Should Huckabee really be the favourite for the GOP nomination?
December 10th, 2007
Tied for second on Betfair and average 17 points ahead in the last two Iowa polls
One of my first introductions to betting was John McCririck’s book on the subject which came out in the early 1990s. A concept that he mentions, which will be familiar to many users of pb, is that of the “steamer”, a runner whose price shortens dramatically - although as I’m sure that PtP and other racing experts will testify, simply because a horse is a steamer is no guarantee of its actually winning the race.
The formal start of the 2008 US Presidential Election, which will not be complete until Inauguration Day on 20th January 2009, draws ever closer with the Iowa caucuses taking place only three days into the new year, and as of now Mike Huckabee is very much the “steamer” in the race to be the Republican nominee. His Betfair odds were in double digits until quite recently but now he is neck-and-neck with Mitt Romney for second place, at about 5 (4/1). Not only that, but he has been storming ahead in the last couple of polls for Iowa, with leads of 12 and 22 points from Mason-Dixon and Newsweek.
So could he secure a big win in Iowa, a respectable third in New Hampshire and then continue his surge with a win in South Carolina ahead of taking on Giuliani in his supposedly “momentum-proof” firewall states including Florida? One of pb’s many US posters, Mike from New Jersey, had this to say in a lengthy post yesterday:
“… I do not think Romney can salvage his position [in Iowa]… Giuliani cannot win the nomination… Huckabee should be the favorite in betting right now.” Mike also warned against betting on McCain - and that for the Democrats, “…whoever wins Iowa wins the nomination…”
Mike’s full comments can be found at post 159 on yesterday’s thread, and Huckabee remains a buy for me in the Republican nominee market. American politics next year will see frantic activity in January and February, and unless the nomination races are incredibly tight, several months of “phoney war” between the final two candidates ahead of the summer conventions and the Labor Day kickoff of the official presidential campaign, during which time attention will briefly turn to other contests such as Spain, Russian Presidential, London Mayor, and Ireland’s EU Treaty referendum. The indispensable Real Clear Politics site is here, a must-read for the American scene.
Lib Dem Leadership
Vince Cable said yesterday on the Andrew Marr show that the Clegg-Huhne contest was “very close” - was he right or just trying to maintain media interest? The markets hardly seemed to have moved at all with Clegg still at 1.3 - or will the betting outsider win as in 2006?
Australia
For those of you following the counting Down Under, there are now ten seats which have completed their vote tallies and declared the final results - full details are available here from the AEC’s “Virtual Tally Room” and the ABC site is here - the ABC says the final totals will be 84 / 64 / 2, although the AEC has 8 seats still listed as “doubtful”, and Labor were just 7 votes ahead in the Victoria electorate of McEwen.
Australia is a reminder that actually we in Britain are fairly spoilt when it comes to counting and declaring election results, and that not all countries do things the same way - America is another country where it can take a while to have the final figures. Although some countries can pretty much finish in the space of 3-4 hours due to counting at polling stations (Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain etc - even Brazil is quicker!) - there isn’t anywhere else in the world where an outgoing administration has to step down so quickly. Our “next-day” approach is second to none as far as I know, while by contrast a new Mexican president must wait five months to take office.
Paul Maggs “Double Carpet”
Guest Editor
The author is an analyst and pundit on UK and international politics
MessageSpace Advertising
I really think it should be made clear just how much a Huckabee victory would be for the grass roots of the Republican Party. Most people in the UK probably think of him as being similar to Bush, because of the religious aspect, but that is where the resemblence ends. Bush was very much supported by the wealthy Republican establishment, his main policies were always going to be slashing taxes and cutting government spending, was always going and he had trusted people like Dick Cheney around him.
Huckabee, by contrast, is completely his own man. He doesn’t prescribe to Republican ideology, but his own fundamentalist Christian ideology. This can mean very right wing views (seeing all abortion as murder) but also some left-wing ones (raising taxes, universal healthcare). He has been outspoken about those unnamed candidates who are “slaves to Wall Street” and has called the well thought of (in Republican circles) Club for Growth the “Club for Greed”. The establishment will be out to get him, probably be mild undermining at first, but if that doesn’t work eventually they will go all out. If he survives that, it will really be a huge split in the Republican party.
The question is then, who will be the establishment candidate? I’m sure they’d like Romney, but he’s (a) unelectable and (b) nowhere near charismatic enough to fight Huckabee. Giuliani is the probably answer - don’t be fooled into thinking his pro-abortion and gay rights beliefs will hold him back too much. Those for who its a central issue are in the minority. The bulk of Republican supporters are uncomfortable about it but his extremely tough War on Terror talk will more than compensate. They would rather a guy not do anything about gay marriage than someone If anything proves to be his down fall it will be his appaling conduct to his ex-wife. Thompson is just a joke, so we can safely dismiss him. McCain, however, could really come back - especially if the news from Iraq improves. I still don’t think he’ll get it, but I think he’ll surprise a few to be back in the running.
1. First paragraph: “Was always going to be amenable to their interests.”
Third paragraph: “They would rather a guy not do anything about gay marriage than someone who’s a ‘tax and spend liberal’, as Huckabee will be painted.”
Not sure how those bits got cut out.
With reference to your comment about the UK’s speed of changing governments after an election - it is bizarre and almost incredible that this is so often given by FPTP supporters as a reason to support FPTP, as if getting a quick rush of excitement on election night/morning is somehow more important than four years of proper scrutiny in between elections, or as if people would be annoyed or upset at the prospect of having to wait 2 or 3 days for the final results.
Just something I feel I didn’t elaborate enough upon in the last thread: why Giuliani is in such trouble.
The reality is, I think Giuliani’s been in trouble for a while. Romney’s enormous leads in Iowa and New Hampshire up until mid-November meant that Giuliani would be facing, not a Romney at 12% in national polls, but a Romney fresh off of two major victories when going into battleground states in Nevada, Michigan and Florida (as well as South Carolina, but the general consensus was that Romney losing South Carolina would only confirm that southerners don’t like Mormons and wouldn’t hurt Romney too much if he was winning outside of the South).
Now, Giuliani had the advantage then that he led in the polls in most of those states, though in some cases narrowly, and that Romney, while popular where he’d been blanketing the airwaves with advertisements, was not especially more compelling than Giuliani, which would give Giuliani enough ammo to beat back Romney. It was at least then possible for Giuliani to win at least three of the pre-February 5 states and then go into Super Duper Tuesday still leading the polls.
Initially, Giuliani supporters cheered for the fall of Romney in Iowa, but they were sorely mistaken to do so. Unlike Romney, Huckabee has the ability to charm the Republican masses, not through massive media buys, but through “Southern manners” that conservatives throughout the country and of many stripes seem to admire. (It baffles me, too.) This means that, if Huckabee wins Iowa as appears inevitable, then wins South Carolina, as also seems inevitable (unlike Romney, Huckabee has no “Mormon problem” and can thus win over all of the social conservatives), he gains massive appeal in the other early states as well.
Giuliani is therefore reduced, when combating Huckabee, to relying on the February 5 states as a bulwark. He’s not going to win places such as Florida and Nevada against Huckabee (though he can hope for a Mormon/non-Mormon split of the conservative vote in Nevada, which is 11% Mormon and thus about 20% of Republicans in Nevada are Mormons). Huckabee has surged in all of the early states, and now leads in Michigan and Nevada (and, I have confidence, in Florida in the next poll); Giuliani might have a hope in those states if he still led, narrowly, but all leads he had against Romney have been wiped away. The only pre-February 5 state that Giuliani stands a good chance in is Hawaii (which has not yet had a poll released, ever, so I’m just going on my gut here); Romney should be able to win Wyoming on the Mormon vote, though Huckabee could sweep through it, too. Maine is hard to guess on, but its nearness to New Hampshire and rural nature indicates a Romney victory.
The February 5 states are also dangerous for Giuliani. New Jersey and New York should be locks for him, and Connecticut may be safe as well, but these are all expected to go for Giuliani. (Similarly, Romney gets no boost from winning Utah and Massachusetts, and Huckabee from winning Arkansas, nor Thompson if he happens to top Tennessee nor McCain if victorious in Arizona, though the latter two are by no means certainties.)
Many of the states up otherwise are ones analogous to where Huckabee leads in pre-February 5: Georgia and Alabama are the southern, folksy states which will most heartily embrace Huckabee; Missouri and Oklahoma are similar and border Arkansas as well; Delaware is very small and therefore difficult to predict, but its Republican electorate is not all that different from one in the South; Minnesota is political similar to Michigan.
Of the other states, Giuliani has the additional challenge in Romney, who will win New Hampshire and probably Wyoming and Maine and therefore not be completely dead by February 5. He will be seriously contesting states where Giuliani might otherwise expect to be strong and which may not favor Huckabee: Illinois, California, Alaska. Giuliani could win some of these, but at expense of surrendering most of the February 5 states and thus the momentum to Huckabee, or Huckabee could even sneak up the side in any of them with the urban Republican vote split (or, in Alaska, the anti-tax Republican vote split). Once Giuliani wins only a handful of states on February 5, he is finished.
Now, the question becomes how to reverse this. I have in the past speculated that Romney could run a highly negative campaign against Huckabee to win back Iowa that would destroy Huckabee. I do not think this will happen now; Romney is too far behind in Iowa to see benefit in dumping money against Huckabee and will continue the strategy of New Hampshire and victory (which he might still pull off, but it’s unlikely). Giuliani will also not bother with a negative campaign in Iowa; he was at 5% (!) and fifth place in the most recent M-D poll there. Additionally, Giuliani doesn’t have a whole lot he can attack Huckabee on because he has scandals and skeletons of his own, and Huckabee comes off as much more honest than Giuliani; Romney could do it because his past is clean.
In the end, you must take this as opinion. I have in the past criticized others from putting too much emphasis on momentum, and I do not want to seem a hypocrite. However, I feel that the momentum against Giuliani that is building is not simply him losing in Iowa, it’s him losing everywhere, and that kind of defeat bodes very ill for his Presidential aspirations.
1. Socrates, the overwhelming impression I still get from the Republican field is that the candidate who is streets aheads of the others is “none of the above”. I can see the party going to its Convention with no-one close to 40% of the delegates, maybe no-one with a third.
By contrast, I think the primaries will have consolidated the Democratic candidate. The Republicans, come convention time, will know who they are up against. It is quite possible that in polling match-ups, each of the Republican candidates is down on the Democratic Party candidate by double digits. Is it just possible that rather than pick a certain loser, the Convention might come up with a “none of the above” candidate?
If so, any dark horses out there? For example, if the Democratic challenger is either black (Barack) or a woman (Hilary) - with a 95%+ chance it is one of the two and - a PLANET SIZED IF - the position in Iraq has improved in leaps and bounds after the Surge, then what about shooting both those foxes and picking Condaleeza Rice? Or are there any of the next generation Republicans who have sat out this cycle but who might be prevailed upon by their Party if called? I think if one could nail those guys down, given the current options they might be worth a small punt at big odds…
One thing where our American friends could help out us Brits please. When we talk about the Republican primaries, do they vote in each state for delegates who will all support the winning candidate (so winner-takes-all, even if he wins with 27% of the vote); or do they get a pro-rated number of delegates for each candidate. (I suspect that some states go one way, some states the other - but some steer on how it works would be helpful. Which are the big winner-takes-all states?)
Thanks.
6. In the Republican primaries and caucuses, it’s mostly winner-takes all (with some exceptions; in California, the winner takes some statewide and the rest are distributed across the congressional districts, and whoever wins each of California’s 53 congressional districts wins some some number of delegates for each; couldn’t tell you the numbers).
In the Democratic primaries and caucuses, the candidates with over 15% of the vote win delegates proportionally. In caucuses, this means that supporters of candidates that come short of 15% in specific regions will then usually transfer their support to their next-favorite candidate of those above 15%, part of why caucuses are hard to predict.
7 Mike, thanks for that.
Australia:
One of the hypothetical electoral systems which I have invented on a just-for-fun basis is FPTP with single-member constituencies, but with the Boundary Commission drawing constituency boundaries on the basis of equal area instead of equal electorate. (I suppose that one could justify it on a feudalistic basis, or something). It would have the advantage of having permanent boundaries which would not be subjected to re-fiddling evey decade or so.
In the UK, the average constituency (with 600ish MPs) would be the size of the Isle of Wight. If one applies the same system to Australia, the average would be about 51,000 sq.km., which is slightly smaller than New England constituency (Independent seat at the NE corner of NSW). There is a useful map here:
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/map.htm
I suppose it would mean dozens of constituencies with zero or a handful of voters; the Boundary Commission could have a criterion of drawing the boundaries in such a way as to ensure at least some voters in each seat.
Apart from having a feudalist justification, it could otherwise be “balanced” by some sort of weighting whereby MPs have different voting strengths in the parliament.
P.S. in Australia the biggest constituency is about 76,000 times as big as the smallest; I think in the UK the ratio is about 1,300.
10. Australlia also possesses both the largest and second largest constituencies, geographically, in the world (Kalgoorlie and Lingiari).
11. Sorry, and third-largest, not second-largest.
5. I’m pretty sure Condoleezza Rice doesn’t want the job (and frankly, who can blame her?) - see her statements quoted at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft_Condi_movement. Apparently her preferred dream job is the commissioner of the NFL.
As for the topic, I think Huckabee has a very strong chance in the Republican primaries. Strange though it may sound to many Brits, Bush has actually angered and disappointed much of the Republican grassroots, and Huckabee is the candidate who would most satisfy their grievances. He has a good chance of winning Iowa, and nobody should underestimate the momentum he’d get from that.
I wouldn’t rule out Giuliani yet - his campaign is well-funded, and despite some recent damage to his image, he’s still relatively popular, particularly in the Northeast. He might well have a better chance of winning the national election than Huckabee; but even if he does, of course, that doesn’t necessarily mean the Republicans will pick him.
11. The amusing thing about Lingiari is that it is 4,000 times as big as its neighbour (Solomon) with which it formed a single constituency before being split. A bit like the er… that fish where the tiny male is stuck to the large female by its mouth.
12. What’s the second-largest? I would guess Yakutia in Russia.
12 - the second biggest being Nunavut in the Canadian Arctic? Australia’s Grey and Canada’s Western Arctic must be up there too.
