Is Brown’s plight much worse than John Major’s?
July 21st, 2008
Do these 95-97 ICM polls undermine the swing-back theorists?
Anybody trying to predict whether Brown’s Labour has any chance at all of turning things round should look at the above table very carefully. For it shows all the Guardian’s ICM surveys for the period from 21 months before the May 1 1997 general election which, of course, brought Blair’s Labour to power in a landslide.
Just compare the polling figures from the August of 1995 with what happened at the election itself - CON 31.4%: LAB 44.4%: LD 17.2%. The Tory 31% share is what they were polling at this precise point in the electoral cycle and what they averaged from the firm in all the Guardian’s surveys in the period until polling day.
The latest YouGov, ComRes and ICM polls are all showing a Labour deficit of 20% or more which, as can be seen, is worse than Major’s Tory party was experiencing at the same point in the electoral cycle
Major, unlike Gordon, was a proven election fighter after his successful battle for the party leadership after Maggie Thatcher resigned in 1990 and his victory against all the odds in April 1992. He also, at this stage in 1995, had better personal ratings than Brown is seeing.
I reproduce the chart to refute the much repeated claims of the swing-back theorists - that polling history shows that a government’s position gets better the closer we get to an election
Ah - I can hear many saying - wasn’t Major polling much worse than this? Well he was but only in polls that used methodologies that have long since been discredited and are no longer used
With the exception of ICM the pollsters from the period have been ditched by the papers that commissioned them or in the case of MORI, made radical changes in the way they collect, compute and present their findings.
The only pollster that you can make any historical comparison with is ICM - the firm that pioneered the changes in polling methodology that were required to deal with the systemic problem from the period magnified in the polling debacle of the 1992 general election.
This all, of course, affects the climate in which betting takes place. Almost all the current polls suggest that David Cameron is heading for a three figure majority - yet the balance of money being invested on the spread markets on the number of commons seats is pointing to one of thirty to forty. That’s why I’m now a buyer of Tory seats and feel quite at ease about the risk I am taking.
MessageSpace Advertising
test
The downfall of the Major government came in one swell foop in the autumn of 1992 when the interest rates went to 15% and the pound crashed out of the ERM. People made up their minds there and then that the Conservative Party had lost its competence for doing the economy.
The downfall of Gordon Brown is not connected to one big single event but is a long drawn-out dribble of decadent dithering and a festering froth of fiscally incompetent incontinence. Depending on what happens to the economy and David Cameron, there may even be a swing-back. I, for one, do not rule out the possibilty of another Labour majority.
Lots of people are speculating about a close result in Glasgow East, and a majority of XYZ or 1,XYZ. But what are the prospects of John Mason getting a landslide by-election victory like David Alton and Simon Hughes did? What were the opinion polls like in their by-elections five days before polling?
JohnLoony’s swing back to Labour @ 2 will not be helped by the votes of the unemployed given the workfare measures due to be announced shortly.
John Major suffered from having a Charismatic waiting in the wings, in the shape of Tony Blair. Labour went from offering the country Kinnock, to offering it a media-savvy “Tory-lite” with a social conscience, one who pledged not to raise taxes or do much to risk Ken Clarke’s growing economy. Major was always going to find it impossible to get much of a swing-back in those circumstances, even if he was essentially a decent chap who delivered a decent economy. However Major played his hand, Blair was going to make his Grand Slam.
I wouldn’t say Cameron was a Charismatic, but for a great many voters he does now embody the notion that “he has to be be better than this shower”. If Labour sticks with Gordon, why should there rationally be any swing-back? Imagine if in the middle of the night, someone has towed your car away and replaced it. You had no say in the replacement car you got. And after you have driven the replacement for just a few miles, you know you have got a lemon. You will never get comfortable with it because it is just bloody uncomfortable. People in the street gawp at its horribleness. But you have got it for three years, without any prospect of changing it. The maintenance costs start to soar. It kangaroo lurches around. Then it won’t start, spending its days refusing to come out of its garage.
And imagine that you live opposite an Alfa Romeo showroom. Pretty shiny cars - with a previously wretched reputation for build quality and reliability. But after three years of having your imposed car, you are faced with a stark choice: sign up for five more years of the crap car, or go for a shiny sporty Alfa Romeo, which the nice man in the showroom swears has addressed the quality issues. No contest.
But what you really wanted was not a shiny - but risky - Alfa coupe. You wanted a car that was going to be economical to run, maybe green, maybe a hybrid. Something thawas going to get you around without any fuss or bother - something that would just let you get on with your life
5 Oops, posted early by mistake. But you get the gist - Brown is a lemon, Cameron is an Alfa Romeo, whilst most folks want a hybrid people carrier. If Labour can make a hybrid people carrier and get it in the showroom by 2010, there will be some swing-back. Assuming anybody can still afford to buy a car.
5 — but John Smith had also enjoyed big leads since 1992 so we should not overstate the impact of Blair’s undoubted charisma.
What did for Major was the economy combined with attacks on Conservative supporters. What will do for Brown is the economy aggravated by attacks on Labour supporters.
2. There may indeed be another Labour majority government. Probably some time around 2030. I really can’t see how they can do it next time though. Things have gone so far that even if there were some disasterous blunder by David Cameron (and he hasn’t looked too much like making one yet - even the policy review difficulties last Summer came about due to other Conservatives all putting conflicting ideas forward concurrently, though that was Cameron’s timetable), the Conservatives are now probably so far ahead that they could change leader and still retain a comfortable lead.
Brown’s plight is worse than Majors for at least three reasons. Firstly, he does not have the personal likeability that Major had - and consequently the personal ratings; secondly, the economy is going to hit the buffers in the two years before the election, whereas the Conservatives went into the election with steady growth; thirdly, Major had other big hitters in the cabinet (Clarke, Heseltine, Rifkind, Portillo, Howard), and while some were better liked by the public than others, all stand up well against the rest of the cabinet that Brown has appointed.
