Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Electing a leader from Scotland could give the LDs a huge boos
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Electing a leader from Scotland could give the LDs a huge boost north of the the border
We all know that GE10 wasn’t a good one for Gordon Brown’s LAB. The party lost power after having a comfortable majority for 13 years and suffered huge seat losses.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Also worth mentioning that neither Gordon Brown or Charles Kennedy had three such dominant female figures in Sturgeon, Davidson or Dugdale to deal with in the Holyrood devolved Parliament.
Mike S is right to look to the power base.......however it seems focussed on Scotland or the fringes of London, hardly a 2005 beating combination.......the old West Country strongholds (Yeovil etc) and Wales seem absolutely gone for the time being, they were flattered by 12 seats (should have been 14 or 15) but thats life, and the LDs need to get used to it
I see GO's organ is on the case:
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/jo-swinson-emerges-as-favourite-to-become-new-lib-dem-leader-a3565686.html
Btw, I posted on this thread before, it's disappeared
They,and you for that matter, thought that about T May.
http://mothership.sg/tag/38-oxley-road/
Is Swinson good enough? Who knows. She is completely untested at that level. Lib Dem members need to be aware that they will be picking someone who could be debating against Corbyn and May (or Boris, or Davis) in three months. They may not have time to grow into the role and if they do flop, it will simply confirm the party's irrelevance in many people's minds. We saw how much damage the lack of media coverage is doing the Lib Dems; another 7% performance would see them condemned to the same media oblivion for the next five years.
Farron's comments about gays confirmed what plenty of us have said for ages, the Liberals are the most illeberal party we have, campaigning for a second referendum is further evidence.
They'll appoint another Messiah and in 6 months they'll still be going nowhere.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/speakerscorner/2017/06/how-tories-lost?fsrc=scn/tw/te/bl/ed/
'Sir; Lynton Crosby's work?
Must admit to being rather surprised by Tim Farron’s decision to stand down, he gave a very dignified speech imho as to his reasons, which for me raised a few concerns regarding faith and politics, but that’s a discussion for another time. – And so to his replacement, Jo Swinson appears to be the only name being touted around, so unless the narrative changes and a new LD candidate makes a bid, she’ll be the party leader.
Easter-egg makers not doing enough to cut packaging, says MP
Lib Dem Jo Swinson's report praises Nestlé but criticises luxury eggs from Baileys and M&S
Many of their traditional areas of strength went Tory in a big way last Thursday and it is hard to see that changing in the short term. A seat like Argyll & Bute, for example, which they used to hold and were still a strong second in in 2015 they are now a fairly poor third and in danger of falling to 4th.
A more important issue for the Lib Dems is whether they get a national hearing. Nick Clegg and Charlie Kennedy before him did that really well. Farron struggled to be heard and seemed to have very little of interest to say. Is Jo Swinson the answer to that? I am not sure. Cable (much though I detest the man) or Lamb would probably do better.
I like Swinson too, but Lamb is exactly my sort of politician, with good judgement. He also speaks well and was one of several very capable LD Ministers.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/commentisfree/2017/jun/15/the-guardian-view-on-grenfell-tower-theresa-may-hurricane-katrina?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
In choosing Farron, the mistake was to put tactical considerations above strategic ones. The key issue at this leadership election, as it ought to have been at the last, is choosing a leader who will establish a strong, distinctive position for the Lib Dems in the context of an economically populist Labour Party, and who will make the right judgments on issues. Choosing on the basis of who will give a small boost in a handful of seats where the LDs have any chance north of the border is simply a failure to see the big picture and the big problem for the party.
Isn't this what David Herdson complained about in his now almost legendary post? He was given wrong information about where to campaign and wasted time campaigning among solid Labour voters.
Given the arithmetic of this parliament, the next leader is going to be very important and have relevance in a way Farron never did. They will be the deciding factor in several parliamentary votes, and amendments that make it into our laws.
Refusing to work with the Government at all, particularly if done irresponsibly, will be as bad if not worse than being constructive.
Tricky.
But what is the chicken and what is the egg here? In 2015 the Tories had Cameron campaigning vigorously, doing his live debates with the public, looking every inch a leader in command of the agenda and on top of things. In 2017 the Tories had May, almost hiding away, reluctant to have any uncontrolled contact with the public (something all too painfully demonstrated again yesterday) and reluctant to commit herself on almost anything for consecutive days.
Campaigning, targeted or not, works when you have something you can really hope to sell and in 2017 the Tories just didn't. There was a residual fear of Corbyn that held their lead (just) but nothing positive at all.
Entertaining follow up. Wharton's strategy SPAD is now the formally non-political SPAD for the Tees Valley mayor. And thanks to a brilliant bit of Tory legislation gets paid more than the mayor does...
Both Swinson and Lamb are good speakers, but Lamb has gravitas and quite a long history of competent performances. His position over A50 was also more realistic, abstaining rather than voting against. He is likely to move the party to be less rejectionist over Brexit.
The extinction of UKIP, and dwindling support for Greens, as well as diminishing SNP presence does leave the stage much less crowded for a third party at the next election. Farron struggled on TV, but Lamb always comes over as a thoughtful pragmatic sane centrist. He has good ideas and also the ability to think them through. He would offer voters a real alternative to Corbyn and May in a way that Farron struggled to.