USA:
I remember previous presidential elections where one of the two main candidates has seemed wide-open at the early stages, but it always seems to become fairly decisive fairly quickly once the primaries start. I very much doubt if there will be any real doubt of it by the time they do their conventions, and we should get a good idea by March at the latest.
12. If Kensington and Chelsea ever gets jealous of Kalgoorlie, it could ask the Boundary Commission to include, say, the Moon in the next review.
Socrates @ 1 — Bush was never about cutting spending. Cutting taxes, yes, hence the deficit, but he believes in Big Government at least as much as his dear old dad and other Republican Presidents up to and including Nixon.
18. I’m not sure if that’s because he doesn’t want to cut spending but more of the fact the either can’t (no support) or doesn’t care *that* much. I just get the feeling that it’s just not on his priority list and over the years he’s just had more important things to deal with.
5. I think “none of the above” was a pretty accurate description of the race a few months back but I think now we’re getting close to the primaries, more have found their man. McCain has certainly picked up support and obviously Huckabee has too. That’s the reason I think it’s so open wide - We don’t have people flocking to Giuliani simply because he’s the most electable.
I’ve always thought it’s going to be decided by after first three races. It’s so open wide that the losers of the first three states are going to be dropped pretty sharpish and then we’ll see the battle lines drawn.
14. Nunavut is second-largest, Yakutia is fourth-largest. I’m not sure where Grey comes in, but probably after Western Arctic.
20. Er, well, just remembered my knowledge of Russian constituencies is out of date-or, rather, there are no more Russian constituencies. So Yakutia doesn’t exist.
18. Bush has always been about cutting spending, and if you take out the huge expanses of military under him you will see social programs in the US have been significantly reduced. His tax cuts have been even bigger of course - part of the purpose is to reduce tax so much that a future President will have no choice but to cut spending.
O/T Fuel protests in the UK may be back this week. From an email I received this morning:
“A group called Transaction 2007 is planning a “nationwide legal protest” this Wednesday. So far, the Transaction 2007 organisers have been unwilling to confirm specifically what action they have planned for this week. When pressed the groups’ spokesman, Chris Hunter, he said “This will be a numbers game levied against legislation. I can comment no further.”"
Very interesting analyses. Am I right in thinking that Huckabee is pulling in the ‘likeable optimist’ vote that did so much for Reagan? In the US, rather more than in cynical world of British politics, there always seems to be a big constituency for amiable, unintellectual patriots who cheer people up.
On a more minor domestic note, I won’t cross-post but see the end of the last thread for news of what could turn out to be a major BNP split. We’ve always been unsure what the impact of the BNP is, but if it divides into quarrelling factions, it’s anyone’s guess what will happen to its vote. Personally I don’t care if the Tories get it all - it’s good news anyway.
24- How about if it goes all to Labour? After all, some of them are former Labour voters in the first place.
Australia:
One thing that does seem odd here, is not necessarily the speed of the counting (although it does seem remarkably slow, as even Ireland with STV manages to have things wrapped up within a couple of days) but the fact that the new Prime Minister and Government have been sworn in with only 10 seats out of 150 with officially declared results.
In a smallish Parliament like Australia has, with a 2 Party system, in a closer year just 4 or 5 seats that are tight could swing the result one way or the other. Whilst it may have seemed pretty obvious in 2007 which way the final result is going, surely there is an obligation to have a fully declared result before a Government can change hands?
Are there other known examples of where a Government can change without the offical result being known?
With Clegg/Huhne the Hamilton/Cazaghe analogy plays out quite well.
The bookies got that one hugely wrong.With 10 mins to go on the voting you could still back Calzaghe at 6.1/1 on Betfair and lay Hamilton at 1.33.Therefore just because Betfair says Clegg looks nailed on that in my experience means that the value is to lay against him.
Oh-And i forgot to mention that Calzaghe won with a whopping 50000 lead over Hamilton.
Who would have predicted that?
27 Interesting point, Timmo, but the comparison could be misleading.
The Beeb’s coverage on the nite was very favorable to Joe. Also, his case was overwhelming compared to Hamilton. Huhne doesn’t have these advantages.
Personally, I think Clegg’s got it but I wouldn’t bet the House on it.
O/T For those interested in continental politics.
There was a parliamentary by-election in France yesterday to replace Dominique Strauss-Kahn (who stepped down to become MD of the IMF)
The election had more media coverage than average because it was DSK’s former seat but also because the constituency includes Villers le Bel and Sarcelles, where very violent riots took place two weeks ago.
Turnout was very low, at 25.06%, even for a very impoverished area where turnout is traditionnally very low (50.89% at the GE last June).
the socialist (38.83) and sarkozyst (37.43) candidates are quite near after the first round. However, the score of small candidates should ensure a socialist hold, probably with a reduced majority (around 52/48, compared to 54.5/45.5 in June)
2 main lessons of this election:
- the Front National is in terminal decline: with days of riots in the constituency by young immigrants who even used fired gun shots at the police, their candidate only reached 7.47%;
- the left has not managed to mobilize heavily its voters in the impoverished suburbs against Sarkozy, as they managed in the presidential election.
Some more first class US posts this morning, continuing PB’s record of attracting the very best commentators for overseas elections - Chris from Paris, Alexander the Astute of Australia, and now New Jersey Mike and others from the US. Our thanks to all of them.
Mike (NJ) - Your logic is impeccable and it leads to the conclusion that the GOP race is so open, muddled even, that almost anything could happen. This does NOT cause me to wonder, a la Marquee Mike, whether an off-field candidate might suddenly appear (it’s too late and there’s nobody there with the credentials), but it does make me wonder whether whoever is picked will be absolutely trounced in the big contest.
I had been buying the GOP at nearly 2/1 on the grounds that it is overpriced. I think I’m changing my mind.
Btw, one small query….What’s the attraction of a UK web site for US posters. You are very welcome of course, but doesn’t our provincialism get on your nerves?
25 most BNP voters are of course ex-Labour (see Margaret Hodge). But, 24, anything that beats the BNP or demoralises them is a good thing. The other day I was pleased to see LAB Gain. Not something that happens very often!
Huckabee - I’m relieved, as he will undoubtedly beat Clinton. Hooray!
O/T - Iain martin at the Telegraph on rumours Ed Balls is putting clear red water between himself and the Brown Lord of the Sith (Institute)
“Strange rumours circulate that Balls is distancing himself ever so slightly, albeit discretely, from his mentor as meltdown hits the government. Can this be true? Surely not. If Ed Balls, the most loyal of the loyal, is starting to think in his quieter moments about life Brown, then the PM really is up a creek.
What it all illustrates is how panic stricken many in Labour have become. When a ship enters waters as difficult as this, many of the passengers, or Labour MPs, start to panic. A few old hands hold their nerve, but also start to quietly make calculations about when they will need to abandon ship. Others run around on deck shouting wildly, bumping into each other and making mad suggestions which they hope, mistakenly, will lead to their salvation (see the Ed Balls for PM campaign).
The air of depression and confusion has spread to the hard-pressed membership, those people who do much of the real work in a political party.”
O/T - Who was the PR idiot who arranged to have Brown photographed in front of an obviously unwilling parade of hugely unimpressed soldiers (of both sexes, of course) in combat gear?
Nurse - the sick bag again, quickly!
Socrates @ 22 — yes, Bush has increased defence spending but non-defence spending has increased faster. Bush is not about cutting spending and neocons are not about small government.
Re Huckabee — you make an interesting point @ 1. The Bush tax cuts overwhelmingly help the rich at the expense of what Americans call the middle classes, which covers just about everyone else.
32 Morning Test
“The air of depression and confusion has spread to the hard-pressed membership, those people who do much of the real work in a political party.”
Yes indeed. It wasn’t so long ago that I recall commisserating with Benedict the Blog about such a situation in which he and his fellow Party stalwarts found themselves.
How times change, and how quickly too.
A site I think some might find interesting is http://www.electoral-vote.com/. The current post there discusses Huckabee and Romney’s relative positions (Huckabee strong lead in Iowa, Romney second; Romney strong lead in New Hampshire, Huckabee nowhere). If you step back through previous reports, there are analyses of the open Senate and House seats, and records of the results of most polls going back to the beginning of the year.
Or, Test, some will think; “OK we are in the Sh1T, but I cant see any of these 6th formers with any chance of improving things. So I might as well make the best of a bad job” and even “You never know that Gordon Brown might suddenly need an expert in computing (such as Nick Palmer) to sit as chair of some sort of review of ID cards and similar matters”
32 - Test
Interesting analysis of Labour’s woes. One of the biggest problems they face in large areas of the counry is the decline of their activist base. They were not able to find candidates for 18 of the 40 wards in East Northants, covering the marginal Wellingborough and Corby constituencies and i know that this was replicated in many other local authorities in England. Any Party is in big trouble when the local base withers. I know. It happened to the Conservatives in the 1990s!
I think that it is still too early to see whether Labour’s decline is temporary, or whether the worm has turned. It is worth remembering that unity is the key and if leadership mutterings start to get too much into the public domain it could turn a downturn into an endgame.
Back on thread; Thank you to everyone who is posting on the US, Australia and European political scene. Very instructive indeed.
Off to London now; have a good day everyone!
After all the talk about Guiliani and McCain, Huckabee is creeping up on them but he still has some tough issues to deal with such as religion - although that is by no means insurmountable.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
New YouGov survey on rating of Brown Cable and Cameron underway completing Wednesday.
38 yes that is interesting. Council seats uncontested speaks volumes. In my opinion this is why Labour MPs demand the propaganda allowance and want to stop spending between cycles to counter it. Presumably it’s the only way Labour can get literature out in areas like that.
I was suprised to see so little coverage in the papers of Gordon’s big announcement yesterday. I fully expected it to headline every paper. AFAIK it headlined none. He can’t catch a break right now. I’m starting to think he is unlucky as well as inept.
Go on Vince,keep on at Gordon Bean,to use a boxing analogy you have got Gord on the ropes.
Doubts cast on Northern Rock sale
The Virgin consortium still leads the race for Northern Rock
Fresh doubts have been cast on Northern Rock’s future, with Lib Dem leader Vince Cable saying plans to sell the troubled bank “will not work”.
The global credit crisis meant no bidder could raise the money needed to pay back the £25bn in government loans made to the bank, he told the BBC.
33. Toe curling stuff…but did he offer our brave boys and girls a copy of ‘courage’ to inspire them in their struggle?
33. Toe curling stuff…but did he offer our brave boys and girls a copy of ‘courage’ to inspire them in their struggle?
Good Morning All.
Just a brief post to wish Mr Smithson well and thank Mr Maggs for stepping into the breach.
May I also endorse Patricia the Punter’s post noting the quality of our overseas contributors.
What ws Gordon’s big announcement, Test (41)? Not a trick question - I just haven’t noticed one….
Re. 5, and those who wanted to wait till next time, Jeb Bush is ruled out by his surname this time, but there’s always Bill Owens.
33.”O/T - Who was the PR idiot who arranged to have Brown photographed in front of an obviously unwilling parade of hugely unimpressed soldiers (of both sexes, of course) in combat gear?”
Oh I think that idea came straight out of the New Labour spin manual on how to grab a headline, any headline while tanking in the polls!
Badly timed and tasteless attempt to use the armed forces as photo opportunity as usual.
Re: Lib Dems. I think there has been aa bit of a move to think of Huhne as a safer option, since if he were to get into difficulties, then Clegg remains as a credible reserve option. Much will depend on how many people voted early- which will have tended to go for Clegg, and how many over the past week, where there seems strong evidence that they went for Huhne.
32. Whoever thinks Ed Balls is the saviour of labour needs their head testing. He’d get ripped to shred at PMQ’s, and everywhere else.
45 Tressage, well I thought handing Basra back within two weeks was the big thing yesterday. It led the BBC anyway. But today nobody seems interested. Evidently he blew his good PR for that one during the botched election.
48 It will be a bit of a mess if the LibDem membership has changed its mind after voting early. There could be trouble ahead - without the moonlight and roses.
50: You would have thought he would have had the brains to send someone else. Any ‘Cyclops’ tanks this time?
32, 38, 41 The decline in Labour activists.
At GE2005 Labour were only able to deploy 1/3 of the ratio of members as campaign workers that the Conservatives and LDs achieved. A clear sign of an unmotivated activist base. Since then things have actually got much worse and in the May local elections I believe I read that Labour put up fewer candidates than the LDs which is a remarkable position. The Conservatives put up significantly more than both. Labour seems to be giving up in many areas.
Iain Dale had some stats on this and the number of councils with no Labour councillors was significantly higher than the Conservatives.
If the GE is in 2010, on current trends Labour is likely to have 30% fewer members than at GE2005. Since 1997 they would have lost 2 out of every 3 members they had then (409,000).
It is highly likely that the LDs will be able to deploy more volunteers on average in each constituency than Labour. This problem is compounded by the fact that because the LDs focus on fewer constituencies their resources could well be a 2:1 advantage in Lib/Lab battlegrounds. Trends indicate that the Conservatives will be able to deploy on average 4 times the number of volunteers than either of the other 2. The SNP believe that they have many more volunteers than Labour in Scotland.
In GE2010 Labour will be outmanned by their opponents in the battlegrounds. It is also the reason why LDs need to target Lib/Lab battlegrounds rather than chasing any Conservative held seats.
Back on the US Election thread, I see Sidney lost no time in cutting Huckabee’s price for the GOP Nomination to 9/2 when he showed up for work this morning.
Too late, Sidney! We all piled on last nite.
Brown ought to stay away from Iraq unless there is something a PM must be there for. Announcing non-withdrawals or ‘thanking the troops’ seems a little unconvincing as a reason for all that expenditure and disruption when he won’t even go across the road to the MoD for a briefing.
Quite, Test (50). Gordon Brown seems to be reverting to the pattern of when he was Chancellor - coming out with a new policy announcement two or even three times, and pretending each time was something fresh.
I expect there is still time for him to go to Basra just once more before Christmas, to make the same announcement yet again.
After reading his comments about AIDS victims I think that although he’ll win in Iowa, his chances of winning over moderates (even Republican moderates) are rapidlly receeding. Even Dick Morris, who had been informally advising him, is now really pushing Rudy, which suggests that Huckabee was really designed as a ’stop-Romney’ candidate. The fact that he has not attracted any serious financial backers underlines this fact. My gut tells me that McCain is in with a very strong chance (c 25%) to win the nomination now that Rudy is being weakened by scandals.
