The Moon of Liberty

I have not written a good partisan political piece for a while, so here goes. 

First things first, as a libertarian, mainly tory leading blog read by few, I want to put on record my congratualations to Derek Draper for setting up labourlist.org. Leaving aside the sites charmless description of far superior blogs as the 'Z-List,' a deeply delusional set of writers who don't seem to understand anything much going on at all, it is at least nice to see the Labour Party getting online and joining the 21st century world of debate. So well done Derek.

I had a look at Labourlist and did to it's credit find some humour however, Gordon won't be amused. How much of the humour is intentional is of course a mute point, but at least it's there. First up is this hilaroius avatar of Peter Mandleson which I have linked from the Sun Website. The image of virtual Peter, like one wasn't enough, comes from the site Second life, a site I assume for people who consider themselves failures in the first lives. Far be it for us to speculate on

Secondly, it bravely links to this fantastic article, which is so good I'm linking to it here. A definitive definition of what Cyber Peter and company tells us about Labour. If you want a good laugh give Labourlist and Gordon's virtual Britian a go, it may take your mind off losing your home, mortgage or job.

Talking of Gordon, or should that be Superman, he has opened his mouth again. This time to The Sun. Not content withsaving the world. now he has felt the Martin Luther King force. Apparently he 'has a dream.' But that was not the best quote. Get this one, apparently he also claims that the election of Barak Obama “gives us a historic chance to move the clock forward”. er, right, funny that because I'm watching my watch now, and the clock is moving forward as it has been for centuries. Seems I'm making history, didn't realise it was quite that easy.

 

With all eyes on the United States, the effect this election could have on the Global economy and international affairs of state in general, why would anybody care about a Scottish place called Glenrothes? Well, believe it or not, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown most certainly does. If you have any interest at all in the future direction of UK politics, so should you.

On Thursday Glenrothes goes to the polls in Gordon Brown's best opportunity to win an election yet. So far, in nationwide local elections, and bye elections in Dunfirmline, Glasgow, Henley On Thames and Crewe, as well as the Mayor of London election, he has failed. In every serious election with national significance since he became Prime Minister, Labour under his leadership has taken a hiding in all of them, so far he is 0-6.

But our Prime Minister has, if you believe the press, been doing better recently. In a bizarre twist, the credit crisis which many put a strong case that he has to take a huge responsibility for, has given him the chance to look like he is leading, at home and internationally, while the opposition parties have no means to act, so either back Brown and strengthen him further, or criticise and run the risk of playing petty politics while real people are struggling. In addition his bringing back of Peter Mandleson and Alaistair Campbell has added expereince, and in Campbell's case a new discipline to the Labour cause. There was a brief Brown bounce in the polls, there is some evidence that is going away now though. There is still a feeling Brown has some momentum at the moment though. Glenrothes can either move that feeling forward, or blow it apart. If Brown is to take an election victory it surely is now.

This is a strange election for Conservative leader David Cameron. Glenrothes has no evidence of Tory support. The challengers to Labour will be Alex Salmond and his Tartan Army of Scottish nationalists. For Cameron an SNP win is the result that matters, he can't say this of course, but all he can do isbe around to annoy the Government and hope the SNP take the victory, which will be an unofficial victory for him by default.

The SNP challenge is huge. at the last General election here Labour has over 50% of the vote, and a 10000+ majority. This means if the SNP managed to squeeze every vote from other parties not voting Labour, they would still lose assuming the Labour vote held up. Of course, there is the catch, the Labour vote won't hold up, and that is why the SNP are convinced they have a chance.

In addition the SNP overturned a bigger majority in Glasgow a few short months ago. This however is where Brown's momentum comes in, if it's real, Labour hold the seat, if not, the SNP can do it again. A loss would be even more embarrassing for Brown as this is right on his doorstep. Glenrothes neighbours Brown's Cowdenbeath constituency. Strenghthened by recent events, on home turf, and a constituency that has consistently voted Labour for many years. a winning forumlar surely?

This is a town, whatever happens on Thursday, is Labour in it's heart. These people longed for a sustained period of Labour Government through the Thatcher and Major years, consistently vote Labour in big numbers, share the very values of Brown and his Scottish Labour ideals. If these people judge 11 years of the Labour Governemtn they yearned for as a complete waste of time by voting SNP on Thursday, what is left for Brown? If Brown can't win an election here in the best circumstances he has enjoyed for a long time, where on earth can he win one?

So the 'other election' on Thursday in Glenrothes matters. Will he become the anti egghead 'whose losing streak continues, doing what comes natrually.' Or can he take a victory and sustain his recent momentum that may just change the dynamics as we move towards the next General Election, putting the Conservative's and David Cameron in particular, right on the back foot? 

 

 

Scenario 1 was the big Obama win, if of course the polls are wrong, it may instead go soemthing like this.

ET 7 pm GMT Midnight

With a huge buzz around the Obama camp, the first polls close. Georgia, South Carolina and Kentucky go to McCain. Despite close polls there, Indiana also is given to McCain. Virginia is too close to call. Vermont is Obama's early success. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 42 Obama 3

ET 7.30 pm GMT 12.30 am

Alarm bells are wringing in the Obama camp, early returns in Virginia have McCain is a small early lead. polls close in Ohio and North Carolina, both currently too close to call, West Virginia is awarded to McCain as expected. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 47 Obama 3

ET 7.50 GMT 12.50 am

In a blow to Obama, North Carolina is awarded to McCain. He is still also ahead in Virginia, with Ohio within a thousand votes early on.  ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 62 Obama 3.

