Will the falling betting price cause Davis MPs to switch?
October 6th, 2005Tory leadership: Implied probability of Davis based on best betting price
-
What are the dangers of having less than a 50:50 chance?
One of the key arguments used by Davis’s team as they have sought to persuade Tory MPs to make public declarations of support has been the Shadow Home Secretary’s position in the betting. After all, they were saying, if the bookies are rating Davis so highly you would be a fool to back anybody other than the “obvious” winner.
That argument held until within about 20 minutes of the end of Davis’s speech yesterday. Then the implied probability of him succeeding, as rated by those willing to risk hard cash on the outcome, dropped below the 50% mark. Tory MPs are no longer dealing with a near certainty and the whole backcloth to this contest has changed.
Now the Davis’s camp first objective is to stop the possible seepage in support from MPs - something that was always going to be possible because it’s a secret ballot. Also the spinning has started. This is more than a public speaking competition, aides are saying, and there’s a reminder that Mrs. Thatcher was not a great performer in the early days.
The big difference between Mrs. T and David Davis is that the former was prepared to put real effort into making herself a better orator. The latter has known for five months about yesterday’s conference slot and should have been training each day for the great event.
The leader in the Telegraph this morning sums up the Davis dilemma this way: “..Overall, it was a poor performance. Mr Davis is a self-assured man but, perhaps for this reason, he lacks the empathy which is so essential in modern politics. He expects to be followed - he will not persuade. This is not, in itself, a demerit when it comes to leading a party but it could well hamper his party’s campaign to lead the country.”
-
8 am UPDATE - Cameron now favorite on Betfair
Conventional bookmakers best price: Davis 5/4: Clarke 10/3: Cameron 9/4: Fox 14/1 Betfair betting exchange: Davis 2.05/1: Clark 4.5/1: Cameron 1.6/1: Fox 11/1 BinaryBet spread market. Davis 40-48: Clarke 19-25: Cameron 24-30
MessageSpace Advertising
Cameron has just overtaken DD as favourite on Betfair . I would have thought all this is a bit of an overreaction to 1 good DC speech and 1 poor DD one .
We all knew that Cameron and Clarke were better speakers. I am surprised at the size of the reaction. I suspect the market has over reacted and that DD is now better value and will attract more money.
No, but Mark, it’s not just the speech is it? I’ve been listening to them all on the radio. And the speeches just confirmed what I’ve been thinking (and I suspect that’s why everyone else is thinking this).
The killer moment for me was on the radio, I heard an interview with this bloke and I thought “wow, who’s this, this is really interesting”. It was Cameron. He was followed by Davis, and I just wandered off.
I read the Davis interview in the Torygraph, and frankly, I was laughing out loud. All I remember is he was doing something in his barn, and he wants to be friends with the SAS.
Last week I was about to cut my losses and walk away with £20 of the £130 deposit I gave to IG on a Cameron win. To-day one fifteen minute speech later I can now walk away with £160. So a round of applause to his speech writer and a toast to fickle Tories. Cheers!
Good sense should tell me to walk away from my bet now but I’m beginning to think that this totally unsuited candidate might just win. Of the five-and despite the speech-I’m sure Cameron is the one GB will most relish. Only 4 years in Parliament and however you cut it a lightweight. Brown doesn’t have the silky skills of a Blair but he is a huge politician. Bigger in many ways than Blair. The contest will be unequal and Cameron will be exposed.
However…….none of the candidates (except for Rifkind) are really the answer. Clark is certainly the nearest but he’ll be leading the wrong party. He doesn’t strike me as a man with the skills of a plate spinner or even the inclination to be one. But that’s what he’d have to be. Davis has zero charisma and Cameron is much too green. Fox is a joke. (He should be standing for UKIP). Rifkind is surprisingly good and would give the party much needed intelligence and gravitas but the party can’t see it.
So it could be Cameron and I’ll leave my money where it is.
MS on the button again. Public speaking well is not AN asset for a polician, it is THE asset.
How arrogant is it not to put the work into it?
Well Maggie was an awful public speaker and though I’d say she was an awful leader and politician as well I think this would be a minority view on this board!
PS Whoever said Nick Robinson was awful had it on the button. Too clever by half
6 - Surely her three election victories are more important than your view on her policies? I don’t think much of the way the leader of your party has conducted himself in office, but I could hardly call him incompetent as a politician.
8. I was responding to David at 5 who said being a good speaker was necessary to being a leader. I was just suggesting that Maggie proves this isn’t the case
8. Someone could win 3 elections and be an incompetent politician. Especially if the opposition is more incompetent.
9 - Fair enough. I agree with Mike, though. She wasn’t stellar, but was far from incompetent when she’d put the work in.
10 - she didn’t have the toughest opposition, but nevertheless the Tories were a pretty impressive winning machine then. (Remembering such days makes me feel old ;-))
4 - I’m not sure Brown vs. Cameron is the mismatch you depict. So much of politics is now presentational and Brown is looking bloated, sweaty and tired. I jus don’t think Brown is going to be the electoral hit many assume him to be, especially (as looks increasingly likely) the economy slides.
Until someone becomes leader, there is frankly no way of knowing how good they’ll be. Ever since the Conservative Party began electing its leaders, the favourite has never won.
5- Public speaking is an assett, certainly not THE assett. What did Willaim Hague and Michael Foot have in common? Brilliant public speakers and parliamentary performers not known for sparkling success as opposition leaders.
The Tories have created an X factor scenario in which they give undue weight to their candidates 15 minutes on stage and the activists play the role of Simon Cowell. Gripping public viewing, full of drama and wonderfully unpredictable. Policies and substance? About as relevant as musical talent.
12. I wasn’t thinking about Maggie in particular. She was competent and I find the majority of her policies repelling (my mother is still “shocked” after seeing a documentary about her, I’m not sure what they showed in it), but she knew what she was talking about.
I was thinking about Italy.
Well whatever, the overwhelming slide in Davis’ price can only mean one thing IMO - existing declared MPs are defecting. For someone to be at 2-1 in a two horse race, on the basis of one speech, is ridiculous. Either that or punters have fallen for a big ramp by the press.