Dr Cable,go for Gordon Bean’s jugular at this weeks PMQ’s and put him out of his misery.
Guardian:
Rock shares face further hits on ejection from FTSE 100
Northern Rock this week faces a mass sell-off by shareholders if as expected the stricken bank is ejected from the list of top 100 companies on Wednesday. FTSE tracker funds, led by Legal & General, will sell their holdings in the Rock when it stops being a member of the FTSE 100. It is estimated almost 10% of the bank is owned by passive tracker funds that have remained invested in the bank despite its value falling from more than £5bn to about £430m this year.
54. We certainly did. Thanks for the info there Peter.
Further ammunition to blitz NuLabour’s economic mismanagement!!
http://www.rte.ie/business/2007/1210/britain2.html
UK factory gate inflation hits 16 year high
Monday, 10 December 2007 09:57
British factory gate inflation hit a 16-year high in November as manufacturers jacked up prices of petrol and food.
The Office for National Statistics said output prices rose 0.5% on the month, taking the annual rate to 4.5%, the highest since August 1991. Analysts had expected a 4.2% rate.
Raw materials costs also rose faster than expected, up 1.7% on the month, taking the annual rate to 10.2%, its fastest since July last year. Again, food and crude oil were the main culprits.
The Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee did not have these figures when it cut interest rates last week to shore up economic growth and some policymakers are likely to worry that inflationary pressures are still rising strongly.
Economists said that the MPC is likely to take this as a reminder that inflation prospects are not as benign as in previous cycles.
The ONS said the rise in output prices was driven by the price of petrol products, which were up 18.5% on the year, the highest rate since July 2001. Oil had hit record highs near $100 a barrel last month. The oil price has since fallen back a bit.
Food prices also rose sharply, with home produced food up by 20.1% on the year, the biggest increase since March 2004. Imported food prices were 8.9% up on a year ago, the fastest rate since June 1996.
57: McCain will only get the nomination of the GOP think that they can’t win, running others would just damage them and he can have his chance as with Bob Dole.
57 McCain would also be fantastic. He’s my first choice. Genuine war hero (contrast with Kerry), been great in the debates, safe for Dems to vote for, sound on judges. Would beat Clinton easily.
UK factory gate inflation now the highest since 1991.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7136115.stm
62- Dont tell me you believe all that Swift Boat crap?
60
Oil has fallen more than just a bit.
About 12% from a high of $100 (for about 30 minutes) to around $88 (spot) as I write.
I expect consolidation around $75-$85.. as the Iran war prospects have reduced .. but it is winter so anything can happen.
So it is likely oil based inflation may fall substantially (with a 4-6 week lag due to supply pipeline)
60 - Yes what kind of a government lets world oil prices rise so much?
62 Test - My post at 31 refers. NJ Mike hasn’t got back yet, but when he does, I doubt he support your view.
There were some terrific US posts here last nite but none to give much comfort to GOP supporters of any hue.
62. I certainly do and so did America, luckily. The Swift Boat Vets incurred the rage of the nutroots because their attack was true, and worked. It included every single officer in Kerry’s chain of command at the time, the entire way up the line. But I have been in too many arguments with Diebold conspiracy loons who think Bush “stole” two elections (and argued that Kerry was a coward for not contesting the result of ‘04) to get back into it on PB.com - so won’t be arguing the case.
67 PtP, are you familiar with this website
http://www.realclearpolitics.com
If you’re betting, you should be.
66. Yes indeed. The last two weekends have been very cold and rainy. Just another example of the government’s incompetence over the whole matter of winter control.
66. The kind that starts wars in the Middle East?
51 Lynne Featherstone MP has stated in her blog this morning that after telephone canvassing this weekend she has found a lot of members still hadn’t voted. However most late voters were backing Chris Huhne. The only slight caveat on this is the fact she is chair of Huhne’s campaign!
Last minute votes have to be received by the Saturday deadline.
PtP, I don’t know if this takes you to the politics page but that’s where you need to be to get US punter reaction
https://www.intrade.com/
68- Correct me if I am wrong, but I thought that the people who were *acually there* said it was all bollocks.
“I certainly do and so did America, luckily”
Kerry is not Bush, so he would have been by default 10 times better. And anyway, remind us of Bush’s military record again?
66
Fill up your tanks now folks.
According to this press release a fuel blockade planned for Saturday.
I blame NuLabour for this shambles,oh wait a minute,nothing is ever their fault!
http://www.transaction-2007.com/
74 - Hear, Hear. Test might be sound on UK politics but his apologia for the revolting character assassination on Kerry by the Bush nasties (aka Karl Rove) borders on the pitiful (and, no, I didn’t think Bush stole either 2000 or 2004).
74
Bush’s war record was almost as impressive as John Wayne’s
76: Kerry’s version of what he did during his military service came into question because it was one of the things he based his campaign on and he was at best loose with the truth.
Huckabee certainly has the Big Mo and it’s difficult to see who can stop him right now. But, to rein in all you bulls, it’s worth pointing out that his organisation is weak across the country and he doesn’t have much cash on hand. It’ll be piling in now of course but he’ll be hampered by the squashed primary calendar, and I would point out that he has not yet been targeted by any other campaigns.
In summary, a worth favourite - not least because he could sweep the south - but there are more twists and turns to come I’m sure. One man who has, deservedly, been ignored recently is Fred Thompson. He’s still a long shot but he’s been getting his act together and he’d only have to regain a few supporters from the Huckabee bandwagon to open things up again.
On the Democrat side, I disagree with the notion that the winner in Iowa takes all. The more I look at it, the more I think that Edwards and Obama will be the top two, and that Biden the top 3 positions aren’t necessarily going to go to the big 3 (see Biden and maybe Richardson as credible challengers still).
But a result like that will just muddy the waters as Hillary could still sneak a win in New Hampshire even if Obama wins Iowa (and she almost certainly will if Edwards wins NH), while she’s way ahead in Nevada and South Carolina is volatile.
It could still go to Feb 5. The only way Iowa kills the race is if Clinton wins there, which is certainly possible even though I can’t see it.
Thanks for your two posts, Test.
Yes, I know Realclear very well and visit regularly. The quality of the articles is a bit uneven but some are gems and nobody who bets seriously on the US elections can afford to ignore them.
Haven’t quite got my head round Intrade yet, but I’m working on it.
Kerry’s problem with the Swift Boat issue was that he did not rebut it for some time and when he did he managed to open up other fronts against himself. Not least reminding people of his teestimony over Vietnam which looked very hostile to his erstwhile colleagues still in combat.
His press allies such as Dan Rather showed enormous bias and the fairly transparent attempts to hit back by implying that Bush had dodged his flight time and may have smoked dope while on active duty simply backfired when ‘evidentiary’ documents being touted on network news were demonstrated to be totally fraudulent.
Whether the Swift Boat story was a ‘true story’ or not it gave many voters doubts and concerns which Kerry seemed to work hard at reinforcing. The hunting party rather put the cap on it for that part of the electorate.
The good thing is that it was an election where bloggers on both sides set the agenda more than the main stream media, which until then regarded themselves as the oracle that could do no wrong. Rathergate punctured that.
Morning all…About American politics:
As I said before I don’t think Huckabee will win the nomination, but maybe he will surprise me. His candidacy is “beginning” now, and the press is already pressing him about the “old scandals”(and in my opinion his reaction is not good). Ant(79) is right to point out that his organization is weak across the USA.Which leaves me to a strange conclusion if he doesn’t win, I can’t see who will(yet). I think he can win in Iowa, but not in NH, and SC remains very open…
80. Intrade is simply the US version of Betfair, works the same way but with more markets and more money. So bid/ask on Huckabee to get Dem nomination in Iowa, Intrade says 70% likely.
82 good summary. I agree.
NH is not fertile for Huck, and McCain, Romney and Giuliani are locked in a pretty much life or death race. Huckabee could weather opposition research (after all, Giuliani managed for months before finally weakening) but he’s definitely an unknown quantity right now and the reasoning behind his surge in the polls is exactly what drove a similar move for Thompson in the summer (unattractive alternatives, a desire to find a winning candidate) and might well be reversed when he becomes known.
He’s definitely in with a shout - as Me recognises - but anything tighter than 4/1 or 5/1 doesn’t shout value at me in a race that won’t be clinched by Iowa (where all polls should be taken with a large dose of salt anyway)
82 Morning Me
Some of the posts on the GOP Nomination have reminded me of a famous remark by Marc Cotton, legendary punter and racing journalist. He had been reviewing a particularly dire contest and reached the following conclusion:
“None of these horses is good enough to win, but one has to. My pin fell on…”
83 Took me long enough to get my head round Betfair, Test. I gotta do it all over again with Intrade?!
85 hehe Hi PtP. A perfect summary!
84-Ant-Nice to see someone that agrees!
61. I’m sorry but IMHO almost the opposite. McCain is the most electable and the strongest candidate (especially in terms of a McCain-Lieberman ticket).
85-PtP-”“None of these horses is good enough to win, but one has to. My pin fell on…”
Yes, you just resumed my post in two lines!
The odds on Huhne winning the LibDem leadership are hugely attractive. I’m seriously thinking about increasing my exposure - although I still put the chance on him winning at a shade less than 50%.
Inside sources confirm there really has been a dramatic last-minute swing to Huhne - but I guess his chances of success depend on whether this is a surge of ballot papers or merely a trickle.
If Huhne wins, it’ll be a disaster for the LibDems. How could Calamity Clegg remain in the party - let alone serve under him?
Although it is in my interest to talk Huck up, as I’m currently selling him, I’m a Huck bear, for reasons explained earlier and by other posters.
I agree with Socrates that in the unlikely event that he gets the nomination, it will seriously strain the republican coalition of social conservatives and economic liberals (in the European sense) that Goldwater and Reagan built. Huck is much more social conservative than either of those two and the American electorate, and much more centrist/populist on economic issues.
4 - Mike is mistaken that Huck leads in Nevada. Romney and Giuliani did in the latest two polls. His lead in the latest Michigan poll is the smallest possible - 21 vs. 20 for Romney and 19 for Giuliani. Yesterday there was a reversal in the Rasmussen tracking poll - Giuliani again leads Huck by 3, after trailing for 4 straight days. We’ll see today if this was only noise, or whether the critical light of the press and other candidates is beginning to hurt Huck.
But I agree with Mike that Florida is essential. Giuliani needs to hold Florida. If Huck wins there too, he stands a good chance.
The Australian system is an absolute joke - to allow people to vote once they’ve started counting the results is a nonsense. There’s no reason why people cannot post their votes to their relevant high commission or embasssy and they be counted there and the totals transferred to the AEC in time for the close of poll.
94. I’m sure Labour will be keen to introduce such a system here once they find out…
Can I just say that the Swift Boat Vets for Truth campaign was a complete and utter distortion. The vast majority of those on the campaign had never served with Kerry and Republicans like McCain have come out to seriously denounce them as untrue. The guy won three purple hearts. Whereas on the other side, George Bush somehow managed to jump the list to get into the National Guard, and then didn’t meet attendance requirements but somehow didn’t get thrown out.
Not that it matters, as being a war hero doesn’t make you any better of a presidential candidate, but I can’t see how anyone but the most partisanly blind can still believe the Swift Boats crap.
I am catching up with the weekend papers and have just seen this little gem of wit and wisdom. Many of you will already have seen it but if not give it a read.
It seems It is Marvin not Mr Bean after all.
The Hitchhiker’s Guide to Gordon BrownT
89: Matthew, that was my opinion on who would get the nomination not who was the best placed to win. At this stage I still think Giuliani will get the nomination but he needs to be very careful who he picks to run with.
A McCain-Lieberman ticket would have to attract enough people who voted Democrat last time to cover those GOP voters they’ll lose which may prove too much of a task.
re 3 people will use the Australian experience as a reason why PR is not user-friendly where the truth is that the Irish use STV which is much more complicated to count than the Australian AV and they have all their results out within 36 hours of the poll closing and the vast majority of them within 24 hours.
89 But what does Lieberman add to McCain in any way?
Socrates It doesn’t matter whether it is true or not, it is what people believe.
John Major tucking his shirt in his underpants, ‘crisis what crisis’, are two other examples where there may be an element of truth but the basic truth is much embroidered to create the final common perception.
100 - sorry 98 already summed up what I was getting in a much less obscure way.
98.
McCain has a very good shot. If Huckabee beats Romnney then New Hampshire turns into a three way contest between Giuliani, McCain and a wounded Romney. If a former Mayor of New York (or indeed a Senator from New York) cannot win New Hampshire then they are unelectable. Regarding a McCain-Lieberman ticket I think that you are underestimating the extent to which the Evangelical Right are willing to accept with social conservatives from other religions. Lieberman may be pro-choice and pro-gay marriage but the RR respect his stance on pornography/violence on TV and his views on religion in public life (views which are long-standing and genuine unlike those of a certain Republican). Lieberman would also help the GOP hold Florida and bring PA, MI, NH and CT into play
98. Giuliani will pick Huckabee, and vice-versa. There’s no other reason for their current non-aggression pact.
McCain-Guiliani brings NY into play.
105. No it doesn’t. NY will not go Republican. It’s simply not going to happen.
103. I don’t agree at all.
McCain is at best a long shot. He has had to abandon Iowa because he’s going to come 5th at best (and might not beat Ron Paul). His entire campaign hinges on winning New Hampshire, where he hammered Bush in 2000. But in 2000 the independents voted for him, while they’re expected to vote in the higher profile Democrat primary this time round.
So McCain is running a NH-or-bust strategy, but it’s still far from clear whether victory in NH would be enough to catapult him to the nomination. And as you note, he’s being challenged hard by Giuliani or Romney so can he win my enough to dominate the news? He’s between a rock and a hard place.
In summary, an attractive candidate to me as well as you, but he’s really an outsider right now surely?
Lieberman lost a lot of credibility from the Democrats over the way he behaved in the 2006 Senate race (leaving aside the self-interested behaviour in running for the Senate in 2000 because he did add a lot to Gore’s flagging campaign). I think McCain-Lieberman would turn off more Republicans than Lieberman would bring in Democrats. You underestimated the polarised partisanship of the Republican base.
Socrates @104 it would make perfect sense. But if the dirt on Huckabee gets too great then Brownback is back in the VP running.
