Site competition entrants give it to Clegg with a 53.71% share
December 18th, 2007
-
But how will either cope with the Vince Cable comparison ?
With the result of the Lib Dem leadership contest due to be announced at 2.30 pm the average entry in our PB competition gave it to the party’s home affairs spokesman with 53.71% of the vote. This is quite close to the 56% predicted by the only media-sponsored party membership poll of the campaign - that by YouGov for SkyNews.
One figure that might be interesting is the number of spoiled ballot papers. For there have been suggestions that a number of voters might have been tempted to write in the name of the party’s acting leader, Vince Cable. He, of course, has commanded a mass of favourable media attention during his few weeks in the role.
His sharp wit at PMQs and his continued pressure on Northern Rock have added to Brown’s woes during a particularly challenging period for the prime minister.
In fact Cable has emerged as such a dominant commons figure that it’s it’s hard to see how either Nick Clegg or Chris Huhne are going to be able to do anything like as well. Inevitably the winner today is in danger of being compared unfavourably with Cable and this could undermine the hoped-for media honeymoon.
There’s another element - Tory and Labour MPs have laid off their normal practice of barracking whoever is the LibDem leader. So Huhne or Clegg are going to face a barrage of heckling when they stand up for the first time with both main parties having a real interest in inflicting early damage.
If it is, as looks likely, Nick Clegg then expect to hear the word “calamity” being woven into back-benchers questions and shouted from the gangways as the ex-MEP rises to speak. Everybody recalls the reception that Ming got first time out and it isn’t going to be any easier for Clegg.
What will be the electoral and polling impact of the new arrival? That’s hard to say.
Thanks to Paul Maggs for running the competition and collating the entries. You can download the list PBC Lib Dem comp Dec 2007.xls”>here.
Contact Please use the new email address Politicalpunter@googlemail.com
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike,
“This is quite close to the 54% predicted by the only media-sponsored party membership poll of the campaign - that by YouGov for SkyNews.”
Wasn’t 56%?
Cable is a nice man, and told a few good jokes like the father of the Bride at Wedding, but let’s face it - its not difficult to take the rise out of the current administration.
To suggest that somehow he will create a significant amount of “spoiled ballot papers” seems rather churlish. When the new leader is announced, I hope that you Mike, a fellow Lib Dem can be the Big Man and think of the party over your own quite clear personal preferences. ..
1-I feel like I had a vision!
re 1. Corrected. Thanks. My Virgin broadband is down and I am doing this on my phone.
Mike Smithson
Let’s be quite clear Vince’s success in the Commons is almost entirely due to him not being a candidate - allowing him to concentrate on PMQs and other Commons set pieces and not touring the country on the stump (like Ming). Because he’s also always been an interim leader he’s had an easier reception from Tory and Labour benches when he speakes in the House.
He’s also been quite clear that he wishes to remain as both Treasury spokeman and Deputy Leader - so he’ll be around for a bit longer as he is unsackable.
Anyway as I see it (and heard from top sources at Cowley Street) the smart money is on Huhne (who at anything more generous than evens must be good value).
4-No problem Mike!!
re 5. Dan - I had a vivid dream last night that Huhne had it it by just two votes which led to a huge row and an eventual court case over the interpretation of spoiled ballot papers.
Mike Smithson
That reminds me, who won “The PBC Australian Election Competition” in the end? Oh please let it be me!
I heard a rumour from several well placed sources that there was a late surge for Huhne, with Clegg still just ahead. Another put it at 52:48 to Clegg, which is within most margins for error.
If he had not over-reached himself with the Calamity dossier, which did strike a jarring note, Chris Huhne could have pulled off a remarkable coup, as most of the party’s campaign establishment appears to be backing Clegg.
Having been stung by the Rhydian debacle on betfair, I am more anxious than before that Clegg’s price looks ridiculously optimistic.
I agree, the first few PMQs will be important. Whoever wins needs to take lessons in gentle self deprecation but savage wit from Cable, who bent with the wind in terms of his style.
The ever more curt and stiff Ming went from statesman to embarrassment in a few short weeks.
7 Mike - keep taking the tablets.
I suppose the 2 vote winning margin represented support for Huhne from the Smithson household.
Something to tell the grandaughter in 15 years time as Huhne finally gets to kiss the hands of King William III:
“This would never have happened Julia love, if it weren’t for me and your Granny Smithson”
Sigh!
10 Oops - that should have read King William IV - sorry, your Royal Highness.
You’re in a generous seasonal mood Peter!
Was Cable ever actually witty compared to ordinary people, or just by parliamentarian standards? The bar for humour in the Commons does seem to be very low: remember how the sketch-writers were rolling in the aisles at Ming’s “trapdoor” “joke”, which almost attained the heights of an unusually poor Marmaduke save for the fact that it didn’t make any sense.
10-LOL!
12 Well, I thought I’d try and cheer up the old boy, since Clegg is the winner ……I think!
13 As a Tory, I really thought Vince did pretty well - his best moment was probably the impromptu joke at Brown’s expense about it ill behoving him, Brown, to poke fun at as regards the temporary nature of Vince’s leadership of the LibDems. Good thinking on his feet that one.
11 Err….. better make that King William V, I think it must be time for bed.
A few months ago I posted more than once or twice about the coming UK recession, scheduled for next year. More or less everyone who responded on pb.com poo-pooed this idea and comments sailed on regardless, debating whether 2008 or 2009 would be a good year for an election… But now look. At this:
http://tinyurl.com/294vjc
I anyone is still awake or even reading this stuff then, ahem, I will accept apologies made on bended knees, if they are sufficiently abject!
So there! Yah boo sucks! Clearly I am the award winner in the “told you so, told you so, told you so” competition.
17. In 15 years time it will surely be King George VII…
A fall in house prices is long overdue and necessary. And to think that ‘a Labour government’(sic) has presided over this unsusstainable rise in property prices, and taken the credit for it too……
19 In 15 years time it will surely be King George VII
Eh….?
18/20
No “abject apology” from me, I’ve been banging on for weeks about selling the house price index and only now are PBers starting ro take notice.
The odd thing is that the Halifax are still expecting prices to remain “stable” next year, well they must be about the only ones with this view. A classic case of having just an itsty bitsy vested interest and therefore losing a tad of objectivity.
Not very helpful, especially if you are a first time buyer and are being given the come-on, only to find in a year’s time that you are deep in nagative equity - I just wonder if the Halifax and others could be held to account in such circumstances for giving unjustifiably optimistic advice?
21. Charlie’s preferred regnal title, so I believe…
23 I was completely unaware of that …..although it doesn’t surprise me! He’ll be 75 by that time and, like her mother at the same age, it’s quite possible that QEII will still be with us.
24. Yes, QEII only has to live another 5.5 years and Charlie (George VII) will be the oldest monarch to ascend the British throne, beating William IV’s record age of 64, set in 1830….
He will beat Edward VII’s record at the end of next month…
24.23.21. It has been reported several times over many years that Prince Charles prefers the name “George VII” rather than “Charles III”. I didn’t like the idea at first but I have long since got used to it and now I would be taken aback if it turned out to be “Charles” instead.
0. What were the results of the Oztralian election predikshun bompetition? Did I miss it or has it not been listed yet?
From the previous Catholic Cardinal thread…
I’ve just realised that if Vincent Nichols gets the job, the small town of Crosby, Merseyside will have achieved an amazing double..
Robert Runcie, (Merchant Taylor’s School), 102nd Archbishop of Canterbury…
Vincent Nichols, (St. Mary’s College), 11th Archbishop of Westminster…
Fidem Vita Fateri
26. I think it has been rightly delayed JL, on the basis that there was some doubt about a few seats.
If there are no further challenges, it looks like being:
ALP 83 (+23)
IND 2 (=)
L/N 65 (-23)
I predicted Labor to win 5 more seats than they have (88-2-60 was my prediction).
