Spread punters flee the Tories
October 14th, 2008
The latest prices suggest an overall Tory majority of just 26 seats
After a morning of considerable activity on the commons seats spread betting markets there’s been a sharp move against the Tories and towards Labour as punters reappraise the new situation following the bank bail-out and how it is being viewed both in the UK and overseas.
Only two of the three main markets - Sporting Index and Spreadfair - have been open this morning. IG - which used to regard itself as a big player - simply has not been accepting bets either way and there are no figures to report.
My view, shared by other punters it seems, is that there’s little doubt that Brown and Labour will get polling boosts in the coming weeks and that that will affect views of the general election outcome.
The commons seats spread-betting are where the serious punters go to try to make money by using their political forecasting skills. The amount of money at risk can be far greater than what we see with conventional bookmakers or even the betting exchanges.
It can be a costly business. This morning I had to transfer a fair bit of cash to Sporting Index and IG Index to cover the losses incurred when I closed down my Labour sell and Tory buy positions on Sunday. Thankfully I got in early and since then the Tory price has slipped a further five seats.
This is a complicated form of betting but one that can be immensely rewarding and profitable if you can anticipate trends - particularly the media narrative that has so much impact on the polls.
Today and for the next few weeks at least Brown and Labour are riding a high and it’s going to be hard for the opposition parties to get a look in. Only a mug bets against trends like this.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
First. Mike’s story of covering his position shows why I don’t do spread betting! But I understand it’s a good proposition for those with ready cash.
First?
An end to Boom and Bust?
Interesting to read all the bullish Labourites today.
Enjoy it while you can. If you really believe that the debt bubble cirsis has been solved by the creation of a load more debt, well I think you may have another think coming.
Why is every so pleased the FTSE has gone up to 4500 when 3 months ago it was nearly 6000?
Northern Rock trading statement out today, did anyone see it? Mortgage arrears up by 58% in 3 months.
This whole thing has hardly started yet. The Darling plan may have stopped the banking system gurgling down the plughole, for which some credit is due (although he hardly had a choice), but the underlying debt problem has not gone away, and the solution has created huge problems of its own for the future.
3 That’s now officially called “Tory boom and bust” after campbell got at the evidence!
Labour bring back the boys for a reunion tour, and blow me, suddenly they are up in the betting stakes. Is there no end to what Campbell and Mandelson are capable of….
4
Yes
Hopi talks about the “recovery”.. and how Labour should tell us it’s coming.
As the recession is hardly started - officially Labour tell us there is none - it’s a bit premature to talk recovery.
About 18 months and 500,000 job losses premature. in my view..
But then earlier this year Hopi denied we would have a recession….
Prescott was right. Fourth term for labour. Shame the country will be f…. by the end of it.
[6] - I’m guessing that they can’t engineer the return of their beloved leader. Admittedly that’s a fairly loose limit.
Just goes to show the power of the “media narrative” in Mikes words and particularly of the BBC. Just imagine a slightly different narrative within the context of the same events but along the lines of Brown having created a mess and his actions being desperation to be seen to try and solve it rather than a great plan from a saviour. This description of events is equally valid but would have had a slightly different impact on betting/polls.
When did the spread markets ever reflect the polling situation? When the Tories had consistent leads of 20% + the markets never reflected the size of majority that sort of lead would have achieved.
I’ve stated consistently since 2005 that there will most likely be a hung parliament, and I’m sticking with that…
Both the by-elections and the historical range of election outcomes point strongly to it…
I forecast a swing to the Tories of less than 5%, minimal tactical voting, minimal regional effects, and minimal progress in Scotland…
And, again for the record, I have never voted Labour in my life, and am unlikely to do so next time…
Ot
Stock markets .
Prpeare for 2-3 days sideways in my view.. and then another trip- possibly to the lows of last week….
Today’s price action suggests lots of people selling into strength,
But as I’m only a chartist…
12. By-Elections point to a hung parliament? What, like Crewe and Nantwich?
382 from rpevious thread. I agree that if McCain had just “opposed” the package he’d have been trashed. I think his problem was that he had no alternative. There was no “McCain plan”. So he ended up looking like a follower, a line-tower and out of touch. If he’d said No, we want _this_ instead, (which is what paulson is doing now) he would now be gettign the positive reviews the PM is getting now. To put it another way, Mccain could have been the political Lazarus, not Gordon, if he’d thought of it.
Which is also a sort of riposte to those who say “uhh, the GB plan is old news, look at Sweden”. Apparently it wasn’t old enough news for Paulson, Bernanke, Obama or Mccain, eh?
I still think that, even in the short timescale you are dealing with for this spread betting, you are misreading the general feeling in the country and thath the swings to Labour will be no where near as obvious as you anticipate.
Put simply I think that Labour are now at their best possible polling position (at about 10 points behind) and that this will now deteriorate quite rapidly as the immediate fear of total collapse subsides and people turn their attention to both the reasons for this crisis in the first place (which Brown hs a lot to answer for) and the consequences of the ‘cure’ (which is going to be very nasty for a lot of people)
16. People haven’t felt the pinch yet, the earthquake has happened but the tremor’s haven’t hit the general population. As time moves on they will do, as unemployment rises and taxes rise to meet the spiralling budget deficit cause by increased benefits and a massive slump in corporation and other tax revenues they’ll feel the pinch even more. Brown has shown he can ride an emergency, but when the going gets tough he loses it. He doesn’t think more than a week or two ahead, and now has the added problem of no longer having any cash to throw to his supporters.
The recovery? Are they really are that ignorant?
Looking at the media you’d think we’d moved into Putin’s Russia, such is the joy at our soaraway stock market who everyone now seems to be an expert on, having watched it for the first time in their lives , for a few days. You really have to laugh at the goldfish type memory of the 24×7 news agenda and their reporting of this nationalisation as some great sucess. dread to think what next weeks headlines will be.
There looks to be medium-term value in a Tory-buy / Labour-sell position, though the opposite is probably true in the short term (meaning there’s no point taking the medium-term bet either as there should be better prices ahead in due course).
The next few polls should be more favourable to Labour, though still with them behind. They’ve had a good week in the media and the opposition have been quiet (remember Mike’s Cameron/news profile rule).
After that I expect a different picture. As with others, I can see a recession lasting up to a year with unemployment rising by several hundred thousand at least and a sharp rise in negative equity and repossessions. Unlike some others, I don’t expect many tax rises - the government will put off solving the problem until after the election and let borrowing run up even higher. Golden rule? Yeah well, it was only ever a guideline.
341 from previous thread:
‘The missing piece of the jigsaw is the political complexion of the 20% of the constituency outside the Central Fife seat for Holyrood - I don’t know if anyone can fill us in on that.’
Answer is that it’s solidly Labour, much more so than the Central Fife bits. Cardenden and Kinglassie are ex-coal villages that used to be in Gordon Brown’s old Dunfermline East seat; Buckhaven and Wemyss used to be in Kirkcaldy. Labour were comfortably ahead in the relevant wards in 2007, and were miles ahead in them in 2003. The addition of these areas in 2005 (and the loss of Leven East to North East Fife) probably added 4-5% to the Labour majority.
“Thankfully I got in early and since then the Tory price has slipped a further five seats.”
Ay, there’s the rub. Because with a spread of 6 seats, closing and re-opening a position is pricey.
So the question is: Is this a temporary blip, and if so, will it go far enough to justify closing a (currently-loss-making) position?
As I’ve said previously, this looks like an over-reaction to a slightly improved media narrative, against an appalling economic background. And with Brown more firmly established than ever. That doesn’t sound to me as indicating a significant revival for Labour, especially as the spread markets never fully reflected the previous Conservative lead in the first place (i.e. they had already discounted the possibility that things might get better for Labour).
It wos the BBC wot won it.
No doubt Brown will get a short term boost from all this.
But one point to remember is that the Banking rescue is not a positive which has a direct impact on anybody personally. It’s not like a tax cut where people’s pay goes up, or a Winter Fuel payment where money arrives in a person’s bank account, or a new hospital or school or road that people see being built and use.
Instead the Banking rescue is abstract - people may think Brown’s done a good and important job on it but the lack of direct personal positive impact means that it will fairly quickly slip from people’s minds.
Some people may say “oh, but if banks had collapsed it would have had a personal impact on people”. Maybe, but people won’t see it that way - people are concerned with what does actually affect them personally, not theoretical hypotheticals.
18. Absolutely, throughout this crisis the media has collectively failed in its duty to provide a balanced perspective. In a country such as Britain, where millions of people are apathetic to politics and ignorant of the issues, this is very dangerous.
7. err. I think you completely misread what I said. I was saying that people will want a plan for recovery that helps “ordinary families” once the imediate crisis has passed.
If you really want, I’ve some thoughts on what that might look like on my blog. This is not “saying a recovery is coming”, it’s saying “we should be investing fast to stimulate demand”. I nicked this idea from Paul Krugman, it’s not mine, btw.
‘Matrons return to Scotland’s hospitals’
Old-style matrons are set to make a return to hospitals in Scotland as part of a drive to improve standards in wards, the Scottish Government announced today.
Health secretary Nicola Sturgeon said the revamped role for senior charge nurses would tackle infections and provide leadership.
The Royal College of Nursing in Scotland said the move was “pivotal” to improving care.
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2460357.0.Matrons_return_to_Scotlands_hospitals.php
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/7669300.stm
23. That’s exactly it!
Interesting as well Job losses as HBOS & RBS are still going to occur! They will blame the government! Could tip some interesting seats that as the jobs that go will be in places where thousands of people are employed.
Labour are still screwed in 18 months’ time. Fully agree with Richard @ 16 - “Put simply I think that Labour are now at their best possible polling position”.
When people vote in May 2010, it’ll be against a backdrop of higher unemployment, negative equity and a government in power for 13 years (plus a third Mandelson resignation). Two weeks’ grandstanding and boasting from Brown in October 08 will look like the hot air it really is.
25. Where are these investment funds going to come from? The budget deficit will be 7% or so of GDP next year even without any stimulus package. And public debt levels could reach wartime levels as bank liabilities are added in. The scope for any kind of stimulus is severely limited - it actually looks more likely that the government will be forced to curb spending.
The underlying picture of a Tory majority of over 100 still hasn’t changed. Even the most favourable poll for Labour still gives the Tories a 50 seat majority. I think this is the time to buy Conservative, not to sell them.
28. Don’t want to get into it here, but i’ve discussed this veryquestion on my blog. Gosh, I sound like Benedict!
18: If you think the BBC’s being pro-Brown, take a look Paul Krugman (the economist who won a Nobel prize the other day) in the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/13/opinion/13krugman.html?em
Has Gordon Brown, the British prime minister, saved the world financial system? …
But the Brown government has shown itself willing to think clearly about the financial crisis, and act quickly on its conclusions. And this combination of clarity and decisiveness hasn’t been matched by any other Western government, least of all our own. …
Luckily for the world economy, however, Gordon Brown and his officials are making sense. And they may have shown us the way through this crisis.
I’m not going to pretend to understand this crisis, and I think the man’s an authoritarian scumbag, but I think you should seriously consider the possibility that on this occasion Gordon Brown may have actually done a good job.
Had to laugh at the Daily Mail today who cried foul over bonuses being paid to rich bankers - then listed four people who had successfully steered their banks clear of the crisis!
19 David Herdson “Unlike some others, I don’t expect many tax rises - the government will put off solving the problem until after the election and let borrowing run up even higher.”
I’m sure that you are right as to what the government would like to do, but I’m not sure they’ll get away with it. Government borrowing has just gone through the roof - indeed, into the stratosphere. In the coming months, revenues are going to fall, in all sorts of ways. (I was at a local meeting yesterday where one of the district councillors said that there had been a huge fall-off in planning applications, and therefore in the fees which go with them. But the costs of running the planning department are largely fixed. Multiply effects like that through local an national government, including stamp duty, VAT, etc etc, and the total shortfall on the revenue side will be huge.) Meanwhile increased unemployment will cause spending to increase.
There is a limit to how much the government can increase borrowing without provoking inflation, increases in interest rates, and an effective devaluation of sterling. Expect large tax increases and severe spending cuts.
Just a quick point, thanks to Mike (not) for pointing out that I was the first to mention what great value Labour were in Glenrothes a few days ago.
And I still think Labour are going to lose the next election, if the Tories don’t get a majority they may as well disband, I mean seriously.
Edmund I am very cautious about seeing economists and authors who win the nobel prizes as oracles. There is quite a lot of politics in the selections whereas for science it tends to be much more based on real scientific merit.
33. And with taxes already on the high side coupled with increasing inflation, I expect people to become very unhappy as time progresses.
33. And with taxes already on the high side coupled with increasing inflation, I expect people to become very unhappy as time progresses.
34 - So if the Conservatives get one short of an overall majority, they ought to disband? I’m not sure I follow your detective work, sergeant.
But kudos to you for being the first to spot the value for Labour in Glenrothes.
31. No, he hasn’t. Action should have been taken months ago - in the end it was forced on a government that was more interested in internal quarrels than the national interest by a near financial catastrophe.
The fact that other governments may have been even more idiotic is neither here nor there.
14. Yes, placed in its historical context, C&N does point to a Hung Parliament…
A 17.6% swing was good, but not that good to be confident of a Tory majority…
I think the Tory spread could get as low as 310-315 but when it does all should pile in.
We saw last week what happens when markets overreact.This will be no different.
In the meantime a sidebet on a June 2009 GE should be considered as a value bet.
GB might just think its his best chance especially as the pensioners and other on state benefits will be gaining around 5.2pct in April.
What about all the tax rises to come? How is this mammoth debt to be serviced? Real austerity looms.
Mr Smithson, it would be a very good time to have another of your polls on what the readership think would be the result of the next general election.
34 - “And I still think Labour are going to lose the next election, if the Tories don’t get a majority they may as well disband, I mean seriously.”
Just like Labour should have done in 1992…
31. I think you should seriously consider the possibility that on this occasion Gordon Brown may have actually done a good job:
Actually if anybody has done a good job it is the civil - service who suggested it!
31. Yes, but, if you’re gonna link to articles already linked to several times, so am I:
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/09/boom-and-bust.html
I think the markets are over-reacting to Brown and Labour’s performance. In the Dog and Datastick people aren’t sitting over their pints, shaking their heads and chuckling in wistful awe at Gordon’s economic mastery of Swedish bail-out systems. They’re just scared. At the moment, some of them, especially the intrinsic lefties, are scared enough to return to Labour.
When these people realise that the End Times have not arrived, just a bloody nasty downturn, all those gloating Labour remarks about “an end to boom and bust” are gonna be poured, by the bucketload, over Labour heads. And the polls will adjust.
Indeed I already sense the first hint of a slightly tainted media narrative for Labour - the first articles saying “hold on, exactly how much is this gonna cost, who is gonna lose their jobs, what does it mean for national debt” etc etc.
Add in the inevitable dash of Mandelson anti-magic - already at work, the man is media poison - and you have the recipe for a pretty shortlived Labour recovery.
34 So do you suggest Labour do the same if they fail to get a majority? Twat.
[40] - The “historical context” isn’t complete yet Rod. The Parliament isn’t over. Add in a few more disastrous by-elections for Labour over the next 12 months and your statistics would swing in the Tories direction.
31: ‘…take a look Paul Krugman…’
I get the feeling Krugman’s main motive is to take a pop a Henry Paulson - if a small fish like Brown can up with something what have our lot been doing.