17. The declareds probably aren’t defecting like you say. There are plenty of undeclareds who could fuel a price movement, plus in my experience when a movement happens in a betting as in a financial market the money floods in or out and then subsequently there is a second adjustment to the realistic level. This is what I suspect will happen here.
18 - yes i should have checked. He’s back in to 1.6-1. That still seems a very big price if he’s guaranteed to make the run-off.
Davis seems to be getting some very bad advice though. Quoting in interviews the number of MPs he has and, especially, the bookies odds as reasons why he shouldn’t be worried is stupid.
19 I agree, at least for the time being this price movement is overdone.
Can’t ignore it, and do need to consider stop losses carefully, but I’ve just had some more on DD.
Key to this is his declared support holding firm .. if that begins to
move away from him it might be time to panic !
Do think that LF is being dangerously underated still .. he remains a natural home for any ABC’s would aren’t convinced DC is ready yet.
Clarke seems almost out of the race if punters are to be believed.
Remember he has been ridiculously overpriced for so long. He will get to stage 2, and may even still be the next leader. He has dangers notably the strengthening of Cameron, but remember the average age of the final electorate is quite high which will favour DD in a DD v. DC race. The membership are Eurosceptic which will favour DD in a DD v. KC race. The only race that he may have certain issue with is a DD v. LF race after LF went for all the Tory activists erogenous zones. But we shall see.
Rifkind says Davis must be worried.
13 - Brown looked like he’d lost weight to me.
24. Rifkind has to say that he is going to be humiliated in the first MP ballot….
Firstly - is it too soon to ask for some apologies from the Tories. A number of us non-Tories have said from the start that Davis was rubbish and we could understand what you all saw in him.
Secondly - slowed down driving to work to hear Simon Hoggart and Matthew Parris - wonderful - Parris - After Alan Duncans speech “You cant throw a stone in the Home counties without hitting a Gay Conservative candidate” Hoggart on Cameron - “who would have believed that a possible Tory leader could practically have admitted taking Drugs”
Was that last comment from Hoggart a spoke aimed at the wheel of the Cameron bandwaggon?
mmm I think there are still games to be played out here. The Mail (very funny anti DD stuff this morning) is practically purring at the prospect of a KC DC pact which would inevitable take all the Rifkind support. With Liam Fox a mad right-winger who would attract a ZERO number of new voters and David Davis being shown up as the competent frontbencher/no-hoper leader-in-waiting that he is maybe Cameron will be tempted.
A 65 year old leader who WILL make ground on the government might be a tempting prospect for the party’s rising star. Surely WH’s speech will have reminded him the danger of going in too green.
26 - “we could understand what you all saw in him.”
Do you mean “could not”? If so, this is entirely unfair. There has been a clear split in Tories’ views on Davis. At least half of Tories on here have expressed considerable doubts about Davis over the past few months.
Sorry re 26 should have been “couldn’t understand what you saw in Davis”
The three strands of the DD proposition seem to be:-
* My mother was a single parent on a council estate
* I’ve got many more MPs backing me then anybody else
* The bookies make me favourite
He is in a spot of difficulty today - which might or might not be fatal - because he has simply not seen communication skills as being important. As the Telegraph says he is a leader who expects to be followed but he will not persuade.
He needs to show that he is more than just a machine politician with a team of strong-arm men - or “heavies” as Walter Wolfgang would describe them - calling in the parliamentary vote.
My money has been on Rifkind but I think I’m going to have to put that loss down to experience. What has changed my mind this week was the Newsnight poll deliberations. Cameron has something that the other candidates do not and the party should seize the chance to choose him.
Sadly I missed my chance to put a bet on at reasonable prices.
Andrea,
Clarke seems to have got as many new backers as Cameron - about 5 a piece overnight, so when everything settles down it will still depend on where Rifkind switches, and what the Tory Right block do. If I were Davis I would actually prefer to face Clarke in the final ballot because with him the Telegraph will fall in to line but with Cameron and maybe Fox things might be different.
I have to come clean… my money was initially on Fox based on the fact he was personable and amusing when I met him. He’s also a decent public speaker (as shown yesterday).
I really hadn’t realised he was such an unreformed old bigot.
I’m a Tory and I want us to win. I’ll be happy with Cameron, I’d be happier with Clarke. I’d be over-the-moon if we hd a frontbench team including Clarke, Rifkind, Cameron, Hague, Osborne, Fox, Davis
31. Whilst I agree that Clarke is the best scenario for DD I think that Cameron would whilst being more difficult still be relatively easy for Davis to overcome. The old dears already think the Cameron is far too slick….
Being a good speaker is a necessary, but not sufficient condition to be a successful politician. As was pointed out above, look at Hague…
[10] If you win 3 elections in a row, by definition you are very politician. Thats how it is defined. How effective you are is a different issue entirely. TB is a brilliant politician. But what we will remember him for? My guess is no more than that–winning 3 consecutive elections.
I think a DD-DC final would be very hard to call. But could it be DC-LF? After all Portillo topped the MPs ballot in the first round last time but did not make it to the final.
The other possiblity could be KC-DC
That’s the really sad thing about Tony Blair. He will be the longest serving nonentity in the catalogue of Prime Ministers. And he was given three thumping majorities.
27 - I hope someone can persuade Cameron that his and the party’s interests would be best served by him working for Clarke. The Tories can’t afford for another potential future star to end up utterly discredited because he was given the leadership too soon. No-one knows how Cameron will react under pressure from polls/Labour etc.
I can’t see Liam Fox making the run-off. Surely David Davis’ support can’t ebb away THAT much?
Having said that it would be a MAJOR surprise if both candidates put to the members are from the one-nation wing.
26 - Could not agree more , Icarus . Way back in May/June I summarised the main candidates as DD poor and overrated , KC the right man but an election too late sadly too old , DC the best candidate but a gamble as possibly too inexperienced anf LF I doubt I thought it worth mentioning him at all as he is the route to Conservative oblivion . Seems to have taken Conservatives 5 months to come to similar conclusions .