92 Why would Huhne be a disaster? Huhne and Clegg’s policy outlooks are not so different - more a question of style. Vince Cable has said he would happily work under either.
4 Mike NJ etc
You make interesting points, although from a betting persepctive I am still leery of both Huckabee and Obama, current polls notwithstanding .
Re Huckabee in SC. I think this idea that Huckabee will win SC because it is the bible belt and he is a Baptist preacher is flawed. SC Republicans don’t vote for social conservative populists campaigns in primary historically, they coalesce around the establishment candidate, and it gets dirty if necessary. They voted for Dole over Pat Buchanan in 96, Bush Sr over Pat Robertson in 88, GWB over McCain in 00. It is the Lee Atwater firewall primary. Sounds like the anti Huckabee smear fliers have already started in Greenville, SC. There is no way that the national GOP are going to have Huckabee as the nominee - as you say he doesn’t even appeal to Northern Republicans . This leads me to conclude that by the time of the SC primary, there will be a smaller field and an “establishment” candidate.
Democrats
I would be laying Obama in this race. The stronger he gets, (especially if he wins Iowa) the more likely the Clinton campaign is to unload on him with both barrels. Unlike Obama, the Clintons have been running hard campaigns for 30 years and aren’t going to give up lightly. If Obama needs to be taken down they’ll do it - you can see Hillary already leaning negative on him, and the surrogates from NARAL etc taking shots at Obama. It can and will get worse and ugly. Think Primary Colors Question then is how much blood ends up on Hillary’s hands and does it give any opportunity for someone else to come through .
I realise this sounds like back the machine, not the new fresh guy, but look at the history of who wins National primaries - Kerry, Gore, Dole etc..
The GOP 2008 contest politically is irrelevant. Always was once Bush won again in 2004, an election victory which like 1992 UK was much better for GOP to lose. I have a few quid Guliani FWIW and still have no reason to think I will lose it.
Hillary will win the Democratic nomination, and then go on to completely dominate US politics for 8 years, and the Democrats for at least 12.
Rather than 2008, GOP should be looking to building a credible campaign for 2016 when the disastrous neo con experiment will be a distant memory.
Nick Palmer
I’ve just been on to your website and read your latest newsletter on party funding. The Communications Allowance is a sore spot in my patch but I think you are tackling it very honourably. I wish you were involved in your party’s review of funding. Unfortunately we’ll have to deal with Labour strategists who have no intention of playing a safe bat.
Or even a straight bat.
109 because I can’t see Clegg working with Huhne after the “Calamity Clegg” dirty politics. LibDem splits will be fatal to them.
43- herbert- well done for your fantastic and informed prediction on Mayeather. Peter from Putney has suggested that this should be post of the month.
I had Mayweather ahead by 4 points by round 10, although the judges had him ahead by 8 by then- which was a bit harsh.
114. A bit of wishful thinking there Test. You are probably far too young to remember the shooting of Rinka and the Norman Scott affair but if a party can survive having its leader go on trial at the Old Bailey then it can survive anything.
116 Good Grief, Smithson, does Matron know you’re out and about?!
Warm regards and best wishes for a speedy recuperation.
You’ll be pleased to know people behaved pretty well in your absence. Expect it will be back to normal soon though.
Atb
116. Great to see you are keeping an eye on us Mike.
Just noted one thing in the thread:
“(Austria, Denmark, Netherlands, Spain etc - even Brazil is quicker!) ”
Actually Brazil is one of the quickest in the world, most of the times, the presidential results is announced in the same day as the election, because Brazil uses “Voting machine”. The official result is announced few days later….
PtP. I’ve got a few days to go yet but I’m still alive and am following this on my mobile phone. I’m in the hospital where Barry is a consultant.
116 best wishes Mike
I remember the Norman Scott affair - mostly because of the playground jokes - Liberalism won’t die it’s too good an idea for that, but i think Test is right - the top figures within the party may have problems working together and this could cause lots of problems between the activists and the parliamentary party.
120-Nice to see you’re well!
No danger whatsoever of the two men falling out after the result is declared.
120.Great to see you posting Mike, I knew that you would not be able to stay away. Take care and a speedy recovery.
There weren’t any really political questions in the cantos city panel poll this time, but since there haven’t been any other opinion polls lately I thought I may as well post it.
http://w3.cantos.com/07/citypp_d-708-gx26y/video/36841_City_Panel_04.pdf
120 “I’m in the hospital where Barry is a consultant.”
Erm…I wouldn’t mention my name. Won’t help you.
Guido has an interesting story about the Labour party being found to have racially discriminated against an applicant.
“I’m in the hospital where Barry is a consultant.”
Good to see you back. Keep witnesses by your bed! (joke, Barry, joke)
“if a party can survive having its leader go on trial at the Old Bailey then it can survive anything”
Some comfort for Labour at last!
Mike,
All the very best & hope you are doing OK - get well soon.
114/121 I see no bigger problems in Huhne/Clegg working together than Davis/Cameron have .
108. “Lieberman lost a lot of credibility from the Democrats over the way he behaved in the 2006 Senate race (leaving aside the self-interested behaviour in running for the Senate in 2000 because he did add a lot to Gore’s flagging campaign). I think McCain-Lieberman would turn off more Republicans than Lieberman would bring in Democrats. You underestimated the polarised partisanship of the Republican base.”
- Lieberman won as an independant with 59% of the Republican vote. Also, the GOP need to reach out beyond their base, given that its now smaller than in 2004.
116. I hope that you are better.
If Brown and Blair “worked” together, why Clegg and Huhne won’t be able to do the same?
The Cameron and Davis contest was very amiable, something which has continued ever since. Huhne and Clegg have ripped chunks out of each other on occasion.
It’s very strange, isn’t it, that only the Tory diehards see trouble and strife in the ranks of the Liberal Democrats. What does Tory HQ feed them with?
Thanks for the kind comments. What’s really pleasing is all this good news about Huckabee. There’s something very satisfying about getting on an outsider very early on and then seeing your choice prosper.
131 He won with 59% of the Republican vote in New England. That’s not the same as winning Republican votes in the South, as you well know. He only won the support of 33% of Democrats in Connecticut so I reckon he’s a busted flush at the national level - he doesn’t seem to add much to McCain.
And how has the kiss from Bush changed things?
Of course the Republicans need to win votes from beyond their base but there’s a danger they wouldn’t be able to keep their base with a M-L candidacy. A third party candidate would be likely. It’s just not a go-er.
136 and the republicans only voted for him because Schlesinger had no chance and he’s slightly mroe republican than the Democrats’ official candidate, Ned Lamont. The figures just doesn’t back up your argumetn.
136 sorry to write again. My reference to Bush’s kiss was erroneous of course Apologies
119- Regarding quickness of official results
French presidential election results are announced as follows:
- around midnight: first totalization by the interior ministry, usually only a few polling stations missing
- 11:00 am the following day: official totalization
- within 3 days, ruling by the constitutional council on any cancellation of local results (most of the time around 10 voting stations’ results are contested out of around 60 000).
130 Give over Mark. Davis and Cameron did not trash each other’s reputations during the contest. Huhne should be able to work under Clegg, but Clegg for Huhne? The outsider who beat him with “Calamity Clegg” and then stood by the contents? Can’t see it myself.
136.
Joe Lieberman is more socially conservative than George HW Bush in 1980 so I don’t think that his views on abortion would ailenate too many voters in the South (it should also be noted that McCain has one of the most pro-life records in the Senate). In any case his hawkish views will if anything energise the Republican base. Lets also remember that Lieberman’s victory was against the entire weight of the nutroots and the Democrat machine in a Democrat leaning state. Also, even if he only appeals to 25-33% of registered Democrats, it’s that bloc which will decide the election.
Paul M@110: No doubt the Clinton campaign will try going negative on Obama, but the question is how much it will help them. Unless they have something really damaging that they’ve kept under wraps until now, there’s a real risk that negative campaigning will hurt them more than it hurts Obama. And so far their attacks have been decidedly underwhelming - all that stuff about the essay he wrote in kindergarten just got the Clinton team laughed at.
Since negative campaigning hurts the attacker as well as the attackee, the window of opportunity for hurting Obama with negative attack probably only lasts until Iowa; If Clinton and Obama both underperform and Edwards comes through with the headlines, Hillary is in the clear; But if Obama can win there a reasonable distance ahead of Edwards, any subsequent attack is likely to backfire.
133- “The Cameron and Davis contest was very amiable, something which has continued ever since. Huhne and Clegg have ripped chunks out of each other on occasion”.
cuddles- even though Cameron thinks of Davis as an oik, and Davis thinks Cameron as a privileged, cliquey Eton toff.
The Tories though have become much better about not washing their dirty knickers in public.
and best wisghes Mike. Great to see you posting.
Who is Barry the consultant when he is at home?
143. how would you know what they think of each other? I’ve never read anything about them having a dislike of each other.
134. Tressage - the Blue Harpies are not fed anything by Tory HQ. If you read about their mythological antecedents they tormented their victims by stealing their food!
139-In 2006,in Brazil I think the election ended at 17 or at 18, and more than 90% of the votes were counted until 21 45…
147 Counted, Me, or weighed?
148-PtP-Sorry, here we say counted, but we don’t speak English!!!!
145. He doesn’t. He simply assumes everyone thinks in the same cliched class terms that he does.
Putin will support the candidacy of Dmitri Medvedev to be the next President of Russia.
Thanks, test. I think that in all parties the wish to gain short-term advantage wars with the preference to avoid a system that ultimately ruins us all.
Good to hear from you, Mike. A friend of mine who knows one of the consultants at his local hospital carries a variant of a donor card, reading, “Not to be operated on by Professor …” Now why did that come to mind?
I’m not there’s much point in debating party morale, since I’ll say it’s good and others will say pooh, but perhaps we can agree that it’s likely to vary quite a bit. I only really know about Broxtowe, Gedling and Erewash, and we’ve remained pretty energised since the non-election - Erewash in particular is enviably full of zeal (went to a fund-raiser there a few weeks ago - must have been 150 people paying £30 a head). But it’s not a marginal, just has a couple of exceptionally good organisers who keep stirring people up.
re 144. He’s a fairly regular poster here and a PPC for Bedford.
I was too young (honest) to have a vote then, but by all accounts Steel v Pardoe made this contest seem very tame.
151. That sounds very significant Matt J. I can’t find a market on this currently. Is there one, does anyone know?
PPC for an Independent Save Bedford hospital party. No doubt Mike will be voting for him if he gets out in one piece.
134: After how the Lib Dems treated Ming and Kennedy are they wrong?
155. I can’t find a market for it currently either.
152 Nick P “I’m not there’s much point in debating party morale, since I’ll say it’s good and others will say pooh, but perhaps we can agree that it’s likely to vary quite a bit.”
Looking at the facts on the loss of members. The following changes have happened since 2000, which was the last year when Labour had the most.
Labour -46%
Con -20%
LD -21%
So it does look like the best indication of morale as represented by membership change, really does “vary a bit”.
A further drop of 46% in the next 7 yrs could reduce Labour to under 100,000 members.
Medvedev:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7136347.stm
A shoo-in if any markets are still trading on this one.
156
“In one piece” is perhaps an inexactitude ‘cos it could include dead.
Perhaps you meant “alive and well”?
I claim Pedant of the Week award.
Best wishes, Mike.
I’ll ask everyone to give you VIP treatment!
Barry
Don’t Bedford consultants give VIP treatment to everybody, Barry?
O/T-A good article about “Brown’s spin team”:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2007/dec/10/politicsandthemedia.gordonbrown
Unlike the Labour Party who only give VIP treatment to anonymous donors perhaps?
I know that only the odds matter, but this Huckabee doesn’t sound the sort who should be encouraged.
Today’s Guardian
http://tinyurl.com/2qc4gh
82 - “The good thing is that it was an election where bloggers on both sides set the agenda more than the main stream media”
Why is that a good thing? It seems to me that what happened was that bloggers were an agent for an old-fashioned character assassination. My impression is that much of blogging obscures the truth, rather than reveals it.
It’s not that I have any great belief in mainstream media, just that blogging seems to have very low standards applied to judging it.
142 Edmund
I take your point about backfire. However, the difference for Hillary is that unlike the others she doesn’t want to be Vice President as a fall back. If she is behind Obama, then they’ll take the chance of MAD, rather than retreat quietly
I wouldn’t read too much into the atacks to date - Hillary is leading and has until recently had no reason to unload. If there is stuff out there on Obama they will have found it, and if they need to use it they will. And they are probably good enough and experienced enough to limit the collateral damage.
The fact that these two Clinton staffers in Iowa have just been busted for sending hoax emails around suggesting Obama wants to turn the USA into a muslim country shows the “Ends justifies the means” mindset to campaigning. Also, my suggestion was more lay Obama than back Clinton.
Anyone else picked up on the new ‘primaries’ markets on Betfair. Not much money traded so far but prices were all over the place this morning. Huckabee at 1.7 at one point to win Iowa, which was quickly snapped up (hope others got on). Are UK nationals able to use Intrade btw?
152 Surely Erewash is a marginal? It was held by the Conservatives from 1970-97, and is the sort of seat they need to get a working majority.
Glad to see you up to posting Mike, just don’t overdo things by trying to keep writing PB from you hospital bed!
Btw does anyone know when the Australian Election Commission will finally declare all the remaining seats?
re 170 I suppose they’ll have decided by the time the 2010 election comes round.
107 - Socrates, I think you are wonderful poster, and truly insightful in many ways, but you are being very hard-headed about the possibility of New York ever going Republican!
I know it was the fourth most Democratic State (excluding DC) in 2004, but that was with an MA Senator against a hated Texan. If it is Giuliani, and Hillary has been snubbed, I think an 8% swing for the favourite son rule is possible.
I will repeat my open offer: will anyone give me odds on “Rudy Giuliani to win NY state from the top of the ticket in the November election, if Hillary does not appear on the Democratic ticket”?
Erewash, Con Gain. Like most seats in the East Midlands.
173 Erewash - A reasonably safe Labour seat with a 7,000 ish majority No 154 on list of Conservative target seats . Can only be considered a marginal in Conservative dreams .
172 - Bit early for ‘Ave It’. Interesting there was no swing at all in 2005.
174 Labour do benefit slightly from boundary changes, and have a 16% lead, but given its recent political history (and a 9% UKIP/Veritas vote that can be squeezed) it certainly is a marginal.