ET 8pm GMT 1 am

Obama gets some votes on the board as most of the east coast polls close. Obama wins in Massachussettes, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, the District of Colombia, Maine and Illinois. McCain is given Oklahoma, Alabama, Mississippi and Tennessee. The networks will not call Florida, Missouri or Pennsylvania or New Hampshire. McCain still leads in Virgina and is ahead marginally in Ohio too. The marginal states are currently breaking for McCain. This is going to be very close indeed. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 95 Obama 78.

ET 8.30 pm GMT 1.30 am

Bill Clinton's state of Arkansas goes for McCain with a big margin. Missouri is also called in McCain's favour in another piece of evidence that the margins are breaking McCain's way and Obama looks like he is hanging on here. McCain 112 Obama 78

ET 9 pm GMT 2 am

More polls close with results coming thick and fast. Obama is awarded Rhode Island, New York, Michigan, Wisconsin and New Mexico. McCain wins his home state of Arizona, Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, Texas and Louisiana. In another concern for Obama, Minnesota is too close to call at this stage, as is Colorado. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 185 Obama 145.

ET 9.10 pm GMT 2.10 am

Some relief for Obama as early returns allow Minnesota to be called for Obama. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 185 Obama 155.

ET 9.30 pm GMT 2.30 am

With the West Coast to come in 90 minutes time, Obama is marginally ahead in Pennsylvania, Florida and New Hampshire, McCain still ahead in Ohio and Virginia and marginally in Colorado. McCain will need to turn one of pennsylvania or Florida around to take the Presidency,

ET 9.45 pm GMT 2.45 GMT

It's announced Virginia is now called in favour of McCain. a major blow for Obama, who now msut hang on to his lead in Florida. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 198 Obama 155.

ET 10 pm GMT 3 am

Utah and Montana go for McCain, Iowa for Obama, Nevada as expected is too close to call. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 206 Obama 162

ET 10.30 pm GMT 3.30 am

A huge boost for John McCain. He is awarded Ohio with very few votes left to count. It's also announced however that Barak Obama has taken Pennsylvania, a win that keep him in the race. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 226 Obama 183

ET 11 pm GMT 4 am

Here comes the West Coast, Obama wins California, Washington, Oregan and Hawaii. McCain takes Idaho. with 80% of precints reporting McCain takes a slender lead in Florida. Florida would now give Obama the Presidency, but is it slipping away? McCain 230 Obama 260.

ET Midnight GMT 5 am

A huge victory for McCain as his lead in Florida stretches and he wins the state. McCain is also awarded Alaska as polls close. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 260 Obama 260

ET 12.30 am GMT 5.30 am

Confusion as one network awards New Hampshire to McCain and another awards McCain Nevada. It's soon clarified, McCain ahs taken both. Obama now must take Colrado to score a 269 each draw, which as the Deomcrats retain control of the Congress, would be enough for him to become President. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 269 Obama 260

ET 1 am GMT 6 am

With 97% of precincts counted in Colorado McCain has pulled off the impossible. Colorado has gone his way. All the marginal factors have broken to him, the polls were wrong. JOHN McCAIN IS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!

Final score

McCain 278 Obama 260.

Two scenarios as to how this could turn out. The real version comes this Tuesday night/Wednesday morning when history will be made.

 

 

US election night is tomorrow night. Here are two scenarios of how the night could pan out. For this ET stands for Eastern US Time, GMT stands for Greenwich Mean Time here in the UK.

ET 7pm GMT Midnight

The first states close their polls. Georgia, South Carolina and Kentucky are called for McCain, Vermont for Obama. In a surprise Virginia, a key battleground state is called early for Obama too and Indiana is too close to call. By winning big in Virginia early signs are Obama is heading for a big win, McCain is refusing to admit defeat just yet. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 31 Obama 16

ET 7.30 pm GMT 12.30 am

The polls close in the key states of Ohio and North Carolina neither are called at this point. West Virginia is called for McCain. Early returns in Indiana see Obama in a marginal lead ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 36 Obama 16

ET 8 pm GMT 1 am

A glut of results come at this point. Maine, Massachussettes, Connecticut, New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, The District of Colombia and Obama's home state of Illinois are all called for Obama. McCain takes Tennessee, Oklahoma, Alabama and Mississippi. Missouri and Florida are too close to call, and in a huge boost to Obama's campaign, Pennsylvania is also called in his favour, almost killing off any path to victory McCain had left. Obama is also given New Hampshire in a sign of a much bigger win their than expected Obama still leads in Indiana and is also ahead in Ohio. ELCTORAL COLLEGE McCain 69 Obama 116.

ET 8.30 pm GMT 1.30 am

Arkansas is called for McCain. Early returns however give the netowrks enough confidence to call Ohio for Obama. He is also ahead in Indiana, Missouri, Florida. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 75 Obama 136

ET 9 pm GMT 2 am

More states close. McCain takes his home satte of Arizona, Wyoming, South Dakota, Nebraska, Kansas, George W. Bush's home state of Texas, and Louisiana. Obama has taken New York, Michigan, Wisconsin, Minnesota and Rhode Island. Colorado and New Mexico are too close to call at this point. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 145 Obama 208

ET 10 pm GMT 3 am

Early returns give Obama big leads and he is awarded New Mexico and Colorado. Polls close in Iowa where Obama is the winner, and Utah and Montana which goes to McCain. Nevada is too close to call but Obama is ahead in every tight race except Florida. With California also to come in an hour, the Obama Presidency is now a certainty. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 153 Obama 229

