Huhne set to win - YouGov
February 9th, 2006
-
Second YouGov poll on Lib Dem members now released
I have just received this from Peter Kellner - boss of YouGov.
The attached data has just been released, from our latest poll of Lib Dem members. Huhne: 38%: Campbell 34%: Hughes 27%
The run-off figures, eliminating Hughes are:Huhne 52%: Campbell 48%.
According to the accompanying spreadsheet the survey took place from February 7-9 and the client was John Stevens. The number of members in the sample was 401.
This is not the survey over which there has been much speculation on the site in the past few days.
The person who commissioned the poll, John Stevens, works in the city and was an MEP, sitting for the Tories in Brussels from 1989-1999.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike. I’m a little confused. Are there said to be two different You Gov polls or is this it? Also do we know who commissioned this poll? Was it a Ming supporter or a Huhne supporter
I would be very surprised if this was the result - but I have been wrong before, and have closed my Ming positions - I had 3 and the price moved 2 points lower after I had done the first two! - The power of PB.
I will pile back in if the buy price goes below 50
Ah the dark horse….common sense prevails, more than a one term leader and no skeletons in the cupboard. excellent news
Huhne supporter, John Stevens is backing Chris Huhne.
1 I suspect this is a second YouGov poll looking at the fieldwork dates of 7-9 Feb.
John Stevens is on Chris Huhne’s supporters list.
The Huhne campaign will be happy with these figures but it is still tight and the nature of YouGov polling may overrepresent Huhne’s support.
What I find interesting about the answers to the other questions is that it is a very mixed picture with all three in contention.
So the turkeys really are voting for Christmas.
Listen to lib dem *voters* folks, they’re the ones who got you up to 22%, if you don’t listen to them, watch that figure drop and seats go to other parties.
One thought on the validity of the poll. It shows 77% of respondents as in favour of higher fuel charges. An academic study (summarised in the Guardian) recently showed that 53% of Members supported this policy. So internet users may be differnt from other members. (Alternatively members may have changed their minds).
I agree with Sam that it is worth looking at all the figures here.
4 - I am not sure it matters too much as the questions appear reasonably unbiased. I would have preferred to see the “who are you going for” question before the others in a way. The trouble with Ming’s age (which precedes the voting question) is that I hear a lot of people say “it doesn’t matter to me but I worry that it matters to other people” and yet I have yet to hear somebody say “it matters to me”.
Interesting that Huhne wins the question on experience outside Westminster - Ming quite probably has more (Huhne is fairly strong on it too but not as much) and it is interesting that this has not come across all that strongly. If elected, it should be something he tries to address. Howard - who had a pretty weighty career outside Westminster - probably had the same problem in that image sense (although he also had other public perception problems Ming doesn’t).
Interesting! I’ve absolutely no opinion about Huhne - never heard him speak, and because MPs can’t usually see TV have missed any interviews too. Other things being equal, I think the public would react with some interest to a fresh face, as they did with Cameron. He’ll have to overcome the “Who Huhne” headlines on day 1, but that’s a transient thing.
I see the Tories are now thinking of abolishing the requirement for MPs to declare allegiance to the Queen - shame Tony Banks didn’t live to see this outbreak of republicanism! I think they’re actually right on democratic grounds - why shouldn’t people be allowed to elect non-monarchist MPs if they want? Swearing allegiance to the interests of the nation and the people represented should do (though the former will still give Sinn Fein problems).
I’m sure it won’t shift a single vote at this point, so for what it’s worth I’ll pass on the opinion of a colleague who has spent a lot of time in the by-election that the SNP will indeed come second, and Labour will win by a moderate margin, say 1500.
Any other interesting local elections tonight?
Unless I’m mistaken this poll is not the disputed one which was debated so much yesterday.
This was the second poll some of us very recently filled in. As I said on this site then, I was sure it was from the Huhne camp because the questions were phrased in a subtly leading way (nothing wrong with that, btw. I’m a Huhne fan).
Eg, Ming and Simon were both described as professional lawyers; Chris as a journalist and businessman - this was the preface to the question, who do you think will best be able to understand the issues facing Britain today?
I’m surprised YouGov is content to allow leading questions to be asked in this kind of survey. They are not empirical questions, and therefore answers may be skewed. This is clearly a good poll result for Chris. But I would treat it with some caution.
(We should also remember that YouGov has no track record with Lib Dem membership polling - how could it? - though this poll may prove to be as uncannily accurate as their polls for the Tory leadership etc. But it might just not.)
This looks to me to be rather too close to call. I know YouGov were pretty accurate on the Tories, but there was a clear leader there, and only two contestants. Simon’s price has plummetted, but these figures seem to show he’s still in with a shout of coming second… do the YouGov figures give us any indication of what would happen if Hughes came second to Hughne? Where would the Campbell second votes go? It could all be down to performance on QT tonight.
Do we have any sources who can give us a running total of postal votes received (as I was able to provide during the Tory contest)?And what about dyslexic LDs who can’t tell the difference between Hughne and Hughes?
A bit surprised, but also worried by how close the candidates seem. Seems like there is no runaway winner. However, a close result would be great for Huhne, and awful for Campbell (in fact, I think MC would struggle to have any real authority given his position if he won by 1/2%) so I hope that if it’s close, Huhne pips it.
But Hughes is clearly in the running, and it’s all to play for on Question Time tonight.
To the doubters I just say - “dream on”
11 - no, the dyslexic LDers all vote Democratic Left by accident.
Huhne “set to win”? Margin of error is well over 2% on that sample size!
Huhne now favourite on Betfair
7 It may be that the debate during the contest, particularly with all three contenders backing green taxes in principle, has shifted opinion within the party.
Given the answers on several issues you can see why Huhne has been gaining ground.
Also very positive that most respondents don’t seem to be overly worried about either of the likely winners.
So the LibDems are going to elect Huhne.
Excellent. He has a majority of 568. Come the election they will be in meltdown. The Tories will have no reason not to turn that LibDem tactic of decapitation against the LibDems. Huhne will be tied down in his constituency trying to keep his seat while the rest of them founder around the country leaderless and lost.
By electing Huhne they LibDems deserve everything that’s coming to them. And such stupidity certainly deserves to be punished.
The other parties must be laughing their heads off.
LibDems are a sell.
17 - as a Huhnite, I’d settle for Ming as leader if need be. If Hughes became leader, it would depend who he put on his front bench. It might be time to defect… to the old Liberal party, which is still going.
18 - spin, spin and more spin…
The poll seems to suggest the Lib Dems are split three ways - between a geriatric Grimond/Steel type who perhaps appeals to the more non-ideological especially in the Celtic fringe, a loony leftwinger who perhaps appeals to the beard and sandals kamikaze squad, and a ‘technocrat’ who perhaps appeals to the younger ‘Orange Book’ element. So the poll could be said to reveal quite nicely the bizarre contradictions within the Lib Dems. I agree with an earlier poster that a close finish, especially if Campbell just scrapes it, will set the scene for more infighting.
Oh F**k.
Another day, anyother barrage of Hughes and Huhne claiming each other are out of the race etc. LibDem members and activists, who use this ploy day-in-day-out, musn’t know what to think!
21 - Interesting what Fred said. In the immortal words of Mandy Rice-Davis: “Well, he would, wouldn’t he?”
18 - Leadership bonus answers that one. The Party leader always gets a bonus in their seat, has done for every party since the Second World War.
9. As you know, Nick, the oath of allegiance is to the Queen, ‘her heirs and successors’. This typical piece of double-verbage (cf. ‘to have and to hold’) exposes a logical difficulty. Monarchists would argue that the Queen’s only legitimate successors are her heirs, so why swear allegiance to both? But republicans can take the oath believing that the Queen’s successor should be an elected president (in much the same way as Cromwell was Charles I’s successor)
Very interesting about Huhne - I think the LDs have hit on something. If just say hypothetically I did not want the Libdems to do well I would definitely prefer Campbell as a leader.
Love it, a getting on for even 3 way split.
Chaos beckons as the Orange Bookers take on all comers and the dull as dishwater bank manager steps up to the plate !!!
On a serious note, if I were an LD, I’d go for Huhne at this stage
of the game. Make Mark Senior right about MC’s age (even though he
is ‘the’ safe paid of hands)and think Hughes’ recent lack of familiarity with an outright straight answer to his past life is something that will continue to hang over him in the eyes of many.
(If not so much among LDs themselves)
Interesting times………….
20- You think it’s spin? I say it’s the numbers. The number is 568.
And you can’t deny the numbers, unless you live in an alternate reality. Which begs the question, are LibDems living in an alternate reality? Those voting for Huhne certainly are.
Remember the magic number: 568.
I’m still selling.
9 - “why shouldn’t people be allowed to elect non-monarchist MPs if they want?”
But that’s simple. Whether you are a monarchist or a republican, you observe and respect the laws of the land, which in this country includes declaring allegiance to the Crown. If you were practically deterred from making republican pronouncements by the Oath, then it might be an issue - but no-one is. Not allowing MPs to swear allegiance the Queen would be like allowing elected US offficials to swear allegiance to the Monarch because they don’t believe in the War of Independence, or French officials to pledge themselves to the Bourbons or Napoleon. Sinn Fein may be licensed rebels, but that doesn’t mean we have to follow their example.
Surely the Ming camp have to release the other poll…unless it’s worse!
There has been much talk that internet users are not typical LD members so the poll isn’t representative. The same could be said in spades about Tory members, many of them elderly, but the You Gov poll proved remarkably accurate on the Tory leadership. It seems to me that those LD members worried about MC’s age faced with David Cameron will now be aware that they have a youngish credible alternative. These polls must be a huge boost to Huhne and yet another severe setback to MC’s campaign. Also whisper it not but Hughes is only 7 points behind MC on first preferences. Could Ming come third?
I think (re 18) the boundary changes in Hampshire might help the LibDems in Eastleigh.
32 - “Could Ming come third?”
No.
This is the best news yet in this contest.
A leaderless, rudderless party with a growing sense-of-direction problem seems to be about to choose a divisive leader with virtually no track record in Westminster who will be resented by at least half his (already out-of-control) MP’s; by a tiny (and disputable) margin.
The membership, already annoyed at the MP’s for in their view unreasonably decapitating their own party, will be demoralised and confused by continuing dissent from and increasingly worried Westminster contingent.
A pro-European leader for the Lib dems is manna from heaven for Conservatives like me in a strongly eurosceptic area like Devon.
An ‘orange book’ leader taking the party right on economics will be manna from heaven for marginal Labour MP’s previously under threat from Lib Dem challengers.
All in all, good for everyone except Lib Dem supporters.
The poll might be taken seriously, although you’d have to take a long hard look at the breakdown before you could be absolutely sure it was truly reprsentative of LDs nationwide. Huhne (who’d be a leap in the dark without the usual charisma of LD leaders) has definitely developed momentum. But Campbell’s underlying recognition and respect should still ensure he pulls through, even if he does so narrowly on second preferences.
Interesting to see postings by some Tories on this site about how they are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of a Huhne victory.
Are they trying to persuade Lib Dems not go for him out of the goodness of their own heart, or do they have darker motives.
I detect that he is the one they fear.