JohnLoony is right about the sudden end of Major’s chances, versus the slow death of Brown. Events could lead to a reversal.
However, it could work the opposite way. Sudden reversals, can be ….. suddenly reversed. But the drip drip of dithering incompetence is far more difficult to change. Gordon is just being himself. What would it take for the public to give him the benefit of the doubt again?
Lets be honest, if he were to heal the sick, the nurses would go on strike.
‘Benefit reforms ‘to be piloted in Glasgow’’
“Sources at the Public and Commercial Services union told The Herald that they had been told by the Department of Work and Pensions that pilot areas for trying out the new policies had been identified, but an announcement of this had been shelved because of the by-election.
“We understand the changes will be pushed through as part of the City Strategy scheme of which Glasgow is already a part, but that this cannot be announced this week,” said one official.”
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2403921.0.Benefit_reforms_to_be_piloted_in_Glasgow.php
From the Guardian:-
The enormous presence of the SNP in the constituency is testament to party members’ belief that it may just be theirs for the grabbing. The party has the biggest of the campaign headquarters, renting out three large portable building on the grounds of Sherwood garage, which sells performance cars.
‘Performance Cars!’ If things are so bad there, makes you wonder who buys ‘em!
It was thinking along Mr Smithson’s lines that persuaded me to open a Sporting Index account and buy Conservative. Labour appears to have lost the permission to be heard. Even if Gordon Brown is replaced (and I think that more likely than some others do), I can’t see much chance of a big Labour recovery - when you drop anything, second bounces are never as high as the first.
I read Marquee Mark’s posts 5 and 6 with interest. I can see the logic, though I don’t agree, and I suspect that thinking like that was behind the “New Labour, New Danger” poster in 1996. That didn’t do the Tories any good though.
10 It seems to be treated as a universal truth that these benefit reform proposals will hurt Labour. I’m not so sure. The places where I’ve heard people rail loudest against “scroungers” are usually urban areas. The people who really get incensed are not so much the middle-class as the low-paid working class who are slogging their guts out for little more than (and they often believe it is for less) than those on benefits. Perhaps these folks are now more likely to vote to support “something being done”?
Betfair:
‘Glasgow East - SNP Percentage Vote’
30.0 Percent or Fewer 1.05
30.01 - 40.0 Percent 1.07
40.01 Percent or Greater 1.1
Best prices - Glasgow East turnout
Ladbrokes:
35-39.99% 3.5
40-44.99% 4.0
30-34.99% 4.5
45-49.99% 6.0
25-29.99% 8.0
50-54.99% 17.0
20-24.99% 21.0
55% + 21.0
0-19.99% 51.0
Betfair:
30.01 - 40.0 Percent 1.44
30.0 Percent or Fewer 2.02
40.01 - 50.0 Percent 2.32
50.01 Percent Or Greater 6.2
12 “I suspect that thinking like that was behind the “New Labour, New Danger” poster in 1996. That didn’t do the Tories any good though.”
The trouble was, people weren’t listening to an anti-Labour message. For one thing, it was in total contrast to the media narrative at the time, which was entirely focussed on Tory sleaze. People had invested their hopes for a better quality of government in that nice Mr. Blair. Similarly, people today aren’t listening to the “Tories still eat babies!!” message which seems to be all that Labour has in its playbook. It doesn’t fit with the voters’ mindset. They think things can’t be any worse than they are under the current Clown Collective.
Best prices - Glasgow East winner
Bookies:
Lab 4/11 (Ladbrokes and Sporting Bet)
SNP 15/8 (Ladbrokes and Sporting Bet)
LD 100/1 (Ladbrokes)
Con 500/1 (Sporting Bet)
(No sign of Paddy Power or William Hill prices yet today.)
Betfair:
Lab 1.31
SNP 3.15
LD 400
Con 420
Any Other 750
13 re workfare. Regardless of who cares, probably the only people who will change their votes will be the unemployed (the vast majority of whom are not scroungers) who will be harrassed. And I suspect most of them normally support Labour.
The government is shooting itself in the foot.
Off topic, I note an account of the Glasgow East by-election in the Times today which accords with some of Easterross’s comments, particularly about there being two separate battles:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4368951.ece
History is written by the victors, or more truthfully, written for the victors by the sycophants who want to prove their own undying loyalty. Certainly John Major lost the 1997 GE when he ignored those who warned him about the ERM in the summer of 1992. He was still on a high and so were his team. Labour was in disarray. Unlike Martin Day I don’t believe Kinnock was crap, certainly not as crap as Nick Clegg.
John Smith was a brilliant leader for Labour, quite the best they have ever had. But, he died. Surprisingly his interim Ms Beckett also led an astonishingly good Euro election campaign in 1994. So, the truth is that Labour DID NOT need Anthony Blair to win. In fact, he contributed little to the 1997 victory. The one service Blair did for Labour was prevent Gordon becoming leader in 1994. But the service he failed to provide was dumping Gordon in 2001.
On Glasgow East, from this distance it is difficult to see anything other than an SNP victory by a country mile. To compare this by-election with previous GEs is pointless. None of the parties did anything in the past, hence the low turnout. My own party is doing a bit of under the radar work to try to ensure a comfortable third but consciously doing nothing to stop non-voters and weak Lab swinging to SNP. My friend in Cowley Street says they are doing the same.
Effects on the party leaderships. Alex enhanced, obviously. If the Tories are fourth then the Beeb will be calling for Dave’s head on Friday morning, again obviously. Gordon and Nick, as Stanislav the Polish Plumber would say elsewhere, “Shrugs”.