ET 10.30 pm GMT 3.30 am

Indiana and Nevada are called for Obama, followed by North Carolina. McCain concedes defeat on television. A consolation for McCain as he is given North Dakota. On the hour Obama will easily pass the magic number of 270. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 156 Obama 260

ET 11 pm GMT 4 am

Obama sweeps the West Coast and with it the Presidency. California, Washington, Oregan and Hawaii all go Obama's way as expected. Idaho is given to McCain. The Democrat celebrations begin, THE ELECTION IS CALLED!!! BARAK OBAMA IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES!!!. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 160 Obama 337

ET 11.30 pm GMT 4.30 am

Missouri is called for Obama. Florida is still very tight, Obama is slightly ahead with 80% of precints reporting. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 160 Obama 348

ET 11.50 pm GMT 4.50 am

The Icing on the cake for Obama, with counting almost complete in Florida he is far enough ahead to be given the 27 electoral college votes, completing a total sweep of virtually all the tight races. ELECTORAL COLLEGE McCain 160 Obama 375

ET Midnight GMT 5 am

It's academic, but the Home state of Sarah Palin, Alaska, is declared for McCain.

FINAL RESULT

McCain 163 Obama 375

 

 

 

On Tuesday in the United States history will be made one way or another. For the first time in 20 years the neither the Bush clan nor the Clinton clan and their teams will have hold or occupancy of the White House. Hilary of course tried to continue the two family domination who, for while they fight elections on opposite sides in electoral terms, both too have much in common.

Tuesday will also create history for either being the first black President if Barak Obama wins, or the oldest elected President if John McCain wins. How much 'change' this will actually bring is in reality open to debate, despite the never ending rhetoric of 'change' coming from both candidates, the likelyhood is the scope for change will be considerably more limited than candidates in an election fight will have you believe.

So who is going to win? I state from the outset, on this blog while I have every respect for Obama and don't believe he will be a bad President by any means, I have supported McCain throughout. He now however has only the most marginal chance of taking this election, Obama should not lose this from here, unless the one question remaining is the final catalyst of a huge upest.

Every poll on the eve of this elecion, both national and state, has Obama ahead. A few months ago I wrote that this election was McCain's to lose, I still believe that was the case, and with some poor campaign decision making early on concentrating too much time on the states he was trying to win from the Democrats and not enough time on states that George W Bush actually won, it looks like he has contrived to do exactly that.

The final weekend polls on the eve of the election have no encouragement whatsoever for McCain. Rasmussen's national tracker, probably the most reliable of the pollsters, has Obama 5% ahead nationally. The state by state position is even more problematic for McCain. Rasmussen's breakdown of the position gives Obama 260 electioral college votes in the 'likely' or 'safe' categories for Obama. McCain only has 160. As 270 are needed to win, McCain has to win almost every state that is either to close to call and considered to be leaning to Obama to take the election by winning 110 of the 118 electoral votes still in play. Obama only has to take 10 electoral votes out of the possible 118 still in play. That with the national poll backing Obama up, looks like game over.

McCain's position is even worse according to the methodology used by Karl Rove & Co. A company dedicated to giving the picture for this election headed by Karl Rove, the man considered to be the mastermind behind the two election victories of George W Bush. He agrees with Rasmussen that McCain has 160, but he calls a few more states for Obama, giving him 311. That is above the 270 threshold required. All very bad news for John McCain, and all very good new for Barak Obama.

Indeed I have not found a single polling scenario that puts McCain ahead, or gives him a glimmer of hope. So can we say with certainty Obama has won this election? The answer is probably. Several factors can affact the outcome, which all feed into one question. First, pollsters traditionally overstate the Democrat and under state the Republican, as a result McCain is probably not quite as far behind as it seems. Secondly many Republican supporters live in the middle of nowhere and are unreachable by polling organisations, so there views may be under represented by default.

In addition the Republican brand is not seen as a popular one right now due to the economy and the fact President Bush's popularity has been in dcline for some time, therefore there may be a 'shy Republican' factor, people unwilling to tell pollsters they will vote Republican, but actually will when they get into the polling booths. Finally in this election there is also the potential for a closet race factor, who would admit to a pollster they were not going to vote for Obama because he is black? Nobody, does not mean for some that may not be true though.

If all these factors come together, it may not be quite over just yet. It is an unlikely scenario, Obama should win this election now. All the evidence says Obama will be the next President of the United States. Nobody could seriously predict a McCain victory right now, there is merely one question left that may turn it around. Are the pollsters actually right? On Tuesday night and Wednesday morning we shall find out.

---

 

The Moon of Liberty UK Political Index will be updated once a month (except this month when it will be updated on the 1st of November, but I'm giving today's figures to launch it). It is calculated including public opinion polls, local council by-elections and any other elections where the swing from a previous election can be turned into a percentage as against a previous set of elections, as well as percentage extrapulations from General election seat predictions from spread betting sites (a fresh set of these figures will be included every two weeks). Anything over a month old does not count. All of these averaged together give the Moon of Liberty Political Index.

So the first index is as follows.

Conseravtive 41%

Labour 30%

Liberal Democrat 17%

This will be a regular feature on here from now on on a monthly basis. Lets see how our method works in comparison to other 'experts.'

This week in Brighton the British political conference season has kicked off as always with the Trade Union Congress. The unions have always been fortunate to be able to gain extra coverage in their timing. While business groups like the Confederation of Business and industry, the Confederation of small businesses and the Institue of Directors, groups who represent the businesses of our nation and who by right should be entitled to equal coverage, don't get it because of the random periods when they hold their conferences. The TUC holds it's congress either one or two weeks before the political parties begin their conferences, so it fits nicely into the schedule.

