Finally, Thompson enters the race
September 6th, 2007
-
But has he left it too late?
After months of speculation, former Tennessee senator Fred Thompson finally joined the race for the 2008 Republican nomination, with an appearance on Jay Leno’s Tonight show while his rivals were engaged in a debate in the key early primary state of New Hampshire.
This is one of the latest ever entries by a major candidate in modern times (although Bill Clinton didn’t declare until autumn 1991 when Bush senior was seen as unbeatable), and now that he has formally declared, attention will turn to whether he will be a major force in the battle for the nomination or will fall flat on his face.
In a video on his website, Thompson set out his reasons for running, mentioning threats to national security and the economy, and the need to change Washington. Meanwhile, his fellow candidates in the debate had some fun at his expense, with Mitt Romney saying: “Why the hurry? Why not take some more time off?”
Obviously a key early test for Thompson will be how he performs in his first debate with the rest of the field now that his candidacy has become a reality. With McCain seemingly out of contention, Thompson will be battling with Romney for the party’s conservative wing, leaving Giuliani as the lone liberal in the race.
Romney already has a victory in the Iowa straw poll under his belt (although none of the other top-tier candidates campaigned there) and more importantly has leads in the states that will kick off the primary season, Iowa and New Hampshire. Momentum from these two could give him a major boost ahead of “Super Duper Tuesday” on February 5 when lots of states, and a number of big ones, hold primaries.
Giuliani meanwhile has opted to instead build support in the states that vote after Iowa and New Hampshire - an approach that prompted one analyst to say: “I’m not saying that his strategy’s flawed - but it’s untried”. Giuliani does have something of the look of a weak favourite about him, and unless Thompson really takes off, for me the betting value is with Romney. The caveat of course is that now Hillary looks very likely to be the Democrat nominee, electability becomes very important for the Republicans too. As an aside, I think they are massively overpriced at 2.64 on the main presidential election market.
Finally, a few weblinks that may be of interest. The Washington Post story on Thompson is here and the latest market prices for the GOP nomination are here. I would also strongly recommend Real Clear Politics and finally, for more electoral data than you can shake a stick at, plus a forum where pb’ers can sometimes be seen, is Dave Leip’s US Election Atlas, although if you’re using this, it uses the “traditional” colour scheme with Democrats in red and Republicans in blue.
Paul Maggs “Double Carpet”
Guest Editor
Mike Smithson returns on 17th September
Paul Maggs runs The Election Game - click on the logo to email for more information.
MessageSpace Advertising
After seeing this he must have a better chance than John McCain: McCain sings Streisand Crazy guy.
“I’m not saying that his strategy’s flawed - but it’s untried”.
That’s being kind IMHO, if your conceeding Iowa AND New Hampshire from the off and you a candidate like Rudy your barmy IMHO… he on the liberal wing (a rather grand term for it considering its size!) of the GOP and he’s hardly going to sweep the primaries in states like South Carolina, rather he should be targeting New Hampshire and all the independent voters who take part in the primaries there (although it seems that many of these voters will opt to take part in the Dem primary and probably back Obama).
But as a strategy, its utterly bonkers for a candidate like Rudy if you ask me.
About time, too.
Will a formal announcement make much difference? It was hardly a secret that he was planning to run and had been shadow-campaigning for months. The markets don’t look to have moved much, if at all: Thompson is still third favourite (just) behind Romney and some way further behind Giuliani.
I still can’t help feeling that there’s an air of unreality about all this (perhaps that’s because he’s an actor). Where is the meat to his campaign? Up until now he’s had a relatively easy ride; from here on, he will have to face the other candidates more directly. In the debates, he will have to stand there and give his answers on the same platform as everyone else - and that will reduce him to ‘just another politician’.
Most election campaigns can be split into two parts: what the candidate has done and what the candidate will do (and the negative campaigning mirror images). And there there are two pretty big holes. He might just get away with sticking to a conservative-wing theme - he can say with some justice that he’s the only consistently conservative candidate in the field with a chance of winning - but his experience and policies are both areas his opponents will surely look to exploit should Thompson’s campaign gain some momentum.
O/T, but more evidence emerging that Cameron may be a Tory after all…
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6980830.stm
Comes across so much better when he’s talking sense. What’s taken him so long to realise? I’ve been perusing the Daily Mail quite regularly this week, and the shift towards DC there is quite noticeable. Even if they’re still oddly warm to Gordon.
Because I don’t get much time to watch TV, I’ve not really followed Thompson, but from first principles I’d think someone within shouting distance of a controversial leader in the polls who has now formally launched his campaign has a fair chance of taking the lead, even if only briefly. Romney’s being going all out for months and is struggling to hold second place.
Bob at 4: A voluntary scheme could be a good idea that gives well-behaved youngsters something interesting and positive to do, but simply doesn’t address the problems of crime and anti-social behaviour, which is what DC suggests would pay for the scheme. If you usually spend your time focusing on drugs or booze you’re not going to get involved in this. It’s like expanding the Scouts movement as a way of combating burglary - not a bad idea in itself, but not related to the stated objective.
Has there been a study of what typically happens to Lib Dem MP votes after their first election.
On here the adage is “they buck the trend and increase their majority in the 2nd election”. Is there a research paper showing this?
8 examples from “Wessex”.
David Rendle (Newbury), 1) 22,055by 2) 8,517, 3) 2,415 4) Lost
Sandra Gidley (Romsey), 1) 3,311by, 2) 2,370, 3) 125
David Chidgey (Eastleigh) 1) 758by, 2) 3,058, 3) Chris Huhne 568
Mark Oaten (Winchester), 1)2 2)21,556by 3) 9,634 4) 7,476
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South) 1) 4,327 2) 6,094 3) 3,362
Peter Brand (IOW) 1) 6,406, 2) lost
Sue Doughty (Guildford) 1) 538, 2) lost
Evan Harris (Oxford west+) 1) 6,285, 2) 9,185, 3) 7,683
Of these 4 went up in the 2nd election (Oaten, Chidgey, Harris and Hancock) and 4 went down (Rendle, Gidley, Brand, Doughty).
Oaten’s 2nd election was of course in unique circumstances. Gidley is the only MP of the 4 to survive a drop in her 2nd election vote. Chidgey was the only 1 of 4 by election victors to increase his vote at the 2nd electione.
How many of the present 66 Lib Dem MPs have only a first election victory? It has to be around 20 which is almost 1/3.
It is funny isn’t it. We have known for months he was going to run, but he never declared. Well now he has.
I wonder what that will do to his poll ratings.
Now that the BBC has cancelled its ‘Global Warming’ documentary, Sky (according to the Daily Mash)has announced theirs.
http://tinyurl.com/2pe4je
An interesting anamoly of US politics is that the most right-wing party,the Republicans,use red as their colour,whilst the (by American standards)more centrist Democratic Party use blue as their colour-this goes against most of the rest of the Western worlds democracies,where red is the colour of the left,and blue for the right-curious!
Grumpy
Just caught up with your N.Africa post from last nite.
My old man was there and got wounded just before Tobruk, which ended his war. He talked a lot about his time as a gunner with the 8th. He never mentioned any booing of Churchill but I do remember him telling me about a newspaper which the squaddies produced and circulated, free I think, to their comrades. I don’t know how they managed such a project but it seems they did and on a pretty regular basis.
He said it was a very good newspaper - very thoughtful and factually sound. It was also very left wing. He thought it influenced a lot of soldiers. It certainly influenced him and he voted for Atlee 1945.
He never voted Labour again however. He said he never forgave Stafford Cripps for hiking the price of a packet of fags. I suspect however that like many people, he no longer believed in Labour’s competence to govern.
There’s no way he’s left it too late. While the campaigning is much earlier than usual this year, last year’s Iowa caucus results showed that the VAST majority of voters make up their minds in the short period after Christmas (Edwards and Kerry surged into the top two from previous polls giving them under 10% combined) - which contrasts interestingly with the huge amount of money spent in the first half of this year.