Anyway an interesting contest for once. From reading the tea-leaves this would be my guess for the probabilities of the final two in order;
DD-DC,
DD-KC,
DD-LF,
KC-LF,
DC-LF,
KC-DC,
34 - I think Hague was a good debater rather than a good public speaker.There’s probably a bit of a difference. His accent was a bit unusual and didn’t lend itself to selling a particular message.
Of the four serious contenders Fox probably sounds the most normal. He doesn’t have the really ‘posh’ Scots accent in the way that Rifkind does.
I think that the interesting thing is that the party at large would be comfortable with almost any outcome, the only one that is likely to cause any serious problems is Clarke winning.
mm Xenon I’m not sure about that. Actually I think the only winner who would not cause many ructions outside the David rent-a-mob would be Cameron…. maybe he’s a better bet than Clarke after all.
Actually Rifkind would be OK but he’s a no-hoper.
41 - I’d say DD sounds most normal. Probably too normal - which is the problem.
36. And you wonder why people think the Tories have lost their grasp on reality! Even if he’d only presided over the NI peace, independance for the Bank of England, devolution for Scotland and Wales and the biggest financial increase for the health service since it’s inception, and a contribution towards democracy in Afghanistan he still would have out performed all Prime Ministers for achievements since Attlee! Or perhaps you buy into the Osborne history lesson for beginners that the Tories abolished slavery and pulled down the Berlin Wall!
Oh! and the minimum wage of course…….
“I think that the interesting thing is that the party at large would be comfortable with almost any outcome, the only one that is likely to cause any serious problems is Clarke winning.”
Wonderful - I think any Lib Dem could have written this with the comfortable party being the Lib Dems.
To me Cameron is the dark horse, sounds as if he has worked hard and effectively behind the scenes but not yet been tested in the rough and tumble of politics. He at least has a chance to grow into the job which DD I dont think has.
45. ‘Or perhaps you buy into the Osborne history lesson for beginners that the Tories abolished slavery and pulled down the Berlin Wall!’ - It is irrefutable fact that the anti-slavery campaign was led by every prominent Tory of the 1790’s including the Tory PM William Pitt. It is also a fact that the Thatcher-Reagan strong defence policey of the 80’s did more to end the cold war than all the policies previously tried….
Leave it out Roger…
Tony Blair can’t claim sole credit for NI!!! Devolution has been a farce, the money on the health service has been thrown into a holed bucket.
Apart from THAT he’s the best PM since Atlee…. What else has he done?
The best thing Labour did was when they stuck to Tory spending limits in the first term. Since then they’ve robbed our pension funds and put us on the road to rack and ruin. If you don’t believe me ask the IMF. If you don’t believe them… check the Treasury figures.
26,39 - Thats a sweeping generalisation. A number of Conservative posters have been calling for either DC or KC for sometime (myself, AHM, John O spring to mind). I really don’t think there was ever an overwhelming majority supporting David Davis.
Rubbish! The Soviet Union collapsed from the inside. Reagan had almost nothing to do with it. Ask any Russian and they’d laugh at you! As for “Reagan-Thatcher” you might as well say the Polish-American axis defeated Iraq! The Poles supplied ten donkeys!
Max. If you are going to outlaw sweeping generalisations on PB.com then it is going to be much quieter here and Mike won’t need a new server after all!!!
um… you allow yourself to say TB brought peace to NI and then say Thatcher/Reagan had nowt to do with the end of the cold war.
Please Roger, one rule for one one rule for another is how bad debates have been conducted for far too long.
Please lets not have a tedious discussion aout how wonderful/awful New labour have been. There is no chance of agreement or even enlightening discussion on that one.
It seems to be accepted that this contest has been a real shot in the arm for the Tories (as I said in an early post, and was slapped down by Rik W for it, it is as if they mattered. But in fact there are another 8 weeks of this - Already DD’s band waggon “is not in the ditch but has a puncture” -M Parris the Today prog., surely other candidates will have an off day before 8 Dec., either self inflicted or from DD’s heavies if they get desperate. Will the Tories end up exhausted, and chose the least worst candidate?
Has anyone else seen the results of the YouGov poll in the Spectator
http://www.spectator.co.uk/article.php?id=6690&issue=2005-10-01
Shows that any of the four as leader would likely boost support with DD being particularly strong amongst women, they like his background. Of the four DD and DC are the two most likely to boost support.
51 - Roger I see you are on form today, with the usual rewriting of history.
Ask yourself WHY the Soviet Union collapsed. It collapsed because of the arms race initiated by Reagan and Thatcher. The Soviet leadership wanted to and tried to keep up but at massive cost to its economy. Gorbachev realised that the Soviet Union could not afford to spend 25-30% of its GDP on the military just to match the West and wanted to see detente in order to free resources to develop its domestic consumer economy. The lack of military support for corrupt regimes in Eastern and Central Europe was a consequence of these decisions and the reason the Berlin wall came down. There is no question in most historians minds that the Thatcher Reagan determination from the Falklands conflict, through the Libya bombings and the deployment of Cruise in the UK, were a major factor in the fall of the Warsaw Pact and the USSR.
As to the leadership issues, forgive me if I dont offer you a round of applause for your prescience. DD is a decent, honest and good SHadow Minister, with sound and sensible views on policy and the future of the party. He just lacks oooomph and the ability to inspire, which this time is proving important to the COnservative Party after the IDS debacle. There is some evidence of KC having the ability to inspire (certainly in the voting population) but he comes with risks. The big surprise is Cameron’s ability to speak well, to inspire and to lead. That is why he has now proven himself to many as worthy of serious consideration.
49 - David I agree with you wholeheartedly!
Abolition of slavery as every schoolboy (and girl) knows was passed by a Liberal (Whig) Government. Why Fox chose to ignore this one can only guess at. As for Northern Ireland…..Both the Unionists and the Republicans have said it was the work of Blair and they should know
(NB Said by Trimble and Adams on a recent tribute program to Mo Mowlam)
50 - Max , I suggest you go back into the PBcom archives for May and June and reread the comments - hindsight is wonderful but not as good as documented evidence
42 - That may be true but it would show how desparate the Conservatives are for any leader however poor . A poor string of results or bad performances against Tony Blair and the knives would be unsheathed quicker than you could say IDS .
