Tories back to a double digit lead with ICM
April 26th, 2008
A third poll has Labour slipping back
Just six days after the publication of the Guardian’s April poll showing a big drop in the Tory lead to 5% there another survey from pollster out tonight which has a different picture. The ICM poll for the Sunday Telegraph reports the following shares with comparisons on the earlier survey: CON 39% (nc): LAB 29% (-5): LD 20% (+1)
So the big drop off in the Labour share has not moved to the Tories. Whatever this is good news for David Cameron and the trend of growing leads of Labour has now been seen in three polls, from there different pollsters all of which use totally different polling methodologies.
On top of everything that has happened this week the ICM survey is clearly another body blow for Brown. With the exception of that 5% poll earlier in the week the polling trend is pretty bad for Labour and does not form a good basis for Thursday’s elections.
With all eyes on the Mayoral battle there has been little activity of late on the commons seat spread markets. I think that all this will change after Thursday.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of a new ARSE poll of polls that comprises ICM, Populus, YouGov, CR and MORI that gives :
Con 40.2% .. Lab 29.8% .. LibDem 18.4% .. Others 11.6%.
The PISSED Wells/Baxter Index with added SOAMES weighting shows :
Con 335 seats .. Lab 235 .. LibDem 48 .. Others 32.
Con majority of 20.
……………………..
Sources :
WIND ….. Whimsical Independent News Division.
JNN …… ..Jacobite News Network.
ARSE ….. Anonymous Random Selection of Electors.
PISSED … Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
SOAMES ….System Of Amending Measured Election Scores
the trend of growing leads of Labour - Shurely shome mishtake?
GE Con. majority down to 2.24 on BF, best bookies go 2.37. Again the Coral 1-25 Con maj at 9.0 looks like value.
God, those dead in the water Lib Dems of six months ago seem to be not so dead now!
CLINTON VS OBAMA: THE POPULAR VOTE ISSUE
——
“One thing many people haven’t noticed about Hillary Clinton’s 55 percent to 45 percent victory over Barack Obama in the Pennsylvania primary is that it put her ahead of Obama in the popular vote. Her 214,000-vote margin in the Keystone State means that she has won the votes, in primaries and caucuses, of 15,112,000 Americans, compared to 14,993,000 for Obama.”
Barone
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/04/popular_vote_gives_clinton_an.html
—–
Con lead cut by 1% from the last ICM Sunday Telegraph poll (04.04.2008):
Con -4
Lab -3
Lib +2
Per Sky News: The ICM marginals poll has a 9% swing from Lab to Con.
Now I realise the swing in marginals could be greater than the whole country but IF it was the same throughout the country it would imply a Con national lead of 15% (ie GE Lab lead 3% to current Con lead 15% = 9% swing).
Of course many of us have long suspected that the swing in the marginals will be greater than the average swing across the whole country because, eg, would the Conservatives really get a 9% swing in Glasgow/Liverpool/Manchester/Newcastle etc?
If the swing in the marginals is greater than the average swing across the whole country then that would invalidate the various seat predictions that certain people regularly post on this website.
5 PM. Those North Korean/ZANU PF figures include Michigan and Florida and not all the caucus states.
Just a matter of time before the Libdems push NuLabour into third spot in the opinion polls.
If only Frank Field and the NuLabour rebels had not capitulated then Gord would have faced the prospect of an equivalent of a vote of no confidence.
I have never been so eager to wait for Prime Minister’s U-Turns as I have this coming Wednesday
Perhaps Nick P can enlighten us as to how long will NuLabour backbenchers put up with Gord as Prime Minister?
5. Apart from bragging rights, a lead in the popular vote doesn’t really mean much unless there was a uniform voting system across the whole country.
I have a tidy sum on that Labour will still be the largest party. Even John Major won one election.
4. Yes, abit more and they will be back to the giddy height of…..March.
7 - The lack of 9% swings in Glasgow, Manchester, Newcastle, would be matched by the greater than 9% swings in safe Conservative seats.
13. Not exactly. Where Labour are on 10% or less, I imagine that share would drop very little. But where Labour are on, say, 20%, one would expect a drop in line with the average.
14 - Sounds like an endorsement for Baxter. Some people won’t be happy
A good opinion piece by Iain MacWhirther
http://www.sundayherald.com/oped/opinion/display.var.2228320.0.its_the_end_of_the_world_as_we_know_it_for_gordon_brown.php
re 11 Rather you than me! After Thurs could be a good moment to back a hung parliament, though.
Is this the first time that Jack’s PISSED prediction with added SOAMES weighting has actually shown a Tory majority?
Took long enough…
FWIW, if there were a fair size swing to the Tories next time (say on a par with 1979) I’d expect a bigger swing in marginals as anti-Conservative tactical voting fell away.
Thinking about Matthew Parris’s article this morning, do you think Gordon Brown might just decide to throw in the towel? Might he try and repeat Balfour’s disastrous experiment in 1905, and invite the Opposition to form an administration?
That conflicts with Rod Crosby
WHOA.
Jack W’s ARSE is now sporting a Tory Majority?
That’s one ARSE I’m happy to be waving around.
18 - Does Jack worry that his predictions are still seen by some as a joke? Why has he not been attacked by Mike yet?
8
Yes, it does include Michigan (where Obama was not on the ballot) and Florida (where they did not campaigned).
About the caucuses, Barone wrote:
“If you add in the votes, as estimated by the folks at realclearpolitics.com, in the Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine caucuses, where state Democratic parties did not count the number of caucus-attenders, Clinton still has a lead of 12,000 votes.”
Here, the point is not : is it right to think this way; the point: knowing that Clinton will try to spin it this way, how can it affect the decisions of the super-del?
@23:
Jack’s ARSE is as funny or as serious as you want it to be.
It’s a remarkably versatile ARSE.
This ICM still have the Tories share too low, but this poll backs up YouGov as far as Labour’s collapsing vote is concerned!
24 - This is the problem for Clinton. Those who know little about the process maybe receptive to her PV argument but the SDs are very well informed and are unlikely to.
My view, maintained all the way through, is that to have any chance of the nomination Clinton needs to win the PV excluding Michigan. She can argue for the inclusion of Florida but having to include Michigan removes any figleaf of plausibilty.
ICM still have the Tories share too low, but this poll backs up YouGov as far as Labour’s collapsing vote is concerned
9. Well indeed, if I were a Lib Dem I would be trying to gain all the disillusioned Labour voters in any constituency possible, if it’s anything the Lib Dems are good at, it’s stealing the Labour vote; remember the swing in Ealing Southall and Sedgefield, if they can achieve similar swings, especially in the marginals, it could be disaster for Labour.
The brilliant thing is, because a Conservative victory seems inevitable, the old Labour excuse; “if you don’t vote Labour the Tories will get back in again” doesn’t wash anymore.
Remember that famous rule, when someone is down you kick ‘em, and all parties should take full advantage of Labour’s current position.
21 I think that Yougov’s forced choice question points to a falling away in anti-Conservative tactical voting. IIRC, Labour led the Conservative by something like 50-35% in 2005, compared to 31-49% now.
23 Mike is aware that jack’s ARSE is so enormous it can squash any opposition - The SOAMES weighting squeezes out the competition like the great man making his way to table at Wiltons.
@31:
Can you imagine the mess if Mike went head-to-head with Jack’s ARSE? It doesn’t bear thinking about, frankly.
Con have won the GE - OK?
24. “Here, the point is not : is it right to think this way; the point: knowing that Clinton will try to spin it this way, how can it affect the decisions of the super-del?”
err, the superdelegates are not children, if the figures presented to them are not the rights one they will pay no attention to them.
33, Do we sense some degree of doubt in Ave it for once?
6 - The figures you are using are untrue M. Magnan. Obama is ahead by about 600,000 votes.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/democratic_vote_count.html
Anyone who allows states where there was no campaign and disallows states where there was just because they use the caucus system is deserving of anyone’s utter contempt.
Stop pumping us falke information to try and fill your wallet.
Seriously, that’s a warning.
24/27: The superdelegates will do what they want to, though, and will then look for good arguments to do it - I shouldn’t think there is a single super who is really passively saying to himself: “Whatever, I’ll do whatever the majority of votes minus Michigan tell me to do”. If Obama were to appear significantly more likely to lose to McCain (not the case at present), then this line of argument would give them cover to go for Clinton. If he looks just as likely or more likely to win, I think they’ll go with the flow.
@35:
He should have used an interrobang:
Con have won the GE - OK?!
by Ave it 08 April 26th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
“false information” rather.
7 - I expect a 10%+ swing in the marginals next time ie any seat outside the labour top 200
Con maj 100 minimum maybe biggest win since 1931
26 28 This ICM poll also tends to back up Populus and Mori that the Tories are not above 40%
A few weeks ago there was talk of Labour having a core vote of 30%. That now looks like a ceiling rather than a floor.
32 it would be an ecological catastrophe
33 How are Watford doing? I know nothing about football so don’t know if I should be congratulating or commiserating with my borther over their performance
43 he he he we are warming up for the play offs by allowing others to get a false impression of us.
To say that we are a pile of shyte who are incapable of scoring and are a disgrace in front of our own fans is of course a distortion
28 All the evidence is that Yougov are the odd one out with a too high Conservative share which even reached 45% last December .
Demcon Watch has Hillary’s SD lead slipping to 22, and this interesting piece…
http://demconwatch.blogspot.com/
“There are 128 unpledged superdelegates who are at least 60% likely to vote for Obama; just 39 unpledged superdelegates are at least 60% likely to vote for Clinton. There are 78 superdelegates in [the 40%-60%] range.”
If my calcs are right, that would leave Clinton with an overall SD lead of about 5, effectively indistinguisible from zero… as I predicted a couple of months back…
gDong!
45 all the evidence is that LDs will be wiped out next time and get back to their 1970 cab size of 6 seats!!!
Re 45 Mark Senior. You have been consistent in stating that Yougov are the least accurate.
We will see on May 2nd which pollster is more accurate.
O/T:
The first installment from the MoS re Lord Levy
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=562296&in_page_id=1770&ct=5
(stifles yawn) Blair has long massages from Caplin. No mention of the Big Feartie so no damage there then?
48 Indeed we will HF
Meanwhile Brown is losing employees before they even start work.