46 Yes, seanT. One of those quotes, by an acknowledged financial genius, sums up the current situation which Labour are facing perfectly:
“Our approach is to reject the old vicious circle of the ’80s–rising debt, higher long-term interest rates, higher debt repayment costs, lower growth, higher unemployment, then enforced cuts in public spending. That was the old boom and bust.” Gordon Brown: November 2000
21…a 6 seat spread makes seat betting a complete mug’s game!
48. I agree they could, but the “historical context” again points against it, since we are now in the final furlong to the election, when the inexorable swingback begins…
I’ll call C&N as the peak of Tory by-election fortunes…
FWIW, I have thought for a long time that the Tory ceiling next time is 300 seats, and could well be less…
50, incidentally, what did happen to Guido’s article about mysteriously missing quotes? Has he been enjoying a visit to Room 101 and learnt that he was in error to criticise the Supreme Leader?
Where is Jack to tell us the Rasmussen numbers?! (Its Obama +5, unchanged from yesterday by the way)
If I have understood the concept of spread betting correctly, the movements reflect SOME punters’ premonition of a short term swing in sentiment towards Labour (and, therefore, the potential for a short term profit) and have little or nothing to do with their view of the ultimate outcome of the General Election in 18 months time.
What will the national mood be in 2010 - the mood that your apolotical friends chime with when discussing politics for 5 minutes in the pub. “Brown messed up the economy but saved us from complete disaster”? I suspect the saving from complete disaster bit will be easily forgotten, but the legacy of debt and unemployment will be ever-present.
So Krugman won an economics prise ? So did these guys..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long-Term_Capital_Management
[50] - I’m interested as to where it all went wrong, since Brown at least said the right things. The standard Tory line would be that Brown spent too much, but Larry Elliot in the Guardian has suggested that it was because the tax estimates were always too optimistic.
Why would that be?
I would have thought that the Treasury would be able to accurately estimate their own tax revenues with all the experience they have. So where did they go wrong? Or was there actually over-spending, in terms of spending more than Brown expected to spend?
Obviously I don’t think they should actually disband, they still have a base, but it does bring up a serious question.
Where do the Tories go if they lose the next election? Cameron isn’t their ‘Kinnock’, he’s their ‘Blair’.
Who’s next? Osborne? Or do they play the long game with Camo?
49. Yes - much as I admire Krugman’s work as an economist, we shouldn’t forget that he also frequently has his partisan political hat on.
50. Nice quote. What has happened of course is that by being forced into an expensive bank bailout by previous dithering, the government has now narrowed even further the already very limited scope it had to cushion the coming downturn with an expansive fiscal policy.
Paul Krugman is a well known Bush hater who sees the world through the same end of the telescope as Gordon Brown so his warm words should be seen with that in mind. I am at a loss to understand how nationalising the banks you have been regulating for the last 12 years is a sign of genius. Surely it is the biggest failure of economic stewardship in British post war history.
55…you can keep your bet running until the result of the election is known,if you so wish.
O/T for Coldstone - Not so Wonderful life…
you mentioned on the last thread your view that “It’s a wonderful life” explains all there is to know about America and capitalism. And that you think the Baileys of this world are right.
In the Washington Post’s sunday edition, a funny but smart article took the totally opposite view: this movie is the root of all Anerica’s problems, from subprime mortgages to gas-guzzling.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/10/10/AR2008101002267_pf.html
20. “Labour were comfortably ahead in the relevant wards in 2007, and were miles ahead in them in 2003.”
It sounds like you know what you’re talking about, although looking at Fife Council’s election results page it looks like the towns you mentioned are split between at least four local government wards, so I’m don’t see how it’s possible to say with confidence what the position was in 2007 (perhaps it would be possible for 2003 because the wards were smaller, but the SNP were doing less well in any case). For what it’s worth the councillor breakdown in 2007 was -
Leven, Kennoway and Largo - 2 SNP, 1 Labour, 1 Lib Dem
Buckhaven, Methil and Weymss villages - 2 Labour, 1 SNP, 1 Independent
Glenrothes West and Kinglassie - 2 SNP, 2 Labour
Lochgelly and Cardenden - 2 Labour, 1 SNP
So on the face of it, a mixed bag. But even if you’re right about the extra bits of the constituency being worth an extra 4-5% for Labour, that would bear out what I said on the previous thread that the SNP must have been at least level-pegging (and possibly ahead) in Glenrothes at the Holyrood elections eighteen months ago. In other words, to win the by-election they don’t actually need a further swing - they just need to maintain their position from last May.
59. If Cameron goes in off the black at the next GE then strap in for the Boris Johnson Experiment.
The Labour Party simply CANT be allowed to get away with this. Even media friends must surely realise that Brown has now put the country in hock for decades, and that fundamentally our banking sector has been ALLOWED to become insolvent, under a regulatory regime set up by Brown.
The public are now realising that the bubble has burst on them and that whilst their house “prices” were a matter of opinion, and are now falling, the debt, as ever, was real and now has to be paid.
The recent drop in support for the Tories, temporary or otherwise, does flag up the attraction of a bet on a “No Overall Majority” outcome at the next GE, on which I posted last night as follows:
“Less than 4 weeks ago, I was buying “No Overall Majority” at the next GE at 3.9/1, but that was when the Tories were enjoying 18%-20% leads in the polls and the prospect of a comfortable three figure overall majority.
With their lead now at around 10% and headed south, Betfair’s current odds of 2.75/1 look very much better value.”
by Peter from Putney October 13th, 2008 at 11:12 pm
52. Given though, that we are running into a recession, over the next 12 months, there must a considerable chance that no swing back to the government (or even a swing against them) will occur.
59 Don’t forget charlie that the Tories are coming from an awful long way behind - to get a majority would mean an unprecedented turnaround in UK politics. I still think they will but this churn underlines my point made over many months - there is no great desire for a Cameron government yet, simply a desire to see the back of Brown.
It is also unsurprising that, given the dog whistle core vote speech Brown made at conference, the national percentage of vote has increased as Labour voters increase in certainty to vote. As many have said, the underlying factors are still there. I would not bet against a Tory majority, but I’m not sure I’d bet for one either - YET.
65. God knows what the next budget will be, but I can tell you one thing. The scrounge culture that has become so hated (whether it exists as badly as some claim or not) will come in for a lot of bashing, but I can’t see how Brown can cut it.
SeanT up above said “I think the markets are over-reacting to Brown and Labour’s performance. In the Dog and Datastick people aren’t sitting over their pints, shaking their heads and chuckling in wistful awe at Gordon’s economic mastery of Swedish bail-out systems.”
On Friday the consensus in the House of Windsor pub in Witney was that Gordon had contrived the whole thing in order to get re-elected. Right, so he he can line up Bush, Congress, the EU and bankrupt a country just to get re-elected. Were that he was so powerful?
It just showed me how much people like conspiracy of the sad truth that it is usually cock up
67. The voters, like unsophisticated gamblers, will chase their losses, and stick (relatively-speaking) with Labour…
Max 5% swing to the Tories. Hung Parliament.
Thanks to antifrank for giving me the credit on the Glenrothes bet, shame our genial host doesn’t do the same once in a while
Whilst the longer term prognosis for the Government is uncertain to say the least the next month or so could be a reasonable one. Currently it does seem to many in the media as if GB is leading the world and this is clearly feeding through into the polls. Also as Mike S mentioned this morning the Glenrothes byelection might not be the disaster predicted (the recent polling evidence, though thin, does suggest that Labour has recovered most strongly in Scotland). So with DC out of the media and the government not loosing as expected a byelection it seems to me that a modest improvement in the labour seats position is to be expected in the run up to christmas. Whether this will be sustained or have any relevence to the actual outcome of the GE is a moot point but in general the way to make money on the spreads is by short term buying and selling.
12 and 41. I think you are right. There will be a swing back to Labour in a campaign. FPTP is in Labour’s favour if they manage to get close to the Tory share. If he misses June 2009, he will be boxed in, and we will effectively have either a 4 month campaign (to October 2009); or a 9-12 month campaign (April-June 2010). What a horrible thought!
I have to say that I am rubbing my eyes at this thread.
In the last published opinion poll the Tories were at 43%.
In this morning’s Times, Peter Riddell, no less, opines:
“The Gordon Brown bounce is real but it is neither large nor unconditional enough for Labour to entertain realistic hopes that it has turned the corner.”
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4938770.ece
The debate on here appears completely disconnected from current polling and appears largely to be based upon posters’ assumptions (guesses) as to what might come next - assumptions (guesses) that have no support in previous opinion polls at all. The next few opinion polls will be interesting, to say the least.
72, you were certainly ahead of the bookies. Personally, I’d lay it now (if you can) so you profit either way, but that’s just me.
“The Labour Party simply CANT be allowed to get away with this.” at 65.
Why not, the Tories performed a huge scam from 1979 to Black Wednesday. So far in 11 years we have had nothing like the inflation, unemployment,inequity and downright criminal damage to society seen in those years
Thus far the right wing ranters have not said how they would have reacted had GB brought in more regulation before the credit crunch. OH they would have howled their indigation like dogs on a moor - James Burdett, Runnymede etc
Me, I’m enjoying the sunshine, because the economy is going to get decidely tough in the next 18 months. You dogs will have plenty to howl about
65. you can’t stop idiots “becoming insolvent” without extremely strict oversight!
Obviously:
The thumping recession coming in the next few weeks will be pinned on Brown. Blaming delinquent jimbobs in america is wearing thin.
58.Timothy (likes zebras).
It’s not the spending that got us into the debt disaster. It was the Greenspan put (google it) and the unduly low interest rate policy of central banks. (Chinese disinflation + fact that central banks dont target asset inflation.)
Is Gordon responsible for this? Not really, like everyone else he went along with the consensus, he definitely spent too much post 2004, but in policy error terms its minor in comparison to the monetary policy error. But then again, most booms just happen because the man in charge doesnt know what is really going on. So Gordon does get the blame.
Financial regulation also plays its part - catastrophically bad ideas - BIS II, etc. Gordon was a cheerleader for this. Again as were most other people. But being in charge he again gets the blame. Gordon is a smarmy liar - he was the king of light touch regulation, for him to try to pretend the crisis has nothing to do with him is repellent. Yes, the trigger had its roots in the US. But British banks are in this mess because of UK regulation done on Brown’s watch.
I see the MSM are avoiding the fact that HBOS and Lloyd are the two biggest losers in the market again. Seems that the market are loving the idea of the government merging the two banks and nationalizing them.
73. “the recent polling evidence, though thin, does suggest that Labour has recovered most strongly in Scotland”
Is this myth ever going to stop? We’ve had five Scottish sub-samples since the Brown conference speech, and no fewer than three have had the SNP still ahead. To use the most recent YouGov sub-sample as a reference point, it had Labour at 36% in Scotland - three points down on its 2005 election showing. The UK-wide figure for Labour was 33% - also three points down on 2005. So where is the slightest evidence that Labour’s recovery is any stronger in Scotland, either in relative or absolute terms?
Have we forgotten that we’re slipping into a massive debilitating recession?
If you’re not pricing that in. Markets don’t react, they overreact. And that’s what they’re doing here.
The moment people next go to the supermarket, people will realise that bailing out the rich doesn’t mean anything to them.
I think you’re being led by market overreaction, Mike, and we surely expect more insightful behaviour than that from you.
79. Even if the Bust isn’t too much to do with Brown, he took for credit for the boom, therefore he must take the blame for the bust.
72. Charlie , when your tip proves to be bad advice, you will get plenty of comment.
Although it is quite correct that Labour will close the gap, this can’t be a long-term trend short of an economic miracle to coincide with the rescue package. Recession is coming and people will feel the impact soon enough. Brown can’t avoid that, and in some respects the Labour Party may be sealing its own defeat by not getting rid of him now - it may be too late next year.
Mike, is there any way you can deny this? If not then you should be advising people to get ready to buy Conservative and sell Labour over the next few weeks (months at most).
77. But you can hardly deny the Conservatives left our economy in much better shape than they found it. Labour will do the reverse.
Ken, your high standards are slipping
Banks succeed - well done the Banks
Banks fail - its the regulators fault
The banks aggressively marketed dodgy products using marginal costings, the Banks paid themselves too muchn the Banks, or at least two of them, would have gone bust had not the govt stepped in.
The Banks would have been apoplectic (rather like Tim Congden yesterday if anyone saw that)had Gordon stepped in earlier. Both the banks and the public had to look over the edge into the abyss frankly - for the change any action to succeed
[79] - Ken, I’m not really trying to get my head around who to blame for the bank collapse, though I tend towards blaming the whole lot of them for their deregulation is good consensus.
I am concerned about the British public finances, because I can see that, at some point, it is going to require public spending cuts and tax increases to bring back under control. Although the bank bailout has made things worse, they were already dire, and really they shouldn’t have been.
Year after year Brown predicted that the PBSR was going to fall, and it kept on growing. Where did his sums go wrong?
#80 Taxpayer now sitting on a paper loss of £2.7 billion on the HBOS deal. HBOS are toxic for LLoyds - many LLoyds shareholders more than likely despair of Victor Blank and this deal.
82. the idea of trips to the supermarket illustrating the country in recession has not so far become a reality - it was just spin.
Edmond in Tokyo The idea to invest in the banks
came from Warren Buffet, who went to downing street
before he did this. Warren Buffet did the same thing and put money in Goldman Sachs, as usual Gordon is good at pinching other peoples ideas
86. “But you can hardly deny the Conservatives left our economy in much better shape than they found it.”
That was just the pure luck of the electoral cycle. If they’d been kicked out of office in 1993/94 the economic legacy would have looked rather different.
81. Sub samples are meaningless, but the evidence of the full Scottish samples was that when Labour was in the hole, they were performing much more strongly in Scotland relative to the Tories.
Tory gains in Scotland will be near non-existent, and any Labour recovery will dash SNP hopes of the long-awaited “breakthrough”, due to the highly unstable nature of the Labour-SNP battleground.
Ouch, Mike. A mug you say! No, the Tories are guaranteed winners. This is a Brown bounce, just like last summer. It’s all downhill from here. If I had the money available to risk I would. You shoul.
92. Even in 1993 / 94 the economy was in much better shape than 1977 / 78.
Just think. Nearly 20 years of a Labour Government. Gordon Browns, Ed Balls et all for another 6 to 7 years. Life is so depressing at the moment.
82. To be fair, Mike has
a) to come up with an idea for a new thread every few hours, not always easy
and
b) is saying that there may be quick money to be made on changing opinions in the political spreadbet market (I understand that how it works) i.e. he’s specifically NOT saying that the Tories are now less likely to win an eventual election
95 In terms of its long-run growth potential, certainly.
From the late Forties till the early Eighties, our economy grew more slowly than the OECD average. Since then, our economy has grown more rapidly than the OECD average.
86, certainly you left the economy on an upswing.
After a major recession that was deeper and longer than that of most of our competitor countries, and which you took us in to after you already had the best part of a decade to ’solve’ our economic problems…
Sean Fear
Yes I can argue exactly that. Most of the benefit to the economy in the 80’s and 90’s came because of the additional competition brought about by being in the EU
Economies always lag behind action. Dennis Healey started the improvement (please note there was no need to go to IMF - it was a huge civil service error in calculation. We did not draw on the money).
The Tories sold off assets - you can only do that once - but it gives a nice glow for a while. By the ’90’s you had run out of assets to flog - hence the Railways mess.
We have marginally out performed our rivals - like France, but nothing like that which the rhetoric claims. They will now catch up over the next few years
And yes this is now a far better organised country than 1997 - better hospitals (I am a heavy user so I know), better schools (I am a heavy user so I know). Most of all I hear the local Tory leader reflectikng Labour values, by caring about low cost houses, something he would never have done uneder Mrs T. It is the indirect leadership as much as legislation that counts. Cameron is reflecting a Labour social settlement
Well, Spreadfair implies Broxtowe Labour Hold, so who am I to quibble?
