politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Farage’s biggest mistake was to duck the Eastleigh by elect

Even with only one MP (currently) UKIP are adding to the gaiety of the nation - I suspect Carswell may end up an independent - not sure he could cope with returning to the tender mercies of the Tory Whips. Anyone seen any mock ups of TPD recently? There is one of Miliband partying in Ibiza good taste prevents me from sharing.

Farage is a start-up CEO. A man who inspires great personal loyalty, who can think (and argue) on his feet, who has a vision of the future he genuinely believes in, and who can improvise.

And he has taken UKIP from an anti-EU protest vote to a serious political force.

But the skills needed for start-up CEO and big company CEO are radically different. Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos are the exceptions: most start-up CEOs make rotten big company CEOs and vice-versa.

Ducking Eastleigh is by-the-by. UKIP needs a process person. An organiser. A person who can delegate. Nigel Farage is not that person.

The resignation that wasn't is merely a symptom of this problem. Without a professional leader UKIP will continue to hemorrhage talent, and will underperform its potential.

@rcs1000 you have a bad habit of making very sensible posts. Those are absolutely discouraged on this website

I very much doubt that Carswell will end up a Tory (despite my desire for Cameron to reach out to him). It's a strong possibility he ends up as an independent (although he'd need to resign again and fight another by-election & there's a good chance he wouldn't win so you need to factor that into the odds). I wouldn't be surprised if he takes the middle route and nominally remains UKIP, but in name only, and does/votes as he sees fit

I had an email from party HQ, 10 000 have joined the LDs in the last week. Extraordinary! It does show that there is potential for a healthy bounce back, particularly if the LDs pick the right leader. Doubly so if Labour pick the wrong one, or if UKIP implode. Jackpot for all three!

UKIP at present is not a party. It's a cult..

Morning all.

A clash of personality and principle was always on the cards with these two, just didn’t expect it to erupt so soon after GE2015. – If Farage is not careful, UKIP’s only MP could walk.


o/t - has the dreaded wrap around SPIN advertisement been cast into the fiery pit?

Interview with Carswell coming up on R4 Today shortly ...

rcs1000 said:

Farage is a start-up CEO. A man who inspires great personal loyalty, who can think (and argue) on his feet, who has a vision of the future he genuinely believes in, and who can improvise.

And he has taken UKIP from an anti-EU protest vote to a serious political force.

But the skills needed for start-up CEO and big company CEO are radically different. Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos are the exceptions: most start-up CEOs make rotten big company CEOs and vice-versa.

Ducking Eastleigh is by-the-by. UKIP needs a process person. An organiser. A person who can delegate. Nigel Farage is not that person.

The resignation that wasn't is merely a symptom of this problem. Without a professional leader UKIP will continue to hemorrhage talent, and will underperform its potential.

Very true.

@SunPolitics: EXCL - Burnham backed by nearly a quarter of Labour MPs as he bids to be next party leader: http://t.co/58B1ATS1h7

ToriesForBurnham™

Douglas Carswell has burned his bridges with the Conservative party under the current leader. While it would be well-advised to welcome him back, I cannot imagine him humiliating himself by returning under this Prime Minister.

He had not done his due diligence on UKIP very well if he has not expected regular rucks with its current leader. Politburo purges and flounces are a longstanding feature of UKIP's short history.

So he's a bit stuck. He can go independent if he so wishes and even argue that he need not submit himself to a by-election again because his beliefs have not changed and he has articulated them twice in the last year to his patient electorate. But what is he actually going to achieve as an independent MP?

That was the figure in the Tory war chest at the beginning of the year, Mr Root, according to the Boundary Commission. How much they finally spent, we do not yet know of course.

There is a cap on expenditure for an individual candidate in the long campaign and the short campaign periods. And then there is the national campaign. And there is also the time before the long campaign starts. So, effectively, the cap is not very effective, if you have enough money.

PClipp said:

Not bizarre at all, Mr RCS. Now that they have bought their way back to an overall majority, the Conservatives are bringing forth all the hard-line Tory policies that they could not implement while they were in coalition with the Liberal Democrats - and which they kept totally our of sight during the election campaign. First off the starting block was Mrs May with the Snoopers Charter.

So all those who had forgotten that the Conservatives were an authoritarian party (among other characeristics) are realising that there is a need for somebody to stand up for liberal values - and that has to be the Liberal Democrats. There is nobody else.

10,000 new members since the election and counting.....