At the top of Labour they even have meetings to find out why people are not turning up to work for Labour. Maybe he is on strike? Is his union the NUT or UNISON?
http://tinyurl.com/4vzopa
“Since his appointment, Mr Pitt-Watson has missed three officers’ meetings and at least two business board meetings and has communicated only to confirm that he had not given notice to his present employer. “
71. Re: postal votes, in the UK is there typically a demographic skew to this vote?
I have usually found that samples of tallying the postal votes are approximately representative of the final result.
8. They are going to be taken into account in the minds of the superdelegates Jack whether you like it or not. Its a fact, its a consdideration for the people who will be making decisions.
Obama’s job is to win enough it what is remaining to take the PV and leave no room for Hillary to breathe. If the gold like figure who has never made a mistake that he has become to some was so clever he should have damn well agreed to re-runs on both disputed states, would probably have done better and then killed Hillary off by stretching his vote gap.
His campaign was dead set against it. Have no doubt that if he and Clinton had said yes to re-runs they would have happened.
I’m not interested in the argument about some principle, he could have this beyond doubt if he agreed to the re-runs.
125. There will be a PB London Mayor competition. We’ll be publishing it at about 5pm tomorrow.
Why now? I have disqualified myself from entering it because of insider knowledge of the postal votes. We should have had a GLA prediction competition about two weeks ago.
40. I think you’ll be very disappointed. Labour can easily recover, and in my view are still on course to be the largest party…
The chance of a Labour majority has largely evaporated, but the Tories still can’t seem to decisively move into overall majority territory. There does seem to be a ceiling to Tory support. This seems to be confirmed by the second layer of the Labour ‘onion’ apparently flaking off to the LibDems, not the Tories.
That can only mean a HP is even more likely than ever…
5) Phillipe, you are seeming a little desperate vis a vis your Clinton Dem nom bet.
Have a look at this video from TPM, it explains what Clinton is up to, the various ways of calculating “the popular vote” with some nice graphics and attempts to predict Clinton’s next step;
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/191113.php
If you want another view, go to Larry Sabato’s “crystal ball” website. He has an article from about a month ago going through “popular vote” mechanics - very important for your bet’s health.
55. Utterly deluded. A poll released a few hours ago indicates a Tory majority of over 60
55 - I’d say the chances of the Conservatives forming the largest party are strong, particularly if they can improve their targetting of the marginals (which Ashcroft should allow them to do).
36. I agree Paul, no one suggesting positively misleading information that could skew views should be doing that.
Can we also include those demographcs and psephology experts who told us as we got ready to count on PA on Tuesday that there was good news for Obama on the basis of taking figures and skewing them towards their own bias?
I’m sure we can agree on that. I say we warn them all.
37 Nick, I’m not asking you to comment on this for obvious reasons, but it must be clear now to you and many of your colleagues with majorities of less than 5000 that Gordon’s leadership is going to lead to all of you being out on your ears after the next election. You have two options - you can acknowledge that the Party made an error in crowning him and ask him to step aside (if a majority in the PLP took this view he would have no choice in the matter) or you can start writing your CV. The choice is yours.
Are Mark and Rod huddling together for warmth?
57 nut there is not going to be a GE now and probably not for 2 years much can and will change before then .
UKpaul, TBF it wasn’t ‘false information’. If you include MI, FL and the caucus states estimates Clinton leads. Of course, that lead is meaningless, but it still exists. I can see it being a pub quiz question in future.
NP - you are right to a degree. The SDs have their own agendas and ultimately just want to win. However they have to weigh the costs of going against the PV. Even if Clinton was doing better against McCain the damage in denying Obama may cripple her as well. There is the added problem of alienating the black vote. This is an essential part of the coalition for the Democrats. There are also young voters who may be turned off for a generation.
Yokel - you are absolutely right about the re-runs. This is where I worry about Obama. He claims to be a ‘change’ politician not running the old ‘textbook campaigns’ but his actions are often those of a conventional pol. He could have said, I may be disadvantaged personally by re-runs but everybody should have their voice heard. It would have been taking a risk but would probably have paid off.
60 - Even if a majority of the PLP took this step, an electable party wouldn’t result. The bitterness and the lack of authority of a new leader which would result would easily outweigh any advantage, wouldn’t make a real difference to Labour and do nothing to resolve the underlying difficulties on policy.
55 - When I first started posting here the ‘ceiling’ on Conservative support was about 33% then it was 37% now apparently its around 40%. I wonder whare the ceiling will be set next?
57. Oh I forgot, it’s election day tomorrow…
Silly me! :>
We are told that the LDs can’t attack only nulab, as it might suggest ‘cosying-up to the tories’. Apparently, it destroys their ‘equidistant’ credo.
Wrong. To see why, return to the commercial parallel of being the third largest company in a sector. ‘Knocking copy’ is always a risk, both because it implicitly criticises a customer’s current choice, and also because it gives a competitor publicity. At the moment, there is low risk in attacking the govt—indeed, the from ‘Stalin to Mr Bean’ line is the crispest summary of GB yet.
But the LDs haven’t the space, time or money to criticise the tories, simply to maintain ‘equidistance’. Much too difficult, as the tories’ policies, out of govt, are only theoretical anyway.
Knocking the market leader is fine. Then, always ignore the other competitors, and try to give the ‘customers’ a warm feeling about your own offering.
65. In the cellar?
64 I agree that changing the leader wouldn’t guarantee victory. But not changing the leader would guarantee defeat.
67 If your analogy were correct ( and I don’t think it is ) , then it would also not make sense for the 2nd largest company to attack the 3rd largest company , the Conservatives should solely be attacking the government and ignoring the LibDems .
55. RodCrosby. A couple of weeks ago you asserted that a Conservative majority was “extremely unlikely” or words to that effect. I offered to take 10/1 on the possibility from you and then, when no response arrived, I said I would accept 4/1.
You said you would sleep on it and come up with some sort of spread bet?
Well I’m happy for us to now agree terms. What do you propose? If you would prefer a straight even money bet on which party will gain more seats than the other at the next GE I would be happy to agree instead.
You state that “Labour … in my view are still on course to be the largest party.” Well, I will have Tory seats, you can have Labour seats. Even money. Name your stake?
Size money has come in for Ken in the last 30 mins - postal vote leakers?
69 - I don’t think “defeat” is absolutely certain with Brown, in sense of an outcome where only the Conservatives can plausibly form a government. Labour have no chance of keeping their majority (barring some astonishing turn of events), and Nick would be advised to brush up his CV in any case, but that’s always been pretty likely, apart from under the Brown honeymoon, and there’s still a big range of circumstances to play with.
71 Why should Rod take even money on that bet when he could get 6/4 on Betfair today .
[70] No, it doesn’t pay the second largest company to attack the third largest, or any smaller competitor. You’d be too negative. You can omly afford to knock one.
72 - A bit premature probabably!
I think it’s all a bit silly. It may be the first time Labour has suffered significant unpopularity in nearly 20 years, but all parties eventually do. The scale of that unpopularity is not unusual or excessive. Parties have come back from this level before. The Tories managed it three times on the trot don’t forget!
Labour only needs a 2-3% swingback from the current position to remain the largest party at the next election. Mere bagatelle by historical standards…
That’s 4% going a begging from the previous poll which I suspect is going to the nationalists.
It would be interesting to see a Scottish and Welsh breakdown.
71 I consider it inconcievable now that the Conservatives won’t be the largest party next time, though I still have doubts that they can win an overall majority.
76) Well, I just got matched at 1.83 on Boris so something is afoot. A new poll or a postal leaker…
55 - lab have no chance of being the largest party - they are finished and rightly so
62 - who’s the nut? LDs are finished and will return to their League 2 status (which they always were in my opinion). Mark to use a coin analogy LDs = 1/2p piece
65. Correspondingly, Labour could not drop below 33, then 32,… 30 …..
ICM have shown the Tories at 40 or above in 7 out of the last 11 polls.
ICM have had them 40 or above in 8 out of the last 15.
For Comres its 4 out of the last 7, despite changing to very unfavourable weighting for the Tories.
YouGov’s regular 40 and over leads don’t seem strange when taken in that context and bearing in mind what Mikeus Oracalus said only a few threads ago…
Historical note: In every single general election and London Mayoral election for the past quarter of a century the most accurate pollster has been the one showing Labour/Ken in the least favourable position. This is what we saw in the 1987, 1992, 1997, 2001, and 2005 general elections as well as in the 2000 and 2004 mayoral elections.
Using the new boundaries, which seat (and notional majority) would the Tories have to gain to become the largest party?
62. Yes, plenty can happen in the next 2 years. Mainly that opinions against Brown will harden. Or do you think Brown will become MORE popular over time?
67 As you have posted this contention of yours again, David, I must answer you this time - of course, commercially you would attack the up and coming firm (if it sells more than your firm) NOT the top dog in decline, as you describe the situation. Anything else fails to recognise the situation. Presumably by advertising you are pushing the benefits of your product, anyway? It is not a case where no-one knows of the No 2 firm, which is where the “ignoring” approach comes in handy.
May I thank all the Conservative ARSE lickers for their enduring support earlier in the thread.
Enough already …. No more Tory tongues please.
83 - I think Anthony Wells site said it would be Dudley South.
77. In the 1980’s Labour had fleeting opinion poll leads over the Conservatives, but they never had a lead lasting for most of 2 1/2 years, as the Conservatives have now had. And except briefly in 1981, there was never a point at which they were 10% ahead of the Tories, on average, until 1990.
Local elections also showed Labour failing to make much headway. The Tories performed very well in 1982, 1983, and 1987, and were level-pegging with Labour in 1980, 1984, 1986, 1988, and 1989. 1981, 1985, and 1990 were the only good years for Labour, whereas Labour have performed far worse than the Conservatives did in that period.
80
Yes, me too. Something is happening…
and it does not look good for Boris.
82 Sally Comres have not changed their weighting to be very unfavourable to the Conservatives , the changes have made it move from being very favourable to the Conservatives to less so .
87 - Thanks.
83. It’s a meaningless artifact, not least because the notionals will all differ, and it depends on the seat performance of all parties. Even if it could be identified, probabilistic forecasting means that seat only has a 50/50 chance of going anyhow..
74. Mark Senior. I’m only making a putative suggestion in order to encourage Rod to frame the terms of the bet.
I will be more than happy to consider Rod’s proposal which, given his confident predictions, I expect to be acceptable to both of us.