20 “the truth is that Labour DID NOT need Anthony Blair to win. In fact, he contributed little to the 1997 victory.”
Contentious words there! The issue is - if not Blair, then who? Blair won over swathes of middle England who might otherwise have sat it out and not voted for a Beckett or a Brown. Blair was a reassuring presence, brought up in a Tory household, who instinctively knew their concerns more than someone brought up in the Valleys or the Scottish coalfields. I think Blair personally won Labour fifty plus seats in 1997.
Labour MPs need to pay more attention to the table at the top of this thread than anything else. Even Glasgow East.
The polls are worse than the Tories faced back in 1995. If they stick with Gordon then they will lose. The smart move is to ditch Gordon, just as it was to have had an early election last year. Labour MPs will not do the smart thing. But I have a bet at 10 to 1 just in case sanity prevails.
“Yesterday, Sir Sean Connery, a long-standing SNP supporter, lent his backing to the party’s candidate, local councillor John Mason. Sir Sean said: “Labour have taken the people of Glasgow for granted for too long. The last year has shown the difference when people have a strong Government that is standing up for them in Scotland, in London and Europe. More than ever, we need that kind of strong SNP voice in Westminster and that is why I hope the people of Glasgow East send John Mason as their new representative.””
http://www.scottishdailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/53343/Labour-hopes-of-by-election-win-are-on-the-slide-
I thought Rod’s analysis had shown there was a swing-back at the 1997 general election?
In any case the analysis is based on the by-election swings and not the swings implied by the opinion polls. I assume, therefore, that the by-elections were worse for the Tories in 1992-1997 than the opinion polls.
Arguably there’s a case for calculating the swingback based on by-election swings since the non-election debacle, because that’s the direction the average by-election swing is heading, not the results previously.
I don’t think Rod has shown that the average swing in by-elections two years from a general election is a useful predictor, only over the whole of a Parliament.
re 24. Rod was wrong if he was saying that there was a swing-back in the polls as the above chart shows.
The main problem with the by-election analysis is that there is no way that that these can be said to be representative. They happen where they happen. Thus Glasgow East will tell us nothing about the electoral prospects of the Conservatives in relation to Labour.
In most by elections the turnouts are much lower than at general elections and there is scope for a lot of distortion to take place if you just look at percentages. It’s the same reason why local council by elections don’t really help us in assessing the big picture.
#23
The man from Bermuda, he say’ yes…! Surely this sad old man should get over the fact that Roger Moore and Daniel Craig are better Bonds then he ever was…?
“It doesn’t fit with the voters’ mindset.”
I assume you mean it doesn’t fit with the media mindset, MM? In fact I have heard this discussion both on TV, and in the press. Notably one occasion when Matthew Parris acknowledged that stories which did not match this paradigm had been downplayed. Incidentally, I liked antifrank’s concept of “Labour losing the permission to be heard”.
21 In 1997 Blair might have won the Morecambe and Lunedales and the Lancasters but Labour didn’t need them. Also Labour won more seats in 1997 than they would have done under Gordon … a lot more, certainly more than 50. But, did they win more than they would have done under John Smith. I doubt it. Smith would have been Major’s equal in gravitas. Brown’s tragedy is not that he is crap but that no-one had the guts to tell him he is crap. A greater man would have seen for himself that he was not a leader.
I don’t think Labour will do as badly in terms of seats in 2010 as the Conservatives did in 1997 but I would be surprised if they did as well in terms of votes cast. A change of leader probably won’t happen because there is no perceived benefit. With the LDs on both the last occasions there was a perceived benefit … wrong as it turned out. Although in both cases there might have been an element of personal malice as well of course.
26
Sir Sean Connery, a man who’ll do anything for Scotland except actually live there.
It is also tribute to Tories on here and other blogs, who went on endlessly about such issues as “Gordon’s Great Pension Robbery” etc, who have finally got their message - and analysis - out there in the mainstream media, where the likes of MM here are even able to claim that any possible positive view of GB “doesn’t fit with the voters’ mindset”.
29, he’s a true patriot, isn’t he?:p
Here is a bit of trivia for you: the character Connery played in The Rock was a former SAS captain called… John Mason!
28 Is n’t it the case that there are more seats that will never be anything other than Labour, even if they do very badly in an election (as in 1983),than there are the Tory equivalent?
The Major polling data set against a backdrop of an improving economic situation 1995 -1997. Gordon Browns figures may plunge further as the economic situation falls further as we approach 2010, the current economic woes are also falling harshly on the hard working families that Mr Brown has tried to cultivate.
27 - I like it too and while I’d love to claim it was original, I’m afraid it’s just something I borrowed:
http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en&safe=off&q=%22permission+to+be+heard%22+%22david+cameron%22&meta=
26
Oooo no!!!
Whatever I might think of Connery’s politics (and it is not favourable) he a million times better as Bond than Moore. Craig is better I agree but prior to him Connery was the only Bond worth watching.
Chris Stephens’ blog (SNP PPC for Glasgow South West):
“A ruthless voter id strategy appears to be paying dividends, not just for this campaign but for the future. Today I was out for the second time this week in Craigend and on the evidence of knocking in supporters letters, the canvassing has been remarkably consistent.”
http://thegiantstepforward.blogspot.com/2008/07/tale-of-two-campaigns.html
33. Like Blaunau Gwent? (I know that is effectively Independent Labour, but still …)
The mood here (mostly from people who haven’t been there) seems to be that Glasgow East is close but that the SNP are running the better campaign and “deserve” to win. However the Betfair odds are relentlessly moving in Labours favour, now:
Labour 1.37 —1.46
SNP 3.2—–3.4
And Ladbrokes say it is the highest turnover for a byelection they can remember (Labour 4/11, SNP 15/8)
Is the money right?
