Big Sticks and Small Carrots

Operation Four-Letter-Word continues in Aberdeen.

Wall on top of the St. Nicholas Centre. Friday afternoon.

I’ve added one to my blog. It seems like a good idea to me (via Independence).
I’m hopeless at spelling but I think Licence would be more appropriate for the UK. I’m anything but certain of this though.

It’s a beautiful day here so I’m off out for a wee cycle.

Hmm, just to make it clear, I’m off out for a wee trip on my bike. I’m not off out to aquire a wee cycle. I’m 6′ 4″, (around 193cm for metric types) so a wee cycle wouldn’t really be very useful.

“If people end up opting out by drifting off to the Lib Dems then it only takes one in ten of our voters to drift off to the Lib Dems you end up with a Tory Government.“
Tony Blair, 30 April 2005, C4

This is commonly referred to as the “back door” argument. It goes like this:
“It is Labour versus Tory. Anything else is a Tory vote by the back door and they (the voters) should have nothing to do with it.“
Tony Blair, 29 April 2005, BBC

A warning - swearing may occur in the following.
In the world of intelligent bloggers it is an argument commonly referred to as bullshit.
Nick Barlow knocks it down here, and again here.
Phil at Cabalamat Journal does a good job on it here.
Justin at Chicken Yoghurt has been keeping a “back door” count here, here, here, here, and here.

And just in case you’re thinking this is some sort of interweb blogger conspiracy to discredit the “back door” argument, you can also read about it in the proper media.
The Independent does a good, if somewhat belated job with this:
Vote for Lib Dems will not let in the Tories
“Labour’s attempts to warn its wavering supporters that a vote for the Liberal Democrats could allow Michael Howard into No. 10 “by the back door” was undermined yesterday in a detailed study carried out for The Independent. The study found that a swing of 11.5 per cent from Labour voters to the Liberal Democrats could deprive Mr Blair of his overall Commons majority but it would be virtually impossible for such defections - at even twice that rate - to let in the Conservatives to form a government.
John Curtice, the respected psephologist and professor of politics at Strathclyde University, who carried out the analysis, said: “Labour’s claim that switching from Labour to the Liberal Democrats could enable Mr Howard to win the election is highly misleading.“

And Channel 4 Factcheck are similarly unconvinced.
Paul Whiteley, professor of politics at Essex University who is advising the British Election Study, also rejected Labour’s claim.
“It’s not true. Currently our surveys in the British Election Study put Labour at 36 per cent, the Conservatives at 31 per cent and the Lib Dems at 23 per cent. If 10 per cent of the Labour vote were to switch to the Lib Dems it would go to roughly 33 per cent Labour, 31 per cent Conservative and 26 per cent Lib Dems.
In this case Labour would still get a comfortable working majority.“

I think that’s fairly conclusive. The “back door” argument is a porky pie told by the Prime Minister in order to scare people into voting Labour. Who’d have thought the man could stoop so low?

I’ve been busy in the outerweb (you see what I did there?) so this post is overdue but it was always coming. I’ve read a couple of other blogs on the subject so I’m confident that what I wanted to say is reasonable. It concerns the opinion poll carried out for the Press and Journal, my local newspaper. There are two articles which, I think, use the poll in a slightly confusing way. I don’t think the P&J have been intentionally misleading but I do think that one or two points need to be clarified.

The articles are:
Labour set to hold key marginals - P&J Poll
and
Begg Faces Tough Re-Election Fight as 30% are Undecided
(Both from 28th April)

First a slightly trivial point - since Aberdeen South is one of the “key marginals” in question, these two articles do seem to be somewhat contradictory. A pedants quibble perhaps. My real concern is with the figures provided by the poll. The problem is illustrated by this quotation from the second article:

“Labour’s Anne Begg faces a tough fight to be re-elected in Aberdeen South, where almost a third of voters have not decided whom they will back, according to a poll for the Press and Journal.
The poll shows that, despite Miss Begg’s high profile, a general slump in support for the Government will lose her votes next Thursday. As many as 38% of those canvassed in the constituency said they had voted Labour in the 2001 general election, but only 21% said they would do so this time.
Just 9% of voters are sure they will vote Liberal Democrat, while at least 12% of the sample voted for the party in 2001.“

12% of those polled said they had voted for the Liberal Democrats in 2001.
The BBC says that approximately 28% of people in Aberdeen South voted Lib Dem in 2001 so we’re missing a large number of Lib Dem voters. Where are they? The Labour figure is correct, it’s about 38% in both cases. The Lib Dem figure is hugely wrong, 16% of Lib Dem voters have disappeared. That’s just plain spooky!

After reading this post from Stuart at Independence, I think I understand what has happened. It is just as well because I’m not very good at understanding the mechanics of opinion polls. I think the P&J has extrapolated the constituency poll result from a poll of the whole of Scotland.
That way madness lies people! It just isn’t a very accurate way to do this sort of thing. As I understand it, each constituency would have to be weighted seperately before any useful conclusions could be drawn. Since we’re missing so many LD voters, this clearly hasn’t happened.

I am cheered enormously by this from Stuart’s post:
“If any Liberal Democrats out there are reading this, you will be very pleased to hear that the P&J did an even bigger hatchet-job on the LibDems chances in Aberdeen South. Do the sums yourself, but whichever way you look at it, Vicki Harris will be the new MP for Aberdeen South, and Annabelle Ewing will return to Westminster as the MP for the new Ochil & South Perthshire constituency.“

I’m not good at sums and I’m even worse at counting chickens but I’ve got my fingers crossed.
Honourable Fiend suggests in this post that the P&J poll might be “slightly whiffy”. Maybe I should order one of Polly’s nosepegs after all.
(Not so I can vote Labour obviously. That will never happen while Mr Blair leads the party, sorry Polly.)
Next post - a comment on all the “back door action” we’ve been getting from Mr Blair. Unsurprisingly, and as has been mentioned a number of times before, it is a sorry tale of untruths, scare tactics, and desperate deception.
(It’ll also be tomorrow.)