Australia - seat of McEwen undergoing a full recount - Labor led by 7 votes. May know results later this week.
Clegg last match 1.12.
today is a good day to give AMNESTY to illegal immigrants.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=503126&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
The Illegal immigrants who started their life in Britain by breaking the law and invading the country will be rewarded with British Passports.
They will also be able to vote Labour!
31 Alf, you’re alive!
We thought you’d been taken out by the Commies at the Beeb. Thanks goodness you are still here to make us all smile on this cold and dreary morning.
Thankfully am in the office this afternoon so can follow the leadership results.
I doubt that either candidate would have wanted Cable to bomb so that they could look better themselves, they’ll bw glad of the profile and momentum Vince has run up. I think Vince would have struggled to establish the so-called personal narrative as a leader, the two main candidates can both do this far more readily, but Vince has secured big morale boosts, even if not the dramatic poll shifts which could have gone with this.
My gut feel is to go against the flow as I have predicted - Clegg with a largeish majority, but I would be happy to be wrong.
18. There have been a few people predicting an economic downturn, though the severity of that downturn varies from prediction to prediction. I think one thing that has made people cautious of forecasting an outright recession is that on a couple of occasions in the last 10 years growth outperformed the general consensus, when that consensus was that it would be low, so there’s a bit of a once-bitten twice-shy effect. Also, guessing the end of any bubble is notoriously difficult. The growth in house prices has had a big effect on people’s perceptions of their growing wealth, as well as providing a genuine source of money to spend (or at least a source of wealth to borrow against). Again, the bursting of the housing bubble has been predicted several times, and each time it then went on to new heights. 2008 might well be the one, though.
25. When Charles beats Edward VII’s record, he will have been heir longer than anyone in history (William IV was only heir from the time of the Duke of York’s death in 1827).
33 Vince has been good, Tpfkar. He’s a class act. It’s one thing though to shine briefly as a stand-in; quite another to cope with the sustained assaults a permanent Leader has to deal with.
Looks like it’s going to be Clegg, doesn’t it. Can’t see it making a huge difference to the Party’s fortunes either way.
Northern Rock - Government now extending guarantees to wholesale fund providers. They are getting desperate. Is there proper collateral for these loans? Is this a way of allowing the Government, by guaranteeing non-commercial loans, to be able to still claim that all its actual lending is secured?
Would it be too cutting to describe this whole contest as “nothing between two nobodies”?
(By the by, I saw Ming walking down Piccadilly yesterday. Never seen the man in the flesh before - and there was a biting cold wind making everybody look “pinched” in the face - but I was struck by how old he looked. Or, perhaps, just defeated? Remember him today - he has been a good servant to Parliament, if perhaps a little too uncritical of New Labour.)
5. If the smart money is on Huhne, where is it? I’ve just had a look at the Betfair market and there’s only £35 backing Huhne, at odds of at least 24/1. Equally, no-one is prepared to lay Clegg above 1.07 - that doesn’t seem like evidence of cashing in to me.
38 No, David, the market is illiquid. It’s a sign that there has been no leakage.
Well done Electoral Commission. Well done LDs.
“More than 100,000 young Britons may have been pushed into unemployment by the new wave of Eastern European immigrants…”
“The study, by the influential Ernst & Young ITEM Club, found that although the recent influx has boosted Britain’s economy and kept inflation low, it may have increased unemployment for younger Britons and reduced pay increases for all.”
“Since 2004, the number of unemployed British 18 to 24 year olds has increased by 100,000, according to the study. “
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/12/18/nmigrants118.xml
…and we had people like Snowflake5 posting on here that immigration benefited the poor.
Is this still the same LD contest that arose after that nice old Scotsman got dumped, or another one?
Hard to keep up, particularly as nobody is remotely interested anyway…
29. McEwen - they found a bundle of votes in the Senate pile apparently - giving the seat back to Liberal incumbent Fran Bailey:
http://tinyurl.com/2gcvfy
Mike re your new email address think you will find that politicalpunter@gmail.com will work and is 5 keystrokes shorter.
re 39. My understanding is that the count is only starting this morning so it’s highly unlikely that anybody has any information.
40 The free flow of goods, services and labour assists everybody in the long run, HF.
You are a conservative, aren’t you? Fancy me pointing that out to you!
45 PtP, I put the country first and the party is a distant second.
100,000 more young unemployed and other older unemployed, are a burden on the rest of us, stoke crime levels and destroy a lot of lives, theirs and others.
A pity that nuLabour has forgotten the working class which was the section of society they were created to stand for in the first place.
Amongst the discussions on the 3m missing driving licence details what seems overlooked is that the cabinet minister at the time was wee Dougie Alexander.
….and the party is a distant second. Or even (hopefully) third!
41. Why post then.
My impression is that the LD Leaders who grew the support base were the ones who were better able at attracting publicity. Vince has been praised for this.
Ashdown and Kennedy were good at this.
Ming, David Steel/Robert Maclennan were less good at it.
Huhne has certainly been able to “gain publicity” during the past few months better than Clegg.
Maybe this is why Huhne should be feared by the Conservatives more than Clegg. The Conservatives Chief Whip said this recently.
48 Icarus, a 31 or 32 point lead on the LDs compared to 10 in 2005 makes “second” a remote possibility for the LDs.
That said, there is a chance that in the 2014+ period that the LDs could replace the Labour party as the main opposition if they focus harder in Labour areas now.
My rationale for believing this is that the LDs almost equalled Labour in campaign workers at GE2005 and could mop up a lot of Labour seats if they change their strategic focus.
LDs lost to the Conservatives at GE2005 and a further 20 point widening puts Conservative seats beyond the LDs.
Clegg has been backed down to 1/20 - something either knows something, thinks they knows something, or just pushed the wrong button…
46 Never mind the appeals to a rather suspect Nationalism, your logic falls apart on even a cursory inspection, HF.
If the free flow of labour assists the creation of jobs and wealth, it helps ‘the country’ which you claim to place above all else.
39. Sorry, I might not have been clear in my post at [38]. What I meant was that there was little evidence of ’smart’ money, which Mike confirms must be the case if the count hasn’t begun. As you say, the market is illiquid - which is more evidence that there’s little of the confidence there would be if there’d been inside information. That said, if the pbc average is close to the mark, then in the absence of polls or other data, the odds are a long way apart for a 53-47 split.
Ptp You mistake Tory philosophy. We believe in free markets but recognise that all markets need management. We simply believe that such management should be as light as possible in the interest of long term economic health and broader national needs.
The labour market has been very much a free for all in regard immigration and it is clearly not in the national interest if it increases unemployment nor is it beneficial if it requires the country to be turned into endless housing estates to meet the increased demand for accommodation.
Immigration can be beneficial but much too much immigration can be socially catastrophic.
The mantra that we need a constant large inflow of more immigrant workers as the population grows older is nonsense. A few moments of lateral thinking would demonstrate that there are several alternatives which would deliver additional benefits beyond dealing with the initial issue, including lower levels of immigration with a consequential reduced demand for services, combined with removing barriers to older people working after retirement age, removing barriers to the economically inactive returning to work, increased productivity, better use of national assets and encouraging the released investment funds originally targeted at house building to more productive new industries and products using new techniques……… At the moment we want to reduce our carbon footprint by increasing the population in order to maintain old fashioned industrial and economic models. Seems an unlikely combination to me.
The current conversation on this is rather as if a developing country wanting more and more workers to hoe the fields because they ignore the invention of the rotovator or mechanised plough. So everyone remains poor and nothing changes.