Nice to see the site continuing its fine tradition of allowing a free rein for partisan rants….could do with some better quality ones though
Has anyone heard any figures on likely MP numbers at the moment? Nick Robinson was saying he thought Davis had 70 & falling this morning. I heard 40 or so quoted for Fox yesterday and both Clarke & Cameron apear to be between 20-30, with Rifkind trailing behind.
On those figures if Fox can come second in the first ballot, surely he could overtake Davis in the second or third, with either Clarke or Cameron emerging as the One Nation candidate?
21 Nice re-spinning of history Roger, totally wrong of course.
The reason that it “collapsed from the inside” was that Reagan/Thatcher called the Soviets bluff militarily and through it financially and their (the Soviets) attempt to maintain the status quo caused their economy implode, aided by very brave Russian politicians of the day seeing the writing on the wall and helping to
facilitate a peaceful solution to what could have been a very dangerous period.
49 - Ever since 1997 , the economy has been heading for rack and ruin according to the Conservatives - amazing that they have lost 2 more elections since then .
Trouble is that they are all pretty poor. KC is too old and europhile. DD safe but dull. LF a dark horse - too right wing but probably tories best chance (I´ll explain). DC a shot in the dark.
My guess is that the Tories will go for DC and regret it. They are not going to put up iwth a leader who apologises for being a Tory all the time - and many will dislike his rising without trace (Major-like). But after a general election defeat the tories normally go for the younger man. Davis could well be asked to takeover in similar circumstances to Howard. My forecast is that DC will blow up rather than grow up - and that those people who say he should have kept his powder dry are correct.
Tories would be better off with Fox - at least he is “new” and younger without an enormous silver spoon - and proud of being a Tory.
He will keep the moneymen happy, and won´t lose people to UKIP (indeed he will probably squeeze UKIP to death).
“As for Northern Ireland…..Both the Unionists and the Republicans have said it was the work of Blair and they should know
(NB Said by Trimble and Adams on a recent tribute program to Mo Mowlam) ”
Terrorists given carte blanche to kill and extort with impunity. A brilliant achievement indeed!
64 - LF may wipe out UKIP but would deliver the centre ground to the Lib Dems so Yes LF please .
“(indeed he will probably squeeze UKIP to death)”.
Are UKIP still alive??
64 - lol. You’ve been pushing this line for days. But really.
32 - I so agree about Doctor Fox being a deeply offensive man. Not that long ago (<6 years), i was doing a masters at a leading university and ended up having the misfortune to spend nearly an hour all on my tod with the man. Christ, it was agonising! The man is so narrow-minded!!! I was having to bite my tongue for the entire time. And his policies - he’d privatise the pavement if he could.
Having once had the pleasure to share a pint with Ken Clarke, I can tell you it was a different experience altogether. I think Cameron would also be quite affable, although perhaps appealing only to the toffs amongst us. I suspect Davis would actually be quite boring. Most ex-military people are.
On the subject of Clarke vs Cameron. I suppose give that Mrs Clarke looks anyone’s granny and that Ms Cameron looks like a typical slightly yummy mum, this begs the question: would you like our country’s first lady to be someone who offers cucumber sandwiches when you go round for tea or someone who goes round offering herbal tea? I suspect I would actually prefer the first, especially after Cherie.
PS I see no-one is pushing Do Davis as a selling point for the Davis camp.
69. And you say Fox is a deeply offensive man! A mirror someone please…….
46.William Wilberforce was a High Tory.
Looks like the initial magic number for DC, KC and LF is about 43.
Assuming Rifkind drops out, if Davis gets about 70 in Round 1 then the others will need 43 to avoid being knocked out in 4th place. Looks like they may all be very near to that number.
If Cameron avoids 4th then surely he must make the final as whether KC or LF is knocked out it would seem almost certain that Cameron would pick up enough votes from the loser to get through.
Very few if any votes are likely to transfer from LF to KC or vice versa, though if LF goes first then there could be the option of some tactical voting by the Davis camp to promote KC over DC.
71. So was Cameron if Andrew Rawnsley is to believed!
The torygraph is clearly anti LF. To produce unflattering photos of both LF and the future Mrs LF is an achievement indeed. They are both easily the best looking in their respective peer groups, though today’s torygraph reader’s wouldn’t know it.
58. The first anti slavery Law passed in 1807 outlawing trading in slaves and the future enslavement of any free man and ordering it’s phased elimination of was passed under a Tory Government.
The poor law establishing work houses etc was actally passed under a whig/liberal govt.
61 & 72 - Interesting analysis. I think I agree with the ideas.
After seeing the speech yesterday I think Fox is worse than Davis. He’s scary mental right-wing. I didn’t renew my membership under IDS and I reckon the same could happen under Fox. I just wouldn’t want to be associated with some of the rabid stuff he comes out with. I can put up with the right-wing of the party as long as it’s not so bad that it pushes away the people in the party of a more liberalone-nation persuasion.
56 - that was before the DD T-shirts which only served to remind us of some Tory attitudes to women.
61 Bullseye. After several calls, a bit of arm twisting and an IOU for lunch (my god this site is now costing me money !!) Here’s my figures that include the openly declared and the closet supporters.
David Davis : 80 heading south.
Ken Clarke : 25 heading north.
David Cameron : 25 heading north.
Liam Fox : 20 heading north.
Malcolm Rifkind : 10 heading home.
Around 40 genuinely undecided.
Two new independent blogs for David Cameron have sprung up
http://davidcameron.blogspot.com/
http://davidcameronleader.blogspot.com/
79 - Our friendly peasant DD supporter Wat Tyler has been conspiciously absent from here in the last 24 hours .
74 - but the Torygraph applauded LF in its editorial several days ago. Also, as a Torygraph reader, why wouldn’t I “know” that Mr and (”future”) Mrs Fox are the most attractive of their peer group?