The trade unions created the Labour Party in the UK and have still give the party money today. However this week they seem to be at war with the Labour Governemnt, seemingly blinkered to the fact that they are helping the Conservative opposition whom should by rights be the real enemy, sweep into power.

The Unions think they are the answer to Labour's problems. They propose huge public sector pay rises that will fuel inflationary pressure, and strikes to ruin the lives of ordinary people if they don't get them, a windfall tax on energy companies that will destroy much needed investment plans that are being put in place to try and secure the long term security of our energy supply. And lets not forget the unions old favourite, tax the rich more and have talented, successful people Britain needs in these tough economic times to other countries.

For poor old Prime Minster Gordon Brown, with friends like these, who needs any enemies. For a PM already looking into the abyss of what seems certain defeat at the election, the rise of the Socialist left among the unions is all he needs. He also must feel a sense of dispair, as to be fair to the prime Minister, then unions are being rather ungreatful.

For Brown has been part of the Government fort he last 11 years which has implemented the minum wage the unions demanded, backed the European social chapter they demanded, has increased public sector pay over the cycle at a higher rate than in the private sector and laid the foundations for an explosion of public sector jobs, a hugely important source of union memebership. He has also implemented maternity and paternity leave changes the unions campaigned for, as well as the winter fuel allowance for the elderly and enacting into law rights for a maximum 48 hour working week.

It is fair to say the unions would not have got any of these things from the Conservatives, and agree or not with the measures mentioned, you would have thought a bit of thanks and humility from the unions would be appropriate. Apparently not. Derek Simpson, The General Secrety of the comically called 'Unite' union has slated foreign secretary as 'Smug' and 'arrogant,' and by the account given here it seems they were some of the nicer things he had to say.  Then there is the plan to vote, a vote expected to be passed, planning strikes over pay if the Government does not give them what they want. They seem happy to use threats of language echoing the 'Winter of Discontent.' A period of mass strikes in the 1970's which ushered in Margaret Thatcher, and 18 years of Conservative rule.

Maybe it will happen again, For the Conservative cause, the phrase 'useful idiots' springs to mind. The unions have so much to be greatful to the Prime Minister for, some would argue much to the deteriment of the country, and yet they are intent on destroying that very same Government. The irony is delicious, the logic nothing short of comical, For the media it's a magnificent feeding frenzy, espcially for those ready to back Cameron at the next election and want to see Labour out, as the unions march on directionless, like lemmings over a cliffe. 

I have not written here for some time. It's time I did. And where better to start than the most exciting election in years. On November 4th the United states will select tehir successor to President Bush. One thing is for sure, forget waffle about landslides and easy victories, this election will be close, very close. There are even scenarios where it could be a dead draw.

How can this be you may ask? The conventional media suggest it's all sown up. On the Democrat side is Barak Obama, aiming to be the first black President. He is young, dynamic, charasmatic, tells a great story, inspires hope, gives a first rate speech everytime he is at the platform. By contrast the Republicans have John McCain, 72 years old, sometimes struggles to give a speech, he represents the party of that hated President Bush. The Republicans are unpopular, McCain lacks Obama's charisma and youth and despite being known as a moderate Republican, surely represents an old America that does not stand a chance against the new, dynamic Obama. So there we are, this race is all over is it? One way traffic, surely?

Well, no actually it's not. In this election most of what you see does not represent what will actually decide this election. Take Obama's speech in Berlin, in Europe seen as a triumph, in the US seen as arrogant. McCain actually gained ground in the polls durin that time, given the almost fanatical coverage from the BBC and other European news networks at the time you would not have known it it the UK or in Europe though.

So lets move to the last week or so. last week in Denver the Democrats held their convention. all the big guns rallied behind Obama, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Hilary Clinton, and Obama finished the show on the anniversary of Martin Luther King's famous 'I have a dream' speech with an excellent speech of his own, complete with all the glamour and razmatazz of 80,000 people in attendence at the home of the Denver Broncos NFL stadium.

Nobody can deny it was impressive. All in tune with the theme we have heard all along of the young dynamic man's march to history and the White House. But how has it really gone down. Had it enabled Obama to stretch out to a huge unassailable lead leaving poor John McCain in his wake. well, according to the historically most reliabally accurate pollster in America, Rasmussen Research, no it has not. As of today on the eve of the Republican convention, coming after a week of wall to wall positive US coverage, Obama's lead is merely 3%. McCain is actually less of a deficit behind going into his convention than Bush was behind Kerry going into his four years ago.

Bush of course went on to win. There is no certainty McCain will, but to understand this election look no further than the postion state by state, do that and you realise despite all the fervour for Obama, this election is actually in John McCain's hands to win or lose. That's right, I said it's in John McCain's hands to win or lose.

Here is Rasmussen's state by state position. The number in brackets is the number of electoral college votes each state is given o a winner takes all basis. 270 are needed to win the election. If you except the states on one side or the other go the way shown (and it is hard to imagine more than one or two at the most won't) the college vote position is Obama 264 McCain 247 with three states so close we can't give them to either candidate. The colours show which way they voted in 2004, red for Republican, blue for Democrat. Notice the three toss up states are red, Colorado, Virginia and Nevada. If McCain wins these, it is almost impossible to see how Obama can win. as the lead in the closest states given to McCain would be won by a bigger margin still.

This means to win this election McCain has to win threestates that voted Bush in 2004, all states won by small margins as a result of christians, gun owners, and supporters of low taxation coming out to support President Bush. They are not asking if they want McCain or Obama in the White House, indeed Obama is not even in the equation. Their concern is whether McCain is conservative enough to be in the White House. They fear his maverick tendencies, they don't like the fact he does not make religion a big issue in his politics.

