Are you ready to fly blind on Ken against Boris?
February 14th, 2008
Can we rely on the views of just 240 people?
With just eleven weeks to go before Britain’s biggest single mandate election which involves more than five million voters the main candidates are today taking part in the first hustings. The winner will occupy what is probably the most power political post in the country with far fewer constraints than almost any other politician in central or local government.
If interest is anything like what we saw in 2000 and 2004 this fight will develop into a massive betting market - so far, however, activity has been pretty light.
The contest, of course, is between two major figures who are universally known by their first names alone - Ken and Boris. The Lib Dem, Brian Paddick, also has high name recognition after a long career in the Metropolitan Police.
Yet for punters there has been almost nothing to help in making a decision. Amazingly a total of just 339 Londoners have been surveyed this year in proper voting intention polls and of those just 240 expressed a preference. How can you take that seriously?
For whatever reason the sample in that poll was much smaller than anything we are used to and well below the minimum level that is regarded as acceptable. That YouGov should have allowed that poll to have been published at all was a disgrace.
In the meantime we have a had the drip drip of media investigations into the running of various bodies that fall within Ken’s remit. This has now extended well beyond the Evening Standard into the rest of the media.
So what is the state of opinion? Is Ken continuing to lead? Where is the betting value?
In the past week there has been an easing of Ken’s position as more money has gone on Boris. The latest betting has Ken as the 0.74/1 favourite with Boris on 1.56/1.
MessageSpace Advertising
Spot the Difference. Mike’s Image Above and these classic fellows.
http://tinyurl.com/2vzphu
The value for me at the moment is Boris. When we do get some polls, they will show him narrowing the gap to Ken. This race will go to the wire and has the makings of a classic, with money to made on the trading.
Boris is gaffe prone (as his Ken) but both appear to be bigger than that. Its whether londoners will take Boris seriously which will do most to see him elected or not. Like Ken, they both appear to be above (and beyond) their respective parties.
The oyster card wallet that was refered to this morning was a touch of genius. Thinks like that could really begin to work in his favour.
It is abysmal that there haven’t been more polls. How can anyone make a proper decision without information. I think it is right that Ken is favourite simply because you can never rule him out.
Missing some live byelection action?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/northern_ireland/7243977.stm
Yeah i barely know where Banbridge is either and I live here….
Whilst we’re noting the use of images this one from the LA Times probably wont be on Billary’s mantle shelf.
Also spot the PB punter (hand on head) who failed to get on Obama at 50/1.
http://www.latimes.com/news/la-na-campaign14feb14,1,1444018.story?ctrack=3&cset=true
4 Yes a surprisingly strong first time performance by the TUV .
5. You know as a punter who didnt get on Obama at all and wont be because theres no point anymore I have to say I’m more than pleased with the bets on that old grump Mr McCain to get the nomination.
In the final analysis of bet of the year I would have to nominate Jan’s choice as the winner above the Obama bet for the following reasons (other than having cash on it)
-Hardly a soul on here bought it initially
-McCain was a well known figure, well exposed and consdiered dead by pretty much everyone everywhere.
Thus by making that choice Jan showed a seriously large pair of testicles.
I would suppose that the choice of what constitutes the better bet other than finacial interest is how it fits personalities of punters and I have a soft spot for the ‘I know everyone says its dead in the water but I don’t care what you say, I know different’ approach. Bit like McCain himself.
6. its good ground for them down there after a dismal Assembly election. It’ll be interesting to see how they or the UUP vote trasnfers should one of them be eliminated first.
By politics the UUP vote shouldnt go TUV and the TUV vote isnt exactly natural UUP either but could see tactical voting either side.
What odds did you back McCain at yokel?
Livingstone has been very resillient over the years, but I do wonder if the new improved car tax has been thought out - he appears to have aimed to increase the charge for cars which emit higher levels of CO2, but not all of them are 4×4x, quite a number are modest estate cars - Passats, Zafiras. The car tax may hit more of West London, than East London, but can Livingstone be trusted not to jack the tax up again, or extend it South, North and East.
I feel uneasy about the data collected on the Oyster Cards, and wonder at the lack of accidents given the overcrowding on the tube at peak periods.
(At least in central London, there is an alternative to the car, RMT permitting, but elsewhere few of the other major cities have a coherent transport system).
Yokel @ 7.
On Jan’s ’seriously large pair of testicles’ you clearly have the measure of me there and it would appear the measure of those prodigious genitalia.
I went nomination only, not on the Pres market. Multiple odds from 17.0-18.0 down (small sums). Most though was around 12’s and the lowest I backed him at was 10s (11.0).