53 PfP “If the free flow of labour assists the creation of jobs and wealth, it helps ‘the country’ which you claim to place above all else.”
It is the GDP per capita that matters not the overall total. 100k more immigrants employed instead of 100k UK people actually reduces the GDP per person since the same total GDP is spread over 100k more people. We all get a little poorer (on average).
The multiplier effect only kicks in if these jobs would not be done by UK people. In this example the Ernst study indicates that they probably would have been.
53
a) that’s a remarkably big IF there
b) Conservatives are not anarcho-capitalists, though some anarcho-capitalists may vote Conservative.
I don’t know of an economist who suggests treating the Labour market like any other commodity. You’re an intelligent person and know this to be true, so I am bemused you maintain the entirely fatuous pretence that all and any immigration is always and everywhere a good thing.
54 - David, I’m not sure the odds are that far away from being right, and I speak as someone who until about 2/3 weeksa ago though Huhne was a decent shot at 4/1 or so.
Nothing has been said anywhere to indicate that Huhne might have snatched it, all the talk has been “close-ish, but Clegg has it”. A consistent 55-45 margin (approximately) seems to be talked about, which wouldn’t generate a 55% chance of winning (4/5) but a much shorter one, which we’re seeing.
Now, I may end up looking quite foolish later in five hours time and for the avoidance of doubt I withdrew this market with a modest blob of green a few days ago, but I would say the current estimation of Huhne (10.5 on BF) is about right. Perhaps a teensy bit of value, but nothing more.
Erm, sorry for that, just thinking aloud. Mike or PtP will hopefully be along to correct me shortly if I’ve muddled my thinking.
50 I think this is because Huhne’s persona, style and business background is more appealing to Tory voters. It has already been observed on this site that the majority of known right of centre posters on here have gone for him over Clegg. To attract the soft Tory vote Clegg has to overcome a huge hurdle in making himself distinctive from the relatively liberal (at least compared to recent Tory leaders) Cameron. However I do see Clegg as having far more appeal to disillusioned Labour voters (of which there are many) as there is a little bit of that Blair charisma about him.
50:Where was Clegg’s charisma during the campaign?
55 I make no mistake, Witan, but whether it is Tory philosophy or your own particular interpretation is questionable. You believe in free markets, as long as they suit you.
As to your ‘Nationalism’, last refuge of a scoundrel!
Keep posting though. These are tough times for Labour supporters and they need your encouragement.
OFF TOPIC, but Breaking News…
Remember last Thursday on Planet Zog, where the Police were offered a 1.9% pay increase from 1st December?
Our Beloved Leader said: “Nobody wants to say to the police, you cannot get a higher salary, but nobody wants inflation to return to the British economy and have pay awards wiped out simply by rising inflation. I would like to pay the police more, just as I would like to pay the nurses and those people who commit themselves daily to public service more, but you have to take a broader view of the national interest.”
He then said interest rates had recently come down because inflation was down and that was because of the difficult decisions taken by the government to avoid the “boom and bust” of the past.
Moving on just five short days - and returning here to Planet Earth - the November rate of Retail Price Inflation is at 4.3% - the highest November figure for SIXTEEN years.
So the police are actually receiving a CUT in pay of 2.4%. No wonder they are not the happiest of bunnies.
16. Was Vince Cable’s joke really impromptu? This was his last PMQ as acting leader. Surely he would have anticipated that Gordon Brown would make some snide remark about it and he could have prepared his response in advance. I agree that the standard of Parliamentary “humour” is not very high.
53. Prophet.
Can’t spend much time on here today (if any at all!) as I’m very busy at work, but, like many free-market Conservatives, I make a very clear distinction between the free movement of money, goods, trade, services and capital – and the free movement of people.
I view this as an entirely consistent position.
All governments exist to represent a society (of people) and legislate on their behalf. In particular, they do so to try and increase the “quality of life” of their people by virtue of enhanced economic performance and material wellbeing. That is (largely) why a government is elected. That is why I support the free movement of trade and goods etc. It allows people here the freedom to make their own decisions about what they want, at the cheapest price, and shape their own lives to their own needs.
BUT, a society is more than just an economy. When you have the free movement of people you can *fundamentally* alter the basis and structure of the society you purport to represent. Essentially, rather than meeting the existing needs of the existing people, you are importing new people who have new needs.
Yes, immigrants can (and do) make a contribution. But, as delicate as this issue is (bound up with race and historical politics) it is not an infinite one and there should certainly *not* be a free market. People are different. They are not money, goods or services that can be moved at will. They are not insurance policies or washing machines. They cannot be traded away. They are not “liquid”. They have views, needs, traditions, aspirations, desires. They cannot be legislated against if, let’s say, the cultural influence is deemed undesirable. Once they are here, they are here to stay. And nothing can be done about it.
In other words, you are not liberating individuals to make a free choice as to what they want. You are making that choice for them. And it is not reversible.
This is not a Conservative position.
re 39 & 54. If someone has real knowledge then serious money starts to get thrown at a market. Here I don’t that is is happening so that you cannot read any thing into it.
For those tempted to “follow the money” just remember the Olympic decision for London at the IOC’s Singapore meeting in July 2005. Even while the result was being read out you could still get nearly 4-1 on London.
Then there is the Dunfermline by election in February 2006 when the final bets placed were at 1-4 on Labour.
56 “The multiplier effect only kicks in if these jobs would not be done by UK people.”
Or if they would not have been done as well, or at greater cost.
You are arguing against the laws of supply and demand. I don’t believe I’m arguing this against a Tory!
LOL!
55 - my point is not that ’smart’ money has gone on the market - but that the odds are way out of line with the reality. Huhne and Clegg should both be around evens as Huhne’s campaign has surged in the last couple of weeks - it may not be enough to catch Clegg - but he is in with a chance - the market doesn’t reflect that (albeit with little liquidity).
Put it this way very senior people at Cowley Street are preparing for a Huhne victory.
PtP - Please pay attention and impose the customary £1 fine on poster #53.
I trust you are keeping accurate records of such penalties - they should pay for the cucumber sandwiches at our forthcoming party.
I have never, ever, used the tired line “We’ll take no lessons from the Tories on…”, but really, HF, lecturing Labour on the evils of unemployment takes the biscuit. What next?
tpfkar at 33: “Thankfully am in the office this afternoon so can follow the leadership results.” You mean you work in Cowley Street so can keep an eye on the count? Or you have a cruel family who wouldn’t allow you to check out pb.com or teletext if you hadn’t escaped from them to your office? Just curious!
61. What’s wrong with using free markets to the extent that they suit a society, exactly?
If we followed your naive prescription we would abolish all welfare benefits, labour standards, and the minimum wage as major constraints on the proper operation of a free labour market. We would also have to abolish all progressivity in taxation, given the negative effect it has on work incentives. A great deal of environmental legislation would have to go in the bin too. Are you in favour of all of the above?
67. But are they also preparing for a Clegg victory too?
65 ….. or more recently when Lewis Hamilton was priced at 1-4 to win SPOTY.
64 “This is not a Conservative position.”
No, but it’s an infinitely more coherent and intelligent one than I’ve been encountering here this morning.
Nevertheless, it highlights the problem which many conservatives have in attempting to reconcile economic rationalism with local and nationalist tendencies.
Wish we both had more time to debate this. We’ll come back to it perhaps at some later date.
66 - actually, given your track record as a Thatcherite laissez faire economist, some of us don’t believe you’re really a Labour supporter…
Oh, and the Conservatives are not proposing to do anything whatever about the influx of labour from the EU, which is what Ernst & Young are mostly referring to, since it would in practice require withdrawal from the EU, which they quite rightly don’t want to do.