This week McCain  showed his maverick streak again, picking relative unknown Sarah Palin, the Governor of Alaska, as his Vice-Presidential pick. Many believe this is to exploit Democrat devisions amongst women who wnated Hilary Clinton to be the Democrat nomination. It may or may not have this effect, but Palin is also a very tradition, christian, anti-abortion, low tax Republican. Very reassuring maybe to those in Colorado, Nevada and Virginia who McCain needs on side to win this election. These people will decide it all, not east coast Democrats, left-wingers in the media or Europeans who think all a Democrat has to do is hate Bush to win. To the contrary, these people are conservative, they like Bush, but do they trust the moderate McCain to put him in the White House? It's up to McCain to pursuade them, like I said, despite the Obama hype, it's McCain's to win or lose in reality. 

Are The Sun Opening a dangerous box?

It's one the the most emotive questions of all, how would you react if someone you loved or cared for was murdered? The reality is of course, you don't know, and hopefully you never will as that would mean it has happened to you. I would guess the reaction would be absed on emotion rather than logic, and human beings should surely be no other way, but it is no way to run a justice system.

Murderers it would seem, are not hard to find in the news these days. From the recent conviction of Steve Wright for the Soham murders, to todays conviction of Levi Bellfield. The question of how to repsond to murder, personally and in terms of law is right at the front of the agenda. The mother of Sally Ann Bowman was clear in her response, she wanted the murderer dead. It's impossible not to sympathise with her position, but is a life for a life really the way forward?

The Sun used this call to 'open the debate' on the reintroduction of capital punishment. Despite the paper making clear it's instinct was not to bring the death penalty back, they wanted a big debate on the issue, the reasons are perfectly noble of course, my guess is they expected the poll they ran to produce an 80-20 split in favour of the reintroduction, in line with previous polls. The debate would create an element of mischief, becuase even the possiblilty of bringing it back would be a clear breach of EU law, and by debating this the paper, while not supporting reintroduction, is clearly stating that we refuse to rule something out just because the EU says so. It's nice bit of EU bashing nicely thrown into the mix by default as a result.

They probably assumed there was a reasonable minority against reintroduction, and they could then say they understood the calls for the death penalty to be brought back, but we can't run a justice system on that emotional response, and the fact a sizeable minority agreed justified themselves going against the majoirty.

However they got a major shock today. The poll was not 80-20 in favour, not even 90-10, but 99-1. That's 99% in favour, and 1% against. True it is only a poll of it's readers, but is it really sustainable for the nations biggest selling paper to hold it's position whilst 99% of it's own readership disagree? What is more there were more than 95,000 votes cast, so it can hardly be dismissed as a small, self selecting sample as most Sun polls can.

It will be facinating to see how the Sun can hold it's position, if indeed it can. Our system is certainly not so perfect that there are no miscarriages of justice, to take the chance of killing one innocent man is surely a dangerous route to go down. This 'debate' however is not as clear cut is the editors of The Sun probably first thought, and if our biggest selling newspaper, the one every politician courts assiduously come election time, switches sides on this issue, the consequences for Britian could be great, in my view for the worse. Whichever side you are on, I advise to keep watching, the outcome could have big ramifications for the mindset of the British attitude to our justice system for a long time to come.

After a break from the blog I begin with a look at the facinating picture in Brtiish politics. Over the last few weeks we have seen the emergence of Prime Minister Brown. He has claimed to be the end of spin over substance, and yet, the opposite appears to be true. During the 'honeymoon', which is all about spin and presentations, Brown has done exceptionally well. Now we are getting back to substance as the honeymoon ends, his lead is starting to evaporate and his Conservtive opponents are back in the game.

Today poll reports are suggesting the gap has narrowed to as close to all square as possible. One poll even has it all square, another that gave Brown a 10 point lead only a few weeks ago now had it cut to three. It is being reported tonight that a third poll to be published tomorrow has a one point Labour lead. Taking margin for error into account, and the ability of polling data to consistantly over estimate the Labour position, we are effectively all square with everything to play for.

The interesting thing about what we are seeing now is that it coincides with a dominance of a key area of politics in which Brown is widely considered strong and Cameron weak, notably that of policy. If Cameron's position on family policy porved a disaster, which it did, he has recovered the ground on tax and crime. His attack over prison policy and early release schemes, the ambitous plans in John Redwood's report to cut red-tape for businesses and cut tax have all gone down well, despite the BBC's attempts to rubbish the Redwood report in a manner they had to apologise for.

In addition, you only have to look at the editorial line of the Sun newspaper to know Brown has many problems. They have attacked Brown day by day, on Europe, on immigration, on tax, on the economy, on crime and disorder, on education, on hospitals. Day after day the editorial line of the UK's leading paper has been a drip, drip, drip attack. Todays polling news suggests this is having a major effect, Brown's problem is that it will be difficult to stop them doing it.

So we go into the conferences and it is truely game on. Over the next few weeks we will see the true opening salvos of the next general election. It could still go either. Browns support for the EU treaty is very unpopular, and he has much to do in reassuring pepople on crime after recent high profile murders. in the measures in the report on family policy Cameron has many pitfalls too, he also has to resist the temptation to vere too much to the right, while mainitaining enough of the polcies that will keep traditional Tories and the likes of the Sun and the Mail on board, without scaring the horses.

