Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Richard Nabavi asks Would Ed face a coup a few months after
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Richard Nabavi asks Would Ed face a coup a few months after a Labour victory?
If the voting in the next General Election reflects current opinion polling, Ed Miliband will become Prime Minister next May. Of course, the Conservatives are hopeful that the polls will shift before then, but, as things stand today, the possibility of a Labour-led government, either in a hung parliament or with a small majority, is certainly a very real one.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Labour only sack their leaders when they lose a GE.
The one exception to that is, I think, if there is a very hung Parliament. In those circumstances, I can imagine the shadow Cabinet regretfully telling their leader that someone else would stand a better chance of getting the confidence of the Commons.
It's the way you tell 'em Richard!
http://labourlist.org/2014/10/how-can-labour-have-a-core-vote-strategy-if-our-core-vote-dont-know-what-were-for/
Can't see it. Even Brown had to be dragged kicking and screaming to use Mandy again.
And people seriously think this could be a competitive news organization to the BBC!
We'd get better informed if we read Plato's homilies all day!
http://news.sky.com/story/1348776/heywood-by-election-miliband-on-shaky-ground
IMRC - don't the present rules make it nigh on impossible to oust a sitting Labour PM ?
"The friendly fire is turning into a barrage (in Heywood and Middleton). A trio of grandees - the donor John Mills along with MPs Tessa Jowell and Margaret Hodge - have criticised his "mansion tax" policy."
I'm sure the good folk of Heywood and Middleton can sleep easy knowing that in their particular neck of the woods they could own whole neighbourhoods and still fall a long way short of qualifying for the mansion tax!
And as SimonStClare says, it makes no sense for them to do it. If they have not gotten rid of him before winning, they're not going to afterwards, If anything he is strengthened as people said he couldn't do it, they undermined the fight with their negativity, and he did manage it.
Tom Clarke (Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill)
Brian Donohoe (Ayrshire Central)
Michael McCann (East Kilbride, Strathaven & Lesmahagow)
Jim McGovern (Dundee West),
Iain McKenzie (Inverclyde)
Frank Roy (Motherwell & Wishaw)
Jim Sheridan (Paisley & Renfrewshire North)
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/02/labour-and-lib-dem-mps-who-voted-against-gay-marriage-full-list
Anyway, good to get to read the semi-mythical (in my own head) Nabavi article.
If EVEL can free us from these medieval religious influences then we should all applaud.
Looks like the Lobby has got over its disappointment at Ukip's defection-that-never-was as Farage prances on a tank in Heywood. #wotlarks
Tory back benchers, on the other hand.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_London_Council_leadership_of_Ken_Livingstone
Perhaps Richard would like to tackle the more relevant question:
"Would David Cameron resign immediately in the event of the Conservatives no longer being in Government after the next election ?"
We all know the Conservatives could "win" the election in terms of votes but still finish up in Opposition on seats.
As to the question - I was struck by this piece from Amol Rajan in last week's Evening Standard:
http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/amol-rajan-why-younger-labour-wants-to-lose-the-election-9770022.html
It's hard to underestimate the potential problems the British Government of 2015-20 is going to face from rising interest faces to Europe. It's quite possible ANY Government will find itself in deep trouble by 2016-17 facing a slowing economy predicated on problems in Europe and rising interest rates as well as unrest over spending cuts and a deficit that just won't go away.
Excellent article, Richard. The points are still valid. The interesting betting question is: who to bet on as next Labour leader?
I'm not convinced by Yvette Cooper, I think she'd be seen as a blast from the past. Chuka Umunna is all froth, and far too obvious. Andy Burnham, not sure what he's really all about.
I prefer the 'clean-break' new generation: Rachel Reeves. Stella Creasy to a lesser extent. Possibly as trading bets. Still have a soft spot for Alan Johnson, but possibly too old. Tristham Hunt looks and sounds v. middle England, but possibly too "posh" for the unions.
Jim Murphy might be a possibility, but I doubt he'd win. He's earned a lot of respect from what I can gather.
Warning: I have no special knowledge, just opinions.
Thanks.
(phew!)
If Ladbrokes were to do a Labour vote share line, I'd probably put it at 34.5% (why would it be at 36.1%? Higher than Labour got in 2005 under Tony Blair?) and price it at 5/6 under and 5/6 over.
