Is this how Labour could win in October 2008?
June 10th, 2008
Just imagine that this weekend or next Gordon calls Andrew Marr into Number 10 for a live interview on Sunday morning.
Just imagine that when the TV crew are setting up it becomes clear that Gordon and Sarah are going to do this together.
Just imagine the programme opening with close-up shots of the two of them with smiles all over their faces and then, looking totally relaxed, him telling Marr that “some things are more important than work” and that he’s decided to give up on the advice of his doctor so that he can spend more time with his family at a critical time in their lives.
Just imagine the Downing Street spinners saying that Gordon is quite well except that he has been warned that his work-load governing the country is causing problems with his blood pressure which could, unless there are changes, lead to serious consequences.
Just imagine him saying that he’s telling the NEC of the Labour party that he will stay in post until the September conference to allow a leadership election to take place.
Just imagine it being announced that all the Brown family are to have a month-long vacation together in August on his beloved Cape Cod and some of the happy press pictures of the four of them from the agreed weekly photo opportunities.
Just imagine how he would be hailed approvingly as the man who put his family first and how this would lead to an amazing turnaround in his personal poll ratings during his final few weeks in office.
Just imagine how this and all the media attention on the ensuing leadership contest would completely block Cameron and his team out of the headlines and the bulletins.
Just imagine the first act of the new leader being to call a general election.
Would the Tories still be certain winners in these circumstances?
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
yes, by a landslide
Just imagine how he would be hailed approvingly as the man who put his family first and how this would lead to an amazing turnaround in his personal poll ratings during his final few weeks in office.
Presumably this would work because the British press have a deep, abiding affection for the Labour movement and there is not a single cynical soul amongst the lovable ranks of Britain’s adorably naive journalists.
Also, I think you forgot one:
Just imagine the betting opportunities!
It would make no difference. Ours is not a presidential system, which is why replacing Gordon is no panacea either.
It’s the economy, aggravated by attacks on its own supporters (which is where a new leader might help but, looking at the likely runners, probably would not).
the press have turned on brown, such an occurrence would be seen as little more than a government trying to save face as it ousts it’s leader
For a new Prime Minister to call a snap election would need faith in a poll spike not seen for a new leader since, well, Brown replaced Blair or Major Thatcher. But in those cases the outgoing leader was personally associated with unpopular policies, and no-one thinks Brown caused the credit crunch in the same way Blair took us into Iraq.
Just imagine that Comrade Smithson is spinning out a load of fantasy nonsense in the hope that some people might be gullible enough to think that any of it is even remotely likely - I don’t know enough about the psychology of betting to know whether doing so would have any effect on anything going up or down or laying or betting or spreading or sliding or tightening or moving out or whatever they do. ::)
(OT) At the top right of the homepage there is that little scrolling box thingy which (among other things) says
Federal Election
Labor 1/4
Coalition 13/4
Does this refer to the next election in Australia (already???) or has it somehow just not been deleted after the one a few months ago?
we’d still win but our majority would reduce vs the 2010 scenario.
[b]Just imagine[/b] that Labour spend 5 months of a 6 month General Election campaign involved in a internal leadership election process.
[b]Just imagine[/b] how petrol & food prices will continue to soar over the next 6 months whilst house prices continue to fall and the pigeons on the economy continue to come home to roost.
[b]Just imagine[/b] how dour Brown will become if he has 6 months to brood over the loss of all that he has coveted inhis political life.
[b]Just imagine[/b] how much policy Cameron can get resolved if a 6 month starting gun on a GE is fired.
Yep - a definite plan for a Labour victory, methinks!
One final one:
[b]Just imagine[/b] how much Spanish plonk Mike must have consumed on holiday before penning this thread!
Just imagine Cameron is caught in a compromising position with a donkey…
Cape Cod?
Mike is clearly simply mocking Brown now. Can I ask: does anyone, anywhere, still have one iota of respect for the man? Including himself?
Mike the problem with you scenarios is that the press would likely continue to report the whole thing as “pure cynicism” and “partisan politicking” on the part of Brown. Would any amongst the hoi polloi actually *believe* the reasons Brown gives? Or would they probably just consider it the last tragic, opportunistic act of a desperate, failed politician?
10 - Stuart Dickson.
“Mike is clearly simply mocking Brown now. Can I ask: does anyone, anywhere, still have one iota of respect for the man? Including himself?”
Do you mean respect for Mike of Brown?
Mike - yes.
Brown - are you ‘aving a larf?
*or*
My problem is that I don’t have a very vivid imagination.
Imagine….
I may say you’re a dreamer. And I’m not the only one. I hope someday Gordon will join us. And the world will be as one.
MI5 didnt give the govt any advice on 42days. So they just made it up. (Human rights commission to seek judicial review if 42days is passed)
‘Vote 42 days or you get miliband on thursday’ - must seem an attractive option for Labour MPs this morning
Vote Brown - get Ginger.
Mike,
You are forgetting that the press is now rabidly anti Brown.
If he started raising the dead, they would criticise him for making the population problem worse.
If he healed the sick it would be a scam so as not to need so much NHS funding.
If he wants to leave in such a way, he needs to collapse very publicly clutching his chest. Then we will buy it.
Yes.
15.
http://www.paradise-engineering.com/quotation/daydream-believer.mp3
IRISH REFERENDUM ON THE LISBON TREATY
Who’s bankrolling the NO?
Evil CIA?
Evil UK Independence Party?
Or evil US military?
Yes, the YES campaign has reached the pinacle of hysteria…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-mysterious-mr-no-843559.html
18 Can we expect a Berlusconi moment from Brown. His Ronaldo esque dive whilst giving a speech was pure theatre. (of course all to avoid another corruption trial involving Mr Jowell)
16 - I find it totally disgraceful that we have a government that dreamt up this 42 days stuff as a means of politically shafting the Conservatives. When it became clear that this wasn’t going to happen the proposals should have been quietly shelved. Now though the government are going around inviting their backbenches to trample over liberty so that Gordon isn’t humiliated. It is utterly despicable that decisions of this magnitude are being decided not on the merit of the case being argued but on the basis of calculation and political survival. Unbelievable.
THE LISBON TREATY
The funniest thing is:
“The Prime Minister, Brian Cowen, admitted he had not read it “from cover to cover”. Ireland’s European commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, added that “only a lunatic” would try.”
Labour now look like the king without his clothes. Blair/Brown seemed to know what exactly they were doing and gave a disinterested electorate confidence. That’s disappeared since Gordon became leader for reasons much rehearsed and I now think their only chance is if Cameron’s Conservatives manage to look even worse. It’s possible but best not to put your house on it.
Six months ago, he might have got away with it. Now it would look like Captain Edward Smith running along the deck of the Titanic shouting “Don’t panic! Don’t panic!” and jumping into the first available lifeboat.
“Just imagine Cameron is caught in a compromising position with a donkey…” Colin [9] - What has Boris been doing now?
The only thing Labour can do to improve their standing is to be seen to be dealing with the economic situation in the best long-term interests of the country (genuinely, not just in Brown soundbite-land.) That means, for example, not picking fights with the BoE governor because of short-term political motives.
[10] Perhaps Labour should adopt “Old Cape Cod” as their theme song - I heartily recommend the version by the Puppini Sisters.
For good or ill, this will be my last post here. I’ve largely enjoyed my connection with the site, but I feel it has lost its way. I won’t give a detailed explanation here - Sunny Hundal has been kind enough to agree to give me space on his blog (”Liberal Conspiracy” - see Our Genial Host’s list of “top blogs” on the sidebar): hopefully the article will be published this afternoon.
Wouldn’t be much point in a big push to improve Brown’s poll numbers, if someone else is going to take over. They’re better off trying to get his poll numbers down to 0, so that anyone else will be seen as a “saviour”, even by the general public.
BBC: At least 23,000 people already in negative equity and that’s just the people who bought this year - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7445324.stm
Just imagine…but it’s hard. Had Blair gone out like that, then it would have been even more emotional a farewell, but there are enough question marks over Brown that the tone would be ‘jumped before he was pushed.’ I see Labour’s problems as deeper than just the leader, so although it would mean a less resounding pasting than they are heading towards, I’d still expect a Tory victory.
And talking of implausible bowings out, come on Innocent Abroad, pb.c needs you! You will be missed, and I’m sure I’m not the only one hoping that after a break you’ll feel the need to be posting back here again. Best wishes.
31 No more boom and bust, prudence. .. How hollow it all sounds now.
IRISH REF. ON LISBON TREATY
Something those who, like me, are waging a lot of money on the referendum must remember:
“The Broadcasting Commission of Ireland issued new guidelines for broadcasters at the end of April ahead of the Lisbon referendum.
Under the guidelines the moratorium period has been extended and will now operate for the entire day before the referendum takes place and throughout the day of the poll itself, until the polling stations close.”
http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0610/breaking1.htm
I feel quite confidant that the NO will win.
Maybe I’m delusional.
We’ll know soon enough!
And the economy?
If the worst is over …
this highly implausible scenario would do nothing more than stabilize labour. They might,just might,deny the tories an overall majority too. That’s it.
Re. 18, and if he walked on water, he’d be accused of not being able to swim.
All that touchy-feely stuff would be completely insignificant compared to:
1) the manner in which the candidate(s) to succeed and Labour party conduct themselves during the leadership change
2) policy changes the new leader makes
3) the Conservative response to the new leader
If a new leader emerges from a bloodbath with identical policies to Brown it would probably make the situation worse, in the short term at least.
Mind you, if they emerged from a good Davis-Cameronesque contest with some significant policy changes it could be the start of a Labour revival… although they’d then have to explain why they were a good little servant of Brown if thye didn’t believe in what he was doing.
31 It’s all too late for Brown and Labour now. Gordon had his chance to call a GE late last year, which with any luck, Labour would have lost, just, leaving the Tories to pick up the pieces.
The economy is now deteriorating at an alarming rate and although a change of leader (and PM) would probably provide a small improvement for Labour in the polls if only by way of relief, this would prove only temporary and a GE later this year would see a massive Tory majority. Labour has now reached the point where it really has no option other than to soldier on and hope for the best.
Sadly for Brown his reputation for economic prudence is now in tatters and his profligacy over recent years will become ever more evident as the UK under performs all the other major economies. The Great British Public are just about to discover how far Sterling has fallen over the past 12 months (17% against the Euro) as they embark on their summer holidays.
Unfortunately, far worse is to come over the next two years and beyond in terms of job losses, house repossessions, higher inflation, higher interest rates, etc., etc.
Brown’s weekly recital at PMQs of Tractor Production figures is going to sound very hollow indeed from hereon.
35 And the economy?
If the worst is over …
Do you really believe that Jonathan, do you?
38 “although they’d then have to explain why they were a good little servant of Brown if they didn’t believe in what he was doing.”
Didn’t most of them start down that road on Channel 4 last night?
Whilst watching, was I the only one reminded of the Monty Python & the Holy Grail “bring out your dead” piece?
“I feel happy, oh so happy…” THUD
Barack Obama
–> Recruits Team to Tackle Web Smears
http://www.buzzle.com/articles/200392.html
Barack Obama is recruiting senior staff to a new unit which will combat virulent rumor campaigns on the internet that threaten to cost him votes in the presidential election against John McCain.
The unit is part of a huge expansion of Obama’s campaign team as he shifts from the Democratic nomination race to the campaign for November’s election.
40 Perhaps he sees the green shoots of recovery?
8 Just imagine how disappointed Robin must have been, having attempted to embolden the opening two words of his paragraphs above, only to discover that this had failed.