Are any more genuine opinion polls expected?
Every since I watched my father being slated by an SNP candidate because my mother was English I have always had extra sensitivity regarding some of the little Scotlanders who support the SNP. In my mind Sean Connery is not Scottish as he does not live or pay taxes here. However many SNP people seem to think he has more rights than the hard working East Europeans who support our economy.
On a different point I wonder whether the Labour posters which have Curran bold type, East End medium type and Labour small type are a sign of the times. Curran against the SNP. Each party trying to portray themselves as the underdog. Is this the way that Labour will fight the next general election I wonder.
Anyone seen Ave it since the Tory candidate for Watford resigned over the police investigation into dirty tricks? Are they by any chance related?
CRIME REPORT:
TO GABBLE who trumpted falling crime the other day, some scum bags have just broken into my car overnight and stolen a well concealed satelight navigation device. So much for your crime falling!
I have on average a crime commited upon me either directly or indirectly every year or two. I do not believe the bullshit crime statistics. What makes this even more annoying is i am out of work and only held onto a car i cannot really afford for the *next job*. I have a high excess so this crime will cost me directly - I have to have the passanger window replaced.
On a lighter note; a crime within a crime they stole the Sat Nav but left my music CD’s! Obviously someone with a sense of humour!
On thread - yes Gordon Brown is in a worse position than Major - the economy was declining before Major was re-elected and recovery started more than two years before the election. Brown is heading now into his final full parliamentary session with economy heading downwards and as yet no coherent recovery plan. Major at least had Clarke come in with a no nonsense sort it out approach.
Cameron made a good point yesterday that the Government hadn’t yet finalised this years budget. Another u-turn in the Telegraph.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/07/21/bcntax121.xml
40. Labour as ‘underdog’ - doesn’t quite resonate, somehow.
Brown is worse off than Major as the economy is going down the pan bigstyle and he was the man at the helm for last 10yrs.
Tory landslide in 2010.
You wouldn’t want to be accused of anything under a Conservative administration would you. It seems that David Davis resigned in vain!
This comment by “Jude” on Con Home re the Watford PCC:
“Let’s drop all this innocent until proven guilty stuff. In a case like this, a resignation is as good as an admission.
I’m starting to think that there is something seriously wrong with our [Conservative] screening procedures. Anybody can make a mistake, but these sleazebags are now being flushed out at the rate of one a week.
It’s only a matter of time before that pattern starts to take its toll.”
41 I was wondering that! Has Sean Fear given his view on the case? He reported that he was a great friend of Ian Oakley back in November 2006
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2006/11/17/sean-fears-friday-slot/
42 - Probably Nick Clegg in cahoots with Neil Kinnock with Mark Senior as look-out. Serves you right.
42 they must be very stupid to steal a sat nav with the price of these under £100, the pub cash price is probably under £20.
One of the benefits of low prices from China is that burglary is less rewarding.
John Major’s government were clearly not up to the job, but Labour have destroyed our very faith in politics as well as destroying this country. The damage that Blair and Brown have done massively outweighs anything that Major managed to do in charge.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
48.
By the way the Police lady who came round said with regard to the Sat Nav that the brand I have attaches to the windscreen and leaves a ring: this is what gave away the fact i had Sat Nav! Just in case anybody else has this type be on your guard!
46 - I wouldn’t make the assumption that everything that posts on ConHome is a Conservative.
11, 18: FWIW, my opinion is that people who are regularly fiddling the system are exactly the sort of people who very rarely vote, or even go on the electoral register. People who aren’t fiddling the system are very annoyed when they meet people who are, and delighted to hear something is being done about them. What would upset them is if people who aren’t fiddling are made to jump through numerous hoops to prove it, and that’s the rub, of course - either you check everyone in detail or you don’t. I think there’s something to be said for a flexible approach on this - be tougher on people who’ve been caught making dodgy claims before than people with a good record.
But whatever the details, it’s wild stereotyping to say that Glasgow is full of scroungers who will now vote SNP to object to more scrutiny.
Why are SatNavs not fitted with a pin or password so that they are useless if stolen?
49 Perhaps they were lost.
51. Yep - common knowledge - you need to wipe down your windscreen - or leave a note saying sat nav removed - and leave the glovebox visibly open.
49. Yes your right there! I only used mine about 3 times -I doubt i will buy another one (Wouldn’t need it at the moment).
46 probably a Labour troll, never believe half the stuff you read in comments.
That said the Waford situartion is bad, but no screening process would have uncovered such likely behavoiur
54. And now the SatNav has been invented, what’s the point of orienteering?
52 Sorry James for repetition, I was trying out a response and the pnone rang…
55. Nevermind hopefully the police will find them!
58 - I would be wary of inferring guilt by accusation. Has the guy been charged with anything?
“Scotland has “won the natural lottery for a second time”, First Minister Alex Salmond will tell the 10th World Renewable Energy Congress in Glasgow today.
He will tell the conference: “Scotland has vast potential in renewable energy, unrivalled in Europe. We have around a quarter of both Europe’s tidal and offshore wind capacity, and 10% of its potential in wave power. We have the potential to generate more than 60 Gigawatts from renewables… “”
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2403925.0.Salmond_Scots_have_won_natural_lottery_for_power.php
Morning All,
1. the post of the year on this site was Casino Royales about the core Labour vote. many people including me assumed that the absolute bdrock was Michael Foots 201 seats and 28% of the vote. In fact given Labours move onto the centre ground it would probably be a bit higher. However there has never been a 3rd term Labour government before let alone an attempt at a 4th. The bedrock has never been tested in these conditions. I had always bought into the swing back argument. Not that Labour would win again but that some recovery was invitable.