I'd also 'sell' that line as well - for as much as I could. I think Labour will struggle to breach 33%.
On the subject of those recent polls, we've now had 3 YouGovs since the big move (total 'N' of around 5,800, MoE ±1.3). The ones before all had toplines of CON 31, LAB 36 and a Lib Dem average of 6.7. The toplines afterwards averaged CON 35.3, LAB 33.7, LIB 7. (I've excluded the poll that straddled the speech).
Here are the changes in the toplines and the switchers:
http://numbercruncheruk.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/conference-season-polling-moves-who-has.html
About half of the Conservative gain of 4.3 points is down to improved retention of 2010 voters (mostly the expense of UKIP) with nearly a point coming each from Labour and the Lib Dems.
Labour dropped 2.3 points, 0.8 of which went directly to the Tories, the remainder being scattered across the minor parties.
The Lib Dems are up 0.3 (within the margin of error), due soley to improved retention of 2010 voters. Since their conference is ongoing, this could well change, so I'll revisit this analysis if it does so meaningfully.
Among all groups of 2010 voters, the pattern is the same: CON up, LAB and UKIP down, LIB no change (yet).
The question, of course, is whether this move will stick or fade, but that is the state of play at the moment.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29255449
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/bd/Catholicism_in_Scotland_in_the_2011_census.png
Also the Catholic Church has been effusive in its praise of Salmond.....
Farron...you
read political betting...
but don't...
bet.
Tom Clarke
Brian Donohoe
Michael McCann
Jim McGovern
Iain McKenzie
Frank Roy
Jim Sheridan
1/3 of a all Labour MPs who voted Against were from Scottish constituencies.
Or would that be telling!
Rightly or wrongly (and I'm not sure I'm too fussed either way) there are still a significant number of people who hold a traditional view of marriage: a legal sexual union of two opposing genders. I don't think they should be vilified for it, although I recognise that it's now outdated.
What gripes with me is how it's almost impossible for anyone to oppose same-sex marriage, today, without being called homophobic. You sometimes can't even defend those that do without being 'implicated' yourself.
I don't like that. Not at all. Bigotry seems to be wonderful when it's in the name of opposing alleged bigotry.
1. (several people): 'Labour don't do coups'. Well, yes, true. But would they have any choice? Everyone agrees that the next government will have to make some really tough choices. Ed Miliband has his virtues, but the ability to make tough choices isn't one of them, still less the ability to inspire his party to accept those tough choices. We also know that there are already - a few months before an election which Labour might well win - rumours about leadership. Alan Johnson is off-piste. Andy Burnham is clearly on manoeuvres. Ed Balls scarcely bothers to hide his frustration and contempt. The grandees are grandstanding. The party has no programme, yet the next government will need to save some £25 billion a year. Is that feasible when you start off unpopular and with even your own supporters demoralised and directionless? Stick those propositions into your inference machine, and the conclusion pops out. Something has to give, and it may well be the precedent that Labour don't do coups.
2. @stodge: "Would David Cameron resign immediately in the event of the Conservatives no longer being in Government after the next election ?" Yes, I expect so.
3. @Casino_Royale I prefer the 'clean-break' new generation: Rachel Reeves. Stella Creasy to a lesser extent. I would agree that that is quite likely in the event of a leadership change after a Labour defeat in 2015 (I think we all agree that Ed is toast in that case). However, in the scenario I'm postulating, a change of leader whilst in government, it will surely be one of the more experienced contenders: Yvette Cooper or Andy Burnham, probably. They'd want someone capable of getting an immediate grip on what would a potentially very chaotic situation. Whether Andy Burnham would fulfil that requirement is another matter, but I expect Yvette Cooper would.
Peter Hitchens did a Radio 4 programme on "Liberal Bigotry" last year, where a "self confessed liberal luvvie" lady who was fiercely pro gay marriage said she was embarrassed at the lack of understanding shown to anyone who didn't agree with her by her own side
Why should Scottish voters have two says in the matter - once in Scotland, and again in England?
No surprise either to see the Conservative-inclined quite to pick up and amplify such "despair" but that's the nature of politics.