176 And the local authority is Conservative-controlled.
172 Morus, I agree with your sentiment but in the spirit of fraternity amongst PBers I’d like to accommodate your bet if I can. My problem is that I don’t know what would be reasonable odds here. I’d also like to make sure I have understood the bet. How about this…
If Hillary wins the Democratic nomination, or Guiliani doesn’t win the GOP nomination - no bet. If Guiliani faces any Democrat other than Hillary, you bet Guiliani will win. Let’s say $20 at even money. Is that right?
You can drop me an email to confirm, or clarify the terms if you like.
Cheers
arklebar@talktalk.net
177 Conservatives polled just 1,000 votes more than Labour in May’s local elections in Erewash wards , I estimate that to win a GE they need to outpoll Labour by 4,000 or more to be in with a decent vhance of gaining a seat .
179: Erewash Lib Dems were still voting tactically in 2005, Veritas got nearly 6% of the vote, and all signs post 2005 (eg the locals) show a Tory comeback in Erewash.
178 - Thanks Peter - I’ve sent you a mail to confirm.
Regards to all - need to get some work done!
O/T Despite the Sun’s classic headline last Friday with “The Ego Has Landed”, Fabio Capello is the newly installed favourite for the England job at 2.45-1 with Mourinho’s price having weakened to 4.3-1. Martin O’Neill remains third favourite at a somewhat shortened 7-1.
I agree with Mark that Erewash looks a long shot for the Conservatives. But with Brown delaying the GE probably to 2010, the Conservative candidate Jessica Lee (Nottingham born) will have had 3 years to get established and mount a close challenge to its MP Liz Blackman.
If Jessica does adopt a 2 election strategy she could certainly get it in 2 elections time because she will still be only 35 in 2010 whereas her opponent will be 61.
182. Peter. Having backed O’Neill at 10/1 I have laid my stake back at the same price following his further statement when apparently he ruled himself out again? Now he is in to 13/2.
It’s an interesting market. Mourhinho has implied he would like the job but the market doesn’t seem to be moving in his favour.
184- stjohn- Mourihno is just looking for some leverage for his preferred job at Real Madrid.
I still think that it will be one of either Lippi or Klinsman with my personal preference for Lippi.
184 stjohn - I saw his first so-called denial of the job, which I thought was exactly the opposite - when he said something along the lines of “bits of me think I would be good at the job, no I’m lying the whole of me thinks I would be brilliant at it”! I’m convinced he’d jump at it if offered, which IMO he should be, although I don’t expect you to agree! I’m in at an average price of 12-1 and I think he’s value at 13/2 if the “Ego” has indeed dropped out.
178- I saw that bet Peter- a bit like taking candy off a baby methinks.
145/150- I heard some interesting stories about the Davis/ Cameron relationship some time ago. Probably things may have smoothed over with the upturn in Tory fortunes. A fragile alliance though.
As posted here many times meritocratic Tories do not like their party being run by an Etonian clique. They are only putting up with it because of one thing.
169 - Well, I have been using Intrade for the past 18 months, so yes. Its US citizens who are barred from it.
186 Tyson - Well Lippi is currently at 9’s and Klinsman at 19’s, so get stuck in!
190 Big Phil Scolari at 41-1 might be worth a punt if the FA were prepared to wait. Mind you, sadly, there’s no hurry, is there?
190- Peter the Punter- Lippi has all the qualities of Sven, except that I am sure he would always keep his trouser zip shut.
I have a little bit on Lippi already. Klinsman at 19’s is very enticing.
After a right old battering from PBers over the weekend (thanks to PtP), Hills have shortened their price on a Huckerbee nomination from 6-1 to 9-2, thereby matching Betfair.
188: An Etonian clique? There are three old Etonians in the Shadow Cabinet and none of them hold the great offices of state.
192 It’s PfP not PtP - £1 in the party pot please!
166 I agree. Frankly Huckabee’s a terrifying prospect.
I think Huckabee could do for the GOP what Barry Goldwater did.
193/195. PfP. You are certainly not PtP. He was up with the lark. See post 55.
Meanwhile in Broxtowe - BNP Councillor “booted out of party”.
According to Evening Paper - Coun Sadie Graham, Broxtowe Borough councillor for Brinsley, was expelled on Sunday December 9 after allegedly writing an internet blog which the BNP claims was to “attack and smear fellow party officials”.
Sure nick P will be distraught at that!
198 stjohn - at 9.55am, an oversleeping lark methinks.
Do you have another slice of this particular cake yesterday?
Re : Yesterday’s free money on Hills, re Huckabee, which is always most welcome, but it’s an expensive and long term covering lay on Betfair - presumably there’s a more cash effective solution, using a credit spread betting account?
194. Now now don’t confront Tyson’s fantasies with facts, they are all he has to comfort him in these dark times.
199: I can contain my grief, cynic - sure you feel the same. See the end of last night’s thread - this has much wider ramifications than Broxtowe.
200. Peter. Yes I did cut myself another piece.
“Could Internal Polls in Iowa Really Show Huckabee 40, Romney 17?”
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjMyZTRjOTJhNDNhOWVjODhkZWQwMDI5YWVhM2Y5YTQ=
Erewash has several special factors. It was where Kilroy-Silk challenged in 2005, so some people rallied to Labour to keep him out, though by election day it was clear he wasn’t near winning. Whether he took votes from Lab, Con or others isn’t clear. Both Labour and Tories have had turbulent periods on the council. Strip out the special factors and it still looks an awfully long shot for the Tories, and they don’t appear to be trying hard.
203. Out of interest, is this a purely personality-based split occuring within the BNP, or is there an ideological element (if that term is appropriate)…e.g. along the lines of the ‘you aren’t Nazi/violent enough’ splits we have seen in the BNP and its predecessors in the past?
206 Another “special factor2 has to be Angela Knight, the Conservative candidate who held the seat for one election from 1993-1997. She was Economic Secretary to the Treasury during Major’s premiership, and a keen Ken Clark fan. A very formidable campaigner; other candidates would not have won the seat, IMHO.
206 Another “special factor” has to be Angela Knight, the Conservative candidate who held the seat for one election from 1993-1997. She was Economic Secretary to the Treasury during Major’s premiership, and a keen Ken Clark fan. A very formidable campaigner; other candidates would not have won the seat, IMHO.
Though Tory peer Conrad Black wont be happy about being jailed for eight years it must be a relief to be free of Barbara Amiel for a while.
Dr Cable has been given another”open goal” for PMQ’s this week.
End to Rock crisis ‘not imminent’
The government is under pressure to resolve the firm’s future
There will be no decision on the fate of Northern Rock until after Christmas, the lender’s chairman has indicated.
Brian Sanderson told the BBC that no action would be taken to resolve the bank’s plight “this side of Christmas”.
The Newcastle-based firm was struck by the credit crisis over the summer and is being propped up by the Bank of England, which has lent it about £25bn
I have predicted some time ago that the Northern Rock debacle will bring the government down and recent events may prove me right.
Well, without wishing to blow my own trumpet (prepare for the sound of bugles) I have to say that I am rather pleased that I followed my own advice last November (http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2006/11/18/are-gore-and-kerry-now-out-of-it/) and got on the Huckabee bandwagon before it had even left Arkansas, and at a price that it would simply be rude to advertise…
203. Thanks Nick
Falling out left right and centre…
Or right, far right and extreme right!
210. Goodness Roger, that was actually quite funny.
211
I am not sure whether Gordon Bean knows how much has been lent to Northern Rock.
At PMQ’s he declined to give a figure.
This from Reuters
Northern Rock is estimated to have borrowed as much as 29 billion pounds from the Bank, and is now seeking a buyer.
Is not Alistair Darling’s job now untenable?
I wonder whether Gordon will manage to squeeze in a question of his own this Wednesday; ‘What does the leader of the opposition think of his shadow foreign secretary William Hague and his candidate for Mayor of London Boris Johnson writing a letter to the judge appealing for leniency for the convicted fraudster Conrad Black’?
211 and 215 Northern Rock
If its £29Bn now and no deal until after xmas. I believe the debt is growing at about £3bn a week.
3 more weeks = £9bn. So the debt reaches £38bn.
Which I believe is about our net PSBR this year?
Is there a limit to how much we can lend?
216 - More to the point, what does Judge Amy St Eve make of *receiving* a letter from William Hague and Boris Johnson appealing for leniency for Conrad Black?
I think I would be somewhat bemused, and inclined to be a little harsher simply for the presumptiveness in assuming that having famous and influential friends could sway my impartiality.
The chairman of Northern Pebble is spinning it out in the hope that something will turn up to help his shareholders. Meanwhile we are shovelling cash in. I think HPS [211] may be right - if not the whole government then surely the chancellor and the Governor of the BoE will both be liable.
Keep picking the spot Vince. Gordon’s failure to answer any of your questions must rebound on him once the amount we have lost becomes evident.
216..but now reverting to the normal obsessive ranting
How one remembers all that grief from Labour when Robert Maxwell passed away, with senior shadow cabinet members attending the funeral.
BTW Woger appears to have forgotten how much money companies such as GEC and BP invested in apartheid South Africa. Something which did not prevent Blair from sending such senior executives as Lords Browne, Simon and Simpson to the upper house. Of course they were all close to Labour, not that any have done much in the Lords.
26. Of course there are. Changes of government and/or prime minister don’t always have to happen in the context of a general election. Quite apart from examples like Brown (June 2007), Wilson (March 1974), Campbell-Bannerman (December 1905), even Tony Blair (May 1997) became PM before all the results were in.
216: Won’t Gordon write to Wendy Alexander?
207 So far as I can tell, it is purely based around clashing egos.
The Special One is clearly too special for England.
Guardian’s ‘breaking news’ is that he’s ruled himself out. Should shorten the odds on Lippi and Klinsman…
I heard an interesting economist on the radio at the week-end say there was a misunderstanding about the money lent to Northern Rock. It is just a loan at a reasonable rate of interest which is the way banks operate. He said he was surprised that even people who should know better such as Vince Cable (who he mentioned by name) talk about ‘pouring government money in’ which is misleading.
226 The problem is we don’t know if the loan is properly secured or not.
226…or if the Bank can repay it.
226 - “… an interesting economist …”
Roger - sometimes you just crack me up!!
Morus. “226 - “… an interesting economist …””
An odd description I agree but his name was someone ‘Davies’ but I couldn’t recall his first name and didn’t even know how to spell ‘Davies’! Nonetheless he was introduced as an economist and he did have a different slant….hence ‘an interesting economist’!
(PS It wasn’t Evan Davies)
O/T - A SPECIAL REQUEST
A number of posters have remarked how civil postings have been since Mike has been indisposed. Clearly most posters have realised that in his absence, the usual self-regulation, which is such a feature of the Site, is more valuable than ever.
Mike seldom has to resort to warnings, yellow cards and the like, and only very rarely has to moderate offensive and potentially actionable posts. It would be be extremely helpful for him and the reputation of the Site if all posters could make a special effort, during his absence, to maintain the highest standards during his enforced absence, which we all hope will be brief.
Thanks
226 - the point is, it’s *not* the way banks operate - no-one else will lend NR money right now. As Mr Carp rightly points out, there exists considerable uncertainty as to whether NR can repay such loans. So Vince Cable is entirely entitled to describe the current situation as ‘pouring govt money in’.
re 222 I don’t understand. Wilson did become PM in March 74 after a general election, and Tony Blair only became PM on the morning of 2nd May 1997 by which point Labour were well over 400 seats having achieved an overall majority by 3.15am.
226. This is politics, not economics.
230. Roger’s “interesting economist” wouldn’t be Gavyn Davies, former economist at Goldman Sachs who’s wife Sue Nye is Gordon Brown’s PA? That might explain the refreshing “difference” in interpretation.
A “racing cert” that David Cameron will bring this up at PMQ’s and rightly so
http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/retirement/ar…mp;in_page_id=6
Brown vetoes £725m pensions rescue
Brown vetoes £725m pensions rescue
Daniel Martin, Daily Mail
10 December 2007
Gordon Brown has overruled his Cabinet over plans to bail out thousands of pensioners whose employers went bust.
Ministers had promised £725m to help more than 125,000 workers whose company pension schemes collapsed. But the Prime Minister has risked a major split by vetoing the plan.
235. Thanks Charlotte! It was Gavyn Davis. I wasn’t aware of his wife’s connection to GB though I don’t suppose that would have influenced him.
233. Blair became PM at c. 11am on 2nd May; the final results did not come in until late evening of that day. Wilson became PM on Monday 4th March, i.e after Heath’s government had continued in office for three days after the results were known. The general principle is that a new PM is appointed by the Queen, or (in Australia) by the Governor-General. Such appointments don’t have to fit in with a strict legal timetable of election results being officially declared or verified (if indeed there are election results at all).
236
This is another example of the strain Gov’t finances are under (see police pay deal etc).
The way things are going I can see an emergency tax rise in about 6-12 months’ time.
217, HF.
If so (NR Debt at £38 bn now, rising by £3bn/week), then if the state of affairs continues exactly as it is, then the NR debt will be equate to more than 10% of the United Kingdom National Debt in another 6-and-a-half weeks.
(National Debt at £574.4 bn as at March 2007, 10% is £57.44 bn, NR would be at £57.5 bn in 6.5 more weeks at £3bn/week).
That’s kind of scary …
Well, the obvious thing to do would be to delay the basic rate income tax cut (but not the abolition of the starting rate). The bonus of that is it would enable them to announce it again in the 2008 PBR and the 2009 budget…
re 238 but in both those instances the decision was made when sufficient results were known - and in the Wilson case after all the results - to know who had won the election. In a close election we would know who had won by the Friday afternoon. In Australia’s case they still wouldn’t know now.
211 Herbert, whilst like you, I believe the Northern Rock crisis will prove to be far, far more serious than is currently realised, costing the tapayer billions, I really don’t see how it will “bring the Government down” as you suggest - after all Brown is hardly likey to lose a vote of confidence, no matter how bad it gets - turkeys,voting, Christmas, etc. Ultimately, if absolutely necessary, Darling will be offered as the sacrificial lamb.
204 stjohn - are you intending to lay off your further Huckerbee bet using Betfair (long term and cash hungry) or are you using a spread bet market?
242. But they do already know enough in Australia to know which party will win.
151. Putin’s choice of preferred successor appears to have gone without too much comment Matt.
216. No offense roger, but didnt labour put intense pressure upon the Sudanese government for leniency over gillian gibbons??