I’m a grand and half or so up overall if he got it.
11. You could tell from the pictures of the pb.com party even in group photos….I was going to the phrase elephant in the room..but I’m not that crude…really.
well I’ve got 2-1 on Boris with Nick Palmer and that’s starting to look better by the day - Helen House Hospice will be pleased to receive the winnings.
if Ken moves out to evens then I can stick a tenner on him to cover Nick’s moggie addiction (or send more money to Helen House).
In a word, no, you cannot consider the views of 240 people to be representative of millions. Even sample sizes of one or two thousand can throw up random results (hence rogue polls).
The lack of proper polling seems a little odd.
Traditional Unionist Voice. That would be saying “Ulster says No”, would it?
I still have a kind of MC Escher feeling when I realise that The Reverend Ian Paisley is now a moderate first minister in coalition with SF…
I was campaigning on a north London housing estate at the weekend (with a red rosette) and (depressingly for me) I only came across a couple of enthusiastic Ken supporters. Many seemed apathetic, but even those who normally vote Labour were complaining about all Ken’s perceived wrongdoings with taxpayers money. The unrelenting attacks from the Standard et al are clearly getting through and having an effect, even on people I would have expected to form Ken’s ‘core support’. I don’t think these constituents will vote for that cretin Johnson, but from my experience at the weekend it will be difficult to get a pro-Ken turnout. Low turnout will not only help Bozo, IMO, it will also give those nuts in the BNP a good chance of picking up an assembly seat.
People, don’t be fooled by current Clinton leads in polls in Ohio. It’s three weeks away and most people there haven’t started paying attention yet. It’s already shown an upturn towards Obama and we still have the Wisconsin/Hawaii results to come in and favour him.
As for those bashing Obama as a naive fool to be shown up once he gets in office, I hope you are willing to admit those remarks in four years.
7. I too missed the Obama punt.
Though for a long time, I thought I had backed him but a recent trawl through my betting accounts turned up no such wager. The mind goes first!
It was clear, once Mike had pointed it out, that Obama is a once-in-a-generation phenomenon. I’ve since gone off him as a candidate because his speeches, like Cameron’s, too often fall apart on close analysis. But 50/1 would have been nice about the odds-on favourite.
My skill at betting allied to brilliant political insight was shown on the Republican side too, where I laid McCain early on, after his underwhelming Tory conference appearance. Fortunately I covered the lay when he reached 14/1
4: Is there some God-awful LibDem style rubbish ‘alternative’ electoral system whereby the winner doesn’t necessarily win? Someone apparently ‘topped the poll’ but didn’t win ?????
These schemes to push everyone to the centre are abysmal, and would ultimately result in Italian style perma-changing coalitions of sameness achiveing nothing at all. Long live FPTP.
Well I am fortunate to be on Obama from 12/1 and downwards and McCain from 33/1 downwards. Hillary has been the big downside in my book. I kicked myself for not covering this exposure by not backing her at 9/2 prior to New Hampshire. I was even prepared to take 5/2 against her from any obliging PBer a few weeks ago but no one would avail me. Well I’ve just made amends and backed her at 9/2 with Paddy Power. I think she’s on her way out but I have all being well managed to balance the book nicely at last.
stjohn @ 21.
On the new ‘Yokel Scale’ of ‘Bollock Betting’ it would appear that stjohn sports a more than useful pair of ‘Jans’. Congratulations.
Drudge reporting - Latest Rasmussen poll: Obama Takes Double Digit Lead: Obama 49% to Clinton 37%; Obama leads among women 46% to 41%… Developing..
http://www.drudgereport.com/
Well, I put £50 on McCain at 1.2 on Spreadfair back in October/November, when he had just received Lieberman’s endorsement and the long Giuliani slide had begun. To me it was clearly the best value in the race. I could now sell at 13.4. Unfortunately, my direct experience of his dullness - at Tory Conference - made me reluctant to stay with him and I sold out at 8.4 before Florida. Still, more than sufficient compensation.
Mike S @ 23.
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/182/462351412_6aa9aba845.jpg
Or … http://www.tattooedgurus.files.wordpress.com/2007/07/04-fat-lady-sings.jpg
Off-topic - on the first review of the Scottish Parliament constituencies.
The Boundary Commission has come up with their first suggestions.
Looks like one seat taken from Glasgow and Paisley/Renfrewshire.
And extra seats in Lanarkshire and the north-east.
Yesterdays Rasmussen was Obama 46% Clinton 41%.