And even if the dynamic is slightly different this time, Thompson has pretty much been running an undercover campaign for months and is right up with Giuliani on many recent polls. He’ll now get a bounce and then we’ll see if his interesting past causes him problems - I think the jury’s out on that one right now.
6 HF. It’s a little more complex. And although there are always exceptions broadly one might say :
1. Between 79-97 by-election winners used to lose at the subsequent GE.
2. From 97 by-election winners performed very differently.
3. GE winners would win second time round and increase majority. Subsequent majorities varied plus and minus. (But not Guilford).
The number of first election winners in 05 is around 10 (Andrea??)
……………………….
An excellent obituary in the “Independent” on Jonnie Dalkeith by Tam Dalyell :
http://news.independent.co.uk/people/obituaries/article2934310.ece
Peter the Punter @ 10 re trench newspapers — of course, the First World War’s Wipers Times is now available in book form for £20.
10
The booing actually took place in this country, during the election campaign, it was recently shown on TV.
My father was also a gunner.
6 - a good analysis. Rendle and Gidley were by-election winners, and in those cases majorities usually go down (at best) when fought at subsequent GE.
In the case of Brand, something has clearly gone very wrong in the IoW for the LDs - look how easy it was for the Tories last time round.
Sue Doughty won Guildford on the back of some local issue (an incinerator or something) that was a hot topic at the time, and it was against a rather complacent MP. It took the Tories by surprise and hurt badly. I think special measures were taken to oust her.
Chidgey’s seat had a large Labour vote to squeeze. I think Labour had finished second in the by-election. Huhne needs to continue to squeeze Labour till the pips come out. He’d better.
You haven’t mentioned the wonderful Jackie Ballard! I would put her down as a special case. Actually, just put her down.
We can’t really tell what will happen to LD majorities next time round.
In 2001, there was a big drop in turnout, so crude majorities are not so useful. I think there was a small Con to LD swing in marginals.
In 2005, the results differed widely, from Norfolk North (big increase) to Ludlow and Guildford (lost). Despite the stagnation in the Tory vote in 2005, and the increase in the LD vote, there did seem to be a small LD to Tory swing in marginals.
Next time round is very different, as there is now a significant number of LD / Lab battlegrounds, and three way fights. There could be widely differing results for MPs fighting Labour from those fighting the Tories.
All to play for. Finally, on your figures about, if I were Sandra Gidley I’d be attending job interviews. And if I were Mike Hancock I’d be worried too. Turnout in Portsmouth North has been lousy recently, and if it goes up to say 70%, it could be interesting.
I make it 20 new LD MPs last time round. 5 were in seats LD in 2001; 15 were seats gained. Again, both these subsets may behave differently next time round.
15 Hi Sam , I agree there will be a big variation from seat to seat in LibDem constituencies . I would agree that Sandra Gidley is highly vulnerable but not Mike Hancock . Portsmouth Conservatives keep shooting themselves in the foot and the Portsmouth North and South sections are barely on speaking terms let alone cooperating . Interesting byelection coming up in Portsmouth Nelson ward close 3 way marginal Labour held seat .
14 Grumpy
Yes, I have early memories of some ambivalence towards Churchill, even in my ‘working-class conservative’ family. (This of course was an ‘extended’ East End family encompassing many branches and a hundred or so members.)
His ill-judged remark about ‘We can take it’ during the Blitz went down particularly badly, prompting the response ‘It’s not you that’s taking it.’ Nevertheless I have no doubt that if you had taken count amongst my ‘family’, all hundred or so, you would have got a Conservative majority pretty much at an election, even the Attlee one.
15 When you say LD/Lab you mean seats you already hold or look to take off them. Which seats are these and apart from Watford/HH&K can’t think of other three wayers
14 I’m sorry your Dad had to go Italy GOM, but it was vital. One of the aims for the campaign was to draw German divisions away from Russia (Stalin was going mental about taking on the full weight of thw Whehrmacht) and more pertinently Normandy the next year.You can see how close run it was anyway. Just imagine if all those German divisions that were not pinned down in Italy had been available for release and tansfer to France. I wouldn’t want to bet on the result
…at *any* election.
15 SBS. Hancock is in Portsmouth South. Also I understood the local Lib Dems were performing well in his area so why is Hancock in particular trouble ??
13 John L
Thank you very much, but I don’t think I could read it. It would break my heart.
Fred Thompson’s video shows him to have exaggerated head movements when he speaks. This looks bad on television, especially in close-up, and in my view is one of the factors that brought Kinnock down.
That said, I am led to believe that the stump speech is, paradoxically, more important in the United States than here, so it may be to his advantage.
The main problem with late entry is fundraising, though one imagines right-wing billionaires will open their cheque books if he has a squeak.
19 - I was actually talking about three way marginals held (since we were on the topic of LD MPs and what happens to their majorities). Hence Falmouth - watch the boundaries, Leeds NW, Bristol W.
Sorry, got Hancock’s seat wrong. I have no reason to believe he is in particular danger, but an 8% majority could go if the turnout increases from 57%. Note his majority was 15.5% on a 51% turnout in 2001.
Jack W and SBS, thanks for the insights. The BBC site said LDs gained 16 (lost 5). Since then they “gained” 2 more newcomers at by elections. Add in a few replacements like Huhne in 2005 and that I guess brings the number to over 20 newbies of their 66. Hence it represents 1/3. Probably a much bigger % than Labour or Conservative.
I looked up Sandra Gidley and she has re-started her blog. Is there an election in the offing?
http://www.romseyredhead.blogspot.com/
18
The situation in 44/45 was a complicated one, there was a recognition and respect for Churchill as a war leader, he gave backbone to the British people in 1940 at a time the cause seemed lost, that is his great moment in history.
Churchill however greatly overestimated his military knowledge and his tactical ability. This was summed up by Wavell who said, ‘He thinks because his name is Churchill, he’s a Marlborough, well his name may be Churchill, but he’s certainly no Marlborough He thinks all tactical and strategic problems can be solved by waving a cigar at a map’
There is a good book on the subject, written by, Gordon Corrigan, ex army officer and lecturer at the Army Staff College, ‘Blood Sweat and Arrogance, the Myths of Churchill’s War’. I think he’s a little hard on Churchill, but its a good read.
Hancock was also, of course, a by election victor (1984?) who lost narrowly at the next two elections.
Any Lib Dems think that Bob Russell will struggle in Colchester next time? I think he has increased his majority in all elections since winning the seat, but could he be a surprise defeat at the next election? I’m not predicting this, just offering it for debate.
Colchester (an Essex army town) just doesn’t strike me as a typical Lib Dem seat, and Russell himself is fairly left wing. Have the Tories selected a candidate (Andrea?).
[12] Reading between the lines of Dalyell’s excellent obit of the Duke, I see what the matter with Cameron is. Our Dave wasn’t flogged by his housemaster at Eton.
28 - big student vote in Colchester.Would imagine this is bigger than the forces vote. Not typical Essex man, quite close to Suffolk. Largely urban seat - previously Colchester was two seats, both with swathes of countryside. Large Labour vote (9,000) really can be squeezed more. No, I think Bob’s safe until he retires (election after next?).
26 Yes, that sounds like my kind of read, Grumpy. I may try it.
I have read Churchill’s War memoirs, and found them absorbing. Beautifully written is the least one can say about them.
You may be interested in what happened to the old man.
His gun took a direct hit and killed all on it apart from him. He had a nasty schrapnel wound behind his shoulder, which ended a promising cricket career, but he managed to drag himself onto a truck and then an ambulance which took him 500 miles through enemy lines to Cairo. The road was held by the Germans but he assumes that because it was a Red Cross ambulance, they let it through. From Cairo he was taken by ship to Durban where he spent six months recuperating (and having the time of his life.) My mother meanwhile got a telegram telling her he was ‘missing, presumed dead’. I found it recently when clearing out her things. It added that if he were alive, it was likely she would hear before the Ministry did and it asked her to notify them. That is in fact what happened. I found another letter, from her to him, in which she tells him that one of his Army mates had just got the message to her.