84. Can I stick my neck out on this one?
I don’t see any way in which Labour will become more popular under Brown - at least, the party won’t go back above 35%. Hence, there are only really two ways for Labour to remain the largest party:
(1) Change leader. I don’t think this will happen but you never know. But I think the government is in such drift that that could only return Labour to largest party territory, not majority government.
(2) Hope that Cameron slips up, in which case the Lib Dems or others will be the beneficiary. It’s quite possible that we could go into the election with Con and Labour swapping vote shares from 2005 - ie Con 36, Lab 33, LD 22. That would I think produce HP with Labour largest party.
Rallings and Thrasher article about the local elections in the Sunday Times.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3822920.ece
60 - There is an interesting issue, though. If the PLP as a body decided to meet, and the majority overthrew an existing PM and elected a new leader who duly went to the Palace to receive the Queen’s commission, would the rest of the Labour Party take it? The new PM would not be leader of the Labour Party under the rules, although, if the vast majority of Labour MPs decided to support the new PM, the PM would then become leader in the same way Brown did.
56
Thank you very much, Mr. Political Capital (I love that Name - if that is your real one!). Born to be rich!
Ok so new MRUK poll says 51/49 KEN vs i think 50/50 last time after 2nd prefs. Will be in the Sunday Times.
86
Jack W.
HC 45 cream is best if your ARSE really is troubling you.
@89/80
Are you seriously suggesting you believe people are betting on leaked postal vote data?
That’s a *very* serious allegation if so. One would expect you to report your concerns to the police and the electoral commission.
As noted above, very substantial move towards Ken on Betfair this evening.
Clearly cannot be in response to National polls tonight so suggests there has to be some other information out there. What is it?
56
I’m hoping now — for Hillary’s stock to raise — that this will cripple Obama…
59 - Agreed, exit polls and polls are not to be trusted. As you know I predicted the PA figures pretty much spot on, there’s so much spin that makes it difficult at times.
63 - going against anything that those who hold the power over the delegate count constitutes false information as far as I’m concerned. If nobody believes that it will happen then anyone propagating it is beiong mischievous at best, destructive at worst.
The mayoral race, as I have previously posted is potentially very very tight.
Is it possible that when it comes to actually casting the ballot that some voters just can’t finally vote Johnson?
Having said that, can someone explain the postal votes system. Is it purely absentee only or is there a wider allowance to vote by post and do we have any notion of how many would be voting as such?
BBC News: Spokesman for Tony Blair has denied he ever said Gordon Brown could never beat David Cameron in a GE.
If that is all that has caused Ken to move in there’s some value in the new Boris price,although theres only a pittance availible
101. A naughty story about Boris?
100
Why would it be illegal?
90. Not what Anthony said.
73,77 In my view Labour’s precipitate decline in the polls over the past 8 months or so is due primarily to personal failings on the part of Gordon Brown. This differs from previous mid-term unpopularity suffered by both Labour and Tory governments, which were due to a whole range of factors and the personality of the leader was only a minor consideration. This is why I believe that a change is essential if Labour is to have any chance of winning - I believe that there is a settled view amongst a majority of the electorate (including many Labour suppporters) that Gordon is not up to the job. And I (a member of the Labour Party since the 1970s and a veteran of the struggles aganist the Trots in the early 90s) agree with that view.
I have just tuned in tonight, after a day of fence-painting and getting sunburn… all I can say is wow… I think that the marginal poll is interesting, Gordon is having a very bad weekend and tomorrow it could get worse as Levy’s book gets serialised.
104 Anyone can vote by post now, if they choose. In the London Mayoral election I would expect 1/4-1/3 votes to be postal votes, so a lot of people will have voted by now.
100 It’s conceivable. I’m sure a lot of people will have compared notes by now.
Can any of you stats guys out there tell me (as a matter of interest), what is the lowest % vote Labour could get and still be the largest party in a hung parliament?
100) Don’t be ridiculous Martin. I hope that’s tongue in cheek.
101) I believe its the new MRUK poll for the Sunday Times. I haven’t got the figures yet but apparently it will say Ken has 2% more that Boris on the first count and Ken wins 51/49 after second prefs.
100) Martin if you wish to bet on the above LEAKED??!! info on your conscience be it.
94 Not really sticking your neck out there Jack - more, some would say, of stating the blindingly obvious. I thought for a moment you were going to forecast a 150+ seat majority for the Tories!
96 - Constitutionally the Queen should appoint the person who holds the confidence of a majority of MPs as PM. However the Labour Party would have to have a leadership election. It is possible that only one candidate would get the required number of nominations. If not then it would go to the electoral college.
If Brown resigns he would probably stay on for the duration of the leadership election. If not then I guess there would be an interim leader. Given she took over at PMQs and is deputy leader I guess that would be Harriet Harman, making her the second female Acting-Leader of the Labour Party.
115: ‘a 150+ seat majority for the Tories’ - surely we all KNOW that is going to happen……
5 - Ridiculous figures include Michigan.
108. Here:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2007/jul/19/uk.byelections
OT
This from Guido. It explains how Harriet got hacked
http://www.order-order.com/2008/04/how-to-hack-harriet-harman.html
102. It wont because it adds nothing new. It may have seepage effect but it hasnt got enough thump to put a crack in Obama that wasnt already there.
Is it just me, but any references on here to the US elections seem incredibly boring just at the moment - can’t be bothered to read them.
114 — MRUK poll
You are probably right. Yesterday, MIKE wrote:
“It looks as though we will have another MRUK poll in the Sunday Times which last week had a very high certain to vote figure - more than 60%. The firm includes those who have a certainty 8-10 out of 10 and the last poll was based on about 75%. Unless they’ve changed the methodology this will boost the Ken figure. Because it’s in the Sunday Times this could reinforce MORI which, hopefully, will see the Boris price move out - only to move in again when the next YouGov poll appears.”
So I guess it is TIME TO RAISE ON BORIS!
113. Depending on the performance of the LibDems, it could be as low as about 24.5% due to our cockeyed electoral system.
But putting a realistic ceiling on the LDs of say 23%, Labour could still be the largest party on about 30.5%…
Now this is a bit more like it - 2nd installment of the Levy serialisation. Gordon is a liar who Blair thought could never beat David Cameron.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=562307&in_page_id=1770&ito=newsnow
116 - Deputy Leader only becomes Acting Leader if Labour are in Opposition. If they are in Government, the Labour PArty Constitution gives the right to select an Acting Leader to the Cabinet.
I think the Party would just confirm the acting Leader (who would probably be made PM by the Queen) to avoid a further disruption in the that office.
If Brown goes while they are in Gvt, the cabinet effectively chooses the next leader.
16.”It is almost as if Tony Blair waited just long enough to see out the good times before he finally tossed Gordon the keys with a knowing smirk. Brown thought he was living the new economic paradigm until, like Sam Tyler in Life On Mars, he found himself back in the 1970s.”
Marcia, I think that Brown’s tipping point has been reached. He has lost the respect of his party and the voters with the result that his authority is slipping away by the day.
24 - Not at all. The only way she has any case to make is if she goes ahead on the PV with caucuses and Florida counted but not Michigan. Michigan figures should be discounted.
OT - Man Utd management are a disgrace. They basically accuse officials of cheating.
119
Thank you!
On the other hand, I was thinking: those insiders betting on the markets with privileged indos are the one who makes the markets a better prediction tool than polls…
So MRUK’s final poll shows a very narrow win for Ken? In reality, for Ken to win, he needs a bigger margin than this, doesn’t he?
128 - I disagree. I think you can include Michigan, but if you include Clinton votes in MI, you have to give him the ‘Undecideds’ from MI, as they were anti-Clinton votes.
128 ManU are LOL and will be crying on Tues when once again they fail in Europe……..
124. Rod. Do we have a bet?
119
I understand that ” No person shall, in the case of an election to which this section applies, publish before the poll is closed any statement relating to the way in which voters have voted at the election where that statement is (or might reasonably be taken to be) based on information given by voters after they have voted.”
But is it not different than : betting on the outcome of the election when informed by, say, postal votes?
CON
OVERALL
MAJORITY
NAILED ON
113. Assuming others remain at same % as 2005 - 27.6%
113 MTF - According to Baxter, realisically it’s as follows:
Labour 31% 279 seats
Con 36% 277 seats
Lib Dem 22% 61 seats
Others 11% 33 seats
130) GIN - not sure what you mean?
134. True, true. Betting on it wouldn’t be. Publishing would be. I figure the previous poster was referring to posts that could be taken as that.
Thank you to the Rod and Easter Road. 27.6% would lead to some interesting chats on the electoral system….
124. But they wont be on 30.5%
Theres theory and reality and in reality theyve no chance of being largest party on that.
115. True Peter. Now you know why I’m not much of a gambler.
133. I’m not really a better, but if you insist I’ll offer you £10-a seat at Tories on 323 seats. You’re buying, I’m selling…
138 I suspect he’s referring to MRUK’s record (in Scotland) of overstating Labour’s support. If Ken has a 2% lead, and this is based on a projected 75% turnout, then it is in fact, most unlikely that he’s ahead at all.
Evening All,
I’m going to stick my neck out if only because is dull when everyone agrees
1. the bench mark next week is 2004 , probably Labour worst ever electn result. If thursday is that grim or slightly better as 2006 or 2007 were then to be honestI do’t see the threat to brown unless his health caves in ( and he looks awful recently). Its not like Labours unpopularity started with brown.
2. I accept that dominoes might start falling if 2008 is worse than 2004
3. do the national polls point to that? Well the tories are up on then and the LD’s down a bitso it may vary in parts of the cuntry.
4. it also comes down to which pollsters are right. If the range is now you gov territory high 20’s to mid 40’s 18% point lead then thats a different kettle of fish to the kind of 31 to 40 gaps we are seeing in other pollsters. Though of course it might be somewhere between the two.
5. When do we start getting hypothetical polling on whether Labour would improve under a different leader and with Who? We assume this is all anti brown animus? What if its not ?
6. IF thursday is apocalypic for Labour then is there a risk that the media pot light turns back on the tories and they as what the next tory government will be like? Will the media will a come back just to keep something interesting for two years ?
7. Governmnts can and do come back from this sort of deficit though its highly unusal to win a 4th term.
Memoirs : Levy’s [spilling on Gordon and Tony] OR Prescott [just spilling].
No contest.
144) thanks Sean. Here’s a link. Headline should be “Worthing Herald Trumps Sunday Times”?
http://www.worthingherald.co.uk/latest-london-news/Mayor-holds-slight-lead-over.4024344.jp
Would appreciate your thoughts.