But I do agree with some of the notes of caution.
Contributions of Conservative posters here seem to tacitly concede that Brown and Darling are seen to have done a good job on the financial crisis (some are even willing to say that they *actually* did a good job), and have moved to the next line of defence, that things are gonna be tough for a while and people will react against the Government accordingly.
I’d agree with the first part - even if there is now absolute normality is the financial markets (which is surely far too optimistic), there must have been a lot of damage done in recent weeks, and the PBR is bound to show tax revenue well down. The next year is going to show inflation improving, but other news is bound to be bad.
The second part seems a bit more doubtful. The Tory message is very much ‘we’ll make good times better’ - share the proceeds of growth, tra-la, improve the environment, build new high-speed trains, freeze council tax, slash IHT, etc. Gordon and Alastair don’t do this sort of happy tweeting very naturally, but they absolutely personify the ‘we are the austere stern-faced captains who will see you through difficult times’ theme. If people think that times are tough, they might like to have some cheery types like Osborne promising good stuff, or they might find them implausible.
That said, those spread market changes look a bit sudden to me, and if we don’t have some good polls and hold Glenrothes I can see them jolting back a bit.
93. “they were performing much more strongly in Scotland relative to the Tories.”
Relative to the Tories? If that’s the only definition of success, I think just about every party has been ‘performing much more strongly in Scotland’, and has been doing so consistently for over twenty years.
The issue of the SNP’s potential ‘breakthrough’ depends on your definition. If they got up to twelve seats that would be a historic high, and that wouldn’t be beyond their grasp even if they slipped slightly from their recent giddy heights.
75: ‘The next few opinion polls will be interesting, to say the least.’
Wouldn’t it be a hoot if Labour’s position worsened? Seriously, that’s in no way beyond the realms of possibility. Okay, the BBC’s ‘Operation Save Gord’s Bacon’ has finally got some traction after months of stalling and stuttering, but I feel it’s going to take more than a national overdose Peston’s elongated vowels to persuade the masses than Gordon is anything other than a bit of a twit.
There is always the argument to consider that uncertain times drive voters into the arms of socialism, which could be at play, but it is rare for voters to rally to the flag of a long-governing party when a downturn hits. One can always argue about who is and isn’t to blame in the ebb and flow of semi-global economies, but the standard response of voters is to blame the party in power, especially when there is no ambiguity as to who is/was in charge. In the UK, there is really no ambiguity, so it is tough to see how Labour can really benefit from the crisis that has already happened and that which is yet to come.
59 - If by that you mean Cameron is the best Tory leader we have had - he isn’t. The reason he is doing so well is that he is a superstar compared to Brown. That is what is all important. Hague was unlucky in that he was up against Blair at the peak of his form, before the spin and lies over Iraq and the economy unravelled.
Cameron isn’t as good as Blair, but he is perceived to be because of the ineptitude of his opponent. This is what makes the Tories so strong. They are not reliant on a single personality like Blair.
Blair is the only electable Labour Prime Minister in the last 30 years. In that time the Tories have had a number of leaders who could have been elected when placed against Brown; Thatcher, Major, IDS, Hague, Fox, Davis and now Cameron would all win general elections against Brown. All these people still continue to be involved with the Conservatives; the only experience Labour have is Blair and Brown; Blair has run off and burnt his bridges, Brown is intent on self-destruction. There isn’t a single Labour MP who could win an election for Labour party leader, let alone PM.
So no, the future for the Tories is not based on one election. The future for Labour ends in 2010.
86
The Conservatives certainly changed the economy, by the ‘Thatcher Revolution’ whether they’ve improved it, as Mao said when asked how he thought the French revolution had affected the world ‘It’s to soon to say’
105 - “Thatcher, Major, IDS, Hague, Fox, Davis and now Cameron would all win general elections against Brown.”
Not Hague and Fox. Or even Davis.
104. “There is always the argument to consider that uncertain times drive voters into the arms of socialism”
In that case there’s certainly no danger of a Labour revival.
106- I believe that line is attributed to Chou Enlai, not Mao.
107. “Not Hague and Fox. Or even Davis.”
You missed out IDS! Not sure about Fox, but I think Hague and Davis could defeat Brown. The stock of both is considerably higher now than it once was.
Cameron: “When the house is on fire it’s all hands to the hose”
12:30 | 14/10/2008
David Cameron, Conservative leader
Jeremy Vine Show, Radio 2
Mr Cameron said that he believed the bank rescue plan was “right for Britain”, and admitted that economic mistakes have been made in the 1980s and the “noughties”.
“The mistake in the eighties was turning on the tap called money and leaving it running too long. The mistake in the noughties was turning on the tap called borrowing and leaving it on too long.”
Asked whether the banking rescue plan was right he said, “I think it is right for Britain. It does seem as if some important steps have been taken forward. When the house is on fire it’s all hands to the hose.”
Asked whether he could have a significant role in solutions to the crisis he said, “The financial crisis is still a crisis. I don’t think it leaves us with nothing to say. I think I do have a role in helping to explain why banks do play an important part in a free enterprise economy.”
He criticised Gordon Brown saying, “He took the Bank of England out of the scene of regulating the debt in the economy. That was a mistake.
“Over the past decade the regulators haven’t regulated properly, the government hasn’t governed properly. There are lessons for all of us to learn. I will be coming forward with our own proposals.
“Even on a good day Gordon Brown, perhaps under torture, would admit mistakes have been made.”
He added that he had “never been dazzled by the City”.
103 Robusticus “I feel it’s going to take more than a national overdose Peston’s elongated vowels to persuade the masses than Gordon is anything other than a bit of a twit.”
I find myself in the unusual position of defending the BBC here, because Robert Peston said today:
“Soon we’ll have the full set of Northern Rock, Bradford & Bingley and HBOS - which will be seen by many as confirmation that the near-catastrophic failure of macro-economic management by Bank of England and Treasury over the past few years was to allow house prices to rise and rise and rise and rise and rise.”
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/
109
You may be right! Those Chinese they all ……. arrr perhaps not.
105. not IDS or Hague! what have you been smoking?
104. despite all the comparisons people love to make on this site and elsewhere with history, there is actually minimal evidence available of what people vote for when a recession occurs with a long-governing party in power. and what evidence there is is decidedly mixed.
103 - I do not expect Labour’s position to worsen. There are, however, a lot of people out there who are really angry with what the Government has done though, as that well-known right-wing headbanger John Rentoul has noted:
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/john-rentoul/john-rentoul-the-week-gordon-met-his-erm-958582.html
“I expect that the Tories’ focus groups reflect the views of the members of the public buttonholed by TV cameras on the street last week: they blame the Government and are especially furious that they, as taxpayers, should be asked to bail out the greedy bankers who were allowed to break the economy.”
There is every possibility of a continuation of the trend of Tory consolidation and a return from minor parties to Labour.
Whatever else happens, I think time for Dave to move Osborne to party sec, and make Ken Clarke shadow chancellor.
Such a move would negate moves back to Labour’s being ‘only’ ten points behind or so, before the recession really begins to bite and Gordon starts raising taxes sharply.
It doesn’t take a genius to solve a problem by throwing 40 billion at it. I daresay if I gave Leicester City £40 billion they would eventually be comfortably mid-table in the premiership.
116. Ken has not sufficiently recanted his love for moules et frites for that to happen.
110 - sorry, I have a mental blackout when I see the letters IDS together
I’ve no doubt that Hague (especially), Fox and IDS would become big hitters in government, but there’s nothing to make me think that any of them could win power in the first place.
116. “Whatever else happens, I think time for Dave to move Osborne to party sec, and make Ken Clarke shadow chancellor.”
Clarke has always said he’d refuse any front-bench job in opposition other than leader, hasn’t he?
Blimey, something must be up, theres a lot of tense Tories on here today.
116. some of Clarke’s views are too risky - there is still a big european elephant in the Tory room.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_mccain_vs_obama-225.html
The latest Battleground poll has Obama 13 points up
Obama 53 (+2) McCain 40 (-3)
The trackers now give Obama leads from 2 - 13 points.
@118:
Normally, Kenneth’s rabid Europhilia would be a problem for me too. These, however, are interesting times.
And seeing him on QT last week just reminded be once again that he could dance under water and not get wet.
Given the current climate, it’s a bloody tragedy that we’re wasting the greatest living Tory Chancellor’s talents.
re 82. “I think you’re being led by market overreaction, Mike, and we surely expect more insightful behaviour than that from you.”
I think the market has some way to go. All it needs is one poll to put the general election back into hung parliament territory and we we will be heading towards 330 seats.
Given this last week I think that there’s a good chance that Labour being only 7-8% behind is possible.
I got the hell out of my positions on Sunday and was proved totally right. I’m now buying Labour at 239 seats and selling the Tories at 340 seats.
117 I doubt it… Lol
DOW & FTSE crashing again - The US dont like SuperGordons ‘plan’
Sky was reporting earlier that America is far from pleased with the UK bailout model and screams of socialism are coming from all sectors.
121. years of telling themselves there would eventually be a recession, and it would benefit them, have not borne fruit.
imagine yourself spending years hoping the whole country would go t*ts up for your benefit, and then the whole country goes t*ts up, and you lose out.
100 Healey can certainly be given credit for reining in public spending.
As for trying to argue that things like ending exchange controls, ending prices and incomes policies, curbing inflation, cutting marginal rates of tax, trade union reforms, privatisation etc. etc. were somehow irrelevant to the improvement in our economic performance, relative to other wealthy nations - well, it’s a bit like trying to argue that dinosaurs roamed the Earth 4,000 years ago.
122, hahaha. Didn’t Labour think that the Tories would split over Lisbon? Instead, Labour had a small split and the Lib Dems engaged in pathetic contortionism.
87 John Wheatley - I dont understand your point about banks. Bad regulation and the rescue are unconnected. Here is a bit from the last post from the last thread
… The credit goes to Brown and Darling for doing it. For those who ask if Brown pushed prices down of the banks or didnt act quickly enough, this is nonsense. If Darling and Brown had dumped £50 billion in the banks 2 weeks ago, the uproar would have been much larger. It is only because 1) The UK has a powerful executive govt with a legislative majority 2) The banks were perceived to be on the verge of failure, that criticism has been muted and that this was achievable. …
Yes, the damage would have been far less if the UK government had put together its package a month ago when the crisis hadnt really blown up. Just after Lehman. But the point is - it would have been politically unacceptable.
Brown though was in charge during the Age of Irresponsibility. He must shoulder the blame for having embraced market pricing of risk, the ignoring of liquidity risk and counter party risk. It’s his fault because he is the peron at whose desk the buck stops. And he was king of light touch regulation. Now of course he pretends to be King of strong regulation, but really he is the fool who embraced light touch regulation.
by Ken October 14th, 2008 at 2:29 pm
Illusory bank profits of prior years = bad regulation = banks thinking they were successful = Brown crowing about City.
Brown rescuing banks = good, but one cannot forget the above bit.
121. wander over to conhome. They’re in full on “heads must roll” mode in the comments.
Anyway Mike might even start a new thread based on this?
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/
That should get us all jumping!
[116] - Ken doesn’t want to be shadow chancellor, he wants to be leader or nowt.
Last weeks council byelections showed no evidence whatsoever of any Labour recovery in support . There were 4 where we have a direct comparison with support in 2005 and now as there was a previous election on GE day 2005
Kent CC Herne Bay
2005 Lab 3207 23.1%
2007 Lab 458 5.3%
now. Lab 537 10.4% The increase from 2007 at least partly due to the absence last week of the Herne Bay Independents
Bristol UA St Georges West
2005 Lab 2218 46.9%
2007 Lab 1118 38.2%
now. Lab 816 30.1%
Cheshire Knutsford
2005 Lab 1478 21.6%
2008 May 769 18.2%
2008 now 342 12.2%
Isle Of Wight Mount Joy
2005 Lab 221 18.9%
now, Lab 38 6.0%
125. Ken will never be trusted with any front bench position until he publicly wipes his fat @rse on the EU flag while holding a framed front page of the 1st November 1990 issue of the The Sun.
New SUSA polls for Ohio and Pennsylvania
Ohio - Obama 50 (+2) McCain 49 (-4) Changes on 28-29/9
Pennsylvania - Obama 55 (nc) McCain 40 (nc) Changes on 5-6/10
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=f459ed4f-3465-434c-9116-8dc250b1fbc0
http://www.surveyusa.com/client/PollReport.aspx?g=a98f6f52-fb6d-4800-9f4e-d55dcb6589f2
124 - would be too easy to throw back “same old Tories” if KC got a high profile opposition role. Would be better served right now as an advisor to Osbourne, and a higher profile role back in government if it happened.
Always wonder what would have happened had Clarke become Tory leader in 1997 or (more likely) 2001
“I think the markets are over-reacting to Brown and Labour’s performance.”
I think people misunderstand markets. The stockmarket is not a barometer of the nation’s economic health. It does not necessarily rise when the economic outlook is good, and fall when it is bad. On the contrary, it rises when stocks look attractively valued relative to their prospects and to alternative investments.
So, right now, the stockmarket may be rising because valuations are - on some measures - at multi-decade lows, despite the fact that investors are well aware that a multi-year recession is on the cards.
Or, stockmarkets could be on the up because yields on government bonds (despite all the concerns on this board about increased government borrowing) have fallen sharply in the last year, and no longer look attractive relative to divided yields. (Royal Dutch Shell pays 6% and has a rising dividend, while 3 year government bonds pay you only a smidgen over 4%.)
Personal view - as a fund manager - is that last week ‘the markets’ were very concerned that we could see a wholesale collapse of the financial system. This would be a bad thing. If, on the other hand, we merely see a multi-year recession and reduced credit, well that wouldn’t be good, but it wouldn’t be the end of the world.
Just my 2c
116 “Whatever else happens, I think time for Dave to move Osborne to party sec, and make Ken Clarke shadow chancellor.”
Whatever else happens, that won’t.
I must say I am amazed at the near-panic some of my Conservative friends are exhibiting at the small improvement in Labour’s fortunes. This is a short-term blip, Cameron is the smartest political operator on the scene, it’s all going to come good. Steadiness under fire is what is required.
In fact we’re not even under fire yet - someone’s merely waving a gun in the far distance, and the gun’s loaded with blanks. Yet there’s a whiff of panic in the air.
134. well he won’t get that but he would be an excellent shadow chancellor.
102. I meant, obviously, relative to the Tories, in comparison to the rest of the UK in recent opinion polls…
As we know, the long-term Tory trend in Scotland is terminal..
99, 100.
You guys still can’t deal with it, can you? Mrs Thatcher saved the country from becoming a total socialist toilet, a kind of Bulgaria with extra drizzle. Smelly lefties like yourselves can’t admit this, which is why you have latched onto this present crisis with such glee. She was wrong! She was wrong! Open the mines! Bring back British Leyland!
Slightly more intelligent lefties, like Gordon Brown (I said SLIGHTLY) have reluctantly admitted that Mrs Thatcher was the greatest prime minister since Oliver Cromwell, which is why Gordo keeps inviting her to Number 10.
140, presumably due to poll leads reaching silly proportions. You should slap your friends in the face with the Fish of Realism and remind them they’re still 10 points up after a week or more of the BBC and the rest of the media engaging in worship of the strange man in Number Ten.