This summer we have seen Cameron, who has looked like a winner from day one, wobble, now we are seeing Prime Minister Brown wobble for the first time too. In a long campaign you get wobbles. Everyone from Bill Clinton to Ronald Reagan, Margaret Thatcher to Tony Blair had them. You may not remember them, thats because in the end they are forgotten if you are a winner. You may remember more the wobbles of the likes of Neil Kinnock and William Hague, beacuse they are only remembered if you are a loser. When it comes to Brown verses Cameron, this conference season may give us the first real indication of which one of these formidable operators is a winner.

New Prime Minster Gordon Brown has had a pretty good first few weeks. His job has been made easier by many mistakes during that same period by his opponents, but still Gordon himslef has run a steady as she goes regime so far, and he has not frightened the horses in the way many thought he may.

He dealt with the Terrorist attacks with a calm, reassuring manner that impressed many. His brave decision to promote the MP for Redditch, Jackie Smith, has been welcomed by many, and vindicated in the way she has dealt with the position so far. His honeymoon period has allowed him to turn the polls around for Labour from a minor deficit to a lead of around 6%. There are signs however the these polls are stabalising and you would expect some edge to come off that lead in due course. So if the honeymoon is coming to an end, could things now begin to go wrong.

The answer is of course that this will depned on what events get thrown up. He has controversial decisions to make over new anti-terror laws. His support for ID cards and wanting to increase the detention period without charge could lead to opposition. His early release scheme for prisoners has come under fire, so has his decision to rule out a referendum on the new EU treaty. The ecomomy is also not as strong as it was, and if that continues, the man who has run it for the last 10 years, Mr Brown himself, could get the blame. So there are many pitfalls that could cause problems on the horision.

We do however live in an age where often perception and image are sometimes as important as reality. So for all the policy areas I have just mentioned, Brown's biggest danger maybe more of the sort covered by this article in the Mail on Sunday documenting what Gordon has had to deal with in his short time as Prime Minister. First a terrorist attack, then floods and now foot and mouth disease's return. None of these are issues that the opposition can make any capital out of directly, to try would actually damage them, but the image of Gordon Brown's regime following one crisis after another could become a big problem for the Government.

Gordon could be in danger of becoming a victim of circumstances through no fault of his own. If people begin to link his Governemnt with crisis after crisis, the view that something different may be needed to stop the rot may become subconciously prevelent in the minds of the public. There is only so long the media can begin with the words 'And Gordon Brown is facing another crisis today' before Gordon Brown and crisis become inextricably linked. If this happens, Gordon could find himself in danger dispite having done nothing worng personally. He must surely hope nothing else out of theordinary happens for a while, or he could become 'Crisis Man,' which will not help him fight a furture election anymore easily.

 

Last Thursday two by elections took place for two vacant seats in the House of Commons. One was due to the standing down of Tony Blair in Sedgefield in County Durham. The other took place in Ealing Southall in London, where the Labour MP there recently passed away.

In Sedgefield Labour held the seat comfortably as had been expected. The Liberal Democrats came second but well behind and the Conservatives third. Nothing out of the ordinary happened there as this was the expected result. The more unpredictable election was in Ealing. Labour began with a majority of 11,000 and by the end of the night they held the seat with a majority of only 3,000. The Liberal Democrats came second and the Conservative, who put a huge amount of effort into this seat, including speculating they may even win it or at elase come a close second, ended up a fairly miserable third.

For Labour there will be some releif they have held both seats. A Governemnt defending seats in a by election is always very difficult. It reinforces the polling evidence that while new PM Gordon Brown is doing well with a steady as she goes approach and is not yet at least scaring anyone away as some in the Labour party had feared, some his opponenets had hoped he might do.

For  the Liberal Democrats it is a mixed bag. They will have hoped to run Labour closer in Sedgefield as it was clear from the off they were the main challengers there. In Ealing they will have been pleased to secure a resonable second, cutting Labour's majority and holding off the Conervatives push to move ahead of them. Having said that, passed experience shows this is the sort of seat that in the past they have actually won in by elections. There by election strategy is a formidable one but on this occasion had not had any huge impact. Liberal leader Ming Cambell will still have plenty of critics on the back of this, but has done just about enough for now to remain leader.

The biggest impact of these results will be on the Tories. Leader David Cameron has from day one tried to make the Conservatives approach a softer and in many ways more Liberal approach. His right-wing critics are already getting the knives out. They state the Conservatives are being punished for not being Conservative enough and state Cameron must do this to get his act together.

Are these critics correct however. In the last couple of weeks the Conservative coverage in the news has been all about exactly the sort of issues these critics have been going on about. I discussed the alcohol tax in a previous entry on here, an attempt to stop 'binge-drinking,' exactly the sort of issue the moral right like to talk about. Cameron has also committed himself to tax breaks specifically for married couples, something these same people fully support. Since these measures were introduced, Labour have taken the lead in the polls and the Consevratives have fallen behind.

Why would this be if traditional Conservatove polices are needed as Cameron's critics suggest? The reality is probably that the sort of voters Cameron has been targeting with his new approach, do not like the moralising that goes with the sort of measures that came out of Iain Duncan-Smith's report. These ideas of the moral right are why the Tories are behind, are why they did so badly on Thursday. The irony of Thursday is those who cirticise Cameron for Thursday, are actually the people who have pushed Cameron into backing ideas that have come out in the last couple of weeks. It is they who are to blame for Thursday's failure, not what Cameron was doing before this point.

We are in a strange position in politics right now. Usually the Governemnt and what it does drive the political temperature. Not now though. Brown is a caution man and will continue to play safe, it is what the opposition leader Mr Cameron does that will be the key. The right will use this result as a means of trying to push the Conservtives towards more of the sort of ideas we have seen in the last two weeks, they don't understand that this is the reason why Cameron is now struggling. Now we will see if Cameron is really fit for Governemnt. Does he have the courage to decisively ignore and defeat his critics, or will he cave in some more, and hand Gordon Brown an easy ride on a plate?

