Has Luntz Part 2 saved the day for Gord?
September 20th, 2008-
Does his latest session merely add to the confusion?
As Mike has noted before, when Frank Luntz conducted focus groups on the Labour leadership back in September 2006, there was a complete lack of appetite for Gordon Brown.
The other much-noted result was the extent to which these findings dashed the hopes of Alan Johnson. The results were not just definitive - they were damning.
So what are we to make of last night Luntz performance for Newsnight, when he took 27 Labour-leaning voters and asked them to assess six rivals to Brown for the Labour leadership? Purnell, Balls, and David Miliband were summarily dismissed. Harriet Harman and Jack Straw failed to enthuse.
The one candidate who received enthusiastic, even unanimous, support was the Health Secretary Alan Johnson. The only reversal greater than this sudden groundswell of support for the former-postman was that a clear majority did not want their favourite candidate to replace Gordon Brown as Prime Minister.
-
Luntz is clear that focus groups “are not definitive”, but this complete reversal of the findings of the September 2006 session cannot be ignored. Are Luntz’s methods fundamentally indefensible, or can we mould these erratic responses into a coherent account of how left-leaning voters feel about the leadership of the Labour Party?
Looking at the LabourHome poll, featured on the frontpage of the Independent and attracting vicious responses from bloggers such as Ministry of Truth, it is clear that Johnson is actually held in very high regard amongst those sympathetic to the Party. The same poll, though, shows that although Brown comes near the bottom of the ratings, almost half want him to stay in role. If he were to be replaced, more would put David Miliband as their first choice than Johnson.
So we have two, non-scientific polls, asking whether Brown should go, and if so, who should replace him. The consensus seems to be that no-one particularly wants him in the job (as predicted in 2006) but then a majority are concerned that replacing him would make things even worse. They like Johnson, but don’t see him being an improvement on Brown.
The only way I can make any of this hold together is to suggest that Labour voters are largely resigned to almost-certain defeat at the next election, and thus cannot see the benefit in overthrowing the PM in the middle of economic catastrophe. Brown may be an unpopular leader, but his career has seen him effectively ruin any opposition to his leadership.
His path to Number 10 has seen rivals beaten, and the Cabinet staffed with people who cannot pose a significant challenge to his premiership. It reinforces my suspicion that, if there is to be a successful challenger before the next election, it might be a candidate from outwith the Cabinet. My small wager on John Reid is currently looking better than the money I have on Jack Straw, though it is becoming clearer to see why Brown surviving until at least 2009 is still odds-on.
Things are scarcely clearer for the other left-of-centre party. The consecutive polls showing apparently contradictory findings about the Lib Dems on 12% and 20% can, however, be explained by timing. As Mike has advised the vast bulk of the fieldwork for MORI took place before the Lib Dem conference. Most of the YouGov survey took place afterwards.
He says: “The Lib Dems always get a good crack of the whip from the broadcasters at conference time and this was why YouGov was so good. You really cannot get a full sense of what is happening from the polls at this time of year until all the conferences are over and further time has passed by. Let’s wait until the end of of October”.
Indeed, other than that the Tories are substantially ahead in the polls there are few straightforward answers at the moment, and I wonder if that can only re-enforce the status quo. Changes of leader requires a boldness, and a preparedness to take significant political risks. I’m not sure that this climate of uncertainty lends itself to rebellion so easily, especially when a successor is so difficult to discern. Maybe, just maybe, Brown is safe. For the moment.
Morus
UPDATE: John Rentoul is teasing us with promises of ‘unexpected’ results in a ComRes poll for tomorrow’s Independent on Sunday. There will likely be a Telegraph/ICM poll out tomorrow as well. As always, we’ll try and bring you the results first.
MessageSpace Advertising
Are Luntz’s methods fundamentally indefensible, or can we mould these erratic responses into a coherent account of how left-leaning voters feel about the leadership of the Labour Party?
Luntz’s focus group comprised many people who would be likely to vote Labour in a general election, or who would consider doing so. Such people are inherently insane, and Luntz’s methodology and results are therefore worthless.
Will Glenrothes be the new Grimsby? Will Labour hold on unexpectedly?
Or will it be the new Langbaurgh? Will Labour lose by only a narrow margin?
Or will it be the new Newbury? Will the SNP have a landslide?
Whatever happens in Glenrothes, I don’t think it will have much effect on the Gordon Brown question.
awstnpwtttanpwom
It’s a horrible acronym.
What does it stand for?
Morus,
I guess there are advantages to being six hours behind UK time; I’m the only one awake at your unGodly hour.
Brown saved?
It’s like being saved from being hacked to death by a bunch of great white sharks only to be allowed to die from asphixiation in a pile of human excrement.
Does it matter whether Brown goes now or later. The guy will not be Prime Minister after the next general election, so it isn’t really about the demise of Brown at all, is it?
This is all about a political project being allowed to die a natural death. Hildaism died after the sad old bitch was driven from power by Blondie and his pals. [Tory Party Tories - hate to be reminded of Hilda crying on the steps of No 10.] And now we are seeing the nasty little business of NuLabour being put to rest by the foul froth that constitute the leadership [?] of that awful plot, by Liars and Fools, to steal the Labour Party from working folk.
I hope that they sink, the dam-ned lot of them. However Britain is not going to wallow in Pretty-Boyism for ever. Cameron is a reaction to Thatcherism [within his party], as was the Liar [from without.]