But why ? when did a PM last have these negatives? the economy is going to get much much worse. House prices have only started falling as have the job losses.
It seems to me that no one realy knows what the core labour vote is because its never been put under this sort of strain before. Its why I have slowly swung towards the apocalyptic.
64. I wonder what one might have thought the Liberal ‘core vote’ was in the 1920s?
BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of a new ARSE (BUTT) poll of polls that indicates :
McCain 45.5% .. Obama 50% .. Others 4.5%
The PISSED Jack W Index with added SOAMES BIG MAC weighting shows :
McCain 121 .. Obama 285 .. Toss Up 132
Changes Since Last Projection - Arizona moves from Likely McCain to Safe McCain. South Dakota moves from Likely McCain to Toss Up McCain.
Eliminate Toss Up States - 270 required for an Electoral College majority.
McCain 187 .. Obama 351.
Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America
……………………
Sources :
WIND ….. Whimsical Independent News Division.
JNN ………..Jacobite News Network.
ARSE …… Anonymous Random Selection of Electors.
BUTT …… British Underpinned Tracking Totals
PISSED … Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
SOAMES …System Of Amending Measured Election Scores
BIG MAC ..Ballot Indicies Grid Manifesting America’s Choice
58 “no screening process would have uncovered such likely behavoiur”
Or unlikely behaviour, even. Whoever was behind it, these events in Watford do rather smack of somebody having some sort of breakdown. Perhaps it was from shock of suffering male pattern baldness?
64 Yellow Sub Good point. What is the bottom for Labour’s polling? 19%, 18%?
We just do not know because there is more bad news to come over the next 12+ months. Why do we think that 23% or 24% is the bottom of the range for Labour? Is it just because it is worse than Michael Foot’s time?
53. Nick, I’ve just seen those elected to the NEC in the MP/MEPs section. I wondered how many stood for those 3 places…has Janet Anderson stood again? there was someone else too?
68. Labour’s bedrock working class vote must surely have shrunk somewhat in the 25 years since Michael Foot’s ’suicide note’. And it’s doubtful whether the massive recent immigration will make up for that, except perhaps in a few particular areas.
What will turnout be like in the middle of the Glasgow Fair?
“A stroll around Easterhouse was decidely quiet… The streets were empty…
One large stretch of park boasted a total of three people; four if count the gentleman parked in his car next to a fly-tipping hotspot; six if you count the two young girls who suddenly appeared quietly on a park bench. They were the sum total of all the teenage youths witnessed in two hours of walking around the area.”
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Glasgow-East-blog-Sunday-in.4306908.jp
Remember, Labour chose to rush it and hold this by election in the middle of the main Glasgow holiday. Why?
68. TC
Labour’s core vote in Scotland must be about 25%. I base that upon their performance at the last Euros. Mind you, records are there to be broken…
Roll on Euros 2009!
On thread. I agree with Mike that the spread markets are underplaying the Brown ooze disaster. However, I’ll repeat what I’ve said a few times before, that it is better value to sell Labour at the moment than to buy Tories.
My reasoning: There will be around 80 others (48 LD, 11 SNP, 3 other Others and 18 from NIreland). That leaves 570 to be split between Labour and Tories, giving a midpoint of 285.
Current SpreadFair prices are: Buy Cons @ 350, sell Labs @ 232.
So that suggests Con is 65 points above the midline, Lab is only 53 points below… ergo Lab is a better buy.
Of course, all this depends on where you set the midline!
65 - ISTR Sean Fear posting some interesting stats about the 1920s elections here a few years back. The difficulty for the Liberals back then was, of course, the split, which meant that there was a decline in funds and candidates. This meant that not all seats were contested at all elections and voters “got used” to choosing Tories or Labour, so in some cases when a Liberal candidate stood after none at a previous election,the damage had already been done.
I can’t see this happening to Labour - at present.
“Whatever I might think of Connery’s politics (and it is not favourable) he’s a million times better as Bond than Moore.”
If anything you underestimate Connery’s advantage. Saying Moore was a better Bond than Connery is like saying Colin Baker was a better Doctor than Tom.
67 Being a bit careful as to what to say as charges have not yet been brought , but posts on vote-2007 site at the time of the Nascot deferred byelection in June 2006 gave plenty of hints as to who was the likely culprit of the offences against the LibDems especially as some of them had previously occurred in Hillingdon .
74 - I think this is the thread: http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2005/12/22/george-osborne-now-favourite-to-be-next-chancellor/
The Tories have a history of embarassment with their candidates in Watford.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2199227.ece
I see that he was a Hillingdon man too.
72 if it is 25% in Scotland then it is probably under 20% in England.
73. ‘ There will be around 80 others (48 LD, 11 SNP, 3 other Others and 18 from NIreland). That leaves 570 to be split between Labour and Tories, giving a midpoint of 285.’
You are missing 5 from Plaid, and SNP will probably be nearer 16 - but I think that LDs will be down to around 36 - so overall your midpoint is about right
LONDON (Thomson Financial) - The average asking price of a UK home fell at a record rate for the month of July, as new sellers cut prices to lure buyers put off by rising mortgage costs and tight lending conditions, according to property website Rightmove.
House prices fell by 4,345 pounds or 1.8 percent in July from June, the largest fall in July since the survey began. The previous record for July was set three years ago when asking prices dropped 1 percent.
This has brought annual house prices down by 2.0 percent, the first time there has been a year-on-year fall since records began in Aug. 2002.
80. Yes, it was a breakdown for illustration only. Personally, I’ve got LDs on 38, SNP on 15, Plaid on 5 and odds and sods on 4. You pays your money and you makes your choice. However, I think we agree that 80 is a pretty solid number for Others.
