones who I think could tip a state (Indiana, Minnesota, Kansas), but I may have missed some. Looking at my ’safe’ states:
What VP candidate could McCain choose to tip the following?
California (both Senators are Dem, Gov Schwartznegger not eligible)
Delaware (both Senators and Governor are Democrats)
DC (never going Republican, unless he chooses Abraham Lincoln)
Hawaii (Obama’s birth state-could Gov Linda Lingle swing it?)
Illinois (Obama’s state - no chance)
Maryland (both Senators and Governor are Democrats)
Massachussets (all Dem in Congress, ex Gov Romney would struggle to win MA from the top of the ticket, not convinced from VP slot)
New York (Pataki? Bloomberg? Giuliani? I was ridiculed for saying these guys could win NY from the top of the ticket…!)
Rhode Island (Gov Carcieri maybe? This one is possible, but for 4 EC votes, would he really get the VP slot?)
And what VP could Obama/Clinton use to tip the following?
Alabama (no-one)
Arizona (against McCain no-one, though Gov Napolitano otherwise)
Alaska (their best is running against Ted Stevens)
Georgia (no-one)
Idaho (no-one)
Kentucky (Gov Steve Beshear? I can’t see KY going Dem even then)
Oklahoma (Gov Henry has just endorsed Obama. Again, safe GOP)
Utah (No-one in state, though Harry Reid [a Mormon] might get the Democrats more than 40% for the first time in decades)
Wyoming (Gov Freudenthal has endorsed Obama - but the most Republican state in the Union for Obama just to see Gov as VP?)
Louisiana (Sen Mary Landrieu is re-running for US Senate)
Mississippi (no-one, as fmr Gov Musgrove is running against Roger Wicker for the ‘open’-ish Class One seat in the US Senate
Nebraska (Bob Kerrey [for Clinton] or Bill Nelson [for Obama] have both been US Senators and Governors-maybe this state could swing)
South Carolina (no-one obvious)
South Dakota (Sen Tim is re-running, and has been very ill, not possible that he will be chosen as VP. Former Sen Majority leader Tim Daschle is only other likely candidate)
Tennessee (Al Gore didn’t carry in 2000 from the top of the ticket, not going Dem for the sake of the bottom of the ticket, not even for Gov Phil Bredeson)
Texas (no-one really left)
Of all of these ’safe’ states, I can only see a well-placed VP choice swinging Rhode Island and Nebraska. What are your thoughts?
by Morus April 24th, 2008 at 5:46 pm
may even think he is from pakistan rather than wales.
I have a feeling (and have for some time) that Ken genuinely thinks/knows hes going to lose.
This can work both ways.
Ken hopes it will galvanise his vote as the prospect of a Boris mayoralty focusses people’s minds. Equally it increases the seriousness of Boris’ candidacy by ceding to him the status of likely winner.
I think that given all the polls to date and the current national political climate, a half decent performance by Boris tonight will see him safely across the line.
20
No doubt about it.. his greatest moment was “Grinding New Labour into the dust” That was the phrase wasnt it…
I think the second edition evening standard is much better
http://vedomosti.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx
23 LOL, Sally.
I’d never thought of the moniker that way, but now you mention it…
New poll anyone with details?
Can’t help feeling if Boris wins he’ll be Britain’s George W Bush, he seemed a nice guy as well in 2000.
and a huge poll lead for the tories!!!!!!!!
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/april08/toriestriumphpoll.htm
25 - not funny AND offensive - well done!
I expect Ken (and others) to heavily push the Last Chance to Stop Boris line over the next week. This (the Standard today) is of course part of the plan – making clear that a Boris win really is about to happen. The Stop Boris brigade will be in full swing with their hyperbole.
Not enough voters actively like Ken anymore, and they certainly don’t like Labour. Negative is the way to go.
33 - 18 % lead!
Incidentally, James Carville, possibly now the most visible Clinton surrogate said last night Larry King that Indiana was “the tie-breaker”. Although the campaign often goes back on its word, I think that just adds fuel to the argument that Indiana is a must win for her to stay in this.
See post 32 as proof of my point
Sky News are reporting that there is a Telegraph/Yougov poll out it’s con 44, lab 26 and LD 17. Ouch!