I know it was a ridiculus sentence, but still, if you are going to attack the tories for asking for leniency, then you shouldnt be hypocritical.
243: Peter, it is possible that the turkeys might vote for Christmas if they thought it would stop a larger cull in a few years. What after all is Brown’s record apart from the economy?
re 245 But you’re misunderstanding me. Say we have a 1974 February situation. We knew the result and who had won by about 10pm on 1st March, the day after the election. If the Australian election had been that close they wouldn’t know. In a non close election, like 1997 we knew at 3.15am who had won it.
248 Ralph, I have argued here bbefore that the next GE will prove to be a good one to lose, especially for Labour. But politicianns of all parties never think that way and are only concerned about the here and now as regards who’s in Government.
Another interesting article on the Lib Dems in te Guardan today. But it does talk nonsense saying even an 11% Tory Lead can still mean Hung Parliament when we all know the Marginals swing is by and large higher than the UNS. October 74 being the exception I think. Thus if the Tories were 11% ahead of Labour not only they would have a majority but likely a comfortable one at that
O/T Capello now in to 1.3/1, less than half his price 3 hours ago - is it yet another case of someone always knows and someone always tells? Shame he doesn’t speak a word of English - still he’s got 9 months or so to learn.
250 Unknowable. The position of Labour out of power will be far different to the past. Blair undermined or ignored so many traditional elements of the Labour movement that sustained it in opposition in the past I’m not sure deprived of patronage and power any election would be good for Labour to lose again now
Further to my 94: Yesterday’s Rasmussen was not noise. Huck seems to have peaked. Giuliani ahead by 5 today.
BUT - politicalwire.com writes: “Political Wire got an advance look at a poll to be released later today from one of the early primary states that confirms Mike Huckabee’s surge in the GOP presidential nomination battle….Most of Huckabee’s gains come at the expense of Rudy Giuliani who has experienced a rapid collapse in the polls.”
Caution: PW has a tendency to inflate the swings in early warnings such as this. AND - if this poll has been taken earlier than the last few days, the counter-punch against H has not registereed. However, if this is Florida, it is significant. Still - I will happily sell you all more Huck at a touche over 4/1 at Betfair, and I guess this gives me an opening, as Huck has moved out to around 5/1 today.
230.
The economist was Howard Davies - Director (equiv of VC) of my University and former head of the FSA.
252. He was first to declare and the first I had my money on. Many of the suits favour him.
254. Its all too messy at the moment Jan.
9. LOL. That would be called a “gerrymander”, I think.
26. The reality is that 149 out of 150 seats are known, if not declared - and governments do not change lightly or narrowly in Australia, the swing is too big for that to happen. If we still didn’t know then I guess caretaker conventions would continue until we did know. But because votes are counted at the polling booth they are cast, rather than a central location for each seat, it takes much less time to get a clear picture for each election than the UK where you have to wait until 1am or 2am!
100. I think - but I am not certain - that part of the reason that people have the ability to submit a postal vote after polling day is to have a mechanism for people to cast a valid vote if climatic events interfere with people being actually able to get to a polling booth in unusual situations. Australia is a big country, with big weather, and in large rural seats in the North - Leichhardt, Kennedy, Kalgoorlie, Lingiari, etc - it’s not unknown for polling booths to be cut off from voters because of monsoon rains, flooding, etc.
242. Indeed John - we knew who won about an hour after the polls closed in New South Wales.
Ryan. In the spirit of PtP’s call for the utmost politeness wouldn’t you agree that though they are both criminal there is a difference in degree between calling a cuddly toy ‘Mohammed’ and defrauding a company out of £100,000,000?
NEW POLL
http://timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3031071.ece
lab 32% -5%
Con 40% +4%
lib dem 16%
258 That’s the problem though, isn’t it Roger? For some people, calling a cuddly toy ‘Mohammed’ is about as bad as it gets. The fact you and I think they are pillocks is neither here nor there.
Hey guys,
Are we expecting a Populus poll to be released this evening?
259. LOL! And there it is.
259. That’ll narrow a touch soon enough, Tories have been quiet.
Populus tend to be the most popular pollster for Labour. 32% with Populus could easily equate to 29% with ICM or ComRes, IMO.
I read the news today and can proudly announce that Labour have put 30 Billion into Northern Rock.
Why is this important? It is now MORE than the Annual Defence Budget!!
Defence spending is NEVER justified! Not even during wartime.
259.Ryans. Excellent news! So the fightback begins.
260. that is my point exactly. I think it was a terrible thing that happend to gillian gibbons, and I whole heartedly support the government in applying pressure on the sudanese government. In my eyes, defrauding 100,000,000 is alot worse, in other eyes insulting mohammed is alot worse.
I dont think it is at all correct to try and tarnish the tories because they pleaded for leniency.
260. that is my point exactly. I think it was a terrible thing that happend to gillian gibbons, and I whole heartedly support the government in applying pressure on the sudanese government. In my eyes, defrauding 100,000,000 is alot worse, in other eyes insulting mohammed is alot worse.
I dont think it is at all correct to try and tarnish the tories because they pleaded for leniency.
259. Central Probabilistic Forecast
Con 308
Lab(+SDLP) 265
LD 39
Nats 19
Oth 3
NI 11 (SF abstain)
Tories 15 seats short
[assumes Average LD incumbency, Nats rise 15%, 2005 swing pattern]
Populus, what happened?
Never posted a Cameron lead over Brown’s party. Suddenly its 8 points.
8 is the biggest lead ever recorded by Populus for Cameron’s Conservatives over Labour.
40 is the highest populus score Cameron’s Conservatives have achieved.
243
I can see NR bringing the Gov’t down IF
Borrowing to support it gets so large the Gov’t debt gets to a stage where it cannot borrow more without a rise in interest rates.
That would almost certainly cause a BIG loss in confidence maybe a market crash and a housing recession. Plus a loss of jobs etc.
It is conceivable.. and would deserve the Gov’t being kicked out cos it would be dire economic management as in 1929 style.
271 - Has Alistair Darling said why he rejected the Lloyds TSB bailout yet…?
270 The polls shows that Labour is now on 32 per cent on voting intentions. This is 5 points lower than a month ago, but this is slightly higher than in some polls a week or two ago, which suggests that the Labour freefall of the autumn may have halted- though at historically low levels. The party averaged 39 per cent during Gordon Brown’s honeymoon in the summer.
By contrast, the Tories are now on 40 per cent, up 4 points since the last Populus poll a month ago, but in line with, or slightly below, other recent polls. On a monthly average of all polls, the Tories were on 40 per cent in both October and November, compared with 33 per cent between July and September. This suggests that the Tories are consolidating, but failing to build further on this earlier rise in support.
This assessment by The Times of its poll by Populus is incredible - despite the Tories being up by 4% compared with their previous poll, they are pretending it is a minor triumph for Labour, by doing what Mike tells us you should never do - comparing with other polls using different methodologies.
Mike, if you’ve had your bed bath, get on here and express your disgust!
273 - Lol. I fear for the hospital staff if they prevent him from getting to his mobile phone!
Tim Hames and Peter Riddell have now lost all credibility and should be ridiculed by every non-partisan analyst. I hope Mike rises from his sickbed to cast them into the outer darkeness. As HF says, Populus goes from zero Tory lead to 8 point Tory lead and these numpties try to spin it away
Pathetic, Tim Hames. Pathetic, Riddell. Just pathetic
264 Anthony Wells gave some information on the different past vote weightings used by Populus , Comres and ICM recently . ICM should give Labour around 1-2% less than Populus and LibDems 1-2% more and Others a little less , the Conservative figure should be the same . As always the detailed data with comparison to 2005 votes should be useful and interesting .
273 - BTW even if it hasn’t got any worse for the Govt, that is a good news story for the Tories in itself - Labour will have been hoping to have recovered from their position of a couple of weeks ago, not stabilised!
266, Roger,
Fightback?
Labour have dropped 5 points! Tories are up 4.
It may look better than the CR or YouGov, but bear in mind that when CR and YouGov were showing 3-5 point Tory leads, Populus was showing Labour ahead.
271 Yes, but what precisely are the mechanics involved which would result in the Government falling?
279 - Far more likely Darling resigns a la Lamont imo. Unless he decides to try and take Labour down with him that’ll be it.
273 pfP yes the Peter Riddell article has in parts the level of work one would expect from a party spinner or a junior reporter.
With Populus, 8 is the joint biggest lead for the Conservatives ever. (4 yrs).
40 is the highest recorded ever for Conservatives with Populus (4 yrs).
With Populus the LD revival seems stalled at 16.
280 Precisely what I suggested in 243.
A certain key Labour supporter posted something on here recently that he expected the Conservatives poll lead to narrow.
At the time I said it would only do that with the Labour friendly Populus polls. So I was wrong!
266 Roger, each week Labour seem to announce a fight back and things just get worse.
Morland’s cartoon sums it up.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/cartoon/
The Government losing many billions in Northern Rock could “bring the Govt down”, but only in the sense that Black Wednesday “brought the last Conservative govt down”. Ie. an event from which they could not recover.
Populus: agree with the Tory comments here that comparisons with other polls are of limited use: given what we know of the methods, this seems consistent with other recent polls that have been good for the Tories, neither better nor worse. The underlying questions are less helpful to them, suggesting the parties are roughly level on the economy, tax and preferred government (not clear on the last one: 47% prefer Labour to Tories, do 53% prefer Tories or is there a don’t know/neither group?).
harry at 207: It’s hard to tell. The official BNP position is that the insurgents were secretly plotting to smear a fine upstanding colleague in the hope of forcing him out. Supporters of the dissidents say the target deserved it, but the dissidents have yet to comment themselves. I understand that the blog in question did claim that the target was taking neo-Nazi positions, and drew on both pro- and anti-BNP websites. My provisional impression is that it was a power struggle, but there’s speculation that Ms Graham could form a dissident populist party that is less overtly prejudiced.
The bare bones are in the local paper here:
http://www.thisisnottingham.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=195917&command=displayContent&sourceNode=134241&contentPK=19217437&folderPk=78486&pNodeId=133951
but if you Google Sadie Graham and expulsion you’ll find a lot more stuff.
The only thing that could bring the government down is if Labour loses a vote on a huge issue, like going to war or perhaps the European treaty which would destroy its credibility and split the party.
Or the budget.
OT. Would it be sexist to comment on the exponential rise in Nigella’s waistline the longer her cooking programme goes on? Another series and Charles might sue.
275 test, you raise the issue of Tim Hames the Chief Leader Writer of the Times.
This is what he wrote in April 2005. “There has been much chatter in the House of Commons about “skipping a generation.” This is usually code for handing the baton to David Cameron (born 1966) or George Osborne (born 1971). I think this would be madness”
Yes madness, for the other parties! I hereby award Tim Hames the Prize for the Worst Prediction of a Leader.
PS He also stated in Sept 07 that the Lib Dems would be mad to ditch Ming.
I am very shocked that some people here are using some sort of Black - Gibbons equivalence to undermine Roger’s, perfectly reasonably, point…
In effect this poll shows a narrowing of the Conservative lead to 8% (though this is do with Conservatives moving to the Lib Dems).
289 Roger I am not allowed to watch unless the wife is not around!
Reminds me of the saying that a woman should not mind where you get your appetite as long as you go home to eat.
292 Now now Matthew JCG Partridge, you have had explained to you by our host Mr Smithson on several occasions how unwise it is to compare figures from different polls. Or have you forgotten?
292.
Matthew Partridge.
No.
It doesn’t. It shows Conservatives going from 1 point behind to 8 in front.
“289 Roger I am not allowed to watch unless the wife is not around”
It’s the funniest programme on TV. She has just described one of her dishes as ‘full of golden gorgeousness’. I can’t quite think what your wife might object to? Maybe comparing cookery?
In effect this poll shows a narrowing of the Conservative lead to 8% (though this is do with Conservatives moving to the Lib Dems)
How do you know? Could be LibDems moving to Labour and Labour moving to the Tories. Could be no movement at all but just changes in likelihood to vote.
*other way round
292: All pollsters work using different methodologies which means that their results should only be directly compared with others from the same pollster.
294 - we are still awaiting Matthew’s explanation for how it can be justified to compare movements between two polls which are institutionally programmed to show movement where there is none.
Amid all his bluster about “what they do in the US”, weighted moving averages etc, he has yet to give an answer to this basic problem.
A few points:
1. There is no psephological reason for not comparing polls chronoligically rather than by company - in America comparing pollsters chronologically is an accepted methodology. The rolling average vs moving average debate may still exist - but you can least conceed that my methodology has some validity (as I conceed that your methodology may have some strong points).
2. The pollsters produced remarkably similar results in 2005, again suggesting that differences in methodology may be overstated.
3. As I noted in my last post on this subject. My methodology has, ironically, been more pessimistic about the Labour-Conservative gap (from a Labour supporter’s perspective) than the CH methodology for the past fortnight.
FWIW: My predictions using a UNS model kindly provided by a user of this site are: Con 321 Lab 269 Lib Dem 31.
That the Tory Party has been swinging behind convicted thief and fraudster Conrad Black is utterly shameful…
It rather makes a mockery of the posters like Rik W and others who were demanding that the Lib Dem pay back all donations from Michael Brown after his conviction. Not only are the Tories not going to disown Conrad Black, but they are actively trying to keep hold of him! I guess it must be the thought of the loss of his generous support.
So are the Tories going to pay back all of Conrad Black’s donations now?
301,
Yes there is.
For example: Suppose there is an ICM poll showing Lab 31, Con 40, LD 17 followed shortly by a Populus poll showing Lab 33, Con 40, LD 15.
At a fairly crude* level we know that all of the apparent movement is explainable by merely the different weightings applied. Such polls would reflect exactly the same underlying “true” level of opinion.
You, however, would report that the Con lead had decreased and the Lib Dems had fallen back. Despite there being no change in the underlying position.
*It’s never quite as simple as “add one or two here, take off one or two there”, but for example’s sake the comparison is close enough.
Matthew - if the Populus figures had been from ComRes they would have been a sensation. Labour could start to think that they were turning the corner.
Alas they are not. Clearly standards of analysis at the LSE, where you are doing postgraduate work, have declined since I was a student there in the 1960s. You simply would not have been able to get away with such sloppy thinking.