So some new sludge will be dragged up; from within the Pretty Boy Party it might be a resurgance of Europhobia. From wihout it might be some form of economic populism, greenism - or rampant racism, who knows?
Whatever, Brown will remain a footnote in history. So lets spend a little more time on looking at post Pretty-Boyism; and from whence the next surfeit of political shocks [good for punting] will come.
Malcolm
4. Good God! You’re not Gildas reincarnated, are you?
I thought these people were supposed to be ‘floating voters’ until some of them started talking about Labour as ‘our party.’ Worthless exercise.
Alan Johnson interview in the Times is a good one - the man gets some nice digs in at Gordon while remaining just the right side of Cabinet loyalty, while indicating he is backing Miliband in longer term..
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4791039.ece
“I have never been a great Brown cheerleader but when I see Gordon at the centre of these events, dealing with this maelstrom, I think he is the best person at the moment.”
“Anyway, I think Gordon has a nice smile. He worked on it as well – he paid quite a lot of money for that smile.”
““If there are people briefing different ways from No 10, that needs to be tackled and Gordon needs to rein them in . . .”
Also clearly states that he expects Brown to go in the first term in the unlikely event of a Labour victory
“Gordon Brown has said that if elected he would serve for one term and when Gordon Brown has decided his one term is over or when he has decided to step down…”
4. “Hildaism” Ha ha ha ha ha! I’ve only just been reading a website about Hoxhaism!
You may be right about the next Cameron government (if there is one). When it comes to the temptations and arrogance of oligarchical bourgeois power, unrestrained by a properly balanced parliament, and with the continuation of the exclusion of the proletarian masses from everyday administration, the next Conservative government will not give two hoots about “liberty”, civil liberties or social spending. Excuses will be constructed to keep the authoritarian and repressive so-called “anti-terror” legislation, or even to extend it further to the realms of peaceful dissent; capitulation to the imperialistic EU will continue unabated; there will be salami-cutting of the welfare state, health care, cultural and social programmes; ID cards may even be resurrected. The hated and despotic war-criminal Brown will soon be gone, but the historic tyranny of the Tweedledum, Tweedledee and Tweedlethree Parties will continue until a proper people’s democracy can be created, which knows the proper meaning of independence.
Surley Luntz’s focus group is just one of many, Or cant Labour afford them any more? I am extremely sceptical about them, as it largely depends on what video clip one shows to the group….
As the conference approaches it’s becoming clear we could be in for a major surprise. Not since Lazarus has there been the potential for such a triumphant return from the dead than than the one Gordon could experience this week.
Extraordinarily this conference could be the making of him. There is a general understanding that our economic woes are not of his making and the sight of his troops rallying plus his unique austere style could at last put him in sync with the country in a way Cameron can only dream of.
…..And with the PR value of JK Rowling’s gift Labour look seriously undervalued.
Labour seats look like a pretty good buy at the moment
9
Just woken up from a dream Roger??. General understanding that our economic woes are not of his making. LOL
I love your optimism Roger. That post really made me smile.
Apologies for going O/T so early but the developing situation in the POTUS election campaign appears to be entering a potentially decisive stage.
Modesty again prevents me from disclosing the author of the following post at 12.05am on Thursday:
“After these latest polls, it will be interesting to see how this moves 538.com’s division of ECVs.
Currently they have it 258 Obama : 280 McCain - it’s possible to imagine a complete reversal if there is further evidence of Obama’s recovery.”
Who would have thought that barely two days later, 538.com’s prediction is now 303 Obama : 235 McCain?
Wow - some reversal! 538.com’s numbers are very close indeed to those of our very own Jack W and both have Obama way ahead and McCain way behind the ECV betting markets.
If both are indeed correct, then there may be some very rich pickings out there.
9
Roger
Jeff Randall doesnt seem to agree with you.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/09/19/ccjeff119.xml
12. Peter. While you are wrestling with your modesty, I guess you are also thanking your lucky stars that you are no longer looking over the precipice with your spread position on this market?
‘Labour denies MP running Glenrothes by-election bid has been sacked’
One party source said: “No 10 leaked the name of Siobhain McDonagh and sought to decapitate David Cairns. If they’re doing the same to Frank Roy - which is what it looks like - then it’s an unbelievably cack-handed thing to do.” He added: “Frank is beside himself. Why pick a fight with Frank?” Mr Roy is a close ally of John Reid, the former Home Secretary.
“The notion he has been sacked - how is that intended to help? With friends like these, the Prime Minister does not need enemies,” added the source.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2449817.0.Labour_denies_MP_running_Glenrothes_byelection_bid_has_been_sacked.php
Christ, that Rowling news *is* good news for Brown. Could he possibly hang on?? I’ll be watching Conference *very* closely. If he can persuade me, then I reckon that’s a pretty good marker.
Roger’s scenario is one possibility - let’s see!
Ther Labour Home poll was a straw poll (no pun intended) and we don’t normally give them much credence since the participants are self-selected. The same applies to anecdotal evidence, but FWIW my GC discussed the issue and unanimously voted to urge me not to support a change of leader (an appeal that fell on fertile ground, as you can imagine).