In the greatest traditions of pointless and meaningless analysis (the only kind I do!), I took the data from all published polls since Brown’s “no election” decision from ukpollingreport and plotted them using the devil’s spawn software more commonly known as Excel. I then plotted a trendline and extrapolated it to 3rd June 2010, which I believe is the latest possible date for the next GE.
Figures:
Con 48.9
LD 35.7
Lab 0.3
Oth 15.1
Sadly, I didn’t get the nonsensical negative vote share I was half expecting, but even so it reflects the precipitous fall of Labour from the 36-38 they were polling in early-mid October to the 23-30 they’re polling now.
29. IA. Very disappointing that you aren’t going to post anymore. I always read your posts and found you one of the most interesting non aligned posters on here. I can imagine why you’ve taken this decision but for the sake of those of us who don’t want wall to wall Tory clones-can’t you reconsider?
45. And what a lovely map those figures make in Baxter
Well done, Mike! It is an interesting scenario and it is quite possible, though perhaps not probable. Enough to send some Conservative posters into a tizzy anyway.
What they are overlooking is that the whole plan would not be revealed in advance. Each step would be taken in the light of the reaction to the previous one.
So Cameron is not given six months notice of a general election, in which to start deciding on a handful of policies. He either has to start revealing his policies now, just in case there is an election; or he can put it off, and be caught on the wrong foot.
Labour don’t have to say anything about an election. That was their mistake last autumn. But it puts the pressure back on the Tories. Cameron starts to define hmself, and the Tory bandwaggon falls to pieces.
45 Labour on 0.3% would just about represent the Party’s membership - and no-one else.
Sounds about right.
Panic,,,panic….Amazingly even a suggestion from an intelligent and seasoned commentator like Mike Smithson that the Tories might NOT (shudder!shudder!) win the next election has sent most posters here into mouth-frothing overdrive. So the press have got it in for Brown - aren’t they also capable of changing their minds at the speed of light? Its called democracy - the candidate who gets the most real votes on the day actually wins the contest and the government is decided on how many of these winners from one particular party get into parliament. Obviously this system should be abolished and the next government decided on by PB.com. I guess that Mike, for one, would be against such an idea.
October 2008, at most 20 weeks to go but more like 18 for an election before the nights draw in too much. The starting gun for this scenario will very soon have to be loaded and primed, if not already. Could all go smoothly but there is a real risk the wheels may come off in a big, big way.
Could it all happen on another date? May 2009 or October 2009? Maybe, but the longer this goes on, the deeper the hole and the less likely it will succeed as a ploy. However, if he did geninely break down, either mentally or physically, would this make a difference? Trouble is Tthe men in shiny suits will then have left it too long.
Don’t Brown and his family look such a happy unit? You could almost believe it, almost…
29 - Hey Mike, like tpfkar and the jolly one, I do hope you’re not abandoning us for real. You are, after all, among the oldest of the peebee contemptibles.
Whichever way you carve it, Gordon is a turkey.
C’mon Gordon, do the decent thing. Resign on 27th June - having had one year in the job. Just a little pinprick. There’ll be no more AAAAAARRRRGHH! But you may feel a little sick….
Can you stand up?
I do believe its working. Good.
That’ll keep you going for the show.
Come on - its time to go.
29 Innocen Abroad
If true that you have posted for the last time, that is very sad. Like so many others, I have enjoyed your contributions and found them fair, balanced and full of insight.
Perhaps like so many other you will reconsider, but if not, fare well.
25: I’m trying to imagine a “disinterested electorate”. I’d guess that the turnout might be even less than with an uninterested one.
The credit crisis goes to stage 2.
Barclays at 307p and falling..
There is no way a Labour Government will be elected again in my lifetime:
Next Phase of the Credit Crisis to Hit Credit Default Swaps $62 Trillion Market - Jun 07, 2008
http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/Article4984.html
While attention has been focused on the relatively tiny US „sub-prime“ home mortgage default crisis as the center of the current financial and credit crisis impacting the Anglo-Saxon banking world, a far larger problem is now coming into focus. Sub-prime or high-risk Collateralized Mortgage Obligations, CMOs as they are called, are only the tip of a colossal iceberg of dodgy credits which are beginning to go sour. The next crisis is already beginning in the $62 TRILLION market for Credit Default Swaps…………..
By the end of this, most UK banks will be bust or taken over?
I see David Cameron has some advice for “over worked” Gordon in the Daily Mail today on relaxing with his family as well. Maybe he has been reading PB.com.
51. My suspicion is that Labour will go to the country on June 11th 2009 (which is local and euro election day.
This means they would sitch Brown sometime around November or December (or Brown resigns with dignity) They then spend the next the winter going through a leadership election contest, with the winner announced in February/early March. They have the Budget in late March, tie up all the lose ends and call the eletion in May for 11th June.
“The Prime Minister, Brian Cowen, admitted he had not read it “from cover to cover”. Ireland’s European commissioner, Charlie McCreevy, added that “only a lunatic” would try.”
What type of person would sign a contract without reading it?
58, it’d be fascinating to know just how many politicians read the site themselves.
52
Hmm.
As someone who absolutely detests Brown and everything he stands for, even I wouldn’t stoop to that guelph. Just because someone is politically inept and dangerous as I believe him to be doesn’t mean that I have to start doubting his basic relationships with family.
It is a pointless and somewhat unsavoury line of attack that should not be given any credence.
To address Mr Smithson’s thesis seriously, if the leader is to change it now needs to be on a point of principle if the electorate is to think again about Labour. 42 days would seem very opportune in that regard.
To address Mr Smithson’s thesis seriously, if the leader is to change it now needs to be on a point of principle if the electorate is to think again about Labour. 42 days would seem very opportune in that regard.
Hi Mike, I’m a great admirer of your site but I really don’t think this type of fantasy post adds to its credibility or quality. I’d have thought there’s enough serious politics to write about at the moment.
Andy Cooke of this Parish is commended by Peter Riddell in the Times today (page
for something he said here last December. I wonder if Mike Smithson has ever considered charging for access to the Archive?
29 Innocent Abroard. Very sad to see one of the old guard retiring form the site. Perhaps as others have indicated you may feel able to return in due course.
Best wishes for the future.
29 Innocent Abroad - Although we are poles apart in our views, I have valued your contributions to this site and IIRC there are very few, if any, who go back further than your goodself on PB.
Like PtP, I hope very much that you will revisit from time to time.
Innocent Abroad. Please reconsider. You are irreplaceable. One of the best independent voices on PB.
I understand the pressures of work but maybe just post less?
Gordon resigning ‘on health grounds’ or ‘to spend more time with his family’ would simply not be believed. Partly, that’s because the excuses have been used so many times before; partly, it’s because there’s as much distrust in Labour as is necessary for the media, lobby and public not to take any given explanation at face value. The slide in Brown’s and Labour’s ratings, which got such a boost from the ‘it had nothing to do with the polls’ non-election press conference, would not be ended with another mistruth. At least Ming had the good grace to accept that not only could he do little to arrest the Lib Dem’s decline, he was a part of the cause. He then said so, publicly. Were Brown to do something similar, accept all the blame and then go, that might make a bit more difference - though I can’t see it happening somehow. Stating health grounds or personal lifestyle choices could look selfish, and whatever Brown’s other failings, I can’t see him doing something that he believes was that.
One point to note. Even were all that to come to pass, can Labour afford an election in October this year? Where will the money come from? There would have to be some serious pig-in-a-poke buying from big donors to get Labour out of their current deficit, and to fund an election, on the back of a new and untried leader.
I think Roger has it half-right at [25]. The next election is now just about the Conservative’s to lose. Of course, Cameron and co could mess it up - there’s a lot of policy to be revealed at some point (or questions to be answered as to why it’s not been revealed) - but it’s difficult to see how Labour can get out of their current hole by themselves. Stopping digging would be a start, perhaps.
The bit Roger doesn’t mention is the economy. That should have been Brown’s strongest suit but is rapidly turning into his weakest. While it’s not all Brown’s fault, he took a lot of credit (both sorts) during the good years and the benign international conditions - in particular, the low inflation produced by China’s rapid entry into manufactures - given little acknowledgement. The same deal holds when the waters turn more choppy. (I know it was not all plain sailing between 1997 and 2008, but as 11-year periods go, it was one of the friendlier ones). The economy is not something any Labour leader can ‘fix’ in a couple of months, and probably not in a couple of years, so simply changing leader is much less likely to produce a feel-good factor.
66 Peter Riddell is to be commended, if he acknowledged his source.
The Guardian seems to lift material regularly without attribution.
Surely, Mike should ask for a hefty donation to the next pb.com party from Guardian newspapers?
57. Of course for every loser on a CDS following a credit default, there should be a winner, the person on the other side of the transaction. So this is subtly different from mortgage losses, which tend to be a net loss to the banking sector (and a ‘gain’ for the household sector).
The problem becomes serious only if there is a major concentration of risk at one or more institutions or, perhaps more worryingly, if there are widespread defaults on trhe CDS contracts themselves. The latter would create a new wave of counterparty risk fears and put financial markets as a whole into an even deeper freeze than at present.
Meanwhile back at home in the dear old UK, where boom and bust has been abolished, the housing market is heading for a very deep recession indeed as transactions collapse. And money markets are pricing substantial Bank of England rate HIKES over the next year.
Whohahahahaha
Is this how Labour could win in October 2008?
No, because the electorate would not buy a pig in a poke. If a new leader is going to save Labour, s/he will need at least a few months in office to set out their stall and convince the public that they are worth a full term. As GIN (59) suggests June 2009 is much more plausible in this regard.
72
I expect CDS defaults.
Brown tousers time. About October 2008.
72
“And money markets are pricing substantial Bank of England rate HIKES over the next year.”
Not sure what you are looking at here but as someone who’s income varies a great deal based on the relative strength of the pound (I am paid in norwegian Kroner) I have to say the sterling seems to bouncing along pretty close to its lowest level at the moment. Good for me at least.
29. Hope you’ll be back soon Innocent Abroad. Like Peter says, shame to see the old guard go.
73. Am I correct in having read that you cannot hold a General Election at the same time as the Euro elections. This is a EU regulation. If so, June 2009 is not within any time frame.
EJ Dionne of RCP looks at Sen Joe Biden as a VP pick for Obama :
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/06/biden_could_help_obama_win_on.html
I thought Gordon didn’t take his family to his “beloved Cape Cod” preferring to go there with his “mates”. They probably go fishing or summat.
Richard@77: “Am I correct in having read that you cannot hold a General Election at the same time as the Euro elections. This is a EU regulation.”
No.
I think Innocent Aboards problem with the site is we have stopped being the small group of the politically committed individuals having a chat about politics with only the occasional need to actually get political. The sheer number of posts can be off putting.
Having said that in the heat of an election evening there is no better place than PB.
79. Hey Stretford-Ender you can’t have it all ways-I thought his personality was so bad that he didn’t have any ‘mates’?
78 - The reason it won’t be Biden is a stupid one.
When running for President, he was found to have used material from Neil Kinnock’s speeches, and on one occasion failed to attribute the material to the source. This kicked off a scandal about plagiarism, and he was also accused of having plagiarised work back in Law School (but later cleared).
After the micro-scandal of Obama repeating phrases from Duval Patrick’s speeches (the Gov of Massachusetts is a friend and supporter and dismissed it), I think they would be wary of a stupid “only good at speeches, and even those aren’t his own” argument. Biden just dregs that up, and there is no shortage of other good candidates.