61 At the moment the momentum is with LF. First rule of leadership is to keep the activists happy, and LF will do that. Whether he can move on to second rule (keep activists happy ile moving out to people who didn´t vote for you last time) is a more difficult question, of course…
75. I think trying to make a partisan claim for any of these slavery reform measures for the Tories or Whigs is pushing it. The anti-slavery movement was always a cross-party one - Wilberforce and Pitt were Tories, Fox and Burke Whigs. There were self-interested Tory opponents of reform and self-interested Whig opponents. The political cleavage was more about money and religion as party lines. Beyond that, the ‘parties’ in the late 18th and early 19th were far more amorphous than now, with lots of MPs on the fringes of them, and considerable factional splits within them. This isn’t a very meaningful debate, indeed it is anachronistic - these issues weren’t thought of in this way at the time and shouldn’t be now.
Well I see Europe will be back in the news tomorrow - the ECHR has just ruled that we have to give prisoners the vote!
When PB meets PB. I love this:
“Cameron & Fox - the dream ticket. They are in talks today. They’d wipe the floor with Brown & Co.”
http://www.popbitch.com/newboard/32/91/78/0/
85 - That must be why Jack W is so quiet this morning: he’s creating rival threads about “our Ken” on popbitch. Wonder what his username is there?
84. Another reason to short Clarke
86 - His user name on popbitch is in honour of his icon: Kate Thornton. He is now spreading rumours about Ken and Kate Moss.
ECHR - is not the EU
89 - who said the EU? Although the distinction is spurious in the wider public.
89. May also provide an opening for Ken if he is smart enough. Doesn’t conflict earlier views but a well timed salvo at the decision would helpfully show he will not mindlessly support anything that comes out of the EU or ECHR. Could be an opportunity.
88 - that really would be the dream scenario. They need a social liberal with a council house upbringing, track record of success in business and great name recognition. Plus Ken Clarke to add some weight to the ticket.
Well it’s lame duck leader time …… but which one …… Ooohhh yes ….. Howards Way !!
86 book value. I do have a life outside of the site ….. I think
84 - The European Court of Human Rights is *not* an EU institution!
94 - Sorry, I was a bit late on that one.
92 - And Pete Doherty looks like a young Liam Fox.
Howard gives May a smackdown: “We are not, and have never been, a nasty party”.
What a fantastic joke from Howard!!!!
7. Yes, Nick Robinson is dreadful - his appointment was a catstrophic misjudgement, especially given the very good alternative of the lovely Martha. It really is time that the BBC appreciates that polite, yet subtle and probing enquiry can achieve so much more than Paxmanesque aggression - witness the very clever way in which David Dimbelby elicited ‘regime change plus’ from Howard just before the election.
98 alex. Do you mean nasty party or leader of the opposition !!
100 - leader of the opposition.
26. Icarus. Said in that way, it seems that the stone throw against tory candidates is the most fashionable sport since the fox hunting ban.
31. In today’s Indy Curry was quoted about fearing that MPs will vote tactically to keep Ken out of the final stage.
61. Cameron’s camp believes they have 40 backers (from the Independent)
80. Mark. He’s in Blackpool
Howard on about Wilberforce now.
“We are a simply a party with many nasty members, and a nasty message.” Howard (check this agrees with delivered speech)
97. yes and his election startegy was successful.
Real world calling Howard….
104 Peter, has he really said it?
Cameron is too slick IMO, and the electorate will get bored of him very quickly. Britain needs somebody who looks like he is anti-spin and straight talking, not another Blair.
It is getting silly for Cameron to become a serious candidate on the basis of one speech.
Tories need contrast from New Labour and Clarke is the only one with a bit of colour who is a firm favourite with voters.
No wonder the Conservatives have been in opposition so long, if they make decisions based on the direction of the wind.
Howard talking about iPods now.
Seriously, a good point I think.
Of course you aren’t nasty - I have met some of you.
Its just that a large part of the electorate think that your policies are selfserving, uncaring and, well, nasty.
As the electorate are clearly wrong, you have a choice: you can either blame your communication abilities or the stupid electorate.
97. ironically Howard is more responsible for them being thought the ‘nasty party’ than anyone including Ice-Box herself. ……And this speech reminds us all why.
Maggie become leader when the party was in power. There is a considerable advantage here as the opposition was weak and she did not need to convince the electorate to switch votes. public speaking was not such a high priority at that time.
112 - didn’t do British history at school, louis?
113 - or current affairs?
63 And you’ve won precisely how many Mark ???
Louie j - I think you are wrong.
112. eh?
Why are you on this site if your knowledge of politics is THAT bad?
107. Britain might well need a straight-talkng, non-spinning leader - if there is such a person - but I doubt they’d ever vote for him or her.
116… Think?
I despair
112 louis j. No Maggie became leader of the opposition after defeating Ted Heath.
119 - lol
For two minutes it looked like the Tories had changed. Where did he learn to sneer like that? But the Madame Defarges seem to like it…..
84 Quite so, it’s NEVER going to be anything less than a festering sore (under KC !)
Howard has always had a good line in sneers
“The three strands of the DD proposition seem to be:-
* My mother was a single parent on a council estate
* I’ve got many more MPs backing me then anybody else
* The bookies make me favourite”
Aren’t these the same 3 propositions for any LibDem candidate trying to win any seat anywhere in the country?
* I live locally
* I’ve got many more residents backing me then anybody else
* I’ve made myself the favourite
112 - Louis - SHOCK - you must be very young!
Margaret Thatcher became leader of the Opposition in 1975 when Labour were in power. She then had 4 years to prove herself as leader of the opposition before the May 1979 General Election when she defeated Labour PM James Callaghan. She had been Sec of State for Education under Ted Heath.
126 - Rik W - SHOCK - you must be very drunk - you mentioned the T word
125 - Nice dig. But living locally is pretty good as far as I can see and most residents backing me = most voters = win.
Tim Bell having a real go at Nick Robinson!
Dont be too hard on Louis J. We all make mistakes on here!
My “I think”, was I thought a more polite way of pointing out an error than some on here.
OK fair comment I apologise to you Icarus and to Louis J.
I’m very uptight due to horrific possibility of Liam Fox becoming leader and guaranteeing another 8 years at least of Labour.
123 - Same message from Toryboy , same message from me since June DD - mediocre , KC an election too late , DC best of a poor bunch but a gamble because of his youth , LF purity before power . Please assume I am trying to mislead you into electing LF , you will get your wish of purity and my wish of no power to your party .