Although to all intents and purposes fully recovered when he finally returned to England, he was classified as not fit for active service and was given a desk job until demobbed. The outcome of the war was no longer in doubt by then anyway.
I was born in 1948. I might easily not have been.
Think of all the tips you’d have missed.
24 Where might Labour look to gain from Lib Dem. Apart from Brent I suppose Swinson. Any others?
following on from the Wessex review what will happen in the London southwest lib Dem goldfields
My impression is they are slipping back / does the weakness in their polling reflect a swing from lib dem to Tory in the south . If it is could be some large swings in these seats . Surely Richmond is at risk / but Kingston looks safe / but like Winchester and Guildford used to be safe Tory seats . How strong is the incumbent vote for the likes of Ed Davey / Susan Kramer
28 Ian. I’d agrree with SBS @ 30. Russell has turned himself into a Mr Colchester figure. Around 6,000 and 14% majority says Lib Dem hold. If the Tory candidate, Jill Skalla, were to win here the Conservatives would be heading for a Commons majority.
Presently too big an ask IMO.
31 PtP. Nice story …. shame about the tips !!
30. I didn’t realise there was a student vote, that of course makes a difference. And if the seat is now centred more on the town it will take out some of the rural Tory voting wards.
Colchester always stands out as an odd speck of yellow in that part of the country. Not proper Essex Wide Boy territory I agree, but Essex none the less!
Morning all.
Pb Wager Alert
Tpfkar, if you’re about:
On the thread a couple of nights ago, you stated that you thought Sarah Teather would win Brent Central at the next GE.
I’d like to propose a wager, to go on the Recorded Wagers List, that Teather won’t win Brent Central - £25 at evens.
Let me know your thoughts.
Thanks
31
I was born in 46′ strange how we are carrying on our father’s arguments. Like you I was brought up with tales of the Western Desert etc. they were my bedtime stories. My father said when Tobruk fell, the heart went out of the army, they thought that they would fall back on Alexandria and it would be another Dunkirk. Fortunately Rommell did not push his advantage, if he had, well who knows, perhaps neither of us would have been born.
32 Punter. Rochdale springs to mind. Plenty of LibDem/Labour history there.
On the figures Chesterfield, although Paul Holmes appears to be digging in hard.
Manchester Withington?
To answer the main question, no Fred Thompson hasnt entered too late, hes effectively been in the minds of many as a candidate for some time so his formal entry is just that, a formality.
The problem is whether he can actually move forward. I believe its 50-50 here. Fred will either go stratospheric in the GOP nomination or he will fade surprisngly rapidly. If its a latter others represent value.
24. After boundary changes Bristol West become a LD/Lab 2 horse race. Tory wards are moved to Bristol North West to make it a better bet for them
28. Ian Jones, the Tory candidate in Colchester is Jill Skalla
30. SBS. “Student vote”..do you mean people related to the university in general (so teachers, people working there and so on)? Or just students? In terms of students in Colchester 7.28% were students on old boundaries (the new seat is very similar to the old one: 91% of the old one is in the new one and no new areas are added)
34 ‘Shame about the tips’.
Yes Jack. If only the Germans had been a bit more ruthless…
Something else to blame them for.
Btw, thanks for your best wishes regarding ‘the project’. It’s early days, but so far, so good.
Morning all
I see my comments on Churchill stirred a few people up yesterday evening. Uncritical admirers of Churchill (of whom there are many) often tend to “forget” about certain parts of the great man’s career. His time in the Asquith Government (arguably one of the most radical and reforming) is often forgotten (even by me).
Churchill was a Liberal Unionist and apparently Clementine is supposed to have voted Liberal regularly. That doesn’t alter the fact that Churchill was the supreme leader of the wartime Coalition, arguably the greatest Government this country has ever known and was a pivotal figure in saving the whole world (to be honest) from the horror of a Nazi-dominated Europe.
As an aside, those who quote May 1940 as a difficult time for any leader should consider July 1588 when the invasion fleet was at sea but we’ll argue that elsewhere..
The 1945 election campaign was an unmitigated disaster for both Churchill and the Tories. The infamous “gestapo” speech which may or may not have been written by Beaverbrook was truly appalling. The fact that Churchill did not or could not recognise it for the abhorrent slander it was speaks volumes.
Yes, Churchill was booed and heckled at Walthamstow Greyhound Stadium and at the Victory parade and even on his “tour” of the country, it was observed that beyond the first two or three rows of cheering people, many of the others were silent.
Now, you can tell me they were booing the Conservative Party but Churchill was the leader of that party and the abuse became increasingly vocal and personal. I think (and it’s hard to blame them) that the Conservative Party had absolutely no idea what was happening on the ground (and mainly in the Forces). They imagined that they could ride to victory on Churchill’s coat-tails but it didn’t work that way.
That said, the Conservatives quickly realised after the 1945 landslide that they had to change but Churchill was no part of that. That was down to younger men like Rab Butler, Ian MacLeod and Harold MacMillan and even a young Ted Heath. They were of course aided by the enormous problems faced by the incoming Labour Government which inherited a near-bankrupt country and collapsing economy.
The post-war privations including the dreadful winter of 1946-47 make today’s problems seem immaterial. After six years of austerity, it’s little wonder that the Conservatives got back to power in 1951. The fact is that pre-war living standards only returned at the end of the 1950s.
The cost of victory was high but the cost of defeat would have been far higher.
31 Seems my father was with yours and grumpy’s in the war . He drove gun transporters .
30 - I guess I meant both. Public sector workers (ie at a university) are not reknowned for loving the Tories.
But I suppose that 7% is lower than I had expected, but surely still higher than the armed forces vote.
Meanwhile …. Mark Oaten in the “Times” on the prospects of a LibDem/Con coalition :
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article2395395.ece
38 Yes Jack. But Lab only gained it in a landslide year which indicates in a close race between the big two they should hold. Possible I suppose that they held in past due to the legendary figure of Cyril Smith who makes Soames look like Mr Universe but who I hope is still around? BTW Is Matlock ok.
Chesterfield yes that maybe one. Much more recent gain. Not big majority from second election. Is there a Tory vote he can squeeze? Looks tough
39 On figures yes. But once they get their teeth into a Intellectual Seat they are very very hard to get out. I think the Tories may well plunge into lost deposit territory there as Leech has shown he can squeeze them. I fancy Leech to hold on
37 “I was brought up with tales of the Western Desert etc. they were my bedtime stories.”
You’ll have me in tears soon, Grumpy. That’s exactly what my old man did too. War stories for me and my brother. Made it sound like a bundle of laughs. In fact, when it wasn’t boring or terrifying, it probably was.
Reminds me of a line from Catch 22 in which Yossarian comments that apart from the getting killed bit, war was a pretty good thing for the soldiers involved - you got fed, lots of travel, good company, and it got you away from the pernicious influence of your parents.
45. On 2001 census, among 16-74 population, Colchester stars were:_
0.7% working in agric, hunting, forestry & fishing
7.2% working in mining, quarrying & construction
10.76% working in manufacturing
0.5% working in electricity, gas & water
17.5% working in wholesale, retail etc
4.25% working in hotel & catering
6.8% working in transport, storage & comm
6.8% working in financial intermediation
11.36% working in real estate, renting etc.
9.5% working in Public Administration/Defence;
8.05% working in education
12% working in helth/social work
43 Stodge but he didn’t hinder the bright young things did he. Don’t forget he was practically LG’s right hand man in the Liberal Govt in 1906-1914. He can certainly be seen in that light as radical forefather of the Mac Toryism. Certainly before WWI he was seen as a class traitor by many of his Peers sic
41 Andrea. “Jill Skella…”
Andrea beaten by 11 minutes to the draw by aged Jacobite !! Hooray.