A shame, because he is a good Senator by most accounts - but this is where the ephemera matter.
Innocent Abroad - Sorry we won’t be hearing from you in the future. Hope you reconsider. All the best if not.
77. The Electoral Commision have said they don’t want more than 1 election on 1 day I think. I expect that’s advice that can be ignored.
82 Why has an image flashed into my head of Gordon, Roger and Ed Balls enjoying a days sailing in Cape Cod on a summers day?
Brown’s fortunes rise or fall alongside the house price bubble which has largely fuelled the debt-fuelled, feel-good-factor of recent years. With the bubble now bursting (prices 30 to 40% down in 2/3 years IMO), inflation rising, and recession (particularly in the huge retail and financial sectors) a certainty I have to conclude that nothing Brown could do would restore his political health or that of the Labour party. They are both dead ducks.
“UK economy: Recession fears grow as house buyers vanish
City expects three rises in interest rates within months to curb inflation…..”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/jun/10/economics.houseprices
Cable calls it right: stagflation. Can anyone with any sense doubt this?
79. Indeed, I would have thought somewhere family-oriented like Tangiers…
82 I hear he’s still got one or two “special friends” though even they must be reconsidering their positions if they don’t want to go down with him.LOL
You’ve got a good memory BTW, Roger, or do you keep files on us all?
85 Boys just wanna have fun!
Paul Linford claims that the electors ‘would not buy a pig-in-a-poke’.
They did with TB, and look likely to do so with DC.
Would a change of leader help Labour? Yes. Hugely.
Was the disaster that is the GB-led-govt foreseeable? Yes. Was the Brown bounce last year foreseeable? Not by me, at any rate. I kept selling labour seats last Summer—and they kept going up…
83. It’s hard to get a better expert on international affairs than Biden though. I think the Economist endorsed him to be a top tier candidate for a while.
I hope DC mentions this tomorrow. Its absolutely scandalous and shows how Labour stance on defence is meaningless.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23493071-details/HMS+Defenceless%3A+Two+destroyers+sail+minus+missiles+to+save+cash/article.do
re 81. I have now read Innocent Abroad’s piece which does raise a lot of relevant questions.
There has to be much more active moderation and when people make the same silly point time and time again then we need do something to put a temporary halt on them.
I’m on holiday until the weekend and in the next few days I will reflect on the piece which will be published this afternoon.
82 There is a tendency to cross the line and attack Gordon in a private capacity rather than in his political & work one. I’ve no doubt from what I have read that he has a strong circle of friends and family. IMHO the advice he has received to take a three week break, whether in Cape Cod or elsewhere, and to adjust his work/life balance so that he isn’t overworking and has time for his sons is good advice.
Not sure though that he can change easily, he married late after decades of full commitment to politics and its difficult once set in a certain pattern of life to radically change it unless indeed its forced on him. There may be some who wish him ill but personally I wouldn’t want to see him forced to resign for ill health, heart or stress related problems.
He has failed to deliver the leadership and direction required and is a failed PM and that is why he should go.
85 Morus. Not sure I agree. If Hillary can get away with “snipergate” then Biden troubles are minor.
In any case I don’t think Biden will be the choice, I still think that Hillary will emerge from all the smoke and mirrors as a strong contender. Richardson also strikes me as being well in the mix.
The GOP choice is also looking very open. I had an initial thought for the Huckster but his Obama/shooting gaffe puts him back down the field.
84. Do you know of any Democrats who would be popular in Michigan? I’ve been racking my brains trying to think of one. Or anyone other than Strickland in Ohio? I don’t think the GOP can win if they lose one of those two states.
Someone said something like this on a previous thread. Gordon has a very ill young son, if he retires for ill health I think it will be his son’s health and not his own.
95
That was the point I was making at 63 Ted.
Attacking someone because they are deceitful about their private lives is one thing. I do believe that it is a valid line of attack as I believe it says something about someones character.
But to simply make inuendo about their family life with no suppporting evidence and because someone chose a particular course in their life (marrying late in this case - like tens of thousands of other people do) strikes me as being both pointless and demeaning of the whole political debate.
I say this as someone who thinks Brown is one of the worst PMs in history and has sold our country down the line. I am opposed to almost everything he stands for in public life. That doesn’t mean I don’t think he is a committed family man. Or at least I have no evidence to think otherwise which is, to me, much the same thing as far as on/off limits goes.
97 Socrates. Michigan was a Kerry state and is the only one that Obama is struggling in. So McCain could win with a replay of 04.
83. Not sure ‘mates’ is strictly accurate Roger.
Cameron! ‘The Shameful Truth’
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/june2008/david-cameron-hair-dye.htm
94 One simple move would make the site a better experience: put the name of the poster at the top rather than bottow of the post (or only show the first five lines).
79/96 I can’t see it being Biden. I think Sam Nunn offers something: right sort of geography, right sort of experience (and a further parallel with The West Wing). Richardson would be a good foil for Clinton, not Obama (same for Bloomberg). A rust belt woman would offer a lot, although I don’t know if Obama can afford both racists and sexists voting against him…
Casey would be good, but not exactly a pin up boy for all the clinton supporters.
97. I think (as I suggested here on Saturday) that Bob Casey might be an interesting choice for the rustbelt.
Michigan is 23% Catholic.
I can’t remember whether this has been posted here before, but this map offers a useful perspective on the religious dimension in this election:
http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/01/27/237-regionalism-and-religiosity/
96 - I agree. The plagarism story is ancient history and not one of great continuing interest. It is of more interest here because of the Kinnock angle and because Biden isn’t a figure we know of for any other reason. But many millions of gallons of water have passed under that bridge and Biden is a well known and respected senior senator.
Morus doesn’t mention that the story didn’t stop Biden running again for the nomination this time round. Of more concern is the fact that his campaign this time never got off the ground. Not because of an ancient story everyone has forgotten but because he just isn’t a very inspiring character. Safe and an experienced insider who would help Obama in the White House but what does he really do in electoral terms?
100. Iowa, New Mexico and Colorado are guarantees for Obama, unless McCain has big leads nationwide (in which case state decisions won’t matter).
74 Agreed, and eventualy the question will be asked repeatedley what would you do ?
Especially in hard times, the electorate and the media would like at least an idea of the way forward.
Surely the real difference between a new Conservative administration, and the outgoing one, now reality is coming home,is they will be spending and taxing less.
Cameron needs to reign in all those extra commitments to extra public spending, and face a changed reality, that if the genral public are cutting back on luxuries, so should his administration.
106 - McCain doesn’t need a BIG national lead to deliver those states to the Republicans. Any lead would probably do it and may well give him Wisconsin too. Colorado is perhaps the exception as it has been drifting to the Democrats at all levels for a while and whilst it was won quite easily by Bush it will be tough this time.
104. I don’t find Bob Casey much of a media performer. He’s one of those people that you find yourself getting bored quite quickly. Has Carl Levin been a DC insider too long to be on Obama’s ticket? He’s Jewish as well, which could stop funds going to McCain. Does anyone know anything about Jennifer Granholm?
109. Granholm was born in Vancouver, so couldn’t be US President.
108. I disagree. Wisconsin is Illinois’ baby brother, and will go for Obama in quite a big way. I said this back in the primary season even when Clinton had big leads there and that was easily turned around. New Mexico is so heavily Hispanic that differential turnout this year will give it to Obama pretty solidly.
Quite a lot of MPs do read pb.com, not necessarily every day. I get plenty of casual feedback.
I’d guess that Innocent’s decision (which I also hope he’ll reconsider) has something to do with the tendency for some threads to be Tory gloatathons. As someone who’s muttered about that in the past, though, I think most people here have been reasonably restrained in recent weeks - we can hardly expect Tories not to be thrilled by the current polls, and the odd post like 52 which tries to rub it in with personal nastiness gets promptly shot at by other Tories.
Mike’s difficulty is that when the Tories are consistently a zillion points ahead, it’s difficult to find new domestic things to talk about - how many ways can we discuss “Might Labour lose the next election by lots”? If the polls remain at this level and prove accurate, then certainly; they might not. Not all that much more to say, except to debate scenarios where it changes, which is what Mike tried today.
As a change of pace, I’d like to suggest one thread on the ray of light that I picked out from today’s poll: the fact that in a poll with a 20% Tory lead, apparently more people still want a Labour than a Tory government. Why is this and what does it imply? A few thoughts on this:
1. This is likely to be unweighted by certainty to vote. A great deal of Labour’s problem at present is demoralisation of its voters - not that they’ve all become Tories, but that they’re blowed if they know if they’d vote. Labour always has the turnout problem, but currently we’ve got it in spades. However, a position where a slight majority want you to win but aren’t sure if they’ll vote is something to work on, and very different from a large majority wanting your opponents to win..
2. There is a “middle option bias” that may distort the findings. If you ask people if they prefer A, not-A or half-A, some will opt for the half-A just to express uncertainty or look moderate. The options here were “like Labour”, “like Tories” and “dislike Labour but prefer them to Tories”. A poll that included a balancing “dislike Tories but prefer them to Labour” would be technically better.
3. Peiople are suspicious of all parties, and there is a residual dislike of the Tories out there too. The absence of a coherent set of Tory priorities (I’m not talking about detailed policies, but things like “Will there be a shift to more green taxation or are they having another think about that?”) is gradually feeding that suspicion, and IMO it’s the main residual reason why they aren’t leading on the ‘preferred government’ question.
Naturally all this is coloured by my own leanings, so some of you will be tempted to do the ‘haha, fantasy stuff’ turn. But a serious discussion might be worthwhile, if only for a change of pace that might lure Innocent back!
112. ‘A great deal of Labour’s problem at present is demoralisation of its voters’
If that’s true Nick, then how come the Tories polled 6000 more votes in the C&N byelection than at the GE and turnout was down only very slightly?
89. i don’t need a file to tell me where someone who writes “maybe they go fishing or sommat’ spent their Saturdays…..but i’ve got one anyway and come the revolution Mancunian Tories are going to have some explaining to do……
111 - That isn’t what the polls are showing. Obama has a small lead in these states which reflects his small national lead. If that flips around, so do the results. I just don’t accept McCain needs a “big” poll lead to deliver the key states. If McCain wins nationally even by two or three percent then he wins the White House (less than that and I would accept it is a toss up).
Whilst watching the 10 oclock news after the football, my daughters 20 year old boyfriend said he felt sorry for him, (Gordon Brown) and questioned why anyone would want the job.
Dangerous place to be feeling sorry.
Just to clarify “If the polls remain at this level and prove accurate, then certainly; they might not.” - I mean (a) yes we would lose heavily at current poll levels if they’re accurate and (b) current poll levels may not continue or may not prove accurate. Both pretty obvious points - I’m just saying we can’t profitably repeat them on every thread.
111 Socrates. Yesterdays Rasmussen has Wisconsin Obama +2%. Kerry and Gore each won by less than 1%. I’d expect it to firm up for Obama but it remains a tight toss up state.
113: Because if you dislike your usual party without wanting a change of government, voting for the other lot in a by-election is an entirely consistent option. People who canvassed in Crewe on both sides met voters like that.
112 - no “haha”, but it’s fantasy stuff, Nick
The polls ALWAYS suggest that there is a whole bunch of Labour voters available to give Labour majorities if only they could be persuaded to vote. Of course Labour can always point to that as “something to work on”. But the fact is that these people never vote, so focussing on them will just be a waste of resources. Bear in mind that large numbers of these people are probably concentrated in Labour strongholds anyway. So persuading them to vote will do little more than prevent an absolute wipeout.