130. Being polite is sometimes not well appreciated on the web. A “you, silly man, you’re talking non-sense and you aren’t even intelligent!” is more effective
125. Which are the 3 main propositions for Labour’s candidates?
110. So are the electorate stupid for only giving the Lib Dems 20% of the vote or are Lib Dems seen by them as even more nasty/incompetent/absurd/irrelevant (pick any) than the Tories?
130 Icarus. “We all make mistakes on here!”
PB.com posters make mistakes !! What rot. How could you possibly come to such a foolish conclusion with such sages as Tory Boy , Printz, Rik W, Andrea, Tabman, book value, alex all singing from the same hymn sheet. Modesty forbids me from mentioning my own contribution :
http://www.getfreshpix.com/Photos/0LMNZ21/PN93NW3f33205T.jpg
135. Jack, I’ve just finished to have my lunch and those images are not the best thing to see!
136 Andrea. True believers on the site don’t do lunch !! Unless there are very long ones
BTW Dinky has declared for DC, just been on the beeb confirming so and looking very majesterial !!
137 - Who is Dinky?
When I joined the Liberal Party we had 6 MPs. We now have more than ten times that - It is taking longer than I hoped but we are getting better at convincing a rightly sceptical electorate
138 - Alan Duncan, I think.
138 - You don’t know! Alan Duncan
137. Jack, international posters are allowed to have lunch.
Re 4. My £160 is now £215. Go Cameron!
Andrew Mitchell’s not the best public spokesman for the Davis campaign, IMO.
Aha. Thought so. Recently (August) when I was coming back from a holiday in Cannes he was on my plane flying from Nice to LHR. He had saome young fella with him and they had obviously had the most steaming row as weren’t talking at all. Was hilarious. They checked in together but didn’t talk. Sat together but didn’t talk. In LHR waited for luggage for ages and didn’t talk. Then they were next to us in the cab rank and still weren’t talking. At the time he was still running for leader I think.
145 Stonch. Sounds like a married couple to me
Ooh, the graph thingy is on now.
145. Why don’t I have these encounters too? My chances to improve my social status are going away fast……
And then if I’ve to come to UK, will I pass DD’s British values test?
observer - is he a better public spokesman than DD himself though?
149. AT- Isn’t it easier to say who is a worse public speaker than DD?
147 - interesting stuff.
149 - The big problem is, Whips aren’t supposed to communicate. They’re supposed to mutter conspiratorially, with the occasional grunt.
139. Wow! does that mean in another 30 years you will have 600 MPs? (good bar chart here surely?) Or that it will take another 150 years for a Lib Dem majority at 60 MPS per 30 years?
Reckon the supposed “appeal to women” will be pushed hard by the Davis camp in coming weeks.
154. Aren’t all candidates (except Ken and Sir Malcolm) highlighting their supposes appeal to women?
The funny part is that according to a poll, Theresa May has more appeal to women that many of them.
As a Labour supporter, its wonderful to look in and watch the most successful political party of the 20th century get it so wrong again.
To be honest I can’t see any of the candidates being an effective opposition to Labour. KC idealy should be the best bet, but in a very televisual age, he really doesn’t stand a chance. The others all have fault lines, Cameron - tory boy. DD well yawn - MR - to much linked to the past and LF another right winger who will never dream of re-occupying the center ground.
To be honest it looks like another Tory loss at the 2009 GE. Sorry guys
153 - With LF and purity before power it will take many fewer years than that .
155 - Why is it surprising that Theresa May should have an appeal to women?
Another very good point from Mike that Davies simply should have put the work in on that speech.
However, running the country is not about being a good public speaker. Some politicians go in for monologue auditions for RADA. It may get good headlines but it’s not on voters’ job description for a PM - even if it IS on the political parties’ job description for a party leader.
I’m not saying public speaking doesn’t matter. Of course it does. But this is a way over-reaction.
Good to see Cameron doing well at it though. Much as I think he’s far too inexperienced, it would be fantastic to be proved wrong. I may be pretty anti-Tory, but a crap opposition isn’t good for the country, even if it does ensure Labour stay in power.
158. Alex, you posted the Daily Mail article about that poll. Commenting the poll and DD topping it, the Mail (they aren’t very good in writing articles) suggested the question was a good indicator abour who female voters find sexy and who not
Here is Andy Warhol’s view of the leadership contest
http://liberalism2010.blogspot.com/2005/10/andy-warhol-theory-and-conservatives.html
You people who think Fox and Davies are too right-wing to win an election should remember two things.
One, they’re in a leadership contest at the moment, and in a leadership contest it’s strategic to move away from the voters’ centre-ground towards the centre of your own party, that is, mid-right by voters’ standards. Even Clarke’s done that with his carefully worded and substance-free cooling on the euro a couple of months ago (so much for being the plain-talking no spin candidate). The winner is likely to move back towards the centre when they try to win an election. They will have to come up with some serious ideas to win; or hope the economy goes belly up and they look half competent.
Two, it’s usually but by no means always true that you win elections from the centre. Look at George Bush. As David Davis pointed out, (my paraphrasing) the massive leaders are the ones who move the centre to them. Look at Thatcher.
Didn’t you suggest originally, Andrea, that Theresa May’s appeal was principally to lesbians?
162.If you run a party leadership campaign as a right wing and then when you win it, you’ll start to claim you’re a moderate centrist, no one will believe you anymore. You could also be seen as an opportunist.
159 - I’d agree that public speaking isn’t the be all and end all but when you can’t get a rousing reception from those who broadly agree with you I can’t see how you’ll sell the message to the wider elctorate.
On anther note can anyone tell me which MP’s have recently declared for the various candidates - I think someone said both Fox and Cameron had picked up some more endorsements.
162. George Bush always strikes me as a strange example of a successful right-winger - he has had two extremely narrow victories, the first decided by the Supreme Court, the second narrow despite being a “War President”. In a parliamentary system his majorities would’ve been tiny.
mmm. Anyone who thinks we need to become like the American Republican party clearly doesn’t live in the real Western Europe.