42 PtP. German efficiency clearly overated !!
Pleased for you that the project is on track.
51.”Andrea beaten by 11 minutes to the draw by aged Jacobite !! Hooray”
Jack, it’s because I was checking pb.com this morning as I was busy with the dissertation
Thompson so far has no real message, and his CV is not that great. He is basically running on personality and his TV fame, but I find him surprisingly weak on TV and the stump. I cannot see how his weak Reagan impersonation can lead him to the White House.
I seem to be almost the only one left not writing off McCain. Interesting to note that the Luntz focus group made him the clear winner in last nights NH debate. As the surge is going better than most expected, this may help him too. But there are still huge obstacles, and he remains an outsider.
Although Giuliani might have conceded Iowa to Romney, he has not given up in New Hampshire, and is not that far behind in NH polls.
One interesting statistics is that the Republican frontrunner on Labour Day has not lost the nomination since the 1950’s.
47 Punter. Rochdale is really too tight to call. Big Cyril is still alive as indeed is the massive figure of MiLord Matlock !!
The Tory vote in Chesterfield is only around 8%, so not to much to squeeze. On balance with around a 3,000 cushion it appears more likely a hold.
Withington very interesting. Labour bloody nose last time hurt. Expect fireworks !!
42. PtP by the way, just as an aside I took the 2/1 with Boyles for Harris in that fight at the weekend.
On taking a look at the histories and various fight forums its an even fight. Its a question of whethet Witter can frustrate Harris and Harris mentally loses his thread. Harris has shown hes still got good form in his last 3 fights, all againist decent opposition and is a naturally big individual at the weight which is usually a good sign.
44 In which case, Mark, he may have saved my Dad’s life. He threw himself onto the back of a gun-transporter, which hauled him away from the battle zone. He was then able to find an ambulance.
52 Andrea. Milanese student in morning work shock ….. Italian government collapses again, not shock …. !!
Jan from Norway @ 53 re Republican frontrunners. Here is an article positing that the American parties have switched characteristics in this regard.
http://www.physorg.com/news108142409.html
54 Yes Jack Mr Bradley seemed to take it ahem badly. He actually put Leech’s mobile number out and urged people to call. I think the Tories will be squeezed mightily there. They dropped like a stone last time. There’s still circa 11% I think left. But there won’t be much when Leech gets through
Some of the comments make Thompson sound like that other actor fellow, you know Ron something. Whatever happened to him?
56 A small world lol .
56 PtP. So between the might and fury of the Nazi empire and Worthing Lib Dems finest’s dad … we all might have saved a few quid and a dodgy greyhound might have run round bends instead of sending us all round the bend !!
Re: 43 - To be honest, Punter, he took very little interest at all in British party politics. I’m far from convinced he stands as some philosophical father figure for liberal Toryism. Don’t forget he had a much stronger attachment to the Empire than most.
Re: 46 - A pretty weak article from Oaten to be honest and he completely misses the point. DC isn’t going to come calling and I strongly suspect that if Sir Menzies offers to support a minority Tory Government the door will be slammed in his face !! DC doesn’t need Sir Menzies or the LDs - he knows that and I know that.
IF, and it’s a big if, DC forms a minority Government, goes to the country and fails to win a majority, that might be different…
Back to Mike Hancock - his vote in crude figures has been dropping over the years
1987 - 23K (lost)
1992 - 22K (lost)
1997 - 20K (won)
2001 - 17.5K (won)
2005 - 17K (won)
48. My grandad was in the African campaign and i would probably not be here if rommel had attacked either, although my grandad would never have met my grandma if it wasn;t for the war.
My favourite books of all time are Spike Milligans war time diaries > http://tinyurl.com/273zyf
A few comments on 1945. In parts of London posters appeared saying “Cheer for Churchill and Vote for Attlee”.
Stodge is right that few in the higher reaches of the Conservative relaised what was about to engulf them. He is also correct that Churchill was a classic Liberal Unionist. In 1950 he brokered the Huddersfield and Bolton Lib/Con pacts. He spoke for Violet Bonham Carter and in 1951 invited the Liberal leader to join his Cabinet.
Roy Jenkins, certainly not a Conservative, concludes his biography of Churchill that in his (Jenkins) opinion, Churchill was the greatest man to have held the office.
BTW Walthamstow Stadium was in the Chingford boundary, in teh former Epping constituency which was represented by Churchill. It ca be argued that he was booed by constituents
Peter
Leech can always come up with a hospital closure if he needs it….
62 Yup, that’s right! Funny old thing, Life. ‘Love it or loathe it, you can’t get away from it’. [Now what's that from?]
64 SBS. Turnout ?? What about Hancock’s share of the vote ??
65 Jimbo Jones. PB saved for the nation by Rommel, dodgy German artillery and British lorries !!
64. In terms of % there has not been great variations
1987 42.91%
1992 42.04%
1997 39.5%
2001 44.6%
2005 42.2%
63 I think you need to qualify that Stodge re Tory Minority Govt. If DC calculates he can do a Wilson and go again in six months you’re correct. If OTOH like Harper in Canada he decides he needs time to present a few budgets and gain trustbefore risking it then it becomes murkier. You may need to factor that in
53. I agree on Thompson but do not underestimate the lure of celebrity. My own feeling is that when comes to the nitty gritty of campaigning He will be weak but I just cant be sure and its making me unwilling to back heavily against him. Most worringly for people liek me who instinctively feel Thompson will fade is that he is the nearest thing to a good old boy amongst the leading Republican contenders. If he plays up to it, theres a fat block of votes for him.
In addition, I have taken some v.small bets on McCain recently (to a total of £37) because hes still in there and the strong negativity around him has lessened somewhat now he’s got his campaign focus sorted. People understandably focussed on his money problems but there was also a serious issue with who was running his campaign with a bit of a turf war going on and that now seems sorted. I wouldnt want to add to my stake though.
I believe that Thompson’s position is more closely aligned with McCain’s than meets the eye. Thompson’s failure could well benefit McCain in a bigger way than many think. Equally, Thompson could kill off McCain. I believe there will be elements of potential support of each that overlap more than many think.
I see no value in backing Thompson and hes made me money already so if I’m right and he does fade then McCain I think will be somewhat shorter than he is now. I think Guiliani isnt much of a bet but might lengthen a bit if Thompson’s early razzmatazz is on the mark and before he has to deliver some subtsance and then it may be worth backing Guiliani.
McCain is the alternative alternative to everything and everybody else in the GOP race. In nomination races, being the alternative is not a bad position as the field shakes itself out. He has however got to see thinsg otu long enough.
Romney, I just cant see it somehow and have avoided him so far. Theres just something not right there to my eye. I said the same about McCain when he was a warm favourite early on that I instinctively felt he was fragile but couldnt quite put my finger on why. It has proven so, and I’ll stick with my instinct that Romney just isnt ‘right’ at least not at this time.
67?
67 Interesting point, Andrea. My old Auntie (as Tory as they come) used to work in Withington Hospital, and was mightily incensed by the Lib Dem campaign. I don’t think she is going to be squeezed!
43 Nearly forgot, Stodge. That’s an excellent post.
The ‘Churchill’ postings have been fascinating and a welcome relief from the yah-boo politics, of which too much lately.
Yokel
Thanks for the boxing tip. I will place it just as soon as I have opened an account with Boyle Sport. I may as well. It will give me the full set.
74 Sorry, Punter, but apparently Leech claimed that the Hospital was going to be closed by Labour, or something to that effect. Bradley was caught flat-footed, and lost.
But the Hospital didn’t close…so maybe some good did come out of it!