They did discuss who they’d like if Gordon were to step down - Alan J and Caroline Flint (as a ‘game-changing’ surprise) were both supported by several but the general view was that Brown retains the potential to revive support and a change would not be sensible. The predominant view was that it was much more important to restate our main objectives clearly, short- and long-term: we’ve been too busy fire-fighting (which includes the leadership speculation) to remind people what we’re for.
Interesting stuff Nick, can’t believe people would want Flint but there you go.
Looking forward to Conference, or slightly nervous?
15.
… senior sources decried the lack of what they have described as any meaningful campaign on the ground. One senior source complained: “There is no campaign in Glenrothes. No-one believes we can win.”
However, Scottish Labour HQ insists this is simply not true, that party workers are “extremely busy”.
15, 19, yawn.
I appreciate your knowledge of Scottish politics, but it would be nice to see some balanced news from you once in a while.
17
Nick, Everyone knows what Labour are for. We have had 11 yrs of it, and the electorate have had enough. Are you expecting Gordon’s “vision” to come to him this weekend
20 - Unlike you Charlie
I think Labour’s best hope at the moment is:-
a) Gordon shores up the core vote with a great speech and some excellent new policies (aka people like me who are currently completely disillusioned)
and b) there is a Lib Dem surge that steals some Tory voters
Might be able to scrape a hung parliament that way, you never know. It’s going to be a crucial 5 days.
6. Ted. In that article Johnson also says “The infighting will be reflected in the polls soon.” Well I don’t know if he’s looked recently but the polls aren’t looking too rosy at the moment.
One can only hope that Rowling included a magic wand in with the million quid.
It is ironic that the party, (the Conservatives) who are most closely allied with the City of London and the sort of people who are responsible, for the current financial mayhem, should be benefiting from it.
If the Labour Party had not been in awe of the, ‘Masters of the Universe’ and realised that Thatcher’s house was built on sand, they would not be in such a mess today.
Hopefully after the disaster of a Cameron government, a new party of the left will take the appropriate action, curbing the excesses of the City Spivs and returning the utilities to the public sector.
Not since AC has Labour squeezed as much value out of a celebrity endorsement as they have out of Rowling’s gift. We haven’t just heard about the gift but also that it’s a reward for Labour’s work on child poverty and because Cameron’s wants to penalize single mothers of which she is one.
But the main point for me is that they’ve got their PR department up and running again and not before time. It used to terrify it’s opponents.
25. The Rowling donation is huge news IMO, considering she’s basically a billionaire. If she’s investing a million quid, who’s to say she won’t ‘do an Ashcroft’ and start pumping money into constituencies? She’s clearly a die hard Labourite to be donating at this time.
Clever timing from whoever sorted all the PR out though
If she’d donated to the Tories I think it would have tainted my childhood and the entire Potter series!
Poor JK Rowling she has aligned herself to Jonah Brown. God knows what disasters are now going to fall upon her.
Addendum:- As i thought, the Rowling story now top story on BBC website
29 - That is Charlie and Roger, now JK is behind our supreme leader, there is no looking back for him.
Its all over for the Tories. A scottish fantasy author gives the labour party 1m pounds that isnt in any way linked to sleaze…rejoice, rejoice.
14 stjohn - you’re not wrong!
24 Perhaps Johnson expects Labour to fall below 20%, which surely would kick the Gordon Out campaign into real action?
Though truth is more likely that Johnson isn’t interested/ politically geeky enough to follow the polls in detail.
God, that Rowling bint takes the cake.
I have no idea of how much she makes after tax but, as someone who is self-employed, I do understand that the reason why accountants exist, and I pay for, is to minimise my tax liabilities. No doubt Nick Palmer has a similar view.
So why someone should criticise the Tories for trying to reduce the tax burden of the average PAYE employee takes the biscuit. [Mixed metaphors: sorry!] Poverty is not a function of government intervention; it is an outcome of how you choose to measure it. [Our poor are quite wealty in global terms.]
Add to this, the Midlands bint chooses to live in Scotland! More of my taxes spent to subsidise her life-choices. Ungrateful money-grabbing scribe…!
Brown’s toxic economic legacy includes a substantial boost for inflation from a deep drop in sterling this year, a substantial budget deficit which may or may not incluede state involvement in Northern Crock, and Notwork Rail, and the enron style accounting schemes of PFI. Add on the Nu Lab gold plated pensions for the core vote in the public sector, and its now wonder that the muppets polled by Luntz back the GUG.
The question for those MPs who peer bravely above the parapet, to view the smoke, and the carnage of battle, is this, do they want Gordon Brown to completely destroy the party if he stays on as leader, or do they want to bite the bullet and push the barsteward off the ramparts to save Labour as an electoral force for an future GE?
34. Fluffy Thoughts. I can’t find the mixed metaphor?
How the Daily Mash sees the, ‘Crisis.’
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/business/insane-greed-still-best-way-to-make-money%2c-say-experts-200809191268/
‘Labour’s Glenrothes by-election chief Frank Roy walks out’
Mr Roy’s move has fuelled the suspicions of Mr Brown’s allies that he faces a concerted coup attempt orchestrated by John Reid, the former Home Secretary.
Mr Roy is close to Mr Reid and worked closely in the Whips’ Office with Siobhan McDonagh, the junior whip sacked last week for requesting a Labour leadership contest, a call Mr Cairns supported.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/labour/2989669/Labours-Glenrothes-by-election-chief-Frank-Roy-walks-out.html
‘Shock as MP quits ‘no-hope’ poll fight’
Labour faced fresh humiliation last night after its by-election campaign manager walked off the job — claiming it was a no-hoper.