112
when I started visiting this site it was at a time when Labour were 10%+ ahead in the polls, Gordon was the messiah and Labour were heading for a “1997 style landslide’. The fact that the mix of posters and comment on here has mirrored the total collapse of the Labour brand is telling in itself and therefore I would say a good guide to betting.
There is a reason that Labour voices are not heard here anymore and that is there is nothing for them to say - you have had your 11 years, achieved nothing and are now simply making a bad siuation worse. get over it.
105 - James: I wasn’t trying to be duplicitous by failing to mention Biden ran again! I just didn’t mention it, as he didn;t really get anywhere.
I know it sounds stupid, and of course Obama could brush it off, but I suspect this is where the intense paranoia of the VP vetting committee sets in, and even minor stuff like that will count.
That aside, I think he’d be quite good, if a little boring.
104 Jack Peterson - I like Bob Casey too, but I suspect a pro-lifer as VP costs the Democrats more (esp in women voters) than it gains Obama in Michigan or Massachusetts.
119. But I thought you said you didn’t come across many (or was it any?) switchers, Nick?
115. I’m not arguing that McCain needs a big poll to win the key states. I just disagree that NM and WI are key ones. I’m just thinking of the makeup of the states in question. I can’t see McCain appealing to rural or smalltown Midwesterners or Hispanics in any real way. On the other hand, I think he will have a bigger appeal to rustbelt voters than to the typical American. I would say Pennsylvania is more likely to flip than Wisconsin. Michigan certainly is. The polls at the moment are showing people’s thoughts before the campaign has really begun, and before a lot of people have been exposed to the character and personality of the candidates.
119. Some, yes. But almost 50% of the previous Conservative vote? Dobtful.
Nick
“Tory gloatathons”
As opposed to the Labour versions we had up until the conference season last year.
It seems to me that the Labour supporters round here have both very short memories and very thin skins. They were more than happy to crow when everything was going well for them but are apparently unable to take it when things start to go wrong.
Rest assured, when the nextx Tory administration ets into difficulty (as it assuredly will at some point in the future) they will all be back crowing away just like the ‘good’ old days.
110. Thanks for that. Rings a bell now you mention it.
O/T I know Phillipe Magnan has been beating the drum for Gov Schweitzer of Montana as Obama’s VP (a suggestion which made the FT this weekend), but I first heard the name from Andrew G on this site a few weeks ago. I thought that was pretty ahead of the game.
Then I read this post , on this article by Mike.
Another name I’ve picked up as a potential VP/POTUS candidate is Brian Schweitzer, governor of Montana. I don’t know anything about him except he’s very popular and in the vanguard of a huge democratic revival in MT.
Andy Cooke suggesting Brian Schweitzer as VP on the same day that Mike picked Obama as the next POTUS - May 27th 2005. Astonishing!
o/t Henley……looks like a couple of new contenders have entered the race its all oer for the tories > http://tinyurl.com/6b74g8
Nothing in the leader mentions anything to do with policy, not a single word. The government is losing support becaue of policy, only policy change can improve their support enough to win an election.
As M. Magnan posted earlier - http://www.buzzle.com/articles/200392.html
Told you so, Obama must realise that email wars are inevitable. he only way to combat the way that lies can be propagated without comeback is to either negate that or to get to the root and expose the perpetrators.
Morning all
Re: 112 - An excellent post as always, Nick. Not sure I’m quite in agreement with you but I do appreciate what you’re saying.
As you and others have said, Governments all over the western world, irrespective of their political stripe, are suffering at the moment in the face of unexpected and unpredictable economic conditions and the sense that we are in a new economic reality in which the “good times” of the last fifteen years or so are over.
As people are forced to recognise tougher economic conditions, they look for someone to blame and Governments are easy targets. It’s much harder to blame the stupidity of bankers and it’s almost impossible to get people to take their own share of responsibility for their personal financial decisions which left them over-committed. In a society predicated on consumption and material improvement, getting into debt is so easy.
I’ve criticised the spending policy of Brown since 1999 on here before. The Tories though have seemed committed not only to matching Labour’s projected spend on health and education but also to increased spending on the armed forces, Police and prisons so I can’t square the circle either.
What irritates me about this site (and I also hope IA isn’t gone forever) is that some of the Tory activists are as guilty of the “Titanic deckchair” syndrome as they accuse Labour of being. For these Tories, it’s all about beating Labour and the LDs, all about winning and having a gloat at your opponents.
Politics ain’t or shouldn’t be like that - when I was an activist, I got bored of the petty knockabout. The governanace of this country is far too serious and far too important.
126. Quite - this endless sour grapes moaning is getting tedious.
When I first started reading this site it was full of Lib Dems gloating at the mess the Tories were in. I stuck with it because it was also full of very interesting chat on a variety of topics and useful betting tips (apart from affording one the opportunity of having the odd pop at our masters).
It is still full of both good chat and good tips, even if the noise quotient has gone up. And no doubt the partisan tinge will shift again in the years ahead.
Posters will be lost from time to time - you can’t please everyone - but others arrive. I notice the moaning only ever seems to get really loud when Labour or Lib Dem posters announce their departure, though…
Just imagine the Tory election broadcasts showing the rows of unoccupied houses all over Britain but especially in aspirational middle England where a great many of the 26,000 households in todays news who have gone into negative equity and the thousands more who ill by then have been repossessed live!
Nothing short of an economic miracle or a war can save Labour but then I would not put it past Gordon Brown to find a new war in order to get re-elected. He will do anything to cling on to power
122. Yes, I think you’re probably right. The realignment will have to wait. Maybe Sam Nunn for one term and then Obama could take the risk of a pro-lifer?
Or… he could choose a pro-life woman! I think Congresswoman Marcy Kaptur of Ohio would be an interesting choice - a leading anti-Nafta campaigner from the Michigan border - although she doesn’t quite have the gravitas required.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcy_Kaptur
Also, I’m coming round to the opinion that some Clinton supporters would prefer not to have another woman on the ticket, perceiving that as a slight to Clinton’s credentials. I think Obama has to choose a man.
Just imagine that after months of lurching from one disaster to the next, people started talking about wanting a PM booted out.
Just imagine the press start to suggest he could go out on ill health and the idea is widely discusssed elsewhere.
Just imagine that odd things happen - like Cabinet Ministers appearing on channel 4 documentaries that resemble a political obituary.
Just imagine he resigns.
Just imagine he and all his collegues chorus it is on the grounds of ill health.
Just imagine noone believes him when he says its not because of the polls. Again.
Just imagine that the potential ‘replacements’ and those left behind have to join in the pantomine and do a ‘Jacquie Smith’ on Boulton. Again.
Just imagine that the public have concluded the Labour Party:
a. made a cock up of the leadership last time and could do so again.
b. has no real talent or noone ‘untainted’
c. could install someone they don’t know as PM.
d. are playing blind man’s buff to save their own necks
e. are taking the p*ss.
f. is a party they don’t give a stuff about anyway and just want an election.
Any [or all] of the above are more likely than, ‘Oh aren’t they a lovely competent bunch of people now they have a new yet, old face, at the helm.
Two more factors.
1. The Labour Party can’t be sure who a real contest would throw up.
2. And that it wouldn’t throw up a split.
No real contest makes a to e above, even more likley.
102. I can see another Michael Crick “expose” coming off!
122 - I didn’t want to imply you were being duplicitous by not mentioning it! Just that the plagarism story is sufficiently ancient that it didn’t stop him having another go. I suspect if that is the only thing on the Biden file then it will be seen as a very clean file. Bigger problems are that he is dull and has a long Senate record (with all the errors and contradictions that brings) which will help President Obama but hinder Candidate Obama.
The Tory triumphalism (odd, as you haven’t won an election yet, and in fact have been out of power for 11 years now) is extremely irritating, and whilst I appreciate the intelligence of posters like SeanT and test, a lot of the rest of posters could be merged into one mindless entity.
The reaction to this thread shows just how terrified the Tories are of Brown leaving office. A new leader WOULD boost Labour in the polls, no matter how you all try to spin it.
130. Which policies?
Other than 10p tax I can’t think of anything particularly unpopular.
137 - You got the key problem there, James. Many of the potential VP candidates help Obama in the campaign, but they are rarely the same ones that you would actually want to be Vice President.
Good for the campaign - Clinton (has some merits!), Schweitzer, Sebelius, Webb, Strickland, Richardson, Edwards
Good to actually be VP - Richardson, Biden, Bloomberg, Bayh
139 or to turn it round - what will be the flagship reasons for voting Labour on the doorsteps at the next election?
(the phrases “we want to do more’….’making the right long term decisions’….and ’started in America’ are not allowed)
To go back to Mike’s original article - I do think the sequence of events that he describes would result in an improvement in Labour’s poll ratings - and I think a lot of Labour supporters would like to see something like this happen. If Gordon is forced out there will obviously be a degree of sympathy for him from most people - Tories excepted - and he will become a tragic figure. The media exposure surrounding this and the subsequent leadership election would certainly bring some disillusioned Labour supporters back into the fold.
I would agree with Ted @95
138. A new leader may boost Labour in the polls, but the public would not be daft enough to elect someone just because they were new. Cameron’s line of attack would basically be “new leader, same old Labour.” The new leader in question would need several months to explain how they were actually going to be different from Blair-Brown and thus effectively rebut this.
134. A woman on the ticket also has the risk of being painted as “affirmative action” if it’s not Clinton. A man would also help for the projection of strength in a national security debate (sexist I know).
140. You can add Warner to the latter list, but I’d put Bayh on the first one. He’s a scheming b*stard.
138, I agree that any new leader for them would, in the short term at least, gain a twofold boost:
1) Labour voters who despair of Brown and would vote for a lemon if it replaced him
2) the honeymoon effect
Also, in the longterm, a new leader would be likely to be superior to Brown in public perception (I say likely not certain because Balls could conceivably get it).
However, they would also lack political gravitas and backbone, because they refused to run when there was a vacancy last time.
Labour also has the risk of a potential bloodbath with a new leadership election.
42 days is a crucial matter as well.
Mike, you need to turn that imgaination off. It’s not doing you any good for your health
138. Oh give over. Would Labour supporters be any differant if/when the roles are reversed. Conservative supporters are just enjoying themselves. These are heady day when they can enjoy being in the lead, but without all the daily problems and issues that come with being in government. You lefties are just going to have to put up with it for the time being.
We should have a PB.Com competition to see if any poster can find something ‘harry’ doesn’t find ‘tedious’
Talking of which…..it’s interesting that the thread Morus points to as Andy Cookes finest hour as tipster should also be my least finest (and that’s saying something). Why I chose to post first on that historic thread I’ll never know!!
On topic: no, I don’t think a change of Prime Minister would have a significant effect on an election result in autumn 2008. Like politicians, like journalists, some on this site tend to exaggerate the personal and the short term influences on election results.
Petrol prices at the pumps are not going to go down by October, are they?
Nor are other perceived and pressing indications of inflation, and linked to this, public sector pay demands and disputes.
The government is in serious trouble, as indicated by all polls at present, and superficial fixes like a change of one element of personnel will not work with the bulk of the electorate, and still less, minutiae which might be hardly noticed.
However, of course neither are the Tories not “certain winners” with the current leadership. But there’ll probably need to be a substantial economic recovery by 2010 to give Labour a decent chance of holding on (whoever is in no.10).
139. http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/guide/
If we look at the graph, Labour first became unpopular at the time of cash for honours and Prescotts affair. No change in policy.