101. Labour are at fault for the economic mess in this country, in the UK it started with poor corporate regulation of the financial services industry. In some ways the problems here are worse than the US! We are also behind in the economic cycle and have not benifited from the stimulas packages plus massive fall in interest rates the US has seen.
I give no cuddos to Labour for nearly allowing the Financial service industry in this country to collapse or hobbling everyone with further wasteful public spending to prop Brown up in office over this summer.
Some Labour people (Not you) are deluded if they think a week where normal political trade is suspended shows Labour are on the way to recovery. The normal terms of political trade will be back soon enough and voters are already hurting! Labour seem to be enjoying the moment a bit too much, I think Labour will find that they will not be embraced by voters but given a good kicking!
88. British public finances (even when one throws in NR and the present bailout) arent that bad.Around 45% give take. The US and Germany manage 60% of GDP, Japan a monstrous 180%. The rate of change is important and level is always something that niggles.
Why did Gordon get his sums wrong? He didnt. He just lied and spent. I dont see that as particularly big a problem. I do wish he had cut back in 2004, but it really is minor in the bigger scheme.
A tougher fiscal guy than me might say - ah if he hadnt spent as much in 2000 onwards, we would have £100 billion more to play with. True enough. It probably wasnt spent well - but I did think some doctors and teachers deserved higher salaries. Water under the bridge either way.
141. “What do you call a man who ignores financial advice?”
“Wealthy.”
@125:
You may be right in the *very* short term, but it still seems risky, because when we price in other considerations, like the forthcoming recession, and massive tax increases to be announced in the pre-budget report, things won’t look so healthy.
These events have demonstrated to me, though, that Osborne is not ready. He’s looked like a little boy playing in a man’s world.
It’s a crying shame that he’s not ‘voluntarily’ giving way to Clarke.
I think Obsorne’s talents would be far better spent as party chairman anyway.
Like two million other small shareholders, we have just received a note from HBOS advising us that our 2008 interim dividend of 6.07 pence per share has been paid in shares.
The “Capitalization Issue Price” is that quoted in the announcement on 18 September regarding the acquisition of HBOS plc by Lloyds TSB Group plc (remember the deal brokered by our Great Leader?) i.e. 232 pence per HBOS share.
Share price today is around 90p if sold direct, about 108p if swapped for Lloyds shares.
When is a “deal” not a “deal”? Clearly when it’s brokered by Gordon W. Brown.
Remember there are two million of us - and this is only one of the dozens of little niggles which could influence our voting intentions.
By the way, has gabble noted the movements in the FTSE so far today? Not as good as I had hoped!
112
Unfortunately that is the media equivalent of the ’small print’. Compared to the BBC’s headlines, it is invisible.
82,97 “I think you’re being led by market overreaction, Mike, and we surely expect more insightful behaviour than that from you.”
Come on Martin, be fair, Mike has said ad nauseam that he plays the GE Seats market on a short term basis and thus far his timing on this one has been damn near perfect, even to the extent of him taking a hit on his previous reverse positions. It is precisely the “Market Overreaction” to which you refer from which he is profiting!
As someone who is active in the market yourself, you must be all too well aware of the virtue of sometimes taking the short term rather than the long term view.
Richard, 140.
I must say I am amazed at the near-panic some of my Conservative friends are exhibiting at the small improvement in Labour’s fortunes.
If Labour saw Osbourne as a liability, they wouldn’t be throwing the kitchen sink at him via the internet. They’d prod him and mock him, but leave him to deal “damage” to his party. That they are going hammer-and-tongs at him show that they want him out because they think for him to stay in the long-term would be bad for them.
Although I don’t know your friends I find that a number of Tories don’t like Cameron because he refuses to advocate for big tax cuts. Thus when you see people “panic”, what they’re really trying to do is make others panic to press Cameron to go. That’s what your friends may have been tricked into doing.
As for me, if I were a member of the Conservative Party I’d be hanging on to Cameron for dear life - but I’m not.
144 - anxiety of being so far ahead then getting down to more realistic levels of support? Tends to happen when you’ve had a good decade out of office. Wait until the narrative changes again.
As for ConHome, why does it remind me of a cat that is more intelligent than its owners? (hint : that’s not a complement to the site)
OMG. I am seriously going to sort out my spread betting account. If the spread indexes get any better for Labour I wil PILE in. There is no way short of Cameron being proved to be an anti-Briton Afghan that the Tories will not win a sizeable majority.
this is almost free money guys
test
Ken! Can you please stop introducing facts and evidence. Many people here don’t like to hear things that don’t agree with their prejudices, and I’d like you remember that.
122. ed. Would that be Babar the Elephant?
@151:
Aye, sorry PfP, you’re absolutely right.
Because of corporate firewalls and things, I’m necessarily forced into playing a longer game than Mike is with this market, so he’s simply taking a short term view and me a medium term view on the same events.
I think he’s probably right, I’m simply not able to respond with the same volatility as our good host.
So, one good-enough Labour poll (fewer than 10pts behind?) could see the spreads move into hung parliament territory, but medium term, I expect Labour’s parlous state will be restored.
#149 No Gabble seems to have moved onto LIBOR - was crowing about a 2 basis points drop in 3m £.
“British public finances (even when one throws in NR and the present bailout) arent that bad.Around 45% give take. The US and Germany manage 60% of GDP, Japan a monstrous 180%. The rate of change is important and level is always something that niggles.”
Oh we are on this one again, how about 100%+ of GDP and rising fast when you add in all the stuff that should be there. You can’t just ignore PFI, Network Rail, Public Pensions etc etc.
143
Of course technically Ollie, (he was always Ollie to me) wasn’t the Prime Minister.
Mines, are we talking coal or tin?
Yeah! well we might have to start opening them again one day: coal that is.
That’ll please your mate Zac!
Much the most interesting thing happening this week is that the Government is junking some of its most toxic policies while attention is being diverted. Yesterday it dropped 42 days, today it drops SATs at 14.
I am becoming more and more convinced that Gordon Brown has been forced on a path of collective Government. What next? Scrapping ID cards? Or a change of strategy in Afghanistan?
146. I have seen somewhere that RBS liabilities are £1.8 Trillion!
162 - so what does Labour fight the next election on, if it’s dropping these policies that were only recently so vital?
Blimey, the Dow is slumping fast and the FTSE with it. Technical profit-taking from yesterday or something more substantive connected to today’s Bush (Brown) rescue plan?
163 But what are their assets? Must be a similar figure…
‘Glenrothes by-election: Labour sets out action plan’
http://tinyurl.com/4jxlkl
164 - Emergency Labour: we’re living in scary times, only an experienced Government can be trusted.
Labour, the Giffen good.
So since my post praising the Tories of the past who could have beaten Brown in an election, we have had a list of reasons why the Tories are bad from the labour trolls, but not a single candidate of anyone from the Labour party who would win an election against Cameron, let alone Thatcher. The cupboard really is bare.
Thatcher v Blair would have been some election. I think Thatch could have prevented the 1997 landslide being quite so dire.
168 - ah right, is that where they suspend the election?
More seriously, the election will be determined 3000+ miles away on November 4
62
Amid the fanfares and trumpets, British troops will march out of Iraq.
Can Labour arrange the headlines in time for Glenrothes?
169. “Thatcher v Blair would have been some election. I think Thatch could have prevented the 1997 landslide being quite so dire.”
You must be joking. If Thatcher had clung on that long (presumably with the poll tax intact) the Tories would have faced a Canadian-style wipe-out.
@ 171
That should, of course, be 162
Q: What is our esteemed PM el Gordo the Broon up to today to save us from financial calamity?
A: He is working away on the Glenrothes by election.
Courtesy Guido.
http://tinyurl.com/4pm2xw
142. I don’t think they need be in terminal decline - breaking the habit of the last 30 years - always either overtly ignoring scotland or lazily bashing the scots - would be a good start.
It isn’t a good thing for scotland or the UK that the Cons are so rubbish up there
* the scots are effectively disenfranchised - they won’t have a serious chance to vote in a Cameron government (or vote effectively against one)
* the Cons are tempted to pursue their supporter base (the english) further aggrieving the scots and leaving us with a “government in waiting” that does not represent the whole country
* the Lab party seems to have become very complacent and corrupt up there, if it wasn’t already
* we have an anti-UK, nationalist party hoovering up non-nationalist votes by trying to drive a wedge between eng- and scot-land
I would believe that the Con brand was “decontaminated” if they actually tried to start something in this direction.
162 - Yes, antifrank, I noticed that and commented in a similar vein earlier today (also they’ve dropped the ‘inquests in camera’ proposal, another toxic policy). It does look possible that the Peter Mandelson re-fenestration was part of a wider action plan by senior Labour figures, to include correcting some of the most obvious own-goals, perhaps even ID cards. Also, to regain control of the media narrative. As such, my guess is that it was intended that the plan should include de-fenestration of Gordon Brown, sometime next year.
But - then the financial crisis hit, and the landscape has suddenly changed. Of course, in one sense, this helps Labour. But it also disrupts any attempt to oust Brown. I do wonder if this is the real reason he is looking so happy. He had been forced to concede things he didn’t like, including welcoming the Prince of Darkness, and knew they were trying to get rid of him. But all of a sudden, it looks as though he’ll be there until the end.
Just a theory.
151. No. If Mike is gonna gloat about his Obama bets (as he should) and his clever positioning on Glasgow East (fair enuff), he should also confess (as he usually does) his mistakes.
He predicted on this site that the post-conference Tory leads would go back up to 15-20%. Some of us on here - *ahem* - disputed this prognostication.
148. Get a grip, Shirtboy Coxall! I agree that Osborne is not the ideal Chancellor. He’s very smart but he is a bit squeaky - i.e. not perfect right now. Party Chairman plus Deputy leader (does that exist?) would be a good role for him.
But Ken Clarke? He was on record saying we should be in the euro - just the other day. It’s a terrible shame he is such an arrogant f*ckwitted europhile, cause he is talented, but making him Shadow Chancellor would be like the Church of England making Richard Dawkins Archbishop of York.
Derr. Bad idea.
Why not David Davis? He has been vindicated on 42 days. He’s smart and punchy. He is working class and likeable. He needs to be back on the front bench - instead of one of the Etonian fops. There are way too many poshos in Cameron’s Shadow Cabinet: they don’t suit the times.
How very, very strange! These two articles from the Scotsman and the Herald are absolutely identical, apart from the title. What on earth are they playing at? Lazy sods.
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Candidates-warming-up-for-Glenrothes.4590163.jp
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2460397.0.Glenrothes_byelection_Labour_sets_out_action_plan.php
114- There is little evidence of what people vote for in a downturn with a long-standing government in power?!
Of course there is: elections!
In recent U.S. history, for example:
1) Stock market crash and start of Great Depression: voters throw out incumbent Republican administration and Congress.
2) Economic downturn, high unemployment, and inflation in Carter administration: voters throw out incumbent Democratic administration and Senate, and Republicans greatly strengthened in the House.
3) Mild recession during presidency of George H. W. Bush: Clinton elected. Even though Democrats then controlled Congress, Bush took the blame and lost in spite of his meteoric popularity immediately after the first Gulf War.
4) Economic downturn, stock market crash in Bush administration: who do you think will win in three weeks?
How is that for evidence?
172 - probably right about Thatcher v Blair, although Thatcher at her high would have beaten Blair at his similar high point.
Blair v Cameron?
176 - I like it. It makes a lot of sense to me.
177
Tebbit on 42 days.
“If the lack of this provision causes the police to fail to prevent a major terrorist outrage, what then? It might mean multiple fatalities, a strike against economically important infrastructure with great consequences, or it might mean that we fail to prevent an outrage as great as the detonation of a dirty nuclear device in a city centre, leaving it uninhabitable for years. We have to take into account that things are changing, that what was unforeseeable a while ago has become terribly foreseeable in terms of the world economy. What was also unforeseeable a while ago is that there is a very weak and potentially bankrupt Government in Pakistan, a country which is a nuclear power with all the dangers that that may bring to us. The weights in the scales are simply disproportionate.
It is very difficult indeed to rectify the injustice which has been done to a dead terrorist victim. Victims have human rights just as much as suspects. Finally, I should say to my noble friends on the Front Bench—to whom it will come as no surprise that I am going to support the Government today—that I do so for one other reason. Let us think about the dilemma if the Government are denied these powers tonight, but at some time in the future a Conservative Administration conclude that they need them. How would that Administration go about coming back to Parliament and asking it to grant those powers? My party might come to rue the day if it wins this vote. So although I find myself in strange company—not least in the company of the noble Lord, Lord Carlile, with whom, as he well knows, I do not always agree, and with many Peers on the opposite side of the Chamber with whom I do not often agree—when I vote with the Government tonight it is partly with the thought of protecting my friends in my party from the position in which they may find themselves if they are in government in the reasonably near future.”
I wonder who most people agree with: Davis or Tebbit?
169. Thatcher indrectly caused it to be so dire.
HBOS @ 76 p (-15%)
Lloyds buying a turkey.
182 For me: Davis.
175. “the scots are effectively disenfranchised - they won’t have a serious chance to vote in a Cameron government (or vote effectively against one)”
Come again? If the Tories didn’t put up candidates or campaign in Scotland, you’d have a point, but they do. Not only do people have a chance to vote against a Cameron government, they’ll take up that chance in huge numbers. The only difference is that Labour isn’t the only alternative to the Tories in Scotland.
“we have an anti-UK, nationalist party hoovering up non-nationalist votes by trying to drive a wedge between eng- and scot-land”
Bot true. That’s the paranoid Alan Cochrane/Telegraph fantasy, but the SNP’s real strategy is a good deal more positive than that.
179. sorry - i don’t follow the action out in the colonies.
182 - Davis as well
189. I obviously meant to say “not true” rather than “bot true”.
Semi Finals.
Maggie Thatcher vs Harold MacMillan
Harold Wilson vs Tony Blair.
Who would be in the final? Would it be a disappointment. Would it be an all Harold Event?
182. what a bizarre line - how is his rebellion going to save his party if his scenario comes true “hey guys, we are going to have 42 days after all - just like Lord Tebbitt said we were going to all along”?
#187 We’re buying the turkey first, LLoyds will be getting leftover turkey curry!
Or then there’s Plan B - nationalisation of HBOS, where the taxpayer gets stuffed!
182 I suspect most side with Tebbit, although that is because they don’t really think about it - all arrested are guilty according to Sun/Daily Mail, therefore deserve 42 days in jail without being charged.
Those of us that side with Davis probably focus on two issues - the natural fear that the first time someone innocent is held, it will become a focal point for more violence, i.e. it will be used against us by our enemies. The second issue is that this Government has massive form for using legislation designed for one purpose for another purpose. All the repressive aspects of apartheid South Africa were introduced as terror legislation…
Thatcher would destroy Blair. Would be interesting as Thatcher was all substance no style, Blair the total opposite. If Balir had beaten Thatcher, would have been the ultimate victory for spin politics.
180 If Davis is brought back it will never be as Shadow Chancellor. He’d demand a heavy tax cutting agenda immediately and Cameron believes that way lies trouble. If you’re looking for an old timer without EU issues Rifkind is the best you’ll get.
189. if Cameron gets in, almost all of scots MPs will be on the opposition benches. fact. that means the scots’ votes have no influence whatsoever.
i may have been harsh about the SNP - but it is certainly true that they are picking up a fair number of “none of the above” votes at the moment (including plenty who aren’t in favour of separation)
183. Blair made Cameron look like Blair-lite, despite providing him with plenty of ammo. would have been a walkover.
182. Davis.
180. Thatcher versus Blair is a category error.
Blair only existed as a successful politician BECAUSE of Thatcher - i.e. it was only once Thatcher sorted the economy and finally exterminated socialism and saved the entire nation and sacked all the silly retarded miners and forced Labour to become a centrist capitalist party… it was only when she had done these tasks that Labourites were obliged to appoint a nice Tory-lite leader who could actually win an election. Tony Blair.