MP Frank Roy quit, telling pals the campaign in Glenrothes, Fife, is “shambolic”.
It is believed Mr Roy has criticised “half-hearted” efforts by the party to retain the seat.
One source said: “Glenrothes is like Custer’s Last Stand. It’s as if they have already given up and they are ready for another defeat.”
Private briefings by party spin doctors claim Mr Roy was DUMPED by Labour after protests by the party’s by-election candidate Lindsay Roy.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/labour_conference/article1714537.ece
38.
Too many Kings?
34.
“why someone should criticise the Tories for trying to reduce the tax burden of the average PAYE employee ”
Details please of this policy proposal. Seems to have passed me (and Osbourne?) by.
Gordo said “Mr Brown said he was delighted to have the backing of “one of the world’s greatest ever authors”.
Well he had got that wrong too. Typical Gordo hyperbole. Just because she made a mint out of kiddies books doesn’t make her a great author!
It’s isn’t Scottish politics that Stuart writes about but a tiny subsection of them. He’s like a zoologist whose speciality in a Yaks fallopian tubes.
34.
“Just because she made a mint o…..doesn’t make her a great author!”
Stop knocking Gordon for his classic Tory philosophy.
I find it surprising Luntz did’nt focus group Cruddas given that he did the best in the populous focus group. No real surprises that the rest are rubbish, tell us something new.
On the basis of “Mike’s theory” that the more media coverage a party leader gets the higher thier rating in the opinion polls I would suggest a “Brown bounce” is extremely likely.(Don’t laugh)
Where have the 2 Old Etonians been in the media lately (Cameron & Osborne) ?
I was impressed by Gord last night on Sky TV and JK Rowling’s comments on the Conservative’s strike a chord.
No ,Nick P I am not going soppy in my old age !
Coffee House deconsrtucts Gordo’s sky interview
http://www.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2096651/the-pm-serves-up-brownies-for-sky.thtml
43
Of course, Mike is right that we should wait until the end of the conference season to see the final position. However, what YouGov and Luntz show is how the LD’s can perform when they have the media attention they will have during a General Election. In the light of this I find it difficult to bet against them getting less than 20% or 55 seats.
Have the righties peaked too soon? Record breaking day in the stock markets. Booming fist is coming to getcha! BOOM BOOM BOOM.
45 - I don’t recall Mike ever putting forward such a theory.
After JK Rowling’s donation a headline writer mixes up the consonants. Luntz 4 Cabour.
‘Cairn You Believe Who’s Behind The Whispers?’
Most of us are worried about energy bills, house prices and global economic meltdown, not to mention the idea of Prime Minister Cameron. Labour lightweights are plotting. It’s pathetic.
This is all happening against the backdrop of a new Scottish Labour leader, a title with all the authority and stability of Sienna Miller’s Boyfriend. The Nats cruelly nicknamed Iain Gray “Mr Three Percent” after his approval rating in some polls. Fair’s fair. That’s a couple of per cent above his boss at Number 10.
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/comment/columnists/lifestyle-columnists/john-mckie/2008/09/20/cairn-you-believe-who-s-behind-the-whispers-86908-20744871/
So are we supposed to believe that with a million quid in the bank and Gordon single-handedly saving capitalism, the Labour Party is going into its Conference with a bounce in its step wearing its hat at a jaunty angle?
And with expectations so high, the reality is going to hurt even more. Remember what one Cabinet source about the content to be delivered this week:
“Awful. Awful. Awful…..”
This week is clearly going to be aimed at shifting the meme that “Gordon has until Glenrothes to save his job”. Reality has intruded in the shape of Roy’s “shambolic” assessment and it seems quite clear that their realistic internal acknowledgment is that the seat is lost. So what will the next substituted milestone be? He has until the first cuckoo of spring? That would be kind of apt - a squatter that only gets on in life at the expense of throwing others out of the nest, and then sits there with ever more taxing demands to be fed.
46 Every statement from brown is a lie. Literally everything he says turns out to be untrue.
45.
“Where have the 2 Old Etonians been”
You would surely not begrudge them a third summer holiday? It’s a good time for chasing the powder in South America.
O/T
Mike
Yesterday Bob Worcester wrote an exceptional thread which only lasted half a dozen responses, before you superceded it with the LibDem bounce poll. Surely this could have been added onto the BW thread as an addendum. Bad manners me thinks….surely not LIbDem bias?!
There is a strong feeling amongst a lot of people that the the LabourHome poll was swamped by Brownites to boost their man…
BTW, days like today are the reason why the Labour Party will not die this slow sad death that many people have claimed.
Whilst
a) their conference gets blanket coverage by the media, unlike the Lib Dems who got barely a passing mention
and b) people are prepared to donate sums of A MILLION POUNDS to the party
And this is supposedly at their nadir.
#37, sorry Roger, my metaphors may not be mixed…?
But the bint taking the cake and taking the biscuit is inconsistent, depending on your definition of cake and/or biscuit.
39 Don’t you mean too many Roy(al)s?
57.