25-jsfl- oh dear, dear oh dear- all going a little bit pear shaped.
139 Yes but consider a jounalist publishing something like ” I observed the Party Agents leaving the building after watching the opening of the postal ballots . The agent for Party X was beaming the agent for Party Y looked glum ” Who has broken the law if anyone ?
147- meant 125- a very interesting link by jsfl (thanks)
141. Why not? The electoral system, despite assertions to the contrary, continues to work in a reasonably regular way. It’s only just another vote distribution like any other, and there’s nothing special about it. The electoral system could easily deliver such a result, if the votes lined up that way…
146 Sally - frankly I couldn’t find anything of interest, could you?
144. Yes, thats what I mean Sean. MRUK overstate Labour in Scottish polls, and on past Mayoral votes, we know that pollsters have all along overstated Ken. If Ken has say a 10% lead, then maybe the reality would be looking more comfortable for him?
The only thing Labour can go on, is that this vote is going to rip up the form book, and for the first time in a generation pollsters are not overstating Labour? Otherwise, I think its curtains!
153 - if the poll showing a narrow Ken lead galvanises Tories to vote for Boris rather than stay at home next Thursday then it’s actually a very good poll for the Tories - removing complacency and all that
147 10/10 for the Worthing Herald and to Political Capital for spotting it!
147 Well done. At last I found it on the Sunday Times website. Ken may win by 1%, but MRUK’s record does not inspire confidence that he will. All the feedback I’m getting suggests he just won’t do it.
Of course, if Yougov put him ahead by 1% on Monday, that will be a different matter.
154. Well thats the central problem for Ken isn’t it? We know its highly likely that Conservatives will turn out much more readily than Labour voters. For Ken to only be polling a 2% lead with a pollster that has past form for overstating Labour, given all the problems he’s going to have mobalising his vote, then I just don’t think he’s done enough.
Again, this is all based on the assumpotion that this election follows previous trends with ragrds to voter turn out and pollsters overstating Labour.
@154:
Though the notion we’re getting complacent is, I think, at best wishful thinking.
I’m bloody terrified that Ken’s gonna get another four years to entrench his antisemitic, homophobic terrorist-loving chums in the machinery of London government.
152. I am afraid I do like reading about what a dreadful man Gordon is. It helps me believe my intense dislike of him is based on my sound judgement rather than my irrational nastiness.
155 PfP. Surely the Worthing Herald is our very own Mark Senior !!
158 - I know what you mean, but with double digit poll leads there may be a temptation among Tory voters to think “it’s in the bag”. That notion needs to be dispelled to ensure the newt is ousted
156. Remind me Sean, how close was YouGovs final poll in 2004 to reality?
155) thanks, hat tip to the Worthing Herald people. 156) Sean do you have a link please?
156-sean fear- Boris 5/7, Ken 11/8 on betfair. The odds on Ken are have tightened (today), and at the lowest for some weeks. Similarly Boris’s are at their longest (obviously).
Plus Caveman, the only punter (except for me on pbCOM) who predicted that Hillary would get a 10%+ win in Penn, is saying that there is good value on Ken getting 40%+ on first preferences.
I am not as brave as Caveman, but this sure doesn’t look to be a 70% certainty for Boris. And I’ve never seen Caveman get one wrong- he has preternatural abilities.
Completely offtopic but a major swing to the ‘no’ side in the latest poll on the Lisbon treaty in Ireland - 35% ‘yes’ to 31% ‘no’ (unsurprisingly a large number of ‘dont knows’ given the subject - ‘dont knows’ have a history of breaking to ‘no’ in past referendums). The 5/1 with Paddy Power for a ‘no’ vote that I tipped a few weeks ago is looking quite good if anyone got on it.
163 http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3822822.ece
162 Within 1%.
143. Rod. An interesting response. I will decline.
Considering you confidently expect Labour to get most seats at the next GE I was hoping for a better offer than that. Never mind.
I have bought Tories at an average of 318 seats. Time will tell which of us proves nearer the mark.
164 Didn’t Hillary win Penn by 9.2% and therefore less than 10%.
164) Tyson - Hillary got 9.2% in Penn - so Caveman predicting 10%+ (was his real view 15%?) is not saying much - would have been a losing bet.
Well both Mori and MRUK have shown a small swing to Ken in the last week, although both were within the MOE. (Mori lead went from 2 to 4 points, MRUK from 0-2 points). Someone posted the Populus poll from just before the last election which overestimated the Ken lead on 2nd preferences by 5 points. That translated to these phone pollsters would give Boris a 51-49 win, which compares to the last you gov of 53-47. Boris is clearly the favourite still but Ken winning would not be a massive shock.
What a laugh, levy thought that by term 3 Blair was in it for himself.
Ask a large swathe of the population of NI and you could have got the same answer….
164 Tyson. Ssshhhh …. actually Hillary won by 9.2% not 10%+
166. Thanks Sean.
All eyes on YouGov on Monday morning, then?
160 Jack W - I must admit that thought did go through my head too!
GIN- good points. We are trying to call this next election on past behaviour- turnout/ certainty to vote. All overstating Labour’s leads. What happens if this changes next Thursday in London?
I tell you one thing, although I am backing Boris heavily now- I expect his odds to tighten again, but by Thursday I think that I will have bailed out with a small profit.
The username and password for Harriet Harmans blog was “Harriet” and “Harman”.
Britain is in the hands of morons.
The most significant change on ICm is the 55 growth in others compared to last ICM telegraph and +4% from last ICM guardian.
A lot of opeple will not be able to vote for an other candidate but expect BNP to do well.Lib dems may also benefit inlabour seats ,particularly where they are i na strong second place in seats/councils and are therefore acrdible recepticle of the anti Labour swing.
ICM swing since may 2004 is Lab to con 7.5%,Lab to Lib 5%,Lib to con 2.5%.
Rogerh
168/169/172 Poor Tyson !!!
168, 169 and 172- splitting hairs.
Fox called it a 10% win, and if it is good enough for Fox, it is good enough for me.
170. I think YouGov will show exactly that, Boris wins by 51-49. A swing to Ken is taking place, but I don’t think it’ll be enough. If he had one more week, then maybe, but I think he’ll run out of time…
And I’ve never seen Caveman get one wrong- he has preternatural abilities”
He got that one (slightly) wrong. The unfortunate thing for both MORI and MRUK is that if my prediction is right, and Boris wins by 52/48, both of their polls will be respectable, but they will still be remembered as pollsters who called it wrongly.
125.Now this is a bit more like it - 2nd installment of the Levy serialisation. Gordon is a liar who Blair thought could never beat David Cameron.
The bit about Gordon being a liar could be very damaging because, there is already a media narrative developing on that issue.
Iain Dale on Levy Throws Grenade at “Liar” Brown
176) Harman’s web log is hardly something that needs huge protection from hackers though is it? These things that Guido does are funny but not exactly like the Pentagon hacker….
143 - LOL - I suggest you give up asking Rod to back his opinions with cash, stjohn.
179 Tyson. Ask Al Gore if another 0.8% is splitting hairs !!
I’d like to stand up and say I reckoned Hilary woudl get her 10% as well.
Frankly her getting 9.2% means that the preiction was a sh1t load more accurate than the too close to call brigade.
If I’d staked on it and lost the bet I’d not have been too upset.
The fact is Caveman would crap on most people here for punting and anyone who expects a 100% record is an idiot. What matters is decent analysis, good value and profit.
179) tyson “if it is good enough for Fox, it is good enough for me.”
175. Well, if this election goes against everything we’ve ever known with regards to pollsters overstating Labour and differential turn-outs, etc… Then we’ll be in a completelyt differant game. And we’ll all have to adjust our assumptions, particularly when it comes to the general election.
Just listened to 8 minutes of the new jeremiah wight stuff. I had to turn i off bcause the guys a nut job.
1. I don’t think its devasting because as yet no on has tiedobama to attendence at one of these sermons
2. ther are some choice quotes whichwill give the issue fresh legs.
3. I think the real signifigance is the timming. I bet some one some where has a collectionof these are they ar just going dribble out. what w really nee i a grainy video of him sat at the bak of church nodding.
4. the call and response wright is rrie and will remind people, unfairly of obama.
171-Yokel- there was an interesting discussion on altruism on pbCOM the other day. Most thought there was no such thing, so Blair being innit for no 1 goes with the general view of pbER’s on politicians.
Blair was just good at pretending he was selfless.
175 The real problem is that using opinion polls in local elections is fraught with difficulty, given the low turnout.
167 stjohn - I think someone must have had a “senior moment” on Spreadfair after last night’s poll results were announced by offering £22 worth of Tory seats to buy at 315.5, when the sale price was 315.0 - presumably they meant to offer a sale at this price but got it the wrong way round - very easily done as Mike himself and I myself have previously discovered. Anyway, I was pleased to take the entire £22 offered and within a couple of minutes the buy price had increased to over 320.
190. I think some people in politics often do want to do good things but of course there is usually self interest at some level. Thats fine, until one takes over the other in real unbalanced way.
Others have always been self interested in totality.
176. If gordon goes and she gets the nuclear launch code for a fewees in a leadership election then god help us.
188 Although on the face of it the mayoral contest is a party one it is also one dominsted by personalities so the pollsters overstating Labour rule may not be so relevant .
167. I’m not a bookie. There has to be something in it for me too you know. I think it’s a fair offer. I’ll even give you the option to close down the bet if the Spreadfair spread falls below 318 or (for me) rises above 328.
Btw I don’t “confidently expect” Labour to be the largest party, but I think the odds are they will be.
195. It was relevent in 2000 and 2004 though?
195. But Norris was much less of a personality than Johnson.
Did the pollsters overstate Frank Dobson in 2000?
185- JackW- why? Gore won that election on popular vote, and on the Florida recount. He didn’t need an extra 0.8%. He just needed an objective Supreme Court to allow a fair recount including hanging and dimpled chads.
172. I predicted a 9% win for Hillz in PA. I also predicted Ronaldo would miss that penalty last Tuesday, three seconds before he did so.
However I additionally predicted, at the age of 12, that when I reached the age of 40 I would be “living in a mansion with all my friends”.
If some are having last minute gitters about voting for Boris, hopefully the endorsement of some of the national papers will seal the deal.
Presumably these polls were carried out pre-endorsement.