From a five to twelve point jump in a tracking poll is huge!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/daily_presidential_tracking_polling_history
21. Hillary has been pretty hard to back well because her price was teady for so long and no one really truly forsaw what is now happening to the point where they would have sat out a Hillary bet without laying off by choice. I suspect, some like me who layed Hillary early and then saw no real movement in her odds at all for ages and just got out at the earliest opportunity to avoid loss may be kicking themselves now not having followed their instinct.
Having said that shes been great fun in the primaries, particularly in the odd primary such as CA, NV and best of all NH where you could get odds well over 100/1 at one stage on the exchanges. That was so worth staying up for.
I doubt we’ll ever see those glory days again in teh rest of teh race….
[25] [26] It really does feel like Obama has finally broken through, all together then: “Ding Dong the…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:MargaretHamiltoninTheWizardOfOz.jpg
Clinton renews calls for Fla., Mich. delegates to count
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/02/14/campaign_dems0214.html
Latest Rasmussen for Wisconsin - Obama 47% Clinton 43%. Fieldwork 13th Feb.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/wisconsin/wisconsin_democratic_presidential_primary
29 On the contrary this February slow death by primary defeat after defeat was foreseen by many on this site. She is paying the price for a weak Super Tuesday performance and allowing Obama to cast himself as the change candidate. In another universe it would have been yet another male president versus a revolutionary woman in the White House.
She need a strategy to win at least one Feb primary well to keep her in the game till Mar 4th. She failed.
32 - Several Wisconsin polls have shown that it’s a single-digit ball game, which is why I think Clinton may rue campaigning in Texas for much of this week. However she has not abandoned the state. She is running TV ads there (the first negative ones of the campaign criticising Obama for not agreeing to a debate), will be campaigning ther saturday-tuesday and has Teresa Vilmain running her ground operation, who is seen as one of the best organisers around.
I really think she needs to win WIsconsin or at least come close to break Obama’s momentum and stop the drift. I wouldn’t put her chances above 20/25% but a win would make her the comeback girl again. As Socrates says Wisconsin matches Obama’s profile. However it does have blue-collar workers, and the Democratic primary is likely to be 37% Catholic, a demographic that Clinton is winning.
Good story from the Labour’s BBC. More Bangladeshi immigrants needed to help the “Curry House Industry”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/7242095.stm
Minister of SubContinent Immigration Keith Vaz first floated this one in 1997.
Hillariously, a spokesperson for the “Open Border and Invasion” Agency said some guff about “enabling UK employers to recruit skilled people from abroad in order to help them compete effectively in an international market”
Yeah. That international Curry House Market. After giving Rover to China, that’s all Britain has under Labour.
and they talk about putting a British Astronaut on the moon.
Latest Rasmussen Ohio - Obama 37% Clinton 51%. Fieldwork 13th Feb.
Narrowing of gap from SUSA + 17% on Tuesday.
I think the Clinton psychology is - campaign little in Wisconsin and a small loss or even a victory can be spun as the fightback beginning. If she does lose big then it can be spun as being as expected because she hardly campaigned there.
33. Not before the contest started it wasnt.
35. That is one of the most transparent pieces of special interest pleading dressed up as the ‘national interest’ you are ever likely to see.
On the same subject it was intriguing to read that one-time uber Blairite ‘businessman’ Adair Turner has now come out against further immigration, saying that the economic case for it is weak. Looking ahead to a Cameron government, perhap? hahaha
39 With all these stories it’s worth reversing the issues involved. Imagine a report calling for more Polish immigrants because of a shortage of waiters in Polish restaurants, with the unemployed Bangleshis being rejected because they lacked the necessary “cultural sensitivity”. Would there be accusations of racism? Think so, with Guardianistas commenting on the Poles historic ant-semitism and discissions on whether Eastern Europeans are more racist than the West.
Bangladeshis have a particularly high level of unemployment as an ethnic group even if the “cultural sensitivity” argument made any sense or was at all acceptable.
O/T - ConHome reporting the defection of a Respect councillor to the Conservatives. Bizarre.
41. is that the same one who had been previously with nearly every other lefty party?
37 - Yes that does seem the strategy but it is stupid. She tried the same thing in SC. You just get the worst of both worlds. You lose, but you still spend resources. If she loses big in Wisconsin (by double-digits) I just don’t see a way back for her. If she won it though it would completely change the narrative.
41 - This bizarre Trot to Tory leap-in-one-go was reported here last night by the Mighty Andrea!