“surely not LIbDem bias?!”
eh??? Worcesters comments were a warning to the three Tory triumphalists on here and would give succour to Lib Dems. eg:
” Polls don’t ‘predict’, ‘forecast’, or show anybody about to ‘head for 330 majority’ at the next general election, probably 20 months hence. Polls measure, within statistical reliability of c. plus or minus 3% how each party stood at the time the fieldwork was conducted.”
and…
“Much was made of the fact that the Tory lead cracked the 50% ceiling for the first time in 20 years, when in August 1988 the Tories reached 51%. But what happened then? Just over a year later, Mrs Thatcher lost her leadership contest, and John Major’s early lead slumped and he barely won the 1992 election. In fact, if one person in two hundred across the country who voted Conservative had voted for the second party in their constituency, it would have been a hung parliament instead of the 21-seat majority he received.”
57. Paul on the Ball - “Bad manners methinks….”
I am sorry to say that I concur. I could not believe the brusque treatment Worcester received. Mike will be very lucky to get guest writers if he treats them thus.
So from the comments here today, it looks like Gordon and Labour and the Lib Dems are going to get massive boost in the polls (and Labour win the bye-election) and the Tories are looking into the abyss?
64.
63. I also wondered why this thread was so short, maybe Mike has a good reason though?
57 - Paul on the Ball - certainly not Lib Dem bias, as a new national poll almost without exception gets a new thread, even when it doesn’t have exceptional results (Lab 24%, LD 20% is interesting, esp when you consider it is from YouGov).
Mike published the two threads simultaneously, I believe to allow a purer conversation about the former. Irrespective of the number of comments, those that responded to Bob Worcester’s article (IMHO) wrote interesting and substantial points.
It’s easy to equate size of respnse with quality or kudos, especially when recently have seen 1500-1600 coments in a single day. I can’t speak for Mike or Bob Worcester, but personally, I would actually prefer 5 good comments on an article I had written, rather than 200 comprising a symphonic poem on why the gvoernment are stupid and a theme and variations on how Brown resembles various anatomical parts. Just recently on here, there’s been a little too much heat, at the expense of a little light, and I guess Mike didn’t want it on BW’s article as well as the YouGov thread.
For those who missed it, it is a very good article from one of the most authoritative figures in the polling industry. Give it a read.
Good Morning,
1. I said yesderday that Luntz and his method are flawed. He is a one hit wonder with his focus group that picked out Cameron at the conservative conference in 2005. His method is to cue the audience, by sleight of hand, like a conjurer.
2. As for JK Rowling, Sky News are showing e-mails are running approx 70/30 against her decision to support Labour, and think she should go back to Hogwarts.
Grrr. Am never buying a book by JK Rowling again.
I thought she was an intelligent woman but clearly she believes spin over facts.
Bah.
68. Well as ‘hilarious’ as that is, it would be an improvement on the 24% Labour are currently polling!
My first reaction to the Brown / Johnson comments in Mike’s article was that “in the land of the blind, the one eyed man is king”. It was only later that I recalled Brown’s disability. But I still think any appeal that Johnson may have is purely that he is seen at this stage to be “the best of a very bad bunch” with fewer of the disadvantages displayed by the rest.
No question that the last 24 hours has seen the first genuine attempt by Labour to shift the media narrative, with their friends at the BBC bigging up Brown’s role in the Lloyds/HBOS merger while studiously avoiding the Scots/English jobs issue, and now with the Rowling bung.
But the reality of people’s lives can’t be altered by media stunts. Rowling’s cash is going down the toilet, people want Labour out and that feeling will only grow as unemployment mounts in the months ahead and the government’s finances deteriorate dramatically.
67 - By the time that articles get into the hundreds of comments they inevitably leave the topic matter. But a dozen comments? Threads which aren’t on the front page don’t get a chance. The simple fact that you have to direct people to read it is proof enough. Pb.com doesn’t support multiple threads, the format just doesn’t favour it. Everyone knows that and this in itself will make it less likely that people will bother to comment on old threads.
69. It seem’s that JK Rowling has become bosom pals with Sarah Brown, so that may have something to do with it.
72 - even Tory conferences in the mid-90s had a degree of “genuine fightback” to them.
Expect this week to be one of the most stage-managed conferences ever
72. The sound of terrified Tories is a joy to my ears today!
O/T. St.John’s occasional horse racing tip.
Record so far for the Flat Race season 2008.
One tip. Tartan Bearer each way to win the Epsom Derby. Finished a close 2nd at 6/1. Recommended with bookie who refunded your win stake if your selection came 2nd to New Approach, who just beat my selection.
Today’s selection and second tip of the season.
Valery Borzoz in the Ayr Gold Cup, each way at 9/1 with Paddy Power, who pay out on 5 places. Ayr Gold Cup 3.30 pm.
76: Hmmm I suspect they would not wish to swap positions with you, whether it be leader, poll ratings or prospects!
Rowling - what a let down. Thought she was intelligent! Just bizarre.
Or maybe she’s a secret Tory, trying to keep Brown in place?!
72 She’s been nobbled by “Voldemort” Brown and his merry band of death-eaters and dementors….
76 yes Charlie at 52% I’m quaking in my boots!
62 Bob Worcester’s warning on the weaknesses of polling as prophecy are correct but his example ignores some salient facts. In 1988 we were in the Lawson Boom, the Community Charge hadn’t been introduced and it was a year after Thatcher’s third victory with Labour under Kinnock still recovering from a comprehensive defeat. In 1989 the Boom was going bust, inflation taking off, the Community Charge was being felt and the splits between the philes and sceptics in the Conservative Party were becoming ever more strident.