 

So it's official, the Conservatives finally have a candidate to take on Mayor of London Ken Livingstone next May. It took them a long time to get here, several bizarre daliences with certain people, and finally it comes down to what we now know.

First the Tories tried to team up with the Lib Dems to get Greg Dyke to run, a man as far away from Conservatiism as it gets. Then they tried to get Digby Jones, then Director General of the CBI, to stand as their candidate. He is now of course a Labour minister in the Lords, how fickle political allegences can be in the modern day and age.

And now, tep up none other than Boris Johnson. He has today confirmed he will make a bid for the biggest office in London. If he wins he will become the most powerful conservative in Britian, Boris Johnson, fancy that.

Boris of course came to national fame after being given a complete mauling on the TV comedy show 'Have I Got News For You,' particularly by Ian Hislop. Thsi went down so well, he appeared again, and then again, and before long Boris was a national phenomonon, with many university groups up and down the land claiming our Boris should by PM.

Before his appearences on the show, he was a little known Daily Telegraph journalist with a Tory edge to his articles as many Telegraph journalists tend to do. By now however he was on any TV show that would take him. He has since even hosted on a number of occasions the show that made him famous and he has driven cars with Jeremy Clarkson on 'Top Gear.'  

He is gaffe prone too. His well publicised affair with Petronoella Wyatt did not go down too well with traditional Tories. His attack on the people of Liverpool infuriated then leader Michael Howard, he has also managed to alienate the people of Portsmouth, Papua New Guinea and been not too nice about Jamie Oliver's healthy eating campaigns.

But the people of Liverpool, Portsmouth and Papau New Guinea don't get a vote in the contest for Mayor of London. Whats more Boris Johnson is the sort of man whom, to his fans, pretty much gets away with anything. His opponent is gaffe prone to, Mr Livingstone's comparison of a Jewish journalist to 'concentration camp guard' was not exactly good manners, and deeply offensive to many in the Jewish community.

So Boris Vs Red Ken. Can Boris really win? Go on any news site where readers are invited to add comments and you will get an inevitable split down the middle. Everything from 'Boris you are great, Boris for mayor, GO Boris!!!' to 'Boris is a complete buffoon who stands no chance.' and every possible view in between. Some say they would rather vote for a prize pig rather than Red Ken, others retort if they vote for Boris, they are close to doing just that. One thing is for sure, the early signs are Boris Johnson has raised the passions and tempreature of this debate. This may just be the most facinating political battle in the UK for over a decade. Mr Livingstone, Mr Johnson, bring it on!!! I can't wait!!!!

 

Today the lead story in the Mail, the Telegraph, the Times, the Guardian and the Independent, five pillars of our newspaper establishment, in unison lead on the same story. You may think therefore the stroy must have been of some huge significant importance for these competing forces to all agree on one thing.

Could it be Iraq, or Afghanistan? How about the state of schools or the Health Service? Maybe it is the aftermath of flooding or further such wanrings about, and the potential consquences to the planet of such a change to the climate. Perhaps, if they wanted some more light hearted, they could feature David Beckhams arrival in the United states.

But no, all of these papers lead with the story of the demise of former Daily Telegraph owner Conrad Black. I'll link one of the links to the stroy here in case any of you really want to read it. Now if this was amongst the smaller stories you could understand it, but is this really front page news? Is this really what the people of Britain are most interested in? Somehow I doubt it.

Newspapers have long had a love of themselves and their own self importance, none more so than in 1992 when The Sun claimed it was the newspaper, not the thirteen million people who voted for John Major, that won the Conservative's the election. Few will forget the 'Its the Sun what won it' claim. The Sun also had a long standing war with The Mirror, especially in the days of the editorial battles between David Yelland of The Sun and Piers Morgan (now a superstar of 'Britains Got Talent' fame) at the Mirror, to the point where tha battles amongst each other almost overshadowed the news in the paper itself.

So today we have Conrad Black, facing a jail sentence according to most reports, as front page news. Such newspapers should be careful, in the age of the internet, you can argue the newspaper industry needs to adapt as it offers only a once a day experience where you can get updates on a 24/7 basis through TV and the internet. For newspapers to be relevent in this environment it must ensure the front page stories are of interest to those who go into the newsagent and by the paper. Spending it's front pages talking about one of it's own, someone few of the people reading it have ever heard of, will only send circulation figures falling and reinforce an emerging view that the newspaper is out of date.

Ealrier today a little known politican from Wales, a man few outside of Wales or the political anorak community (like myself) knows who he is, was elected Deputy First Minister of the Welsh Assembley. His name is Ieuan Wyn Jones. You may ask, the Welsh assembley? It's not even a parliament, surely that doesn't matter.

It's true to say this will little impact on your everyday lives, or indeed, given how little power the Welsh Assembley has, a huge affect on the everyday lives of even the people of Wales. This election however is the start of a trend that began when devolution was first introduced. in 1997 Tony Blair's newly elected Governemnt promised a Scottish Parliament, a Welsh assembley and a Northern Ireland assembley. All these were delivered.

Blair and Labour argued that for years the Scots and Welsh, who had voted Labour in election after election, still got a Tory Minsiter who they had not voted for running their affairs. At that point they did not know they would become a three term Govenrment, so to guard against this in the future devolution would ensure key decisions in the other nations of the United Kingdom would be made by the devolved bodies. Some in Labour also took for granted that they would have big majorities in Scotland and Wales, ensuring their hold on power there.

