Is a Gordon 2008 exit wager the best C&N bet?
May 16th, 2008
Will the PM’s £2.7bn gamble pay off?
In the previous thread we looked at the latest betting on Crewe and Nantwich where the best you can get is 0.21/1 on the Conservative victory. I think that is going to happen but betting at that price - not my normal way of doing things.
I am coming to a view that Gordon Brown has wagered so much on next Thursday that if Labour is defeated by a significant margin then the big political question will be whether he can survive.
For not only has he borrowed a massive amount to fund the tax cut he’s also thrown all his developing policy ideas into his gamble in the so-called “draft Queen’s Speech”. On top of that he has put his personal position on the line following the media blitz.
Let nobody be in any doubt - it is Gordon’s future that is on the line next Thursday. A small defeat would just be about survivable - but what happens if the margin is anything near the 12% that ICM had before their “spiral of silence” adjuster or the 16% that the pollster had on general election voting intention in the constituency?
I am quite taken with the prices you can get on a Brown 2008 exit. Paddy Power has this at 6/1 though they are restricting your stakes somewhat. At William Hill you might be able to get a bigger bet on at their price of 5/1. UPDATE 1645 Hills have slashed the 2008 exit price to 5/2.
These prices offer much better value than is currently on offer on Betfair’s Brown departure date market.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Are there any odds on possible majorities?
Gwyneth’s majority at the last election was 16% how damaging would it be if the Conservative margin was bigger than that in percentage terms?
I agree with your logic, Mr Smithson. Thanks for pointing me to these odds (which look very generous to me); I have bet accordingly.
He’s obviously not firing on all cylinders so…
An interesting market, but I still don’t see a likely mechanism for GB to be gone quickly. If we’re waiting for the Men in Grey Suits, surely the fact that he has filled his Cabinet almost entirely with ar5e-licking pygmies is going to mitigate against that? Would the Grey Suit types be from outside the Cabinet?
No insult intended to any genuine pygmies.
The labour machine in C&N seems to be inept in the extreme.
5 - I think that where there is a will there is a way. Someone commented previoulsy that Gordon can hardly say ‘you can’t get rid of me you haven’t got a mechanism’. If Labour want rid then he would be gone.
6 did you see the stuff i posted at the end of the last thread?
Possibly … but I don’t see it because even if I were a Lab MP who decided GB had to go before the GE, I’d conclude that he should take the current **** hitting the fan. No point in the new Leader facing all this. Better to see how the economy goes and change leaders much nearer the GE.
I don’t think there’s any value in the bet. Unfortunately for Labour GB is here for the duration.
If Labour lose Crewe and Nantwich, someone is bound to seize the moment. These opportunities only come around once in most politicians’ lifetimes. Brown will be gone much sooner than most think. Alistair Darling will not wield the knife, yet he may end up as the new Leader.
9 - But then when said new leader lost the election Labour would probably need another leader. To quote the Scottish Play “If it were done when ’tis done, then ’twere well It were done quickly;”
11 - Interesting you are suggesting that they replace a leader with no personality with a leader with even less.
I’m not sure that the tax cut was especially aimed at the by-election. More important was the prospect of parliamentary defeat on the Finance Bill, something which would have created a true crisis of confidence.
I’m not convinced eother about the party trying to force Brown out. It’s not like Mrs Thatcher in 1990 where it was easy to precipitate the contest and it could all be over within a couple of weeks.
Trying to oust a sitting PM with a procedure as cumbersome as would have to used against Brown would be traumatic beyond words. Who would be running the country while the PM had to campaign to keep his job? This would play terribly with public at large. It would also prove irreparably divisive to the Labour Party. I am sure would diminish, not enhance, its standing in the country.
8. yes ty! It did seem a little petty!
11, surely a joke? Darling is unlucky, but also a glove puppet.
I think the PPS rebellion under Blair isn’t entirely comparable. Blair had been in for a decade, and knew he had at the very most another year and a half.
Brown has dreamed of the job since he was three and a half, and has been salivating for it over the last ten years.
In addition, he was crowned not elected. Who is the change candidate who opposed him and had support? Who is the big beast who can take over?
As Boulton said ‘pygmies and youngsters’.
On the other hand, unless they go for Balls, they could hardly choose someone worse. But could they have a second PM who hasn’t won a general election? And what if the contest goes bloody?
Re 11 on that logic, how many times would the Tories have ditched a PM? We are talking about an emminently losable by-election. Lots will be made of it because the Tories have failed to win one for even longer than the Rams. But consider in the context of post-war, mid-term contests, this isn’t going to be a shock (unless it’s an absolute thrashing).
15, on the other hand I quite liked the lovely lady’s response. If I were a floating voter I might just pick a cross in her box.
14 - If he decides to fight, I think if he were shown the game was up it could be cleaner but I agree I think it is unlikley. They couldn’t foist a second unelected leader on the country and get away with it, and Labour MP’s would rather have a certain 2 years of enjoying their jobs than risk a general election and possibly be out before the year is up.