Brown bounce bought labour success with no change in policy. Then there was the none election and all the spin and attempts to wrong foot the tories, which caused him to crash. No change in policy there either.
Got even worse after the budget. Polls at the time found initial support for all the policies in the budget, yet the budget itself bombed. So was this an issue of policy? I’ll give that this was further compunded by the 10p tax row.
Then C&N, Local elections and london elections added to the impression of a party in decline. No change in policy there either.
138. yeah I agree that a new labour leader could be an interesting prospect. However, calling a lot of Tory posters on here mindless isn’t particularly constructive.
Whilst the sight is majority tory, just put your own filter on when reading comments, concentrate on posters you trust and ignore the waffle. It’s not difficult. Also this isn’t the only blog in the world, and if you want a truly rounded political heads up read conhome, labourhome, libdem voice et al.
140 - Bayh at least probably secures Indiana (11 EVs) which went strongly for Bush and would be a sop to Clinton whom he endorsed. He is also quite credible and a potential successor as President. I have a few quid on him at good odds - big drawback is that he doesn’t add much in terms of balance by region, religion etc.
141. Exactly. Labour are tired and with no positive narrative at all.
I think bearing in mind Brown’s attacks on Cameron it will be that Cameron has no substance. Because that worked really well for the Tories in ‘97 didn’t it?
149. Easy answer there Roger - I don’t find you tedious at all. Your posts are richly entertaining, if perhaps unintentionally so.
152. The way I see it, this site is just reflecting the massive shift to the Tories thats taken place on this site in the last year.
When you read back through old threads, like the 2005 general election threads, it appears that Labour supporters were actually in the majority - Just like they were in the nation. So this site represents whats going on nationally, IMO.
When the pendulum swings again, then I suspect we’ll see Labour supporters in the majority here (I may be one
) But for the time being Labour supporters need to stop being po faced and accept it for what it is. They and their party have lost the support of the country and people want them out. Blogs and forums mearly represent this fact.
96 but Hillary didn’t get away with snipergate at all, did she Jack? It finished her.
“130. Which policies?
Other than 10p tax I can’t think of anything particularly unpopular.”
Are you actually being serious? You read post after post on here and you haven’t picked up on which policies are unpopular?
The benefit of this site is that you get differing views and you have to stand up to being challenged on them. Ridiculous sites like the liberal conspiracy one that was mentioned are merely either back slapping ones or ones that believe that the minutiae of differences are more important than the broad thrust of policy. Both are wrong headed and, in the case of that site, it compounds it by naming itself on a lie, there is nothing liberal about it at all.
149 - But Roger, it has ensured your place in posterity! You are a pb.com institution, and even if you weren’t, you would be solely as a result of that single post! You are the man who had greatness thrust upon him - you can’t complain about that. You get to say “I was there”. Some of us were 30 months late to the party.
145 - Again, like Bayh, Warner does at least bring a marginal state won by Bush last time and with a fair number of EVs firmly into Obama’s column. They are more or less the same age and very plausible 2016 candidates. But, like Edwards, Warner has gone somewhat beyond “coy” in his approach - either could backtrack and do it but they have been surprisingly firm in their statements.
152 “…the sight is majority tory …”
There is probably a discrepancy between the readership and posters. The site has changed from being majority Labour/LibDem posters (at or before the last GE) to being majority Tory posters. But the readership is probably much more mixed.
Not too surprisingly — you’re more likely to post, and post often, if you feel optimistic & your party is doing well.
158. I don’t take this site to be representative of the population of a whole. Polls show support for 42 days and ID cards but you’d be hard pressed to find anyone on here except Nick who supports them. It’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking everybody thinks like us.
157 - Not really. It hit in late March didn’t it in the long run in to Pennsylvania which she won reasonably well. I suppose it might have been the straw that broke the camel’s back but probably not.
162 - The economy is the reason, people have been gradually finding themselves worse off and, in some cases, suddenly so. That is the reason for government unpopularity, you may say that is the result of policy rather than policy itself but it is still allied to policy.
Just imagine pigs that fly
87: Spot on. Economy is heading down the pan. Stagflation? we’ll be lucky to get away with the stagnant bit - big recession coming.
162 maybe all posts should be colour coded to reflect their red, blue or yellow affiliations. The number of posts could then be restricted to reflect the latest opinion polls. so currently 40%+ of posts would be from Tories and the Labour and lib dems posts would be about equal……on 20 % each…..
(leaving stuart dickson to account for the other 20% - only joking)
154 True as were the Conservatives in 92, but they could say the alternative would be far worse, and the opposition has not fundementally changed.
Only the half is correct now, as the change Cameron talks about is fragile in the extreme, the Liberal/Green agenda.
98. G he had an ill when wanted to job, so badly.
He had an ill son when he took over.
He has an ill son while insisting he is going nowhere.
I don’t want to sound hard [and I am sure the media wouldn't want to either] but if he suddenly sings that tune when nothing has changed it could look cynical and backfire.
Personally. I find the idea of using the ill health of one of my own children to save my own face, abhorant.
Think back to the conference season trip to the see the troops. At the time, not only was the idea of ‘using’ the troops political suicide, but the idea that your opponents might suggest you were was very risky. I held my breath when some Tories complained about it. It was accusing someone of doing something that was really really low and as such could backfire.
The media reported it as ‘they say this, what do you think?’ until the public reaction became clear. Now its part of the accepted mainstream narrative that that is just what he was up to. They do not wait for a negative public reaction anymore before pouncng.
Everything he does is now analysised with cynicism and put in an unflattering context.
It is particular problem if the timing of his departure were to coincide with a particular setaback or series of them eg. a commons defeat, defection etc.
It hard to see a time at the moment where he would get a clear run. If he did he could go more easily.
But he would have to go whilst seeming to recover somewhat. In such circumstances I doubt he would go. He would hope he was turning things aound.
One way of improving the site would be for Tories to refrain from predicting what Labour voters/activists/MPs should do/say/think and vice versa. Similarly, I make it a betting rule not to vote on internal Labour, LD or Democrat issues - deputy leadership, Democrat nominee - as I am a dyed in the wool Conservative and would be foolish to second guess those who think very differently. E.g. One of the few political bets I’ve lost on was the post Kennedy LD leadership contest, where I was suckered into putting a couple of quid on Nick Clegg to run.
I will miss Innocent A, but suspect he’ll be back. How’s he going to get through the US general election without PB.com? Unthinkable.
161. I would also like to apologise for using the word sight when i meant site. doh. I think you have a point about when people likely to post.
I use this site to get news and to keep ahead of what is happening in politics, to listen to what lines parties are using to defend themselves/attack opponents, what spin is working and what is not and just to keep track of polls and opinion really. NickP’s posts are useful in getting an insight in to how Lab MPs are feeling (at the moment it feels like he is clutching at straws for some good news!)Dan’s posts tell me what the Lib Dems are likely to attack the tories on, and so on etc.
138. Not terrified of Brown leaving office, I think - just believing that if he stays there then the margin of victory would be larger than if he left. It’s the ‘let’s reverse ‘97′ syndrome, hefty three figure majorities and ‘Ya boo sucks, anything you can do, I can do better’.
Not necessary, IMO. Might even be counter-productive. Look what style of government that gave us over the last 11 years. With massive majorities there’ll always be enough lobby-fodder to allow an executive to do more or less what it pleases, and that is very bad and potentially disastrous. Those siren voices whispering “You know best, you’ve got the votes, ignore the nay-sayers…” No thank you.
I hate the thought of Brown struggling on until 2010, what sort of shape will the country be in by then? As it is he’s like one of those old music hall turns spinning plates atop sticks - and they’re wobbling to the tipping point and he’s rushing round trying to keep them going while telling everyone he’s gonna make it all come out right in the end. Nope. It needs a fresh act on stage. And replacing the maestro with one of his assistants might perk up the audience for a short while but not for long.
FWIW my dream scenario is an election this autumn with a Tory majority of maybe 70 - 80, perfectly feasible even with a post-Brown bounce. If they can’t make a good start on sorting things out with that, then they never will no matter what their majority. Second terms? Never expect it as a gift or as of right - bloody well earn it.
Although there is an imbalance on the site (and the “blogosphere” in general) with more Con posters vs. Lab or LD ones, I don’t think that is necessarily the problem.
However there is a massive overrepresentation of extremely right wing posters within the “Tory” ranks; the more moderate ones are often drowned out. The party under Cameron has moved onto the centre ground of politics really, you would never realise this or be able to guess any of the party’s published policies from reading this site.
149 Reminded me to check my 2008 competition entry - not doing that well on a number of fronts (can Gordon please have a Cabinet re-shuffle quickly and move Smith & Darling in next couple of weeks) - but I see that for reasons that must have made sense at the time I put in Governor Phil Bredesen of Tennessee as Obama’s VP. If anyone from the Obama camp is perusing this site could they mention to Barack how eminently sensible such a choice would be?
162 — When Labour first floated ID cards it spoke of polls showing 80% support; now the figure is between 50 and 60 per cent. Support for ID cards is ’soft’ — and remember, people haven’t been forced to pay and go register for them yet — while opposition is determined and growing.
I’m sure most people were in favour of the Poll Tax at first, just as most Americans initially voted for Prohibition.
The more Australians were informed about that country’s proposed ID cards, the less they wanted them. Palmer is a fool if he thinks the same won’t happen here.
Very amusing thread!
To some point your scenerio has intesting value.
It has to be remembered though the Labour party are broke, the economy will in all likelyhood suffer a severe deterioration over the summer. The Government will also be even more directionless than it is now. Interest rates are due to rise further and inflation will continue to let rip. On the plus side a general election would be welcome.
It will not happen even if a real chancer and gambler got the top job, not after being 20 points plus behind, losing a by-election by landslide quanities and the local elections. The public would not be as sympathitic as you might think, particularly as he has hardly been the “straightest” of PM’s.
Labour have nothing to lose by following this scenerio, i am sure that some Labour folk are very tempted. I doubt though Brown would want to go under these terms.
There seems to be an assumption that Gordon Brown leaving and being replaced would automatically benefit Labour. I’m very doubtful about this because I do not see anyone on the Labour front benches with any noticeable popular appeal. Certainly there is no Heseltine equivalent. And any younger leader would almost certianly be outclassed by Cameron (as has been the fate of Clegg whose election by the LibDems was a mistake). Moreover the ditching of Brown would appear to be a change engendered by panic and there would be huge pressure to call an election. If they went ahead with an election the result would be a massacre. If not, they would be on the back foot from the start.
I think Labour is stuck with Brown and his (their) best bet is to tack to the Left, rebuild their core support and give their activists something to support and work for. Brown’s repeated attempts to discomfort the Tories by triangulating is not working and Labour should abandon that approach. They still have two years.
138. Triumphalism and lack of grace when the times are good are unattractive traits and I know in moments of weakness I am as guilty as many Tories here(particularly in response to LibDemers self-righteous pomposity and in this respect have occasionally been reprimanded by NickP (though Nick I think your straw clutching over this one ‘ray of light’ is a little desperate). This is not good and I think everyone should consider showing more respect to each other.
However, having scanned some of the old threads, all that is happened is that the Conservatives are now in the ascendancy and the gloating of Lefties was just as unpleasant during the Brown bounce for instance.
In respect of elections the Conservatives have not won, I may have been asleep but I think the Conservatives won the London Mayoralty, hundreds of seats at the local elections and the C&N by-election and all this in the last six weeks. Were these not elections, was I just dreaming these triumphs?