And though you might not like that most of the voters do
165 - the second one was only “narrow” because of the electoral system.
Two weeks ago the Lib Dems had a cross patch conference and were seen as having underacheived in the election. This week the Tories had an ebulliant conference and were seen as “on the way back”. Actually, I think that the Tories are flirting with anhilliation. When Liam Fox is considered more credible than Ken Clarke, there is something terminal going on. The Lib Dems were kicking ourselves- but the fundamental shift to Liberalism remains as strong as ever- and with Fox, Davis or even cameron in charge of the Tories, the shift is likely to happen even faster. Only KC- with all his myriad faults- offers even a chance for the Conservatives, and he does not have the traction that Cameron just got. Bye bye Tories- horrible knowing you.
148 - Andrea, if you want to bump into politicians I would suggest you visit Edinburgh - you can hardly move for them. Quite often see Ming Campbell walking towards his (very nice) townhouse, the Ed South MSP lives on my street and you see a whole host of other MSP’s around town (allthough none of them very famous). On top of that I’ve seen Margo McDonald, Alistair Darling and the late Robin Cook in my local supermarket.
The problem is James O, we’ve heard it all before. Remember all the confident predictions last year that the Lib Dems were about to replace the Conservatives? The voters had other ideas.
168 - the fundamental shift to Liberalism or Liberal Democratisation?
164. Max. Fox announced yesterday 3 new backers: Stephen Hammond, Brooks Newmark and Stephen Crabb
Cameron was backed yesterday by heresa Villiers, Mark Lancaster, Grant Shapps and David Mundell.
Duncan backed him today.
Not sure if someone else has come out today.
The only way we will slide towards the abyss is if we elect Fox and his mentalist right-wing agenda. Even Davis will manage to tread water.
Meanwhile Charles Kennedy is less of a prime-minister than ANYONE speaking at the Tory conference (with the possible exception of FM)
169. Max, but I’ve to have a chance with them. Not that I’m jelous a good wife at home……..
Mandelson was on holiday in Italy this summer, but he was near Naples and I’m not sure I would have liked to see him.
Re: 126 - Even more important, Rik, she had been an MP for many years before that - elected 1959, a candidate in 1950 ? Cameron is a green banana who could and very well might become a formidable politician in five or ten years but he’s not ready yet.
He wobbled badly under fire in August and early September and was described as a “busted flush” not that long ago. KC is the men with gravitas and a nice line in levitas too. Davis is presumably still the main Right-wing candidate as Fox seems to have turned off a number of people on the socially liberal wing.
I don’t “fear” any of the leadership contenders - the fact that there are so many “possibles” may strike you as a position of strength. As a punter, an open race usually means they’re all much of a muchness.
I do feel, for what it’s worth, that had Howard led in 1997 instead of Hague and Hague taken over from IDS, we wouldn’t be having this leadership battle now. Cameron is where Hague WAS in 1997 with all the weaknesses. Look at Hague now, he would be a shoo-in if he were to be a candidate.
Tell me, Rik, if Hague had stood, would you vote for him ?
If Hague had stood I’d have backed him to the hilt. We have lost a great leader by sticking him into bat too soon.
156-’But in a television age he doesn’t stand a chance’
I think the contrary is true of Ken Clarke and that the public at large appreciates the natural style / breath of fresh air ‘take me as I am,I smoke, drink etc’. as oppossed highly spun,stage managed politicians according to the political correctness lobby, which have been dished up to the public over the past few years.
If all goes to plan in the next few years you are going to have GB as your leader ,whilst his rants at party conferences may go down well with the non Blairite faithful,to the public at large is is hard to think of a politician that has less charisma and appeal in media terms,just a dour,dull Scotsman.
168. Goodness next we will be told historical forces make a shift to ‘liberalism’ inevitable…Marxism is on the way back among the Lib Dems!
why do people keep referring to the light hearted side of KC. He’s not clubbable, sociable or remotely funny. Being fat, unhealthy and badly dressed doesn’t make you amusing. It’s amazing how a media myth can developover time.
I see that Brute is praising Cameron in the Spectator. That’s him sunk then.
[178]
“The People’s flag is slightly pink/ It’s not as red as some folks think/ Then let the scarlet banner float/ We want the middle classe’s vote/ Though cowards flinch and traitors sneer/ We’ll be in power for many a year”
Less revolutionary, more capitalist: “the trend is your friend”
179. “Being fat, unhealthy and badly dressed doesn’t make you amusing.”
Is being a fat a good reason not to vote someone? And not having a good fashion teste too?
Do these 2 things make Ken a bad person?
I really dobut it!
[179] “Fat Stupid and drunk is no way to go through life, son”
179 - “Being fat, unhealthy and badly dressed doesn’t make you amusing.”
Of course it does.
70 - everything that was said in post 69 about mr fox is god’s truth. maybe his condescension is only bettered by yours?
may i suggest that, if you are going to join these boards to wax lyrically about your “favourite”, you start some kind of campaign rather than bother us all with your posts.
PB.com has always prided itself on vigorous, independent debate, rather than pathetic put-downs. sadly “there’s always one…”
168 Don’t leave so soon James - stick around and watch the Country being run properly for a change.
176 Ditto - But his time will come again I’m sure.
185. It was your sexism I was talking about. Not your likes or dislikes of Mr Fox. And I agree that most PB regulars prefer vigorous debate which is why I doubt many were impressed by your asinine attack on named politicians wives.
179. “Being fat, unhealthy and badly dressed doesn’t make you amusing.”
An AWFUL lot of voters will identify with him then? And they’re mostly not that brilliant public speakers either, and probably above average age to boot!
Post 69 was both patronising and offensive. So if you’re going to dish it out, I’m afraid you have to be prepared to take it as well.
169-’Actually I think that the Tories are flirting with anihillation’
It sounds just as credible as your decapitation strategy at the last election,can you remind us how many senior Tories you managed to decapitate?’
Interesting times. What a different Conference from usual, and very positive. Good to meet you too James.
For what it’s worth here are my random mumblings.
Speeches
I listened to four of the five leadership bid speeches from exactly the same point on the Conference Hall floor, so I feel able to judge the comparative reactions. And sorry Nuala, I didn’t watch Rifkind’s speech although anecdotal reports are that it was first class, the only sure thing about this election is he will come 5th.