33 Holy cow. That is massive. 18% lead and Labour on 26%. I suspect Ken is truly knackered as some of it will rub off in the Mayoral election. Is 26% the worst ever for Labour>????
I’ve just noticed that since the BoE announced their new facility for banks to repo their mortgages in exchange for Gilts/T-Bills, the 2 year swap rate (which is what most new fixed mortgages reference off) has moved from 5.02% (Tuesday) to 5.48% (Today).
As most of the housing pain is supposed to be in Labour held areas, might this hurt Ken’s chances ?
36 it will be 25% in 2months time
42 - Hardly. In all seriousness I wonder what the local election results are going to be like, only a week to go!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/24/npoll124.xml
The poll story
37 - I agree it is a must win, because it would counterbalance Obama sweeping North Carolina on the same day, and get her (I think) about 5 Indiana superdelegates who will be swayed by how their state votes.
I think she’ll win it, just, and that will be thanks to Evan Bayh, but also to Jill Long Thompson’s campaign against GWB loyalist Mitch Daniels to become the first female Governor of the Hoosier state. That is the sort of Emily’s List-sponsored campaign that saw lots of Clinton Democrats energised on the streets before Indiana ever thought it would be a key primary, and those activists will be key in getting out the vote.
is it yougov? Seems too large. What of icm? Does the weekend effect explain it all?
44, brown trouser time for Labour.
If Boris does win (and it remains a big if) Brown’s position grows ever more precarious. The conservatives should be careful not to drive him out, he’s an enormous electoral asset for them.
24 You are assuming that the Veep pick will be a politician, which I agree is likely but non political picks could change your dynamic. (If indeed VP picks help swing states at all)
For instance if McCain were to pick a Hi-tech businesswoman (e.g. Carly Fiorina or Meg Whitman, both of whom are working on his campaign) perhaps it would help on the west coast.
If Ken blubs on telly between now and polling day, I can’t see it having the same empathy effect as Hillary’s did
I presume some one will soon say that 18% lead is not enough. Any lead that is below 30% will be said to be totally inadequate.
OT. I heard ken on radio today. yes, he is trying to a do a Hillary. I think it was after Wirral by election that major stunned veryone for 10 minutes by saying that it indicated a labour government ( we were weeks from may 97 ) and used it to pivot to why that had to be stopped.
I think he is hoping that as people imagaine Boris in charge that people will rally to him particularly on second prefences.
AS for the poll. Well bloody hell. I imagine the field work was during the tax thing but even so.
I’ve spent all week canvassing and whats trully terrifying for Labour is the fact that just about everyone thinks its hitting them. People who are actually going to benefit often by quite a bit from 22 to 20 think they are losers. This has to be one of the great presentational fiasco’s of modern politics. Since who ever came up with the term “Poll Tax”.
STill as with the Mayor You Gov do seem to be be diverging.
Final comment on the LD’s. we are now over three weeks into RoPA mandated equal air time and 17 in You Gov is only one percent up from clegg inherited after the leadership election publicity blitz. If, and it is an if we finish a national election with 5 weeks of RoPA equal air time and have not had the usual poll bounce there will be trouble at the mill.
50, undoubtedly.
Also, welcome to the site. Well, to a posting status anyway, having emerged from the dingy shadowlands of lurkerdom.
39- For the first time CON > LAB+LD
I think this is the most striking fact: Labour meltdown does not imply a LD rise, transfers are directly to Con
(just for fun, Baxter predicts a Con majority of 164 on these figures, Ave it, over to you…)
45 Morus re Indiana
Good article in the NY Times today about Indiana, including this quote from a resident
“Saying you’re ready to change is probably not the best or only thing you would want to say around these parts. Frankly, we want it to be like it used to be.”
Whole article here..
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/24/us/politics/24indiana.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
46 the sample is over 2000 people. It out to reduce the eroor margin should it not???
Tories still 2 short of a majority
dog rosby
O/T My pre-penultimate footy suggestion of the season. Back Spurs at 10/11 (0.91/1)to beat Bolton Wanderers. OK, the visitors are desparate for the points, whereas Spurs are not, but playing at home, they should be good for a comfortable victory - if they bother to turn up that is - there are rumours of a major clear out at White Hart Lane this summer, so hopefully this will be the case. These odds are available from Bet365, Stan James, etc.