169. I don’t think Brown would actually do it. To his credit he’s attempted to shield his family life from the public eye in a way both Cameron and Blair haven’t. But it is an element of real politick that is worth considering in this debate.
Nick @ 112 and following on from Alex @121.
I think Mike has aleady covered your argument. [By 'covered' I mean kn*ck*r*d].
You have to remember that in the mayoral poll a significant number of your voters weren’t even registered.
171. I also think it is sad when people leave the site and no longer post.
sometimes tho I feel that it is the intransigence of their own opinions that is the factor as opposed to the majority of very reasonable people that post here. for example snowflake was a very good poster and quite combative, but had a habit of putting words in people’s mouths who disagreed with her and skewing what people had set to suit her own bias. sadly i think she left cos she was fed up with the Tory majority here but then i think that reflects more on her than the site.
No chance, Mike. This leader hasn’t got the media skills to pull this off. It would come across loud and clear as an attempt to throw the media of the scent of his fear.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
173 I suspect that the Tory posters here are representative of the rank and file, which is much to the right of the leadership.
i see the Telegraph has fulfilled its promise of stories of other MEPs acting like robber barons.
“Labour MEP Michael Cashman paid boyfriend ‘£8,000 a month from expenses’”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2101900/Labour-MEP-Michael-Cashman-paid-boyfriend-andpound8%2C000-a-month-from-expenses.html
I agree with that even in these highly unlikely circumstances, Labour probably won’t be saved. However it might just be a bit uncomfortable for Cameron as the public wonder whether this very ambitious man with a severely disabled child has his priorities right. He might be viewed a little differently and that’s the one thing that could count against them. But the whole discussion seems a little ridiculous.
Also, why would Brown expose his family AFTER deciding to quit?
184 how many nannies at 1997-8 prices could you buy for that?
183. As said before, people tend to troll and overplay things!
People regularly say i am a Tory and i am not even a member, because they banned me - there loss!
I have noticed though that the site swings too far away from public opinion as it swings from Pro-Brown or even Anti - Cameron to Anti - Brown or Pro - Cameron. Somethings like expsenses don’t really register on the greater scheme of things. People need to losen up abit - Politicalbetting.com is hardly the political equivalent of the battle of Britain!
183. yep, may well be true. The rank and file membership (i.e. << 1% of the population) may well be to the right of the leadership, but Con GE voters are probably to the left of it on average. So this is still an imbalance, especially when they are so vociferous.
I don’t think the other parties have such a gulf in viewpoint between the membership and the voters they are trying to entice, although that is another debate I guess.
184 The Mail goes into more detail - Mr Cottingham runs his own PR company in addition to working for Mr Cashman (I prefer the Telegraph’s approach - why does the Mail have to headline Gay Lover rather than a civil partner? - it is a rag isn’t it)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025371/EastEnders-MEP-pays-gay-lover-pound-30-000-secretary.html
Perhaps more worrying for Labour & Lib Dems is Guido’s sentence:
“Incidentally, Guido has been busy gathering evidence of LibDem and Labour MEPs using European Parliament expense funds in a systematic way to fund their party machines.”
187 - “they banned me”
What for if you don’t mind me asking?
173 a valid point - and from a Tory activist.
I am often struck by the fact that those who get most hot under the collar on here are not actually active within the party.
And THEY think WE are weird!
Brown needs to be seen to turn a corner to survive and propser as PM and that requires a high risk strategy.
Mike’s post may be one in terms of Brown going but 42 days allows an opportunity for a corner to be turned on an issue where there is public support.
Scenario.
Brown loses 42 days vote.
Brown resigns as party leader but stays as Prime Minister to force a Labour leadership contest over the issue of confidence on 42 days.
His Cabinet challengers are caught as they would have voted for 42 days and look opportunistic if they resign from the Cabinet and campaign against him.
Cue weeks of Gordon campaigning on 42 days against a backbencher who is against. An issue where he is on the side of the public.
Odds on that? I would say pretty big as the risk is reminding people of major’s gamble. And it probably won’t happen but his options are rather narrow at the moment to get some traction on an issue where he has public support.
This is the final nail in NuLabour’s coffin and Gord’s days are well and truly numbered.
If Gord had any conscience about these statistics he would tender his resignation without delay
The next opinion poll should have NuLabour trailing in a distant third!!!!!
More children living in poverty
The government is committed to eradicating child poverty by 2020
The number of children living in poverty has risen for a second year, a government report says.
The government called the rise in poverty levels “disappointing”. The increase may threaten its target of halving child poverty by 2010.
The number of children living in poverty rose by 100,000 in 2006-2007 to 2.9 million before housing costs.
Pensioner poverty increased for the first time since 1998, rising by 300,000 to a total of 2.5 million.
The number of poor children and pensioners rose by a greater degree once costs such as rent and mortgages were taken into account.
“This is a disgrace. We are watching more and more pensioners drop further below the poverty line,” said Mervyn Kohler of Help The Aged.
Kate Green, the head of the Child Poverty Action Group, said the government should spend at least an extra £3bn a year on benefits and tax credits to meet its promises on child poverty.
188. read a little bit of Labourhome and you realise that there are some serious lefties there whose views don’t connect with the mainstream electorate, just as there are some serious right wing loons on ConHome who are about as in touch with reality as Amy Winehouse
185. It would have no reflection on Cameron at all, why would it?
Brown clearly cannot cope, delegate, run things, express emotions, compete in elections, tell the truth even about not calling elections or the real reason for the recent mini-budget i.e. 10p tax.
Cameron on the other hand has shown he can cope under pressure despite the fact his child is not well. Why on earth would a parent with an unwell child seem not fit for office? - barmy idea! If your child is not well, are you expected just to give up? Life goes on i am afraid.
G, look at the trend in the very graph you linked. There is a clear downward trend beyond the bumps and troughs linked to individual events. The only way things are going to get better for Labour is for them to give the electorate a fresh reason to vote for them, and a new leader alone won’t do that. Limiting asylum seekers and clamping down on gypsy camps were supported by majorities of the public too, but they cast the Tories as the nasty party. Likewise ID cards and 42 days might be individually popular, but they cast the impression of Labour as the authoritarian, controlling party. By contrast, a lot of the stuff Cameron has come up with hasn’t been that popular, but it recreated the Conservatives as a green, progressive party (whether you agree with that perception or not). A new Labour leader would have to reimagine the party, and simply using New Labour policies and arguments all over again won’t give the public the freshness they are seeking.
Brits won’t elect a new Labour leader to power purely because they are new and call an election. Labour are in deep shit, and need a total reversal of policy and approach. They have people within their ranks capable of delivering that, but as to whether they stand a cat in hell’s chance of securing the leadership in a party increasingly given over to corruption is hard to know.
It’s less than 1 in 10, but it still could happen.
Des Browne has released some good news today. A new award that recognises families of those who have lost Service Personnel on operations or as a result of terrorist action whilst on duty is being created.
192 - He wouldn’t be able to limit the issue to 42 days and in any event public support for that is, I suspect, broad but shallow. People’s default response is, “well, if it helps the fight against terrorism then fair enough…” but note the conditional “if” - it isn’t an issue that occupies most people’s minds.
183 You suspect wrong. The more right wing elements tend to be older wherever they are found [a big generalisation but past discusions here tend to support it].
They tend to vote Tory come what may. Right now they would vote for any Tory such is their dislike of Labour taking us back to ‘the bad old days’ as far as they are concerned. These people know we have a huge budget deficit and have been banging on about it for years. They are now saying ‘I told you so’ and that deficit is not going anywhere fast. After ‘over spending again’ as they see it, they will vote to keep Labour out quite literally to their dying day.
190. Making my displeasure known of certain prectices at the highest possible level! Not letting it go even after several years, despite an acknoldgement of the reppellent activities in a moral and human context of some people within the Tory party who should not have been there and should have been sacked.
Interesting debate on here and some excellent responses.
I’ve come to the view that how politicians deal with defeat is as important as how they deal with victory. John Major must have known he would lose and lose big in 1997. He could have walked away but didn’t before the GE. Perhaps he thought that the electorate would punish the Tory party by punishing him.
It may be that Brown knows he will lose in 2010 but that he has to let the electorate vent its anger at Labour by having him there as a figure to vote against (unlike Blair).
How cathartic all of this is remains to be seen.
200 - Um, isn’t that what the poster at 183 was saying? Posters here are generally either in that group or supportive of it and that group is to the right of the leadership?
Looks like it is game over for Brown:
Fuel protests and Strikes to start according to BBC and Sky TV - not on website yet.
Govt asking people not to panic buy or words to that affect.
56. Here, here Peter!
On a personal level, may I say I’ve been quite upset by your prolonged absences from the site recently?
I’ve always had a soft-spot for you! It’s a real shame you’re not around much anymore
173, 183. Not all of us are extremist right-wingers.
195. Martin - There Gordon would be with his young family including a sick child and he sacrifices is own career for them. A minority of people (and I think this is what Mike is getting at) would compare the situation to Cameron, who despite similar family situation, has not allowed anything to get in the way of his ambition. Possibly unfair but it is perception that ultimately counts.
201 Your tenacity is well known. Everyone who has ever visited this site knows that Nick Clegg reminds you of Neil Kinnock.
207. I see, don’t think it would resinate though. Brown has his own disability though, Cameron does not. That is the only thing that impresses me about Brown - he still got where he wanted to be: PM, though i doubt he would have liked the situation he currently has found himself in. Despite the fact of his early injury and blindness in one eye - good man!
Maybe this tenancity and ruthless persuit of power indicates one thing - he is a battler and he has been written off as never being able to succeed Blair. Never underestimate this bloke! He may be uncharismatic, crap comunicater, crap PM, crap strategist but in Peter Mandelsons words “a fighter and not a quiter!” I doubt he would go on his volition.
208.
208. You might say that i could not possibly comment!
In response to various postings about the right wing elements of the Tory party and how mainstream they are.
It is interesting that, in spite of the claims of those who oppose them, the views of espoused by those on the right of the Tory party (as opposed to the real right of the BNP etc) are actually becoming more mainstream by the day. Certainly the big ideas that have previously been viewed as minority views such as partial or total detachment from the EU, a reduction in the size of the government, English only votes, reduced taxation even if it means reducing some services and strict enforced immigration controls, are all now becoming majority views amongst the public.
At one time to mention these things in the mainstream of the Conservative party would have met with torrents of criticism about how out of touch with the electorate the Right were and how they were risking possibility of future Tory victory. Now it seems undeniable that many if not all of these views are not only mainstream but are being claimed by significant majorities in polling.
149 Roger. I’ve done you the great service of factoring in your invariably “interesting” betting forecasts in the SOAMES weighting of my ARSE. They are few higher honours !!
157 Test. No no …. after “snipergate” Hillary refocused and finished the primary season very strongly, but too late. It certainly wasn’t terminal to her chances.
194. I’m sure you’re right that these people exist, but they seem to be able to keep themselves to themselves a little better. The Con party’s right flank seems to be at its most vociferous on “politically neutral” websites like this one, which can be a real turn-off to the neutral/swing voter I must say.
I could see several rays of light if I were GB:
Oil prices are likely to fall in the medium term (altho’ they will likley go much higher first) - so some respite there.
Hopefully world harvests may get better so food prices stop rising as fast.
Eventually troops come back from Iraq.
The Conservatives are likely to do something stooopid.
David Cameron may fall ill and be replaced by a loser …. like?
Anything can happen in two years and probably will.
I would not want the job in such difficult times but I cannot see GB quitting . To do so would be to admit his whole life’s work is wasted.