Sky News have just introduced Vince Cable as Lib Dem Forign Affairs spokesman. The man’s becoming a one man party.
34. Obama won Catholics in the Potomac Primaries.
39,40 I don’t think our economy will crash and burn because a few curry houses find that their terms and conditions are only attractive to someone from a third world country.
47, you say that now.
But who knows?
This time next year £100bn could be propping up Northern Curry, in a vain effort to ‘curry’ favour with voters in the North of England.
As I said, the crossovers will be first women, then poor whites, then Hispanics:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0214/p25s05-uspo.html
46 Catholics is an a misleading grouping in these cases as it begs the question which Catholics - Hispanic? Irish? Polish or other Eastern European? French?
Can see in tis race why race/ethnicity, gender, education and income play a part but religion? Surely when Clinton does well among Catholics in California its actually in large part she did well with Hispanics
Work to do in Pennsylvania and Ohio. A two edged sword for Clinton, people will see these numbers and predict clear wins for her, anything else will be seen as a failure.
Ohio
Clinton - 55
Obama - 34
Pennsylvania
Clinton - 52
Obama - 36
Presidential match ups -
Florida:
McCain 44 percent - Clinton 42 percent;
McCain 41 percent - Obama 39 percent;
Ohio: McCain 44 percent - Clinton 43 percent;
McCain 42 percent - Obama 40 percent;
Pennsylvania:
Clinton 46 percent - McCain 40 percent;
Obama 42 percent - McCain 41 percent.
Between 3 & 6% of voters suddenly become undecided when Clinton is out of the equation. Interesting is Pennsylvania, I don’t kmow that much about the area but figures show that Appalachian states are poor for Obama, does this have much of an effect on Pennsylvania?
I still stick to my earlier advice of backing Obama at the height of the Clinton Super Tuesday spin and holding on until just after next Tuesday.
46 How did she do with flatearthers?
50. A good and fair point. For what its worth, Obama won among every “white ethnic” group on Tuesday. That’s all of the people that identify themselves as Irish-American, Italian-American etc. These groups tend to have more of an identity on the Eastern seaboard than they do here in the Midwest, who would mainly identify as just Catholics, albeit maybe with an Irish or Italian background.
52. They vote Republican.
OT: Extremely interesting article on ConHome regarding the Tories not taking the EP seriously enough. It seems to be along similar lines to one in the Economist a month or so ago that mentioned Britain was losing influence in Brussels because few young diplomats wanted to work for the EU any more.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2008/02/dr-charles-tann.html
Sorry, the above is from Quinnipiac.
Here’s Rasmussen.
Nevada
Obama - 50
McCain - 38
McCain - 49
Clinton - 40
I think the last two posts show, more than anything, the way that Clinton works on the previous possibilities of the Democratic party whilst Obama opens up new ones. Can Clinton break new ground? Can Obama keep the old ground? These are the questions that presidential betters need to know.
54
56. The people Obama is losing in these match-ups seem to be the blue collar workers. I find it extremely hard to believe they’ll back McCain, who now has a platform of making permanent the tax cuts which he himself described as unfair on the middle class, and Obama who will lower taxes for the poorest and raise them for the very wealthy.
47 - But following the logic through, if terms and conditions improve that is reflected in the price of your chicken tikka. There aren’t obvious answers to this sort of issue. At one level, I am uncomfortable about blocking perfectly decent people who want to come and do real jobs which bring genuine benefits to the public (in this case serve curryholics like myself very tasty, reasonably priced food). There are of course issues over integration and whether there are abuses (for example linking rent and wages to get around minimum wage legislation) but the sort of knee-jerk “no, never” seen here is not really based on good economics or good sense.
46 - True, but Clinton did much better among Catholics. She lost them in Virginia by 6 points but she lost Protestants by 34 point. In Maryland she won the Catholic vote by 3 points and lost the Protestant vote by 31 points.
Obviously she has to do better across the board in Wisconsin or anywhere else to beat Obama, but she has consistently done better with Catholics. Given they will make up a larger proportion of voters than average benefits her.
50 - I’m not claiming Catholics to be an homogenous group, or that other cleavages are not more important, but religion does seem to be a factor. I posted a link to an article on RCP a couple of days ago which had done regression analysis on all the results so far. This statistical technique shows the impact of a variable all others being equal. This showed that Clinton did beter in states with more Catholics independent of any other variable.
Rasmussen tracker -
Clinton 37
Obama 47
That’s a massive move to Obama.