Low pressure affecting Britain next week. Not sure it will be more than showers in London.
197. indeed. If boris wins only 51 or 52 to 49 to 48 hen n the current cirumstances i think he might be canonised by the Labour Party.
164. Tyson. Caveman is brilliant.
But firstly, Hillary DID get less than a 10% win in PA, I think?
Secondly, Caveman thought that Ken getting 40%+ in first preferences was value at 6/1, or a 14%+ chance, so unlikely? He certainly wasn’t saying that Boris has less than a 70% chance of winning.
197 Ken was Independent in 2000 so it was not relevant . In 2004 1st preferences for both the 2 main parties were overstated by all the pollsters ( I agree Labour more so ) . Many on here believe that this is the case this year too .
Gordon Brown set for U-turn on terror detention
“Gordon Brown is preparing for a climb-down on his plans to detain terror suspects for 42 days despite insisting that he would not compromise on national security, according to a leaked Whitehall document.”
104. Having said that, can someone explain the postal votes system. Is it purely absentee only or is there a wider allowance to vote by post and do we have any notion of how many would be voting as such?
Anybody can apply to have a postal vote for any reason. Local authorities vary widely in the efforts they have made to enable or encourage people to apply, and I think there are some places where as many as 50% of electors may have PVs - although it may have been worse a few years ago than it is now.
In Croydon there are c.28,500 postal voters out of an electorate of c.245,000. Of those 28,500, about 11,000 have already been processed, about 3,000 have arrived and are waiting to be processed, and about 18,000 out of 28,000 are expected in total.
Ken was still associated with Labour, even as as Independent. I don’t know if he was overstated but its not irrelevant. My guess is he was.
205. “Gordon Brown is preparing for a climb-down on his plans to detain terror suspects for 42 days despite insisting that he would not compromise on national security, according to a leaked Whitehall document.”
Strange use of the word “despite”
203- stjohn- to clarify I did say that caveman though there was value at Ken getting 40%+. He didn’t say anything about % certainties.
Anyway, I am off to bed.
The City/ Fulham match on MoD was a cracker!
165. Might be Offtopic, but interesting.
I bet there are a few fonctionnaires in Bruxelles with the Irish heebiejeebies this evening. The EU knows that it’s only got one shot at getting this Constitution through a referendum in Ireland.
If the Irish say no there is no way it could be brought back for another vote within two years, if at all. Within two years a Tory government will be in power in London - which means a referendum in the UK. Which means the Lisbon Treaty would fall, whatever the Irish do.
So the EU has one chance and one chance only.
Expect, therefore, intense pressure on the Irish in the following months - veiled threats of expulsion etc etc. I’d like to think these threats would be selfdefeating; but the Irish are no longer the men of Easter 1916. They will take the Eurocash and swallow their pride.
O my Parnell and my Collins long ago.
If, Ken outpolls the Labour assembly candidates by, say, 10%, that will in itself be an impressive achievement. His problem is that Johnson is also likely to outpoll the Conservative assembly candidates by a hefty margin.
201 Blimey, has Boris now to rely on the rain?
Tyson - I predicted 9%, only 0.2% out. I think someone else did (SeanT?) too.
205. Desperate, absolutely fecking desperate, the man has no judgement if this is true.
This guy is a classic bully, big talk until someone stands up to him, then he withdraws.
212. I think bad weather hurts all parties, really. I’m not sure why it should be just Labour voters that won’t go out in the rain.
If anything, it might benefit the incumbant. Remember in 1995 when the Tories lost 2000 councillors, it was hot and sunny all day. Likewise in 1997.
214 Didn’t he write a book about courage?
210 - “If the Irish say no there is no way it could be brought back for another vote within two years, if at all.”
Date the Irish people said ‘no’ to Nice - June 2001. Date they said ‘yes’ to Nice after being told to think again - October 2002. Impact of an Irish ‘no’ vote in June - minimal (besides me picking up a bit at 5/1). Not that I want to stop you wetting your pants at the thought of it all crashing down ;-).
214
It will be immsensely difficult to spin the 42 days u turn, if indeed thats what happens. After all the Govt has been pushing it for months
The weather has no impact on electoral outcomes.
175
If Boris wins, why would you make only a ’small profit’ if you are ‘backing Boris heavily’?
200 However I additionally predicted, at the age of 12, that when I reached the age of 40 I would be “living in a mansion with all my friends.
But, Sean, we were under the impression that this was so or is this only when you are in Bangkok?
217 Though we may have had a change of government in the UK within that timescale.
179
Clinton backers or GOPs-Who-Want-Her-Rather-Than-Obama are spinning a 10% lead because it sounds much better…
205. Intereating article. Just what we come to expect from Gutless Gordon. I’m curious though, why should being detained in a police cell for 42 days be any better than being detained in a prison cell for 42 days? Its just geography ultimately, but its still pretty unpleasent.
224. Its much kinder. The food is better.
Not that I have eaten either, you understand. Just going on how much each costs.
217. I take yr point on Nice.
But I do think bringing Lisbon back as smartly as Nice was brought back would be impossible. They couldn’t simply ask Ireland to vote again on the same document; there would have to be (fake) changes to the text, presumably on neutrality and tax etc.
These would have to be agreed by all 27 nations. Others might object to the changes. Brown would, also, be under renewed pressure to let the British have a say - and all of this much nearer a General Election. This time he might cave in.
It’s an enticing prospect for a sceptic like me. However I’m not “wetting my pants” - as I said I think the Irish will say Yes anyway - they will be bullied and bribed into acquiescence by Brussels.
We sceptics must be patient and wait for Captain Cammo to take the helm.
213 OK Show-off, so what’s your take on the likely London Mayoralty result?
John Loony. Apologies if I missed an answer from you,- are you allowed to tell us after the results are declared, what the postal votes were and what were your conclusions? It would be very entertaining!
213. Yes, I did also predict 9%. I think there was someone else, too, who got it bang on. Icarus? Innocent Abroad?
226. I have eaten both. Prison food is better. You get “high tea” on Sundays.
186 et al. For the record I took a small value punt on Hillary to win by 12+ at 5/2 I felt she could get closer than the polls and these odds were showing, which she did.
I was funding it from a large locked it profit I’d already got from backing her to win outright at 1/3. I would have tipped this earlier as well, but am generally loath to tip at such short odds unless 100% certain, and to be honest, was also put off by the fact that I might have deemed as being “pro-Hillary” by some of the Obama lovers on this site and end up having to endlessly justify such a bet. FWIW I also made a nice profit on the night backing her on the night to beat the 7.5 spread on Betfair. Again, I was going to tip that as well when there was large sums avaailale to be backed at 2/1+, but couldn’t be bothered witht he hassle.
I too think Obama is an excellent orator and potentially a generation defining politician, and if you look back you’ll find I was repeatedly flagging up generous odds to back him late last year well before Iowa, but the guy doesn’t walk on water, and his “chickens are now coming home to roost” due to the lack of objective press scrutiny until now, which a more experienced campaigner would have sorted out months ago.
For the record I think Boris will win, but with a likely strong squeeze on the Lib Dem and Other votes, Ken may well get greater than 40% on 1st prefs and still lose overall, hence the 6/1 tip with PP earlier.
227 - Nice wasnt changed before it was brought back to the Irish people.
The EU could try bullying Ireland into voting ‘yes’ I suppose but I guess they’re far too clever to adopt tactics that would be so obviously counter-productive.
I suspect your big delusion is to think that Cameron would ever put Lisbon to the people of the UK if he got in before all states had ratified it. It might be a nice thought for you but I’m extremely sceptical about it.
re 206 I’ve got a proxy vote for the first time ever this year - being in Scotland, sufficient diesel permitting - and the process seems to be very smoothly done as I only applied for it on Wednesday. All I need to do now is hope my Lab supporting proxy keeps his word and votes the right way.
I think the weather is a myth really. when I first started out the rationale was that tories had more cars and could thus get more of there suporters to thepolls but its not 1945. Ifanythig I sspet low turnouts benfits theincumbant in that it easier to et people tovote againts something rather than for it. I doubt theres a scrap of research evidence to suggest any difference one way or another
230. Long ago? I understand police cell food now = £25 per day. Prison = £3!
‘High’ Tea in prison? I suppose that is something to look forward to.
230 According to the article it wouldn’t be prison or police station food but home cooking - suspects “would spend the final 14 days tagged or under house arrest.”
Nonsensical idea just to save Gordon’s face on the 42 days figure (current 28 plus 14).
It would be helpful to have a few more here, apart from Mike who we already know reckons it’s worth betting the farm on Boris, from those whose betting opinions are also respected, on the outcome of the London Mayoralty contest, incl Caveman, Jan from Norway, PtP, etc. Let’s be hearing from you!
230 - Let’s show off!
I predicted a 8-9% for Clinton; and explicitly warned Political Capital than betting on a Clinton victory of less than 7.5% was “too much risky”,
If/when cameron gets in he’ll sign upto the treaty in the same way Thatcher and Major would have done.
229. are you allowed to tell us after the results are declared, what the postal votes were and what were your conclusions? It would be very entertaining!
I *think* I am allowed to, after the close of poll - but I’m not sure and I’ll have to double-check with the D.A.R.O.
On Obama and Clinton I think it is clear that Obama’s support with Democrats has held up pretty well despite Wright, Ayres, Bittergate etc. Nevertheless reading blogs and forums there is a lot of anti-Obama sentiment around that was not in evidence a few weeks ago.
Reasonable to suppose that a lot of this sentiment is coming from republicans. What we don’t know is whether any significant number of these Republicans will crossover and vote in Indiana and N. Carolina. These will be the first open primaries since the s**t hit the fan. There is also no longer any point in voting in the Republican primary.
Some Obama voters have clearly been motivated as ABC voters (anybody but Clinton). Will we now have a lot of ABO voters?
116 - Yes, I took those points as given. But, if the PLP decided to take it upon itself to change a leader, then they could, in theory, end up nominating a PM who was not leader of the Labour Party, if the incumbent remained in office without the normal procedure being invoked (I don’t think this is even remotely likely to happen to Gordon Brown, but it is an interesting constitutional point which may be of relevance to a future Labour government, or a situation where MPs as a whole decide to short-circuit the rules the party in the country as a whole has laid down).
236 According to the prison officers, they would rather be in prison. Perhaps the last bit could be a muliple choice. A ‘Sue Barker’: Home or Away?