Ain’t going to happen! (Besides, I’m bloody well not being humiliated to pay £60 to that Tyson urchin).
he will just resign and then there will be a leadership contest. he won’t fight for it, saying “you’ll have to force me”. if a long line of people told him “your time is up” he’d have to agree to step down - wouldnt he?
re 16 that’s right. In early 2010 GB might be forced into ‘this hasn’t worked out too well, time for next generation, over to Miliband’ whose job is to use his honeymoon period to avoid a landslide and then re-build for 2014.
If Labour MPs want their leader gone, they’ll do it, irrespective of the mechanism.
It has, however, been true in the past that the Tories pounced on leaders with ruthlessness; whilst Labour were more reflective and tended to ’stick it out.’
Here’s my bet: it won’t happen unless it becomes clear that the favoured candidate (Miliband, or perhaps Straw) makes it known to collegues that they wouldn’t mind the job. If that happens, it makes rebellion much more likely.
If, however, the two close ranks around Gordon it makes it more tricky for the rebellion to burst out into the open.
(O/T but, well, would you believe it:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7404268.stm
14
IF - and it’s a big if Labour meltdown in C&N and the Conservatives win and have a majority> 10% , that would - imo - signal that the Brown brand is fatally flawed.
After all, if it’s so bad that your own party leaflets do not mention the Beloved Leader, but your opponents do, then the brand IS flawed.
So if Labour go on with Brown, they are facing certain defeat with a Leader whose appearamces in public jut lead to ridicule. Just read the press comments of Relaunch Mark 5. They are either indifferent or scathing.
A change of Leade gives a chance of snatching a bad defeat from the jaws of a crushing defeat - which could make 1997 look like a summer picnic.
As for methods, his entire cabinet could do to him as Mrs Thatchers did. And the outcome for Brown would be utter personal humiliation. Would he risk that or resign?
‘he was crowned not elected’
So was Edward II, and look what happened to him. Not that there are (many) similarities beyond that…
17. I agree. This is the return of politics as usual, something unfamiliar to many New Labour groupies. Governments lose by-elections and perform poorly in the locals: its not remarkable. The country would be an international laughing stock if it dumped the PM for this reason.
I was interested to read Mark Seniors comments yesterday.
Mark, I am flattered by your interest in my life but you are a bit insensitive keep bringing up my employment position. I have no doubt i will get a job in the very near future. In addition to that i have no doubt i will be earning subtantially more than you, despite the fact that you have 2 jobs!
Fvck off mark and get a life!
15. true, her reply was good, put labour in their place. I saw Frank Dobson on newsnight last night, his defence of their posh attacks was rubbish. They’ll lose votes just having him stumble around.
26, Edward II never had to put up with a Mandelson spreading foul rumours.
On the other hand, grisly as Gordon’s end will be, I doubt it’ll match Edward’s.
However, Edward III was crowned too. The difference between II and III was that II was a laughing stock and III ran around kicking the hell out of the Scots and Welsh and being admired by his minions.
30 - I thought it was Ed I who was Hammer of the Scots.
19 There’s absolutely no reason not to have a second unelected PM - it has happened before - the last person to be the second unelected PM in a single parliment was one W S Churchill.
21 Yes - if the Crewe result is bad Brown will have to go, procedure or no procedure. IMO he was lucky that Ken did not blame him personlly for his defeat on May 1st - had he done so I think many in the PLP would have joined in and he would have been gone already. Brown has no support in the Party beyond a small and diminishing group of acolytes in Westminster, and I find it hard to believe that MPs with marginal seats will continue to support him if C&N is lost. Hopefully he will be persuaded to go with a modicum of dignity, but time will tell….
31, yes, Edward I was indeed Malleus Scottorum, however, Edward III had even greater victories over them.
29 Any defence by any Labour person about any policy or action looks inept, because people don’t want to hear it or don’t believe them.(except a few diehards)
I think this is a critical point that hasn’t really been explored by the main stream media.
32. Churchill became Prime Minister in pretty extreme circumstances though, didn’t he?
30. Apparently Lord Levy tore into Labour last night on the late night Andrew Neil program. I don’t think the Blairites are going to be happy until Brown has been kicked out of no.10. The Blairites gave Brown a fair wind to start with, Brown screwed it up they seem therefore to feel that Brown undermined their man - replaced Blair with a fifth rate PM in the guise of Brown. No wonder the Blairites are pissed off.
I would just like to gloat and say i told you so last year. I said on the day of the handover if i were a Labour supporter i would interdict the train and stop Blair from standing down as an MP - he probably already had as Brown wanted to get rid of the deposed king asap.
26 - You’d hope that Labour MPs would have more dignified end in store if it came to it
However IIRC the reason for the method used to ‘dispatch’ Edward II was so no marks were left on the body to suggest foul-play… more parallels perhaps?
32, hardly comparable circumstances. Plus, nobody in Cabinet is worth a tenth of Churchill.