There are echoes of that situation today - the long boom of 1994 to 2007 has bust, inflation & prices and Labour is divided - and something game changing might well save Labour from what seems to be an inevitable defeat but I find it difficult to imagine how they can win with Gordon Brown in charge. He believes apparently its nothing about himself but all about the economy; I think its indeed about the economy but public trust in Brown, respect for himself and his leadership has been lost.
IMHO the greatest danger for him is when the worst of the economic crisis is over - as Alan Johnson says “he is the best person at the moment.”, when the moment is over it will be his unsuitabilities that are highlighted. Still believe its June/July 2009 when the coup is most likely.
78. Jon C - “Or maybe she’s a secret Tory, trying to keep Brown in place?!”
76 - last time I heard a comment like that was when Jacqui Smith screeched “the Tories are in total disarray” over what was really a small disagreement on policy/direction between Cameron and Osbourne. Which wasn’t a confident fightback as a comment of straw-clutching.
78 - interesting she didn’t do that while she was writing the Harry Potter books. Popularity wise she’s peaked now anyway
79. Lol!! You used words from the Harry Potter series because JK Rowling is in the news
81 - Quite. The polls may not be a predictor per se, but polls don’t move without events moving.
74. I’m sure ‘Mrs. Brown’ is in need of comfort.
For those who would like a little psephology behind their bets: top American politics statto-bloke reckons Obama will poll 54.3%.
http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/shared-blogs/ajc/politicalinsider/entries/2008/09/11/alan_abramowitz_bar_bet_obama.html
Which would be a big ECV win.
79 it’s Volderbrown and his band of Death Eaters, Lucius Balls & Narcissa Cooper, Nick “Scabbers” Brown etc.
88. Lololololololololol you did it as well! You changed names of Labour politicians to names of Harry Potter characters!! Without making any puns at all!
PB.com wit at its finest.
The Worcester thread had been set to be published automatically at 6pm. Alas at precisely that time I got a tip about the YouGOV poll. What could I do - sit on it?
I tried to re-time Bob’s piece but it had alreasy been published.
This was unfortunate and highlights the problems with all guest slots and material prepared in advance. Hot news has to take precedence especially if it can affect betting markets
76. And the ridiculous spectacle of desperate deluded lefties imagining the Tories are bothered by Rowling and one good day for Labour is just sad.
Its appropriate that Rowling writes kiddies fantasy..only in the fantasy world of fairweather Roger and his little yapping puppy ‘Charlie’ is any of this game changing.
Thanks St. John - I’m on.
90.
Fairy nuff. But it still begs the question posed by Paul on the Ball at 57: “Surely this could have been added onto the BW thread as an addendum.”
I eargerly await the response from the Old Etonians as to the comments by J K Rowling
“It sends the message that the Conservatives still believe a childless, dual-income, but married couple is more deserving of a financial pat on the head than those struggling, as I once was, to keep their families afloat in difficult times.”
Gord wil capitalise on this and especially the Conservative silence.
69. Yes I too will never buy a JK (Why can’t the daft woman use her proper name) Rowling book. It pants anyway what she writes. Rich socialists are the most horrid of people.
89 An extra red pill with your lunch-time medication, I think, Charlie….
73 - It was on the front page, just that it didn’t have a period where it held the conversation.
There are two types of pb.com reader - some, like us, read the full threads and take part (or lurk) for full discussions. This group are more focussed on the rolling, 24/7, 40-000-words-a-day conversation that has become a hallmark of the site, and might well miss a thread if they are following the conversation more intently. It is for these people I’ve highlighted the piece in the comments.
The other type of reader, whom I reckon comprise a massive majority, only read main threads, and never comment or read the comments - I know lots of these. They read pb.com like I read Iain Dale or Dizzy - they scroll down to the last thing they read on the site, and cover all the new front page postings. They will have noticed and read the article, and there would be no need for me to highlight it.
I still don’t buy into the ‘judged by number of comments’ thing, and I am adamant that this was not a slight on Bob Worcester, whom I know Mike holds in very high regard. No-one wants the conversation to run dry, and a new post should stimulate argument, but some of the best threads are often definitive, and the ones that have holes in their argument attract the most attention.
79 That’s it Charlie get into labour conference denial of reality mode. What was it last year: Mr Palmer said about the election that never was “It could be another 1997 style victory” (I think he meant for the tories really). The other classic was Kinnock “grind(ing) the tories into the dust”. Good luck with the knees up.
Now the Country knows what to use as firelighters for November 5th… Dig out those Harry Snotter books.
98. Bounce after Lab conference = 10% Labour lead!
77 Thanks stjohn - There’s a huge field and therefore I’ve backed it for a place only with Betfair at 2.3-1 IIRC Betfair only pay out on the first 4, compared with PP’s first 5.
67. Morus. Fine post. I’m curious to know what pleasure Tory posters get out of echoing the dozens of identikit Tory posters in slagging off Gordon Brown usually using word for word the same insults. Why not just a ditto mark? Martin Day used to be in a league of his own but not any more.
Serious question - after the Conferences of the mid-90s, specifically 1994-97, what was the Tory bounce (if any)?