They relegate the populus poll to the bottom almost as an afterthought
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/07/labour-poll-rating-four-year-low-miliband
Whever leads Labour they will do the damage to the country that Labour always do.
Trying to justify English votes for English matters to labour posters is a completely fruitless task.
And that's just domestically. Can't they see how their actions are being viewed abroad?
BTW how did Mr Mundell the solitary Tory MP in Scotland vote in that instance? Welsh MPs? NI MPs?
On the main topic, it did occur to me that Mr Nabavi's thesis has some support if one considers that a Labour victory in the UK could contain a serious defeat in part of it. If SLAB were to suffer a defeat - or at least serious damage - in Scotland after a damaging indyref (damaging from the point of view of SLAB), then Mr M has to take some responsibility for that. Whether [edit: such a defeat] is possible is much debated at the moment, of course, not least because the Yes vote figures strike at the heart of the SLAB core votes, but that is a separate matter: the question here is whether a defeat in Scotland would be enough to trigger a coup.
Precisely which bills are ‘English’? A large proportion are a mixture of English and UK extent, as other measures are added during the passage of a Bill. What about ‘English’ bills that have public expenditure implications across the UK? Would such a system create two classes of MP?
YouGov do have a good record (particularly when some people accuse them of bias) such as the London Mayorals and the Euros this year.
The problem is that the PC world has confused Tolerate with Celebrate.
It is an unarguable fact that a certain small % of people (and many many animals in fact) are homosexual. Born that way. Can't help it and don't want to be any different. It is a 100% natural state of being for those 2% or whatever the number is. It is therefore intolerable from an equality point of view to deny them equal rights in marriage etc. If you really believe in freedom and equality then you beleive it for gays too.
It is also unarguable that the other 98% find the 2% a bit Eeew! Or more than a bit yucky indeed. That is also a 100% natural state of feeling. It can be a primal visceral thing coming from somewhere deep in our old, lizard brains.
So the challenge is for the 98% to Tolerate the 2%. They don't have to like homosexuality, they don't have to Celebrate it, they don't have to support Gay Pride Marches or wear AIDS trinkets or whatever. But I think they do have to accept it and not impose their own strongly felt views. For that way lies totalitarianism and the rejection of freedoms for all.
What would be best is if we all just accepted this and STFU about homosexuality - from either the pro or anti side.
If all the established Westminster leaders emerge as distinctly unloved, the most prominent political insurgent is not exactly mopping up all the lost affection. Just 36% say Nigel Farage is doing a good job, while 37% think he is performing badly. That produces a net –1 for the Ukip leader in the week of the Clacton-on-Sea byelection. It is a modest improvement over some of his recent scores, but remains a considerable setback from May 2013, when he briefly enjoyed net approval of +17.
Seems fair.
One is: It's a free country.
Two is: I'm entitled to my opinion.
Three is: Nice one Cyril.
Have I stopped hearing all three for rhe same reason? Or is there something sinister about the extinction of the first two? When did this happen?
It's an argument......
The SNP voted on English tuition fees. They abstain on some votes, but they vote on other things when it suits their purpose
If that is from all voters, he is doing very well.,I keep hearing that UKIP are the most disliked party, yet he is not unpopular, and two of his rivals are 30-40 points more unpopular, despite leading more popular parties
Ever heard of 'Devolution'? Ever thought what it means? Its a 2 way street or should be.
Scottish Labour MPs voted on a matter that had no relevance to their constituents because of devolution. 'Devolution' - geddit? Labour MPs voted on an English only matter for which they had no responsibility for with their own constituents. They could vote without any fear of reaction from their own constituents.
Sophy Ridge @SophyRidgeSky 3h3 hours ago
Nigel Farage says if UKIP win the Heywood and Miliband by election, Ed Miliband will be gone by Christmas
IMO any trouble that Labour might get into after a close GE result, would be nought compared to the trouble Dave would experience trying to navigate an EU negotiation.
One way to sabotage any "mansion" tax would be if the Tories changed it to a square footage tax, which would take in all properties, but be set at a negligible level.
Labour would then have to either increase its level for everybody - including their own payroll vote in the damage - or admit to the envy factor, and set it a different level in Tory constituencies.