Interesting fact though. Plus, I bet nobody in Labour minded a ‘toff’ being in charge then.
37, that makes sense, though I’d also heard it was meant to be something of a cruel joke, what with Edward II’s preferences.
33 - Ah I bow to your greater knowledge of Plantagenent kings, not my major period.
40, hehe, not mine either really, I just remember the three Edwards from Starkey’s Monarchy series.
Reminded me of the Moghal’s first three great emperors.
Babur founded the empire and was pretty good, but his son Humayun was a disaster (chased out by Sher Khan Sur actually, whose name was used for the tiger in the Jungle Book). But Humayun’s son, Akbar, was the greatest of all the Moghal emperors and conquered just about all of India.
I have donee some historical studies and the worst historical results in European and Canadian election for a party of government have been from parties that got rid of an unpopular leader for new leader, who they thought would save them.
Kim Campbell In Canada 1993
Spain Landelino Lavilla 1982
France Pierre Bérégovoy 1993
All put into replace unpopular leaders and did even worse.
My choice would be the PM should appoint a young deputy who can be a fresh face for TV, but not lead the party to an even worse :result.
34. I agree. Crewe and Nantwich will demonstrate whether we’ve reached a tipping point in the public consciousness…
In 1997 the economy was strong, but people long gave up listening to Major and the Tories. Major could’ve stood on his soapbox and promised the world and he’d still have lost. By the time the election rolled round it had already been won by Labour - because people thought it *would* be. It was a foregone conclusion.
I think we’re nearing this point with Labour. If Crewe goes blue I think the public consciousness will dramatically shift - the Tories are going to win the next election - and from then on anything Labour promise, say or do won’t make the blindest bit of difference save a catastrophe befalling the Tories.
39 - A theory i remember being suggested when we did Marlow at A-Level… ah! Sixth-Form and our sophisticated sense of humour!
re 5 “militate” but given the howler I made on the last thread, who am I to comment!
re 14 Nick Robinson on Today this morning suggested that such a defeat would have led to Darling laying down his career for Brown by resigning.
38. The point with Churchill as you point out was he was a politician of experience and more importantly he had correctly forecast the trouble brewing in Nazi Germany. He was therefore an upgrade in terms of leadership. Despite Brown’s dire performance i cannot see anyone in the cabinet suitable to take office instead of Brown. They are all sixth raters.
It would be better if Labour resigned and we had an election and the Tory team could take over. They are a much stronger set of politicians compared to the current cabinet IMO.
44 - I still find the punishment meted out to Simon de Montfort the most amusing.
re 26 but henri who would you have in the Queen Isabella, Piers Gaveston and Roger Mortimer roles?
Mike - I’m beginning to think PP’s 9/1 on Brown’s departure before any GE in 2009 is better value than their 6/1 for the remainder of 2008.
One thing’s for sure, he’ll resist with every fibre of his body any attempt to force him out and with the 3 month summmer recess not that far away, followed by the annual conference, it shouldn’t be that difficult for him to survive the next seven and a half months.
2009 could be a whole different ball game as 100+ Labour MPs start to realise the party has only just over a year to save their jobs. Should the polls then continue to show double digit leads for the Tories, I would expect some action.
Losing the next GE to a small Tory majority or less is one thing, losing to a 100+ majority is quite another.
I do agree that if Crewe and Nantwich goes blue, then there will be a significant change in the public consciousness as has been said. However, I do not believe that Brown will go as leader this year, simply because nobody who has the sufficient potential support and capability will want it. So, the only way Brown will go is if he himself jumps.
43: The tipping point was past when having been given a chance to prove himself last summer he failed.
50, but surely the danger becomes that they hold a leadership election and it turns nasty. That would turn the voters off even more.
I think if Labour don’t ditch Brown this year, they should keep him (from their perspective) as the best of a bad set of options. Ditching him later could make things worse and they won’t have any time to turn it around.
[36] - Alistair Campbell was very supportive of Brown on Newsnight though.
38, 47 I was merely making the point that there is no constitutional bar against a second unelected PM. Given Brown’s polling position (ie much more unpopular personally than Labour as a party) it would be reasonable to assume that Labour’s position will improve under a new leader, whoever he/she is. All leaders have a honeymoon to some extent.
53. The other interesting point as we saw with the deputy contest is the complete absence of being able to forecast who the winner will be. I did not think Labour would choose Harmen over Johnson or Benn for that matter.
52
I think the tipping point might be Gordo losing control at PMQ’s or even possibly losing control in a live interview a la John Nott.
I feel pretty sure Gordo has been close to exploding on several occasions recently.
54 Er, yes, Campbell is a fervent Labour supporter.
49. Let me think about that…
47. Here’s an interesting question. In 1905 the government of Arthur Balfour resigned but the House of Commons was not dissolved - indeed Henry Campbell-Bannerman was asked, as leader of the opposition, to form a minority government.
It had, I believe, been Balfour’s tactic to resign, hope the Liberals could demonstrate they were not fit to hold power, and then win the election in 1906 (he went down to a landslide defeat).
