Comments on: Modelling lame duck prime ministers http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/ Out of the crooked timber of humanity, no straight thing was ever made Sun, 22 Nov 2009 02:13:42 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Anthony http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-151338 Anthony Wed, 12 Apr 2006 20:54:31 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-151338 <i>But surely those that have arbitrarily had prizes removed by Tony become vindictive towards him</i> That would depend on just how crappy those PPS jobs are. But surely those that have arbitrarily had prizes removed by Tony become vindictive towards him

That would depend on just how crappy those PPS jobs are.

]]> By: Lennon http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-151274 Lennon Wed, 12 Apr 2006 15:25:54 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-151274 <i> implies structural incentive for frequent shuffles... </i> But surely those that have arbitrarily had prizes removed by Tony become vindictive towards him... (rebellious former ministers) not sure that this is modelled at all from what I understand. implies structural incentive for frequent shuffles…

But surely those that have arbitrarily had prizes removed by Tony become vindictive towards him… (rebellious former ministers) not sure that this is modelled at all from what I understand.

]]> By: Doug http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-151265 Doug Wed, 12 Apr 2006 14:24:04 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-151265 <i>but the real sensitivity is to the difference between how many prizes Tony has versus how many Gordon has.</i> implies structural incentive for frequent shuffles... interesting... but the real sensitivity is to the difference between how many prizes Tony has versus how many Gordon has.

implies structural incentive for frequent shuffles… interesting…

]]> By: Alex http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-151068 Alex Mon, 10 Apr 2006 12:50:49 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-151068 The new leader of the Labour Party would become PM, conditional on his having the confidence of a majority in the Commons. The difficult bit is that the Labour Party has to have an election first to decide who gets to be leader, and all kinds of trade union delegates, affiliates and random membership dingbats get to vote as well as MPs. The new leader of the Labour Party would become PM, conditional on his having the confidence of a majority in the Commons.

The difficult bit is that the Labour Party has to have an election first to decide who gets to be leader, and all kinds of trade union delegates, affiliates and random membership dingbats get to vote as well as MPs.

]]> By: Daniel http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150996 Daniel Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:10:57 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150996 <i>I don’t get the “calendar for the next 3651 days” part. That takes our MP to 2015, and I can’t see why that matters. It looks like you’ve multiplied 365 by 10 and added one day for a leap year, but there are two leaps years (2008 and 2012).</i> I did the thing on the basis of sixty months, and unaccountably decided that this was 3651 days. This is one of my trademark elementary arithmetic errors, put in to prove to future historians that it was indeed me that posted this. in answer to oneeyedman's questions 1) no, but I'll email it to you if you like once I get it tidied up 2) making the shitlist bigger makes the crossover date earlier, as you'd expect, but the real sensitivity is to the difference between how many prizes Tony has versus how many Gordon has. 3) pretty difficult I think 4) I handled it by ignoring it, I'm afraid. I'm not sure that more accurate modelling would make all that much difference though, since the whole thing is about <i>who</i> gets selected for the prizes (also, some of the "Prizes" are pretty crappy PPS jobs) I don’t get the “calendar for the next 3651 days” part. That takes our MP to 2015, and I can’t see why that matters. It looks like you’ve multiplied 365 by 10 and added one day for a leap year, but there are two leaps years (2008 and 2012).

I did the thing on the basis of sixty months, and unaccountably decided that this was 3651 days. This is one of my trademark elementary arithmetic errors, put in to prove to future historians that it was indeed me that posted this.

in answer to oneeyedman’s questions

1) no, but I’ll email it to you if you like once I get it tidied up
2) making the shitlist bigger makes the crossover date earlier, as you’d expect, but the real sensitivity is to the difference between how many prizes Tony has versus how many Gordon has.
3) pretty difficult I think
4) I handled it by ignoring it, I’m afraid. I’m not sure that more accurate modelling would make all that much difference though, since the whole thing is about who gets selected for the prizes (also, some of the “Prizes” are pretty crappy PPS jobs)

]]> By: Kevin Donoghue http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150978 Kevin Donoghue Fri, 07 Apr 2006 20:37:36 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150978 <em>For those of us in the Colonies, what are the mechanics of a mid-term, intra-party PM shift?</em> The new Labour Party leader becomes the new PM. At the moment AFAIK it doesn't look as if any Labour MP intends to run against Brown for the leadership. For those of us in the Colonies, what are the mechanics of a mid-term, intra-party PM shift?

The new Labour Party leader becomes the new PM. At the moment AFAIK it doesn’t look as if any Labour MP intends to run against Brown for the leadership.