A just for fun election sweepstake has been set up on qwghlm.co.uk (via doctorvee).

I’ve plumped for a Labour majority of 63. I was torn between what I want and what I actually think will happen. In the style of Paddy Ashdown on Spitting Image, I’ve chosen to go “somewhere in between”.

Detailed Political Analysis
Do you really want to vote for a man with a sweaty forehead?

Unrelated Pop Quiz
1 Botox injections are known to bring about a reduction in wrinkles but do they also stimulate excessive sweating?
2 Inappropriate sweating is a sign of guilt. True or False?
3 My grandfather used to say “men sweat, women perspire, ladies glisten”. What do PM’s do?
4 Is this the cheapest shot I’ve ever taken?

Answers on p94.
(What ya donna do Hislop, sue?)

Vote Labour or the hamster gets it

Another ridiculous email from Labour and they are insinuating that I want you to vote Labour. Sod off! I’ll take my chances thanks, Mr O’Farrell.

He says:
“It is terrifying to think that in a week’s time we could actually have a Tory government.”
It is terrifying to think that a man of Mr O’Farrell’s intelligence could seriously suggest that this is a possiblity. Has he seen the opinion polls, the betting predictions, the starting positions of the parties, the swing needed for a Tory government, Michael Howard…
It isn’t going to happen!
This election can only decide the size of the Labour majority. Mr O’Farrell wants it to be big, the hamster wants it to be very small.
I’m not scared of Howard because he won’t win. I’m scared of what Blair will do if he wins another huge majority.

Real World Intrudes on Blogging!

Bearing the above in mind, this post will be a hurried shambles. I’ve hardly been near a computer all day so I’ve not even had a chance to read any blogs. And so much has been happening. The full legal advice seems to be in the hands of the BBC and C4. Blair says it vindicates him, Howard says he’s a liar (he’s a bit late in the game, isn’t he?) I’m not nearly well enough informed to express any opinions on these events so I won’t bother (Doesn’t normally stop you. Ed.) Interesting stuff though.

I had a mini crisis today when the borrowed camera stopped working after just two photos. I thought it might have been because it got a bit damp as it wasn’t the driest of days in Aberdeen. Turns out the battery had run flat so there was no need to panic. I’ve got one half decent picture which I might post tomorrow.

I also managed to get to the library to see if I could find a copy of the “Straight, No Chaser” documentary on video. Unfortunately I was out of luck, they don’t have it. I did get a Thelonious Monk CD and I can confirm that I still like jazz! I will try to get my hands on a copy of the documentary at some stage. (Thanks for the recommendation, Monk rocks and jazzes too!)

Thats it. I’ve done other things today but they were too dull to write about. Yes, more dull than the above. Difficult to believe but true all the same.
Goodnight.

I’ve got a few things to do in the town centre tomorrow. I wonder if I’ll see any of these?

Operation Four-Letter-Word

Before you consider voting for any candidate belonging to the party of Tony Blair you should read this post by Justin at Chicken Yoghurt. Stop. Did you read it? Forget my post, just read it.

OK, I’ll continue with my second rate scribblings for anyone who’s come back. Daniel at Crooked Timber has written a summary of the problem with Blair’s defence of his handling of the war. It’s worth bearing in mind next time you hear Blair saying that his integrity shouldn’t be the issue.
(Link via Europhobia)

The two posts linked above are a strong reminder of what you are voting for if you decide to vote for a New Labour candidate on 5th May. In Aberdeen South, Anne Begg is defending a slim majority against the Liberal Democrats so I live in one of the few places where it really is possible to let Blair know what I think of his actions. It is becoming obvious that the Tories are not going to form the next government. Now more than ever, a vote for Liberal Democrat Vicki Harris in Aberdeen South will be a vote well cast. How many people really want to see Blair back in power with another huge majority? I can already hear him: “My decision to go to war in Iraq has been fully supported by the British people. My integrity is not in question. Lets put this behind us…”
Putting this behind us isn’t an option available to everyone.

I won’t be voting for Anne Begg because she works for Mr Blair. We can be sure that any vote for New Labour will be presented as a vote for Blair after the election.

Here is what Strategic Voter recommends for Aberdeen South:

In this case the principal challenge comes from Vicky Harris of the LibDems, who was/is also opposed to the war, and has a good record on voting reform (one of the leaders of the successful campaign to bring in a fair voting system for future local elections in Scotland).
And in this case we should note that since 1997 Ann Begg has only rebelled 13 times, nearly all on minor matters. As a ‘loyalist’ (to whom?) who didn’t resist foundation hospitals, top-up fees, etc, she has been elevated to Labour’s National Executive.
We consider this constituency an absolutely key Labour-LibDem marginal, with no other party standing any realistic chance. If Labour lose it then Blair’s Westminster majority falls by 2.

Please, please, on this occasion vote ‘tactical LibDem’ and send to Westminster someone who will resist the illiberal and privatising drift of New Labour (or the Tories) !
Strategic Voter: Aberdeen South

Full details of Ann Begg’s record in parliament can be found on they work for you.
Some points of note:
She voted very strongly for the introduction of foundation hospitals
She voted very strongly for the introduction of student-top up fees
She voted a mixture of for and against the Iraq war

For me however, these details are of secondary importance. What matters to me is that any vote for a New Labour candidate will be taken as a vote for Tony Blair, a man who would rather not discuss the question of his integrity.