72. Any chance of McCain being the VP candidate for Thompson?
69, 70 -
Thanks Andrea; that is why I think Hancock is vulnerable to increased turnout. Apart from his disastrous
39% in 1997 (when he regained the seat), his share is static. The Tory share depends on the turnout.
69/70. A bit slow there Andrea … almost a minute !! Do buck up
73. The reason why Manchester Labourites seem to dislike Leech more than anything has to do with Christie Hospital and the 2005 campaign.
They even tabled an EDM to practically call Leech a liar…but they mispelled the name of the hospital!
77 Augustus. Clearly hospital saved by Lib Dem election !!
“Saving Hospitals Here”
77. Augustus, I think it has become a strategy used by all parties to be fair…everytime there’s an election all hospitals, post offices and whatever seem to be under threat!
On balance I think possible effects of exagerations won’t last until next GE among the general public
78. No idea but I’m guessing unlikely. McCain & Thompson get on well but I think that’d be stretching it at this stage.
McCain, if his finances run out, could make for an interesting VP option for someone I suppose but hes a stubborn old sod.
78. No idea but I’m guessing unlikely. McCain & Thompson get on well but I think that’d be stretching it at this stage.
McCain, if his finances run out, could make for an interesting VP option for someone I suppose but hes a stubborn old sod.
[74] Perhaps the next comp should be to find the Peebie whom Augustus’s Auntie Carp would most like to be squeezed by
Funny how the 1951-55 Churchill government is so often much-maligned and quite unfairly IMHO. In the context of that period, I’m sure those 4 years fully ‘rehabilitated’ the party to again be trusted in domestic policy.
Almost all the 1945-50 reforms were maintained, full employment was preserved, Macmillan’s 300,000 pa house building programme was a spectacular success. And Churchill’s active conciliation of the trade unions - never again the man of 1926 - reflected a spirit of generosity that was appropriate for that epoch, even if it did sow the early seeds for the travails of the sixties and seventies.
I’m probably a minority of one in holding this view.
86 IA. Well as Aunty Carp is a Tory it’d have to be Sean Fear …. winning again !!
Not that I’m bitter, no not me, no Sireeee …. the b*$&^:>
76. Boyles are ok but their website is deadly limited at times on the markets that they offer.
Who would you prefered to be squeezed by?
John
http://manchester-libdems.org.uk/images/sites/217.160.173.25-40336f53506548.95608453/49.jpeg
or Lucy?
http://www.lucypowell.net/common/images/priorityPhoto4.jpg
Looks like the old chesnut national service (light) is back on the agenda.
Original thought is lacking, we might get the warm beer(possibly extra cold) and cycling next to cricket fields 50`s nostalgia next.
Going for the right of centre pensioner vote, thought that was already in the bag, with the hatred of johnny foreigner voters.
82 Jack do we know if Kaufmann is running again. Gorton may just may be interesting if not. Though after Withington things could get seriously nasty if Lab think the Lib Dems are going for it
87 Yes. Had Churchill’s 51-55 Govt been hated it’s hard to see how Eden would have got that landslide 7 weeks after
87 John O. Perhaps a minority of two but for other reasons too !!
92. “do we know if Kaufmann is running again”
he hasn’t announced his retirement so far.
Bush seems to have screwed the playing field so much that Republicans will be left with pygmies as candidates. Romney could actually win from here, almost unbelievably. Then again, they elected Bush…..
84. I think Thompson is the only one thats possible due to . It’s generally embarassing for a VP to be much older than the President. (Unless the President is clearly a figurehead like Dubya.) Thompson’s only a couple years older than Giuliani, but he seems older, which is the important thing.
“due to his age”
91. If it was done well its something that i would have considered doing as a school kid. lots of people i met at uni did gap years but they had all been to public school and knew what that was about as a comp lad i didn’t really understand what gap years were about. A great way to meet people from different walks of life and do something useful at same time.
94 Has he been re-adopted? If he went he is just the sort of grandee that would go at the last second. The NEC can then impose a favoured Political son of GB, and Gerald goes to the red Benches
95. Even though I don’t think Romney will get it, due to religious intolerance, the guy’s clearly capable. His business career couldn’t be contrasted more with Bush’s and he has shown extreme competence in managing organisations.
99. yes, he won the trigger with the backing of all CLP branches.
98,
National service was compulsory you were conscripted unless you could use your network to get around it.
This is voluntary no legal basis to force you into it.
So why keep linking concsription to voluntary,its trying to grab a headline and make lots of people think its something it isnt.
Plus lets see the cost implications of these warm words.
101 There you go. Last minute retirement loyal Brownite slips in…………
103 - I would be very surprised if Kaufman went. He has no wife, kids, grandkids to spent more time with. He’s still fantastic in committee (whether you agree with him or not).
102. I agree about cost implications etc, but if they can find a 6 week activity course for young people that is worthwhile (as in not destroyed by Health & Safety types or making it too sterile) then i would reckon that could be a great thing for young people. How often do you hear people moan that there is nothing for kids to do? if this could make a difference then i am for it, but if its rubbish then fair enough.
104 He’d just chair various House of Lords committees wouldn’t he. I’d think him a cert for the Red benches when he goes
102. If it was compulsory this scheme would lose votes. As a liberal I could not accept the government forcing individuals into giving up a period of their lives to work for it, but on a voluntary basis it sounds like a good idea.
Interesting the PB.com Left’s attack on Cameron’s National Citizen Service. Nick Palmer dismisses it as only applying to ‘well-behaved kids’ and ignoring those into drugs and drinking. So, let’s just abandon them to drink and drugs, eh, Nick? Don’t you think they have aspirations? Isn’t it your people who are constantly blaming bad behaviour on youngsters ‘having nothing to do’. Come on, this is an imaginative plan that needs some working up, but is optimistic about the ambitions and capabilities of 16 year-olds. How long is it since we’ve seen any politician big-up 16 year-olds and trust them to take the opportunities put in front of them. Come on, Nick, have some ambition, dream a little.
dez dismisses the idea as sub-National service, ineffective cos voluntary and costly. But, it’s the voluntary nature that would make it effective. Most youth crime, in my experience, is 10% troublemakers and 90% hangers on. This gives the 90% something to focus on, the chance to do some good, gain some ‘respect’ , meet new people (and girls/boys) and to get away from the bullies. Sure, some will dismiss it as a waste of time, but they might start to come around once they hear the stories of their peers who’ve done it. Shame you didn’t come along, Estate Hard Boy, it was cool and I met some soldiers/charity workers who are way harder/cooler than you’ll ever be.
108. Nick et al. need 16-year olds to remain alienated and angry in the hope that they will vote Labour when the voting age is lowered.
On The Naked Civil Servant on BBC 4 last night Quentin Crisp got a paper exempting him from National Service on the grounds of “Sexual Perversion”. I am sure quite a number on PB would be safe from conscription if that was still a criteria for exemption.
They don’t seem to make programmes like that any more…
….or people like Quentin Crisp.
108. I think that this is an issue that if it was thought up by Brown, Tories would call it typical Nanny state etc, Nick Palmer would say great way to help vulnerable kids. As its by Cameron, Tories bigging it up, Labour deriding it. usual stuff
112 - as a general rule, the Nanny State isn’t terribly keen on making things voluntary. Had this suggestion carried the description ‘compulsory’, I would be dead against it. Instead, I’m willing to see exactly what Dave has in mind.
66
Roy Jenkins not a Conservative? there are few who might question that. Jenkins certainly wasn’t a socialist, but then most Labour politicians aren’t. Finding a socialist in the Labour party is as rare as finding a Tory politician who really believes in family values. Apart from Anne Widdecombe, but then its easy to believe in marriage when your aren’t: or is that me being cynical!
108,
I have heard it all before from both parties .
It`s total bull shite triangulation to connect with hard right voters, who want won`t national service back, to give the youth some disipline, and liberals who believe in good voluntary works.
However it will be just like Majors citizen charters total waste of beuraucratic nonsense which caused more harm than good.