‘I doubt he would go on his won volition’.
One of the reasons I find this whole scenario a bit fanciful. Slow news day?
204. How do the fuel protesters afford the fuel for their convoys?
To gladden seanT’s heart (if he is awake and sober at this hour)
“The ComRes survey of 1,010 UK voters finds that 64% of UK voters believe that the UK should hold a referendum and 26% think Parliament should decide.
33% say that they would vote to accept the Treaty if given the opportunity. 40% say that they would reject it. 27% don’t know.”
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/
205 - !!!!Pet peeve alert!!!!
You mean ‘hear,hear’ not ‘here, here’…..
—This post sponsored by Pedants ‘R’ Us Inc.—
212. I disagree, many of the policies you suggest have only become mainstream because they became moderated:
EU detachment once the xenophobic, British tubthumping aspect was removed.
A reduction in government size, but only as long as it’s not a slash-and-burn technique - tax cuts can not be promised in advance as it depends on the fiscal and economic environment.
Tougher immigration controls when the issue becomes deracialised and when immigrant communities are discussed with respect.
212. the only one of those that I have seen gaining any traction in “the real world” is stricter controls on immigration. I don’t think that is necessarily something to be pleased about.
Golly, with all the bleating on here its like One Man and his Dog in quadrophonic.
Lefties: dry your tears, hoist your gussets, and come out fighting like men. Either that or bog off to that tiny site Labourhomefortheretarded.
The trouble is, right now the Tories are nearly on 50% in the polls, and Labour are down on 25%. Therefore you would expect a very sizeable preponderance of Tories on here, anyway.
Moreove, given that the richer and more educated the person, the more likely they are to be Tory (or at least rightwing), a generally smart and erudite site like this is gonna attract an even greater preponderance of Tories than exists in the population as a whole.
A rightwing bias on pb.com is, consequently, almost inevitable - in the present circumstances.
There is a further problem, too.
Labour are now ideologically bankrupt. Morally defunct. So if lefties come on here to make points, they face a fundamental problem - i.e. what points are they gonna make?
What can they say? -
- We believe in helping the poor, whoops no we don’t what about 10p tax?
- We believe in democracy and devolving power, whoops no we don’t what about the EU referendum betrayal?
- We believe in international peace, ah, no, hold on, we illegally invaded Iraq and killed half a million
- We believe in redistributing wealth and… oh… I’ve just remembered inheritance tax
- We believe in freedom and liberty and.. sh1te, no we don’t what about ID cards and 42 days and religious hatred laws
- We believe in helping the working class… no we don’t we allowed mass clandestine unnannounced immigration which has destroyed unskilled wages and national cohesion
- OK we believe in erm… erm… what do we believe in again?
That’s the central problem. Labour stands for literally nothing, or at least nothing remotely coherent.
Therefore when lefties come on here all they are able to do is make sniping little partisan points against the Tories, because that’s all can do. Witness the ludicrous nannygate: when that emerged, suddenly we saw Roger and Gabble appearing above the parapet, having a pathetic potshot at the most trivial scandal since John Major’s Vesttuckedinnderpantgate.
Until lefties regain a sense of what they believe, and what they want in society, and how their party should go about doing it (and how they cleanse themselves of the terrible sins of 1997-2010) they are gonna get walked all over on sites like this, and crying about it like a girlguide doesn’t really help.
Especially when we remember how much they were gloating just a year ago.
As for Innocent Abroad, of course it is a shame when posters leave. I hope he reconsiders. The site might indeed benefit from a little more moderation, or perhaps giving Martin Day some valerian pastilles.
But in my experience posters often announce dramatic departures… and then they tend to come back.
218. In other words, only 25% of respondents want to reject the treaty. 75% are either happy with the status quo, want to vote to support the treaty, or don’t know.
96
‘I think that Hillary will emerge from all the smoke and mirrors as a strong contender’
How could Obama campaign with Hillary on a ‘change’ platform?
Change as in back to the 90’s with Hillary & Bill?
221
So you have missed (for example) the ICM poll a couple of days ago showing that with regard to the EU, a total of 67% either want just a trade relationship (41%) or complete withdrawal (26%) and that if the EU wopuld not allow a renegotiation for a loser relationship than 57% favour total withdrawal?
Just in case you hadn’t seen it the report from Channel 4 is here:
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/britons+want+looser+ties+with+eu/2277337
221. Yes, those pesky voters simply refuse to accept what’s good for them, don’t they?
223. Ummm… no. 40% want to reject the treaty. And only 33% want to accept it.
225. How does that go against my point?
220
so you mean once people realised that the caricatures that the left were trying to use to portray the advocates of these policies weren’t true?
The majority of the Tory party has not moved away from its view that the EU is bad for the UK overall, nor that taxes should be lower and the state much smaller. All that has happened is that people have finally seen that they were right about these things and have started to ignore the rantings of the left ho claim all manner of catastrophe if anyone should even consider any of these positions.
On topic.
1. Cons will win an overall majority at the next GE if Brown remains leader.
2. A change of leader soon gives Labour a chance to turn things around.
3. For all the arguments that the public would not tolerate another unelected leader, I think they would be more intolerant of Labour indulging in a leadership election at a time of great economic uncertainty when stability and strong leadership are called for.
4. A new leader would need time to seek to make a favourable impression on the electorate. So calling an immediate or prompt General Election defeats the purpose.
5. Any change of leadership beyond this year will not help. It will be too close to the GE and will be recognised as a desperate and cynical electoral ploy.
So, easy really. Brown is persuaded to step down this year. Straw steps in immediately as a safe pair of hands, admits to a whole raft of mistakes made by the Brown government, seeks to learn from and address those mistakes, reintroduces genuine collegiate cabinet government, gives ministers the confidence and permission to articulate their own policy areas to the media, possibly brings back some of the more experienced ex-ministers now residing on the backbenches….
Job done. Only one problem. Straw says that a further change of leader would require a General Election. Aaaarggh!! Why did you have to say that Jack. Maybe he could revise that opinion?
228
Sorry Soctrates, my first answer concerning the EU was not directed at you as I hadn’t read your posting then. It was in response to Ed’s posting at 221.
My repsonse to your comments is at 229
23. If that is seriously what you believe (and I doubt even you are that simple) then what’s the problem: JUST GIVE US OUR F***ING REFERENDUM.
Eh?
You must surely be confident the Federalists will win - cause “75% of the people don’t reject the Treaty”.
227. you mean 40% of the 64% who even want to bother having a vote, i.e. a quarter.
229. I’m a conservative who supports all of the policies you mention. But while the left did their best to stereotype advocates of such views, the right certainly didn’t help themselves in the way they made the argument. It was only with the election of Cameron the Conservatives stopped pigeon-holing themselves.
223
er no Ed, you obviously don’t know how to read these polls.
200 No I don’t think it is what he was saying.
Are people on here who have nothing to do with the party ‘the rank and file]?
Or are the members rank and file?
In terms of the membership, active and otherwise it has changed. New people have arrived. Even among the pre Cameron membership some of the one nation Tory elements were very much there but dormant and have now been given a voice. [There are quite afew of us on this site!] Some others like Sean Fear[?] I believe have undergone an accomodation a shift towards Cameron.
The combination which has led to a change in balance.
The idea that there is a dislocation between the leadership and the membership is a left wing wet dream. There are a mix of views, no doubt and it is significant, but no more than in most parties and less than in some!
As for the rest they are voters. Some on here like elsewhere are life long Tories. Some voted for Labour in 1997 and have come back. Some are new. But much the same theory applies. Some will identify more. Some less. Every vote is a compromise and they all carry the same weight.
If (a big if still IMO) the Irish vote No on Thursday would Gordon Brown continue with ratification as John Major did after Denmark voted No to Maastricht? If not then the Constitution/Lisbon is dead. If he does continue with ratification then it will be back and the negotiations to get a form that can be presented back to the Irish will dominate much of the time Gordon has left.
200 Very true that type don`t like Cameron, they are quite racist in private between friends,anti european,homophobic, agreed with the IRAQ war initialy,
think anyone who votes Labour and has any wealth at all is a hypocite,think Cameron is just saying all this Liberal/Green shite to get elected, but thats ok as he will revert to thatcherism once in power.
However they agree with 42 days in fact agreed with Blair regarding 90 days, but Cameron knows they have no where to go, and they vote which is another benefit for a good impersonater of Blair.
Just imagine that you’ve been overexposed to strong sunshine for several hours and in a woozy condition you tap out the most ridiculous nonsense on the computer and than press Submit.
235. I certainly don’t know how to read them quite like you do, no.
I am just looking at the headline numbers.
36% don’t want a referendum, i.e. are happy for the treaty to go through.
Of those that do want one, we have
22% want to rubberstamp the treaty
25% want to vote against it
17% don’t know
238. Most right wingers I know are vehemently against extending detention without charge.
We prefer deportation or execution
.
212 My own take is that those views have always been mainstream among the public (and will surely become more so during a recession). However, they have been masked by the good economic times most people have enjoyed till recently. Yes, they don’t like unlimited immigration, tax rises, Brussels, or political correctness, but when real wages are rising, property prices are going up, and inflation’s low, they’ll just grumble and won’t get that angry with the government. That’s why William Hague didn’t get very far in 2001. Some Conservative modernisers then made the mistake of belieiving that the public were much more left wing than they really are.
But now that the good economic times are over, these issues come back with a vengeance to hurt Labour, on top of the ill feeling that people have about the economy.
223 ed that is in line with this morning’s Nickolodian tune which says that it doesn’t matter that the Tories are massively ahead in voting intention as more people want a Labour government than a Tory one.
But if people will not get off their sofa’s to exercise their democratic vote then they are not part of the political equation.
So it may be comforting to view things in such a way but it is meaningless, because if they can’t bother to vote they are unlikely to take part in the political process in any other way.
This poll on Lisbon is simple in political terms. If there were a referendum as promised the vote would most likely be ‘no’.
29. Best wishes to Innocent Abroad.
Don’t know whether anyone has seen this new Betfair market.
When will Innocent Abroad next post on PB.com?
Today 1.4
Tomorrow 1.8
After tomorrow but before midnight on Sunday 1.6
Next week 1.9
June 23-June 30th 08 3.2
July-Sept 08 1.7
Oct 08-Dec 08 2.2
2009 onwards 1.6
Not much liquidity at the moment but possibly a bit of value July-September 08 ?
233
No because that wasn’t the way the question was phrased.
The poll asked two separate questions.
1. Do you want a referendum (answer 64%)
New question to all (not just those who said they want a referendum)
2. If there were a referendum, how would you vote (answer 40% reject, 33% accept, 27% don’t know)
It comes o something when the only way the Europhiles can actually make any point at all is by misrepresenting even the most basic of evidence.
Interesting to see what Lib Dems make of this :
http://www.libdemvoice.org/beating-labour-and-the-diversity-agenda-2831.html
224 - Although I have a little sympathy for that, I don’t really think Hillary on the ticket would blow a “change” campaign out of the water.
Firstly, “change” in one sense means a change from the current administration which arguably McCain doesn’t deliver (as although he is seen as a “maverick” his voting record is, argue Democrats, closely aligned to Bush on some key issues). Clinton does not damage that argument.
It does make the “change” as in change from Washington business as usual more difficult (as Clinton is the ultimate insider) and Hillary supported the war. But that comes to the second point which is that Clinton would be going for VP and let’s not overstate the VP’s role in the campaign or thereafter. Americans know very well that the VP is not co-President. It will be Obama’s (or McCain’s) name on the door with all they represent. VP choices will bring some people along to the party (and drive some away) but it is quite a small issue.