Asking who would win between Thatcher or Blair is like asking who is more important to my health: Alexander Fleming, or the GP who prescribed antibiotics for my recent bout of tonsilitis.
London Diary : Mandy pushing for a snap November election !!
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/2008/10/will-brown-try.html
193 - I’d swap any of them for Gordy
Mrs Thatcher is the greatest peace time Prime Minister we have ever had.
IMHO
197. spin politics has already won - deal with it!
199. “i may have been harsh about the SNP - but it is certainly true that they are picking up a fair number of ‘none of the above’ votes at the moment (including plenty who aren’t in favour of separation)”
True on the last point - but equally there’s been plenty of polling evidence for many years showing that a significant minority of Labour voters (and even a small minority of Tories) favour independence. So there’s a good deal of cross-voting on the subject, and the position is more complex than it is sometimes portrayed.
200 - disagree it’ll be a walkover, in fact it would be close as dammit to 50/50
Why? Blair’s spinning in opposition was so blatant it was unreal (giving the Sun and the Mirror two totally different views on the same day over the EU, one such thing I remember) while Cameron is a lot subtler.
Neither really have/had ideas or an ideology, just an ability to “manage”
All depends on who you found the slightly more convincing, although Blair would win it because he was the first of that ilk of politician
206. sure. side issue though.
Scotland and the UK would both be better off if the Cons had put any effort or thought into scotland in the last 30 years.
I remain utterly convinced that the Tory strategy is absolutely the right one at the moment. I doubt the polls will move that much more and even recently it’s worth emphasising that while Labour have bounced up the Tory polling is barely changed. There are plenty of DC doubters on here, many from within party support who yearn for the glory days of the 80s. It ain’t gonna happen but DC will bring the tories back to power and with a thumping majority. I have said this on many occasions on this site - and am happy to be held to account be it in 09 or 10.
202 - you’d think they’d have learnt by now.
207. the original vs. the copy - they were head to head. watch the videos! walkover.
211 - wasn’t Cameron ahead in the polls for just about all of that time?
204 Thatcher split the country in two and created wounds that are yet to heal. The best Prime Minsters don’t do that. MacMillan is the best Tory by far. Attlee the best overall. More lives have been improved by Attlee’s NHS than any of the Thatcher reforms.
201 If your’re right, the best Cameron can hope to be is the receptionist who booked the appointment. In your world, he’s a Bjorn Again tribute Act.
What an extraordinary thread. This week the entire banking mechanism came within a whisker of systemic collapse, forcing HMG to pump in TENS OF BILLIONS OF POUNDS in support. It survived (just)
Two days later, the general is that the economy is again booming again, and Brown is saved?!!!
202. “A general election traditionally takes place 17 days after it is formally announced so if the PM wanted it to coincide with the Glenrothes by-election on 6 November, then next Tuesday would be the moment.”
‘Coincide with the Glenrothes by-election’? They haven’t really thought that one through, have they?
If this story has any provenance at all, I presume it’s just the political black arts from Mandelson, trying to spook the Tories. If the speculation really took hold though, it could backfire just as badly as it did last year.
209. scampi - “I remain utterly convinced that the Tory strategy is absolutely the right one at the moment.”
The Tories have a strategy?? Well, it just goes to show you: you do learn something every day.
115.”There is every possibility of a continuation of the trend of Tory consolidation and a return from minor parties to Labour.”
We are about to find out if this small Labour bounce in the polls is going to consolidate their core vote at around 30-33%, or if it will increase further in the short term on the back of recent economic events.
Will the Conservatives keep their +40% polling figure, and if they do in spite of any Labour bounce, will it finally put paid to any arguments that the Tories current polling position is soft?
But what about the SNP and Libdems?
We could see some polarisation of the vote between Labour and the Conservatives as voters decide who best they would prefer in office during some pretty tough times. I think this could squeeze both the Libdems and the SNP in the run up to the GE.
Labour voters in the core heartlands might decide they don’t have the luxury of that protest vote for either the Libdems or the SNP, and it will come down to who they think will best protect their interests in No10 Downing Street rather than Bute House.
The Libdems continued successes during the last 11 years has been achieved in a period of benign economic conditions. And although the SNP benefited from a very good campaign and extended honeymoon, the new economic situation will have an effect of some of those Labour voters they have been so studiously courting.
Tear up the 2005 GE results because the political landscape has changed dramatically, and tear up the 2007 Devolution and local election results because its the economic situation has changed dramatically.
216 - well, their strategy has been so bad that it’s got them a catastrophic 10 point lead even after Gordon Brown saved the world from collapse.
If they do win the election, it will be because of THAT week in October 2007.
204. In all seriousness, I would say Thatcher was the greatest peacetime leader in any country anywhere, in the history of human civilisation.
Her noblest achievement was taking the wretched working class coal miners, and grinding their chavvy little unemployed faces into the dust. Stupid plebs.
179 Plan may also not be helped by this sort of article.
For Mandelson, like the New Labour project itself, symbolises the bullying arrogance of the neo-liberal creed that has dominated the world for the last three decades.
It is a world in which powerful countries prise open the economies of the poorest so that private corporations can control their food, their water and their electricity, where governments claim to be powerless to intervene in the workings of the ‘free market’ and yet are suddenly able to produce undreamt-of sums of money to bail out banks when they fail - our banks, not those of Russia, Argentina or Thailand which once went to the wall without receiving any bail-outs or offers of assistance.
We may well wonder at the motives of Gordon Brown for bringing one of his former political enemies back into the government. But as we shake our heads at the cynicism and moral blankness of the “prince of darkness” we might pause to consider that these vices are not just his: they are part and parcel of the system that allows such men to flourish
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/45619,opinion,how-guyana-brought-out-the-bully-in-mandelson-matthew-carr
217. “And although the SNP benefited from a very good campaign and extended honeymoon, the new economic situation will have an effect of some of those Labour voters they have been so studiously courting.”
If there’s a recession and the media narrative is that Labour is to blame, the SNP might well look even more attractive to those voters. Presumably the SNP line at the GE will be ’send a strong Scottish bloc to Westminster who will back up the SNP government’s case for greater resources for Scotland’ - that could well be quite effective if people are hurting and feel that Scotland is getting a raw deal.
“Two days later, the general is that the economy is again booming again, and Brown is saved?!!!”
EdP - this is called a “straw man argument”. I don’t notice anyone arguing what you’re suggesting.
re Tebbitt versus Davis. His argument could be used for giving lethal injections to Muslim children. Ergo Davis is right.
I’m still pretty much convinced Blair would have beaten Cameron in a GE when the campaign got underway.
213. You are clearly too young to remember the 1970s Jonathan. The country was bitterly split then, too. There were many, many people who deeply resented the privileged role (and the way it was abused) of trade unions. Who deeply resented the destruction of financial wealth and erosion of living standards through inflation. Who were in despair at apparently inexorable economic decline and humiliation abroad. Who were extremely angry about mass immigration.
Equally there were lots of people on the left who were gripped by bitter class hatred and/or owed allegiance to a foreign ideology (communism).
Britain was a million miles from being a harmonious society at ease with itself in the 1970s. It was a dysfunctional, frequently angry place.
Good Afternoon PBers worldwide and in Iceland.
…………………….
140 Kieran. The SUSA Ohio poll is actually M-45/O-50. The internals are worse for McCain with only 85% AA for Obama and an underpoll of AA’s by 3 points.
223. “I’m still pretty much convinced Blair would have beaten Cameron in a GE when the campaign got underway.”
Blair couldn’t even beat Michael Howard in England, so I don’t know what chance he’d have had against Cameron.
Here’s a great little article penned by the NYT’s David Brooks explaining, is his words, what I’ve been saying here as for what can be expected politically in the medium term in the U.S.: big Democratic victory this year, irresistable left-wing overreach driven by congressional liberals, and then a backlash.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/14/opinion/14brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
Ironically, if the Democratic victories in Congress were modest this year, the Democrats may have stood a better chance of maintaining their control of all of the levers of Washington power for longer, but the seemingly massive scale of their impending victory portends governance from even further to the left, and then the backlash as stated by Brooks. That’s why I’m predicting a very wild political ride right through Obama’s first term, GOP gains in 2010, and then all the cards on the table in 2012.
224 - were race riots widespread in the 1970s as well?
Seen lots of footage and accounts of football hooliganism back then, and the 70s seemed a lot more lawless
Tony Blair had fought the 2005 election on the basis that he would stand down. When he showed signs of being slow to do so, he was effectively forced from office. David Cameron was elected as an opponent for Gordon Brown. His strategy with Tony Blair was not to defeat him, but to set up his fight against Gordon Brown.
Arguments about whether Tony Blair would have beaten David Cameron are as stupid as arguments about who would win a fight between a badger and an aardvark. We simply don’t have any meaningful evidence.
224 Thatcher polarised this country like no-one before or since. Except maybe James Blunt.
219 This is just the normal middle-of-the-road, shades of grey stuff we have come to expect from you SeanT!
Thatcher is overrated. She only looked good because Labour were so rubbish at the time. We have been better off without her.
FDR is arguably the greatest peacetime AND war-time leader of C20. Although Churchill probably steals the latter.
213.”204 Thatcher split the country in two and created wounds that are yet to heal. The best Prime Minsters don’t do that. MacMillan is the best Tory by far. Attlee the best overall. More lives have been improved by Attlee’s NHS than any of the Thatcher reforms.”
You had to be there….back in the seventies to understand why we had our first female party leader and PM, and 18 years of a Conservative government.
228 Certainly there were riots involving the NF and its opponents. Industrial disputes were certainly a good deal more violent then than they are today.
i think the HBOS merger is going to fall apart quite quickly now. Totally destroying Lloyds, which used to be healthy. kiss of death.
230.No, the Unions polarised this country back in the seventies, they tried to control who ran the country what ever the GE result.
New PPP poll for North Carolina :
McCain 46% .. Obama 49%
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_NC_1013345.pdf
231. “You had to be there….back in the seventies to understand why we had our first female party leader and PM, and 18 years of a Conservative government.”
I think the main reason is that James Callaghan didn’t call an election in the autumn of 1978 when he might well have won!
227 - “That’s why I’m predicting a very wild political ride right through Obama’s first term, GOP gains in 2010, and then all the cards on the table in 2012.”
Except that I believe the GOP will still be a mess (and a poisonous, ugly one at that) in 2010.
There might be slight anti-Dem incumbency shifts in 2010, but only in places which should have been GOP anyway.
2012 will see a more cohesive Republican party, which may make significant gains though won’t win the presidency or Congress
222. yes, i believe Davis’ preferred method is hanging? much more civilised
As usual, Brown never learns - this time he wil blame Mandleson for The Election That Never Was 2.0
Just two days after a near financial meltdown, and it’s all gone straight to the Savior Of The World’s head.
Watch the “Will he? Won’t he?” rumours yo-yo in tandem with the FTSE
Now he’s fired up the rumour mill, and his political future so closely stakes on the performance of the FTSE, surely there will be an irresistable temptation for the City to seek it’s revenge on The Great Nationaliser through playing the markets?
Will the FTSE be suspended Mugabe-style during the election campaign? {in th eiterests of ploitical ’stbility’ of course)
Brown has just tied his political future to dysfunctional international stock markets operating their highest volatility in a generation, and his future may well be sealed with a “global solution”
236.”I think the main reason is that James Callaghan didn’t call an election in the autumn of 1978 when he might well have won!”
Would he? Or do you think that it took one winter at the end of the 70’s for the penny to drop that we were the sick man of Europe, derided by all?
218. “their strategy has been so bad that it’s got them a catastrophic 10 point lead”
Only teasing! Oppositions do not win elections, governments lose them.
Often an Opposition “strategy” is unnecessary, if the govt is bad enough. This govt is bad enough. And how!
232 - thanks, thought as much.
With a backdrop like that, it’s quite easy to see why Thatcher did as well as she did. Though it might also explain why 45-55 year olds are the most likely (and currently only) demographic that favours Labour
224. Indeed. Britain was a public urinal in the 70s. A grubby, depressing, sad, declining, self-loathing, nasty little post-imperial socialistic boghole. Thatcher was the loo brush and the bleach.
The latest issue of the comic Viz (which, I may say, has had a sudden return to form) has a good skit on this - a tribute tour of 70s bands and comedy acts, from Brotherhood of Man to Peters and Lee. They call it the Best of British Sh1te, to remind everyone just how awful everything was circa 1977.
130 DOW & FTSE crashing again - The US dont like SuperGordons ‘plan’
Or maybe they do as it’s now up 130.
“IG - which used to regard itself as a big player - simply has not been accepting bets either way and there are no figures to report.”
Mike - forgive me for saying so, but you always seem to have something of a down on IG, I know not why.
I’ve just checked their website and there do indeed have prices up for their GE Seats Market as follows:-
Labour 240-246
Con 334-340
LibDem 43-46
240. Iirc then they were ahead in the polls at the time.
181. Their usual tricks, they just publish what Labour send to them without even changing a word.
241 - and that’s why I think all talk of Labour coming back is futile. Brown permanently damaged himself over the non-election, and it’s interesting how now this recent bank crisis has subsided holes are starting to be picked in him again.
243 - although it was from 1980, check out the beginning of the video “Bedsitter” by Soft Cell. That’s what people were facing even in their day-to-day lives, let alone the industrial strife
243 “Save all your kisses for me”
You’re right, they don’t make ‘em like that any more!
242 Thatcher took that public urinal, contracted it out, fitted a turnstile, charged you 20p and left the place smelling worse when she started. She did paint it primary colours though and call it Executive Lav Express. Fancy a can of Quattro anyone?
231 etc Thatcher caused riots in Trafalgar Square, the heart of our country. No one else did that? You’re on a losing wicket if you say that Thatcher wasn’t divisive. She was and she fully intended to be. That was her whole point.
MacMillan was THE great Tory since the war. A million times the PM she was IMO.
237- Time will tell. All I can tell you is that Brooks and I are on the same page on this one, and I disagree with him as often as I agree. One must be careful, though, to not foist one’s own preferences on the electorate in determining what average voters will do. In the U.S. (and this seems to be a real difference between the U.S. and the UK), voters very quickly get over whatever they don’t like about one party once the other party takes over. For example, the Dems looked screwed in 1980 and 2004 but stormed back with big gains in 1982 and 2006, respectively. The GOP looked screwed in 1964, 1976, and 1992 but stormed back with big gains in 1968, 1980 and 1994, respectively.
The key does not appear to be how much a party is disliked when it leaves the stage: rather, the central factor is the extent to which the new governing party takes control and pushes its agenda. The more the new power advances its agenda (and, as Brooks states, the liberals in the Democratic Party are likely to prevail over the moderates), the more quickly and decisively the voters negatively react. This goes hand in hand with the old adage that voters don’t vote for something, they vote against something, and that elections are generally a referendum on the existing government. This may not be what you would like to see happen, but it is what does happen.
Apologies if already posted (”Find” function always crahses my PC!)
Could we be looking at a snap election?!
http://londonersdiary.standard.co.uk/2008/10/will-brown-try.html
240. “Would he? Or do you think that it took one winter at the end of the 70’s for the penny to drop that we were the sick man of Europe, derided by all?”