Constitutionally - could that happen again? Could Brown and Labour look across the dispatch box and say to the Tories - ‘OK, you have a go?”
55, I agree but if the public find it unpallatable they’d be shooting themselves in the foot.
56, Harman (whose pathetic strategy was ‘vote for me because I’m a woman’ and then refused to give her second preference to Blears) only won thanks to Cruddas who named her as second choice.
But for that Johnson would’ve got it.
It just wouldn’t make sense for any of the younger generation of Labour politicians to want to take over now, only to be voted out in 2010, a career terminating event. Self-delusion might lead to their not accepting defeat as inevitable, but I think the possible candidates involved are realists.
As for a ‘caretaker’ such as Jack Straw, well what would anyone be supposed make of that? His GE pitch would have to be vote for me and if I win I’ll stand down and hand over to A. N. Other as yet unknown. It has to be thought through - it would be farcical IMO.
51 No, that is naive. Most MPs would jump at the chance of being their Party leader, however difficult the circumstances.
55 nickc - I agree, were Labour to choose a new leader before the next GE, his or her inevitable honeymoon (remember even Brown had one of those), will prevent the probably closely following GE from being a rout for Labour.
60 - Cameron would call an instant election though.
57: MTF, the tipping point when he stopped being able to win an election occurred when he lost the good will of many voters with his Iraq trip in the midst of the Tory Conference, and the election that never was. The next tipping point will be the the point after which anything he does (or Cameron does) won’t stop the negative feeling gainst him and Labour.
I just got spam trapped for Enoch Powell and rivers of Blood!
65. Good point!
66. Haven’t we already past that point?
63- no, I refer you to 62.
For younger names, it’s suicide- take over and lead their party to the worst election since 1983- at best. It would be a William Hague scenario.
For older names, I can’t see anyone in the cabinet openly challenging Brown- they would only stand if Brown went (Hurd in 1990).
That leaves the egoccentric backbenchers and all that would prove is a Labour rerun of 1995 and John Redwood. They simply wouldn’t have the support.
64 Yes I can certainly see a scenario which runs - lose C&N badly - Gordon out by early June - new leader in place sometime in July - Autumn election resulting in hung parliament - new leader would then appear to have pulled off a major triumph given the position they started from and their position would be secure whether or not Labour remained in power.
70. Labour are doomed then by the look of it!
Looks to me as though Labour are going to have the political equivalent of the credit crunch!
“For not only has he borrowed a massive amount to fund the tax cut he’s also thrown all his developing policy ideas into his gamble in the so-called “draft Queen’s Speech”. On top of that he has put his personal position on the line following the media blitz.”
Totally agree with you on this Mike, I was struck by two points this week when looking at the Brown survival strategy. First of all, I think that it really is a survival strategy with the Labour conference being the shoreline he has to reach and hang on to. IMHO it will decide whether he survives until the next GE, something I have not thought possible for a while now.
If the mini budget to try and undo the damage of the 10p tax band row does not work, and he does not get the favourable media attention he hoped by laying out his plans in the future Queens speech, what’s left in the arsenal to fill the newspapers until that Labour Conference?
More backbench rebellions over the Embryology bill and 42 days detention, mixed in with lots of speculation about him either being forced to go or being ousted by some plot. Neither has to happen before then, but the damage will be done just as it was with IDS, the rumours of his demise dominated his last conference.
A >20% swing will do for Gordon…
(just like 21.3% did for Thatcher at Mid-Staffs in 1990)
15% is very bad, but not necessarily unrecoverable..
10% is poor, but really just normal mid-term blues..
(remember Fulham 1986, 11%)
<10% will be comparatively good…
71 - I dont think so. If Labour chooses a new leader I think it would hardly register and they would be defeated outright in any election at any time.
71. Gordon won’t go unless he’s forced. It would be nigh impossible to depose him by early June. I believe there would have to be a special conference and a card vote.
Friday is clearly Tory fantasy day. If you’ve got a majority in the HoC you’re not going anywhere.
More bad news for the economy . oil reaches $127 a barrel..
77 Mrs Thatcher had a 102 seat majority in 1987 and she went. Gordon is not immune to events.
77. We have noticed Labour and Brown have been going nowhere for quite a while!
74 - what did for Mrs Thatcher was: “no, no, no”.
Is it me or is this by-election taking ages to arrive. Can’t wait for next Friday to pick up my wedge and wave goodbye to Gordo!
thinking about it more i don’t think he will go unless he’s forced and will be prised kicking and screaming rather than go voluntarily. He may develop be a bunker mentality after a major defeat in Crewe. things may go quiet for a while but politics doesnt exist in a vacuum.
News of job losses, inflation rising further, and so on will only make him seem more embattled and the “no return to boom and bust” phrases will seem more and more bizarre (and probably get replayed on the TV more often). at some point, something will give and there’ll be a Geoffrey Howe moment , perhaps?