McCain 47
Huckabee 34
Paul 8
Nationally -
Obama 46
McCain 42
McCain 48
Clinton 41
55. Hopefully that’s a prelude to the UK’s final withdrawal from this deeply dysfunctional organisation.
59. Pull the other one.
Rasmussen tracker poll in full. “Stunning” they say. Obama leading in women and whites.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
Also on the Latino angle, am also hearing rumour the Taco Bell Dog http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taco_Bell_chihuahua is planning on endorsing Obama.
¡Yo quiero Barack Obama!
59. A very sound economic analysis, but STOP TALKING ABOUT CURRY! For a Brit marooned in the United States it’s extremely depression when you can’t get a good Rogan Josh, Onion Bhajee and Naan Bread anywhere!
63. This will grow. The media have really been projecting Clinton as a loser only since Wednesday morning and many people take a couple of days to change their minds in the polls. Something which will be crucial for superdelegates deciding is that Clinton now has an unfavourable rating of 53% nationwide. That’s before a Presidential campaign states, how can anyone recover from that?
64. “depressing”, ugh.
59 It’s unskilled work, and such unskilled workers will in time become entitled to social security benefits. So, the UK taxpayer is unlikely to benefit. And unemployment is already running at about 14% among Bangladeshis, suggesting that this type of work offers very little in the way of prospects.
Socrates - assuming Obama gets the nomination what do you think will happen in the Congressional elections?
In the House the Republicans look in trouble. 20+ retirements, many in competitive seats. Their committee has been massively outraised by the DCCC and is being investigated for fraud. Their freshmen are raising tons of money. Could easily increase their majority, getting say 240 seats.
In the Senate things are looking good for the Democrats as well. They should pick up Virginia, New Mexico and New Hampshire. They have credible chances in Colorado, Minnesota, Maine and Oregon. Alaska could come into play if Stevens is hit with more corruption charges, as could Arizona if McCain resigns his seat. Only Louisiana looks in any real danger. So the Dems should have at least 55 seats, maybe as many as 58/59.
Is that realistic and if so what do you think the Dems would achieve with those kind of majorities?
240 wouldnt give you an proper democraphic sample of London. It just couldnt span Havering to Hillingdon or Bromley to Barnet with any degree of accuracy.
Think of Paddick: 8% doesnt represent the level of support for L.Dems across London (around 20% perhaps), and also I dont think they had party names in that question so that was 8% on pure name recognition alone.
Of course Im not putting Paddick on 40% or anything silly. I dont think he has much of a hope. But the more the campaign continues the less I think it is beyond the realms of possibility. Can anyone suggest a likely scenario where he will get into the second round of voting, and pick up the 2nd preferences which could make him winner?
66 and question remains - why do workers in curry houses have to be Bangladeshis? ethnicity is rarely a compelling requirement for a job.
67 Yes those sort of figures are realistic Dem achievements . McCain or no McCain , this year will be a VERY heavy GOP defeat .
68 - “Can anyone suggest a likely scenario where he will get into the second round of voting, and pick up the 2nd preferences which could make him winner?”
No.
Clinton at 5.8 for Wisconsin on Betfair. Good value?
66. 69.
I dont know if anyone has linked to this but I note we are not alone in this immigration vs. ethnic food conflict.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7242551.stm
I really like the comments about escalating which foods go on strike: “head of the organisation said that Tuesday’s strike had been a success and that a follow-up strike was planned in two weeks for sushi and noodles.”
It puts the striking French to shame. Although if my Lamb Dansak and peshwari nan were to disappear from the menu I would genuinely storm Marsham Street.
67. It’s worth remembering that in normal times 95% of House seats are won by the incumbent, due to the advantages in name recognition and lobbyist funding. However, I don’t think these are normal times and Obama should have a lot of appeal to the religiously involved but politically uninvolved conservatives. That said, expect the GOP to hit him hard on his church, which has some questionable leaders. Congress has extremely low approval ratings at the moment, but much of that is because they were expected to end the war and haven’t, so voters may well want to give them a proper mandate. There is also a LOT of public anger towards the GOP’s congressional scandals, especially from small town religious conservatives. I think the Democrats getting 240 is probably a minimum figure here.
The Senate should have less of an effect because there is more loyalty to incumbents. About 56 or 57 is my guess, but you really do need to look seat by seat. Obama should cause a big black turnout, perhaps up to white levels, so factor that in to your conclusions.
69. The BBC article is garbage as it doesn’t give any proper explanation.
The concern is specifically about chefs, rather than ‘workers’ - and the worry is that under the new system they will not be able to qualify under the English language requirements (although they would pass the skills and earnings tests).