Joe Fairw and Sam
Would you like to drop me a line?
liberalism2010@yahoo.co.uk
17 - I accepted that possibility. But I am not convinced.
Can someone who understands Maths better than me tell me what the margin of error on this poll is?
33 - Maybe slightly. It’s still the best news for the Tories ever, and just after I was thinking of going short on them too because the Cameron bubble is bound to burst sooner rather than later.
Of course, it means Labour is a shoe-in at the next election.
33 The boundary changes in Hampshire help Romsey and Eastleigh by a few hundred votes each on paper and Winchester by a couple of thousand. This is due to a large chunk of the rural bit of Winchester being hived off into the new Meon Valley seat.
35 - Couldn’t most of that post have been written about the Tories a few months ago?
37 Go for it then Subs - Bring it on !!!
I think that Huhne would be a very capable leader for the Lib Dems. His steadfast desire to do something serious about green issues is inspiring. And although he may not have as much charisma as Cameron, clearly the word coming from the hustings as reported here and elsewhere shows that he has heaps more than Ming. Let’s face it, and though this might seem unfair, compared to the other two leaders, Ming does look elderly. Hughes would be a dead duck, that’s fairly obvious to everyone. So, if the Lib Dems do get Huhne, they’ll be doing well.
29 - The other key number is 400,000 which is one of the amounts I’ve seen bandied around for how much the Tories spent in Eastleigh in the run up to 2005, yet couldn’t win it back, and indeed the swing was less than it normally was when a sitting Lib Dem MP stands down. Now, consider what happens when Chris Huhne is the sitting MP and as party leader gets to be on TV every day during the election campaign. The Lib Dems tried to decapitate Howard and poured a lot into Folkestone during the last election…and his majority actually went up.
39 - I reckon if you include the margin of error the final result is roughly Huhne 48-56%, Campbell 44-52%.
Sam at 42, you could have said this about the Conservatives -quite accurately, at any time from about 1988 until 2004 when Michael Howard eventually brought the party together behind him.
I am certain that the Lib dems have a very hard time ahead, political parties can easily fall to pieces when under pressure - we did; you will.
9 - Nick, on message as always. If you’re ramping the SNP then the orange hordes must have you worried!
I would have thought Huhne’s majority will only go one way with an increased media profile and that’s up. His current small majority doesn’t worry me at all.
Sorry to state the obvious but I couldn’t see any mention above that this isn’t a FPTP vote - do the figures give an impression of people’s second choices? Is it possible for there to be an anti-Ming or anti-Huhne element that could see Hughes slip through? (yes, I’m clutching at straws here).
For those with a firewall at work. Betfair as I write:
CH 1.96; MC 2.06; SH 25
The market seems to believe the second You Gov poll.
49 - you can deduce from the figures there that Hughes’ first preferences break about equally to the other two candidates. Nothing about the second prefs of Campbell and Huhne supporters as far as I can see.
The market probably believes the YouGov poll becuase half of those on here are busy clicking various buttons on Betfair et al!
41. Sam et al. I think the Eastleigh boundary changes will have a minimal partisan effect - only part of the divided Chandler’s Ford West ward is leaving, which is Lib Dem held. Huhne’s notional majority will drop by a couple of hundred. Leaves things very tight though.
51 bookvalue, go to http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/IDE060101003_1.pdf for the full poll results.
I’m happy with my position on Huhne so don’t have to worry about clicking on Betfair!
I get happier with every click.
21 - The problem that you can’t seem to grasp is that although we all have our prefered choice as leader most if not all of us would be happy to work with any of the three in that capacity. In policy terms the gap between all three isn’t that huge so that it has become about which we feel is best able to lead the party in making further progress. I think that is why the race is so close with all three probably enjoying 25-33% support.
Personally from talking to others I have no idea who is going to win. I’ve always believed that Hughes would do better than has been forecast at times on this site. I’m also aware that a lot of people have been impressed by Huhne. Campbell is widely respected but there is concern about his age and the ‘caretaker’ image. Although he is my first choice I don’t think Hughes will win. If I had to gamble on the other two I think I would guess Huhne by a small margin over Campbell but it would be no more than a fiver.
…can’t believe Huhne’s price hasn’t tightened more than 1.9something
The poll estimates the potential vote a few days ago. People will change their mind after QT and Dunfermline. It’s still all to play for in my opinion. Hughes will likely do well this evening, but maybe people have factored this in already. I wonder if the audience will be partisan? Will we see another attack like Aitken Junior’s on DD in the Tory contest QT?
Eastleigh Boundary changes very marginal indeed - although would imagine the Tories of Hiltingbury and Chandler’s Ford are now looking forward to fighting Winchester!
58 Seems to indicate taht there are many doubts about this poll. You gov might just end up with a tarnished reputation here (or not, of course). I am tempted to buy some Campbell - but I think that the price will swing out further before tightening.
Or it may just be that it’s not being reported widely yet. Eg. it’s still not on the BBC website. It can’t only be us who are working Betfair.
61 BTW Mike - what is he doing in that photo? It’s even more bizarre than the gun!
46 - Yes. +/- 4.9% would be how it would appear on paper but as your figures rightly recognise that is at 50% and we are looking at slightly lower margins.
51 - The numbers do have Campbell’s and Huhne’s second preferences - both split heavily in favour of the other rather than Hughes. So it is impossible to see Hughes coming through the middle on those numbers, although the sample sizes are obviously lower for second prefs so big margin of error. That ties in with thoughts elsewhere on Huhne/Campbell being a common 1/2 in either order, with few Hughes second prefs. The question about who you would NOT want leading the party further confirms this (Hughes well ahead, others equal).
Have gone flat. Too many polls, too much spin.
Ming on IG now at 50 but closed!!!!
29 - If you look at the record of party leaders in the modern era they almost always increase their majorities due to their high media profile. In 1997, while all about him huge Tory majorities were being overturned John Major increased his majority. Blair, Kennedy, Hague and Howard all outperformed their parties and substantially increased their majorities. Defy history if you will it’s your money.
54 - thanks Tim Z.
This poll is rubbish - buy Campbell.
60. Despite Hiltingbury (especially) and Chandler’s Ford E being Tory inclined they won’t I fear offset the loss of rural areas to Meon Valley. That said, after the Oaten scandal, anything could happen - he had a big personal vote that could go into reverse. If instead of the Tory GE vote being 10% less than in the CC elections and the Lib Dem share being 11% higher these figures were reversed, he would be out.
35 & 47 - Marcus, if you’ve recovered from your little Tory wetdream, could you respond to my enquiry on the previous thread (92) about what level of performance in D&WF would disappoint you.
67 - All the cases you cite were in safe seats. This is not Huhne’s position. If Huhne were thinking of his party first, then the only thing he’d be worrying about would be shoring up his majority. Instead, his mind is elsewhere…
72 - That’s not true look at Kennedy’s majority after the 1997 election which was around 3,000 which is hardly safe.
73 - 3,000 is safer than 568.
73 - His absence touring the country didn’t hurt him despite the fact that personal contact with voters has traditionally been much more important in the Highlands & Islands.
72 - I have expressed before worries about Huhne’s majority because it would be spun as part of a “Libs on back-foot” story. It is a factor against him, and members casting a vote should consider it carefully.
However, that is not the same as worrying about him actually losing his seat. Were he elected leader, there would be a three year by-election style push on the ground from day one. The Tories would do it too but you simply aren’t as good at it. He would almost certainly survive with a reasonable majority in fact.
73 - indeed. I remember there was a load of media speculation during the ‘01 campaign that CK might lose his seat (I think following a rogue constituency poll). As it was, he recorded a massive swing.
Huhne now down to 1.8 on Betfair…on the evidence of the poll and other data we have that seems to me to have gone too far. But taking account of momentum may well be fair. There seems to be a few hundred pounds needing to bet against Ming but refusing to see the writing on the wall (in other words laying Ming at below prices on offer in hope someone will back him, only to see the money which was available drift away). So if you think the poll might be somewhat biased towards Huhne, you think Ming will do well on QT and, ultimately, pull through, this might be the day to back him. But make sure you see how far the drift goes…as I’ve been writing this Huhne has come in to more like 1.7!
73. That was a 10% majority though - small seat size. I think the really interesting question about Huhne’s fate is what happens if he doesn’t win the leadership…after all look at what happened to Jackie Ballard and David Rendell hahahahaha
What do you think Nick Clegg is thinking?
Reading the data too close to call if accept that the 401 asked are representative of the membership.
Ming now 47 would like to buy but still closed!!!
79 Fred - yes it was well worth the one-term Flook to get rid of Ballard. Fortunately Browne will be much harder to unseat - not least because the Taunton boundary changes do not favour the tories.
79 - yes, Huhne’s majority is around 1.1% ahead of the Tories. It’s a huge gamble for the LibDems.
71 Any failure to advance from our current level in D&WF would clearly be a disappointment and would offer critics an opportunity
(which I’m certain they will latch onto gleefully)to question the depth of our recovery in recent opinion polls.
Being objective, I don’t really see Dunfermline as a key benchmark/measureable for us at this stage though as it clearly isn’t going to be a target seat anytime soon and isn’t naturally fertile Conservative ground.
Think May 4th will be hugely indicative though and will be the basis on which medium/longer term assessments will begin to be made more authoritively.
Re 2 & 81 Icarus - pls could you explain for those of us who don’t spread bet…how can it be closed? Bookmaker refusing to take bets? And
‘I had 3 and the price moved 2 points lower after I had done the first two!’ completely confused me!
Re 39 & 46. If this was a random sample of Lib Dem members - i.e. one in which all Lib Dem members had an equal random chance of being polled - the margin of error on a sample of 400 would be plus or minus 5% on each figure, which would actually mean that on first preference the three candidates are within the margin of error of each other & they could come in any order whatsoever. But by definition panel polls aren’t based on random probability sampling, so standard margins of error don’t apply.
Clegg is gutless.
80 He’s probably thinking it’s time to arrange for quiet beer with Mr Huhne sometime soon!
84 “it clearly isn’t going to be a target seat anytime soon and isn’t naturally fertile Conservative ground.”
Isn’t that what the Tories said about the Leicester South by-election result having spent the campaign claiming they could win it, bar charts and all?
We 86 well pointed out, though someone else pointed out that in percentage point terms the margin of error falls as estimates move away from 50%. However, if it was an unbiased random sample, the probability of Huhne actually trailing Hughes would be low.
Sorry IG say that they wont take bets whilst considering effect of the poll - they expect a new price in 20-30mins.
Re I had 3 - meant I had 3 bets taken at different prices and had to close them one at a time - the price moved after I had cashed in 2 of them.
If the price stays at 47 or lower I can rebuy at less than I sold allowing for the spread of 8, which is a bugger, but I had a chance to look at the poll data so that I can decide whether to get back in or not.
87 - no, he’s 39. Far too young for any sensible politician to dream of becoming their party’s leader.
86 - we had this discussion last week I think: the MoE still measures the precision of the poll, but not its accuracy (i.e. its correspondence to how the full electorate will vote).
as a labour supporter huhne would be the favoured option. a lib dem party with huhne, laws (why do the tories want him, he’s cold and a bit odd on tv), clegg and the new libs in charge. they look and sound like psuedo tories and it’ll be easier to win back the seats we’ve lost to the libs in recent years with them in charge. they are also more likely to hold on to those southern seats the tories need to win back to form a govt.