83. Well inflation on the RPI measure is the highest since 1991!
Interest rates are unlikelt to fall further and i think Mervin King said 2 years before rates fall then!
Labour are knackered!
indeed, if inflation gets worse, its quite possible the next move on interest rates could be up rather than down.
Despite the ‘87 result, she couldn’t personally command a majority in the HoC in 1990, so she went. Only 204 of her MPs backed her.
If Labour change leaders, Labour will continue in power if that leader commands a majority in the commons. Only if the PLP splits or Labour decides it wants one will there be an election.
(This is all the old fashioned way of doing things, it is questionable how this will stand up in the era of 24/7 scrutiny and blogs)
O/T - More bad news for Brown.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7404557.stm
70 Didn’t some previously unheard of North Wales Tory MP challenge Thatcher the year before she was finally forced out ? Stalking horse was the expression I think. Perhaps Labour could find someone to play a similar role, although I’m not sure if the Labour election rules work in the same way as the Tory ones did back then.
82. The thing about Labour MP’s is their spineless - they could watch Brown beingtaken apart in every PMQ’s until the next GE and not lift a finger against him!
The problem for Labour is their whole economic strategy has collapsed, run out of money, run out of immigrants, run out of taxes to raise against people. Plus we are still at war in two countries where the government insists in using rubbish or insufficient equipment. Time for Labour to go me thinks.
76 So what does he say when a delegation from the PLP tells him he’s lost their confidence? You haven’t got a procedure? Do you really think he can hold on using procedural grounds alone? If he loses the confidence of the PLP he’s out, procedure or no procedure.
89. Here here!
89 Yet another Tory wants Labour out shocker! We know you’re Tory, it’s a bit predictable.
re 65 as indeed did Campbell-Bannerman
I think Gordon will stay on until he gets roundly thumped by the big clunking fist of the electorate in 2010. He’s not got the personality to accept he’s not the best man for the job. It’s bad for the country and worse for Labour but that’s just the way he is.
re 86 and in a secret ballot, how many do you think Gordon would be able to muster?
There’s real anger out there at what Brown’s policies have done and are doing. No manner of bribes can paper over the cracks now. We are in a mess in this country, business are really suffering at the moment, it isnt just food inflation in the supermarkets making it a bit difficult for the poor. Businesses are suffering across the board, and not just banks & estate agents. The government is so out of touch it doesnt realise what is going on here. Jobs are now being shed & drastic action is needed.
92. You cannot seriously want Gordon or Labour to continue in power at the moment? Labour are a complete shower - they do not even have the confidence of their MP’s hence the mini-budget earlier this week.
Think Labour needs to spend some time in opposition to work out what they really want to do in government as Labour have no idea.
94 Only Harold Wilson decided he wasn’t up to it and left.
It is in the nature of all PMs and Leaders to believe that they are the only person (out of 60million UK citizens) capable of the job. Brown is no worse than any of the others. Cameron certainly has messianic tendancies.
Even if C&N is wretched for Labour, Brown will still dither around before deciding to go. Coming about 6th in Henley (behind UKIP, a Fuel Protestor and the Yogic Fliers) might be the final straw. At that point, expect about 300 Labour MP’s to indicate they would sign an “in the name of God, go….” petition.
So, about the 27th June then. Birmingham City fans used to have an appropriate chant, whenever an opposing fan got led out by the police in a headlock:
“Cheerio, chererio, cheeri-o….”
27th June: Cheerio Day.
98. Do you support Brown as being the best person for the job of PM?
I would be surprised if you thought that was the case.
The wisdom of crowds is usually correct but I agree with Jonathan, I think PB has it all wrong on this one.
Gordon will not go after a sizeable defeat at Crewe. Like Jack W explained to Philippe after WV, the result is already priced into the market. We all know Labour will lose Crewe. The PLP and Cabinet as well as Brown know Labour will lose Crewe. Therefore, if they were preparing a post-Crewe defenestration the briefings to that effect would already have started “if we lose at Crewe he’s gone” said a source close to the Foreign Secretary/friends of Jack Straw.
Instead, the likely successors are jockeying for a post-election leadership bid. Miliband says on Newsnight GB is the right leader “up to” the general election. Alan Johnson pledges his support on QT last night. Would either of them allow Jack Straw to supplant them? Doubt it.
The plan seems to be let Gordo take the fall in a 2010 GE then the young turks will take over and rebuild. They don’t want to ruin their shot by leading Labour to defeat - maybe a lesser defeat than with Gordon but defeat nonetheless.
99.”Even if C&N is wretched for Labour, Brown will still dither around before deciding to go.”
There is some truth in that, he still seems to be under the impression that he can turn things around enough with the right strategy between now and 2010. That’s why I think the period between now and the Labour conference is going to be his last throw of the dice…..
But Test if you were a Labour leadership contender and you thought that you might lose your seat at the next election, you have to move before the election. The first thing to do would be to resign from the cabinet - in sorrow rather than anger - then watch things come tumbling down.
There are parallels with IDS’s departure.
