24 JUNE 1960, Page 4

Portents

PPROBABLY the most telling commentary on the decline of the Labour Party is the current trend of speculation on the party's next leader. According to the Gallup Poll's report, prepared for the News Chronicle, half the people asked who they would like to see in Mr. Gaitskell's place (assuming that Mr. Bevan could not take over for health reasons) had to confess they did not know: and it is a reasonable supposition that most of them did not care. Of the rest, 18 per cent. wanted Harold Wilson, which is a fair indication of the limited choice available, especially as the rest of the field consisted of Richard Crossman, Barbara Castle, James Griffiths and George Brown, running in that order.

And of these votes, how many were cast simply because the voter felt bound to say a name, any name, rather than admit 'Don't Know'? The front runner, as Mr. Wilson by seniority can reasonably .claim to be. always holds the advan- tage in such preliminary skirmishes, as Mr. Nixon and, now, Senator Kennedy have found in the US. According to the Guardian last week the latest poll there means that 'Senator Kennedy appears to be the only Democrat with a good chance of defeating Vice-President Nixon.' This is absurd: any Democratic candidate, even one unknown today, could now stand an excellent chance of winning, if the cards fall well for him in the next few weeks. Popularity, as the polls themselves have shown, waxes and wanes with frightening rapidity : the ratings for Mr. Nixon, even for President Eisenhower himself, have fluctuated wildly—and one does not have to look many years back to remember when the polls pointed to Estes Kefauver as the candidate most likely to succeed. Whether there is any truth in the allegation that polls create the victories they are designed only to reflect is something that can- not be proved; but it is depressing to find the Guardian blithely assuming that polls are neces- sarily portents.