The Tories were opposed to this (except in Northern Ireland which they saw as a special case), arguing it would lead to the break-up of the United Kingdom. The Nationlist parties in Scotland and Wales agreed, and obviously supported the proposals seeing them as a trojen horse to independence.

Referendums were won and the bodies were eventually set-up. One promise at least you can't accuse Blair of breaking, but should he have done? At the time the Scottish Parliament referendum was won the then defense secretary George Robertson stated the setting up of the Scottish Parliament killed the argument 'dead.' The Nationalists scoffed. 10 years on, where are we now?

In Northern Ireland things are slighly different. Nationalists and Republicans there don't want Northern Ireland independence of course, but want the province they call 'Ulster' to be under the rule of Dublin. Their opponents, the unionists support the union and Northern Ireland's place in it. In the early days of Northern Ireland devolution, the moderate Ulster Unionsist Party and SDLP from the Nationalist side dominated, the hard line Democratic Unionists and their Republican counterparts Sinn Fain (who many argue have links with the IRA) were very much in the background. Today Ian Paisley of the Democratic Unionists is the leader of the assembley, his deputy is Martin McGuiniss.

McGuiniss leads Sinn Fain in the assembley. With the IRA effectively dispanded, Sinn Fain have one aim, a united Ireland. As part of the devolution package it has been agreed a referendum will be held once a generation, and if a majority want it, Ulster will return to Dublin. Demographics suggest the nationlist/republican side of the argument, currently around 46%, could soon become the majority, this means McGuiniss, the Sinn Fain Presindent Jerry Adams and company, have not only grown as a result of devolution, they may not be far off getting what they want.

Across the sea in Scotland there is another story of Nationalist gains.  In the recent Scottish Parliament election the Scottish Nationalist Party (SNP for short) became the biggest party for the first time. The results break down also suggest that if the wind is against Labour next time, there is scope for a new series of SNP gains at the next election too. There are as many as 16 constituencies where if Tory or Lib Dem voters can be pursuaded to tactically vote against Labour, the SNP could win the seat next time.

The SNP leader Alex Salmond does not have an overall majority, but has for the first time been elected First Minister of Scotland. If his support grows further, he could soon be in a position to push for an independence referendum. It may take one more election for him to be in this position, it may even take two, but Salmond and his party are not going away and support for them is growing. The SNP have unquestionably benefitted from devolution, the independence argument is far from 'dead.'

That brings me back to Mr Wyn Jones. He is the leader of Plaid Cymru (Welsh for 'The Party of Wales') They are the Welsh Nationalists. In his election as Deputy first minister, Mr Wyn Jones has negotiated a refurnedum to give the Welsh assembley offical law making powers, effectively making it a parliament. Not only this, but Labour as part of the agreement are committed to supporting this. If the pattern with Scotland having a Parliament is anything to go by, this is a great opportunity for Plaid Cymru.

This is little evidence for support for Welsh independence now, but today's election of Mr Wyn Jones may be the first step for Wales to follow Scotland down the same path. It also means all three devolved bodies have people commited to the end of the United Kingdom as leader or deputy leader of the body. Nothing will happen overnight, but this could be the beginning of the end for the United kingdom. It is not clear what will stop the path towards this, maybe nothing can. So if in five, ten,  twenty, event thirty or forty years time, Northern Ireland is under Dublin rule, Scotland and Wales are independent and the United Kingdom no longer exists, remember the day I introduced you Ieuan Wyn Jones, he may be far more significant than you may have first thought.

After the smoking ban it's a good question as to how far the nanny state can or should go. Labour is already planning a clampdown on alcohol, with new warnings and the banning of aclohol sponsors on replica football shirts. These measures are the brainchild of Caroline Flint, who for those who don't know (and it will probably come as some suprise to her that anyone wouldn't) is the Minister for public health. She is the current nanny of the nation, she know whats good for us, because of course we don't. In the light of Miss Flint, it would be nice if we had an opposition that did not want to lecture us all on how to live our lives.

Well I'm sorry to inform you that we can only dream. This morning samples of a new report commissioned by the Conservative Party, a report that David Cameron, the Conservative Party leader, has said he supports 'the thrust of' suggests a new tax on alcohol that would increase the price beer by 7p a pint, 20p on a bottle of wine and 70p on a bottle of whisky. Apparently this alcohol tax is, according to Tory MP for Chingford and Woodford, Iain Duncan Smith, 'required to improve the health of the nation.' Mr Duncan Smith did of course lead the Conservative Party once, and many argue he was the worst leader in the history of the party.

It should said this idea has not yet been adoprted as party policy. But given opinon polls now put Gordon Brown and Labour back in the lead, it will be interesting to see what Cameron does. Cameron set this report up in the first place, if he rejects these proposals he will be open to ridcule about his judgement of setting the report up, but the idea that forcing low income people to pay more for the night out through higher alcohol taxes is going to reduce alcohol consumption is nonsense. All it will due is add to the financial pressures which create the very social breakdown this report claims it wants to get to the heart of. It also smacks of moralistic undertones that have damaged the Conservative Party's image for so long, and reverses the trend Cameron himself has been trying to move into over the last year.

After the devisive Grammar schools row, and the new Prime Ministers impressive start in his new role, the fair wind Cameron has had so far is now turning cold. The positions is not a disaster, but it depends on him holding his nerve. This report is one of a number of traditionalist forces trying to move Cameron into a more old-fashioned direction, which will only lead to the wilderness of a fourth election defeat. Enraging drinkers (of which there are plenty) into voting against him, will not help his cause.