1. The leader is clearly not delivering. (Poor opinion polls, poor commons performance, whispers in the Commons and fear in the constituencies, the media have given up on you.)
2. A new leader would need more than a year to make any impact. (Ditching IDS after 03 conference left an assumed 18 months before the election)
3. A safe pair of hands is needed (Howard and Davis were the favourites in the frame)
3. The oppo are not doing enough to help you. (Blair still popular in the country despite war and in control of his parliamentary party)
There are also other factors:
1. Dozens of MPs’ jobs are on the line, so even more pressure.
2. This is changing a PM, not an opposition leader, so more risky.
3. You’ve lost significant elements of your party’s powerbase in the country - councillors, Scotland and Wales - so looking even worse.
I’d say the odds are 3/1 against Brown surviving the year, but I’m not putting any money on it this time. The reason? In my water, I feel Brown would rather have his entrails scattered across College Green than admit failure, and he still holds a lot of political cards as PM.
100,97
Do I support Brown as PM? Yes
Do I prefer this Labour govt to a possible Tory one? Yes
Do I belive Labour will/should lose at somepoint? Yes*
Do I think Brown is the best person for the job? Until I get a seat, he’ll have to do.
*Yes, probably to a reformed Tory party. Cameron is definitely making progress in the right direction, but he’s not there yet. Crying shame the LD’s didn’t take their chance BTW.
103 the Jacqui Smith option?
Let me see:
I’m Home Sec but may lose my seat. Do I a)
Push Gordon out then attempt to become the first Labour woman PM, knowing I almost certainly will lose that election, and if I win, will then be notorious for turning a Labour majority of 64 into a Tory majority of 40 (let’s say) within two years?
or b) display unity, retain the affection of the party, stand down at the next election, take a peerage, and sell my no holds barred memoirs for around 400k?
Not much of a choice in my view
101 - I have switched my view on this recently. It isn’t logical and it isn’t particularly fair to Gordon Brown to oust him now, but the Labour party has collectively lost its head. It has zero confidence in Gordon Brown and will not come together again until he has gone.
107 remind me again antifrank what party are you?
And while we are all concentrating on Gordon Brown, don’t forget that erstwhile little Brownie Wendy Alexander, I don’t think that her position is anymore stable than that of her boss at the moment.
And quite often forgotten is the fact that the Scottish Labour party can be very ruthless, and just because its not being reported in the news, don’t assume that the knives aren’t out under the media radar.
Labour mind games
Her biggest mistake was to turn the SLP from a defeated party into a laughing stock repeatedly over the last few months. She has a reputation for not getting on with staff that far outstrips Brown’s as well. She is having real problems retaining staff at the moment, and I suspect the same problem with holding onto the support of her fellow Labour MSP’s.
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/themole,,not-again-now-an-unfair-car-tax-is-embarrassing-for-brown,29075
Oh dear, not another tax row!
OT — is it Lembit Opik’s pied a terre on Through The Keyhole?
107 Yes this is also true. Another reason I expect him to be gone sooner rather than later.
101 Of course all his potential successors are defending him now - just look at Michael Howard’s defence of IDS even as the backbenchers were writing the letters that did him in. But you would be very wrong to assume that this means they are not interested in the leadership should it become available. Johnson’s performance on QT last night was light years ahead of Brown’s dismal media manner - on the strength of that I think he’d be a contender.
108 - A floating voter. I was initially very attracted by Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, and if he had come to office with a pledge to have a referendum on the EU treaty and scrapped ID cards, he would have been 3/4 the way to getting my vote. At present, however, even if these matters were sorted out I cannot envisage voting for Labour since they are so woefully incompetent and disorganised in large things and small.
I’m currently toying between voting for the Tories (I like Cameron, like the new model Tories, but dislike the knee-jerk EU policy), voting for the Lib Dems (who I don’t take very seriously but who are anti-ID cards and who are within 500 votes of Labour in my constituency) and abstaining.
FWIW, I have £50 at 20/1 on a 2008 departure, but I do not seriously expect to collect. It has however enabled me to make a useful hedging bet on Cameron in the Party Leaders market.
I can’t see the price getting much lower than 6/1. A C&N disaster for Labour is already factored in.
110. Yes, and this time the tories are the one who are pushing it. The entire plan was thick, heavily taxing people with normal sized cars at a time when everything else is going up is bound to create resentment.
109. If Scottish Labour continue in the vein of recent weeks/months, I could honestly foresee them doing a “Tories,” and losing a lot of support in Scotland.
Brown won’t last. Fill your boots, punters.
[58] - The point was made in the context of Lord Levy apparently laying into Brown, that the “Blairites are pissed off”.
My point was that not all of them are damaging Labour by saying so publicly.
117 At what sort of price would you be prepared to fill your own particular boots, Tapestry?
114.”FWIW, I have £50 at 20/1 on a 2008 departure, but I do not seriously expect to collect.”
Don’t rub it in! I am not a gambler, but I messed up trying to register on the site to get in on that bet when it was flagged up, I missed out.