70 “What’s wrong with using free markets to the extent that they suit a society, exactly? ”
Absolutely nothing at all, as long as you make it clear that’s what you are doing.
And it would also help if it were made clear what is meant by ’suit a society’. On close inspection, this usually turns out to mean ‘what suits me’.
75 - Surely the Conservatives won’t be in a position to do anything about anything for another wighteen months or so, so what’s the point of that post?
70 The extent to which you can actually create a totally free market is constrained in various ways - even so-called Thatcherite free markets were essentially rigged in favour of multinationals and their associates. So this is all about the way you slant markets, IMO.
69, Nick P, yes but why has your party made life worse for the NEETS? Why have the number of NEETS risen in recent years? We are not in a recession, yet so the economy cannot be blamed for this.
I come back to the conclusion that the Labour Govt has become so detached from its roots that it has lost sight of representing the working class people it was created for. It has after all lost more than half its members since 1997. They did not leave because they were still in love with the Labour party.
We need to put this into some historical context, after 12 or so years the same thing happened to the Conservative party. It started listening to others about the ERM etc rather than its own voters. Maybe this inevitably happens to any party in power for a long time?
FWIW I have heard from a couple of Cleggies over the past couple of days who think that- if not two votes- it is going to be within 0.5%. This really really would be exceptionally close, but does not seem to have been picked up anywhere.
73. Prophet.
“No, but it’s an infinitely more coherent and intelligent one than I’ve been encountering here this morning.”
I entirely disagree. 100%.
And I think I’ve clearly exposed the reasons why it is sheer lunacy in my post above. It is not intelligent. You are failing to make the eminently logical distinction which I pointed out.
My guess is you were wound up by the slightly more incendiary language of “HF” and now you are defensively arguing against nationalist tendencies, rather than dispassionately assessing the realities of mass-labour markets!
One of the reasons this debate is so difficult…
Sorry Prophet, but on this one you are not the All-knowing, Most-compassionate, Most merciful
71 Mike, I imagine Dan means a Clegg victory was already factored in (and as has been mentioned, it does seem he has been the candidate of the party establishment). But the establishment are now readying themselves for the possibility - or more - of the result going the other way. Is that right, Dan?
63: Scripted or otherwise Cable’s jokes got positive media attention for the first time in a while. That won’t be easy to follow.
I still think they should have followed Mike’s advice and got Clegg and Huhne to do a PMQs each.
60 As a Huhne supporter I am perhaps not best placed to answer this but suffice to say Clegg’s camp feel their man has the real potential to grow into the leadership role. He certainly avoids the political jargonese so many employ and I think he will have that easy ability to engage the public in the visual media. His real strength may well be outside the Commons (as was Blairs) but I suspect he will be a perfectly decent performer at PMQ etc.
70 Btw Chevage, I don’t recognise the name and if you are a new poster, welcome.
No, of course I do not disavow welfare benefits and the other ‘constraints’ you mention, but give me a break. I’m just making a few points, not trying to write a Blue Print For Utopia!
All I’m trying to do is make the fairly obvious point that in the long run you probably do more damage to ‘national interest’ - whatever that may be - by adopting a protectionist stance towards the free flow of labour than you do by opening up you labour markets to competition from wherever.
Pretty bog-standard Tory philosophy, I would have thought. And I’m supposed to be a Leftie!
(It’s true!)
76. By ’suit a society’ perhaps I might venture the daring notion that democratic choice would be a possible definition. Let’s ask the public at large whether they think immigration is too high.
Or is that - like European integration perhaps - a subject too complex for the ignorant masses to decide upon? After all think how the Daily Mail et al. would fill the heads of the poor dears with unpleasant notions.
75 Nick P, the Conservatives had advised in favour of having restrictions on the first 2004 wave of EC immigrants and continued to argue this at the GE2005 election and were called racists by your party who denied that there would be any major problems.
The French and Germans knew better and put restrictions in place.
But being arrogant your Govt thought it knew better.
Arrogance comes with being in office for too long, accept it and try and deal with the consequences on the working class.
75. “Oh, and the Conservatives are not proposing to do anything whatever about the influx of labour from the EU, which is what Ernst & Young are mostly referring to, since it would in practice require withdrawal from the EU, which they quite rightly don’t want to do.”
Yet another reason why the EU ties our hands and dictates our destiny as a country.
You may think me mad for saying this Nick, but there will come a time when people will “wake up and smell the coffee” and simply won’t put up with it anymore.
When public opinion is sufficiently mobilised (10/20 years time?) a Conservative government will be able to push through treaty repeals, or partial, or total withdrawal, from the EU with full public support, no matter how difficult it is. In just the same (very difficult) way trade union reform was passed in the 1980s.
You can laugh now, but when you’re old and grey I shall be knocking at your door and saying; “told you so!”
PtP I am beginning to believe you don’t read what other people actually post.
But as you are transmogrifying into the site prefect I am happy to have your permission to carry on posting.
Clegg 1.07 and Huhne 10s on betfair - the fat lady warming up ?
re 4 you as well, me too last night: just when the nonsense about Livingstone’s non-anti-semitism was getting interesting.
77 and 87: Well, we can look forward or backward. Looking forward, Conservative policy is to continue the Governmen’ts policy of accepting free movement of labour throughout the EU, except for a temporary derogation for Bulgaria and Romaina. There is no difference whatever, so it’s pointless (not to use a stronger word) to criticise the Government for its current policy.
Looking backward, unemployment under the last Conservative government reached heights massively above the current level *before* the metldown that led to the total reaching three million.
It was seen as a ‘necessary price to pay’, if you recall.
81 You may be right, Casino, especially in connection with the ‘incendiary language’ bit.
I’ll have a look at it again later. I really do have to press on with other priorities now.
Thanks for your comments anyway.
89 Well, I must admit I read some more carefully than others Witan. And yes, I should try to be less pompous.
It’s been pointed out before.
89. Witan - “PtP I am beginning to believe you don’t read what other people actually post. ”
You are correct.
The Prophet is a great bloke. Very polite, very civil and very generous, genuine guy, but he clearly hasn’t read my post at 64, or he wouldn’t have said this: “Pretty bog-standard Tory philosophy”!!
:shock:
Prophet - apologies for my criticism
61. “These are tough times for Labour supporters and they need your encouragement.” - I have to say, a perceptive comment!
a. These are difficult times for Labour supporters indeed, and Broon’s deliberate rudeness to EU leaders last week was a new low, I couldn’t imagine it would get as bad as this.
b. But yes I’m encouraged by the amazing b*llocks on the site from Tories who don’t understand the free market. The attempt to combine free market thinking with nationalism is of course contradictory, it goes back to Thatcher, it still haunts the conservative party. Haven’t you heard of the United States of America, Witan et al? That’s where the idea of a free labour market comes from.
92 Nick P, you are in Govt now and have been for 10yrs.
The issue is the impact that this Govt’s immigration policies have had on the working class. The Ernst study has found the impact to be negative.
The Govt should acknowledge that it was wrong and appologise for this. A Mea Culpa, could start the process of re-building Labour.
Not that I want that…
re 25 and the Queen has only to live just over another 4 years to become the longest lived head of state.
[98] This assumes the early death of the current King of Thailand- an act of lese majeste that in Bangkok would lead to a) a long prison sentance and b) probably the forced wearing of pink sports jackets…
re 99 I meant of the UK (or its predecessors in title)
86 “Let’s ask the public at large whether they think immigration is too high.”
Yes, Chevage, and whilst about it, why not ask if they think there is too much crime, too little wealth, and not enough happiness? Then all we have to do is implement the policies that give the public what it wants. Should be easy.
Makes you wonder why nobody’s done it before.
The idea that you can contain the free market within national boundaries is absurd. The free movement of Labour, is the lubrication of the free market.