86 - thanks, Andrew. I’m inferring from that that you’re saying the YouGov poll should be more accurate than +/-5%…?
83 and elsewhere - let’s just kill this nonsense about majority, stone dead.
Most of Chris Huhne’s MP backers are campaigners who’ve won their seats the hard way. Some of them have small majorities. None of them are complacent in the slightest.
The Tories threw the book at Eastleigh in a concerted way before the General Election - a large six-figure sum, more than even the decapitation seats bar I think Howard’s. And Chris - despite not being the incumbent - still won.
None of us would be backing him if we thought he would not hold his seat. And yes, I backed Jackie Ballard last time: except in Taunton the Lib Dem local government base was disintegrating and the local party clearly not up to shape - and it got worse.
I would happily lay any money on Chris as leader retaining his seat. Even if he doesn’t win, he’s much more likely to retain his seat than others with larger majorities - with a good campaign team in place and rock-solid Lib Dem control of Eastleigh Borough Council.
Question Time is now critical - but there’s a real contest on here. Buy Huhne.
89 - I would have hoped (forlornly obviously) that an educated North Oxford lad might have conceded that a 10% share of the vote is rather indicative of the seat not being within the top, say, 600+ of Tory targets …
76. I agree that it’s the media angle on it rather than the actual risk of losing his seat that’s the worry (although I’m probably less of a risk-taker than others in that I do prefer to err on the side of caution). We need to ensure that all our media coverage in the run-up is focused on policies and values rather than anything else.
what’s happened….after a frenzy of Huhne backing suddenly no-one will touch him at
Mings price on IG has moved again down to 45 now back up to 46 all the time being “Closed” - so it can’t be the weight of money moving things.
Hva e they been talking to you Mike or just reading PB.com?
79 - Both Ballard and Rendel were humiliated in 1999 and looked rather foolish. If I remember correctly, they each got something below 10% of the vote. Whatever happens now (unless there is something horrible in the Sunday papers!) Huhne won’t be humiliated - he will look like a major player win or lose. Generally, people quite like having a major player as their MP in preference to some saddo as long as the casework is being done efficiently and they are seen around.
63. It looks as if he’s trying to make a point about EU regulation - too much of it lying around and it needs to have sunset clauses. Or it could be new tax legislation.
97 I fully understand that. The point I was making was that Tories, many of whom regularly criticise the Lib Dems for their by-election tactics, are past masters at telling the electorate in a by-election one thing, and then using the opposite as an excuse for their failure afterwards. Leicester South was one example of this.
Was this by any chance the same poll which asked something like “who’s the right age, and who is more likely to understand issues facing the public”?
So did this poll measure whom people actually intended to vote, or whom they though was in his best age to lead the party?
im quite pleased. ive had £10 on Ming at 2.5, i could now lay this and make it a free bet.
Bally Eric - I don’t think you’ve been listening to Huhne enough. He’s great news for the tories, in fact I couldn’t think of a candidate who would be better (at least Hughes may squeeze labour votes and take some tory/lib dem marginals). I’m sure you realise that Huhne is good news for labour but, as far as the two main parties go, it’s a win/win situation.
If I was the tories I’d be glad that it wasn’t Campbell (although he still presents a good target) and labour similarly with Hughes. Huhne is a double whammy, everyone’s happy (except many lib dem voters……….)
89 I hail to the masters of bastardized bar charts !
101 Most members will probably have voted before the Sunday papers come out - all ballot papers now seem to be out.
102 - Oh I see - EP is European Parliament then.
Now it becomes evident that the other poll that was supposedly leaked was in fact by another campaign and not Huhne’s. Some of us thought that maybe it was excellent spinning on their behalf: now it looks like it was a desparate defence by one of the other campaigns.
It reinforces the belief that Mike and Guido’s numbers were right (or nearly right) about the other poll, and that yougov’s rebuttal was playing lose with their language in their rebuttal.
UKpaul - Absolutely right. The Tories are going to love quoting Huhne’s swivel-eyed Euro clap-trap back at him at every turn.
Huhne wants to scrap the pound for goodness sake - how many votes is that going to win off the Tories?
94 & 106 So we’re agreed then. Huhne will be good news for Labour because he’s right wing and good news for the Tories because he’s left wing.
I think I’m starting to see why the Lib Dem members seem to identify with him …
34 - Marcus(and other Tories)your argument about Huhne is hilarious, same one the Lid Dems tried to use for DC, no experience, not enough backing with MPs(remember Davis had the vast majority) and other such tosh!
I think mist Lid Dems accept that they said this as they were worried(justifiably it seems) about him.
So please you “true blues” don’t fall in to the same trap of Huhne would be a disaster, experience….. I think that looks like you guys might be just a bit more worried about him then Ming or Hughes.
Please don’t reply if its just the normal vitriol, time will tell as it will with Dc, but rubbishing Huhne at this point will not make anyone change their minds(if fact the opposite will probably happen)
06-10 & 11- two words for you Tory lovers “Flip-Flop”, DC in May 2005 and DC Feb 2006, please lets play spot the difference or not!
96. Readingliberal, I still think it’s a needless risk that we don’t have to take.
(I also don’t see how the majority size of his MP backers comes into it)
109 - I was just thinking the same thing. This new poll was done a couple of days later than the first one and, if the leaked figures were near to being right, would suggest a small shift Huhne’s way. This would certainly fit in with the growing sense of panic in the Hughes camp.
“Being objective, I don’t really see Dunfermline as a key benchmark/measureable for us at this stage though as it clearly isn’t going to be a target seat anytime soon and isn’t naturally fertile Conservative ground.”
I couldn’t give a damn one way or the other. As you say, May 4th is far more important.
96 - How can you kill this? Chris Huhne’s miniscule majority is the sword of Damocles hanging over him and, by extension, the LibDems, if/when he becomes leader.
Sure other LibDem MPs of small majorities, the difference between them and Huhne is they’re not standing for party leader.
You say that at the last election the Tories threw a six figure sum at Eastleigh, so next time, they’ll throw a bigger six figure sum, depending on their fund raising.
You may be convinced that Huhne won’t lose his seat. The numbers, or rather that little magic number, “568″ suggests it’s in danger.
104. Yes, it did use blatant push-polling.
Re: 93 & 95. The margin of error on a 400 sample is +/- 5%. What is much harder to pin down is the definition of the universe to which that margin or error applies. Because there is not an equal random chance of all Lib Dem members being polled it is plainly not +/- 5% on the attitudes of all Lib Dem members. At the other extreme it will, I don’t doubt, be very much more accurate than +/- 5% on the views of Lib Dem members who are signed up to YouGov’s panel. But there is no way of knowing how similar or different they may be from Lib Dem members as a whole. So I do not think it is possible to assert anything else about the margin of error - indeed I think it is arguable that YouGov polls don’t really have a definable margin of error. That is not to criticise them at all - it is just a function of internet polling, and of course YouGov’s record is exceptionally good both in general and specifically on party leadership ones (though this Lib Dem race is plainly more complicated, and seems much tighter, than either of the Tory leadership elections that YouGov got spot on).
re: Sunday papers and new exposures. Didn’t the Tories in Eastleigh make some mud stick on Huhne over his use of public money to fund his campaign? Something about the European Parliament office in London? Might be worth another look.
117 - PaulT - Desperate man, looking at his majority as an excuse not to vote for him! Remember the Lib Dems did the same with Howard and failed, his majority went up due to the fact that he was being targeted and that he was leader.
Re 99 & 100 ignore 99 temporary lack of liquidity.
100 Icarus what is the point of displaying changing prices if it’s closed? Don’t you prefer Betfair with lower margins and ‘instant access’?
118. This poll is somewhat unusual in that it asks questions on policy and personality before asking for voting intention. The policy questions in particular seem to flag up the Huhne agenda: green taxes, minimum replacement for Trident, troops out of Iraq by Xmas.
This isn’t push-polling, but the choice and order of questions does seem designed to give the best possible result for Huhne.
114 In my view each of the three bring risks which we have to balance with their positives.
The low majority is certainly a risk with Huhne.
For me the risk of us appearing to have a ‘caretaker’ leader with Campbell are greater.
The most important factors for me personally are a) how convincing they are when they appear in the media (Kennedy’s big plus) and b) they ability to set a clear agenda (Ashdown’s big plus).
From what I have seen during the campaign Huhne has done best on both of these.
123. Doesn’t that qualify as push-polling? It’s pretty unusual for a poll to ask questions in that order.
I’d be happy to hear no more of Huhne’s majority, as this has been completely overdone here. Most first term MPs get an incumbency effect; most new leaders get a bounce (even the hated Howard, for God’s sake!). Huhne would be expected to get both - doesn’t make it safe but lot safer than it looks and just not a factor to go on about.
120 Well if they did they obviously didn’t make enough of it stick.
Ming has had the backing of half the Lib Dem MPs, yet despite this has been running a very lacklustre leadership campaign.
If he cannot lead the other MPs in a decent leadership campaign then Lib Dem members need to ask themselves if he is really gonna be capable of succesfully leading the parliamentary party as party leader.
I wonder if some of those MPs who committed to him very early on are now regretting not biding their time a little.
I know several Lib Dem members who have gone over to Huhne in the last week and however accurate the poll is, it is surely picking up on what is a very real swing towards Huhne.
118 - And was it commisioned by the same client than the previous, unpublished polls?
A quote from a previous thread:
Some clue about the client for the YouGov surveys might be drawn from the code they give them. Each survey has a three letter code followed by eight numbers. The three letters are generally quite descriptive of the client ; e.g. TEL = Telegraph, FIN = Financial Times, YGX = YouGov.
The three surveys commissioned during the LD leadership race which I’ve completed all have the code IBE. That’s the first time this has been used in the two years I’ve been a YouGov panelist. I can’t come up with an answer from this… over to you Sherlocks.
by Bill Butcher February 8th, 2006 at 9:53 am
According to the Huhne site http://www.chris2win.org.uk/news/45.html , this poll was commissioned by John Stevens, whose name you can find also from the supporter list of Huhne: http://www.chris2win.org/pages/fullsupporterlist.html
Now, why hasn’t he released the previous polls? Was it because he had to get one, which would put Huhne on lead, and therefore finally resorted to a poll, where the questions were twisted to favour Huhne?
124. I don’t think you can really put ‘the appearance of having a caretaker leader’ in the same league as majority when it comes to risk.
Fortunately, no one thought Churchill was a caretaker leader during the war.
Is it not possible that a safer seat will be found for Huhne to contest at the next election - say Mark Oaten’s Winchester, to pick one at random?
Any signs of any high-profile defections from Campbell to Huhne yet?
129. Good thinking, Lilith.
Re 129 To repeat from earlier thread: I would urge people not to complete polls for which the funder(s) are not transparent. If you’re not told up front (as you should be), ask; if refused an answer, refuse to give your answers!
131. Uhm, it would generate bad press (the LD leader is afraid to lose his seat).
129 - For guys who would love him to be leader you guys are sure working up a sweet about him!