232 (and 239). You may know more about Ireland than me, but you know jack about the British rightwing if you actually believe that.
Of course Cammo would put Lisbon to the people if he had the chance. Euroscepticism is now one of the helices in the DNA of the Tory party. Cameron would cause himself endless grief and turmoil if he backtracked on that. He’s not that stupid.
A comparison would be a new Labour premier asking his MPs to bring back capital punishment.
However, Cammo won’t get the chance to give us a vote - sadly. And I think he is right not to promise a retroactive referendum. That is constitutionally very tricky and politically very chancy.
It constantly amazes me how people underestimate the euroscepticism of eurosceptics. It ain’t a ruse. It’s not a phoney gesture. It’s not some sad little spin for temporary gain.
That’s Labour’s metier.
231, 237 No sooner the word than the deed, in fact in reverse order!
Thanks Caveman.
214.”This guy is a classic bully, big talk until someone stands up to him, then he withdraws.”
Yokel, if only Blair had really stood up to him over the last 10 years, the Labour party might not have got itself into a situation of a Brown coronation. For Blair to wait until Brown was in the air across the Atlantic before announcing that he would serve another full term speaks volumes.
No bl**dy wonder lesser figures in the government did not have the courage to stand up to Brown, they knew that the boss would not back them up when it mattered!
On the possible U turn over 42 day detention, it just sounds like Brown’s authority is draining away. Its always easier to maintain unity in a governing party when the polls are favourable and the opposition is weak. Continued dire polling figures will concentrate Labour MP’s minds on their own seats rather than the well being of the government as a whole.
I’ll never know why Blair didn’t move or sack Brown immediatly after his 2001 landslide. That was his golden opportunity to take control of the purse strings away from Gordon and truely reform this country. Instead his major demotion was…. Robin Cook?
244. I doubt it. They’ll do what Thatcher and Major did. Get te best deal possible and then keep the show on the road. I haven’t seen anything that suggests that he could really opt for a kind of second division status. The reason that the Tories are the worlds most successful (Democratic) partys there pragatim. And they’ll be pragmatic over this.
[237] FWIW, I have a substantial one-way book on Boris being London mayor. Not clever—-I just follow faithfully all Mike Smithson’s tips. I suggest you do the same.
246 - However, there’s no real evidence that rebellious MPs get a significant bonus electorally, as opposed to loyalist MPs, even if they’re prominent and the government is unpopular. The voting public isn’t that discriminating. If there is a personal vote, it’ll be based on the sort of local roots and painstakingly created local profile that Westminster rebellions can’t give you. Keeping a good relationship with one’s CLP, and a recognition that a job under the present dispensation is unlikely, will be the motivation for most rebels who aren’t Campaign Group members, or of a ismilar kidney.
249 Thanks David and apols for omitting you from my earlier list of respected punters, probably because we just don’t hear from you so much these days.
247 I assume in 2001 he really believed that he and Brown made a strong team, then with 9/11 his focus was even more on foreign affairs - Robin Cook was to dominant a figure for Blair to have a free rein there.
I don’t think its totally beyond question that one day a future Conservative government may pull us out of the EU altogether, actually. I don’t think it’ll be Cameron that does it, but in the end we’re going to be faced with a choice. Do we commit to this superstate project 100% or do we get out of it, 100%? In the end, I don’t think out position of giving bits and pieces here and there on the quiet will be sustainable.
The decision will depend on which party is in power at the time. If its Labour and their popular, they may just win a vote to commit to this thing fully. If ots a popular Tory government, they may just win a vote to withdraw altogether.
248. No. You’re simply wrong. Things have changed since Thatcher and Major - precisely because the Tory party ripped itself apart, over Europe, under those two leaders. They are now united - and sceptical.
Remember the Tories turned down their most papabile leadership candidate - Ken Clarke - in favour of Ian Duncan Smith, because of the latter’s euroscepticism and the former’s europhilia.
Any party that could choose IDS over Clarke on a matter of ideology, or anything, is pretty firm in its beliefs, wouldn’t you say?
Having promised a vote several zillion times Cameron would reignite that civil war if he reneged; so he wouldn’t. Besides, I happen to believe he is sincere in his euroscepticism - i.e. that he means what he says.
I know this is quite hard for lefties and Lib Dems to understand - that a politician can still mean what they say….
252. Perhaps. But still, even in June 2001, I bet Brown was being a constant pain in Tony backside. If he’d moved him from the Treasury, I wonder how differant Blairs legacy would be now?
250.How much pressure was applied to MP’s to sign that ringing endorsement of Brown as the uncontested successor to Blair?
I also think that some MP’s have factored in the additional local publicity if they are seen putting their constituents concerns before the that of their government.
Some of the strongest criticism Cameron faced over the grammar school issue came from MP’s with significant numbers of those schools in their constituencies, just when the Conservative were suffering in the polls last summer and an Autumn GE was looking very likely.
The tragedy of Blair’s premiership is that he was needlessly afraid of three men: George Bush, Gordon Brown and Rupert Murdoch.
255 Taking his 10 year period as PM as a whole, Tony Blair was a very reluctant firer of cabinet colleagues and I remember reading that he just hated this aspect of the job. Perhaps this was why Brown kept his.
There was talk about it at the time among Blairites - but it came to nothing. It was too dangerous: the Brownites, as a claque, were fully embedded at every level of Labour, and, while Blair might have beaten them before Iraq if it came to a real fight, it would have exhausted his political capital. He would have had to spend even more time watching his back, whether Brown was in the Cabinet or not, and any successor like Cook or Straw would doused in ordure by the Brownite sections of the media.
253. Interesting to speculate. At some point the EU is gonna ask for something that demands a referendum - direct tax raising powers, an elected president, a single UN seat, majority voting on defence - etc etc.
That will be the crunch. As you say a very popular Labour government might just be able to force this through (I think Blair could have won any European referendum in 1997). But will we ever see a Labour party that popular again?
A weak Labour government or a Tory government would obviously lose a referendum, or just say No. What would happen then? I suspect we wouldn’t leave Europe 100% - instead we would have some kinda formalised semi-detachment.
With our various opt-outs, we are headed that way anyhow.
255.The irony is that Brown might have been better prepared politically to fight an contest if he had been moved to other departments, it would have helped him if he had been made to work harder at being in the cabinet. He performed better in those early years before Blair became leader and Labour were in opposition, he had to work harder to position himself within the Labour party nationally too.
Sky News have just done a piece on the polls/locals/mayoral. They are following the line that Ken has moved ahead and whilst it would damage Tory moral if Boris lost, it wouldn’t really mean too much to Labour MPs. Its a battle of well known individuals.
The key is just as Spencer said. If those in marginals feel there are problems in their own back yard they will fidget.
If they go along with the polls and think Ken will hang on and then he doesn’t [possibly by a clear margin!] that could cause panic on the basis the polls are not showing how bad things really are.
If YouGov shows a Boris lead and he goes on to win, it will add to the belief that YouGov’s big Tory poll ratings are right when Labour have been scrambling to convince themselves they aren’t.
258 - Yes: he was a bad butcher: Asquith and Attlee would not have approved. Apparently, one person he called in to sack managed to work on him so effectively that he ended up with a promotion.
228 -
52.5/47.5 to Boris.
231 - I can’t remember anyone saying anything other than Clinton would win PA easily. I think my exact words were that only an idiot would bet otherwise.
254. We may never know a the EU project is running into the sand. Expansion is quite rightly now seen as more important than “ever closer Union”. I see a flash of Disraeli in Cameron and I think he might rather enjoying signing the next great Accession treaty in Sarajevo in 2014.
Some more election surprises from yesteryear…
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/1964.png
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/1951.png
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/1945.png
262 - my husband’s family who live mostly in East London/Essex borders have a few voting for Ken but will not vote for Labour in the Assembly. For some it has become a vote between 2 personalities.
264 Thanks ukpaul - FWIW I agree with you to within 1%.
267. Its quite astonishing that Ken has had so many Tories voting for him for so long.
269. think the system is begining to bed down. Directly elected mayors are about hiring city managers who idelly should transcend party boundries. Ken has been vry good at this. to be ulling in a few tories while gettin endorsements from the Greens and ESPECT is quite an achevement.
265 Europe will be Brown’s big headache from June onwards, once the Irish referendum is over. There will be the President of the Council and his powers, the other Lisbon Treaty goodies, France in its last presidency trying for European defence, trying to get a “level playing field” on taxation, particularly corporate tax and other issues. Gordon hasn’t the strength in Europe that Blair had, he was unpopular as a finance minister and his weakness at home will hamper his effectiveness. Cameron will have the easy job, supported by a eurosceptic party and eurosceptic press.
265. I agree Cameron is at heart a pragmatic one Nation Tory, like Disraeli. But this pragmatism means he has a healthy respect for his own self-interest - and in the modern Tory party, that means Doing The Right Thing on Europe.
Remember Cameron was ELECTED partly because he was more noisily sceptical than Davies. If you’ve forgotten this, you can be sure he hasn’t.
And it is untrue to say that widening of Europe has precluded deepening. This was the UK’s plan, of course, but it hasn’t quite worked out that way: Europe has widened AND deepened. And it will continue to do so: “ever closer union” is written into the Treaty of Rome.
The political elites on the continent are set on a quasi-Federal Union, and have been since the Second World War.
Good luck to them, but the UK won’t be in it.
In fact, I think the turning point for us was a while back - when we failed to join the euro, even under a passonately europhile and very popular prime minister.
And since we may be about to see a by-election record broken shortly, here’s the last occasions…
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/1982.png
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/1978.png
260 “A weak Labour government or a Tory government would obviously lose a referendum, or just say No. What would happen then?”
Why would a Tory government ‘lose’ a referendum?
Labour’s EU fraud has been a coup d’etat and act of treason.
After we have removed Labour’s Human Rights Laws, the Laws of the UK should be above any other foreign laws. Then we can get back to running our country and rebuilding what we had before the Lefties got in.
Now, I would vote Yes in a union with Canada, USA and Australia.
Expansion is quite rightly now seen as more important than “ever closer Union”.
Yes. In fact, I don’t think it’s recognised here just how much this has changed the underlying trends within the EU, compared to the period when the Franco-German alliance plus Benelux could normally rely on getting their way. The movement towards full political union will be becalmed unless and until the accession nations are genuinely won over, which they may never be.