]]> By: P O'Neill http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150971 P O'Neill Fri, 07 Apr 2006 19:05:21 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150971 <em> I don’t get the “calendar for the next 3651 days” part. </em> Daniel may have to declare that everything is correct up to an arbitrary scale factor and assign it as an exercise to sort out to the details. I don’t get the “calendar for the next 3651 days” part.

Daniel may have to declare that everything is correct up to an arbitrary scale factor and assign it as an exercise to sort out to the details.

]]> By: jim http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150968 jim Fri, 07 Apr 2006 18:18:25 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150968 I expect, have long expected, Blair to resign on or about the tenth anniversary of his becoming Prime Minister. He's a very anniversary-oriented sort of bloke. That your model shows the tension maximizing around then adds some drama to the scenario. I expect, have long expected, Blair to resign on or about the tenth anniversary of his becoming Prime Minister. He’s a very anniversary-oriented sort of bloke. That your model shows the tension maximizing around then adds some drama to the scenario.

]]> By: JohnTh http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150967 JohnTh Fri, 07 Apr 2006 17:47:41 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150967 As I undestand it, once Blair goes, the selection of the new PM officially is made by the Queen, who in practice asks the MP who is recognised by the majority party in the Commons as their Leader. If Tony Blair announces his departure well in advance, the Labour party members would get their say as to the successor, but as things stand Gordon Brown would be the runaway favourite in any such election, especially with declared majority support of Labour MPs. Should Blair depart suddenly, I would guess that the MPs would have to select a successor themselves immediately, and would doubtless select Brown, who would be confirmed by the party at a later date. As I undestand it, once Blair goes, the selection of the new PM officially is made by the Queen, who in practice asks the MP who is recognised by the majority party in the Commons as their Leader.

If Tony Blair announces his departure well in advance, the Labour party members would get their say as to the successor, but as things stand Gordon Brown would be the runaway favourite in any such election, especially with declared majority support of Labour MPs. Should Blair depart suddenly, I would guess that the MPs would have to select a successor themselves immediately, and would doubtless select Brown, who would be confirmed by the party at a later date.

]]> By: C.J.Colucci http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150966 C.J.Colucci Fri, 07 Apr 2006 17:07:10 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150966 For those of us in the Colonies, what are the mechanics of a mid-term, intra-party PM shift? Does Blair say "I quit. Gordon's the new boss" or is there some kind of party or Parliamentary vote? Would the mechanics be different if Blair were forced out by scandal or death or something? For those of us in the Colonies, what are the mechanics of a mid-term, intra-party PM shift? Does Blair say “I quit. Gordon’s the new boss” or is there some kind of party or Parliamentary vote? Would the mechanics be different if Blair were forced out by scandal or death or something?

]]> By: almostinfamous http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150965 almostinfamous Fri, 07 Apr 2006 17:03:06 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150965 wow, you've got pre-emptive bendification powers. that's pretty good stuff. wow, you’ve got pre-emptive bendification powers. that’s pretty good stuff.

]]> By: Backword Dave http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150959 Backword Dave Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:35:10 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150959 Dan, I'm missing something. I get the "At some date between 6 May 2005 and 5 May 2010" part. I don't get the "calendar for the next 3651 days" part. That takes our MP to 2015, and I can't see why that matters. It looks like you've multiplied 365 by 10 and added one day for a leap year, but there are two leaps years (2008 and 2012). Dan, I’m missing something. I get the “At some date between 6 May 2005 and 5 May 2010” part. I don’t get the “calendar for the next 3651 days” part. That takes our MP to 2015, and I can’t see why that matters. It looks like you’ve multiplied 365 by 10 and added one day for a leap year, but there are two leaps years (2008 and 2012).

]]> By: Daniel http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150956 Daniel Fri, 07 Apr 2006 16:10:22 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150956 <i>the steves called, they want their schtick back</i> <a href="http://d-squareddigest.blogspot.com/2002_10_13_d-squareddigest_archive.html#83021152" rel="nofollow">Me from 2002</a> replied, telling them to get bent. the steves called, they want their schtick back

Me from 2002 replied, telling them to get bent.

]]> By: david http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150955 david Fri, 07 Apr 2006 15:39:20 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150955 Shit, I can't believe I'm going to end up in finance school. Shit, I can’t believe I’m going to end up in finance school.

]]> By: almostinfamous http://crookedtimber.org/2006/04/07/modelling-lame-duck-prime-ministers/comment-page-1/#comment-150951 almostinfamous Fri, 07 Apr 2006 15:04:08 +0000 http://crookedtimber.org/?p=4529#comment-150951 the steves called, they want their <a href="http://www.freakonomics.com/" rel="nofollow">schtick</a> back. the steves called, they want their schtick back.

]]>