134. Would bad press not be better than running the risk of trying to defend an anorexically slim majority? Surely trying to negate such bad press would be a better use of resources than trying to match what we Conservatives would be pouring into our decapitation efforts in beastly Eastleigh?
134 - Absolutely right Andrea, it is utterly inconceivable that he would switch seats. I also believe that there is a constitutional rule in the Lib Dems to prevent chicken runs of the sort that occured in 1992-7 amongst the Tories, although just possibly you can in theory follow voters (so if Eastleigh loses one ward to Winchester you could theoretically follow possibly).
Mike, can you explain why a YouGov poll showing Campbell 6% ahead gets the header “it’s very close”, while a YouGov poll showing Huhne 4% ahead gets the header “Huhne set to win”?
136. “Surely trying to negate such bad press would be a better use of resources than trying to match what we Conservatives would be pouring into our decapitation efforts in beastly Eastleigh? ”
well, I think you conservatives should save some resources for all the 100+ seats you need to win a majority.
136 - No. “Huhne stands and fights against the odds” is infinitely better than, “Lib Dems on the run: Huhne deserts marginal seat”. He knows that and would never do it - and I believe he is genuinely committed to the seat and his constituents.
138 Peter - it’s because there’s a clear movement in Huhne’s direction. It’s always been Ming’s contest to lose - he’s doing just that.
139. We have considerably more resources at our disposal than the Liberal Democrats, and in Liberal Democrat-Conservative marginals, we could be boosted by the Liberal Democrats having a leader distracted by trying to cling onto his own seat.
138. Momentum. Ming ain’t got it.
140. All the while, Huhne would be unable to join the fight in key marginals elsewhere as he would be distracted by his own personal battle.
128. What lacklustre campaign? He has an excellent-looking website featuring a constant stream of endorsements from MPs who clearly think he is a genuinely nice person to work with, determined etc etc. He’s given us a far better idea of how he would lead the party and what his values are than Huhne has. He’s not tried to put all his eggs in policy baskets that may or may not end up being approved. He’s been to Dunfermline numerous times and been to hustings and other appearances at the same time as having to carry out the acting leader’s job. The one thing that hasn’t been to my liking has been the odd bit of whispering, but from what I’ve heard that has come from the fringes of the campaign anyway, and in any case has been nothing compared to the spinning of the Hooners.
A word of advice for nervous Campbell backers on IGsport. Don’t sell too frantically. If you bought Campbell at, say, 62, there’s no point in selling him at 42 when you can buy Huhne at 55. Obviously you’ll be a guaranteed 17 down when one bet ends up at 100 and the other zero, but that’s preferable to being 20 down by selling a bet at 20 less than you paid for it. It also leaves the option of selling later if Campbell’s odds narrow and Huhne’s tighten. Even if you sell him at just 10, that’s still 10 saved on top of the 3 mentioned above.
Of course, this assumes you accept, as I do, that this is a two horse race. If you think Hughes is in with a realistic chance, buying Huhne and selling will not be synonymous.
129 An alternative explanation would be that IBE is the code used for all Independent clients and, having got wind that the first one was being run by a supporter of another camp, they decided to get one of their supporters to commission his own.
The Huhne camp would have been happy with any result that showed him in contention. The fact that he is edging ahead would simply be a bonus.
141 Quite right
That last line should read:
If you think Hughes is in with a realistic chance, buying Huhne and selling Campbell will not be synonymous.
139&44 Daniel- So its down to money or resources, as you put it, nothing to do with policy, ah thats right not decided on them this far from a GE….Yet this far from a GE you want to run scare storys on a guy who MAY become leader, I’m a flaoting voter after voting Lid Dem last time, but you Tories on here really do turn me off!!
145: Valient effort, Val, but sinking … sinking …
144. An appearance in marginal X showed by TV could probably reach more voters than a walk in a street of Eastleigh.
The only problem would be if constituents think he is not interested enough in them.
Andrea - O/T, but have you seen your beloved and most venerable Helen has been getting press over on Recess Monkey?
Plus there is a new photo of her……
http://www.recessmonkey.com/ - scroll down to 2nd and 3rd article today
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6f/Helen_clark.jpg
144 - Precisely - the danger for the LibDems is that that Huhne would be so tied down in his own seat that he would be almost invisible everywhere else. So, even if he keeps his seat, it could be bad for the LibDems everywhere else.
52. Thanks. MilkyBar Kid.
We’ve already noticed the resemblance, but someone here mentioned that PB has more femininity than her!
149. FYI, I actually think Huhne is the most dangerous of the three candidates in overall electoral terms but I don’t think it’s a scare story to suggest that holding onto a majority of 568 in the face of a vigorous campaign by local Conservatives may prove difficult. Besides which, decapitation strategies are hardly a Conservative invention - witness the Liberal Democrats’ 2005 campaign, which you endorsed!
125. Valerie, push-polling is something different, designed to plant negative ideas about a candidate or issue in voters’ minds. It is targeted at all voters (or all swing voters). The results are not analysed or published.
I think this is more a case of creative polling, similar to the polls on fox-hunting where you get very different reesults depending on whether its the Countryside Alliance or the League Against Cruel Sports commissioning the survey and setting the questions, question order and answer options.
This sort of polling is designed to build momentum for a campaign.
149. The sort of people who post on here are generally people who are interested in the electoral mechanics rather than actual policies. The closer you get to campaigns then the further away you get from policy. For too long the Conservative Party thoought it was all about the policies while Labour used sophisticated marketing and campaigning to win. Finally the Conservatives have realised that winning is about clever campaigning not just sayiong this is us - take it or leave it.
150. Not a valiant effort - just what I think.
In what way has Huhne run a good campaign? (apart from saying something about raising fuel taxes at the start).
“Do I look bovered?” : C. Hughne suporters.
The problems for Hughne in Eastleigh include his current friend, momentum, and our old friends UKIP.
Hughne’s vote fell from 40.7% to 38.61 (compared with Chidgey in 2001)…
Conor Burns (Top Tory) increased his vote from 34.27% to 37.47%…
Labour fell from 21.92% to 20.57%.
And the real spanner in the works…
UKIP polled 1,669 votes (3.35%)in 2005 (849 (1.78%) in 2001)
Assuming some uplift for Conor from the Cameron factor, plus the salivating prospect for UKIP voters of helping to pop Brussels Balloon Hughne and you complacent LibDems really ought to start looking bovered.
147 - “An alternative explanation would be that IBE is the code used for all Independent clients…”
I think that’s unlikely. Did you read this part of my previous quote:
“…the code IBE. That’s the first time this has been used in the two years I’ve been a YouGov panelist”
159. apologies for spelling Huhne incorrectly.
159. “Hughne’s vote ”
Is Hughne the secret love child of Chris Huhne and Simon Hughes?
158. The fact that Huhne has risen from complete obscurity to clear front-runner indicates how well his campaign has gone in relation to the other two (three if you include Oaten).
158. Sorry, I don’t mean to give the impression Huhne’s run a bad campaign - I don’t think he has at all - but I don’t think it’s been better than Campbell’s.
Hughes’ has been a little odd…
154 - I think Monkey’s suggestions may have just pushed me into a vow of celibacy…..
155 - I say again Howard faced the same problem and came through it fine.
Also just because I voted Lib Dem does not mean I endorsed the “decapitation” strategy.
If this holds true then all the Torys on this site endorsed MH in the last election and have “Flip-Flopped” under DC in a few months, he has thrown everything out yet you guys seem to love it, no matter that he wrote the bloody manifesto just 10 months ago!! Please don’t lecture me about my voting.
Baskerville. Huhne did not inherit a personal vote but he should be able to build one up over 4 years. Also with a decent push there’s no reason why the Labour vote couldn’t be squeezed substantially next time. Nonetheless the seat is marginal and that ought to be a factor to weigh up against MC’s age and SH’s lerftishness and lack of candour.
82. Andy - yes Taunton without the Exmoor wards will be harder to win, though it will still be marginal. We could always get Browne to defect (aaarggh that word again) instead though. I miss Jackie Ballard, she was a huge vote winner for the Tories down here in the West Country.
165. There’s a Mr Clark….I still have to find a photo of him, I’m a bit curious.
166. Two points in response to this comment - firstly, Howard’s majority was significantly larger than 568 and secondly, I didn’t lecture you about your voting.
Huhne is a low key, competent technocrat with zero charisma. The sort of guy who makes a good no. 2 in a ruling party - and may get to take over and become PM eventually. A third party like the Lib Dems really need someone with flair who finds it easy to grab media attention. With Huhne the party gets someone who resembles the character played by William H Macy in The Cooler. I’d seriously advise anyone who is thinking of voting for him to get the film out on DVD first. Every journalist I know finds him boring as hell - including the ones who knew him at the Guardian.
268.”I miss Jackie Ballard, she was a huge vote winner for the Tories down here in the West Country. ”
and you even had troubles to defeat her. Those years were really bad for you.
268 - How’s the getting people to defect thing going for you chaps, by the way? I have been holding my breath for weeks now and it’s getting a bit wearisome.
159. I suggest that UKIP will have less impact on the next GE than they had on the last one. It’s hard to see where they are going to get new votes from, while much of their existing support resulted from voter boredom and the RKS-factor. With 3 new party leaders next time and the prospect of change in the air there’s every reason to expect (1) a higher turnout and (2) a drift away from fringe parties. Huhne can fight Eastleigh on the national stage; he won’t have to pace the streets; it won’t be a by-election, after all.
159. Ah but that 20.57% labour vote looks tasty for the traditional libdem squeeze. Seriously, the Tories will take a few LibDem seats at the next election, but I can’t see Eastleigh being one of them. I’m confident that the combination of higher profile (irrespective of his fate in the leadership battle), incumbency and the squeezability of the labour vote will see Huhne OK.
170 - “witness the Liberal Democrats’ 2005 campaign, which you endorsed!”
I beg to differ.
149 Big Mak - Do grow up.
163. DVA - Huhne has never been obscure among activists - he’s pretty well-known and well-respected.
158 - nice try
.. but Val, don’t do yourself a disservice. You and Peter are the most vocal part of Ming’s campaign, the rest has been a real flop.
Keep up the good work - someone’s got to.
But surely, Baskerville, there is a limit on the amount of money you Tories can throw at a consituency? After the first half million pounds or so, does it not stop being productive? I expect Tory Central Office must have some figures somewhere. So if 400,000 off-book was not enough to topple Eastleigh this time, how much will it take?
Valerie, if your thoughts about John Stevens are right, and it came out, it could destroy Huhne’s campaign. Issuing multiple opinion polls and then keeping them secret until you get one you like is pretty low.
175. It would if you were attacking, but you’re not, you’re defending.
174. Indeed, UKIP are likely to be squeezed, but in Eastleigh their voters will have a pretty clear choice of where to go.
By the way, I am not saying Huhne will lose Eastleigh, merely that it will be a fight and therefore a distraction.
If I were voting, as an activist, I would be concerned at the effect of that distraction on my leader.
Keeping them secret until you get one you like and *only* releasing that one, that is.