“… apart from the SNP, political opponents were privately conceding that Labour will probably win the crucial by-election.
A Conservative campaign insider said: “It’s a classic damage limitation exercise by Labour. Alex Salmond has played into their hands by raising expectations of an SNP victory.
But the biggest move in the odds has been towards the Conservatives, who came fourth in 2005 and had just 7 per cent support in the most recent opinion poll. Their odds have been slashed from 100/1 to 33/1.”
Err… not on Sporting Bet! There the Tories are 500/1
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Glasgow-East-byelection-Labour-plays.4306814.jp
Remember the Government’s £35 billion ‘Building Schools for the Future’ scheme (BSF), which Brown says will result in UK schools being the “best equipped in the world for 21st-century learning”? Well, according to the Government’s architecture watchdog, some eight-out-of-every-ten new school designs are “mediocre” or “not yet good enough”. Best in the world? Certainly doesn’t sound like it.
I never believed the idea of swingback, just a theory designed to fit a partisan viewpoint.
66 - Jack, are you following the US closely at the moment? McCain is making some appalling errors, his ideas on the economy are a basket case, as exemplified by Gramm and by giving conflicting views on the *same* day. I used to think he was amiable and better than Bush but god help the US if he gets in power. Add to that the usual GOP suspects on the right, the neo-cons, the christian right and so on and you worry that he’s too weak to hold them back and a Bush 3rd term really is what we’d get.
This is why the right wing press are trying to say the election is ‘about Obama’, because they are worried about the spotlight falling on their own candidate.
McCain’s getting too much of an easy ride at the moment, maybe the Dems are holding their fire. The slavering Obama haters have been out in force for a while though, so they need to push back sooner or later. They must be getting desperate that everything they’ve tried, from the ridiculous idea that he’s being treated as a messiah to painting him as ultra-liberal (I wish) has failed to give McCain a lead.
The clincher is Iraq, Maliki clearly agrees with Obama, Centcom release a statement saying that he doesn’t (note - not Maliki, no specifics and from US command!) because that shoots McCain’s supposed usp out of the water. Without him being able to say that he knows what’s best for Iraq his foreign policy platform crumbles.
‘Sarkozy on EU mission to Dublin’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7516254.stm
81. Yeah, but asking prices are £10,000 more than they were in December according to their chart. This is a tricky market to bet on.
@79:
So, it’s looking quite possible that Labour could soon be the third party in England, at a national as well as local level?
85. re centcom That’s not quite true. The cbs article is a good guess at what’s going on.
‘With Obama due to visit Iraq soon, al-Maliki’s spokesman Ali al-Dabbagh was quick to discredit the report, saying the prime minister’s remarks were “not conveyed accurately.”‘
http://www.qurl.com/tld38
Telegraph cartoon hits the nail:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/graphics/2008/07/21/ixd21.jpg
86 - Sarkozy would best serve the EU by staying the hell away from Ireland, if any one man could single-handedly derail hopes of Ireland ever ratifying Lisbon it is him. Sorry Chris but your man is painfully bad at being President. He is a great advertisement for the Lisbon solution of a permanent president though!
89 - The New York Times have the audio and have made a direct Arabic translation.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/21/us/politics/21obama.html?_r=1&hp=&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&adxnnlx=1216635271-X+heCs+aXGhayOel4ojThg
“But the interpreter for the interview works for Mr. Maliki’s office, not the magazine. And in an audio recording of Mr. Maliki’s interview that Der Spiegel provided to The New York Times, Mr. Maliki seemed to state a clear affinity for Mr. Obama’s position, bringing it up on his own in an answer to a general question on troop presence.
The following is a direct translation from the Arabic of Mr. Maliki’s comments by The Times: “Obama’s remarks that — if he takes office — in 16 months he would withdraw the forces, we think that this period could increase or decrease a little, but that it could be suitable to end the presence of the forces in Iraq.”
He continued: “Who wants to exit in a quicker way has a better assessment of the situation in Iraq.””
Now McCain and supporters are desperate for that not to be so but it is clear that Maliki pretty much backs Obama’s position. The CBS article says as much too, when you compare Maliki’s wish with McCain’s ‘hundred years’ or whatever policy he has this week, then it’s clear that he would find Obama’s proposals much more to their liking.
Rather sarcastic but perceptive article from Freedland in the Grauniad -
“If Europeans really want to help Barack Obama next week they should repress their enthusiasm for him – and stay home. Ensure those crowds are thin and lethargic; maybe even offer the odd heckle, perhaps while brandishing a hostile placard. Let the travelling US press report that Obama is not so popular with foreigners after all: nothing will endear him more to the American public.”
To show enthusiasm for a visiting *American* politician? It’s rather sad that it invites sneering rather than pleasure that the world’s greatest power may take the rest of the world with it rather than order it around.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/20/barackobama.eu
I read with interest yellow submarine’s post about Labour’s bedrock.I live in one of those areas where they could stick a rosette on a donkey for Labour and expect to win.The ward parties have collapsed.The activists are not there.I still do not see a massive shift in allegiance (it is tribal)but they are not going to vote at all next time and it could,indeed, be worse than 1983 for them.
re 2 again this myth is being peddled.
The Tories had a poll lead on several occasions after September 1992 up until the Lamont budget in 1993. It was the raising of taxes to cope with the after effects of Black Wednesday which did for the Major government’s economic credibility.
93. The Guardian still seems to be smarting from the results of its ill-fated attempts to influence the 2004 election.
re 59 or the skill of being able to read a map.
95. Glad you picked that up. I think the Tories still recorded poll numbers in the upper 30’s for most of 1993. The crisis after crisis began to eat into the tory vote but the Tories still remained in the 30’s.