That said, it is just special pleading as pointed out by Harry, and there is precisely no chance of them getting any exemption. If they are worried about losing chefs then they’re justy going to have to invest in some training.
69. This was my main thought.
69 It doesn’t. I once went to an Indian restaurant in Riga, where apart from the owner, and the chef, all the staff were Latvians.
75. Cant they do what Arsenal do? Tell them: “He is really good, and so what if he is Brazilian urchin with no caps, hes better than Steve Finnan.”
Something similar would work for chefs. I like the idea of a cook off. Masterchef II: Passportchef.
If they can rustle up a mean Dopiaza in front of IND officials then they can come in…
Speaking from experience, I can confirm that very few of the waiters in TiffinBites, Russia Row EC2 are Bangladeshi. They are mainly East European.
Inside the Clinton Turnaround Strategy
http://www.southernpoliticalreport.com/storylink_214_216.aspx
78. Very true, but in the style of La Arse, won’t this undermine the next generation of British chefs?
Before you know it, the potential Olivers and Ramsays of the future won’t be given a chance in the top restaurants in the country; they’ll all end up cleaning cutlery in The Old Dog and Duck, and British cuisine will suffer as a result.
Sure, people will come to the UK to eat fine Indian, Italian or French food, but the standard of Fish & Chips will drop off dramatically! Good for North Sea stocks I suppose…
35
I think we will survive!
Presumably if its so complicated to make a curry then a similar case can be made for only certain ethnic employees being able to prepare a traditional English breakfast?
80 - They still seem to think that both Florida and Michigan were somehow fair elections for some bizarre reason. For a start, you can’t suddenly make an election count when people were told it wouldn’t, there will be thousands of people queuing up, if they try this, showing how they were dienframnchised because they followed the rules of the DNC and they didn’t vote accordingly. Secondly, an election with no campaign is not a fair election.
The only solution, if they want an election to count, is to rerun it after all the others have finished (after Puerto Rico, or is it South Dakota). Either that or the delegates can be seated according to the ratio of delegates won from those states that stuck to the rules they were given.
“dienframnchised”
No excuses for that mess of typing!
“disenfranchised”
83. It’s possible the delegates themselves could have a caucus amongst themselves.
72. Yes. That’s good value, I think.
Going by all the polls Clinton is quite close in Wisconsin. She’s still likely to lose but.. 5.8??
The polls are all over the shop at the mo. National polls are favouring Obama but the crucial state polls for upcoming primaries are much sweeter - relatively - for Clinton.
So, yes, IMHO, 5.8 for Clinton in Wisconsin is “value”.
85 - Delegates from an unfair election get to choose amongst themselves? Again, it’s not exactly a way to get a state into your column, by ignoring those who stuck to the rules they were given.
Way O/T but anyone concerned about this:-
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7245578.stm
81. That is an interesting point. But I would rather young full-of-flair Denilson (or his Pakistani equivalent) prepared my curry than the overwieght microwavable meal Brit Stewart Downing.
Gorday Ramsey is where he is today because he learnt to cook in France. Oliver learnt under Carluccio. In fact one of the major arguments as to why we lack consistent talent in English players is that our players dont go abroad enough. Export is our problem not import. Our footballing balance of payments is much like our economic balance, and our development of talent suffers.
Will there be any betting on the Pakistani elections?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7243754.stm
Or are too many unknowns…
90 - Far too many unknowns.
67. Refamiliarising myself with some of these races, I think Alaska is more likely to turn than Maine. A black turnout for Obama would ensure Louisiana and could even give the Democrats an outside chance in Mississippi.
91 well there are the known unknowns but its the unknown unknowns that are the real risk….
86 - The point isn’t the previous polls but the fact she has effectively given up on it and plans to spend the whole time in Ohio and Texas (and presumably not to spend campaign cash on Wisconsin). So the message will be that Clinton isn’t bothered about you, Obama is in town and all the ads are Obama ads over the weekend. I think 5.8 is about right.
84. Both wrong - the correct term is disfranchised.
Does anybody have a precise number for how many delegates Clinton beat Obama by in each Florida or Michigan if they were counted? Doing it on a strictly proportional basis I work it out as a lead of about 40 in Florida and 26 in Michigan. Which really makes it a minor issue compared to the superdelegates.
Collins looks well dug in and popular in Maine Socrates so I’d think thats a definite Rep hold no matter what happens elsewhere.