176. *sigh* That wasn’t a lecture, I was merely responding to your indignation about a possible decapitation strategy by the Conservatives by pointing out that you voted for a party whose 2005 campaign was largely centred around a decapitation strategy (oh, and by playing the Iraq card in seats with large Moslem and/or student populations). I didn’t say you personally endorsed the decapitation strategy, I said you endorsed the Liberal Democrats’ 2005 campaign, so please don’t lecture me about non-existent lectures!
178. and the YouGov poll is likely to be somewhat skewed towards activists. As I said, Huhne is well-respected amongst them.
Another factor is that activists may have slightly rose-tinted glasses when it comes to looking at Huhne’s majority. They see it in terms of campaigning, rather than stepping back and taking a cooller look at the actual risk (media and otherwise).
I genuinely believe people are under-estimating Simon Hughes’s showing. I know of many members who are waiting for the public hustings in the next few weeks (including the QT special) before casting their vote. Several things are counting in his favour, such as confidence in speaking to the public, and long-term support of a large proportion of members. He is also not drawn back by the problems of his rivals (inexperience with CH and one-term with MC). There are many who care about the party who will feel compelled to vote for him.
186. Valerie, isn’t Hughes liked by activists too?
Lib Dem price in Dunfermline has tightened a lot… any news?
177 - Tory Boy- Ah thats 2 votes in my house lost, you guys really are complete….no sorry not worth it, not changed at all have you(and thats why you’ll lose yet again my friend)
Although it may now be too late! Imagine an investigative journalist being able to show, just as Huhne is being crowned, the sleazy way the Huhne team managed to push themselves into the lead, pushing aside old Ming with clever use of multiple polling! I hope you are right, Valerie!
189. how could you see it? using the links from pb.com, it gives a page with a warning about the market being closed.
190 Yeah yeah yeah - You were a floating voter - yawn !!
182, 184: Hrmh… Well, I trust there are people here from both the Campbell and Hughes camps, which will inform them of the evidence presented in the items 104, 118 and 129.
182. I don’t think Sir Menzies ‘Campaigning Before Christmas’ Campbell would have much of a leg to stand on when making an issue about underhand tactics.
185 - and you endorsed the most right wing, racist and unpleasant Tory campaign in many a year. Of course like all Tory’s today you deny this and your lovely and “Liberal” now, you also are playing the Iraq card in Dunfermline, back to you!
DFW prices on BF are:
(to back)
1.12 Lab
3.05 LD
30 SNP
210 Any other
Very low amounts so high liquidity - somebody though just bought every LD lay down to 5, whereas last night bets where exchanged up to 12 I think.
193 - explains you guys to a tee, go play with the other children.
191 - inaccurate and pretty much libellous nonsense. Shows how desperate some of Ming’s less easily controlled supporters have got.
What ‘clever use of multiple polling’? Has someone found a way to corrupt YouGov? Give evidence or withdraw.
Several rep[lies, I’ve been working.
71 - I’d be disappointed if our vote share gors down tonight.
Eastleigh - there are wildly inflated figures being bandied about for what Tories spent in Eastleigh, all wrong. Conor did do some spectacularily effective fundraising but I’d be surprised if he spent 10% of the figures above in the year before the campaign.
During the election all target seats had help from CCO mostly though poster sites; but again, in the low tens of thousands.
I think Huhnes low margin is a red herring anyhow, I agree that if he becomes leader his vote will get firmer, it’s a non-issue.
I was very critical of the Lib dems crude and unpleasant ‘decapitation strategy’ and pleased that in all but one seat the Tory vote went up as a result; so it’s a proven failure we won’t see again.
Lastly, my point has been all along that this contest for the Lib Dems is where we were in 1990, not where we were in 2005.
If Hune gets it he’s your John Major; not your David Cameron. If Campbell gets it, he might be your Michael Howard.
If Hughes gets it he’s your IDS.
199 - the Peter who made that post is a Tory, not a Ming supporter.
160, 182, 184 Well this one had an IBE code and was the one commissioned by John Hemming a few weeks ago:
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/IBE060101001_1.pdf
196. I didn’t actually vote Conservative in the 2005 election so you are of course completely wrong about me endorsing that campaign, but I’d be careful about making libellous comments about that campaign being racist if I were you.
In any case, instead of launching ad hominem attacks strewn with grammatical errors, why don’t you admit you’ve lost the argument about decapitation strategies and that your indignation at the Conservatives (re: decapitation) was misplaced?
191 - inaccurate and pretty much libellous nonsense. Shows how desperate some of Ming’s less easily controlled supporters have got.
What ‘clever use of multiple polling’? Has someone found a way to corrupt YouGov? Give evidence or withdraw.
Huh? Valerie came up with a plausible scenario and I was speculating on what would happen if it proved to be true.
Her scenario is that John Stevens commissioned multiple YouGov polls with the commitment that they be kept secret, and released only this one because it gave a Huhne lead. That doesn’t require any corruption on YouGov’s part.
196 You really do sound like a floating voter Big Mak !
Flushed out springs to mind.
Oh - and I don’t support any Liberal Democrat, as book value says.
188. Yes, he is. All I was meaning is that to describe Huhne as having risen from obscurity doesn’t really correspond to the reality within the party.
If he really had risen from obscurity all round, he’d be polling slightly more than 6% among Lib Dem voters in the Communicate Research poll. Do you think Cameron would have been polling 6% among Tory voters at the same stage in the Tory campaign?
NB 69% of Tory voters aged 55-64 - a fairly key group - said Campbell had most appeal to them. 60% said he would make the party more popular. (I think we can assume that most of them weren’t engaged in reverse-spinning).
Ah - there are two Peters - and I though your views just kept changing with bizarre regularity!
175. I’m not sure the kind of Labour voter you get in Eastleigh is necessarily going to be an easy crossover to the Lib Dems in a GE. It most certainly isn’t polenta-land there. A eurosceptic, populist Tory campaign might well win more converts than a Lib Dem candidate pushing for euro entry and higher taxes on cars. The high UKIP vote is a clue here.
Heh! He’s very stubborn about keeping the same identity here despite the obvious confusion it causes.
199: for evidence, read 104 & 129.
204 - You might want to check the name under that scenario again.
96
“The Tories threw the book at Eastleigh in a concerted way before the General Election - a large six-figure sum, more than even the decapitation seats bar I think Howard’s. And Chris - despite not being the incumbent - still won.”
Presumably you have some evidence of this “large six figure sum”? Conor Burns regularly spent nights at my (Winchester) constituency office from 10pm ’til the wee hours using our HP printer to do his leafets; his constituency couldn’t afford to keep a permanent secretary on staff and Conor was constatntly engaged in large fundraising efforts. Yes he got some Ashcroft help but to suggest that the party in any way “threw the book” at Eastleigh or spent “a large six figure sum” is complete fantasy.
That said, as always the opinions on this site are amusing for being so polarised but probably short on the reality stakes.
Does it help the Lib Dems that Hughne’s majority is small? No. Is it a disaster for the Lib Dem’s? No. If he’s leader there’ll be plenty of help at constituency level to ensure the message gets out and Hughne will have plenty of exposure to put him in front of Eastleigh’s voters. That said it will be an unwelcome distraction.
The result in Eastleigh, like many others in the South, will depend on where David Cameron is come 2008/9 and what sort of direction the new Lib Dem leader pulls the party in. Boring as it may be for all the anoraks (including me) on this site, it’s far too early to give any sort of meaningful answer to these questions yet.
I’ll go back to lurking now . . .
204. Can I point out that I didn’t come up with that scenario - Lilith did. All I said was that it was interesting.
Peter/Valerie - I think this could be a dodgy poll not least for the reasons that you and Valerie have already mentioned. In additon. John Stevens is a ‘public’ Huhne supporter and if he has possibly commissioned a number of YOU Gov polls to try and get the result he wanted this would mean deep pockets - which he has - but how does this square with the limits on funding for the LD leadership campaign set at £35k. Which CH’s campaign is easily spending without paying anything from £5k to £20k for polls…..
I think this is going to blow up in their faces. Dangerous.
213.”Conor Burns regularly spent nights at my (Winchester) constituency office from 10pm”
is it the next NOTW exposure?
203 - I think I am well within my rights to say it had racist overtones, if anyone wants to take me to court go ahead, strange how I would be pulled up on this while the people marching last Friday have been left alone?
I was not (incorrect grammar or otherwise) endorsing the strategy, I thought it was a waste of time. My point is that whatever party you vote for there are policies that you don’t agree with, and that was one.
So be you any colour on the political spectrum that was my point. Also I was not aware this was an English language site, post are quick and with no spell check or time to spend much time on them. Although it seems you got the jist of things still.
12 - No, that is right. I mean John Stevens, an obscure deselected MEP who later defected to the Lib Dems: I’m not suggesting suspicious activities by the senior policeman!
These are the results from YouGov’s poll for John Hemming - observe the code.
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/IBE060101001_1.pdf
IBE doesn’t correspond to a single client.
All this blatant Campbell ramping by making up scurrilous rumours about the Huhne campaign commissioning expensive, biased polls until they get the right result is ridiculous.
The Campbell campaign is floundering - get over it.
214 It was indeed interesting if fatally flawed, and no-one is blaming your for it.
218, Peter, actually I urged you to check who wrote the message 129, where the scenario was presented.
220. The Campbell’s camp should pay more attention to all the ridiculous names they allowed to get in their supporters’ list.
Councillor Ginger La Grange stayed there for almost a full day….
216 I always wondered who that guy with the long lens was
Latest on betfair…huhne continues to shorten.
If he goes 1.8 it gets snapped up very quickly — obvioulsy lots of orders in the system.
CH 1.72. MC 2.32. Hughes 26
Daniel, these accusations of political bias as an alternative to giving an answer to every argument and piece of evidence really are tedious. I am not a backer of Ming Campbell - or Chris Huhne or Simon Hughes. I am a backer of David Cameron.
220 - I’m not involved in Campbell campaign. All I did was presenting the evidence I have found from this site and that of Huhne’s in the message 129. I’m sure all this is veriable. And if it is true, I think it will not be the Campbell supporters who will be desperate.
227. Lilith, where’s the evidence that John Stevens commissioned the previous poll?
I just see speculations.
219 Thank you Anthony - just as I said at 202
226. You will note that I did not name names so you can lay off with the defensiveness. I am not in the game of picking fights with fellow Conservatives today - if I was, I’d go and say something controversial over at ConservativeHome.com
217. As I’ve already pointed out that I did not say you endorsed the decapitation strategy, I think this argument is pretty much exhausted now.
lovely to see the lib dems in their true colours. bald men fighting over a comb.
227 - Lilith - Your only evidence seemed to be that you believed the IBE code to be specific to John Stevens. Both Anthony Wells, who works for YouGov, and I have demonstrated that this is simply not the case.
223 Andrea - Fabulous. I almost spat my coffee over the keyboard there. I look forward to some NOTW revelations.
Lilith, sorry, I see it was you rather than Valerie who made the link.