If the British working class, (is there such a thing) cannot adapt to the social and technological changes of the twenty first century, then they will suffer accordingly.
Money has no flag, money knows no country, profit is the only loyalty to the free marketeer.
95 No apologies necessary, Casino, but now I really do have to go.
A bientot.
101. As usual you pretend to be interested in a serious discussion but relapse into fatuous wisecracks when challenged. A lack of self-confidence, perhaps?
The free movement of workers (let’s set aside other forms of immigration, for the purpose of this argument) doesn’t coexist at all well with modern welfare systems, something which Milton Friedman pointed out.
Basically, there are two reasons (a) foreign workers acquire entitlements to welfare benefits over time. Some of them (unsurprisingly) will come to prefer welfare benefits to doing the jobs that are too poorly paid to appeal to the natives (b) jobs that offer terms and conditions that only appeal to people from poor countries won’t appeal to the natives of a rich country, some of whom will prefer to live on welfare instead.
We could of course, slash welfare payments, and let the native and foreign workers battle it out in the labour market, but I suspect that would be electorally unattractive.
104 No, Chevage, a lack of time!
Au revoir.
Even though the government is in deep s**t, much of it of its own making. The Tories could have a problem with Mr Redwood’s musings on rape.
http://tinyurl.com/2w7uv7
86: ‘Let’s ask the public at large whether they think immigration is too high’
Only if their opinions are informed not based on the hysteria that seems to pervade this issue from both sides.
105
We could of course, slash welfare payments, and let the native and foreign workers battle it out in the labour market, but I suspect that would be electorally unattractive.
If thats what you, ‘really believe’ why not get it put in the next Tory manifesto, and try it: don’t think your chances are too good!!
Agreed, Ralph. It would be great if the BBC could have a little resurgence of Reithianism and do a proper programme explaining what’s actually happening, separating immigration from asylum, and showing the pros and cons of both, with no lobbyists or politicians involved. I don’t find most people really unbalanced on the issue, just worried in a diffuse way, and we shouldn’t either feed or demonise the worries.
If the Huhne/Clegg contest is very close - surely there would be a recount and the coronation timetable would be put back. If this was so when would the announcement of the recount be made I wonder - perhaps around 1.00pm?
The problem, Coldstone (109), is that Cameron and his Tories are desperate to get into office: so they couldn’t possibly say that, could they?
What they actually did if ever they were to get into power would be quite another matter, of course. And I think that Sean Fear is somewhere closer to the centre of Tory thinking than many here realise….
I read somwwhere, Goupillon (111) that they are starting to count at 2.00., with the declaration taking place at 2.30. So any announcement of a recount would presumbly be about that time instead of a result.
109, 111 I’m not actually advocating it as a policy, (I think it would be rather unattractive) merely saying that it would be one option.
107 Prosecuting some “date rapes” as assaults might actually secure more convictions.
105 - I agree, but, to an extent, this is conflating two different problems. If the welfare system creates an incentive to subsist on benefits, this will apply to whoever is entitled to them, be they native or immigrant.
It may actually be barriers to employment that divert a number of potentially productive immigrants into a life of dependency; generally, those with the motivation to uproot their lives to move to a different country are of the more dynamic persuasion.
To suggest that immigrant labour must necessarily displace native employment seems a little mercantilist - in an expanding economy, employment is not a zero sum game. As long, of course, as the necessary infrastructure is maintained (not something the UK has been good at over the past few decades).
113. Tressage - how can they count 50000 votes in half an hour?!
Morning all:
“Gordon Brown’s Christmas terror tactics”
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/index.php?storyID=10267
“generally, those with the motivation to uproot their lives to move to a different country are of the more dynamic persuasion.”
They can be, but OTOH, there are groups of migrants whose rates of economic activity are a long way below that of the native British population - due to things like poor education, or cultural hostility towards allowing women to go out to work.
112 - I’m sure Mr. Fear would regard that assertion as tantamount to slander.
Mike, interesting article, and Vince has been set up to overshadow the new leader what ever happens.
Re 7, Mike Smithson “re 5. Dan - I had a vivid dream last night that Huhne had it it by just two votes which led to a huge row and an eventual court case over the interpretation of spoiled ballot papers.”
Now that rings a bell
I hope Huhne wins, I make more money
(To be fair if I had done the right thing I would not care as I would win either way!)
118 - “there are groups of migrants whose rates of economic activity are a long way below that of the native British population - due to things like poor education, or cultural hostility towards allowing women to go out to work”
Compared to the British *average*, certainly. Are they necessarily of lower activity than the low end of the British spectrum, though? Poor education and cultural hostility to *any* kind of legitimate employment is certainly a feature of some native areas….
Im £0.00 on Clegg and £100 green on Huhne - not sure I am going to collect..
re 111 I did ask a few days ago what happens in the event of a tie, and does Vince have the casting vote.
The count started at 10.30 and will be finished at 2. At least, that’s the plan.
Re 102 Coldstone “If the British working class, (is there such a thing) cannot adapt to the social and technological changes of the twenty first century, then they will suffer accordingly.”
That sort of attitude really helps the BNP.
‘Only if their opinions are informed…’
…oh dear, and so we step on to the slippery slope toward authoritarianism. Does the public have an ‘informed opinion’ about most issues of public policy? Of course not - it rather forms its attitudes on hunches, instincts and bits and pieces of second-hand knowledge.
That is what you get when you have a democratic system, and you have to accept it. There cannot be a situation where certain subjects are declared out of bounds to democratic decision making as being ‘too difficult’. Otherwise we might as well dispense with democracy entirely and institute some kind of government by ‘committees of experts’. Or perhaps we could return to a highly restricted franchise as in the early 19th century - any takers?
RPI up to 4.3% !
The shopping index (CPI) static.
121. ‘Are they necessarily of lower activity than the low end of the British spectrum, though’
If you have a problem with people of that sort, why would you want to increase their number via immigration?
124. Lewis - so there could be a recount announcement around 2.000pm which would really liven up the betting!
Labour may feel even a Lib Dem Leadership announcement might at least stop more bad news heading up the media but why has the most uninspiring Leadership election led me to hope someone at Lib Dem HQ loses the disc with the voting data on today……….
Re 126 Chevage “That is what you get when you have a democratic system, and you have to accept it. There cannot be a situation where certain subjects are declared out of bounds to democratic decision making as being ‘too difficult’. Otherwise we might as well dispense with democracy entirely and institute some kind of government by ‘committees of experts’. Or perhaps we could return to a highly restricted franchise as in the early 19th century - any takers?”
Or a oner person one vote system, where the monarch is the person and the monarch has the vote
116. Because they are counted electronically!
129 I guess so. I don’t know what the actual arrangements are for a recount.
110: Perhaps a chat to the right person is in order?
126: A democratic system should present the voters with the facts and let them generate their own opinions. A person’s own opinion must be better than a reheated version of someone else’s.
I am very slightly Green on both Clegg and Huhne. Delighted to have crawled back my position having backed all the early non runners. My main early position was on Vince Cable. Although he proved a losing bet once he refused to enter the stalls, not a bet I’m ashamed to have made.
I think Clegg will get it and the LDs will regret their choice. He can waffle for England.
128 - it’s one of the products of a liberal immigration regime. On the plus side, there’s the economically active that add to a nation. In the long term, it seems more advantageous to make a country an easy place to settle, encourage the economically beneficial to do just that, and try to manage the downside effectively.
Anyone actually keen about Clegg getting it or is he Mr Inevitable ?
I seem to remember Labour elected the same chap in the summmer… )
Is anyone having trouble with betfair today? Can’t seem to get the prices up.