I took a less optomistic view of LD fortunes, though even I expected double figures of LD MPs.

We will see very quickly the difference between Conservative majority government and the coalition, and I think a large number of people will change their minds on coalition. It will be seen as a golden period of good government. Theressa May's snoopers charter is a good example, but will not be the only one.

There is a lot of ground to recover for the LDs, but I do not detect the same fratricidal infighting that is breaking out in the other losing parties of UKIP and Labour.

It is important that the last few years in government are reflected on, but they should not turn into navel gazing.

As one of the signaturies of the US Declaration of Independence said "We must surely hang together, or we shall surely hang seperately"

antifrank said:

Douglas Carswell has burned his bridges with the Conservative party under the current leader. While it would be well-advised to welcome him back, I cannot imagine him humiliating himself by returning under this Prime Minister.

He had not done his due diligence on UKIP very well if he has not expected regular rucks with its current leader. Politburo purges and flounces are a longstanding feature of UKIP's short history.

So he's a bit stuck. He can go independent if he so wishes and even argue that he need not submit himself to a by-election again because his beliefs have not changed and he has articulated them twice in the last year to his patient electorate. But what is he actually going to achieve as an independent MP?

He can remain an independent voice in UKIP. He is the parliamentary party, and it would be absurd for UKIP to expel their only MP. He is not without friends in the party, and Farage is not without other opponents.

Labour's 'ground game' and 5 million conversations...

Speaking from Washington DC, Mr Messina said: “It was amusing to see all these polls saying, ‘Oh, Labour’s talking to more people’, and I kept thinking to myself, ‘That’s great, because we are talking to the right people, over and over and over again’.

“We were having as many as eight to ten conversations with undecided voters in the final week, while Labour was still, in the final week, mailing every single person in the constituency. And that just didn’t make sense.”

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4438656.ece

@DavidJonesMP: Douglas Carswell's every utterance, every breath, every tic of body language, scream: "What the heck have I got myself into?" @BBCr4today

Scott_P said:

Labour's 'ground game' and 5 million conversations...

The new plan... "one hundred MILLION conversations"... titter

Scott_P said:

RobD said:

The new plan... "one hundred MILLION conversations"... titter

Start with the 60 million free owls you promised, then we can talk...

Did someone say owls??

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2014/06/20/article-2662719-1EEE326200000578-499_634x359.jpg

Scott_P said:

@SunPolitics: EXCL - Burnham backed by nearly a quarter of Labour MPs as he bids to be next party leader: http://t.co/58B1ATS1h7

ToriesForBurnham™

Burnham opposed by more than three quarters? In a five-runner race, support from just over a fifth of MPs is surely just par for the course, to mix sporting metaphors.

DecrepitJohnL said:

Burnham opposed by more than three quarters? In a five-runner race, support from just over a fifth of MPs is surely just par for the course, to mix sporting metaphors.

But Burnham is also the union favoured candidate

Unions are employing call-centre staff to persuade their members to vote in Labour’s leadership contest, as they try to maintain their influence over the outcome.

The rules were changed last year to limit the power of the unions to choose Labour’s next leader. Yet senior party figures are worried by how easy it has become for unions to sign up potentially hundreds of thousands of affiliates within weeks.

Unions that want to sign up their members as an “affiliate” — with the right to vote on the Labour leadership — only have to phone them up, ask for confirmation of their address and get an assurance that they want to affiliate to Labour.

No money needs to change hands, yet this procedure then gives them the same voting rights as full Labour party membership, which costs £46.56 a year.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4438615.ece

Scott_P said:

Labour's 'ground game' and 5 million conversations...

Speaking from Washington DC, Mr Messina said: “It was amusing to see all these polls saying, ‘Oh, Labour’s talking to more people’, and I kept thinking to myself, ‘That’s great, because we are talking to the right people, over and over and over again’.

“We were having as many as eight to ten conversations with undecided voters in the final week, while Labour was still, in the final week, mailing every single person in the constituency. And that just didn’t make sense.”

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article4438656.ece

Yes, the key to victory was Messina's sophisticated targeting of voters. There was no great popular uprising in support of Cameroonism or in defence of bacon sandwiches, and next time Labour will also have better voter targeting.

Good morning, everyone.

The unions determining Labour's leader? What could possibly go wrong?

I think Mr. Smithson may be right, but another problem was Farage's self-destructive comment on resignation. This had the twin effects of making tactical voting against him even more likely, and making him duplicitous when he resigned for three days and then rose again.