Andrea, it’s not speculation that secret YouGov polls have been commissioned. This site has been arguing about one of them for most of this week. Nor is it speculation that the Huhne camp commissioned this latest poll. You don’t have to wear a tin foil hat to link the fact that the latest poll showed Huhne in a good light to the fact that it was released. After all, if it had shown Huhne in third place, do you seriously think John Stevens would have made it public? In which case, we have a mysterious first poll, a likely commissioner of that first poll, a likely reason to keep it secret, and then a public second poll that, surprise, surprise, is good for Huhne. Put that evidence together and a pretty plausible story emerges.
233. If you’re an Angela Lansbury fan, you could spot the other fictional name on the list. It’s there since monday.
234. Peter, it’s speculation that Stevens commissioned the previous polls. You’ve no evidence to back it.
For me it could have been Ginger La Grange or Stewart Lewis to have commissioned them.
Its amusing to say its Libellous to call the Conservative Party racist.
I for one would love to see that go to court.
Could you imagine if they lost?
228 - Andrea, did you read this:
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2006/02/08/yougov-says-the-leak-was-wrong/#comment-160329
I haven’t personally participated to any YouGov poll, but I don’t have any reason to doubt what “Bill Butcher” told in his posting, especially as it was posted before this poll was published. If what he says is true, then John Stevens commissioned the previous poll.
Those who are registered in the YouGov and have answered the polls, can probably verify if the polls had the same client code.
227. Your ‘evidence’ is actually nothing of the sort. It is idle speculation, which has been comprehensively refuted. To persist with this notion about the YouGov polls being a Huhne campaign equivalent of the Irish Treaty of Nice referenda (i.e. repeat until you get desired result) is either seriously misguided or a fatuous attempt at ramping Campbell.
234 - Where and how have you demonstrated it?
338. Lilth the poll commissioned by John Hemming had the IBE code too. so that comment doesn’t prove anything.
239 Danie, my speculation has been denied, but not “comprehensively refuted”. There is a difference.
238 Lilith - are you deliberatly ignoring the posts by myself and Anthony Wells?
One of the polls you are referring to - which had an IBE code - was commissioned by John Hemming.
He is different to John Stevens.
This shows that your assumption that polls with an IBE code are the same person is pants.
242. See Andrea’s comment at 241 for an immediate example. Scroll further up and read the comment by Anthony Wells, a respected YouGov employee.
Daniel, I think you can agree there’s a pretty limited number of people who would commission a YouGov poll on the Lib Dem leadership. Obviously there would be newspapers, but other than that, the leadership campaigns themselves are the only other likely contenders.
The fact that the first poll was kept secret rules out newspapers, so it seems very likely indeed the poll was commissioned by one of the leadership campaigns. Which do you think it was, if not Huhne?
234 Indeed it does.
And the most plausible story is that the first poll was commissioned by one of the other camps in the hope that it would put Huhne third.
It didn’t, but the Huhne camp got a leak of the results.
They then got one of their supporters to commission a second snap poll which has now been released.
241 - Did you participate that poll, or how do you know?
245. Peter, maybe the other contenders?
I would rule out Hughes because he had already commissioned a CR poll
245. Received wisdom is that it was commissioned by somebody with links to the Campbell campaign.
247. Look at post 119 for the full poll and code.
Now now, children.
243, No, I just haven’t seen you posting any evidence (or Anthony Wells to post anything at all).
Jim, 46: Okay, that does make sense. One problem with Lilith’s theory is that the first poll’s leaked ‘results’ were briefly promoted on Huhne’s campaign site, but that may be because they saw how well they were received on PB.C and the potential for using them to prove Huhne’s momentum.
What I don’t understand is why the theory that it was Huhne’s camp rather than Campbell’s is being treated with such hysteria.
Read the thread lilith. Evidence has been provided.
252. if you had read other comments, you would have noticed this poll commissioned by Hemming:
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/IBE060101001_1.pdf
The code starts with IBE (look at the link address)
253. Because of the suggestion that it would be damaging to Huhne’s campaign if somebody with links to the Huhne campaign had been repeatedly commissioning loaded polls until they got the desired result.
253. “What I don’t understand is why the theory that it was Huhne’s camp rather than Campbell’s is being treated with such hysteria. ”
maybe because accusing a camp to do polls until they find the result they prefer is more damagining than accusing a camp not to reveal a bad poll.
Even if IBE hadn’t ever been associated with someone else, it wouldn’t prove beyond doubt that it was Stevens both of these times. The point is more that a limited number of people would have an interest in commissioning the poll in the first place, so surely the idea that it was the Huhne camp who did, then kept it secret, is worthy of some consideration?
I think that the fact that Hughes has more public supporters that the others on his website is interesting. His percentage of ordinary members rather than MPs & Cllrs is even more impressive. A good performance on QT tonight and I predict a move forward. All that we have really seen over the last week is a move from Campbell to Huhne. Now that Campbell is dropping back his support could go to Hughes. I think its a 3 horse race….but I’m still backing Hughes!
58. it’s worth of considerations as much as suggestions that MG or SH did it.
but they’re all just speculations at the moment.
255 - Hmmm, I see. In that case I was probably wrong, and we still don’t know who commisioned the unpublished poll.
259. I wouldn’t consider supporters list as so important. Especially because it’s easy to create fictional names.
261. yes, we don’t know. It could have been Huhne, Ming, Hughes, Mark Oaten’s rent boy….
258 - Yes - it doesn’t prove beyond doubt that they didn’t. But it does refute the only shred of evidence that they did.
I find it very difficult to believe that the views of the YouGov sample would have changed dramatically from one three day period to the next. Therefore it is very likely that Huhne was in the running in the first poll. And that was all they needed to show at that point. So if it was theirs they would have published it.
It would not be in the interests of either of the other campas to publish it if Huhne was in contention. So it is more likely that it was a supporter of one of the other camps.
Given that we now know that Hughes camp was already running a Communicate Research poll it is less likely to be them.
So it is most likely to be someone supporting Campbell. Or possibly someone with a completly different reason for doing it.
The only thing I am now 100% certain of is that it wasn’t ‘webpoll2′;-)
58 The other poll was very good for Huhne and could have been used quite profitably by them , if Mike’s figures were correct. There was no guarantee that another poll would be better. The MC campaign will surely counterattack and demand an answer from Huhne on whether he or any of his supporters commissioned the earlier poll. That is unless MC’s supporters did it which I still think is the most likely explanation. I cannot imagine that Stevens commissioned both personally. It would be highly damaging to him personally if it ever got out which, let’s face it, these things usually do.
232: Yes, LibDems are fighting amongst themselves right now, but that is only because the leadership contest is close to within the margin of error. If the same had been true of the Tories there would have been real bloodshed in the last weeks!
There are a lot of “new” posters here making accusations and counter-accusations, but it’s all par for the course of politics. Right now I’m more interested in bye-election rumours, and why the Liberal price is tightening so much. Anyone got rumours?
I think Huhne’s poll numbers are part of the Cameron effect. LibDems in wing chairs all over the land saying to themselves’ If they can do it,so can we,’ and then making the assumption that the new boy is the fresh face and the best bet and has no hidden faults.
Its a reasonable assumption on the face of it, but Dave got nearly half the MPs voting for him, and almost all the possible candidates were in the race and lost out.
Huhne has very few MP backers, not all the good candidates, let alone the possible candidates, are in the race and he is most unlikely to get two thirds of the votes.
Ignore Huhne’s GE majority. Just think what will happen to all those people who see themselves as so, so, talented but who failed to get into the race as they assumed they would be the young cardinals to an old pope who they could push off his perch at a convenient time.
Now they are furious with themselves and the membership and most of all with the Emperor for performing so badly that their futures are being changed. So even if Huhne does not win The Emperor will have few long term friends. Either way the ructions will continue and grow as putting the scandals to rest will be nigh impossible if Huhne or the Emperor scrapes home. LibDems will soon be making toasts to Charlie over the water (well the Firth anyway) and wishing he would come back again.
If Hughes wins the champagne will pop in CCHQ all week not,as for the others, for a night.
Given that we now know that Hughes camp was already running a Communicate Research poll it is less likely to be them.
Agreed, so we’ve essentially narrowed it down to the Huhne or the Campbell camps. I am coming around to the view that it probably was Campbell rather than Huhne, if only because I’d expect the secret results to be similar to the public ones in the poll Stevens commissioned. But it is worth examining the other possibility - that it was Huhne’s camp - if only because of the sensational implications. If I were an investigative journalist right now, I’d be doing all I could to find out who commissioned and then kept secret the first poll, because if it was Huhne’s camp, they’ve effectively used “How to Lie With Statistics” - which mentions using many surveys and only releasing the best - as a textbook to push aside old Ming, the favourite of MPs, MEPs and almost as many members as Huhne, and seize the crown.
Alternatively, if it was Campbell’s camp who kept it secret in a panic, it’s still a great story.
259 - The second preference data on the YouGov poll points strongly away from that though. Caution is needed due to the margin of error, but Campbell’s supporters break very heavily for Huhne, and likewise Huhne’s for Campbell. No, it looks pretty bleak for Simon all in all.
I wonder if Peter and Peter could work out some convention - Peter (ConCom) and Peter (Liberalism2010) perhaps? I have known they were different contributors for ages but clearly some people do not appreciate it.
Back at today’s real election Labour must be getting very desperate …
Alistair Darling said:
“Catherine is a first class local candidate who served her political apprenticeship under Rachel. She is the person Rachel wanted to succeed her.”
“I ask everyone who lives in Dunfermline and West Fife to preserve her memory by voting for Labour.”
“Do it for Rachel. And do it for every hard-working family, every pensioner and every child in your community.”
269- I usually click on their link to see who they’re.
Thing is, I comment on lots of other sites besides this one with this name, and have done for ages. I’ve been around the blogosphere so long I had a blog back in July 2002.
264 - You shouldn’t forget that the questions in the two polls were formulated differently. That might affect the result, and so the views might seem to have changed dramatically.
267 Dream on blue2lose Dream on . We Lib Dems may not have the widest choice possible - I stated frequently yhat I would have liked to see a female candidate but the choice is better than that offered to Conservative members of someone who could not speak well at his party’s conference and someone else who refused to confirm or deny that he took Class A drugs in his youth .
Think Huhne would win Eastleigh in any case but note:-
Jeremy Thorpe - Devonshire North
1966 - not leader - majority 1166
1970 - leader - majority 369
so, his majority does look rather thin.
170 - agreed, but didn’t sentimentality also enter into the Cheadle by-election?
267. Interesting analysis. I imagine Clegg and co are spitting teeth about this latest poll result, which is why I’m surprised one of them hasn’t carried out another media hatchet job on Huhne today.
If the momentum remains with Huhne, I imagine there will be a few defectors soon. Interestingly, I keep reading that Opik is backing Huhne now, but the Huhne campaign has not added him to their list of declared supporters (which is understandable I suppose, I’m not sure I’d boast about an Opik endorsement either!).
176: Patsy Calton was a superb MP who was well-known and liked in Cheadle. Mark Hunter was previously leader of Stockport Council, and they had I believe often been involved in events together.
So his taking over from her was very real. Sentimentality is possible, but I think that there was a general appreciation for how much a Lib Dem MP had done for the constituency in just 5 years.
278. Catherine Sthiler shared the same office with Rachel Squire.
273 - Possible but unlikely given that these are party members.