113 interesting what would you say if the party’s proposal was to stay in the EU but adopt the two-speed approach put forward by Giscard D’estaing? (ie opting out of Lisbon, repatriating some key powers, but still paying our dues etc)
Latest Rasmussen Presidential and Primary Trackers :
McCain 45% .. Obama 45%
Clinton 42% .. Obama 48%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
118 - Some of them are damaging Labour in private then?
I notice it is now the view that when a company is in a mess you are now advised not to sack the CEO. So Willie Walsh keeps his job despite the T5 cock up. The same applies to leaders of political parties when they have had less than 12 months in the job
Most of the problems facing Gordon are external (even if he contributed to some of the problems in the first place) The same problems would face a successor. Therefore don’t change. That he has poor presentational skills these days is not enough reason to change leader.
It is worth remembering that it was Gordon who won the 2005 election for Blair and Labour
Brown was quite bold in choosing new blood for the cabinet and ditching some has-beens. It follows that as they are not all established media tarts like John Reid they appear smaller people. personally I was glad he started bringing new faces in.
Jack W, no point posting the Clinton statistic, unless it’s just for thrills. The whole thing is over, but since you are fond of Rasmussen, how about posting the Arkansas poll?
I think I might put money on McCain for President, the overreaction about appeasement is exactly the same kind of hysterics that Kerry lost on.
John Edwards reaffirms that he has no interest in running for Veep a second time round. Attorney General …. Mmhhhhhh.
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/edwards-back-in-the-spotlight-again/
[106] - There’s always the option of returning to the Commons in a by-election, just as Portillo and Rifkind did, bearing in mind that Cameron may be able to sustain the Tories in government for more than one term.
In terms of personal ambition, the prospect of losing your seat at the next general election is not the be-all and end-all. Perceived disloyalty, however, tends to be frowned upon.
124. I think people were glad Brown brought new faces in, John - but we’ve found out over the past few months that they’ve not been effective in rejuvinating Labour - far from it, they give off the impression of inexperienced pygmies not sure what they’re doing. Bringing in new talent can be a good move - so long as it’s ‘talent’ you’re promoting, not mediocrity.
Gordon was a significant factor in the 2005 victory because the economy still appeared strong and as the Chancellor he could take the praise. Now that things are turning around for him he loses his trump card.
127. Look at Portillo he was disloyal and lost his seat! Now he is relegated to a bitter and twisted commentator!
[123] - That’s what the mutterings in the media suggest, and indeed the poster at [36], says that Levy did so on TV last night. Personally I think you’d have to be a moron not to have a few choice words to say about Brown in private, but it’s a different scale of problem entirely if people start saying those things in public.
O/T More trouble for Labour- this time in Doncaster
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/7405185.stm
127,129 You can be lucky, Francis Maude had to sit out 1992-97. What a personal disaster.
125 Jaz. As you’ll no doubt be aware I’ve been trilling that Hillary was out for more than a few weeks …..
…. however I’ll continue to post the headline results of each poll.
The Arkansas poll was posted yesterday but for information the headline figures were - M-33/C-53 and M-57/O-33.
Not too much of a surprise in Billaryland.
Nick Clegg still reminds me of Neil Kinnock!
121 - it would at least be a coherent policy, though not the one I would have chosen. But I value competence and coherence highly when considering who to vote for. It would improve the Tories’ chances of getting my vote for that reason. The current Tory position on the EU doesn’t amount to a policy.
131. Very True - Mind you he earned a huge amount of wedge in those 5 years if the press on his non-political career is to be believed.
131. Could some of the “Labour outake” in 2005 be possible leaders such as Stephen Twigg or some others such as Chris Lesley? I don’t think the former could be due to his sexual inclination.
127 I think to the MPs concerned the prospect of losing your seat is most certainly the be all and end all - or perhpas just the end all! Much more important than loyalty to someone you didn’t vote for anyway, rather resent having been dragooned into supporting and who has proved a disaster in office.
re: the retrospective increase in vehicle excise duty to apply to cars registered betweeen 2001 and 2006 .
” Brown again is worryingly in denial. He was challenged about the tax at his monthly press conference on Thursday and denied it was retrospective, because it only takes effect next year.
The Labour MPs are left scratching their heads in wonder - what on earth is going on in Gordon Brown’s brain? Is he really this stupid?”
It’s these sorts of things that really do make you wonder if he just makes it up as he goes along or whether he’s been smoking something or on the pills.
136 I do not think being gay would make the slightest difference to be a leader of a UK political party in this day and age. We have moved on.
For what it’s worth I’ve just had my fourth request to help the Lib Dems in Crewe and Nantwich - this level of contact is usually only reserved for those elections where M’Lord thinks there is a chance.
The e-mail claims that Labour’s support has ‘collapsed’.
It rather gives the lie to Tory claims that the Lib Dems have given up - by the looks of the big guns visiting over the weekend and next week it is still game on.
What are the odds on Labour coming third I wonder?