The left wing is alive and kicking across the pond.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/10/AR2008061000405.html
240 I don’t know how you’re coming to that conclusion. 40% of those surveyed are opposed to the treaty. Not, 40% of the 64% who want a referendum. Or in other words, 55% of those surveyed who have a view would vote No, as opposed to 45% who would vote Yes.
245. that was not apparent from the snippet I read, sorry about that.
My point was not a pro-treaty one. For the record I am in the vast majority on this issue - couldn’t care less.
However the 36% who don’t want a referendum must surely be counted as supportive to the treaty, as there is absolutely no chance of the treaty being rejected by the UK without a referendum (it could be derailed elsewhere of course).
There are always several ways to interpret a survey like that and you are allowing a bias on the subject matter to creep in when choosing one.
247. James. I cannot see how Obama can choose Hillary as his VP candidate; someone who clearly wants him to lose.
243 All polls pick up far more people who vaguely identify with Labour than people who actually go out and vote Labour. Of the 44%, probably about half would actually vote Labour.
News from Henley ( ref Three Line Whip ) the Miss Great Britain Party are fielding TWO candidates one blonde and one brunette .
242. I think most swing voters don’t see themselves in either right-wing or left-wing terms. They increasingly want people in office who see and appreciate the arguments on both sides of an issue, and then seek a solution that does its best to find the optimal balance.
This is why people like Cameron and Obama have become so successful. There was a Spectator Q&A with Cameron a while back where he was asked if the Tories should argue the Laffer curve more, and DC said flat out he didn’t think there could be Laffer curve effects when we were already down to a 40% top rate - and although he wanted to cut taxes, he felt he had to make sure the budget was balanced.
If you look at Blair’s time as PM, it’s similarly true. When he was all about combining a dynamic economy with strong investment in public services, he was well liked. When he became about defeating militant Islam, no matter the cost in blood, money, civil liberties etc he quickly lost favour.
250 The 36% will include those who never bother to vote. What you’re doing is like adding don’t knows/won’t votes to the Labour score in a poll on the ground that they’re basically happy with the government, otherwise they’d want to vote against it.
250, so the Lib Dems supported the treaty when they abstained on voting on it?
The case is clear. Anyone who thinks manifestos should be honoured, whether EU-phile or EU-sceptic, must be in favour of a referendum. I have no doubt if the country were generally in line with the spineless EU-phile politicians then we would have had the referendum already.
222 seanT “Moreove, given that the richer and more educated the person, the more likely they are to be Tory (or at least rightwing), a generally smart and erudite site like this is gonna attract an even greater preponderance of Tories than exists in the population as a whole.”
Richer maybe but more educated not.
257, hehehe. Given the recent IQ discussions, perhaps Mike could put up an IQ test for us all to take:p
255 The 64% will also include those who never bother to vote .
See from reports that turnout in the Donegal Islands (who voted yesterday) was only just over a third. Inishboffin (22%), Gola (29%) and Arranmore (35%) were poor but Tory Island (we have our own island?) nearly reached 50% which I hope means the No voters came out in quantity (would be a let down if Tory Is voted Yes wouldn’t it).
Highest turnout was on Inishfree at 71% but as that was 5 out of 7 voters it’s a poor show really, why didn’t the other two vote, easy targets for GOTV.
http://www.independent.ie/national-news/lisbon-treaty/turnout-low-as-the-islanders-go-to-polls-1403850.html
94,103. Mike. I agree with footsoldier that putting the name of the poster at the top rather than the bottom of the post would be an excellent idea. This idea has been suggested before.
In addition posters could, if they wished, highlight their posting identity/intention. Peter the Punter and Punter probably wouldn’t need to do this as there is already a clue in their choice of blogging name.
257. It’s understandable that the ‘educated’ (2:2 sociology) poor might vote for the parties of envy. They must feel their lives have been a dreadful waste.
256. But manifestos don’t have to be honoured if you LOSE the election, do they? The voters have rejected it.
This was Mrs. T’s doctrine when explaining why the 1979 Tory manifesto was so different from the 1974 one.
251 - I just don’t agree she wants him to lose. If she is on the ticket and loses, it pretty much ruins her chance in 2012 - why go for a proven loser to put up against an incumbant McCain? Would make no sense - Democrats would go for somebody like Warner. So if she is on the ticket, her best chance is winning then waiting until 2016 when she would be pretty old but younger than McCain today and quite possibly still fighting fit and ready to go.
There are plenty of arguments against Clinton as VP nominee - brings Bill on board, doesn’t look credible to the public given the fight they have witnessed, lack of chemistry, pressure to give her a lot of power. But her willing defeat on the ticket isn’t one of them.
On the topic: I think it would have to rely on a lot of things going exactly right for Labour to pull it off. I reckon “go long and give Cameron as much chance as possible to lose the election” is their best bet. It had a fifty percent success rate for John Major, after all.
For IA - farewell and we’ll miss you. Hopefully you may reconsider in time.
Augustus Carp at 67 - cool! Got to buy a copy of the Times now (and thank you Peter Ridell, if you’re reading)
Morus at 128 - unfortunately that “andy c” wasn’t me - in 2004 I first posted s simply “Andy” until another andy and then “andy c” turned up, so I went to my full name. Although if Schweitzer gets it, I’d have loved the credit for it… .
262. It’s not only poor people that take sociology and other joke degrees.
263 Not an excuse for the Liberal Democrats who didn’t write a manifesto expecting to win and whose supporters didn’t expect a Lib Dem Government but rather it was so voters would know how supporting the Lib Dems would matter in regards of what the Lib Dems would do in supporting or opposing Government policies.
259
Of more interest to me is the poll showing tat 57% of people would favour total withdrawal from the EU if we were not able to renegotiate our relationship with them.
Now that is a number that I think will grow over the next couple of years as people see how hollow any idea of renegotiation really is.
**** NEW THREAD **** NEW THREAD **** NEW THREAD **** NEW THREAD
Will seanT go up in flames at the National Liberal Club PB BBQ ??
No party has a monopoly on intelligence or academic acheivement. Stupid argument. There are clever right wingers and left wingers. We have a PM with a doctorate.
262 - If Jon is who I think he is, he is almost certainly the mst well educated person on this site so your comment is a bit ludicrous to those in the know.
On the general topic of the balance of the site, I suspect if Cameron is elected and runs into trouble in mid-term (as well he might) the political balance of the site may look very different. It isn’t half so much fun being on the defensive as coming on here armed with smileys, self-righteous indignation and half-arsed “analysis” to condemn the powers that be.
270. Just goes to show that some people are too clever by half.
263, if your party is in the position to pass or deny a government proposal which you expressly campaigned on and included in your manifesto then you are honour bound to keep to your promise.
I’m not expecting the Lib Dems to try and enact their tax policies: they can’t. But they could’ve allowed more Labour MPs the chance of delivering a defeat to the anti-democratic passage of the Lisbon Treaty through the Commons.
***NEW CONTINUATION THREAD***
PoliticalBetting.com Barbeque at the National Liberal Club
Cheers
Morus
Do I have an entirely different perspective to 90%+ of the honorable posters on this site??
I don’t know.
But I have an entirely different thesis about Labours predicament than the “Labours policies were ok, they were innately more popular, noone liked the Tories, Brown screwed up over the election and discgate and that was it” - consensus.
I believe New-Labour were elected;
(a) Because of Blair
(b) To improve the public services
(c) Out of sheer disgust at the arrogance, sleaze and crassness of aspects of the Tory government.
I think cynicism and distrust of the New-Labour government set in very early, around 2000-2001, and this was demonstrated by a much lower turnout at the 2001 GE.
However, the electorate reasoned the job on public services might need more time, and they still couldn’t abide the Tories, and they thought Blair was a credible PM - so they stuck with it.
Howver, from 2003 onwards, New-Labour lost a sizeable block of the already sceptical liberal middle-classes over Iraq. In addition, increased resentment from the Southern/Midlands working classes started to sink in over rising Crime/Immigration. This started to seriously fracture the coalition of support on which NewLabour was based. In local elections, there was evidence of a sizeable move to the Conservatives from 2003 onwards, which although didn’t translate at a general election, was a serious sign of latent voter sentiment - they didn’t really trust Labour to deliver, or offer value.
However, the swing-voters in the key-marginals in 2005 were still prepared to back Blair - mainly because Howard was never a credible alternative for government (indeed, it would have been interesting to hypothesise what would have occurred had Cameron become leader in 2003 - rather than Howard - but that is another matter) and Blair was starting to *lead* on reform against his party, rather than chasing headlines. And some voters responded well to this.
However, after 2005 and the election of Cameron. Things rapidly fell apart. Labour lost heavily in London in 2006, lost Scotland, Wales was only narrowly held and starting losing the support of key swing-voters.
Since Brown has been elected, Labour have further lost the London Mayoralty, a key by-election and reduced to a very low base of council seats.
What do I conclude?
(1) New-Labours popular support has been declining since at least 2000/2001 - and that the coalition which brought it to power was always very fragile
(2) New-Labours already unenthusiatic coalition started seriously fracturing in the 2001-2005 parliament - losing liberal middle-class and southern/middle working class voters; with a different Tory leader, could easily have lost their majority in 2005
(3) New-Labour have been on the policy defensive since around 2003/2004 and, increasingly, losing the battle of ideas/issues
(4) New-Labours 2005 victory was a rejection of the alternative PM - Howard - and the key-swing voters stuck with Blair in the absence of anything different.
The election of Brown, in this context, is purely an interruption to a long-term decline of New-Labour. Brown was never popular or well-liked even before his “bounce” and his - very brief - sizeable poll leads was an aberration.
Why do I think there will be no Labour recovery?
(1) Since Harold Wilsons defeat in 1970, Labour have FAILED to poll 40% or more in EVERY single election apart from 1997 and 2001.
(2) Much of Labours vote in 1997, 2001 and 2005 was a vote for Blair, not for Labour.
(3) The evidence strongly points towards a continuing fracture of not only Labours support amongst swing-voters, but also amongst CORE voters in Scotland (to the SNP), Wales (to anyone but Labour), Southern Working Classes (to the Tories) and many others that stay at home.
(4) The electorate has continued to move significantly to the right on welfare, social security and tax - DURING Labours tenure
It is difficult to draw any other conclusion that Labour is haemorrhaging support just about everywhere and, as it has chosen to stand for nothing, will fall for nothing.
I will bet on a Tory landslide.
256. Well they could have chosen to make the vote quite hairy for the government, but didn’t. This is tacit acceptance really, with stated reservations.
I wouldn’t be so hasty as to say that everyone wants a referendum just because it was in the party manifestos. The voters were not given a credible choice to vote against this.
For the record I wouldn’t trust these sort of polls as far as I could throw them anyway - there have been a couple recently that basically contradict each other.
264. James. On reflection I think you are right. If she is on the ticket she will want him to win. Off the ticket she surely wants him to lose.
I thought Gordon didn’t take his family to his “beloved Cape Cod” preferring to go there with his “mates”. They probably go fishing or summat.
by voxpop June 10th, 2008 at 9:25 am
‘fishing’? Shurely you meant ‘fisting’
You are wasted here, Smithson - you should go over the other side of the pond, and be a script-writer for the West Wing..
Still, truth is always stranger than fiction…
167 - there are different shades of yellow - Plaid (uesed to be green) and SNP would confuse things a bit…. & dont even start on Ulster colours…..