I don’t think I’m saying anything that hasn’t been said many times before when I suggest that if - as had been widely expected - Callaghan had gone to the polls when the Lib-Lab pact expired, Labour would have stood a reasonable chance of holding on.
As for the ‘eighteen years’ part, I also have to remind you that if a few votes had gone the other way and Healey had defeated Foot in 1980 (thus averting the SDP split), or if Argentina hadn’t invaded the Falklands in 1982, it’s quite conceivable that Thatcher would have been a one-term Prime Minister.
#130 DOW & FTSE crashing again - The US dont like SuperGordons ‘plan’
Or maybe they do as it’s now up 130. - Election On!!!
Uh Oh! - DOW about to go negative. Snap Election? Dont be silly! - its just those nasty Tories trying to paint me as a ditherer
Iain Dale has this on Three Lewisham Labour MPs Pass the Electoral Buck
243: ‘…from Brotherhood of Man…’
Hang on. At least they gave us a Eurovision Song Contest winner. When did the nation last manage that particular triumph!
250 Macmillan achieved very little, apart from winning the 1959 election.
256. Better known as “The Motherhood of Bran”…
252.Saw that earlier when someone linked to it on another site.
I posted this on last nights thread. “Waiting to see if some in the Labour party will over reach themselves by trying to talk up an earlier GE again, that would be a mistake and surely they would not be that stupid again, would they?”
Do we have GE’s when the government is on a *war footing* I ask sarcastically.
257. I heard he built quite a few houses
227 I imagine John Major may have consoled himself with such thought in the immediate days before 1st May 97. The reality is landslides are virtually impossible to reverse in one go, it would take a combination of everything you mention plus probably an economy that tanks even further (assuming it can’t just be blamed on Bush) rather than improving however slightly, plus some major White House scandals. As 237 says GOP gains are all but certain in 2010 but they’ll likely be the US equivalents of winning back Enfield Southgate, Welwyn Hatfield or Braintree. Rock solid places that should never have slipped from GOP/Tory hands anyway.
250 - You obviously have a soft spot for Tory toffs. This could be the biggest pbc defection alert ever.
journalists are rarely more ignorant when writing about financial, rather than celebrity news, which is what they excel at. it really shows in the press at the moment.
250 - “You’re on a losing wicket if you say that Thatcher wasn’t divisive. She was and she fully intended to be. That was her whole point.”
They were devisive times full stop.
You wouldn’t get a Thatcher, or a Foot, or even a Kinnock these days as a party leader, at least in this country.
252 OK, there’s no need to shout!
“Feverish speculation is sweeping Westminster that the PM could well go to the country”
Really? Anyone else aware of such “feverish speculation”?
243 . 1977 was brilliant - Silver Jubilee -country still had a sense of community between the evil bitch wrecked it - not to mention the Pistols etal -do you actually know anything apart from your tiresome loathsome prejudices …
243, whereas the only good things to come out of the eighties culturally speaking were inspired by opposition to Thatcher. Maybe she did have an achievement after all.
Oh my God, here we go again…
250. But your opinion is clearly worthless, as you make elementary errors.
Being divisive is not necessarily a bad thing in a leader. Abe Lincoln was pretty divisive: what with the Civil War and all. I understand he is regarded as one of the better presidents.
257. From wikipedia:
Nicknamed ‘Supermac’, in his premiership he advocated a mixed economy, championed the use of public investment to create expansion, and presided over an age of affluence marked by high growth and low unemployment. He restored the special relationship with the United States, decolonised much of Africa, ended National Service, strengthened the nuclear deterrent, and pioneered the Nuclear Test Ban with the Soviet Union, but his unwillingness to disclose United States nuclear secrets to France led to a French veto of the United Kingdom’s entry into the European Economic Community.
I think that’s a pretty good record.
250.No, I think we reached rock bottom as a nation in the Winter of discontent.
As anonymous and dangerous correctly points out, “They were devisive times full stop.”
The Irish Budget announces a 10% pay-cut for ministers, and a 1% rise in income tax…
DOW: Up . . . down . . . up . . . down . . .
Its numberwang out there.
265.Mutterings in Westminster, PfP, remember its foundations have been built on rumour and plots.
Breaking News
Brown has already lost over £2 billion of taxpayers money on HBOS according the Evening Standard. This is just the beginning.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23572544-details/Unsteady+HBOS+could+be+facing+full+State+takeover/article.do
This is all like Northern Rock all over again. At first the press hailed Brown for action on NR, then when it became clear that we had just bought a bankrupt bank that was losing £698 million every 6 months, the euphoria soon turned into condemnation.
When the UK and US expose themselves to ever greater liabilities then it is not inconcievable that they might default on their own obligations. It happened to Russia in 1998 and the balance sheet for the UK is looking ominously similar to that of Russia in 1998.
Remember total losses on the UK poperty market may be over £500 billion by the end of the crash. The takeover of the liabilities of the banks would completely bankrupt the UK as the losses are half of national GDP.
Instead of containing the losses within the banks and the foolish foreign funds that bought huge stakes in them, he is spreading the losses into the UK exchequor and to the UK taxpayer. With such huge obigations default is almost inevitable. The real money doesn’t exist.
If this so called election gets any kind of mainstream coverage, Brown has to confirm or deny it IMMEDIATELY
262 I have respect for patricians such as MacMillan who sought a better world after the mess of the great war. Sorry if that is a controversial point.
266.”243 . 1977 was brilliant - Silver Jubilee -country still had a sense of community between the evil bitch wrecked it”
Thanks for reminding just how nasty the left can be when Mrs Thatcher’s name is mentioned. And it was only a few days ago on here that some were complaining that we were all being beastly to a Labour PM.
252 Prof King has it right in that article. Calling an election right now would be madness for Labour and highly destabilising for the country in these unprecedented times. Labour’s best hope is for the plan to be seen to succeed and a recession that isn’t as bad as feared. Next spring can’t be ruled out on that basis.
261- The GOP may manage to peel back a few of those districts this year, such as Lampson’s Texas district, even in this disastrous environment. If the GOP can manage no better than to repeat that sort of nibbling at the edges in 2010, then the Dems will have accomplished something not seen since Roosevelt/The Great Depression: wielding absolute power without electoral consequence. I’ll bet against that, thank you very much.
I notice that through the 18 years of tory rule that the bottom 5m in society experienced no improvement in their living standards.(Gotta love the trickle down effect). The green line represents the number of people who earned less than 60% of the 1979 median income, it was about 5m in 1979 and about 5m in 1997. Compare and contrast with the blue line. It’s a shame that the website doesn’t allow for comparison with 1979 after 1997.
http://www.poverty.org.uk/01/index.shtml#g3
275.Agree Charlie.
Why would there be talk of an election anyway? Unless internal polling has seen Labour jump about 15 points
277. “And it was only a few days ago on here that some were complaining that we were all being beastly to a Labour PM.”
Well, I have heard the word ‘retarded’ floating around quite a bit - is what Graham H said any worse than that?
New ARG national poll :
McCain 45% .. Obama 50%
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/
276. Not controversial, just wrong.
275. Quite right. If this election rumour really is being spread by Labour (and not, as I suspect, by Tory mischief makers at the Standard) then they need to shut it down straight away. What the F are they thinking? Another half-arsed election that never happened would be catastrophic for Brown.
what is the loss on Northern roack and B&B if taken at todays marker values or expectastions of credit losses coming through the system under the new FSA stress tests
My life is complete, SeanT just said I was ‘quite right’
If Attlee was so fricking good why did he not comfortably stay in power post-1950?
Saying Attlee is the best PM is a ridiculous statement based on the “the NHS is greatest thing ever ever ever ever” view of UK politics with absolutely nothing else taken into account
280 We all know Maggie was bad/good (delete whichever applies). It is quite amusing to think that anyone here could be swayed by someone else’s opinion. We’re all just contributing to global warming. She’s history that’s the main thing.
275, An election now would be completely and utterly bonkers. The only circumstances that Brown would be justified in calling a snap election now would be if the opposition were to attempt to block some key legislation. Then Brown could be justified in seeking a mandate from the people.
283.”Well, I have heard the word ‘retarded’ floating around quite a bit - is what Graham H said any worse than that?”
Did you miss the point I was making? Floating around quite a bit implies that it was a widely used term, was it really?
285. The difference between this one unsubstantiated rumour and 2007 non - election debacle is that Constituency Labour Parties were on war footing. My mate who was chair of his CLP was printing leaflets, batching up and organising deliveries to be ready to go right up until the Marr interview.
unless we hear about the same happeningin CLPs across the country then there will be no election this year.
I have far more respect for Macmillan + Heath than I ever will for buffoons like Michael Foot and Tony Benn who tried to bring this country back to the dark days of out and out socialism. Ugh.
288 It’s not how long it is, it’s what you do with it that counts.
The NHS made more of a difference to my life than most political policies I can think of. I guess I should rate privatisation and union law as highly.
278. The thing is, King’s advice mirrors the advice of the cautious ‘greybeards’ last autumn. As sound as that advice appeared to be at the time, I don’t see how anyone can now deny it was catastrophically wrong. Labour would have had a better result in a snap general election than they can possibly hope for now whenever it is called.
And for all we know, this might be Labour’s last precious window of opportunity to limit the number of seats lost. But I don’t think Gordon Brown will have the courage to go for it now, any more than he did last autumn.
290 - I sense a few grubby hands from certain Labour dark arts masters in this
Build up a narrative that Brown is doing well (which he’s getting kudos for but not really improving his popularity). Leak an election warning, then immediately deny it. Hence re-affirming the narrative that Brown is decisive after all.
293 - Heath sullied his own legacy with his embarassing attitude to his successor that lasted for 20 years of him getting fatter and fatter and more miserable looking.
Very sad as I met him towards the end of his life and he was receiving none of the respect a former PM should be awarded. And he brought it on himself
291. “Did you miss the point I was making? Floating around quite a bit implies that it was a widely used term, was it really?”
Yes, my impression is that kind of language has been used quite frequently - not by you, I hasten to add.
296 That’s a bit of a stretch.
295. I’ve said for a while now that the next few weeks is as good as it is going to get for us.
I still think that Brown should be looking at Spring 09 VERY seriously.
299 - I wouldn’t put anything past anyone when it comes to this sort of stuff
289. There aren’t opinions when it comes to Thatcher. It’s like having an opinion on whether 2 + 2 = 4. She was the greatest peacetime prime minister of the 20th century: end of argument.
She saved the nation from socialist decline, destroyed the overweening power of the unions, unleashed the vigour of the British economy, defeated a fascist junta in Argentina, restored the nation’s self esteem and, during a quick lunchbreak, helped to win the entire Cold War against communism with Ronald Reagan.
These are indisputable facts, not matters for adolescent debate. She was THE greatest premier of the last hundred years. That’s why even Labour leaders pay her obeisance. Claiming she was not the greatest prime minister is silly and pointless and, frankly, rather embarrassing.
Move on.
297. …Except he was right about his successor
I have just seen a copy of the underlying data arising from the YouGov marginals poll for a key marginal in the East Midlands, whose candidate I am helping.
It is devastatingly bad for Labour - not just the top line voting intention figures.
Whilst I accept that it is two months old, these intrinsic factors will not change and Labour are extremely foolish - as are spread betting punters (who are often wrong) - to base their calculations on two week’s media coverage.
In short, I am very relaxed about long term trends favouring a Conservative General Election win.
294 - The NHS is something I think the vast majority of s support (I certainly think the lack of a suitable syetem of healthcare for the poor in the US is something the world’s richest country should be deeply ashamed of) but that does not make Attlee a great PM.
He’s overrated because of the NHS. Not a bad thing to be overrated for but it is still true.
302 She is too old for you SeanT.
304. The entire political climate has changed since two months ago.
If you are going to use those figures, I’ll use those from a year ago and confidently predict a Labour majority of 100.
Ridiculous post.
282 “Why would there be talk of an election anyway? Unless internal polling has seen Labour jump about 15 points”
… or if the economic forecasts were so bad that it was thought that the longer they leave it, the bigger the Conservative landslide will be.
I actually think it is plausible, and note that they’re rapidly ditching unpopular policies. This bounce is as good as they’ll get. If they leave it until next year or 2010, the fact that Brown hasn’t saved the world’s economy will be evident to everyone. For a snap election they’d have a plausible line: “Times have changed. We think it right to go to the country now so we have the mandate to take the difficult decisions … blah.. blah.”
It would stuff the Lisbon Treaty [remember that?], however.
303 - No he wasn’t. She WAS the best PM since the war.
305. From the point of view of the right, shouldn’t Attlee also be rated for the founding of NATO and the commissioning of Britain’s nuclear weapons programme? That sounds like a positively Thatcherite foreign and defence policy to me!
307, but haven’t many here predicted Brown would get a (temporary) boost from the financial crisis? Nothing unexpected has happened.
What would be surprising would be if the economy didn’t slip into recession. That really would change the game.
308. Whatever happened to the Lisbon treaty? Did it go the same way as David Davis’ political career?
It’s odd to think back to all of the things that we thought were such a massive deal at the time but will have next to no effect on the general election.
279? Like it or not most Americans see the incumbent Party as the one in the White House therefore your theory will likely only be tested in 2010. You maybe right about a handful of Southern seats but the fact that they’re having to fly in a sitting VP and throw everything at winning something like Sugarland says it all. It’ll likely be cold comfort as the GOP wipeout in the North East in 2006 rolls across towards the Mountain West in 2008. I think there’s speculation even GOP House Minority leader could find himself under threat.
311. He is going to get a boost. Next poll will see Labour about 6-7 points behind IMO.
307 - “The entire political climate has changed since two months ago.”
Has it?
The economic situation has changed beyond all recognition, but as pointed out before, when the economy tanks the incumbent suffers.
Brown has had about 2 weeks decent publicity. He’s starting to slightly lose that already. He needs six more weeks of the last two weeks, which ain’t going to happen.
308 - looking at it that way, it makes a bit more sense, although it could also make things even worse for them if “events” take a different, non-Govt friendly turn
Another wave of will-he-won’t-he General Election speculation coming up. I’m getting all excited!
Actually, Labour well may be making the exact same mistake as last year if this election thinking is coming from them!
Labour are seriously stupid if they think that a period when political hostilities are withdrawn is a show of popularity for them.
Indeed this should be the firing pistol for the tories to start politic hostilities again!
315.
Two months ago the Labour party was in turmoil, and everyone including myself wanted to see the back of Brown.
We now have an essentially united party, willing to let Brown have another chance at getting things right, and sorting out the economy. I agreed with far more of his Conference speech than I thought I would.
Two months ago, the Tories had the initiative. Now, they look weak, and their poll leads look very soft.
314, yes…. but so what? If he maintains that (or improves it) that’s something. But a temporary boost would be exactly in line with my post. We still have a recession coming, Labour is still loathed, Brown is still uncharismatic.
265 …… but just in case, I’ve taken the last £2 worth on Betfair at 50-1.
Ladbrokes odds, also shown as being 50-1 on Oddschecker and Bestbetting have mysteriously disappeared. The best odds elsewhere on a 2008 GE are approx 20-1 (from PP IIRC).
317. Martin, maybe that is the thinking behind it?
Imagine how Cameron would look during an election campaign, constantly sniping at Brown whilst Gord is off around the world trying to sort out the economic crisis.
Brown would be able to confidently speak to the nation about the crisis. Cameron would literally have nothing to campaign on.
312 “Whatever happened to the Lisbon treaty? … It’s odd to think back to all of the things that we thought were such a massive deal at the time but will have next to no effect on the general election.”