However the cone line was a good idea, you could shout and let your anger drain away on some poor sod answering the phone.!
111 - Quentin Crisp - yes, what a hoot. One of the stately homos of England. My mother used to draw him when she was an art student in the 1940s and 1950s.
“finally, for more electoral data than you can shake a stick at, plus a forum where pb’ers can sometimes be seen, is Dave Leip’s US Election Atlas”
Yep, Afleitch, Ben and myself (Democratic ‘Hawk’) are regular faces down at Dave Leip’s; where no one escapes my wrath be they:
- the ‘Iraq, Iraq, Iraq (as if nothing else matters) Brigade’,
- liberals, but only those who insist that some ideological purity on the Democratic Party should be rigorously applied, thus effectively making it unviable across huge swathes of America. The party’s strength lies in being a “big-tent”
- uber libertarian la-la-landers, those types who are best left in their Ivory Towers
- the Christian Right, those who emerged in reaction to the Social Gospel and are viciously intolerant
- secularists, pretty intolerant but in a different way
- Bush (incompetent)
- Republicans, who are, for the most part, a putridly reactionary party (socially and economically)as well as, increasingly, that of sanctimoniously hypocrisy
Now who I have I missed out of that list ;)?
RE: Republicans; at long last, Thompson is officially in. Don’t like Romney (phoney), Giuliani (a delusional hack who used the great Churchill to blow sunshine, frankly, where the sun don’t shine at the 2004 RNC), while McCain is simply past it. Hopefully, he’ll retire in 2010 and Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano can run and win his Senate seat for the Democrats.
RE: Democrats - Not sold on any of them yet. I’d have preferred Warner or Bayh, pretty solid, and immensely popular, accomplished former ‘red’ state governors
32: Chesterfield is certainly a Labour target - I’ve been canvassing there myself (partly because I know the former candidate). I wonder if Cambridge is absolutely safe for the LDs, especially if rumours of LD-Con cooperation were to grow, probably not a popular position in a university town. On that subject, I note Mark Oaten cites ID cards as a reason to be critical of Labour - chuckle, this is the man who voted for my bill when LD spokesman on the subject.
On the national service idea, I did say that I don’t think it’s necessarily a bad idea. But it’s not a solution to youth crime, and therefore idle to pretend that savings in youth crime will pay for it.
114 Peter Hitchens compared Roy Jenkins to Mao Tse Tung.
Cameron has decided to adopt the scatter gun approach. Keep firing out policies, proposals etc see how they click, yep we’ll have that one. Wouldn’t it be easier to issue a pic-n-mix manifesto, sort of delete where applicable. You deliver a copy to every householder, there’ll be lots of options, cross out the ones you don’t like, send it back: perm ‘em all, BINGO thats the government’s programme.
p.s. if anyone at CCO adopts that proposal, there’ll be royalties to pay.
119
It was the hair!!
Thompson just 1% behind Guiliani in the latest Rasmussen poll, by the way, taken before his lauunch (source: Real Clear Politics). The cats offer a £10 charity bet at evens that he will be ahead in the first poll whose sample is taken fully after September 5. Any takers - Jan?
122 led me to think - is it worth someone (Paul or Mike I guess) updateing the Recorded Wagers page with new bets (I’m sure I’ve seen a number go through), and also move down the page (or similar) the ones that have been settled with the result.
120. Sorry to disappoint you, grumpy, but it would be you who owed CCHQ the royalties. That is precisely what CCHQ is already doing. It’s called Stand Up, Speak Up. You go onto the website and vote on the ideas put forward by the policy commissions. Go on, you know you want to.
119 Golden moment for Woy when giving his farewell address to the PLP in 1977, he said “I leave without wancour.” Skinner then piped up “I thought you were taking Marquand with you!”
Quentin Crisp - one of life’s true individuals and a national hero if ever there was one. That whole army “Sexual Perversion” scene had me roaring with laughter!
Back O/T - to say that one is against DC’s proposals does not mean you favuor leaving kids to the ravages of drink and drugs. A strawman argument if ever there was one. It isn’t a bad idea, but just sounds like a glorified Duke of Edinburgh thing. Will it be able to get those that need it most onto the scheme?
100: all fair enough, but the guy makes Blair look genuine. Poses as a rino to win in a liberal state, then 2 years later is advocating polar opposite positions on countless issues.
122 Nick. Rasmussen is Thompson’s best pollster, and he is likely, but far from sure, to get a small bounce. As I like to bet, but not to gamble :-), I’ll pass on this one. However, if you want the same charity bet, but based on the results published by Rasmussen on 1 October, I’m in.
119 Sean. I think that Woy Jenkins’s had a red book too ….. of vintage claret years !!
118 Nick P. Are the cats laying odds on Chesterfield and/or Cambridge as Labour gains ?? … put me first in the queue please !!
122 Nick,
I’ll take that - £10 to Babbington Dog Rescue (I don’t do cats!)if Thompson isn’t ahead of Rudi in the first poll whose sample is taken fully after September 5.
There are lots of stories about how “lazy” Thompson is, together with issues about how badly he manages his staff. I think his entering the race will be a signal to start unleashing the dirt on him. Much as he might be thought of as the Great White Hope (emphasis on the white) for those Republicans who yearn for another Reagan to rescue them, I don’t see him pulling off that trick. At the moment his status is largely down to being “none of the above” in a particularly poor field.
129 Jack W Waller was mentioning Newport East ahead of Swanea West. I have to agree the Lib Dems in Swansea seem off the boil. In Newport they’re simmering nicely. Either on ur radar
131 Punter. Neither presently and certainly not if we have an early election. More long term perhaps both but I’d put both in the Labour column if pressed. In betting terms very comfortable odds on.
re 104 careful SBS you’re beginning to sound like a Telegraph obituarist!
re 110 but it never seemed to matter between 1939 and 45.
Met Romney once (in Moscow of all places) when he was heading Salt Lake City Olympic team. He seemed comfortable (except when discussing alcohol with British journos) and assured and deeply ambitious. But there was something lacking, I felt. Gravitas, I guess. But then again, the US Pres campaign genuinely is a beauty contest…..
For those with a penchant for facial hair there is an amusing piece in this week’s NS
http://www.newstatesman.com/200709060014
I think Dave would look much better with a “Thurso” rather than a “Mandelson”.
on Hillary gaining the advantage from the primary fiasco.
Article by Robert Novak on Hillary gaining the advantage from the primary fiasco.
Hello all,
An interesting evening in the US yesterday. (Though the girlfriend, and most of the US public, would say that was because of the quality of last night’s tennis than because of the Jay Leno show or the Fox News debate.)
Contender debates happen so often and are so orchestrated that no one debate can alter the contest on its own. However, they can shift the mood music a bit. To me, the most striking thing about last night’s debate was seriousness – the questioners know the GOP is in trouble and wanted serious answers to serious questions. The RCP stories are a bit contradictory, with different columnists puffing up their own candidates. Personally, I thought McCain did well – he seemed less pallid and more energized than I’ve seen him in months. The debate format played to his strengths, New Hampshire voters like him anyway (remember 2000) and he came across well by sticking to his guns on Iraq and the meaning of fiscal conservatism. I don’t think McCain can pull things around from here because the religious loons in South Carolina would rather lose an election than vote for a candidate that takes on special interest groups.
Romney was the undoubted loser. He looked sooo smarmy, vacuous and flip-floppy. This is just bad political strategy: Romney’s spent a lot of money in the early states. His actual record of achievement in his past life is quite strong. So why he feels it necessary to come across as someone who will say anything to please the audience is beyond me. Anyway, before today I’d been arguing that there was some value in Romney’s odds. I recant.