Carswell's perspective seems a bit peculiar to me. Not just the refusal to take the money, but not seeming to get why his own party might just be a little bit peeved.

Nah Mike, you're presupposing a lot.

1) Farage is crap in Westminster elections, he always loses, he even once finished third in a two horse race

2) UKIP only win Westminster seats when they have the incumbent MP

antifrank said:

DecrepitJohnL said:

Scott_P said:

@SunPolitics: EXCL - Burnham backed by nearly a quarter of Labour MPs as he bids to be next party leader: http://t.co/58B1ATS1h7

ToriesForBurnham™

Burnham opposed by more than three quarters? In a five-runner race, support from just over a fifth of MPs is surely just par for the course, to mix sporting metaphors.

At this stage nearly a quarter is very good going. There will still be lots of Don't Knows.

But MPs have a limited role now. They get to nominate, but after that they get no more formal say than any other member.

Not sure what the exact rules are, but if a quarter of Labour MPs nominate Burnham they are probably disbarred from nominating anyone else. That may make it a lot harder for some leadership contenders to get the nominations they need to stand.

That said what does "nearly a quarter" mean? A quarter is 58; you need 35 nominations. 35 is closer to 58 than zero.

Mr. Pong, ha, if nations had a veto over the next monarch Edward II would never have got the gig.

I actually feel sorry for Mark Reckless (I know)

Persuaded to defect by Carswell, he's now lost his seat, and were Carswell to leave UKIP, Reckless will be thinking "OMFG, what the hell was I thinking, was I even thinking?"

Plato said:

Fascinating stuff from Mr Messina. Surely Labour had the money/volunteers to do it if they'd wanted to? The human waves of union members leafleting/canvassing could have been used in a different configuration.

"The predictions were so far off because no company combined online, telephone and mobile phone polls because they were too expensive. “We were able to do that because we had volunteer capacity to do it . . . you gotta go all the way and get this. It’s expensive, it’s difficult, but you’re gonna miss a bunch of close races if you don’t.”

Why didn't the Conservatives do it last time? The reason is they'd not studied the reports from the Obama campaign.

It is easy to see how Farage and Carswell view 'short money' differently. In how each sees it, they are both right.

There is little political or philosophical difference between them.

They are disagreeing about a relatively small sum of money. A 'big' man never worries too much about money. Not an issue, or much of a problem.

What we should be talking about is: who leads the OUT campaign? Both Farage and Carswell have correctly assessed that neither is the right man. But who?

Already time for 2020 retirements announcements!

Ronnie Campbell (Blyth Valley) apparently confirmed it is his last term

www.newspostleader.co.uk/news/local/labour-s-ronnie-campbell-delighted-with-election-win-his-final-one-1-7251861


"This is lucky number seven. I have to stop some time, so this will be my last time running.
“I’m 71 now so I think that’ll be enough, but I am delighted to be representing Blyth Valley for another five years, it is an absolute privilege and I thank everyone for voting"

logical_song said:

MarqueeMark said:

PClipp said:

Not bizarre at all, Mr RCS. Now that they have bought their way back to an overall majority, the Conservatives are bringing forth all the hard-line Tory policies that they could not implement while they were in coalition with the Liberal Democrats - and which they kept totally our of sight during the election campaign. First off the starting block was Mrs May with the Snoopers Charter.

So all those who had forgotten that the Conservatives were an authoritarian party (among other characeristics) are realising that there is a need for somebody to stand up for liberal values - and that has to be the Liberal Democrats. There is nobody else.

10,000 new members since the election and counting.....

I remember how bullish you were 5 weeks ago. How dismissive of those saying you would get smashed.

Why should we listen to a thing you say?

How many UKIP MPs did you predict?

One. Consistently. (Check my competition entries it you doubt me.)

I also said that one would be a lonely, regret-laden figure.

david_kendrick1 said:

They are disagreeing about a relatively small sum of money. A 'big' man never worries too much about money. Not an issue, or much of a problem.

Um I think that applies when it's your own money, not someone (the taxpayers) elses.

Scrapheap_as_was said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I actually feel sorry for Mark Reckless (I know)

Persuaded to defect by Carswell, he's now lost his seat, and were Carswell to leave UKIP, Reckless will be thinking "OMFG, what the hell was I thinking, was I even thinking?"

First Sol, now the TPD - are they all coming in to our new party then???