It will certainly reappear as a key issue if an election is held anytime soon. Remember there is a Conservative promise to hold a referendum if it hasn’t already come into force. Dynamite, I would say.
318. Can I just make it clear that I was predicting that there was a chance that Brown’s conference speech might be quite good for a long time before. I was obviously rubbished by MTF and others but I turned out right in the end.
302.Seant, Dizzy thinks has just the thing for your Christmas stocking.
Maggie T Nutcracker
302- “helped to win the entire Cold War against communism with Ronald Reagan.”
I agree with everything else, but what the hell did Thatcher do to win the Cold War? (You could also argue that Reagan didnt do much either altough I can at least accept that as a posibility).
321. Yeah but isn’t it dead? Haven’t the Irish killed it?
318. Now, they look weak, and their poll leads look very soft.
Well the Tories seem to be staying the right side of 40!
Come on Labour call an election then!
313- I’ll gladly take a bet from you on Boehner being ousted from his seat: it won’t happen. I’m not sure what you’re arguing with me about, though, since I am also saying that the test of my theory will indeed come in 2010, not this year, except to the extent that the GOP should manage to peel back a few House seats in this year’s elections. I never argued that the GOP won’t have a substantial net loss of House and Senate seats this year. My argument is that they’ll reclaim a lot of them in 2010. Are we on the same page?
318, hahaha. You think we should be spending 2.5m on theatre tickets and 300m on laptops to give away to people?
You think cancer patients deserve free prescriptions but other longterm patients don’t?
You think Labour introduced suffrage reforms decades before it existed?
Brown’s speech had a good one liner, the policy was tosh and many facts were simply blatant lies.
Labour still have Brown because they’re too nice/cowardly/incompetent to knife him. You’re actually willing him to succeed so it saves you the horror of axing him yourselves. He won’t. He’s electoral poison and an unpleasant character.
Irish betting tax doubled to 2%…
312. No, the Lisbon Treaty is still very much out there.
The EU is right now trying to think of ways of forcing it swiftly down Irish throats: they are well aware that they are working to a deadline: i.e. the next British election, which will probably see a Tory government, an EU referendum, and an irreversible No.
Elmar Brok, the Federalist German MEP, said this outright last week - they desperately need to get the Treaty passed before the British elections, as an incoming Tory government will mean an end to further European integration “for the next ten years”.
The EU has just 16 months max to subvert Irish - and European - democracy. Then it’s curtains.
Charlie - listen carefully please!
There is no polling evidence as yet that the fundamental psephological data is now favouring Brown.
You are confusing your own narrow self centred concerns as to the governance of the Labour Party with the concerns of the electorate -you are not alone as this is the view of most backbench Labour MPs (pace “our Falklands moment” (sic) - which are a completely different matter.
Yes the political climate has changed since 2 months ago. Our economic position has got a whole lot worse! And a whole lot worse than many other countries! I don’t see Australian banks going bust, for example.
324 “what the hell did Thatcher do to win the Cold War?”
Everyone knows the answer to that. She gave those Ruskies a good talking-to. As a result, the iron curtain crumbled.
‘You think cancer patients deserve free prescriptions but other longterm patients don’t?’
This annoys me, completely misquoting him.
It was all terminal illnesses.
322
What is about the speech that was so wonderful/ There wre no new policies. All it did was shore up the core vote.
320. Well that shows how far Brown and Labour is out of touch - Mad!
Please try that Brown, how can Brown expect a non-political election. Stupid!
320 Mike - please would you clear my moderated post re a possible 2008 GE? This could just conceivably become a hot topic, especially as it is referred to in tonight’s Evening Standard.
320 The converse risk is that the Public may think things are even worse than Brown has admitted if he’s going now. His whole recent bounce has been to portay himself as a steady hand. Avoiding the impression of panic by rushing to the Polls woulds be very hard. In any case if he felt unable to go with 5-10 point leads in 2007 I find it hard to believe he’d suddenly leap now.
331. Please don’t patronise me. Posts like this is why so many people don’t find your contributions helpful at all, despite you being an MP.
Nick has so much more class than you it’s unreal. I don’t have ‘narrow self-centred concerns’ when it comes to politics, I want to see fairness.
333- Regardless of what Thatcher did or didn’t do to win the Cold War, at least she unreservedly supported the right side of the fight.
Danny Alexander hits the spot with Which other toxic assets will they dump?.
“In the space of 24 hours we have seen the end of 42-day detention, the scrapping of plans for secret inquests and now the abolition of Key Stage Three tests. Just as banks are desperate to offload their toxic loans, the Government is swiftly ditching its toxic policies. As there are still several days of the week left there should be plenty of time for ministers to add ID Cards, Council Tax and Britain’s continued presence in Iraq to the list.”
330. Yes but the EU will not get the Irish to ratify it before 2010 and they have no way of putting it in place without the irish ratifying it short of throwing the irish out*. So it’s dead, there’s nothing the EU can do.
*which might create enough of a public outcry to lead to full scale reform of the EU
338
It might be to dump the poison in someone elses lap. If his eyesight is really that bad, Gordo might just want to go feeling that he has rectified some of his highly tarnished reputation? Its just possible, however unlikely???
334, “And because we know that almost every British family has been touched by cancer, Alan Johnson and I know we must do more to relieve the financial worry that so often goes alongside the heartache. And so I can announce today for those in our nation battling cancer from next year you will not pay prescription charges.”
However, I did see that this followed:
“As over the next few years the NHS generates cash savings in its drugs budget we will plough savings back into abolishing charges for all patients with long-term conditions.”
(From http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/sep/23/gordonbrown.labour1).
Charlie, why don’t you argue the point I put to you, about polling data, rather than being rude and whining about how much nicer Nick Palmer is?
Events have moved so fast in the last few weeks, most of us haven’t had time to pause for breath. How would a general election in this atmosphere be remotely in the national interest? The Labour leadership must quash this foolish rumour asap.
335. What’s wrong with that? When Labour are losing seats like C&N and Glasgow East, they need the core vote.
318/320 - you’re making some rather risky assumptions:
1: the entire election campaign will be run on how well Brown did with the banks. Nothing else
2: Labour is suddenly all united and the internal warfare from a couple of weeks ago is all gone and everyone is happy.
3: Nobody will get affected by the cold weather (both meteologically and metaphorically over the recession)
4: Cameron will have absolutely nothing to say on anything, will go AWOL during the entire campaign and that the Tories will release a blank bit of paper as a manifesto.
5: The public will appreciate an un-necessary election.
I feel deja vu all over again.
345. You haven’t told us the data you’ve seen.
338. But but but… who would have thought he would bring back Mandelson? That was a total googly.
You know, he might just do it. Call an election. I can see the logic. Make it a khaki election, part of the war on the credit crunch. The Tories look nervous again. Labour have their tails up.
I can’t see things actually getting that much better for Labour in 9 or 12 months… But right now anything could happen - public mood is so volatile.
Roll the dice? Yes, it makes a mad kind of sense. But if they’re gonna do it they need to DO IT. Another halfcocked non-election would be brutally self-destructive.
285: ‘…as I suspect, by Tory mischief makers at the Standard…’
Actually, I detect the hand of that clever sausage George Osborne in this General Election speculation. What better way to distract from Brown’s economic grand standing than by stoking up another rumour about the very thing that put people off Labour in the first place? Next we’ll be hearing that Gordon’s planning to remove tax benefits for people on low incomes.
310 I think that’s quite fair. Attlee must be credited for his clear-sighted realisation of the dangers posed to Europe by the Soviet Union, and his readiness to clear out the fellow-travellers from the Labour Party. So, with that, and the NHS, he is certainly entitled to be regarded as one of our country’s most effective PM’s. And in those respects, his legacy was a good one.
Set against that is the socialisation of the economy that led to relative economic decline.
I don’t think Cameron would want to win right now.
Arb opportunity, again!
Glenrothes: “Best price percentage: 99.5%, bookies only: 104.2%”
327 I too don’t think the GOP man is really under threat but the mere fact that it has been floated without provoking roaring laughter immediately is highly indicative of the current state of play. On 2010 I think so but instinct says GOP gains will likely be marginal as the surviving GOP members of Congress are likely to be just as hard core as any leftish Democrat as by necessity the GOP is driven back on it’s absolute heartlands. This could hurt them in trying to win back moderate voters in swing States if the all the talking heads for the GOP for the next few years are hardliners. The GOP could run the risk of being little more than the party of Dixie for a few years.
The question is what polling data have YOU seen that makes you so confident about the Brown bounce?
You are making the assertion, based on the fact that everyone in the Labour Party is feeling warm and cuddly about each other again -I have merely rebutted your assertion, made without any demonstrable evidence.
To which poll do you refer?
355 +not really+
318 - ‘willing to let Brown have another chance at getting things right, and sorting out the economy’
The Labour Party may wish to do so, but do the electorate?
Brown’s had eleven years already - and look at the mess.
340. “Regardless of what Thatcher did or didn’t do to win the Cold War, at least she unreservedly supported the right side of the fight.”
Yes, but so did every other British Prime Minister during the Cold War. I think even the intelligence services would now concede that Harold Wilson was not a KGB agent!
In the 16 seasons covered by Margaret Thatcher’s leadership of the Conservative Party (1975/6 - 1990/1), Liverpool won the championship 10 times and were runners-up 5 times, finishing out of the top two only once (in 1980/1).
Since she left office in 1990, they’ve never won the title.
Come back Maggie, all is forgiven.
353. charlie I impressed with your posting!
May I make a slight suggestion about your posting name!
charlie the troll!
That’s a compliment!
356. Wonderful, so now you’ve turned the argument THAT YOU STARTED around to me?
I’m referring to the fairly simple fact that Labour WERE 20+ points behind in the polls, and are now between 10-12 behind.
Simple enough for you?
358. I’m not in the Labour party, I am the electorate.
339/345- I’m glad to see another MP posting here and hope his contributions prove to be as valuable and interesting as those of Dr. Palmer. Although there is clearly an ideological gulf separating me from the good MP from Broxtowe, I find his contributions to be one of the best elements of the PB experience. The more MP’s, the merrier, I’d say. I hope Mr. Jackson realizes that savage and perhaps unfair attacks are par for the course on PB and should not be taken too seriously (I’m not speaking specifically of the present exchange upthread), but there is also much to be gained and learned here.
327- I know you have said you think Obama will win, but what states do you think he’ll get? I’m starting to think that the election will narrow over the next 3 weeks and Obama may only just scrape through, and only win 3 Bush States (NM,CO and IA). Or do you think the ‘landslide’ scenarios where Obama wins the entire North Eastern United States (Plus a bit more) is more realistic?
363. I suppose you were a member of the Tory party until Cameron came along and quit in disgust!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
364. Stewart has been posting here for ages.
Afternoon all, just caught up with the postings.
Re a General Election, bring it on! Labour is bankrupt so where will it get £20m? Probably from its friends in Goldman Sachs etc
Let’s hope Lord Fop dos start talking up an election because once called, Brown cannot change his mind. Cameron is going to win, no matter when it happens.
Today the media has all been about the economy nosediving with little about Saint Gordon’s package to save the world.
Re Scotland, dismiss the Tories at your peril. The Scots Tories have come a long way since the dreadful days of 1997. We have more councillors on the ground and especially in key marginal seats than at any time in 20 years. We have 17 MSPs keeping up the party’s profile and some of them are constantly on SCottish TV, like Annabel Goldie. Most importantly we have a growing and younger group of activists than for many years and in all the key marginals the campaigns started several months ago. Everything clearly shows that Labour has more MPs than it can hold on to as do the LibDems and it is simply a case of whether it isthe Tories or the SNP who chalk them off.
What would be the impact if Cameron asks at PMQs “Will the Prime Minister confirm that there will be no election called this year?”?
355- fivethirtyeight.com says there is a 30% chance of the Dems getting 60 seats! Of course with Lieberman it isnt quite as strightforward…
359- I knew that would touch a soft spot! I cannot argue with you there as that is not a particular area of expertise for me. But I can tell you that, in spite of my young age at the time, it was apparent to me during the 1980’s that Americans felt a true affinity with Lady Thatcher as our best and truest ally at the end of the Cold War and that she helped inspire a lot of good will on the part of Americans toward the British.
The moves we’ve seen on the spread markets over the last few days show just how much the media narritive clouds punters’ judgement. Fundamentally I see little evidence to show that the Tories won’t win a substantial majority at the next election. However, I did - like Mike - close some (but not all) of my Tory ‘buy’ positions for a loss. I still believe that the ones I hold (including a buy at 348) are good long-term value. I’m not going to close them all only to re-open them at 330 or something. If I’m wrong, and it’s a hung parliament, then I’ll lose heavily. But I really don’t think I am and am prepared to tought it out…
368. Serious question Easterross, what Scottish seats are the Tories likely to take in an upcoming election?
Dumfries and Galloway is a cert I imagine?
304 “I am very relaxed about long term trends favouring a Conservative General Election win.”
Stewart Jackson MP. The warrior _for_ complacency.
363 - ‘We now have an essentially united party, willing to let Brown have another chance at getting things right, and sorting out the economy’
Yet, this statement suggests otherwise - it’s the use of the word ‘We’. It seems to imply you’re in the party.
356 STewart Jackson, you have been absent without leave for too long!! Welcome back and tell Dave all the Tories on here are chipper and raring for him and George to start letting rip to remind the British people how our bankng system got into the mess which precipitated the disasters of the past 3 weeks.
315. With inflation up to 5.2% today and expected to rise even higher when oil resumes it’s rise after the winter, the news is as bleak as it can get.
At $80 a barrel oil remains at 3 times it’s long term average over the 1996 to 2006 period, and looks like the bottom of the winter cycle. The fundamentals are as bleak as can get.
Despite a global recession, global car sales are expected to continue increasing at 2-3% per annum. Only in the US, Europe and Japan are they expected to fall. This means the global demand for oil is unlikely to fall much in the long-term, while it is almost certain that supply will fall. Costs must go up, profits and living standards down. It’s a calculus no amount of spin can hide us from.
The danger in the Brown spin is we begin to believe it and make serious mistakes that make the problems much worse. It’s no wonder that the revived Campbell-Mandelson spin machine coincides with ‘humiliating bank nationalisations’ as a ‘triumph’, ‘economic collapse’ as a ‘economic strength’. Its straight out George Orwell’s ‘1984′. It couldn’t get any more surreal.
OT- Is it true that Sinn Fein/IRA have lost vast sums of money because of the current financial crisis? If so then…BWAAAHHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAA! (Repeat for about an hour)
Nothing as yet from the all-seeing and all-knowing Iain Dale as regards there being an imminent GE.
370 Nice one!
351. I agree - after all, I said it in the first place - this feels like clever Tory black ops.
However, the fact remains Brown is in an unpredictable state of mind (Mandelson?) so it is possible he really is thinking of an election.
Furthermore, I think he possibly should do it. Call it. Labour’s position is gonna peak with the credit crisis in the next few weeks, from then on we must surely return to status quo ante, recession and Labour infighting and a big Tory lead. Now is the moment.
342. Simply wrong. There is enormous pressure on Ireland to call and win a referendum in 2009. The present EU plan is to firstly to smear the No campaign - cf the investgations of Ganley’s money - so they will be less effective next time.
Then they will detach elements from the Treaty and force some of them through the Dail, only then will they put the more innocuous stuff to the people - with meaningless but grand-sounding attachments saying “Ireland’s neutrality will be respected”.
Along with this there will be not-so-subtle threats to reduce Ireland to semi-detached EU status if the people dare say No.