Mind you your posts are more forgiveable compared Peter Riddell’s piece in the Times.
Mike Smithson
301 You are correct in saying that opinion polls in the US are compared chronologically and the fact that fifferent pollsters are ignored . However , AFAIK pollsters in the US do not use any weighting so their polls are directly comparable and the sample sizes of usually 500 seldom more and sometimes less have greater M of E than in the UK . As Andy points out in post 303 Populus Comres and ICM are basically the same polls ( there are minor differences ) and the results from one of their polls can be converted pretty accurately into what the other pollsters would have given with the same data .
292. I can’t believe you are still spouting this nonsense about comparing polls with different companies. There is not one person on here who agrees with doing this. This poll is bad for Labour no matter what the spin on it form you or the Times is.
302. Is that the best you’ve got?
302. A bit harsh!
Interesting to hear from Hague though why he though Archer a man of ‘probity and integrity’ and then recommended Black for a peerage. Just the sort of astute judgement we need from a foreign secretary!
308. Whereas playing politics about the Gibbons case is true statesman like behaviour.
303.
I conceed that if you looked ‘under the bonnet’ and standardised the methodology you might get more accurate results. It might also be an interesting exercise to filter each poll separately and then compare the results. However, that does not detract from the fact that in 2005 all the pollsters produced very similar results. If one methodology favoured one party consistently this would simply not have happened.
In any case I prefer to use a filtered WMA which gives precedence to up to date information, as opposed to a methodology which weighs a poll that was produced a fortnight equally with one produced today. If you are so obsessed with methodological differences that you are prepared to use stale data, that’s your choice.
310. I meant to say filter each company’s polls, not each individual poll.
Can people please stop drawing equivalences to Black and Gibbons!!
Gibbons is morally innocent and deserved all our support.
Black is morally guilty and deserves to have the book thrown at him.
It’s shocking that tories simply seem unable to tell the difference.
There was I thinking from his earlier comment that Roger was a devotee of the theory that Conrad Black was a good man brought to his knees by his blind love for a woman
312. In your eyes and most peoples eyes she is morally innocent. However she lives in country which is notoriously islamic strict. she should know their laws and respect them. In the eyes of the Sudanese people and their law, she was morally wrong.
Im not defending their law, however to say she was morally innocent is wrong.
The methodologies have been changed since the 2005 General Election
BTW, do our Labour posters agree with many of our assessments that the last populus poll was rogue. There was much criticism of those point of views which seems to have been misplaced.
310,
It easily could have done so.
The margins of Labour victory varied from 3 points (NOP) to 6 points (Populus and ICM).
With a 3 point MoE for each of the parties (and effectively about a 4.5 point MoE on the lead), an exactly accurate survey would have returned anything from a 1.5 point Tory lead to a 7.5 point Labour lead. With the “perfect” methodology.
You’d expect most of the polls from a hypothetical “perfect” methodology to be actually within about 2.25 points of the true lead (about 2 out of 3), but your distribution of polls with identical methodology would vary even if the underlying true levels of opinion remained constant.
Conversely, two polls with different methodologies could hit the same point (especially if they are rounding to the nearest point) despite their tendencies to diverge.
An example. For the sake of argument, let’s assume that ICM and Populus have coincidentally developed methodologies that perfectly bracket the “true” value of underlying opinion, and that ICM will always report Labour one point lower than they actually are and Populus will always report them one point higher than they actually are.
If the true value were 32%, ICM would report between 28%-34%; Populus would report between 30%-36%. An ICM report of 33% and a Populus report of 33% would therefore be perfectly possible.
Of course, over time (and multiple polls) the tendencies of the polling companies would become apparent.
B*ll*cks Ryans, I’m a well-known Tory and am happy to say she did nothing wrong whatever, she was respectfully acquiesing in a suggestion by her Muslim pupils, she is wholly innocent. Sudan and they alone are to blame. Well done Warsi and Ahmed.
If I say that Gibbons was just foolish and unfairly punished by a wicked regime can we end the silliness and talk about politics?
316 Woody662, it looks like the previous one was a rogue but it was in line with other Populus polls that have been kind to Brown.
319. This poll looks grimmer and grimmer for Brown then.
316 I think that depends on your definition of a rogue poll . It was certainly at the higher end of M of E in Labour’s favour at that time but not quite IMO a complete rogue outside of M of E expectations .
Yes alex just the sort of lovable rogue we can’t get enough of. A real Tory ‘A’ lister! How about a fund raising dinner with principal guests Aitken Archer and Black? That’ll get their wallets out. It could be hosted by William and Fffffffion. I reckon they owe him one!
You’re sending out mixed messages here, Roger.
I return from my near-permanent exile to confirm that Peter Riddell is, in essence, a tit.
Arguably he has always been a tit: he is certainly a blinkered and deluded pro-European. But Europe aside his judgments carried some weight in the past, they seem measured and sagacious.
Now he is just absurd. A figure of fun. A weeble that won’t fall down. A muppet. A big fat political tellytubby with a picture of Gordon Brown on his dayglo red tum-tum.
Peter Riddell, shut the F up.
Got it wrong on Putin and Medvedev. Ooops!
Mixed messages, I always thought Roger just disagreed with everyone!
I was so sorry to see that Lord Black has been sent to prison for six and a half years. Obviously that fact that Boris spoke up on his behalf didn’t do much good. Of course the fact that Boris did speak up on his behalf could have made it worse.
‘Conrad! bloody good chap, now you listen to me you Yanks, let him damn well go, bloody colonials what do you lot know about anything, throwing our tea in the harbour, what bloody cheek: was that all right Conrad?
327 - Really? I thought convicted fraudsters routinely got sent down for the rest of their lives in the US.
I’m reasonably confident that Labour will be pretty close in the next couple of weeks. This poll was probably taken last week. It takes a while for things to filter through. This poll is still a response to Labour’s ‘Weekus Horribilis’. I’m pretty certain that Labour are regrouping fast and will quickly move into positive territory.
NB. This prediction is NOT based on my ’straws in the wind’ which now includes 4 admen 1 hairdresser and a French restaurateur!
329 - So a prediction based on absolutely nothing at all then?
Poll was taken Friday to Sunday
Sean T. Though Peter Riddell is not known as a poster on here could I refer you to PtP’s earlier post [231]. We are all being very nice to each other, especially/even to fellow Europeans, to avoid disturbing Mikes sleep!!!
Why are Tories, or anyone for that matter, defending a crook?
329 Parallel universe thinking???, or designed to incite comments?
Actually lads Roger might, just might have a point. The Tories have been quiet, Gordon turns up in Afghanistan just as there is some of the most consistent coverage of fighting there (with, apparently, a successful result, though we’ll see in due course), there has been some interesting policy stuff too from the government. If it stays quiet they might just see a steadying or a touch of a rise.
325. Yeah what the heck happened there? I cant remember his name but there seemed to be a big steer to a bloke called Ov or something. Is there something that took him out of the picture?
The test Roger is the likelihood to vote in the ICM poll - I suspect that the “None of this Lot” Party will be getting stonger and stronger. I understand it is being suggested that voter are given a lottery ticket to encourage voting - At the rate it is going it will have to be cash in hand!!
333 - Err, because Gibbons was also a crook according to the laws of Sudan therefore it is now ok to defend all crooks (as long they donate to the tories?? - not sure about this bit), or something.
335 - A point that Labour might recover slightly, or a point that they will be leading in 2 or 3 weeks?
330 alex. Not on nothing…..Labour once again look like the governing party not a stuttering shambles.This Black business together with Hague and Boris’s support is a subliminal reminder of certain perceptions many hold of their opponents. I’ve not been following the minutiae of politics and it’s easier to see things as non-dorks see them. Labour looked awful up till midway through last week. Now they don’t ….but we’ll see
328
Six and a half years, seems odd, why the half? Apparently he now wants to ditch his British citizenship and peerage and revert to being a Canadian. If he becomes a Canadian he can serve his time in a Canadian open prison, but as a Brit he has to serve his time in a US jail. What a shame, and all the trouble little Willie Hague went through to get him his peerage.
Still if you see a coronet and red cloak trimmed with ermine going cheap on ebay, you’ll know whose!!
335 “quickly into positive teritory”.. i think not, Donorgate is and will be a millstone..
324. Thats just such a statement that reflects just how short term obsessed modern society is.
Near Permanent exile..what 3 weeks?
In the old days a few weeks would have been 5 years I tell ya.. I should know, I’ve been around so long that I remember Kings Cross when it just a Prince……..
339 - Don’t forget Lewis Hamilton losing SPOTY to a Welshman!
By the way, I’ve just realised a very good reason why Huckabee will not make it to the nomination or the Whitehouse.
He plays bass.
Thats not the instrument of a winner, a man out in front.
BTW what’s Gordon’s cover story for the latest revelations over the data discs?
338. Leading? Not likely.
339. Wind Farms that aren’t going to happen, a trip to see visably unimpressed soldiers who aren’t being paid correctly by a PM who is said not to be interested in defence, and pay offs for Labour councillors voted out of office. I think Labour are going to have to do a little better than that.
332. On my very occasional visits to this site of late, I have noticed ever more frequent outbreaks of reasonableness, interspersed with moments of accord, all of it underlain by an air of chattiness, concord, and mature ecumenical debate.
Clearly this has got to stop. You are all in danger of wonking yourselves to death, if you don’t die of narcolepsy in the interim.
YAWN!
When my travels are done, I may have to return to the pb fray, to provide some much needed venom, bias, belligerence and gratuitously flamboyant nastiness.
“Why are Tories, or anyone for that matter, defending a crook”
I don’t think they are. They just think six years without Amiel sounds like a reward not a punishment
347. Policies on allowing people their own care budget…..I’ve yet to see a killer negative on that. That its been around in other forms for years matters not. It looks good. IOt alsio helps the government save money and cuts the pressure on social workers..well ok, that last one is a negative..but still it looks good, possibly because it is.
Bear in that its also dependent on things being quiet overall, Rogers enthusiasm notwithstanding. If you cut away the possible hyperbole and the nonsense over links to Black (who gives a fiddlers) there is a base point that things have been steadier in the last lot of days.
349. Roger, I’m flabbergasted. That remark actually skirts the outer edges of wittiness.
Obviously this is a random event. If you make enough absurd, inane, idiotic, dreary, tedious and totally illogical statements - which you do - eventually one of them is going to be almost funny by accident.
Some weeks ago the Mole(first post) said that Brown would begin his “fightback” focusing in international issues(that’s what we are seeing, aren’t we?)
Everyone expects Labour to recover a bit. It would only be normal. But i doubt “policies” will have much to do with it. The problem for the Govt is two fold:
a) the events of the last few weeks may well have permanently cost them 2-3% of the vote
b) the Tory vote seems to be operating independently of Labour woes and may well have found a new base level of c40%.
Talking of the US Presidential race, I think it should be noted by the pb community that there are only 5 copies of my book left on the amazon shelf:
http://tinyurl.com/2pgfa9
Hurry up, peebles! A book about online dating. The ideal gift for lonely sexless men who spend too much time on the internet. That means us! Buy it for each other.
Oh, don’t forget there is a police investigation going on…
How many have you sold?
356. If there’s five left, I must have sold, ooh, literally tens of copies.
I need to pay my barbill. Then buy my daughter a Christmas present. Come on lads, pony up.
It will be interesting to see whether the ridiculous commentary accompanying the Populus poll survives into the hardcopy of The Times tomorrow - somehow I doubt it.
279
I can see the Govt having leant £billion sto N Rock being unable to fund its Budget, so having to cut spending on some key Labour areas: eg pensions (note the non payment of £700M ), NHS, cancellation of key MOD programs etc, long term sick etc. IF the economy goes sour.
This could lead to a Labour revolt on a Budget, a defeat and dissolution.
I think it’s unlikely as it assumes very bad credit conditions etc but it’s possible. Judging by tight spending limits being imposed NOW, if we had a recession and tax revenues fall, the fiscal deficit could treble to £90-£100 Billion in which case BIG spending cuts would be needed.
Given the need to fund several white elephants - the Olmypics for one - in 2009 -2011- there are some things the Gov’t can’t cut. And cancelling Trident or big weapons programs would hit Labour heartlands badly (BAE systems in Northern England).
So if the Gov’t had to make enforced cuts, whichever way it went could be disastrous for its core vote and MPs could rebel.
359 - Ken Clarke had his budget defeated. Didn’t result in the govt falling.
335. See Martin Kettles view in the Guardian of the so called interesting stuff (sorry can’t link). ‘Initiavitis’ is his word. I’d like the Conservatives to ask Broon how he is going to pay for all this nosense as well please (a favourite Nu-Labour ploy)considering he has borrowed over $40 billion on our behalf already and rising.
What was he announcing in Iraq..didnt someone tell him that that plan didnt work last time..he just looks a bigger wally trying it again.
Black is a crook and should be sent down for at least 8.5 years. Hague, Boris or any other Conservatives supporting him is just silly and bad politics. Then again I dont understand why they dont come clean on Ashcroft good or bad.
I agree that Riddell is a tit. In the 1 point Labour poll last month he never once mentioned the other contrary polls. Now he mentions them profusely. Like Brown, he must think we are all idiots.
The economy is still the government’s achilles heel. There is certainly evidence that it hasnt prepared at all for the rainy day or year.
“New poll shows big shake-up in GOP race”
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/10/cnn.poll/index.html
353 “Everyone expects Labour to recover a bit. ”
Clearly that is untrue.
New Populus poll
Cons 40 +4
Lab 32 -5
LD 16 n/c
Roger, just got in and read your posts. Some of your best ever, if I may pay you such a compliment. But I can’t work out if you are pro-Brown this week or anti-Brown?
I thought that you were flirting with the LibDems ar one point as well - or was that just part of the general admiration felt by most of us for the excellent job that Vince Cable seems to be doing?
The spinning on the Populus poll is quite bizarre. Murdoch has fully swung behind the lame duck, bogey picker.
Ask yourself why would Murdoch support a party so mired in corrupt, incompetence and disregard for British Servicemen.
Murdoch cannot actually support those traits. There must be another reason.
The problem of bias is it can only be identified ex post facto.
Various methods have been proposed over the years for doing so: Mosteller; Lau; and Martin, Traugott & Kennedy.
Even if there was bias prior to 2005, as others have said, some pollsters have changed their methodologies since - so bias may have been removed or added. We simply don’t know.