Thompson will undoubtedly rise in polls in the next few days on the basis of greater media exposure (he’s on Fox News tonight – it’ll be interesting to see how the pundits judge that performance), but I don’t see much value beyond that. I’m not convinced he differentiates himself enough from the other candidates in substance and I have doubts about his ability to get sufficiently organised in enough campaign states – winning in South Carolina and hoping for momentum isn’t enough. And by delaying he’s allowed Mike Huckabee to creep onto his conservative turf.
Rudi was Rudi last night and won’t have changed anyone’s views on him.
I can see a situation arising in which the Dem nomination is wrapped up by February 5th, but the Republican race is wide open going into March. And if that happens, as I’ve argued before, the dominant factor in the late Republican race will be who is best placed to beat Hilary rather than who is ideologically purest. That – I think – helps Rudi.
108
‘Interesting the PB.com Left’s attack on Cameron’s National Citizen Service. Nick Palmer dismisses it as only applying to ‘well-behaved kids’ and ignoring those into drugs and drinking. So, let’s just abandon them to drink and drugs, eh, Nick?’
Just heard Brown on the radio saying that we don’t need Cameron’s National Citizen Service as its already covered by existing govenment policies.So dear old Nick is now officialy (for the very first time)in disagreement with his own party’s policy.
Or could it just be a case of him doing an Andy Burnham?
140…um, to be fair to Nick, he wasn’t explicitly disagreeing with Dave’s idea, was he?
ConHome seems in favour of it, but while it sounds jolly worthy and a good idea to raise and discuss, having reflected upon it I’m not sure how practically useful it’ll be at tackling the problems Dave wants it to. But, he does himself no harm by suggesting it anyway.
140 - Another scheme is neither here nor there. Gordon may be right that existing youth policies covers this sort of thing. Why do you have to be so dismissive of Gordon, eh?
Punter - Lib Dems are imploding in Wales. Peter Black (Swansea) AM is thinking of challenging Mike German for the leadership. Labour are confident of regaining Swansea City Council next year. The LDs were 3500 votes behind Labour in Swansea West in Labour’s worst year. They have no chance.
140. Brown is referring to V, an ‘independent’ charity set up by the government in 2006 to spend £70m over three years increasing volunteering among 16 to 25 year olds. V was born out of the Millennium Volunteers and the Russell report. V may be worthy, but it is not the same thing Cameron is proposing. Apart from anything else, no-one has heard of it.
I’m not knocking V, but what Cameron is talking about is something altogether more ambitious than handing out grants to charities to run volunteer schemes.
142
‘Why do you have to be so dismissive of Gordon, eh?’
Because of his past record of spin,double counting,triple counting,stealth,deviousness,reannouncing old policies and pretenting they are new,pretend tax cuts etc.enough reasons, eh?
143
Thanks,so yet another misleading comment from Brown,no surprise though.
Nick Palmer seemed earlier to be tying to fulfil the Sun’s prediction of Labour’s response to Cameron’s initiative.
The Sun thinks the National Service idea is great (as will many of their readers probably). The Sun thinks Labour will try to trash the idea as unworkable. The paper seems to have a good grasp of the Labour psyche.
While everyone is getting worked up about the Russian Airforces, latest attempts to threaten the West with antique aeroplanes. This interesting Russian story seems to have slipped by without notice.
http://tinyurl.com/2vzcf8
I liked the story of the woman in Hong Kong who chopped of her huspand’s penis, tied it to a helium balloon that was conveniently tied onto the balcony rail, and waved it bye bye.
147. After that delightful slice of Russian life, under related articles, Yahoo has: “Australian comedians arrested for stunt at Bush hotel” Makes me laugh anyway.
For those interested in politics in the forces in the Western Desert you can do little better than read Richard Kisch’s ‘The Days of the Good Soldiers’. It deals with the Cairo parliament, largely run by the other ranks, the role of the Communist Party and soldiers’ newspapers.
I’m not thrashing it, ‘but’ anyone remember, Willie Whitelaw’s, Short,Sharp,Shock treatment for young offenders, did that have much effect, don’t think so!
The comments further up the thread about the incumbency effect for LD mp’s are well made, and substantiate a lingering doubt I have had that Liberal posters were in denial about their vulnerability
The belief that Liberals hang on against then trend may have been true when there were 6-12 mp’s,all of them highly individual. They benefited from disproportionate media coverage among other things. Once you get to 50 mp’s the individiality is lost. The mp becomes just another mp.
The LD’s have kep their seats largely because of Tory weakness rather than incumbency, I suspect. The real visceral hatred of the Tories is mellowing, and the LD’s are being targeted by DC.
It would not suprise me if the LD’s lost 20-30 seats
140 - Be fair Brown steals so many Tory policies Nick can’t keep up. It’ll be Government policy tomorrow.
“The real visceral hatred of the Tories is mellowing” to be replaced by fairly real hated of Cameron and all his works by loyal Daily Telegraph readers.
150
Thanks for that
“real visceral hatred of the Tories …” to be replaced by fairly real hated of Cameron …by loyal Daily Telegraph readers.”
By only some.
Some are actually in favour of him asthe previous holders of his post were clearly when appointed not fit to run a modern party… but then the CP was not then a modern aprty.
Just read the sneers about opinion polls an dfocus groups. Sure, they may be often misleading… but a party out of touch with modern methods is often a party out of touch. And that can be a fair description of the CP in the last 3 GEs.
152
Agree,a lot is made of the so called incumbency factor as if it applies to Lib Dem MP’s only.
Almost half of the current Lib Dem seats were gained in 1997 from the Tories at the height of their unpopularity,if they finally get their act together and the two party squeeze continues then Lib Dem losses to the Tories of 20+ seats is quite possible.
Europe will not go away for Gordon - see:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/09/06/neu206.xml
Why does he not announce a GE date and have a referendum on the “EU constitution” and Britain’s future in Europe on the same day? IMO this issue must be properly confronted, debated and resolved by a referendum to put it to bed for say a minimum period of 10 years.
152 With great respect John , I as a LibDem am not in denial that the next GE will not be a tough battle to hold on to the seats we have . I concede a few may be lost but feel also that some seats can be gained too . Much depends on how things pan out over the next perhaps as many as 2 1/2 years .
I would also say that many Conservative posters are in denial on here . They seem to believe that all they have to do to win is have a new rather more presentable and appealing leader than Howard and voters will fall over themselves to vote Conservative .
You state that the visceral hate for Conservatives is mellowing . Amongst a large part of the population ( perhaps 50% ) it is still there just as it is for Labour in a large part of the population too . You are fortunately in FPTP electoral system whereby you ( and Labour ) do not need anything like 50% of the votes to be able to form a government .
What I am sure you and many other Conservative and Labour activists resent is that the LibDems do not suffer from this visceral hatred except from the very small % of the population that are Conservative and Labour activists . This means that voters as a whole are more receptive to be persuaded to vote LibDem and it is down to LibDems to do that and not lose the 20-30 seats that you say is likely .
125 - it was in the House ” Ileave this place without bitterness or wanquor” response “he went a week ago”
159 OTOH the Lib Dems have rather fewer partisans among the electorate than either Conservatives or Labour.
It doesn’t take much of a shift from Lib Dem to Conservative for the former to lose quite a few seats.
That said, I can’t see the Lib Dems having fewer than 45 seats under any circumstances.
Witan: my original comment was “A voluntary scheme could be a good idea that gives well-behaved youngsters something interesting and positive to do, but simply doesn’t address the problems of crime and anti-social behaviour, which is what DC suggests would pay for the scheme.”
You represent that as “Nick Palmer seemed earlier to be tying to fulfil the Sun’s prediction of Labour’s response to Cameron’s initiative. The Sun thinks the National Service idea is great (as will many of their readers probably). The Sun thinks Labour will try to trash the idea as unworkable.”
I don’t think it’s unworkable, or a bad idea. I just don’t think it will do what DC put on the tin. But having advised a couple of days ago that we don’t get deep into the virtues of policy, I’ll say no more about it.