138. Not had any problems Benedict.
117. Interesting article. Fascinating that Brown might talk about security given that no government has done more to alienate our armed forces and latterly the police.
As for the National Security Council, didn’t the Conservatives propose that? Finally to Lords Reform, if there is one thing that you can guarantee that Labour will always screw up in an attempt to gain an advantage, that is anything to do with our constitution and democracy.
It sounds as if it will be quite a hilarious outing for old Gordon Ebeneezer Scrooge. Bah Humbug!
138 - Benedict, if you’re having a problem, use this URL instead:
http://sports.betfair.com/Index.do?mi=20639573&ex=1&origin=MRL&mv=classic
It enables you to smartly side-step the clunking fist of Betfair’s horrible new interface and slip smoothly into the loving embrace of their old, familiar style.
83: “I still think they should have followed Mike’s advice and got Clegg and Huhne to do a PMQs each”
Had they done that, they wouldn’t have elected Posh Boy Cleggy. And from a Tory perspective, an outright GE victory becomes a little bit closer with PBC’s election today.
Still, it might get the LDs back up towards 18% which is where I think they need to be to suppress Labour vote share in key seats the Tories have to win back at the next GE.
BTW, how long until the next LD leadership election is scheduled? I know that like buses (and most LDs do!), they tend to come along in threes…
Much support for Clegg comes with hope rather than expectation. Personally I think it’s a crazy risk.
If he becomes leader he will have to give me good reason to vote in coming elections because I’ve seen little reason to in the leadership campaign.
138 - Betfair’s okay for me, I was hoping to nibble the reported double figures for Huhne but they’ve gone. Got some at 8’s though now.
Sorry 0/T, but it’s the first time I see someone saying this and it seems so logical…
“Why Huckabee Might Be Helping Romney”
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/why_huckabee_might_be_helping.html
re 139, Stjohn, “138. Not had any problems Benedict.”
Yes, looks like the browser on the PC i was using.
Many thanks for the heads up.
Re 141, Andy D many thanks.
Re 143, UKPaul Many thanks also.
I see that the LD announcement is deemed the 7th most important story on the BBC News website right now.
Yep, seventh!
Not in the Top 10 Most Read or Emailed either, with the BBC’s outrageously PC censorship of The Pogues being of far greater interest to the man on the street.
141. Andy D. Very poetic!
re 120 thanks to PfP (I think) advertising the arb with William Hill a few weeks ago I’m now at break even with both candidates.
140-”As for the National Security Council, didn’t the Conservatives propose that?”
Yes: “Unquiet World, the report from a Tory policy group(…) recommends establishing a US-style national security council to work on strategy” (July 27)
But there’s one thing I agree in the article, Brown needs one day off( but if he wants to take more days off, I would not oppose!)
re 135 yes indeed a Vince victory would have made for a very profitable Christmas.
re 141 Andy D many thanks I’ll give it a try and it might solve the graph problem which has them stumped.
147. K T Tunstall has recently brought out a good remake of “a fairytale in New York” - is that banned too?
142: But it would have been nice to watch them both mess it up.
150 Indeed he can have as many days off as he likes! The more the better!
151. Chris A. Nice all the same to have one’s judgment vindicated even if it doesn’t convert into hard sterling.
147. Porrige with Ronnie Barker has been censored for years - PC tw*ts.
‘A democratic system should present the voters with the facts and let them generate their own opinions. A person’s own opinion must be better than a reheated version of someone else’s. ‘
How charmingly naive! That is absolutely not what happens. Rather, the voters are presented with ‘versions of the truth’ by competing political parties and media outlets - assuming that is they actually take any notice of these voices.
The average voter, who is not - and cannot - be a specialist then comes to a conclusion about which of these competing ‘versions of the truth’ they find most convincing, based on instincts, hunches, their own experiences and the views of friends/family/colleagues etc.
It’s a rough and ready process of discovery, not some kind of academic exercise where the voter is educated into having a set of informed and original opinions across the various areas of public policy. And that is how it will always be - take it or leave it.
152 - lots of things appear to have them stumped at the moment. If you have a market with lots of previously matched bets on it then it loads unbearably slowly with their ghastly new interface (which to be fair looks quite nice, it just ruins the functionality of the site).
I have about 350 different matched bets on the LD market, and it takes 45 seconds to load on the new interface, a sorry state of affairs. Just stick “&mv=classic” at the end of at the specific URL of any market you’re playing (which is given out in the Rules tab) and you can use the old style.
The England managers market, on which I had >1000 bets, had a loading time that was quite useful for timing boiled eggs…
When voting for prospective lib dem councillor candidates if there are only 2 candidates the ballot paper has a third choice “Re Open Nominations” fondly known as the third candidate Ron. I can’t understand why this option wasn’t on the leadership ballot so that ballot papers wouldn’t have to be spoiled to show disapproval and gives members a genuine recordable alternative vote.
158: I know that that is not how things happen, I just suggested that it was a way they ’should’ happen.
We can though provide people with facts and hope they get past the miasma of half truth and hyperbole.
re 160 but under the AV than would have been more complicated to count and who’d have got Ron’s trnasfers?
160. Ron may have won.
161. Who are ‘we’ and who decides what are ‘facts’ rather than merely opinions?
RE: LD contest.
Well we know that for once it really is a two horse race and
Only LDs winning this election!
137. But Labour didn’t offer a choice!
69: I’m on site with work most days Nick, and when they’re shelling out for my valuable time I can’t really get away with spending most of the day on t’internet! That’s why i post mostly early mornings, late evenings and weekends, but was in Germany on a ‘documentation’ visit a couple of weeks back so could most more regularly.
I won’t comment how near the office is to SW1…
41.
“that nice old Scotsman got dumped”
Sorry to tell you, Sir Alec just had to go! the Tories are now run by a nasty young Scotsman. . . do keep up!
Too close to call is the latest…
137.
“Mr Inevitable”
You suggesting two Blairs versus Brown?
Re 169, Cicero, “Too close to call is the latest…”
Are you near the count?
Only I am laying Clegg at low odds and buying Huhne long.
169. Cicero - from what source and when please.
169- Latest from who?
As Jack W would have put it, did you receive a pigeon from Cowley street?
(If) it’s Clegg…
What happens next? Clegg’s expected to have won, so he wheels out his new ‘Shadow’ Cabinet. Vince stays as Deputy Leader (obviously) and continues to hold his position of Chancellor – for now. His team need rewarding, so expect to see promotions for someone like Julia Goldsworthy who might find herself with the Home Affairs remit. Perhaps her or Alistair Carmichael anyway, moving back to the position he briefly held during Ming’s Acting Leader tenure. Norman Lamb would be another possibility here.
Foreign Affairs might be expected to either go back to Ming (again, ‘for now’.) or to remain with Michael Moore – another Clegg supporter. If this were the case, expect to see Ming go to International Development or Defence (if he wants to stay in ‘cabinet).
It would seem unlikely for Huhne to get one of these top positions. It would be likely that Clegg would see him as a loose cannon, so would want to reward him (a little), but not too much. Home Affairs would possibly suit Huhne, but Clegg is unlikely to give that particular carrot.
I’d also expect a low cabinet position for Kennedy to be offered. Something like Justice or Education, perhaps.
And if Huhne gets it? I would expect Cable to stay as Deputy (with a fairly wide ranging brief), but to lose his Chancellorship. Clegg would stay as Home Spokesman (or possibly move to Foreign). No place for Ming or Kennedy, but Steel would get a hefty brief in the Lords. Expect to see one of Huhne’s female supporters rewarded. Either Featherstone to Foreign or Kramer to Home depending on where Clegg ends up. This would leave Transport free for John Leech.
Another Cleggite would need rewarded however, so either Julia Goldsworthy will move to the Treasury (What are the odds for female Chancellor, Home and Foreign…?) or Danny Alexander will get it.