274. Sorry, yes, that was indistinct. What I meant was - a weak Labour government or a Tory government would lose a referendum - IF they tried to sell a major shift of sovereignty to Brussels (e.g. direct EU taxes, or a single UN seat etc).
I agree with you on a Union of the English Speaking Peoples. We just have more in common with them, especially the Aussies and the Canucks. We rub along together.
Whenever I go abroad and watch Brits on hols, I realise this. If the Brits hang out with foreigners it will usually be Aussies or Kiwis, followed by Canucks and then Americans. Or the Irish, of course. There seems to be a natural empathy between these peoples. And it’s not just down to language.
You rarely see Brits partying on down with Belgians, Greeks, or Spaniards. Yet we are asked to unite with Europe and forsake our Anglophone cousins.
Stupid.
272. has an analysis been done on the likely new Tory intake? do we know who we are getting? I think we will have to/want to digest former Yugoslav states, albania and the ukraine eventually, possibly even Georgia. I’ve always had a soft spot for israeli membership of the EU. The cash/political capital eeded to do this will put ever closer union in deep freeze. I doubt a show boater like aeron wouldefuse the visuals of Sarajevo 2014 and once the cvil ervice ha him house trained he’ll love it.
275. Total bollocks.
seanT
I am not convinced by your assertion that Cameron was elected because he was more loudly anti-Europe.
Never crossed my mind. Nor have I heard it mentioned. Had he been a Ken Clarke it would have come up. But the shades of opinion between Davis and Cameron were, I believe. largley irrelevant to much of the party membership.
His election was in many ways a rejection of much that brought IDS to the helm including the obsession with talking about Eurpoe all the time.
[N.B Must put on tin hat.]
Not sure if already posted but per UK Polling Report the mruk 1st preference numbers are:
Ken 44, Boris 43, Paddick 9
Run-off: Ken 51, Boris 49.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/blog/
276 Have you been to a Belgian party?
277 EU will stay away from Ukraine and Georgia because Russia wants to carve them up. The EU will always appease russia.
279 Strewth. IDS… what a disaster. He was totally rubbish and preferred to drag his party (& country) down rather than resign from a job he couldnt do. A bit like Major and Brown.
277. I’m guessing you’d be hard pushed to find a Tory europhile under 40 anywhere in the country, let alone knocking on the door of the Commons.
If you were a serious europhile would you join the modern Tory party? Of course not. Europhiles are deceitful authoritarians with no morals - they join Labour.
279. You seem to have forgotten this, from the Spectator blog just after the Tory leadership campaign:
“Mr Cameron’s promise to withdraw from the EPP, made when it was not even certain that he would stay in the leadership race, helped to win the votes of Tory MPs who might otherwise have been put off by his ‘modernising’ plans and his refusal to back grammar schools or cut taxes.
“For Mr Cameron, the policy of EPP withdrawal is a giant cut of meat thrown to the Eurosceptics to stop them tearing him to pieces as they have done the four previous leaders. As a device in the Cameron campaign, the pledge was a roaring success…”
An Anglosphere woul be facinating but 2 cetuaris to late.If we hadofered the Philadelpia lawyers commons representation and then turned the Lords int a empire federal chamber in the 1800 then perhaps but not now. Ho many ritsh people are interested in God, Guns and Gays?
There are hree canadian provinces thatcould e come US states but the rest would rather join the EU !
278 - In what way? Some of the accession countries are more enthusiastic than the others about the EU and specific policies, but none of them possess the same faith in ultimate political union that the Six did in the late 1940s and the 1950s. There’s no ultimate interest in merging their identites, although they want to be members of the same club as their richer western brethren.
A slight irony, BTW: one great practical circumstance that made European more desirable during WWII was the way in which the governments of free Europe, based in London, were forced into co-operation for a common cause. It’s not surprising that some of the people who were closely involved in supporting them, like Major-General Gubbins of the SOE, were warm adherents of European unity afterwards.
282. I accept that of course but there there is a diffrence between not being europhile and Thersa Gorman. Yes ?
aslo has anyone checked your “landslide zone”? Do yu ave nuters in seats because you think they’ll never win them? but then might?
33 Ave it
Thank God the General Election is over and the Tory Party [NuLabour faction] have been thrown out of office. Will the Tory Party [Pretty Boy Dave faction] be safe on Europe, as according to ARSE they have a smallish majority? Will Brownstuff and his friends work with the Tory Party [Never was Elected faction] and get together with non-Europhobes in Pretty Boy’s lot to defeat the new government on their intended leaving of Brussels?
Or will it all be so boring now with the new Tory [Pretty Boy Dave faction] government carrying out policies agreed by all three Tory Parties in their non-manifestos that were put before the ‘we are all Tories now’ electorate?
Now the rest of us can get forward to living peacefully whilst our new elected dictators get on with bankrupting our nation, destroying our rights and interfering in our lives.
Malcolm
283. I agree Goergian Britain missed out in the 1770s. We could have had a Federal Empire, uniting Britain, America, Australia and Canada. Quite something.
But anyhow a cultural and corporate Anglosphere, arguably more powerful than any polity, has risen to take the place of the Anglo-American hegemon.
The internet is the ghost of the British Empire, sitting crowned upon the grave thereof, as Gibbons nearly said.
279.&282.Seant, I am with SallyC on this, that pledge did not even register for me as a Conservative member when I voted for Cameron and I am a Eurosceptic. I know that it was red meat to the virulent Eurosceptic wing, but I still think that many of them voted for Davis instead. In fact I would bet that they would have gone for Fox had he been on the ballot.
No, we were tired of losing, and the majority of people who voted for Cameron backed him because he looked like he could finally turn out fortunes around politically on the domestic front.
I am not surprised that ConHom went with a diary piece on Peter Oborne’s column today rather than the excellent article by Matthew Parris in the Times….
282. That ‘giant cut of meat’ passed me by. Clearly gobbled up before I got to it.
[60] - It’s not who is the Labour leader that matters, but what they do in Government.
Brown was getting high opinion poll ratings when he was talking about the “change” he was going to represent, but the reality has been that he is a Blairite through and through. Just as with Blair, it is all about triangulation, petty politicking and the neoliberal consensus.
The only difference is that Blair was slightly better at it.
There’s no evidence that any senior Labour politician, who has a reasonable chance of becoming leader in place of Brown, would do anything substantively different. Cruddas has an idea of what is going wrong. As do a few other MPs, one way or another, but they aren’t big enough players, and the rest haven’t the wit to listen to them.
Cook might have been the figure who could have worked this out and become leader, but he’s dead. All the others are Blairites.
Changing the leader is only relevant if you change the political direction at the same time. Cameron understood this. Neither Labour or the Lib Dems do.
284. Even as you twitter away on here, the EU is bringing forward plans for - common taxation, a European army, a European public prosecutor, common ID cards, judicial harmonisatinion, etc etc etc.
Just check any official EU website if you don’t believe me. Many of the accession countries are as keen on this stuff as the Luxemburgers; those that aren’t will be bought off with (our) tax money, as per.
Your faith in the “good intentions” of the EU, which has apparently and miraculously changed its entire essence and stopped seeking closer integration, is as touching as it is risible.
288. Fair enough - I accept you and Sally are actually Tories, unlike me, so you probably know more of the inner workings of the Tory party!
However I do distinctly remember the “mood music” around Cameron changing when he made that EPP pledge; it brought him invaluable support from the right, when he was having trouble fighting off Davies and Fox, and was under suspicion of being a bit wet.
I am sure this mattered to MPs if not average members.
I agree that in retrospect it seems irrelevant compared to the larger question of whether he is: lucky, competent and a winner. He seems to be all three at the moment.
282 - I’m someone who would normally vote in the Conservative interest, and is pro-EU. While I’m saddened by the slow death of Conservative pro-Europeanism, and it’s put me off taking a more active role in politics than I might have done, I have to accept that there’s no great electoral or ideological incentive for the Conservative Party to become more pro-EU at the moment. I could not join either Labour or the LDs.
You know it is very difficult to predict elections from this distance. Hilda was aided by the Argentinans, Bush Boy was aided by Big Al, both in 2000 and again in 2001. Mugabe has been aided by South Africa’s weakness. As dear SuperMac once said, “Events, dear boy,” and he knew what he was talking about.
I think it would be better for all if this poll excitement was followed by a cold shower. Take three deep breaths and remember that the Bandleader won an election against Pipeman when only he thought he could win.
Malcolm
287. Yes, I assume you have read Nail Fergusions Empire. I see the net as being entirely in that linage. But have I read somewhere that once translation software allows sites to be directly turned over mandarin will take over from english as a web language.
if all goes to plan and China returns to having 25% of worls GDP as well as poulation as in the 0 to 1500 AD period then i may well force a more united angloshpereor indeed a Western Union as Balladur has written about Its one of the raso I’m so pro Ken n that he has seen that hCty Of Lndonis probably kep h UK afloat through the whole 21st Centuary.
292. I think you are right on the MP front.
I endorse ChrisD’s comments completely.
291. I’d be interested to know in what way Cameron “changed the political direction” of the Tories.
Their fundamental beliefs remain the same: patriotic, capitalistic, libertarian (with caveats), and eurosceptic. There was no clause Four moment for Cameron, much as he wanted one early on, because there was no fundamental ideological issue on which the party needed to evolve.
What Cameron did, with a degree of success, was change the attitude and the demeanour of the party - make it sound optimistic rather than pessimistic, inclusive rather than exclusive, upbeat rather than dismayed.
He changed the package, not the product. No?
previous thred: Rod C mentioned that back in 1979 the Times was still refering to “Mr. Wilson”, etc.
Note that it is STILL the policy of the New York Times to use “Mr.”, “Mrs.”, “Ms” when it mentions anyone in the paper. With very few exceptions; don’t think they refer to “Mr. bin Laden” anymore.
Which occassionally makes for strange reading. But that’s the Gray Lady for you.
292.Sean, I think that the Conservative party is now a fairly united Eurosceptic alternative to both Labour and the Libdems. But, that only matters *if* we are in government and in the driving seat as it were. As an opposition party we are particularly impotent as the vote on the Lisbon Treaty showed, simple because all the other main parties will vote together, or sit on the backsides rather than derail the project.
I understand your passion for this issue and its shared by many of the regulars at ConHom, but its not what matters most to the voters in the UK, and their views have to be taken into account too.
284 - the EU is bringing forward plans for - common taxation, a European army, a European public prosecutor, common ID cards, judicial harmonisatinion, etc etc etc.