O/T Does anyone know of a constituency that reflects the national outcome of the 2005 GE? i.e. Lab 36%, Con 33%, LD 23%.
281. Colne Valley and Pendle were near:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/155.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2005/html/453.stm
Daniel (X77): “If the momentum remains with Huhne, I imagine there will be a few defectors soon.”
Yes, Huhne is good isn´t he? Who do you see as the first Tory defector to the Lib Dems? Cameron himself?
175. And have a look at the 1979 result…oops Con majority 8000
283. I meant defectors from other leadership camps, not other parties. Cameron has already effectively defected to the Lib Dems!
Had a quick look at the YouGov raw data with my very inexpert eye. Can someone who’s more of an expert tell me if these figures seem right:
385 of the 401 sample said they would/might vote, and this broke down as:
Huhne: 123
Campbell: 112
Hughes: 89
D/K or undecided: 62
If Hughes were eliminated, his 2nd prefs would add 35 to Campbell and 32 to Huhne (with 22 undeclared). Which would give a final result:
Huhne: 155
Campbell: 147
These numbers seem very small to be able to extrapolate an accurate result… But I’m happy to be told otherwise.
182. By jimminy, Andrea, how do you do it? Somehow I knew you’d be first with an answer. Many thanks, very helpful.
283 - I think he means from the other leaderships camps, at least i think so.
On that note, any sign of any Lid Dem defectors to the Tories, Rik where are you?
284. I was responding to 282, not 283! Doh!
184 - yes… well there were “other factors”…
84 Fred, right odd.
But methinks you misses point, when Thorpe was the leader his majority went up quite a bit in 1974.
1979 followed the court case when he was not the leader
289. Please ignore! Double doh!
All this stuff about lots of polls being possibly commissioned by John Stevens with an IBE code might be vaguely relevant if the one poll we know was commissioned by John Stevens (ie this one today) actually had an IBE code.
It doesn’t.
It has an IDE code.
287. Baskerville, I recalled those 2 results.
OT: am I the only one who couldn’t see the Dunfermline market anymore?
But now I’ve a new market called “Lib Dem Forecast” (I suppose it’s about who will be the top 2)
282 & 287 - I was thinking the same thing. Are you really an Italian student, Andrea or are you simply some kind of sophisticated computer program?
Jack W are you there and, if so, what news from Scotland?
295. I’ve a witness who has seen me once!
283 - That’s an interesting one. John Bercow perhaps? Graham Brady? David Curry? Alan Duncan? Nick Herbert? Eleanor Laing? Andrew Lansley?
294 Andrea, you need some new specs. Dunfermline is still there, the Lib Dem forecast was always there as well.
296 - Signore Duncan?
296 - Your mother?
298. well, I don’t have it anymore. I think my problem is that I’m redirected to Italian betfair site and they don’t have Dunfermline markey anymore.
299. Oh, no! But I wouldn’t mind…..:wink:
300. No, Millie, your father….we’re trying to imitate Oaten.
302 - He used to be my local MP…………..Duncan that is not Oaten
Wasn’t it JulianH who allegedly met you? I still go along with the rogue computer explanation for your incredible powers.
303. How lucky!
who’s your MP now?
298 Andrea, have you tried logging in again? betfair.com
305 - Someone unspeakable I’m afraid. I don’t know whether it helps but Alan does like Italian food. I have an Italian uncle and Alan used to visit the restaurant in London where he worked. At least that’s what AD told me.
That in turn is an interesting list, Millie (293), of Tory MPs who you think might possibly switch to the Lib Dems.
“John Bercow perhaps? Graham Brady? David Curry? Alan Duncan? Nick Herbert? Eleanor Laing? Andrew Lansley?”
What is it about them that makes you think that they might find the Lib Dems more attractive?
108 - They wouldn’t any longer be in the same party as John Redwood and Ann Winterton… that’s a good enough reason.
David Curry is one of the few remaining pro-Europeans, isn’t he? We’d have him, though might be difficult to hold on to his constituency. Bercow seems a bit of a loose cannon. Herbert sounds reasonably sensible - would probably have him. Not sure about the others.
286 Your are quite right Councillor Tall. It’s probably enough to show that it is Huhne v. Campbell but not to provide an exact prediction.
And however well YouGov did with it’s Tory poll, we may still find that the group sampled by this poll do not refelect members as a whole.
304. Baskerville, don’t you believe he met me?
306. Tim Z. ok, I’ve it again now. Tomorrow I’ll book a visit with my doctor for a eyes visit…….
307. Dean. someone unspeakable? Uhm, Gorgeous George, Clare Short, Ed Leigh?
310. Ian Taylor is another pro-Euro left
Thanks Andrea - I’d forgotten about him. Yes, I think I’d have him - and the seat should be defensible too (he must carry a fair personal vote, and we have a decent base in the constituency).
310 - Lansley seems sensible and personable enough, but again the constituency would be hard to hold onto (though it does have some wards which are in the city of Cambridge but not the Cambridge constituency).
The big catch, of course, would be Ken Clarke, but I think he’s ratehr tarnished his image recently and no doubt won’t want to stand again at the next GE. He’d be a mixed blessing.
293. Ah and forget about Herbert.
315 - do you think he has a decent personal vote? At least it’s not far from soem areas of strong LibDem infrastructure.
295 Dan. OK ….. news from Dunfermline :
Turnout - Sluggish this morning, picking up this afternoon … but unlikely to pass 45%.
Labour - Feverish activity. Some consternation at low turnout in strong Labour wards early on. Worried about Lib Dems but more about majority than loss.
Lib Dems - Manic … more Lib Dems here that at a sandal shop in the January sales. Genuinely feel they are pushing Labour hard ….. but not enough for a win.
SNP - Clearly on their hols …. nuff said.
Conservative - As above with nobs on.
SSP - Who ???
316 - Rushcliffe (LD Gain)
318 - he comes across as a modest enough guy who gets the job done, so yes there’s probably a bit of a personal vote there.
Personally I wouldn’t welcome Clarke much - he’s not very liberal on ID cards or local government, for a start…
315 - the same andrew lansley who wrote in the observer in 1995: “Immigration, an issue which we raised successfully in 1992 and again in the 1994 Euro-elections campaign, played particularly well in the tabloids and has more potential to hurt. So does the issue of identity cards. If Labour lines up with the civil liberties lobby, then Blair’s efforts as shadow home secretary to remove crime as a Labour negative will be reversed.” Interesting point on ID cards…
322: thanks for that info, eric - on second thoughts, Tories can keep him!
Hmmm yes, well it balances out Brian Sedgemore!
Have you seen the photos from the conservatives ball?
Just for Sean Fear, his favourite Tory woman:
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/56789080.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A6C46725D29E46B358A55A1E4F32AD3138
Jack’s favourite:
http://cache.gettyimages.com/xc/56788379.jpg?v=1&c=MS_GINS&k=2&d=17A4AD9FDB9CF19390335F8FA9CA92A6FAAD20F75F2292F0810F755E003CBEB8
Probably the best looking couple:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=56788002&cdi=0
Liam Fox should lose some weight:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=56787971&cdi=0
Has anyone mentioned the Cable article in today’s Grauniad?
Re Andrew Lansley. He might, of course, have changed his views over the last ten years. There are some Tories we know of who have changed their views in less than ten months.
325 - was the Venerable Helen there? Have the Tories let her in?
121 - I’m not a LibDem, so I can’t vote.
328. Don’t worry, she wouldn’t join you. She wasn’t very pro-EU (she was part of “Labour against the Euro” group).
thanks for those pix andrea. a salient reminder to many i’m sure why they will never, ever, vote tory. fox and his wife are particularly spooky.
don’t know who she’s, but she was there too:
http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=56789065&cdi=0
332 - she’s a Bond girl apparently (but I had to google her). I like the way one of the keywords for that photo is “eye contact” - it took me a while to notice that.
326 - At 92, more or less at the end of the last thread. Seems that Vince couldn’t find too many liberal Conservatives at Westminster. One to cross off Rik’s defection list it would appear.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,,1705413,00.html
332. http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1853489/ is all I could find of her.
325, A tight black dress doesn’t really suit Theresa May, does it? She’d do better buying something from Hampstead Bazaar.
I imagine there was some kind of mixup with the “other” Theresa May, with hilarious consequences.
335 - http://www.mi6.co.uk/sections/articles/bond_20_catherine_mcqueen.php3?t=dad&s=dad
Ruby Wax, Catherine McQueen and Kirsty from Relocation, Cameron does seem to be pulling in the big showbiz names to his cause. Keep up the good work!
339. Ruby Wax?? Glad I didn’t have an invite.
John Salako also attended - well I never…. we should fast track him and have him stand in Croydon North!!!!!
339 - Kirsty Allsop attends every year - she is as much a fixture at the Winter Ball as Peter Stringfellow and Tim Rice…
also, is it me, or does the erstwhile Mrs Fox (to be? has the wedding happened yet) look as though she needs to shave her chin in those photos….
342 - well it would explain some of the rumours about Little Liam I suppose…
Maybe those rumours about Dr Fox were true. Tong Ting not Ting Tong.
…the usual horrible self-serving politicians biting each others backs. (I thought the Liberal Party’s treatment of Kennedy was particularly squalid and shameful …. what a bunch of rats … just when I was hoping they might, under Kennedy’s leadership, offer a sensible alternative to the twin awfulness of the Labour and Conservative parties. He offered a voice of opposition to the disgraceful war we have been fighting against Iraq and beyond … a hope of decency and negotiation ….. I see no other hope on the horizon. So he was discovered to be a recovering alcoholic ?
so says Brian May… who seems to hate all politicians except CK.
345 - shurely shum mishtake?? after all, isn’t he friends with Lembit from their Sky at Night appearances?
Rather thick arms too.
347 - “Strong in th’arm and thick in th’ead … ”
Somewhat appropriately given discussions about Chris Huhne, today is an important day in the history of Eastleigh. It is the 12th anniversary of the death of the constituency’s last Tory MP.
From the BBC’s “On This Day” site :
“Results of final forensic tests released three days later found Stephen Milligan had died of asphyxiation from the electrical flex tied in a noose round his neck.”
“Further details of the appearance of his body - including a black bin liner over his head and wearing stockings and suspenders - were consistent with auto-erotic sex practices.”
The site doesn’t mention the reputed orange in his mouth…
349 - Thanks for that 12 year old story Bristol Neil
Rather an interesting 3 week old story in private Eye last week I thought relating to the same part of the world ?
345 He certainly knows to rant does old Bri. And play geetar, obviously.
Re 331 I thought that must be OTT…until I looked at the pix! Do Getty Images work for Lab?
350 - just an interesting coincidence… and a timely reminder that all parties have had their ‘mavericks’. Ron Davies anyone?
349 the cause of death was Oxytoxiphilia.
I always felt rather sorry for Stephen Milligan. A very capable individual by all accounts and what is his lasting place in British politics? Unwise of course and you wonder about people’s psychology really, but he wasn’t harming others and when you get over the fact it was quite funny you recall that it was also very sad.
Didn’t both he and Huhne work on the Economist at one time?
355 Huhne certainly did.
I think that Auberon Waugh wrote a very fine obituary for Stephen Milligan.