Bias or not, simple averaging of polls introduces another flaw. It implicitly assumes that opinion has not changed during the averaging period.
The best method of “averaging” polls is to use a Kalman filter, as Matthew does, which better tracks opinion over time.
Since bias cannot be proven or measured at the moment, it would follow that one cannot legitimately exclude certain polls on the mere suspicion of bias.
Matthew is correct to use the Kalman filter, but I think he slips up using simple uniform swing projections. One obvious reason is they take no account of the Nationalists’ advance, and thus overstate the number of Tory seats (Unlikely they will gain Angus, Perth & N Perthshire, Stirling as UNS predicts)
367. There will probably not be an election for 2.5 years. No need for him to switch sides yet.
357 Sean - Thank you for directing me to Amazon, where I am able to pick up a copy of your book from a “marketpace seller” for just 98p. Before taking the plunge, I thought I’d just check with you that you would be at the PB.com party in January to autograph it for me please?
367 When I first read the commentary on the Populus poll, I actually wondered whether the writer was simply taking the p*ss or that it might even be a rogue article.
I can’t imagine that Murdoch or Murdoch Jnr have sanctioned this or even that it’s got past the Editor.
Some very odd statements in another article by Riddle
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/peter_riddell/article3031412.ece
“Fed up with this lot, but alternative is little better” is his conclusion!
“Populus notes that Labour is now one point or so above the level of the Major Government at the same stage of the 1992-97 parliament, while the Tories are polling about eight points below the level then of the Labour Opposition. ”
But Populus were not doing polls in 92-97?
Then to cap it all we have the Labour fed spin that Riddle has clearly swallowed.
“The Brown leadership still believes that its position is recoverable. So we are in for some heavy pounding on policy issues, starting today with the ten-year children’s plan and welfare reforms on Thursday.”
Peter Riddle should be given the “Brown Nose Award” for services to nuLabour.
re 340 He cannot ditch his peerage - it would require an act of parliament, and you don’t need to be British to have a peerage. For instance, Lord Kingsale who was at university with me is a New Zealander and he inherited that from an Irish fifth cousin. You do, however, have to have British citizenship to sit in the House of Lords.
370. lol. That means I make 0.001p in royalties.
*sigh*
Looks like my daughter will be enjoying a pretty frugal Christmas.
Sure I’ll sign it for you if I am at the pb party. But that depends if 1. someone tells me where and when the party is (I really don’t visit the site so much these days). and 2, I am in the country (I’m travelling a heck of a lot at the mo with various jobs).
Now I shall to bed. I’m still recovering from the bar prices in Oslo. Guten nacht.
T
372, the reason I spelled his name “Riddle” is that is how it is spelled in the headline above the article!
re 360 when? If the government cannot pass the Finance Bill then it has to go and there would be no excuse for HM not granting a dissolution in such circumstances.
370 Sean, in my last post, I should have added that I then intend to sell the freshly autographed copy of your book on eBay and, since you didn’t profit from my purchase by way of receiving any royalties, I’d like to divi up say 10% of the proceeds to a charity of your choice. I hope you think this fair.
I think Labour supporters should prepare for the possibility of being 29% with ICM and 28% with ComeRes when their December polls come out. MORI will be about 32% with YouGve at 30%.
Thats my guess.
378-I’m sure some will cheer, because Labour will be up 1% in ComRes!!
372. LOL! We’ve got ANOTHER ten year plan? This time on Children and education again? We’ve had more ten year plans in the last ten years, than Russia (where I think the idea of the ten year plan came from?) Point is, do we ever get to the end of these ten year plans, before a new one is implemented? Do we ever get to judge and assess on their success and failure? NO! Which I suppose is the point of them?
The idea that Brown is going to turn around his fortunes with ten year plans is laughable. And why are people like Riddell repeating the myth that for the Tories to win the next election they have ti be polling the sort of numbers Labour were polling when they were heading for a 180 seat record landslide? The Tories can win and govern with a majority of around 30, and they don’t need to be as far ahead as Labour was from 92-97 to do it.
lol - sorry, if I am late in picking up on this, but Matthew JCG Partridge’s blog is called the “Political Tipster’… Frequent readers of the site will know exactly what I mean…
379. LOL! Well I can’t see them being at 27% with ComRes again this month, but I don’t think they will be far away.
Talking about honours; does anyone know why Tory donor and DFS founder Graham Kirkham was given a peerage?
Services to sofas?
382-Don’t you understand?In the current situation, when Labour is up by 1%, it means that they are beginning their(tenth?) “fightback”…Seriously, I think they are going to improve a little in December(if nothing happens), Brown has not done anything really wrong this month…
382-GIN-I forgot about this(well he will do something that the press won’t like it):
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/sun_says/article244723.ece
377. The happy laughter of my readers is better than any royalty cheque; the twinkling smile of a contented bookbuyer is richer than any Pulitzer. I am storing up treasures in heaven and my overdraft will be paid off by Jesus.
I have recently visited four countries in five days and have no idea what I am blithering on about.
384. Theres plenty of time yet.
383 Roger what did Joe Kagan get an honour from Harold for? Raincoats supplied to dirty old men?
387-LOL!
“Has Ed Balls got what it takes to keep No 10?”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2007/12/11/do1102.xml
388 LOL!
I will attempt to,as scientifically as possible,comapre like with like in what I say.The Blair/Brown govt is 10 years 7 months old.This govt won the last election by 3%-so taking a mid-point for recent polls,a Tory average lead could be reasonably stated as 9-10%-lets say 9.5 % for arguments sake.Therefore,this would represent a mean two party swing of 6.25% Labour to Conservative since May 5th 2005.
Referring to the historical MORI data,and comparing where the previous 1979-97 Conservative govt reveals that,averaging polls of the last 3 months of 1989,therefore fairly accurately repeating the age of the then government,the Labour opposition led by an average of 7%-as the Conservative Party won by 11.8% in 1987,this represented a swing of 8.9% beteween June 1987 and the last quarter of 1989.
The major difference is this time we have already had the leader-of-the governing party change,and as a side-issue,it was interesting to see in the MORI historical data how Labour reacherd a peak lead of 24% in March or April 1990.On this basis,if by next spring David Cameron’s Conservatives were regularly racking 15,18,20% leads I would seriously adsmit to myself that the likely outcome of the next election would be a Tory victory-but whilst leads remain in the circa 8-10 % bracket,I still believe that if a week is a long time in politics is a long time,then the timespan beteween now and say,summer 2009 is an eternity,so I feel obiturising Gordon Brown just yet may be a tad premature
If Mike was not indisposed we would now be reading a thread entitled;
“Populus gives Cameron’s Tories biggest ever lead!”
And there would be the octet of smart wavy haired Camerons, smiling beneath the masthead.
Whether Mike would have recommended a BUY Tory, SELL Labour position I’m not sure? I’m guessing so. Cameron may not yet be advancing into the high 40s but as alex suggested at 353 he may have arrived at a new base level of 40%. The Spreads, surprising to me, haven’t reacted to this poll which is clearly good for the Tories.
“I feel obiturising Gordon Brown just yet may be a tad premature”
Me too…
393,Referring on from my post at 392,if David Cameron were to be on course to win the next election then by around March we should be looking for polls giving a Con-Lab advantage of around 45/6-27/8,speaking in rough terms,of course-this would involve a shrinking of the ‘Others’ vote,as,in this scenario there was agrowing feeling DC was heading a bandwagon leading to no.10
To answer my own earlier question (genuine, as the answer wasn’t then online), I see in…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/peter_riddell/article3031412.ece
…that apart from the 47% who prefer Labour to the Tories, there are 17% who don’t fancy either, which seems to leave 36% who positively prefer the Tories. I’m not sure that Riddell deserves the insults being hurled at him - Labour currently unpopular, Tories not yet convincing, seems to me a fairly accurate summary which correctly leaves the future uncertain. Mike S if here would point out that these ‘underlying’ polls don’t adjust by certainty to vote, and indeed I suspect that’s part of the story of the lead - Tories much more certain to vote at the moment rather than much more numerous.
woody662 re whether last poll was a rogue - looks like it, doesn’t it?
393 stjohn - Mike would also have been hammering away at the commentary accompanying this poll - quite extraordinary for The Times, I haven’t checked it for a couple of hours, wonder if it has changed. Very strange, also, that the spelling of Riddle was incorrect.
OT: I was out canvassing a few days ago , in a ward that has historically been very Conservative (but the ward is now mixed with both lib dem and con representation), but suspect it has probably never been canvassed. On answering the door, the voter was shocked to see me, and said he had a few bones to pick, and then decided to rant at me about the Profumo Affair, which happened fourteen years before i was born….
Two things that struck me:
i) People sometimes have a very long memory when it comes to politics.
ii) That canvassing on a forty five yearly basis is perhaps the reason the LibDems won the seat a while ago.
396 So Nick, like Mr Riddell, you consider this a good poll for Labour and a poor one for the Tories?
396, first voters have to fall out of love with you so they become dont knows, then they find a new partner after that.
We are just in a transition with more upside on 40% than downside.
371. Murdoch does not interfere with the editorial content or the political slant of The Times. This has been confirmed repeatedly by former editors. He does however, consider The Sun to be his to do as he wishes, choosing the editorial position, and actively taking an interest in its political leanings.
371 Gaz - we saw it openly conceded on PB.com about two weeks ago that Murdoch does directly influence the political stance of his newspapers. Regular readers will recall that I linked a particularly flattering photograph of the great man with this story!
249. But the whole point is that the election in Australia this time was not close.
401.I was under the same impression, he does not interfere with the Times, Sunday Times and FT editorial content. He enjoys having some editorial control over the Sun and the NoW as part of the perks of being the owner, he says he does dish out advice to Sky news but they just ignore him and do their own thing.
404 Well I think we can certainly agree that he doesn’t influence the FT!
“Balls’s bold plan to end child poverty could revive Labour”
Do I need to say who wrote?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2225566,00.html
404 “he does dish out advice to Sky”
No pun intended!
406,Having read the article,it does bring forth a few thoughts:
(a)Tiny incremental rises in helping poor,watching-every-penny families are considered by seemingly all parties less important than
(b)Whatever threshold IHT kicks in,which anyone with an IQ above a corned beef sandwich can find a loophole escape from.Yeah,I know that last senetence is rude,and I am NOT gonna apologise-at the end of the day,being born in February 1971,I am still (rightly in my opinion)at the tretament of poor,vunerable pensioners,unemplyed,mentally ill whilst Mrs.T and John Major held office,so sorry,when push comes to shove,I am a Labourite-and with many proud achievements over the last 10 1/2 years
405.Its late and I was on a roll with the word times!
407.In an interview I heard Murdoch moaning about how he would like skynews to be more like Fox News and that they just ignore him, thank god.
408-Nice to see a Labourite around here, there aren’t many in the site!
411,We’ll all have to club together,and sing a rousing rendition of ‘The Red Flag’,nice to meet you,BTW
412-LOL!Nice to meet you too, Patrick. Don’t want to disappoint you, but I’m not a Labourite(that does not mean that we can’t club together and sing!!), but nor I am a tory….
413,Thanks for respondong;sorry I was a while but You Tube (from which I need de-toxifying:lol:)took me away for 30 odd mins,then I trawled the joke pages)-but hope we chat again soon!
(Before I go,here’s one:
Roger Darwin,after 5 years msising,walks into his local police station.His first words:’That’s the last time I go on holiday with the McCanns’..
414-LOL!!!!!Good night!
I guess I was wrong about Romney not fighting back in Iowa…
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/11/us/politics/11adbox.html?_r=2&ref=politics&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
(Warning: The New York Times requires a subscription after the first few article hits in a day.)
It might be a good idea to be ready to sell some Huckabee in case this hurts him more than I think it will.
I want to offer an observation on the recent Huckabee surge in Iowa. People tend to lump Bush’s constituency into a single conservative entity. However, his win in 2000 was the result of an alignment of several right-wing groups. The religious right was brought into the fold along with Big Oil/Energy and Cheney’s long-time military contractor benefactors. Bush was far from being a favorite for the GOP nomination until these forces coalesced.
Fast forward to GOP candidate standings a month ago. You will note that there was no leading candidate who captured the religious right. Guliani, Romney and McCain all failed to take appropriate stands for endorsement by the political positions held by the religious right or their personal issues ruled them out.
I believe the leaders of the religious right were “shopping” their support and found a “buyer” in Huckabee during the past few weeks. Suddenly he was anointed in Iowa after trailing badly for months. I don’t believe his campaign message had changed before the surge in the polls. I do suspect the grassroots organization of the religious right made it known that he was their man and the surge followed.
The big question will be whether Huckabee can overcome the other special interest groups that wield considerable influence in the GOP.
New thread someone!
The message from the polls is simple.
a) Labour doing badly but not yet at meltdown stage
b) Conservatives seem established at “base level” of c40% (a level which appears independent of Labour’s recent lows)
Conclusions:
a) Conservatives in very strong position for launchpad to majority territory, but not yet in a position where they can expect it.
b) Labour in serious trouble, may already be in a position where they can’t hope to retain their majority, without some event that fundamentally alters the political landscape in their favour.
For some strange reason the press slant is that “doing well” for a party currently on 200 seats in to be on target achieve an overall majority, whereas “success” for a Govt with a majority of over 60 is to be on target to retain power as a minority administration. Such is the way of the world.
*“success” for a Govt with a majority of over 60 is to be still in with a chance of retaining power as a minority administration. Such is the way of the world.
I think the underlying issue results are interesting. The Conservatives now have no significant deficits on any issue. That’s got to be worrying for Labour, I would have thought, because it suggests to some extent that the headline polling figures are less a kneejerk reaction to events, and are actually sustained to a reasonable extent after considered thought (which the underlying figures are some sort of ‘proxy’ for). Of course the underlying figures are much harder to turn round, because they are unlikely to be affected by one or two ‘events’.
Does anyone have any thoughts on the relationship between the headline and underlying figures? (also are the underlying figures weighted in the same way?)
Morning all, new thread now open for business.
Thanks
Double Carpet
Re. 324, and Riddell being a Teletubby, presumably he says ‘EU!’ instead of ‘Uh oh’.
I remember Tinky Winky’s name being taken in vain on the second Thick Of It special (’They all want to talk to Tinky Winky….F*ck Tinky Winky!’)