Next up Kim Philby.

But if Churchill managed to re-rat....

Charles said:

PClipp said:

MarqueeMark said:

I remember how bullish you were 5 weeks ago. How dismissive of those saying you would get smashed. Why should we listen to a thing you say?

Because we have a corrupt system where 72 milion pounds can buy you Tories your way back into office. It will be very interesting to see what the final figures for expenditure turn out to be.

I bet the Tories spent less than £72m

How about a bet: 1pt = a full £1m below £72m for Tory spent in the GE (official figures). I'll be any amount you want up to £5 per point

Does include the value of volunteers time? I understand that the Charity Commission wants that allowed for in Charitides accounts

Miss Plato, hope ITV gets it. Suspect they won't.

Slackbladder said:

I'm going to call the labour election now for Burnham. He seems closest to the unions, and the one they'll plump for over the others. He's a known name and labour members like their comfort candidates.

Morning all,

Bear in mind though, it is one member one vote now. The unions will have less of a direct say. And Labour have been clear that there will be no repeat of the nonsense where ballot papers came wrapped in pictures of Ed M.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, you're too soft.

I like to be magnanimous in victory.

No point acting like Rome towards Carthage after the second Punic War

North Korea seems to have a new form of execution the Romans would have liked.

Execution by anti-aircraft gun.

Pong said:

RobD said:

Pong said:

Scott_P said:

@arusbridger: Prince Charles's black spider memos to be published today... http://t.co/LAdPYJUpzO

Today is the day the nation decides whether Charles becomes king....

Is this like when TND tweets about an interesting poll?

lol

I'll wait to see whether or not they're actually "interesting"...

Ultimately, IMO, it's impossible for any future monarch to be as *clean* as QE2. She was cushioned by a compliant media during her younger, more politically inquisitive years and reached constitutional maturity before the internet came about.

I recon QE2 will be the last superhuman monarch.

I think it is more to do with the fact she was Queen at 26. Charles has had a lot longer to do nothing.. so filling the time with his causes probably makes him more inclined to lobby.

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, you're too soft.

I like to be magnanimous in victory.

No point acting like Rome towards Carthage after the second Punic War

North Korea seems to have a new form of execution the Romans would have liked.

Execution by anti-aircraft gun.

Pigdog was appropriated from the North Koreans.

OldKingCole said:

Charles said:

PClipp said:

MarqueeMark said:

I remember how bullish you were 5 weeks ago. How dismissive of those saying you would get smashed. Why should we listen to a thing you say?

Because we have a corrupt system where 72 milion pounds can buy you Tories your way back into office. It will be very interesting to see what the final figures for expenditure turn out to be.

I bet the Tories spent less than £72m

How about a bet: 1pt = a full £1m below £72m for Tory spent in the GE (official figures). I'll be any amount you want up to £5 per point

Does include the value of volunteers time? I understand that the Charity Commission wants that allowed for in Charitides accounts

Labour would be more worried about that. With their armies of workers that must paid, oh, say the minimum wage? A living wage?

TheScreamingEagles said:

MarqueeMark said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, you're too soft.

I like to be magnanimous in victory.

No point acting like Rome towards Carthage after the second Punic War

North Korea seems to have a new form of execution the Romans would have liked.

Execution by anti-aircraft gun.

Pigdog was appropriated from the North Koreans.

Then Mr Reckless can consider his political demise to be rather easy.

Carswell has refused it on principle but have any other opposition MPs ever refused it on principle? If not, why not?

Farage has a problem here because he's set a higher standard for loose-lipped candidates that have the other parties. I don't think it's been because the media have been intrusive (which they have), it's because he likes discipline. Farage hinted at his views in his resignation speech - he finds it irritating dealing with less-disciplined people who mouth off inappropriately.

Carswell is either a loose cannon or a free-thinker depending on your view. I'm sympathetic, but on that basis, I'd have to sympathise with the foot-in-mouth brigade too. I probably do as I was brought up to think that 'Sticks and stones ...'

You can see why Carswell left the Tories, so I'd expect Farage to make an issue of it. But there's a bit of my party, my rules. But being 100% of the MPs, he makes it awkward for the leader. Just imagine a Labour party with only Skiners, Fields, Corbyns and Hoey's.

Hmm ... might even be an improvement

As ever, an interesting article by Mary Riddell in Telegraph on Labour defeat. She raises a very good question: what was the point of Crudas doing all the policy work if most of it was totally ignored?