355 - It is a shame - it got swept into the same category as the affairs that were going on at the time, and has stood out because it was perceived as such a bizarre act….
yet it is something that has been practiced for millenia, and not 3 years later Michael Hutchence went in exactly the same way..
It was indeed a tragedy
The code for the latest (presumably Stevens) poll was IBE060101003. The one for the disputed earlier poll was IBE060101002.
My original post was making the point that the three letters usually refer to the person commissioning and the numbers are a date and sequence marker.
But maybe IBE = incoherent bleeding eejit.
Milligan’s death was very sad. It was not what you can call suicide though.
OT Which MPs caused by-elections by killing themselves? There was that guy in Paisley, and wasn’t the Mid Staffs one as a result of suicide…
360 - Stonehouse. Sort of!
This is a slightly gloomy topic for a lovely sunny day isn’t it? Were you thinking of hanging around the offices of MPs with marginal constituencies looking a bit miserable and loudly discussing French philosophy? Fiendish!
357. I could be wrong but; I once heard that Stephen Milligan’s girlfriend at the time was one Julie Kirkbride (then a Telegraph journalist) and that she was the last to see him alive. She then met her future husband Andrew Mackay at Stephen Milligan’s funeral…
If this is all untrue I apologise unreservedly!
349: twelve years ago today. I was in my last year at college when that took place. Where has all the time gone? By the way, there is a conspiracy theory that something more sinister was afoot involving MI5, Special Branch or other dark forces (first reports mentioned an orange and a bottle of poppers which strangely disappeared etc.) because Milligan was against rail privatization and was about to spill some beans and scupper the policy. (I mentioned this only for curiosity value, not as an endorsement of the conspiracy.)
Even Stonehouse doesn’t quite match the Australian PM Harold Holt who just thought he’d go for a swim and was never seen again. 1967
364. Didn’t they recently reopen the case?
365
There is a “Harold Holt Memorial Swimming Centre”, I love the Aussie sense of humour.
326. Cable’s article is very good.
I liked the reference to ‘the fierce debates that my party enjoys.’
322. There’s always something. I like Dominic Grieve, but he was against civil partnerships. David Willetts I think is good on a lot of things, but he also has his dodgy side.
345. where did you find that?!
364. Friends in Melbourne still insist he was picked up by a russian sub and taken back to the USSR.
365 - Ssshhhh!
368 I thought it was the Chinese?
364. Yes! - I learned to swim at the “H Holt Memorial Swimming Pool” - took years before I worked out why my Mum thought it was so funny.
Australian politics - esp. on a State level - has traditionally been deeply corrupt and often correspondingly funny. Roughly on the same level as Belgium…
364 - Later to be re-enacted by Harold Bishop in Neighbours.
But Harold Bishop came back!
Madge - you’re back! How I cried when you died…
359 - no it isn’t. It’s IDE
http://www.yougov.com/archives/pdf/IDE060101003_1.pdf
Re. 57, Blair didn’t enjoy much of a leader’s bonus in 01 (he suffered, in fact, an adverse swing of 5%) or in 05 (when the multitude of other candidates obscured his share of the vote dropping by 6.5%). That was, however, very much the exception to the rule. Kennedy, Howard, Hague and Major all enjoyed leaders’ bonuses.
I should be so lucky ….. lucky lucky lucky ….
by Sam the Shark ….Chinese New Year 1967 at 10:43am
Re. recent suicides by MPs, it was Gordon McMaster in Paisley South in Paisley South in Autumn 97 and John Heddle in Mid Staffordshire (the by-election took place in 1990, though I’m not sure if he didn’t kill himself the previous year). Before that, there was Jocelyn Cadbury in Birmingham Northfield (a member of the Blue Chips). The first two killed themselves c/o their car exhausts, whereas Cadbury shot himself in his parents’ garden.
pip - the IDE is a typo I’m afraid, sorry
Everything has gone quiet from Dunfermline…any hint of how things are going?
376. But how much work did the opposition put into those seats in each case?
When are we expecting the Dunfermline declaration btw?
I’m really confused why all the Tory posters think that Huhne’s europhilia is going to cost the Lib Dems in elections. Being strongly eurosceptic didn’t do William Hague any good, nor whichever Tory it was who prattled on about “England as a foreign country”.
If anything, this could be a masterstroke by the Lib Dems if it forces the Tories back to their obssessive pre-occupation with the EU, when the rest of the country is more interested in jobs, NHS, poverty, etc.
382 - PA had an estimated declaration time of 0100 for the general election last year.
assuming there no recounts!
Somehow I doubt it Timothy. The europhile stance of the Lib Dems is not a vote winner - as each round of European elections demonstrates.
Lower turnout at a by-election generally speeds things up a bit (not always).
386 - I think Timothy’s point, with which I tend to agree, is that a eurosceptic approach may help the Tories in some quarters but banging on about it in a General Election is still a major error as it makes you look irrelevant (just as we were wrong to bang on about the NHS and schools in the 1999 Euro elections). You would probably be unwise to make it the focus of any future attack on Huhne, therefore. Actually, the stuff above about Huhne’s Europhilia is grossly overblown anyway - he can point to a good record on championing sunset clauses and so on for example, and is no more Europhile than many Tory MEPs (and some MPs).
Re. leadership campaigns: the Campbell campaign has apparently sent out 11 email updates compared to 3 from Huhne and 3 from Hughes. So no lack of lustre there.
http://ballotsballsandbikes.blogspot.com/2006/02/hughes-huhne-campaigns-go-awol.html
382. It was declared at 00:58 last may. with a low turnout, they should be faster to count the votes.
387. In Cheadle they were more or less an hour faster. In Livingston they counted it 30 minutes faster (00:46 vs 01:18)
388. He can indeed. And the financial services stuff. Huhne’s actually a great example of effective engagement in the EU in action.
Any betting movement in Dunfermline? I am behind a firewall.
I hear about 12.30 is likely, but it depends on total turnout- looking less than 50% at this point
86. If I was a Lib Dem, I would view the involvement of a murky figure like John Stevens in this episode with alarm. It appears that having failed to insert a euro-fanatic (who I suspect he presumes he could control) as Tory leader a few years ago, he is now trying the same thing with the Lib Dems. A destabilising individual best avoided….what I wonder would he have in common with Brian Sedgemore?
393. Lib Dems on 7.6, Labour 1.09 on Betfair (to back). 12 and 1.5 to lay.
391 Andrea. Do you have the details of the Returning Officers ties for the past fifty years ……… in order of declaration time and swing to the oppsition party …. anytime in the next 43.89 seconds will do !
So what’s the next move for Camp Ming?
Most of the parliamentary party are backing Ming including almost all of the heavy hitters, and today - even Paddy Ashdown..http://www.menziescampbell.org.uk/ will they swerve over to Huhne or come out fighting?
What would you do now if you were in Camp Ming? I’ve heard that they’ve been making an effort on the secon preference front what would be the best strategy?
395. Fred, sorry to resort to this sort of reply but that is complete rubbish.
398. Ashdown’s endorsement (just gone up) uses my favourite phrase again - ‘flim-flam and modishness.’
Best strategy is to continue on the present tack, I think - luff up a bit, but no sailing too close to the wind. No whispering. (The voicing of genuine concerns re. Huhne’s majority is, of course, exempted
)
My sources in Dunfermline suggest that it is going to be close between Labour and the Lib Dems, but Labour should scrape home.
The SNP campaign has apparently had some traction in the last couple of days - I guess the Profs comments and health campaigners have helped and although they will trail in third they have probably confused the tactical voting message of the Lib Dems.
Tories should see off the SSP in the battle for fourth place.
And have just done another YouGov for the Sunday Times (as I presume STI must indicate).
General issues based question, plus a ‘who would make the best leader for the Lib Dems’.
Interesting to see that most SW Lib Dem MPs who know more than most about the strength of Euro sceptics (UKIP or otherwise) are not supporting Huhne. This includes all 5 Cornish MPs. I think they know what a liability Huhne, with his scrap the pound fanaticism, would be to the party’s chances.
Having said this, I think Huhne will get the leadership if for no other reason than he is not Campbell or Hughes. If that happens I see a lot of unhappy senior Lib Dems. How about some defections to the Labour party?
403: Which SW Lib Dem MPs are so authoritarian they might join Labour?
403. I’m not sure who would have to win the Lib Dem leadership to cause defections to Labour. Maybe Stewart Lewis if he supports ID cards or something.
Hmmm…interesting… there were some weird bets of 7777.00 yesterday on the Lib Dem leadership, and now that figure has just reappeared, to back Huhne at 1.66.
The figure 7777.00 managed to appear in all 6 columns at once on Betfair, laying Ming and backing Huhne, or was it the other way around. Anyway, they were all cancelled and a couple of them were wagered the other way.
…and there’s also 7777.00 to lay Ming at 2.58. What fun!
403 - Defections to the Tories I would categorise as highly unlikely, but defections to Labour would appear inconceivable. I would not read much into the Cornish MPs acting as one. They are a close-knit grouping on many matters and that is part of the secret of their success (it is very effective in county campaign terms - all you ever hear there is “Cornish MPs say X”).
Euro fanaticism may be the mantra coming out of Tory central office but, as both Valerie and I (both solid Ming supporters) have noted here, it is a load of old tosh and all his colleagues know that perfectly well. He is a constructive engagement man and actually very critical of many European initiatives.
£4000 has just become available on Labour in Dunfermline at 1.07…
206-8: This is a reappearance of odd things that went on last night. I suspect a software glitch or somebody fooling around rather than anything real actually happening.
410 - Sorry to be dim - is somebody offering to bet £4000 at those odds or take £4000 at those odds (or whatever it is - I forget the terminology)?
Someone is offering to take 4000.00 at those odds.
332 Andrea http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=56789065&cdi=0
She’s clearly obeying Cameron’s edict to open up on the Centre ground!
399. Valerie, would you care to say why?
There is a story on “The Scots Independent” that the Lib dems in the by election put out a leaflet with a bar chart saying the latest canvass figure or some other such such nonsense were:
Lab40 LD38 SNP 16 Tory 15…….yes a total of 109%……
16. so that’s why postal vote is up? the Birmingham way
Mr. 7777 - its a well known “intimidation” technique on Betfair… You want to bet against something, so you stick up 7777 to BACK it and a small amount on the LAY side (your actual bet) - its supposed to make people panic and get them “hitting” your real bet…
For those looking for “dollar bills on the pavement” (riskfree profit): StanJames still offering Huhne at 2.00. Buy him at SJ and sell him at BF 1.7. Just placed £450 myself.
416.
“Lab40 LD38 SNP 16 Tory 15…….yes a total of 109%……”
The Tory figure was obviously only 5%!
Probably artworked by a too-long-in-the-bar-charter?
418 Thanks, Observer.
Who is this mysterious Stuart Lewis bloke?
Is he some sort of in-joke?
422. In the last MORI poll, they put him as an option for LD leader (probably to see how many people were answering without knowing what they were talking about)
And only 1% of Liberal Democrats didn’t know what they were talking about!!
Similar figures for Conservatives were 83% and Labour 67%
I feel a bar chart coming on!!