Yes, and such plans will continue to emerge in the future from the Commission. It does not automatically follow that, when these various plans emerge from the decision-making process, that they will spell a real advance for political integration, or that the accession countries will take them without lying down. That depends entirely on the ocalition of countries that can be assembled on a particular issue: and it’s much harder to assemble a coherent coalition than it was in the days of the Nine, the Twelve, or the Fifteen. We’re more likely to get a bog than a shining path towards integration.
Your faith in the “good intentions” of the EU, which has apparently and miraculously changed its entire essence and stopped seeking closer integration, is as touching as it is risible.
I don’t recall using the words, “good intentions” - and nor are they words I’d use here. The EU is not a singular beast with one mind, intent on dragging John Bull along with it. The Commission, the big powers, and the smaller countries, are all different centres of power within the EU with strategies based on both self-interest and belief (either in ultimate unity, or fundamental soveriegnty above certain levels). We can pursue our own strategic aims for EU without tampering with our essential sovereign characterisitcs.
297. correct. It took Labours 4th defeat for clause 4 and it would have done for the tory one. However it doesn’t look that way now which makes me wonder aboutwhat a cameron government would be like.
286 Malcolm.
Now Brownstuff has been thrown out of office he will not work with Dave. He will not work. At all. Indeed it is highly unlikely he will never be seen in public again, at least in England.
He will grow a beard and revert to speaking with a Scottish accent in the hope that noone will recognise him.
299. I totally agree. As a eurosceptic (albeit non Tory) I am bored of being morally right but politically defeated. There’s no point constantly winning the philosophical debate (not hard with lying europhile scumbags) and then constantly losing the actual votes.
The Tory party will, I hope, rein in its passionate euroscepticism so as not to seem too loony to the people, who agree with the cause but are put off by the angst. Indeed Cameron is doing just that, and doing it well.
Once the right returns to power I hope and believe Cammo will resolve the democratic deficit vis-a-vis Brussels. Speed the day.
303. How amenable. Who are you and what have you done with the real seanT?
Those eurosceptic Tories on here that are backing McCain for President should probably be aware that he is a staunch eurofederalist.
297. He did swing back the power balance in the party to the One Nation side of things though, with added focus on quality of life rather than focusing entirely on economic growth.
301. You know, I rather think a Cameron government will be like John Major’s, albeit with less incompetence and division, and no Jeffrey Archer.
304. Good question. Perhaps the real SeanT has been mellowed by fatherhood and foreign rights.
305. I’m an Obamacan!
287. I’m sure you actually know this, but Australia was founded in the late 1780s as a reaction to losing the thirteen colonies. It probably wouldn’t have been settled had our focus still been on North America. (Although, with more power in the Western Hemisphere, places like the Rio Plate might have been settled under the Union flag.)
I wouldn’t describe modern liberal Toryism of the Cmaronian sort as “One Nation Toryism” as it was understood in the early post-war period. It’s a different animal, in my view: more socially liberal; more EU-sceptic; less infused by a desire to protect the traditional institutions of the realm (from the CofE to the monarchy); much more economically liberal; closer to US thinking; and more coherent ideologically.
303.Sean, my other half fired off a letter to our Libdem MP in the wake of the Referendum amendment vote because he abstained from the vote. The reply was swift and full of the standard excuses, but at the end of the day we were not represented at all in that vote.
305.The problem is that there is a sizeable group who are pro Obama, that is causing a fit of vapours on some Conservative sites.
309. Fair enough. It was shorthand - I meant One Nation to mean touchyfeely Toryism, Toryism with a human face, Toryism that hugs the NHS to its bosom and wants more trees everywhere, in contrast to flinty old Thatcherism.
I agree this modern sensitive Toryism is probably rather different to One Nation Toryism of old. I’m going to stop using the word “Toryism” now.
278. While I’m a passionate supporter of your extremely backed up EU posts, I have to disagree with you here Sean. The introduction of Eastern European countries into the EU have added extra power to the Atlanticist camp. Britain should be more forceful in taking leadership of this group, as many of the former communist bloc look to us as being that natural leader. The UK is losing influence within the EU, which is mainly its own fault. We should realise that we can be a strong power inside the institution without having to go along with full speed integration.
More bad news for Gordon Brown in the Observer.
Blair told aide ‘Gordon will lose to Cameron’
“Even though Blair last night issued a statement categorically denying the claims and insisting he did believe Labour could win under his successor, there was consternation in Downing Street.
In his memoirs, serialised today in the Mail on Sunday newspaper, Levy writes that Blair ‘told me on a number of occasions he was convinced Gordon “could never beat Cameron”‘. The peer added in an interview yesterday that Blair was ‘disappointed to see Labour’s slide’ under his successor, with an ICM poll of marginal seats showing yesterday that on current polling trends 131 Labour MPs could lose their seats, handing David Cameron a solid majority.”
“Levy said Blair still believed he could have won a fourth election, adding: ‘But Gordon? “He can’t defeat Cameron,” Tony told me. Blair believed Cameron had major strengths - political timing, a winning personality and a natural ability to communicate to Middle England that Gordon would be unable to match.’”
309. Indeed, but it stays true to the central theme of One Nationism: making sure the social fabric remains intact, and that no part of the Nation is left uncared for. That was the main problem somewhat with Thatcher, but even more so with the post-Thatcher Thatcherites: they believed once you did the benefits and drawbacks calculation you should follow whichever policy led to the greater good, with little or no consideration for those the drawbacks fell upon.
298. In their headlines? I’d be surprised. e.g. “Mr. Bush wins re-election….”
312. I’m afraid this is delusional.
The hope, in the UK, was that all these new states would slow down the speed of integration, and maybe even reverse it; they would also, it was thought, dilute the Franco-German domination of the Brussels agenda.
I see only slender evidence for the latter and absolutely none for the former. Many of these new states, it turns out, are keener on integration than countries in the west; notice it was western countries that voted down Lisbon - not a single Accession country has done so.
Even the Poles, who were expected to be pro-British and bolshy to Brussels, have turned meek and communautaire: the new Polish government is strongly in favour of an EU army, for instance.
Accession has also given Brussels an excuse to abolish more vetoes and accrue more power from the nationstates - so as to “streamline” decision making in the expanded EU.
No, broadening has proved no barrier to deepening. I realised why this is, when I went to Romania recently and saw the EU flag in front of the Bucharest parliament. The flag is enormous. It flutters proudly - and almost defiantly. In the direction of Moscow.
For these countries the EU is a chance to shake off the taint of communism, to get lots of money (of course), to reform their own societies, and to belong to a great big powerful club so they don’t feel lonely and small and frightened of Russia.
Good luck to them. But to expect them to be anti-Brussels or “looking to Britain as a natural leader” is a pitiful daydream.
Getting back to the poll, it is rather odd that Labour can lose 5 per cent and none of it go to the tories, isn’t it?
287 History shows zero chance for a “federal” British Empire.
From 1890s to 1930s this was pushed with considerable vigour by Joe Chamberlain & other leading UK imperialists. Yet time and time again, this concept was shot down by the dominions, led by Canada (esp. Laurier & Mackenzie King, but even “aye, ready, aye” Meighen thought is was a non-starter) and South Africa (Gen. Smuts).
The Aussies and NZers were a bit more eager, because of the very low percentage of residents with non-UK heritiage (before WWII).
But even Anzac ardor was never very great . . . and diminished to the vanishing point in 1941-42 (when there was still some talk of an “Imperial Cabinet” when Winston Churchill made it crystal clear he didn’t give tuppence if the Japanese Army caused some minor inconvenience by marching into Melbourne the way they marched into Singapore.
As for the United States tolerating domination or dictation from London in ANY form from the 1770s up to the 21st century, forget it. We ran you guys off the first decent opportunity we got. Then spent a few generations trying to wrest Canada from your grasp. Nearly came close; likely would have succeeded except for the stalwart oppostion of French Quebeckers, who by the way also HATED the whole notion of a “federal Empire”.
Plus how likely is it that UK would have put up with eventual American domination of a George III federal empire?
316 Anyone who thinks the UK is on the verge of a key leadership role is almost certainly wrong. But the idea that expansion has slowed down integration is pretty spot on in my view. There is a recent Bruegel publication on the euro area which begins with the assertion that a federal government in Europe is further away now than it was in the 1980s. This is not just about the latest expansion. The Finns seem to think it is fine to be in the Eurozone and for the EU to have a very limited role. And the Franco/German axis ain’t what it used to be (and probably never will be).
316. Do you really think anyone really gives a toss, Sean? ‘Great’ Britain has been in decline for a century, the UK is already partially dismembered, Pax Americana is about to give way to the Mongoloid Millennium, and we are merely an outpost at the end of a very long oil and gas pipeline that originates in faraway Russia…
Do you really think muppets like Brown or god-bless-us-and-save-us Cameron are in any position to resist the inexorable geopolitical forces that already have us in their jaws?
“And we alone shall feed them….” the Inquisitor continues, “Oh, never, never can they feed themselves without us! No science will give them bread so long as they remain free. In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet, and say to us, ‘Make us your slaves, but feed us.’” The Brothers Karamazov, Fyodor Dostoevsky
318. Sorry to offend your chippy colonial sensibilities - old chap! - but we weren’t talking about the 1890s, more the 1750s-1760s.
My understanding of the American Revolution is that many of the rebels were, at first, loyal British patriots - who wanted representation to go with their taxation. No? If some accommodation could have been found with them, as was sought by men on both sides, then I believe a new kind of Federal Empire could have evolved, something sui generis.
I’m not saying it would have lasted, but it would have been interesting. Who knows!?
Certainly by the 1890s such a thing was impossible with any of the Dominions, which were, by then, fast evolving towards their own statehood.
Paradoxically, of course, the tide has shifted once more since the second world war, as a new English-speaking empire has arisen - a corporate and cultural empire run in New York, London, Los Angeles, Silicon Valley, Hong Kong, etc etc.
320. Judging by your use of bold, you evidently DO give a toss.
321-
I think that scenario very likely if GIII had had a bit more nous. However I think it whistful thinking that the space currently occupied by the USA would have been anything near as economically and militaryly powerful as it has now become. An America which was a democratic outpost of the federal british empire would not have attracted the non-English speaking immigration that the USA did. The “huddled masses” from Central and Eastern Europe would have gone elsewhere- to the detriment of America’s economy.