First up was Cameron. Pleasingly impressive. I watched stranding next to Boris Johnson. The last person I remember seeing make a completely notes/autocue free delivery was Anne Widdecombe in Bournemouth about 5 years ago. And lke her, he carried it extremely well. My concerns remain that a lot of the rhetoric was very superficial, and remain unconvinced as yet of what happens when you scratch below the surface further. “Change to Win” was his slogan - personally I’d like to know a little bit more about what and how this change actually would be. Certainly did himself a lot of good though. I’d sum up the audience reation as “Enthusiastic”.
Tuesday afternoon saw Clarke. Watched standing next to George Osbourne. Big beast he (Clarke) certainly is. Started slowly, but when he got going, boy did he get going. Heavy on record, this was the type of speech that Conference has missed for the last 15 years. Convinced me - at the time - that Clarke was the one to beat. Audience reaction: “Electric”
Next morning saw Davis. The hall was packed, stood in front of the diminutive James Brokenshire, so may well have obscured his view. Davis gave the best speech I’ve ever seen him make, and it was still rubbish. Got on the phone to lay more Davis on betfair and the price had already started to collapse. I also had a tip about Fox for later in the day and managed to get in at 18s ready to lay off later. What a dreadful performer Davis is. The speech sounded like one he had just printed off the internet that IDS or William Hague might have made at some point i the past, and cut out the jokes. Audience reaction: “Polite”
Fox. Stood with Fox’s Press Chief. Liam Fox knows how to press the right buttons at Conference if nothing else. Consumate delivery, clever coded put downs, the surprise package of the week. My tip paid off and Fox came into 12s. Audience reaction: “Fervant”
Straw poll survey
The mood of representatives however was the thing that surprised me more than anything else. True to my word, I kept a tally of intentions of the people I spoke to - not scientific, and spread over the week (there was a marked change after Wednesday morning!) I have split into three categories to test my theories about which candidates would appeal to what type of people, and tried to get a decent number (ie over 100) for each category.
Gay men. Sample size 116 Davis 3 Clarke 34 Cameron 38 Fox 22 Undecided 19
Straight men. Sample size 106 Davis 18 Clarke 17 Cameron 38 Fox 15 Undecided 28
Women. sample size 108 Davis 4 Clarke 42 Cameron 27 Fox 32 Undecided 3
Make of it what you will. Pretty much all those who indicated Davis to me were in the first day. After his speech his campaign seemed to die a slow and painful death, and it was very difficult to see anyone prepared to publically back him.
ITN and Sky News also completed straw polls. I am led to believe that ITN only found 5 in 100 people backing Davis, and Sky had him last out of the five when I spoke to them in the afternoon.
The Campaigns
Clarke. Visible in pale blue fleeces, Clarke team’s coup was giving out branded water in the sweltering Winter Gardens. This was so popular Cameron’s team copied it the following day (although with fizzy water that explded on opening) and Davis seemed to photocpy his logo and stick over some bottles they’d bought down the supermarket.
Cameron’s team grew day by day and the I(heart)DC stickers became more and more ubituquous as the week went on. Like Clarke, Cameron’s literature was top notch, and varied.
Davis. Like his speech, rubbish. He got in first dishing out plastic goody bags from the outset with DD wristbands - although I didn’t see anyone wearing one - some cheap looking badges and a lot of bumph that even the most cash strapped association wouldn’t put out as an In Touch. More representatives seemed to be interested in the “truth about Davis” leaflet that was being peddled outside.
Fox campaign. Non existent, bar some tiny little business cards.
Rifkind camapaign. Seemed to start on the last day when about half a dozen members of the blue rinse brigade were dishing out some leafets.
Off the record conversations
Plenty of them. I had some very ineteresting conversations with MPs over the week but given how quickly postings from this site get around the party I have decided not to post.
However I am absolutely convinced the Davis parliamentary vote is soft, that he may struggle to get as many votes as he already has pledges. It’s wide open still and as an outside bet I think the members may end up with a choice of Cameron or Clarke v Davis or Fox.
The big caveat I have is that the 10,000 members who go to Confeence are incredibly more politically sophisticated than the 290,000 who don’t. If the leader was decided by Conference then by the end of the week Cameron would be a shoe-in, as his support base seemed to visibly grow day by day. But it isn’t, and until I speak to some more ordinary members I wouldn’t want to call it.
I’m still wavering towards Clarke, but wouldn’t be unhappy with cameron. Whilst I personally like Fox, I remain unconvinced he’s the right man. Davis is a complete no no.
Typo above - The undecided figure for the straight men should be 18 not 28
There are 10,000 members at conference? That sounds like a rather large number.
193. thanks for your report.
“Gay men. Sample size 116 Davis 3 Clarke 34 Cameron 38 Fox 22 Undecided 19
Straight men. Sample size 106 Davis 18 Clarke 17 Cameron 38 Fox 15 Undecided 28
Women. sample size 108 Davis 4 Clarke 42 Cameron 27 Fox 32 Undecided 3″
No differences between straight women and gay women?
Andrea. I only know of about half a douzen lesbians and therefore the sample size wouldn’t be very large.
196 - caught in the spam trap but I only know of about half a douzen gay women in the Conservative Party so [a] the sample would be too small and [b] I’m not about to start asking the ladies I speak to about whether they are or aren’t. I’m in an information priviliged position of knowing who the gay men are, given I was chairman of TORCHE until three years ago.
197. Aren’t gay women allowed into Torch too?
If so, do male members outnumber female ones?
193 - “Gay men. Sample size 116 Davis 3 Clarke 34 Cameron 38 Fox 22 Undecided 19″
What can we conclude from this? Is Cameron the beneficiary of the groin vote? What do you reckon Andrea?
200- Cameron has clearly been boosted by Hanky Dinky Dunky’s fans. Davis 3 gay supporters: Nick Herbert, Ian Dale and Michael Brown.
I’m told that London’s rent boys haven’t declared yet. They’re crucial”
Cameron will be PM in 4 years time.
Nuff said really.