It was only 1994 and the death of John Smith combined with the election of Tony Blair that really sealed it for the Tories. This is when Labour started getting polling numbers equal or slightly better to the Tories now.
What is worse for Labour is the Tories have not changed their leader in 2008, which has created the catalyst for change. It is the government that has been seen to fail. In this sense it could well be worse for Labour than the Tories in the Mid - 1990’s as some of the lead Blair and Labour had was not in reality an accurate measure of public opinion. I am talking of the 60%! figures.
97 - Satnav? waste of money!
The Sun has a devastating attack on Browns record as chancellor.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/columnists/kavanagh/article1447377.ece
His record as chancellor was his only plus point - now that crutch is being kicked away he’s DOA.
99. It was for me! Only got it for my job - then two weeks later they let me go
I had a job where you had to goto 5-7 different addresses everyday in an area i was unfamiliar. I am unlickly to do that sort of business again so will not bother with another one(It was CIS - low value business for poor customers!).
I liked the female Police officer though! She had a nice B*tt and gave me a really nice wave goodbye after she had finished with my car!
re 99 - even at the price that the guy who nicked one from Martin will be flogging it at the pub this lunchtime
69: You’re ahead of me (as usual), Andrea - who won? I can’t remember who stood or even whom I voted for - it was a pretty low-key affair.
63: Stuart - you’ll find a post from me at the end of last night’s thread which might mildly surprise you.
96 - Probably the most hamfisted piece of activism from a UK paper in recent memory.
As a comparison to Jack’s figures here’s my updated EV prediction, I tend to the more positive end of GOP possibilities, hence the difference in our outcomes; for example recent polls in Florida have been mostly leads for Obama but demographics are not as favourable and that may change in the long run. Same with states such as Montana where Obama has been shown to be in the lead.
Updated EV prediction
Definite Obama - Massachusetts (12), Connecticut (7), Maine (4), Rhode Island (4), Vermont (3), New Hampshire (4), New York (31), New Jersey (15), Maryland (10), DC (3), Delaware (3), Pennsylvania (21), Illinois (21), Minnesota (10), Wisconsin (10), Iowa (7), California (55), Washington (11), Oregon (7), Hawaii (4) RUNNING TOTAL 242 Delegates
Probable Obama - Michigan (17)
RUNNING TOTAL 259 Delegates
Leaning Obama - New Mexico (5), Colorado (9), Ohio (20) RUNNING TOTAL 293 Delegates
Definite McCain - Georgia (15), South Carolina (8), Texas (34), Alabama (9), Louisiana (9), Mississippi (6), Tennessee (11), Kentucky (8), Arkansas (6), West Virginia (5), Oklahoma (7), Kansas (6), Nebraska (5), South Dakota (3), Arizona (10), Utah (5), Idaho (4), Wyoming (3) RUNNING TOTAL 154 Delegates
Probable McCain - Indiana (11) RUNNING TOTAL 165 Delegates
Leaning McCain - Florida (27), Missouri (11), North Carolina (15), Alaska (3), Montana (3), North Dakota (3) RUNNING TOTAL 227 Delegates
Too close to call - Virginia (13), Nevada (5)
MOVEMENT SINCE PREVIOUS STATE OF PLAY
TOWARDS MCCAIN
Ohio - Leaning Obama from probable Obama
Indiana – Probable McCain from too close to call
TOWARDS OBAMA
North Dakota – Leaning McCain from probable McCain
Obama – 293 EV (no change), McCain 227 EV (+11), Toss Up 18 EV (-11)
98. This also shows that the political worst for a governing party from an economic downturn can often lag the actual economic low-point. The economy was in theory well into ‘recovery mode’ by 1995 but the Tories’ ratings showed no sign of this. People didn’t feel better off, and in many cases were still nursing serious financial wounds.
The current downturn is just starting to bite. The low point could be a year away. This means there is almost no chance of Labour regaining any support from the economic situation before the next GE - indeed the danger is that they may well have considerably more support to lose. Mike’s call is right - the pricing of the spread markets looks too favourable to Labour.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7517101.stm
This article is being given somewhat undue prominence on the BBC news site. It is interesting to observe the witch hunt that there has been against this documentary whilst the ever more ludicrous claims we hear on a daily basis about the extent of climate changes go virtually unchallenged.
102 - exactly. Just leads to “deskilling”. I travelled in convoy with a colleague recently, who used Satnav, and I arrived a good 45 minutes beforehand (on a 3 hour journey).
107. Is there any betting on climate change e.g. ice cover? Given the number of AGW religious devotees still about, there ought to be some money to be taken from them for a while yet.
@102:
Presumably if it is Neil Kinnock that’s going around nicking Martin Day’s consumer electronics, it fits in with Labour’s repeated pattern of hawking knock-off goods to keep the Labour party semi-solvent. Ps, Ks, and now GPS.
110 - the Order of St George and St Patrick (Supporter)?
109: I can see one of those long-term William Hill markets on the subject - put down your money now, collect in 10,000 years if your forecast proves right…
108. I think your idea of a “convoy” might be a bit different to mine!
107, just saw that on Sky News, and then the BBC coverage.
Sky pointed out that it was found guilty of misleading a few chaps, but cleared of misleading the public.
The BBC banged on about a ‘fine line’ on the latter, with it being heavily implied that it was only because neither harm nor offence had been caused that they, in effect, got away with it.
106 I always had the feeling that Nulab were de facto Govt from the latter half of 1996 on, ie the Tories were de facto opposition, and so made a dead cat sort of political recovery (I believe the electorate generally did give full throated approval to Labour on 1.5.97) from mid 96 - mid 97. I must admit despite Ken Clarke’s perpetual ranting about how well his economy was going, I never gave that much credence for the apparent “dead cat bounce”.