100
You mean amongst kids aged 5-11……
I’ve been saying for a few days that Brown is now safe until 2010, and from the comments here I sense people are coming round to that way of thinking. The fact that the markets rallied yesterday allows Brown to fabricate that he had something to do with it, and allies in the media have fallen over themselves to disseminate the lie. It’s just a crumb of course but was all that was needed to annihilate the ‘rebellion’ - a sorry rattlebag of invisible men, ministerial never-should-have-beens and fair-weather sycophants. And yes, the Luntz thing has provided a small sprinkling of hundreds and thousands on the cake.
Very strange that the JKR donation seems to have inspired panic in the Conservative party with instructions from CCHQ to its drones posting on here to try to rubbish and ridicule her with the odd bit of personal abuse thrown in .
100 - Only 10%?
106 - You would say that
Rowling is not a surprise.
- She is a long time friend of the Browns and they are Scottish ‘neighbours’
- They both produce fantasy fiction, she for children he for the electorate
- They both criticise the Tories for policies they do not have
- They both praise Labour for successes they have not achieved
She is possibly on the way to being a billionaire and the sort of person many in the Labour party want to tax more highly. So like the other billionaire Lords who have funded the Labour party she donates to salve a conscience?
Being a successful author, actor, businessman or woman, or spread betting magnate does not mean you political judgement is any good, just that you have the dosh to make a splash.
I would be much more impressed if any party’s membership had risen significantly or, US style, a small donations campaign had raked in oodles on small amounts from masses of normal voters.
Er, but who is J K Rowling? Is he/she connected to motor racing, like that other big Labour donor?
So retired English Rugby-Union players will play a game at Twickers against a team of retired Johnie-foreigners. They are hoping to raise £1million for injured British soldiers.
And some media-savvie scribe-bint throws said money at a dieing party, safe in the fact that her accountants will discount it (donations) and the English will continue to pay for her Scottish life-style. So people putting their lives-on-the-line count less then her tax-avoidance preferences…?
[MODERATED - Morus]
This amazed me,
From the BBC
The Labour party has seen a surge in funding from private individuals, who donated a total of £3.8m between April and June.
Other high-profile donors to have contributed this year include comedian Eddie Izzard, who gave almost £10,000, and Steve Lazarides, graffiti artist Banksy’s dealer, who gave £120,000.
All the Labour conference needs to do now is pass the resolution to give the vote to 16 year old’s and NuLabour is safe.
Must dash to Bolton and see if Adebayor and Fabregas can strut their stuff for Arsenal later today.
109. Why are you pretending never to have heard of Rowling? It just makes you look ignorant. Or maybe you actually are?
110. Are you 1. Under 12 or 2. Martin Day?
94 Frankly I am sick of lefty luvvies who have done brilliantly under Labour telling the struggling masses how wonderful Labour are. When the tories get in there should be a windfall tax on Ian Mckellen, JK Rowling, Piers Morgan, Andrew Marr, Eamon Holmes, Alan Sugar, Nick Robinson, Russel T davies and that woman with the gravelly voice that sucked up to Brown at last years conference, as well as the endlesss other talentless rubbish in the BBC and media that we have to put up with and pretend they are somehow clever and profound just because they are on the telly due to their mates being in power.
109: ‘…but who is J K Rowling?’
Didn’t she write Harry and the Chocolate Factory or some such silliness?
Charlie (Entre nous- JohnO’s the brightest of us all!)
111 Fools and their money are easily parted.
21. As opposed to the rubbish you have posted.
114. Embarrassing post! Tories pretending to care about the ’struggling masses’ and imposing windfall taxes
I had more respect for you when you knew what you believed in!!!
110 - I’ve moderated your post. If you have something sensible to add about literary achievements of the early 21st century or the Barnett formula, I know we’d be dying to hear it, but if all you want is to shout expletives at people, there are other sites for you to go to.
112 - Maybe he’s pulling your leg charlie. Just a thought.
106 - “instructions from CCHQ”. Yes Mark I’m sure that’s the case.
116 - Oooh, you are awwwfulll
121. Clampdown on moronic abusive Tories!!!! More of this needs to happen!!
117
The timing of the gift is hardly coincidental. Lots of straws being clutched on PB today..
106
Mark Senior. You must be very jealous. The only person ever to give more than a million to the Lib Dims turned out to be a bit shady? Have they paid the money back yet?
123 - To be clear, clampdown on moronic abuse. The trench it is flung from played no part in deciding to moderate that particular sentence.
119 Not at all embarrassed I don’t know about you but I am sick of celebrities especially the Labour supporting kind and would love to see a windfall tax on them.
28. She is a dumpling , only interested in getting her face in the papers to whinge on about her terrible 3 days as a poor single mother. Easy to see why she is attracted to Labour. I am almost as sick of seeing her pontificating about single mothers and poverty as I am of seeing Brown. If she had any feelings for poor people she would be putting the million pounds to help poor single mothers, not throwing it down the drain on the Labour losers who are heading for a well deserved oblivion. Publicity seeker first and foremost.
106 I imagine people at CCHQ have more productive things to do.
123 - A clampdown on all moronic posters would be ideal.
127. If you had utterly any idea what you were talking about, you would know Rowling is exactly the opposite of what you are saying.