136 - I think Stephen Twiggs sexuality wouldn’t preclude him, the fact that he is an idiot would.
136. Good grief we really are scraping the barrel for candidates now, aren’t we? Why not just disband Labour entirely?
141 - didn’t stop Gordon.
127- I don’t think Labour MP’s will be plagued by the disloyalty card. They did not vote for Gordon, and Gordon tried to shaft Blair pretty horribly a year before he left.
Someone like Cruddas, perceived as a stalking horse could well end up as our next PM.
60 - “Constitutionally - could that happen again? Could Brown and Labour look across the dispatch box and say to the Tories - ‘OK, you have a go?””
Only in theory. If somebody is able to form a Government (i.e. somebody can command a majority on a Queen’s Speech) the Queen can ask them to do it. She would probably ask the leader of the Official Opposition if a PM resigned and said he would allow the Opposition leader to form a Government (by abstaining on the Queen’s Speech) and if the Opposition leader indicated via back channels he would accept.
You can just about envisage circumstances where it might happen, but not as now with a substantial Labour majority (more likely in a hung parliament). Obviously Cameron would decline any invitation and the Queen would dissolve Parliament in the present case.
He would be very unlikely to take it then immediately resign (as James B suggested) - it would be massively rude to the Queen to accept an invitation to form a Government then basically not bother and there would be no need as declining the invitation would also lead to an election. He could accept, pass a Queen’s speech and precipitate an election a few months later because he would have legitimately formed and led a Government as requested, but there would seem to be no advantage.
140 Clegg very upbeat in the Guardian
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/05/it_was_all_about_trains.html
142 It won’t happen, but I wonder what the consequences would be if it did.
140: Dan, come on you would never get a ‘we’ve given up’ Email even if they had.
139 “I do not think being gay would make the slightest difference to be a leader of a UK political party in this day and age.”
Unless they denied it in public, perhaps? That p1sses off both the straight and the gay!
Everyone sems to be concentrating on what Gordon will do.
I think Gordon will have no choice about what Gordon will do. As I said earlier if Labour lose C&N, someone will see the once in a lifetime NOW moment and go for it, that’s what politicians do. Gordon will become a victim of circumstances, if he has any sense he will save what is left of his reputation and resign “for the good of the party”.
146 “Clegg very upbeat in the Guardian”
As opposed to Clegg very beat up in the Parliament - each week during PMQ’s.
139. Yes, gone are the days when gay men would have to pretend to be ‘natural batchelors’, ‘not the marrying kind’, or enter sham marriages. Thank heavens.
i think the Queen should rule absolutely, by decree. We would be a lot better governed.
142 Start the “Draft Vera Duckworth!” campaign now! It is Labour’s only hope…
I have done some historical studies on the worst historical results in European and Canadian election for a party of government have been from parties that got rid of an unpopular leader for new leader, who they thought would save them.
Kim Campbell In Canada 1993
Spain Landelino Lavilla 1982
France Pierre Bérégovoy 1993
All put into replace unpopular leaders and did even worse.
My choice would be the PM should appoint a young deputy who can be a fresh face for TV, but not lead the party to an even worse :result.
Imagine it a dream ticket make the current PM a sort of president figure and then send Milliband as deputy PM and chancellor, as the fresh face of the party to compete with the two other younger leaders. Make Darling foreign secretery. There is no shame in using one of the younger labour politcians to maje up for the current PM alck of ability in PR. I think a total change in leadership would be risky as showqn by my previous studies but a new chancellor and deputy PM could do the work.
Congressman Pete Stark is the first SD of the day to endorse Obama :
http://www.insidebayarea.com/ci_9281004
Personally I think it is borderline lunacy to bet on either an early GE or Brown quitting - however it would be extremely interesting to see what policies the Tories are putting forward to solve the economic crisis.
139 I think sadly you are very much mistaken - have a look at a few opinion polls on the subject.
150 Precisely. Gordon’s fate is not in his own hands. Most of the Cabinet undoubtedly believe that they could personally be the saviour of the party - this kind of self-belief is found in all senior politicians. They will not hesitate to grab for the PMs job if they think they have a chance of getting it.
148 - of course - but if they didn’t think there was a chance they wouldn’t be asking for help at all - or would want people to go to Henley instead.
158- Plus Murdoch would never allow it.
I am glad to hear that Nick Clegg still reminds you of Kinnock, Martin (330. We must all keep thinking that positively.
As Stodge pointed out the other day, Kinnock took his party up to the 33% level, he increased Labouor’s representation to about 300 MPs and laid the grounds for Labour to form the next government in 1997.
Yes! Nick Clegg is getting there! Even Martin is convinced!
So if Brown does get the boot from his party in the next month or so and a “safe pair of ahnds” leader installed, when would we be looking at a general election? I realise theres no obligation for Labour to call an election, but after going through two leaders I can’t see how morally, Labour could last for long without consulting the electorate. So we could be looking at an autumn general election, maybe?
Brown’s problem is not just the last few weeks or months, but the last 12 years where he ha