Probably a bit ill thought out and certainly a bit rushed, but interesting to think about…
122: I repeatedly fail to get this betting stuff. If that’s the case, why not stick £50 on Clegg now, then you are up either way surely?
174 Some interesting points, Billy Ruff, but they are all positied on the idea that the two candidates are in some way or another “enemies”. I really do not think that that is the case. Frankly, the Lib Dems’ Parliamentary team is not big enough to have factions. Personal animosities (which surely must exist amongst some of them) have to be underplayed by the desperate need for friends - and the Lib Dems know that if they don’t hang together, then they will certainly hang separately.
175. I guess £0 vs £100 chance is better than £5 vs £50..
175 - not worth giving up £50 of potential profit for £6!!!
Betting is always about value - really you should aim to disregard your previous bets (they are the equivalent of sunk costs) though that’s hard to do in practice.
The temptation to “green up” bets that are going well can be a long-term mistake - what most people end up doing (on average) is reducing their profits on correct calls and incurring the full loss on incorrect ones.
I am finding the cheapest way to back Huhne seems to be to lay Clegg where £1.4 seems to get me £10.
Still no hard news from the LD count, which is as it should be, my info the other day was from the Clegg camp.
I hope I am right from a betting POV, I lose quite a bit if Huhune wins, but I would be surprised if it is as close as these rumours suggest. A lot of activists I know dithered til the last possible moment in casting their vote, but most went for Clegg, as did I. In Birmingham, almost all the councillors went Clegg, and most of the Asian membership.
In the large rural target seat where I operate, Clegg had at least two thirds of the activist votes and my impression was the armchair vote was even more firmly in his camp.
If Huhne wins it could only be because of a disastrous Clegg campaign, which it hasn’t been, though not the steamroller success some predicted. He has had a tendency to wing it rather uninspiringly at times, he has been slated as ‘not doing his homework’ and relying on an undoubtedly formidable brain to get through. He rather too obviously preferred the Cameron pattern of speaking without notes, which only works if you can avoid waffle and bluster … and the result was adequate, but not the inspiration some people expected and hoped for. He is much better when he really does put the work in, speaks more slowly, and especially when he refers to concrete examples to illustrate his points - he becomes far more interesting to listen to.
Huhne has shown he has a talent for ‘using his sharp elbows’ to get into the media agenda, and perhaps works harder, but he has been unable to conquer a rather ponderous rhetorical style which emphasises the wrong words. But he could do the job well.
Clegg has the intellect to improve, he seems to have the measure of Paxman, and will be a good campaigning focus outside Parliament, which matters a lot in the LibDems. He is photogenic, where Ming was a visual disaster, especially once his glasses were removed, partly due to the ravages of chemotherapy it must be said. Clegg is warm and relaxed where Ming came over as cold and stiff. Chris Huhne is similarly warm, but not perhaps as charismatic.
I remember how wobbly Ashdown was at the beginning of his leadership, and he never shone at Westminster, but it did not really matter. Provided PMQs are at least reasonable - heckling will be inevitable - what happens in the TV studios, conference platform and out in the country will matter more, and there Ashdown was head and shoulders above anyone since Grimond, though that predates me. Until coalition mania warped his judgement.
Kennedy was often almost embarrassingly below par during his leadership visits, and not that good in the Commons, but the media and MPs liked him and gave him an easy ride, til the end. I think he never really enjoyed the job. Ashdown could do 7 or 8 leadership hits in a day, and always impressed everyone he came into contact with, for Kennedy three or four was the maximum.
The LibDems have been itching for a leader firing on all cylinders since Ashdown left, so lets see what happens. Particularly during the enforced equal air time of a general election, either contender will easily be better than Ming or Kennedy, and Clegg is better looking than Cameron, which does seem to matter in this day and age.
I see Clegg’s odds are drifting out a little, Huhne now at 5.6 - 6.0 but not much money following him.
176 - I think that, even if Clegg and Huhne had started the contest as the best of friends, then I doubt they’ll be ending it in much the same state, especially after ‘Calamity Clegg’…
Huhne lost momentum when news of this dossier emerged. It seemed careless to let a headline out like that without checking it.
The other issue which cost him support was his apparent backing for a new minimum British nuclear deterrent to avoid buying Trident Mark II, but not at the same time adopting unilateralism.
Clegg’s leaflets were far better, but in the last few weeks my household only had further leaflets from Huhne. But I will still be amazed if Huhne pulls it off.
He understands the betting markets and I suspect if his camp really thought he was that close you would see signs of betting activity in the last few days, and it has not really been there.
Sorry I should have replied a bit sooner - a comment from a mate going in - security seems quite tight and I am not sure how much people can really see of the whole picture.
Re 183, Cicero, Many thanks.
For those of you waiting for the final three ELECTION BATTLEGROUND programmes I have recorded with Robert Waller, they are now available from this post on my blog http://iaindale.blogspot.com/2007/12/election-battleground-complete-series.html
We cover Yorkshire & Humberside, the South of England and the East Midlands.
Links to the other regions are also on that blogpost.
My thanls to Robert, who has been a brilliant guest and full of information on every marginal constituency. In the whole series I never managed to ask him a question he didn’t know the answer to! Maybe that says more about me as an interviewer.
Anyway, I hope Political Betting.com groupies have enjoyed this series of ultimate political geekery.
Iain
Apparently Facebook have cast doubts as to whether Lib Dem MPs exist.
http://kerroncross.blogspot.com/
185. NOT Humberside Iain. It ceased to exist in 1996. The region is called ‘Yorkshire & the Humber’ or better still ‘Yorkshire’!
187 - just beat me to it Dave!
Of course here in the East Riding of Yorkshire we never recognised “Humberside” as being any more a real place than Narnia or Middle Earth…
Hm, looking through this thread, I really should do some work today.
Just in case it has not already been mentioned, more data has been lost.
“Revenue loses 6,500 people’s data”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7149767.stm
It is becoming a habit.
The DTI have just issued the following statement.
“Following our ground breaking protection of the poppy fields in Afghanistan by our brave soldiers enabling our drug barons to obatin plentiful supplies of cheap opium, I have every confidence that ID cards will prove of immense help to our criminals enabling them to become world class at identity theft. We in Briatin know we have a world beating crime industry and we must do eveything in our power to ensure it grows as fast as possible. In preparation we are practising by spasmodically losing valuable personal data so criminals can become adept at finding and using it to maximum benefit.”
187,188 et no doubt al
It’s still Humberside as far as the Boundary Commission is concerned! There is also a cross-’border’ seat at Brigg and Goole, and an important one too. I worked as a consultant for Glanford (Brigg) council when trying to break up the admin county of Humberside, so I am well aware of the arguments between “Yellowbellies” and “Yorkies” !
The same applies to those Welsh correspondents who criticised us for talking of Clwyd, Dyfed etc when they ceased to exist for local government purposes some years ago. The Boundary Commission have not caught up with that either - see for example Clwyd West and South.
Thanks too to Iain, who always asked me easy questions, even if the answers weren’t. Any predictions I made are of course tentative and subjective - but not partisan. As I said in yesterday’s thread, no one can possibly know what the outcome of the next election will actualy be, and more interest for that.
191 “actually”. I can spell, I can’t type!
re Iain Dale 185. Sadly, Iain, I don’t think we have “groupies” in political betting as in your final para - “Anyway, I hope Political Betting.com groupies have enjoyed this series of ultimate political geekery.”
I always wanted a job where there were lots of groupies but, alas, this is the wrong site.
193 - come on Mike, on election nights people are practically throwing their swingometers at you! What more could a man want?