When you have inspired a generation of video gaming and electronic obsessives to pick up a book, and done countless charity work without any recognition whatsoever, come back and comment. Just because you don’t share her political views doesn’t mean you have to subject her to an ill-informed personal attack.
127 There’s no need to be unkind about her. She’s always been on the left, politically, and she can spend her money as she chooses.
If I hear that story about JKR being poor and living in a flat in Scotland and having to write a book I will puke.
The question de jour is whether to watch Faldo’s Fools give away the Ryder Cup to gloating ‘git in thah hole’ rednecks or ignore it and watch the footie. Utd had better turn up tomorrow and get a point or the EPL is going Russian again.
114: ‘Frankly I am sick of lefty luvvies…’
Absolutely. In fact, I think it was a poor decision taking handouts from this Rollings woman (whoever she is). A bunch of puffed-up Highgate BBCati mmmwwwarrr-mmmwwwarrring each other brings to mind all the toe-curling shallowness of Blair’s tenure - something we were told Brown hated with a passion. (But perhaps Gordon likes his pink champagne before 1 o’clock a little more than we were told!)
131 Waste of time Sean , the nasty tendency branch of the Conservative party is out in force this morning .
O/T - Splendidly uncomplicated world-view expressed in this interview
(’we could beat ‘em with slingshots’)
http://mreugenides.blogspot.com/
131 - Totally agree with that Sean. I’ve nothing against her I just don’t think her intervention today will make much difference to the outcome of the next election. Quite happy to see other people kidding themselves otherwise though.
I do hope English voters remember this stab in the back when they are about to put their cross on the ballot:
Lloyds TSB included in the merger document a pledge to ‘keep jobs in Scotland’, as well as stating that its ‘management focus’ would be on saving as many posts north of the Border.
In a further concession to Scotland, HBOS’s grand headquarters on the Mound in Edinburgh will serve as the Scottish base for the entire bank and Bank of Scotland notes will continued to be printed there.
Analysts claimed the deal would likely result in more cuts in England and Wales, while by contrast a senior Lloyds TSB manager admitted it was unlikely lead to thousands of compulsory redundancies in Scotland.
Rowling Huh! The Tories do that sort of thing much better, they’ve got Louise Bagshaw, author of such wondeful works as errrr, I’ll get back to you on that.
Still with the sort of sales Bagshaw enjoys, she’s gotta be up for at least thirty quid, then there’s our very own seant, well pass the tin.
For the record, can I just say that the only contact I have ever had with CCHQ was to deliver a package to Smith Square in 1983.
137 - Presumably the deal will end the moment Scotland becomes independent…
This “one liner” could contribute to David Cameron’s fall from grace
David Cameron supports Aston Villa football club.
139
Was it a VERY BIG BANG?
141 - So does Prince William
I think Villa are well on the way to becoming everyone’s favourite second club.
114.
“I am sick of lefty luvvies…”
You prefer Rightie-shiteys??
137. People think Cameron and Salmond are the biggest threat to the Union. Infact, it appears to me Brown and Darling are biggest threats of all.
lol, Author donates money to party of government, all voters reconsider their position due to being incapable of acting without the guidance of ‘celebrities.’ Good luck to her, however it is evidential of nothing and her views on the Tory proposals are not so much vox populi.
On the other hand, rather less palatable for Gordon is the damning indictment of Sir Stuart Rose on Labour’s dithering over the economic conditions - rather takes the gloss of Brown’s ‘looky here, I have fixed it all up for you magic-like’
138 - Do Rowling books actually have a large amount of literary value?
144. Yes. At least they don’t sicken us with their patronising hypocrisy.
141 We all have our cross to bear.
132. U got it! FALDO is crap as as captain. He couldn’t pair rabbit’s.
As for JK Rowling; I still like her book’s even if I cant admire her politics. It’s down right silly when poster’s say “they’ll never buy one of her books again.
Of course if one likes FANTASY, the Malazan Empire is the place for you.
Surprised theres so much comment on here about JK Rowling giving Labour some money. Its her money, its up to her what she does with it. It won’t make any differance to Labours popularity or the election decision. People won’t vote Labour because JK tells them to.
147. Ask the MILLIONS of kids that would never have read another book if they have any literary value.
I grew up with the Harry Potter series, and they are funny, well written books. Not to everyone’s taste I’ll admit, but I loved them, and left school at the same time the last book came out, so they were a big part of my and my yeargroups life.
They will go down as a classic series.
Thursday’s Western Mail (Wales) had interesting article on the next election outcome by election analyst Dr Dennis Balsom. Basing his forecasts on polls, recent council and Assembly performance he predicts that:
PC will gain Ceredigion from LD andAberconwy from Labour.
LD will gain Newport east from Labour.
Cons will gain Montgomery from LD
Cardiff North from Labour
Vale of Glamorgan
Vale of Clwyd
Delyn
Carmarthen West and
Preseli Pembrokeshire, all from Labour
However, if present opinion poll figures remain, he forecasts:
PC will gain Ynys Mon and Llanelli from Labour
LD will gain Swansea West from Labour
Cons will gain Brecon from LD and Bridgend and Clwyd South from Labour.
As for Luntz - no Gordon has been saved by the very mess he helped to create.
It should also be noted that a part of Gordon’s ’support’ was from Labour supporters acknowledging Labour were doomed and wanting the new leader to start fresh wen the Tories take over - not per se an endorsement of the ‘giant’ in number 10