88 - China did something very similar a while back (but with less subtlety) so this seems like the US gently reminding them that two can play at that game. Just another move in the new Great Game…
92 I think the problem for the Democrats in Louisiana is that a sizeable block of the black vote now lives in Houston and Atlanta following Hurricane Katrina.
97. That was my point! Maine is looking solidly Republican to me. However, Arizona looks more vulnerable that most people are imagining.
99. But even considering that, if 50% more blacks turn out to vote for Obama that should give them an extra 10% in the total poll.
94 - She hasn’t completely given up on it. She has ads up there and will be campaigning saturday through thursday. I reckon she has a 20% chance so 5.8 is value.
92 - Thanks for that. The Democrats should really be putting a lot into their Senate races, the closer they get to 60 votes the more they will be able to achieve next year. Looking at the individual races it is extraordinary how few of the Democrats are under any pressure at all. Harkin, Johnson and Pryor are all potentially vulnerable but there is no credible challengers. Louisiana is the only state in any danger on the Dem side. In contrast on the GOp side there are a number of races that have the potential to become competitive if there are any ‘macaca’ moments; Wicker’s Mississippi seat, Kentucky, Texas, Kansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina. If the Dems drag a couple of these into play they could be within range of 60. A 9-seat pick up is unlikely but this time two years ago very few would have predicted the 6-seat pickup the Dems achieved.
88 Except the Chines destroyed an orbiting satellite, littering the preferred orbits for satellites with thousands of bits of junk; the US is destroying an out of control satellite that could (small chance but there) cause damage when it re-enters orbit and crashes to Earth.
The former case was to show off and nothing else, the latter is doing it for a reason but there is a side benefit reminding the Chinese the US had the power already.
67 Kieran Is there a suggestion that McCain might resign his Senate seat if nominated? Kerry didn’t last time. If he won the Presidency, then could Janet Napolitano replace him in the Senate with a Democrat until 2010?
100 - I think Maine and Oregon are the toughest nuts to crack of the 7 in play (the others being Virginia, New Mexico, New Hampshire, Colorado, Minnesota). However Tom Allen is a credible challenger, as a congressman in such a small state he starts with a political base, name recognition and experience. He is keeping up with her in the fundraising stakes and Collins is not as popular as Snowe. I’d expect the DSCC to put a lot of resources into this race and if Collins is tied to Bush I think there is a chance of a Dem pick-up.
102. Expect Hispanics to come out big for the Democrats for congressional races, regardless of the Presidential nominees. The GOP has made it very clear what they think of Mexican immigration and Latinos are not happy. McCain maybe spared their wrath but the party won’t be. Can’t see Oklahoma, Kentucky or Kansas changing hands though, unless the opponents are Dixiecrats.
http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2008/02/11/daily33.html?jst=b_ln_hl
104 - Yes there is a suggestion he may resign this summer. He would have to be replaced by a Republican, because of state law in Arizona. If he did resign before the Presidential election there would be a special election in November to elect someone to finish the term.
103. Unless there never was a malfunction in the first place, and this is all handily manufactured to prove the US’s strength.
101 Socrates I would have thought that the big benefit of increased African American turnout would be in districts and states that were historically viewed as safe. In swing places like Louisiana and Missouri, where getting the African American vote out is key to success for the Democrats, I would have thought that the existing GOTV machinery is already well established. Obviously it makes things easier with Obama top of the ticket, but not convinced 50% increases are on the cards. They could well be in formerly safe districts where there hasn’t been much GOTV historically, though.
106 - I wouldn’t expect any out of Kentucky, Kansas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Mississippi or Texas to change hands. They are red states and the incumbents are well dug in and have plenty of money. However they are not completely safe, many have low job-approvals. They each have reasonably good Dem candidates (although not the best, particularly in Kentucky and North Carolina), and if it becomes competitive the DSCC has the funds to make a difference.
My point is that the GOP are defending lots of seats, and even though they are relatively safe there is a reasonable chance that 1/2 of them could become competitive in the way that Virginia and Tennessee did in 2006.
Carville Acknowledges Hillary in Trouble
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/Carville_Acknowledges_Hil/2008/02/14/72700.html
“She’s behind. Make no mistake. If she loses either Texas or Ohio, this thing is done.”
107 Thanks Kieran. Interesting.
67 - Kieran
Think you’re right on Virginia, Minnesota but think Maine will just about stay GOP - is it Olympia Snowe?
For me the interesting races are in New Mexico and Colorado. The Udall cousins are running for the two US Senate seats (Mark in CO and Tom in NM), and there will be no incumbants in any of the three US House races in NM (both GOP are running for the nomination to face Tom Udall in the Senate race - expect Mayor Chavez to run in the 1st District for the Dems in 2008, unless he thinks he can get the Governor’s mansion without some time on the Hill).