Good luck!
2 - sorry, Tyson, only just saw your post.
California as a swing state is a nightmare scenario for the Democrats, as spending money on your ’safe’ states is bad even when you don’t have to pay LA prices. McCain is the sort of Republican who can consider it, but I think it is unlikely.
If he could have a Californian on the ticket, that would help, but the only candidate of that stature is Gov Schwartznegger who is obviously ineligible. Duncan Hunter ran for the GOP nomination, but is to the right of Attila the Hun on immigration, so rule that out. I can’t see any other Republican Congressmen having the stature to get on the ticket.
The GOP won California every election between Truman and Clinton except for 1964 (Johnson v Goldwater), though in all those elections except 1976 and 1992 they had a Californian on the ticket (Nixon in ‘52, ‘56, ‘60, ‘68, ‘72, Reagan in ‘80 and ‘84). Only twice (as I say in 1976 and 1988) have they won it without, and those were elections which were preceded by 49-state knock-outs won by Californians, so it took some time for California to re-align to the Democratic Party.
This time, I think the key issue will be immigration. McCain *was* very good for a Republican on this issue, but his later prevarication may have undone that goodwill, and even turned a lot of Hispanics away. If Obama doesn’t choose Richardson, and McCain does well to re-assure Hispanics that he is the only Republican likely to show a clear path to citzenship for illegal immigrants, then it is not impossible, but still fairly far-fetched I think.
California costs a lot of money in terms of media buy, and I think McCain will spend his cash (limited, by FEC regulations for taking public funds, or just from poor use of the internet to fundraise) in places more likely to yield a return on investment. If McCain could fundraise like Obama, or if there was a senior GOP Californian to put on the ticket, he would go for the jugular and win it, but I think the current climate dictates that he will barely try to win the state, which is why I have called it safe for the Democrats.
53 Though the Telegraph’s seat calculator apparently thinks an 18% lead would only result in a 50 seat majority -
“It would hand Mr Cameron a majority of more than 50 seats if repeated in a general election.”
Though I suppose “more than 50″ does include 160 or so, perhaps its just the Telegraph finding it hard to say Cameron would win a landslide.
Do we get 18 Dave’s. 18 Grumpy Gordon’s. Or 9 of each?
57. Wrong, for the following reason:
Never, ever, in any circumstances, put money on Tottnum.
Pretty disgraceful that the Tories don’t have a 100000000000% lead, in my opinion. This clearly shows that Dave is all spin and no substance.
55 All the Yougov national samples are over 2,000 , but some of them are the same people whether this reduces the M of E see Mike’s post earlier today re self selected samples and his example of where a sample of 2.3 million people gave false results .
This is going to cause ripples in Jack W’s ARSE.
59. More than fifty, less than thirty… when are we going to get some precision in British politics?
48 - A very fair point - I don’t think VP will necessarily be a politician, but to swing the states that I mentioned in that post (which are states which strongly favour one party or the other) I think a firm identification with a state would be necessary, and that normally means a politician.
Even if McCain chose (don’t laugh, it’s a hypothetical) Bill Gates, I’m not sure that he is as identified with California as a Governor or Senator of that State. To swing those states will take someone who has held state-wide office, and who has measurable approval ratings in the state.
In general, though, I accept your point.
55 - I think a sample of 500 has an MoE of about 5%, 1000 is an MoE of about 3%, but 10,000 are needed for 1% - ata guess, 2000 in your sample would suggest an MoE of about 2.5%, but I’m sure someone like Rod or Andy Cooke could give you a precise figure.
Re: YouGov - calm sensible analysis coming up……
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(ahem) real lead probably *slightly* lower - but good fun nonetheless!!
Woohoo!!
Can we have those 18 happy Camerons on the frontpage now please?!
Telegraph poll is catastrophic news for Labour, disappointing for the Lib dems who don’t seem to be gaining any support from Labour losses and great news for us.
Can Labour turn this round now?