191. Very interesting series thank you Robert. I think we’re confident of doing a bit better than merely halving the majority in NW Leics though.
I hope someone is watching sky for those of us supposedly at work today
sky call it for Clegg
195, I said, or intended to say, that the majority was halved last time (2001-05). Sorry if I didn’t give the impression that it could go either way - another marginal right on the cusp of deciding who will be the largest party.
I must have made lots of mistakes, in fact I know I did; but all the programmes were recorded as live without the possibility of re-takes, or knowing what Iain was going to ask about in advance ..
re 197 - like they called it for Alan Johnson in the Labour deputy race.
‘Sky sources’ have a narrow victory for Clegg.
What a Clegg victory would demonstrate to me is the ultimate power of the media. For it was they who ordained Clegg as the favourite as soon as Ming had been resigned by Hughes and Cable. There was no consultation with the outside world. There were no opinion polls. It was the Westminster village who decided who the likely favourite would be.
And you know what armchair activists are like once they’ve been told who is the most likely to win…
Thank God I’ve won a bet after the X Factor disaster
Re 200, Ralph, “‘Sky sources’ have a narrow victory for Clegg.”
Last time they were as reliable as Roger
Sky - there was a recount.
BBC sources have Clegg winning too. Same source?!
203: That bad? lol
For those away from the TV apparently it was very close and there was a recount.
Clegg- but really close!
Re 204, MikeL A recount? Wow.
In which case it is too close to call. I am now very very green on Huhne and mildly irritated on Clegg
205 - Second mistake in a row if true, you may as well hand the next election to Cameron on a plate.
There is a recount or there was a recount ?
205: yeah, looks like a new next Libdem leader market will be up and running in about 20 mins then
Whereas I’d be much more likely to vote for a Huhne led party than a Clegg led one, I think that Clegg is probably the better choice here. His gentle, inoffensive manner will lose hundreds of Lib Dem voters certainly, but Huhne’s bullish manner and love of, as someone put it, ‘using his elbows’ would probably have alienated more people. Even if it would have made the Lib Dems that much more palatable to myself!
500 vote margin of victory according to Jon Sopel on News 24.
Whereas I’d be much more likely to vote for a Huhne led party than a Clegg led one, I think that Clegg is probably the better choice here. His gentle, inoffensive manner will lose hundreds of Lib Dem voters certainly, but Huhne’s bullish manner and love of, as someone put it, ‘using his elbows’ would probably have alienated more people. Even if it would have made the Lib Dems that much more palatable to myself!
ukpaul@209
Give Clegg a chance !! He’s not even officially elected yet.
P.S. i voted Huhne
Whereas I’d be much more likely to vote for a Huhne led party than a Clegg led one, I think that Clegg is probably the better choice here. His gentle, inoffensive manner will lose hundreds of Lib Dem voters certainly, but Huhne’s bullish manner and love of, as someone put it, ‘using his elbows’ would probably have alienated more people. Even if it would have made the Lib Dems that much more palatable to myself!
Whereas I’d be much more likely to vote for a Huhne led party than a Clegg led one, I think that Clegg is probably the better choice here. His gentle, inoffensive manner will lose hundreds of Lib Dem voters certainly, but Huhne’s bullish manner and love of, as someone put it, ‘using his elbows’ would probably have alienated more people. Even if it would have made the Lib Dems that much more palatable to myself!
205: yeah, looks like a new next Libdem leader market will be up and running in about 20 mins then
205: yeah, looks like a new next Libdem leader market will be up and running in about 20 mins then
ukpaul@209
Give Clegg a chance !! He’s not even officially elected yet.
P.S. i voted Huhne
198. No probs Robert. It was a good series and respect to anyone with that sort of knowledge of the country.
You were right about Swadlincote btw.
sorry, was that me?
Blimey! I knew I had server problems, but didn’t realise they were quite that bad. Sorry everyone…
Clegg: 20988
Huhne: 20477
220 - I stated what I would do earlier if he won, he has to win *back* my vote, as of now I will abstain. I’m not someone who just votes without being given a good reason. Seeing as I’m in Guildford it’s votes like mine that he can ill afford to lose.
The next few months will show whether he has the guts to attack this government or not. Over to Clegg.
Good to see the rubbishing from the Tory corner, since at least Nick Clegg will have no trouble bettering at least their expectations.
41,465 votes cast - not very many, is it?
I really believe this result is the worst of all worlds for the Lib Dems. For a start, Clegg comes across as an outsized and somewhat earnest student politician, who is neither “right” nor “left” but simply ineffective; and secondly he has not really managed a hefty mandate so his charismatic legitimacy is tainted also.
Trust the Lib Dems!
224, I make that Clegg by 50.616% (50.62% for competition purposes)
Fantastic result - for Tories and Labour!
Lib Dems elect a lightweight non-entity, but 50% of the party wanted someone else!
Split asunder, right down the middle.
Is this the end for the Liberals?
Oh dear, I’ll stop laughing shortly….
224: could they have had a worse result!
Wow, that’s close.
I shall from refrain from musing over the implications of Clegg winning with a slender 50.6% of the vote as I’ll just be branded another troublecausing Tory, etc etc…and cheer the fact that Betfair have already paid out.
Woo woo, back of the net (and so on…)
Have I just heard the cue for all the Blue Harpies to swarm down with invitations to sign up with the Tories?
Very sorry to disappoint you, you chaps, but please don’t bother. Nick Clegg will make an excellent leader for the Liberal Democrats, as would Chris Huhne have done, though in different ways, since they have different strenghts. (I voted for Chris, by the way, since it is now irrelevant.)
The betting now must be on the first Tory or Labour MP to defect to the Liberal Democrats.
Sorry it’s O/T and has nothing to do with Clegg, but it’s important:
“Conservatives admit to receiving illegal donations”
“David Cameron’s constituency party has admitted receiving £7,400 in invalid donations, it was revealed today.”
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/conservatives/story/0,,2229373,00.html
Do you we have a boosted entry for Xmas No1?
New thread
Looks like Jennie’s won then?
Congratulations to Mr Clegg, and commisserations to Mr Huhne.
Now all we need to complete the picture is Mark S to come on and point out that,
yet again, when real votes are cast, people vote for the LibDems and not the Conservatives.
Sky’s Boulton and co saying DC’s constituency assoc failed to declare £7000 in donations and prizes.
In some ways The Tories having missed a donation had to happen , noone can be 100% squeaky clean, erors will happen, but very embarassing in DC’s own back yard
http://adamboulton.typepad.com/my_weblog/
229 - Do we know the actual turnout (any spoilt or unreadable votes?)
It’s hard to think of a worse result for the Lib Dems. A favourite who has an unconvincing campaign and who wins by a whisker from a candidate who has been more energetic and more visible, taking over from an unexpectedly successful stopgap leader. No momentum, no clear direction, no enthusiasm. For the Lib Dems’ sake, I hope that Nick Clegg realises just how serious the dangers are for them.
So Cameron now resigns his seat, does he? Or is corruption/negligence not so important when done by Tories?
Oh dear. Not a great result for the yellows, is it?
224 50.616%… Not the widest of margins and far less than announced by Yougov
BTW I think the poster called “jennie” won the competition
Well, I wonder if we can get Betfair to stick up a new market straight away
BTW, Ralph thanks for the numbers.
243. At no point have the tories called for anyone in the government to resign over it, so I don’t see why any tory should be expected to either.
Be nice to LibDems Day.
So Clegg has defeated Chris Huhne
And Tories think this is a boon
but beware a surprise
as the poll figures rise
So don’t count your chickens too soon
I would like to take the opportunity of congratulating my genius fiancée for makine a better prediction than people who actually had money on it.
Hmm, maybe I should try to raise some cash by using her ability to sort these things out…