There's a story behind this: was there some indication that brand May wasn't working, but they didn't come up with a good alternative? Was there illness? Did she find she didn't enjoy meeting the public (and to be honest, who can blame her?)
Swinson's back up to 1.75 (back) on Betfair. Bit short for me to put more on, so I'm hoping Lamb declares first and then I can lay him, then Cable and I can lay him.
Much better than having positively loony policies such as homeopathy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Tredinnick_(politician)
or Climate Change denial.
I don't know anything about Jo S. Being Scottish won't make a difference. The issues with Brown were very different. If she's good this could be the first chink of light for those of us on the centre left.
I've been making this point since she was PM: I was undecided about her because there was no visibility of who she was or what she wanted. It was funny to read the different strands of the Conservative party on here projecting their image onto her, when it turns out that is all she is: a projection screen.
I gave her until the conference speech to get things together, and that was utterly underwhelming. Still, I got swept along with the rest of us on here, thinking the polling figures meant the GBP were seeing something in her I wasn't.
But I was right about Corbyn. )
Good at campaigning, yes. We've still got to see whether his lamentable leadership over the last couple of years will improve, even with a cowed party behind him.
They were varying shades of terrible in the job.
As we have become more presidential perhaps it is time to establish "registered" supporters who can only sign up for one party, for free, and give them votes in leadership elections.
It wouldn't take long to see the flaw in your argument and I doubt parties would agree to it.
The Tories did have the problem that their national campaign switched away from the emphasis on TM yet, as Nick says, their principal leaflets were already printed and my TM leaflet arrived during the last week. So the Tories lost brand coherence between their national and local activity, and the local leaflet unhelpfully drew attention back towards TM's by then somewhat tarnished reputation.
Shipman in the ST claimed even TM was complaining that repeating Strong and Stable made her sound robotic, but Crosby told her to keep on doing it (and his view was that her problem was an inability to do it naturally). There was also a claim that her Maidenhead acceptance speech contained chunks quoted verbatim from the "Tory candidates 'lines to take'" sheet sent out by HQ to all their PPCs. If so it indicates a frightening inability to express her views in her own words, which should be a core competence for any politician let alone a PM.
OT, YouGov is doing its post-election mega-survey of the GE today; tons of questions about the campaign and politics/engagement/knowledge/opinion generally. Takes about 20 minutes, working fast, to complete.
I'm inclined more towards Lamb personally, mind.
It takes a very big issue to get 14,000 voters to change their minds in two years and whether or not the bins were emptied isn't that.
It was BREXIT. If they had wanted to get more votes in London Mrs May should not have behaved as though it was her idea or she would inevitably get people riled.
Swinson, Lamb, or Davey would do a great job.
https://twitter.com/RupertMyers/status/875610702693580801
Theresa May can still shape Brexit. But she may not have the skills.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/16/theresa-may-shape-brexit-eu-exit?CMP=share_btn_tw
The LibDems require a big hitter, a big beast who will get noticed and that means Uncle Vince. He has the name recognition, experience and gravitas for the post.
Cable for leader, Swinson as deputy and leader in waiting and a big campaigning role for Lamb.
Sorted ... next ...
Anna Soubry is high-profile, which people like, and abrasive with everyone, which they don't. IMO the seat will fall next time, if the national picture is roughly what it is now. (Big if, of course.) The evidence that first-time incumbency wears off gradually is relevant.
https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/875500153200934913
27% of voters support the DUP deal, 48% oppose it.
ARSE hat-trick incoming
The model would have been perfectly capable of identifying the type of voter likely to swing away from the Tories in a close fought election, had anyone at CCHQ realised we were heading for such a situation and pulled out the right data.
Blaming the model for pulling out the wrong data is a human not a statistical failing!
Does anyone care who the LD leader is?
Of course it is true that the LibDems face a challenging situation.
Nevertheless there is clearly political space for a party with liberal views and for one unashamed to say that Brexit is likely to be a bad mistake. UKIP is declining because its 'space' is largely taken by the Tories, and because its leaders are not the right people to put together the sort of patriotic/left wing party for which it had been assumed Corbyn had left a gap (and because this gap was probably never as big as some Tories had hoped).
If we steer towards a soft Brexit and things go reasonable well, Labour is probably well placed and the LibDems will continue to struggle. If, on the other hand, it is clear that Brexit is heading towards difficult waters, Labour may find its 'yes but, no but' position increasingly challenging and dissatisfied Tories (including large numbers of the so-called resigned remainers) are likely to find the LibDems, under the right leadership, potentially attractive.
It's also possible their model for predicting whether someone is a Lab-Con swing voter is just rubbish.
57% of voters didnt want a Tory government just last week
Peter Bone ....
Ashdown beating Beith was anti-establishment beating establishment.
There was no serious establishment candidate in 1999 when Kennedy won but let's say another anti-establishment win for the sake of argument.
But Menzies Cambell beating Chris Huhne, and Nick Clegg beating Chris Huhne were both establishment wins. There is no sensible way to spin it otherwise.
Additionally, it is not clear what "establishment" means at this point. Swinson is likely to be the outgoing leader's strong preference, as Lamb was in 2015. But does that make her "establishment" or him?
You're positing a rule that just doesn't stand up to any scrutiny.