That’s the plan at the moment. Whether it will work is moot. Who wants to call a referendum in the middle of a recession? Not Cowan, that’s for sure. But who wants to be the only EU member holding up the rest? Not Cowan.
The Czech decision will be crucial, as will British developments. If Ireland look totally isolated by early 2009, with no prospect of a Tory government in London to save things, I think Cowan will crumble and call a re-vote. But then he will have to win it.
369. That would be a truly brilliant question to ask, if there is further speculation tonight.
‘the all-seeing and all-knowing Iain Dale’
367- His presence must predate mine substantially since I have not seen rollicking exchanges with him here, while Nick is a regular presence. Regardless, I hope he visits more often then. Sometimes this place takes on the unappetizing character of an echo chamber and I find the interjections from Westminster to be refreshing, even if not always agreeable in content.
367. Stewart has been posting here for ages.
I thought you only started posting here recently charlie - you said you were a student on summer holidays.
Charlie don’t take this personally but i smell Bullshit with your coverstory and online idenity!
377- I’m sure in 10 years time there will be enough cheapish 30mph Battery powered cars. Wont do much good for Top Gears raitings mind you.
I understand - but hardly a basis for your cockiness is it?
A 12% deficit still gives - on the current poll of polls - a Conservative majority of 134 seats.
I understand that the Mandelson/Campbell/Brown relaunch Labour Party doesn’t do humility but recognition of your predicament is a precursor to having a strategy come the General Election.
371. That may be but I doubt most American’s could name a single British post war prime minister except for Maggie Thatcher and Tony Blair. Even then I wouldn’t expect very high name recognition.
383- He doesnt post very often, so it isnt suprising you havent seen him before.
390-
383=385!
371. I would accept that in the battle between liberal democracy and authoritarian dictatorships, there is no doubt what the right side of the fight was during the Cold War, but it doesn’t necessarily follow that siding with the US was always synonymous with that. Thatcher was an enthusiastic cheerleader of the brutal US-backed dictatorship in Chile, for instance.
389- I won’t argue with that. In fact, I would hazard a guess that a bare majority of Americans couldn’t name even one British post-war prime minister (except perhaps Churchill)! Churchill would probably get the most mentions, then Blair, then Thatcher, then Major or Brown. Just my guess, though.
Latest Gallup tracker :
Registered Voters
McCain 42% .. Obama 51%
Likely Voters
McCain 45% .. Obama 51%
Likely Voters Plus
McCain 43% .. Obama 53%
http://www.gallup.com/Home.aspx
383 - Look up the previous MP for Peterborough and you will see we all have much to thank Mr Jackson for… Warning, don’t look her up with a full stomach or if you feel queasy…
385 sorry
386. If you say so Martin! I don’t know exactly how long I’ve been posting here, but I think it was roughly when the American primaries started, and I’m pretty sure Stewart has posted a few times since then.
390- Of course, no country is ever always on the “right side,” even if one can manage to somehow specify what exactly the right side is in all cases. Not America, not the Russians, not even the British. My point was limited to the Cold War.
377. absolutely spot on. Weakness = strength. Economy and financial system collapsing = triumph for Brown.
Barmy .
395. Would that be Helen Brinton? Doesn’t she have an interesting piece of footage on u-tube?
368. “The Scots Tories have come a long way since the dreadful days of 1997…”
You forgot to add, “with the help of Proportional Representation…”
But Westminster elections are still conducted under FPTP, the last time I looked. And under such a system, the Tories are now an irrelevance in Scotland. The LibDems have incumbency, Labour have their fiefdoms, the SNP have a huge surge, and the poor old Tories have… zilch to give them hope at the next election…
As the Liberals found out in the 1920s, once you fall to the status of also-rans under FPTP, you stay there, in practice, forever…
Forecast: one or two seats max for the Tories in Scotland, for the forseeable future…
386 Charlie should be relieved anyway, He won’t have to take his SATS
398. Did you know that Nick Palmer used to be a commie!
I always find it strange that he went to MIT instead of Moscow but hey - that’s NP! An interesting person and i look forward to his frank and fulsome comments on PB on a special thread after the next election on his thoughts!
399: ‘Weakness = strength’
And the good old Beeb spinning a good news low inflation story as inflation reaches a 16-year high. Great stuff!
393- I found a photo… most unfortunate.
373 Charlie:
Dumfries and Galloway (Lab)
Roxburgh etc (LibDem)
East Renfewshire (the Rt. Hon. Parkhead Smurf)
Edinburgh South (Lab)
then depending on anti-Lab or LibDem split
Stirling (Lab)
Argyll (LibDem) both a toss up with the SNP
others can come into play
400 - I don’t want to see any footage of the delightful Ms Brinton
406. Thanks
401.”But Westminster elections are still conducted under FPTP, the last time I looked. And under such a system, the Tories are now an irrelevance in Scotland.”
Really Rod? Bit of a gamble to dismiss a whole group of the adult voting population of Scotland by sweeping their votes under the carpet in a four party system, whether its FPTP in Westminster, or proportional representation in Holyrood.
74 Charlie. Well done re Glenrothes. Now how about you acknowledging my 2 earlier posts “Glenrothes could well turn out to be the turning point for Labour” ? Mike didn’t acknowledge this either, but pretty pathetic to keep mentioning it.He has quite enough on his plate, without trawling through hundreds of minor contributions to his site.
I got the hell out of my positions on Sunday and was proved totally right. I’m now buying Labour at 239 seats and selling the Tories at 340 seats.
by Mike Smithson October 14th, 2008 at 3:48 pm
Mike are you sure you are not part of the reason for the move in these markets.
I suspect they move more as a guess about what other players are about to do than the news narrative or the polls as such. For evidence look at the movements over the last year. The Tory position was stubborn to put it mildly despite massive poll leads.
But you speak as the Betting Thunderer on here and, Hey, Prescott!
Boulton and co picking up on the election murmurs
http://blogs.news.sky.com/boultonandco/Post:08faeab2-4e11-4440-a948-fdf1df886bd1
409. WTF? I’m not dismissing anybody, just reminding the Tories of the realities of their preferred system (FPTP)….
The Tories are now in the same situation in Scotland that the Liberals were in England in the 1950s. Get used to it!
410. I was clearly joking.
re 185 sadly whipped up by the likes of Labour and the Sun most people would go with Tebbit. But why stop at (suspected) terrorists? The police reckon they know who the bad guys are. Why not go knocking on a few doors in the middle of the night and round up the usual suspects. And here’s another bight idea, we could accidentally drive them to a forest and mow them down Katyn style.
412 MTF - Yes, but in relation to early 2009. That must, I think, be a more likely option.
Sky: “Terror Plots” being investigated…
Election Fever Mounts…
404 ‘399: ‘Weakness = strength’
‘And the good old Beeb spinning a good news low inflation story as inflation reaches a 16-year high. Great stuff!’
The beeb story is almost certinaly fed to it by Campbell-Mandelson.
The BBC is just making a fool of itself. How can anyone say something so stupid! ‘High inflation = low inflation’
Even the Labourites must be laughing. The BBC are like puppets on a string. They have no credibility whatsoever. I actually feel sorry for the BBC staff, as they must be under great pressure to toe the Labour Party line.
Snap election rumour: no. Absolutely not. The Broxtowe cats offer you a £100 bet if you disagree.
Mike’s ‘media narrative’ is still running. The Evening Standard being nice to Labour today for the first time for a year or so - inflation story emphasizing impending fall, big picture of Cabinet meeting, their ’scorecard’ (which the anti-government guy *always* wins) with Brown (’adulated by journalists’, having to deny he’s a hero) winning 1-0 over Cameron (’caused gasps on Radio 2 when he claimed he was thinking of bank recapitalisation when he referred to big initiatives in his conference speech’) (both quotes from memory). Even the Express is halfway civil.
Incidentally, I enquired about buying the YouGov poll details for Broxtowe, but the Ashcroft-powered Tories put in a bulk bid for exclusive rights to the entire poll, which cost them something like £80,000 (that’s what I was quoted) and is why Stewart has the details. It’s from the same period that the Tories were ahead by 20-25% nationally, so you can understand a certain chuffedness on his part as he eyes the details.
413.401.”But Westminster elections are still conducted under FPTP, the last time I looked. And under such a system, the Tories are now an irrelevance in Scotland.”
416. Yes I noticed that as well (2009)! Ironically an early election may assist an economic recovery particularly if there is a change of govenment. It may help boost optimism an essential part of human economic nature!
Brown is a great undertaker! But he is not going to fashion the good times again and people know it!
401 You’re mighty confident. Do you have local knowledge as well.
420. And?
I’ve been saying for weeks Spring 09 is Gord’s best chance.
419 - It’s not Broxtowe Nick!
419. Ashcroft-powered Tories
Actually Nick - I think that phrase does you no good at all.
Why do i think this: Well the people on here know the score with regard to Tory donations - Ashcroft has been deminishing as a percentage of the total for quite a few years. Your electorate will say Lord who?
Just think you are beating dead horse!
425. ‘the entire poll’
403: yes, S&S knows all my secrets, past and present, and seems bemused but unfazed - as small-d democrats, we respect our right to different opinions. I wouldn’t have cared for Moscow - was never keen on the dictatorial model, and suspect they would have frowned on the sort of comrade who chatted on blogs, if they’d existed then, without consulting the commissars. MIT was seriously wonderful, though I ran out of money and had to leave before I’d done much more than acquire a taste for board games (the MIT Wargames Society was the cradle of the hobby).
No comments here on the scrapping of exams at 14 yet - teachers will be pleased as they’ve been nagging us about over-testing for years. I wonder how the wider public will react?
re 417 I should hope that “terror plots” were always being investigated. Intelligence is the way to defeat terrorism, not locking up innocent people for 42 days.
Ah, an official denial of election fever from NIck Palmer. So it is on then. We only need Roger to gainsay it, too, and we can be 120% certain.
428 rest assured Nick, They wont be thanking Ed Balls-up or the Govt…..
Tebbit or Davis? Davis, d’oh!
re 428 was never keen on the dictatorial model
Well doesn’t that just take the biscuit, when you consider that you want us to have to carry a piece of plastic and register our movements whenever we change house, visit the doctors, get a mobile phone, consult the council etc.
Interesting how “terror plots being investigated” hits the airwaves after 42 days has been politically castrated. Are not terror threats being investigated on a daily basis?
428. The education system is a total mess largely due to kids being taught to pass exams rather than really being educated.
If they’re getting rid of 14 testing, that is at least a start.
the standarrd is only building Brown up to knock him down again Nick. Don’t be so naive. They are behaving like most of the press , doom one day, joy the next. it all sells well. Don’t believe for one moment Brown saves the day has any traction with the general public - everyone can see through this - it’s puff.
If there is one thing I will never criticise the Government for, it is the edcuational system. From 2000-2007, I received a full, free secondary education, with teachers who were passionate about their subjects, and have made me want to teach in the future myself.
I never felt I was simply being prepared for exams, I felt that I was learning genuinely useful things.
As a hostage to fortune the Labour party website is magnificent, all about how ‘Orrible Dave will slash and burn and leave all our kiddies without clothes and schools and they will have to walk to school in bare feet.
And a look at that famous Brown conference speech and all his promises involving money. Billions, not millions, just trip off his tongue.
And he then promises to save the whales or is it the rain forests? Can’t remember which although it removes all developing world debt at the same time I am sure. And he buys banks shares like there is no tomorrow at apparently no cost to the taxpayer whatever.
La-la land.
So when the bill has to be paid and the hangover from the hubris hits home and the inevitable cuts come and the jobs disappear and the government ‘unavoidable expenditure’ goes through the roof, how will he attack Dave then? That his proposals for cuts are too modest, and only Gordon ‘Rock’ Brown will slash and burn enough?
And by the way, I don’t have a problem with SATs at 14, I’d have rather they’d done away with the Primary school SATs.
New thread - Will the Bush move add to the Brown renaissance?
428. Interesting with regard to MIT! Hope it was money well spent!
Seriously though I think you did a post grad degree there IIRC! They are expensive - I know mine was and I too ran out of money and ability to pass relevant exams! Think the lattor was more important but some of the models IMO were not passable unless you had identickt views to the lecturers!
I find the states a fascinitating place and that stephen fry program is great! I was watching the BBC news and it does not look good for the GOP in North Carolina. My view is the election there is as good as lost for mcCain and whilst McCain comes across as a good potential POTUS - I think Obama is the better communicator. We will see! What effects a change of govenment will have here beyond Iraq pullout, it is difficult to say!
Sky: Complex terror plots building…
Tension Mounts!
By the way The Times has an extended list of the ‘no more boom and bust’ quotes, and it shows they have all been at it, all of them: Blair, Brown, Cooper, Darling, kelly, Alexander, Johnson. There must be some they have missed from that little list.
http://timesonline.typepad.com/comment/2008/09/boom-and-bust.html
So, Palmer was “never keen on the dictatorial model,” was he?
Sure — and “ID cards will pay for themselves,” too.
PS: there’s no such thing as non-dictatorial Communism; an intelligent person would realise that.
441. models = modules
Well Rod Crosby if we have a November election we wont have to wait long to see whether 400,000+ votes means the Scots Tories are dead! Remember last year we took a FPTP seat from you not the other way round and we are going to take it at Westminster as well.
Strange all the Labour rampers on here being so dismissive of Maggie’s legacy when Tony Blair and Gordon Brown consider she is the first PM since Winston Churchill to merit a State Funeral, especially since she is still alive and showing no sign of pegging out!
Funnily enough I have been watching the BBC news and I heard them talk about the worst inflation for 15 years and interviews with estate agents explaining because they are averaging 8 sales in 13 weeks they are making more than half their staff redundant. Oh yes and Tessa Jowell explaining why the recession which of course Gordon Brown had no part in creating has resulted in NO developers coming forward to take a major part in the London Olympics disaster which means another £700 million is being spent by the Government with the prospect of the taxpayer having to meet the entire bill.
Perfect conditions I would say for The Great Leader to lead Labour forward to a great victory- not!
re 411. Last year when the polls pointed to a 100+ Labour majority and all the talk was of an early general election the highest the Labour buy price got to was 332 seats.
We’ve seen the same with the Tory surge. Punters are risking so much money in this form of betting that whichever party is going forward there is a reluctance to bet beyond a certain point. I got stung on Labour in October 2007 and on the Tories in the past week,
O/T but perhaps of some interest to PBers (and apologies if this has already been mentioned):
The first Canadian results will come in at 3am BST (10pm Eastern time). The polls close earlier in eastern Canada, but Elections Canada operates a news blackout (enforced by threats of legal action) until the polls have closed in British Columbia.
I think CBC will be running streaming video of the results programme; if not, then CBC radio may be the best bet for results and coverage. Go to http://www.cbc.ca/news/canadavotes for full details and links.
Incidentally the Toronto stock exchange has shot upwards today - providing a good news backdrop for Stephen Harper and probably helping Tory chances a little.
Also, the National Post is live-blogging the results at:
http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/posted/archive/2008/10/14/live-blog-canadian-election-day-pre-game.aspx
428.”No comments here on the scrapping of exams at 14 yet - teachers will be pleased as they’ve been nagging us about over-testing for years. I wonder how the wider public will react?”
I posted earlier about one of your Libdem Westminster colleagues, Danny Alexander listing the dumping of toxic Labour policies.
The problem with spread betting is that you are essentially betting on a highly-leveraged derivative. A one percent shift in votes produces about a 2.6% shift in seats!
So a poll’s sampling error alone could see you about 50 seats on the wrong side of the trade…