Marquee Mark: the charity wager’s on. I actually have a dog, not a cat, myself (my wife’s influence)…
A statue ought to be raised to Quentin Crisp for his observation, “After four years, the dust doesn’t get any worse. “
Calling Nick Palmer!
Our bet on Boris being the next Mayor of London never made it to the recorded wagers page - are we still on? You gave me very reasonable odds and, as my confidence grows of actually winning this bet I’d hate it get lost in the maelstrom of next May’s GE as Helen House Hospice need all the contributions it can get
Rejoice: Citizens’ juries have started. At Bristol’s Brunel Academy. Brown and Balls photo op. with tables of school children for 3 hours. Who could be cynical ?
ps. They have stolen the catch phrase from Seattle’s most popular radio show, “We’re listening”.
Mark Senior 159 - noted - although I tend to see the expression “With great respect” as a euphemism for “You are talking tosh, but I’m too polite to say so”
In the distant past Liberal revivals tended to be when Tory governments were unpopular. In Labour period, the Tories scooped the protest vote.
This latest long term revival by the LD’s has been unusual because Labour is in power, but the Tories are unpopular - a unique combination compared with the 20th century norm.
Therefore with a few exceptions I reckon the incumbency rules are off
Betting prices for 2010 GE.
Ladbrokes 4/1
Betfair 4.7/1,(last matched).
VC.bet 5/1
Will Hill 8/1*
I’ve just gone in again for 2010 at 8/1.
Whats the difference between citizens juries and the large amount of consultation done by government already on a formal and informal basis?
164. kingbongo
The procedure for recording political bets here is to click on the link on the right hand side of the page. Under Pages. POLITICAL BETTING RECORDED WAGERS. Then click on the link to email Mike with the details of the bet.
164: I reckon Lib Dems will be most vulnerable generally where they are changing MPs in held seats (The ‘open seat’ effect seems to hit the Lib Dems much more than other parties).
But those places, like Cheltenham and Eastleigh, where new MPs got in on vastly reduced majorities will probably be held next time (whatever some Con posters think) as long as the national share of the vote is in the upper teens (OK, the jury is out on that one).
168. Nothing - the results of ‘consultation’ and the deliberations of the ‘juries’ will both be ignored.
171 Oh Archer! So young, and yet so cynical!
170 - Eastleigh easy hold. Huhne has profile and local results v good. Cheltenham - don’t know.
Hereford - still MP retiring - Tory gain?
Yokel @ 168 — Citizens’ juries are focus groups paid for by the government. Focus groups are paid for by the party. Hope this helps.
Apologies for being (vaguely) back on topic. A question for any students of American political history out there: is this the first presidential election where no member of the incumbent administration is seeking the presidency at the next election?
So much for the fiscal prudence of this government:
The handling of a £1.5bn computerised farm payments scheme by two senior civil servants is condemned by MPs today as “a masterclass in bad decision-making” which could land taxpayers with a £500m extra bill. A highly critical report from the Commons public accounts committee accuses Sir Brian Bender, then permanent secretary at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, of being “largely responsible” for the fiasco, which left tens of thousands of farmers without any cash from the European Union.(Source: The Guardian)
169 - thanks for that stjohn; I did mail Mike ages ago and I think he likes both parties to email him.
After taking my money for the pesky cats over the Brown bounce Mr Palmer offered me good odds on Boris - I’m hoping he hasn’t forgotten, or is so worried at the prospect of losing his seat next May he’s trying to hold on to every tenner he can!!
More evidence of prudent government:
he Government could be forced to come clean over the true cost of its medical training “disaster” as a result of a demand from doctors’ leaders.
The British Medical Association (BMA) has written to the National Audit Office (NAO) calling for a full investigation into how much public money was pumped into implementing the reforms.
The heavily-criticised changes were introduced in 2005 aimed at speeding up the time it takes junior doctors to become specialists, but have been besieged with problems.
154. Winning over centrists is far more important than losing a few to the right. There’s a lot more votes in the centre. Besides, the Telegraph and other right-wingers are just making a lot of Conservatives dislike their dogma, which in turn makes them look at their own views with more balance and become more centrist.
158. The EU referendum isn’t something Brown can ignore and if he thinks he can get away with not holding one he doesn’t have any political astuteness whatsoever. You can’t fight a resurgent opposition, the overwhelming majority of public opinion, half the papers kicking up a shit storm, and up to 100 of your own back benchers. He’s going to have to buckle eventually so he’d be far smarter just giving in now while the damage will be minimal.
168. Citizen’s juries get in the headlines?
Oh, and why in the picture at the top of the thread is Fred Thompson being interviewed by Jimmy Hill?
180. Jay Leno looks nothing like Jimmy Hill!
174. Yeah but government often does a huge amount of consultation as it is..or are Citizens juries by your defintion a way for a governing party to have focus groups paid for by the taxpayer?
175-At the 1952 election neither candidate at the election had been in the Presidential administration preceding. But, Truman had run for the presidency during the early primaries before dropping out…
166 , The with respect was in the new spirit of the site started by Andy the other night . So it was not insincere but how long this will last is anyone’s guess LOL .
176
Margaret Beckett who presided over the entire fiasco then got promoted to foreign secretary.
New thread now open - Part 1 of the UK’s Benchmark Seats.
Double Carpet
183. Thanks, but what seems unique this time is that none is even contesting it. Besides 1952, there look to have been three other elections in the 20th century when neither president nor VP was nominated, but they either viewed themselves as candidates or someone else in the administration ran for the White House.
1908: Taft was a member of Theodore Roosevelt’s cabinet, was nominated and won.
1920: Wilson, despite being incapacitated by a severe stroke, still hoped to be nominated for a third term and blocked others from standing with that in mind. He wasn’t
1928: Hoover was a member of Coolidge’s cabinet, was nominated and won.
Going back further than that becomes a little harder, but given the frequency with which incumbent presidents were turfed out, the lack of a two-term rule and the way in which some 19th century politicians seemed to be able to hold down several roles at once, I wouldn’t be surprised if this is a first.
Nick Palmer You met the Sun’s predictions of the Labour response to the Cameron intiative but the language was just different. The difference between what you said and claiming it to be unworkable seems semantically minute.
I can’t help but wonder whether The Sun is only giving Cameron the time of day because of the European Treaty hoping to force Brown into calling a referendum.
There is some merit in Cameron’s idea but I’m in no hurry to blow sunshine …
The bottom-line is that Cameron is now, at least, now talking possible policies so should the Conservatives take the lead in the polls, then it won’t be by default. It will make a refreshing change from the man, who within five seconds of being elected party leader, expected to take the lead by default on the back of government ‘failings’. (Yes, all governments no matter what persuasion or where they are are not without fault).
The jury is still on whether the Conservatives will ultimatly present themselves as a viable alternative given that on some issues where they can Labour is vulnerable, especially on the economy and public services, sounds oh so rather hollow given their own track record.
Murdoch will back whoever he thinks will win come the election, possibly hedging his bets should things remain tight between Labour and the Tories. I suspect he knows that Brown will carry more clout internationally, be better received, and be the stronger man, with regards to Europe, America and the wider international community.
But speaking of The Sun and Cameron’s ‘National Service’ idea, it all makes me wonder how the thinking man’s comic would have reacted to such an idea had Neil Kinnock proposed it. I suspect it would have vilified him just as it always did. And there was a man who was sincerely modernising his party. I sometimes wonder if Cameron needs his own, for want of better words “Kruschev Moment” or “Clause 4″ moment (I seem to recall some here mentioning the latter) where he denounces the excesses of the 1980s and the part they played in rupturing society. I’m not apportioning blame, just stating the way I see it.
The ‘New Right’, both sides of the Atlantic was, arguably, inherenly contradictory, given that the consequences of the expansion of market forces, espoused by neo-liberals, tended to undermine the social institutions, favoured by cultural conservatives. We are living with the consequences.