Hey Casino, how on earth did you do that?????!!!!
On my computer the HAHAHA’s went right across the text box, right OUT of the test box, right OUT of the white surround and right accross the blue background and off the page!!
I was almost expecting them to come out of the side of the monitor.
That was SOOOO cool.!!
56 ROFL - nice one “Dog”
brown is toast, palmer is charred crumbs
24-Ks, Mt, ND-no way, whoever is on the ticket.
Nebraska no way, but your scenario could put one of the Congressional (it’s Nebraska not Ks that does not allocate on a winner takes all basis. Think I said it was Ks, apo-logies) in play. But, as you say, why bother for one EV?
Think Ct and Vt could be more in play, though doubtful, and like your thesis as to why. Basically independent voters. Giuliani/Pataki on the ticket are more likely to swing votes in Ct, NJ, even Pa than in NY proper, and may firm up NH. If McCain can take those 4 then he’s in.
Someone mentioned that NJ is always the swing state that turns out to be safely Democrat. I’d riposte with Virginia, if anything the Rep vote has been going up ever since 1992 at every election. An outlier, yes! But would only expect to see it go on a big win for the Dems. Colorado also threatens to eb the dog that never barked too. Again, Rep vote has gone up every year since 1992, and was only about 1.5% less in 2004 than in 1988 despite changing demographics. The state has a growing Hispanic population and Obama seems to turn them off. This could also make NM more difficult.
Mike isn’t in of course. He is on a date.
61 - been bitten by that before huh? I have to say, I would be wary of betting on, or against Tottnum. I need to run the numbers but I would guess they have been one of the most inconsistent teams (and I say that as a Newcastle supporter) - They manage to lose 4-1 to both Birmingham and Newcastle, yet beat Arsenal 5-1 in the Cup. Just a screwed up team I reckon…
I think this is the more suitable pic for 18 Gordons
http://i.treehugger.com/images/2007/10/24/brown-gordon-cp-2961417.jpg
71 my pleasure. it will sink in eventually that this govt is history
New thread - YouGov poll has Labour down to 26%
69 The Conservatives are not gaining any support from Labour losses either . Changes from Dec 2007 Labour minus 6 Conservatives minus 1 LD plus 3 Others plus 4
What I find so god-damn lucky about this whole situation is that Gordon Brown has almost single-handedly defeated HIMSELF.
We have done very little to warrant such a huge poll lead.
Gordon Brown does a more effective job as Leader of the Opposition than Cameron *ever* could.
69
I believe Labour could turn it around.
Gordon resigns after May 1st disaster due to illhealth and Hutton or someone sensible but personable take over.
Not going to happen. Gordon is a one man machine designed to turn voters off Labour.
71. Woof!
Until confirmation is forthcoming it would be sensible to treat this as a possible rogue. It’s really out of line with recent polls.
75. They beat Arsenal Under 16s-come-Reserve Side in the League Cup.
Good grief! I expect the lead is slightly lower than that in reality, probably more around 11%-15%, however it’s still huge. The 10p tax row has become a talking point, mainly because people are confused. They see more tax going out, but they also see Brown saying people will get compensated. Quite what the compensation is is still being argued over so people don’t believe it, or are just exasperated.
53.”39- For the first time CON > LAB+LD
I think this is the most striking fact: Labour meltdown does not imply a LD rise, transfers are directly to Con”
Chris, that is the most amazing aspect of the poll, the Tory lead is greater than the Libdem figure. Wow!
63. mark senior still living in a fantasy world…
70. Hehe!!
Maybe pb.com recognised how funny this poll is for Gordon and wanted to express the “cyber-laughter” as out of this world!!!
82.Rod, I would normally agree with you, but not this week with the extremely bad headlines for the government. At the end of the day the polls will diverge from recent trends if there is a big enough issue/issues that exercises the voters and makes them angry. The polls can be as volatile as the voters.
Keep saying it ……. Boris is home and hosed
Outer London is sealed.
Westminster, K&C, Wandsworth & H & F following local election trends.
Free money ……………
82 ROFL - nice one Rod!
72 “Palmer is charred crumbs”
Would that be Huntley & Palmer crumbs?
Oi!