1113 - I should have put it in “commas”. It was supposed to be a convoy, but at a key junction m’colleague followed her Satnav, whereas I used No 1 roadmap and intuition!
112, I thought the point about global warming was that it was an imminent threat to life, the universe and everything?
@107:
Are you surprised? The documentary failed to follow the GMW-Auntie official line on everyone’s favourite bit of pseudoscience-du-jour, AGW.
Of course they’re going to give it undue prominence.
108. The bloody thing i had made noise everytime the speed limit changed - even if you were well below it.
Maybe after the government announcement on benifits today this sort of economic crime will become rife? Drug addicts may just soley turn to crime, rather than seek help. Some will become reformed characters and seek help so i suppose it is swings and roundabouts.
The government seem to be doing a very strange set of measures at the moment. Some that appeal to core Labour voters such as giving £30M to a failing middle-eastern state yesterday and then butchering the status-quo here! Strange times we live in politically.
118, what does the A in AGW stand for?
103. Nick, Dennis Skinner, Michael Cashman and Dawn Butler got elected.
I read it on NEC member Peter Wheeler’s blog.
120. Alledged ?
119 - perhaps they should get it on prescription?
110.
120 - anthropogenic.
Holocaust Denial
HIV-causes-AIDS Denial
Manmade Global Warming Denial
I call ‘em the unholy 3.
@126:
Twat.
126. Who says global warming is all bad anyway ? Pass me another bottle of Vin de Pays du Orkney
If you were on the M1 Tabbers were you racing the signs -”Junction 21 13 miles 12 minutes” I think you can claim a prize if you do it in 10 minutes but, it is very bad for your fuel consumption!
126, you seem confused.
The Holocaust is a recorded historical event.
It has been scientifically proven that HIV leads to AIDS.
MM global warming theory has not been proven. Indeed, (even if true) it may be unprovable. How do you account for the warm period of the Middle Ages and Roman era? All those senators driving around in their 4×4s?
Climate always has and always will change. Man may influence it, but to liken those who disagree with what is becoming an orthodox theory sometimes aggressively defended to people who deny the Holocaust demeans your own position rather than mine.
85 ukpaul. Yes, I’ve been following developments closely between frequent forays to the great white telephone !!
I regard Obama’s foreign trip as a necessary hurdle, that so far he has managed well. Many “events dear boy, events” to flow under the bridge yet but Obama is clearly in the box seat at the moment.
123. Yes that is an option but if they are taking benifits away, surly that will include drug withdrawl theoropies. Problem with drug addicts is the fact they consume drug’s leads to a possibility that they are mentally ill and act in an irrational way. People with mental illness quite often do not except they are ill and think there behaviour normal.
There is much that needs reforming in society in relation to mental illness and it does impact upon the dispersment of Benifits.
You could be even more in denial: you could be a young-Earth Creationist.
Tony Wright (Cannock Chase MP) to stand down at next GE because of health fears. He is battling chronic leukaemia and kidney disease.
134. Sounds like he should stand down now. Obviously wouldn’t be allowed to tho.
“The Holocaust is a recorded historical event.”
There are people on this very board who don’t think so.
“It has been scientifically proven that HIV leads to AIDS.”
Tell that to Thabo Mbeki and his apologists.
“Climate always has and always will change.”
As was the case with the Iraq war, it’s like throwing petrol on a fire. Just because the fire was already burning doesn’t mean you can deny the petrol made it worse.
134. That’s a shame i thought he had recovered and it was in remission. I think he chaired a commitee did he not?
130 - They had sports cars, haven’t you seen Ben-Hur?
@133:
I’m sorry, BannedHorse, but you just equated questioning the pseudoscientific nature of AGW with being a Nazi sympathizer.
You lose any credibility you may have had with a grotesque and cheap shot. I know the left now do it frequently as a pattern of behaviour (using the word ‘denial’ is in and of itself meant to taint with implications of Nazihood). Just because others do it, doesn’t make it right, Mr Horse.
We’re not stupid, and unlikely to be cowed by such cheap tactics. AGW is unfalsifiable, and is therefore pseudoscience. You, as an AGW fanboy, are worthy as much of my consideration as Intelligent Design enthusiasts. Mind you, at least pastafarians have a sense of humour.
All of which leads me to wonder why the left seem so eager to use such foul, underhanded rhetorical means to shut down discussion of the non-scientific nature of their weapon of choice. Presumably, you don’t want your new Socialism-by-the-backdoor to exposed to the electorate for being as much of an idiotic scam as your last failed attempt to destroy capitalism, socialism-by-the-front-door.
107. This is the documentary made by the guy whose other films include one about how breast implants have medical benefits.
Yes, criticism of that is clearly a “witch hunt”.
131 further …. Obama in Iraq and has headed to Basra.
134. That’s sad. Seems one of the better Labour MP’s
Jack - what about your thoughts on Glasgow East? are your SNP links any good - sounds as if Lib Dems and Conservatives wont have much of a clue about what is happening.
127. It is this sort of post that is ruining this website.
139. So not one scientific academy or organisation in this field has realised this theory contradicts science?
136, you appear confused, again. I’m not disputing HIV-AIDS, becaise I’m not Thabo Mbeki. I’m also not a Holocaust denier.
All you’re attempting to do is to pretend that global warming (and man’s influence or lack thereof upon it) is somehow as concrete and established as the two things mentioned above.
It isn’t. And your claim that making more CO2 is somehow adding petrol to a fire contains no compelling reasoning or evidence whatsoever.
Explain to me why the present warming trend (although global temperatures fell last year) is different to any previous warming trend?
HuffPo reporting a “NY Times” piece that Hillary is being vetted for Obama’s Veep :
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/07/20/nytimes-clinton-is-being_n_113889.html