With McCain likely to win large parts of the South West, if I were Howard Dean and the DCCC I’d want to bolster the Democratic ticket with Richardson regardless of who was top of the ticket, but especially if it were Obama (unless his support amongst Hispanics continues to grow).
Their opinion won’t count for a lot, but if there are three or four good candidates (K Sibellius, Richardson, Bayh, Wes Clarke), the full-throated support of the DCCC might help tip the balance.
G’night all.
109 - Louisiana is tough for Mary Landrieu. It is trending to the GOP, they won the Governorship and the last Senate seat. Ironically Katrina has hurt the Democrats here. Plus, Landrieu has only managed to win with small margins in the past. However, despite this she still has the advantages of incumbency ($4m cash on hand compared to $0.5m for Kennedy her opponent). Plus Dem turnout was significantly higher than the GOP’s in the recent primary. Given that it is likely to be close Obama at the top of the ticket could make all the difference.
108 It proves the USA’s anti ICBM capability can be utilised for attacks launched from satellites - much like an ICBM though further out in space - but no-one really doubted that and it could have been done using a satellite approaching end life and still under guidance rather than one that was just launched but lost its guidance system.
If interception missed, risk is satellite didn’t completely burn out and happened to hit a populated area.
North Carolina certainly looks vulnerable. I hadn’t realised it was in play.
113 - The incumbent in Maine is Susan Collins, not Olympia Snowe. Collins is fairly popular, but not as popular as Snowe. As for New Mexico the Dems are favoured to pick it up (I’d say it was their 2nd most likely after Virginia). Udall is uncontested in the primary and is raising more money than the two GOP candidates combined. Plus it looks like being a close and nasty primary on the GOP side, and polls show Udall beating both candidates comfortably. CQ just changed their rating from Toss Up to Leans Democratic.
116 - Not that he will but if John Edwards got into it the Dems would probably be favourites. Their problem is that their candidates aren’t that high profile.
118. Profile won’t matter as much in this election due to the huge fundraising of the Democrats. They can blanket TV ads in crucial states, giving anyone recognition.
As far as these Senate and House races are concerned much will depend on how long Obama’s coat tails are.
I am of the view that the Democrats may need a considerable number of attendants to ensure that Obama’s sartorial electoral elegance sweeps through!
have to think ohio will follow the pattern we’ve seen so far and close up the nearer we get to polling day, 3 weeks is an absolute age in terms of this race
110. If Hispanics turn out for the Democrats, thats 35% of the Texan population. It’s not expected, but if the Evangelical vote is depressed and the Democrats get a decent opponent it could have an outside chance.
109. What about a 25% turnout for a 5% higher vote then? It’s enough to keep Lousiana safe in my book.
O/T Romney backs McCain.
US General Election - The South
Only a handful of southern states are in play for the general election, regardless of the Democratic presidential nominee. For one thing, no Southern state has a Black majority, let alone a majority of African American voters.
Following Southern/Border states will go REPUBLICAN:
North Carolina
South Carolina
Georgia
Kentucky
Tennessee
Alabama
Mississippi
Louisiana
Texas
Oklahoma
Possible Southern/Border SWING states for 2008:
Virginia
West Virginia
Florida
Missouri
Arkansas (only if Clinton is nominee)
Personally think GOP highly likely to win the majority of these possible swing states.
Back on topic - BORIS JOHNSON
Sounds like Boris did a pretty good job launching his anti-crime program. Maximum of seriousness, minimum of jokes. Which is the right strategy surely.
Omen? Harbinger? Abberation?
Is Boris only 1.56/1. Goodness have the bookies forgotten so soon?
London 2005: 4% swing to Con (Enfield, Southgate 9% to Con)
London 2006: Con gain Ealing from Lab
London 2008: Boris wins (perhaps on first vote)
SSI what do you think will happen with the gubernatorial race in Washington? Looks like it is going to be very competitive again, although I doubt it will be as close as 2004!
Looking at vote-2008, there seem to be some unpredictable by-elections tonight - a Tory who resigned in unfortunate circs, and by implication apparently a Labour one too in a La b-Lib marginal, though it’s not spelled out. Also an Elgin election which Labour would take in a good year but is probably safe SNP this time.
General amazement on that forum at the UUP win yesterday - there IS life after death.
Really think most of the speculation of Democratic wins in the South this November is SERIOUSLY delusional.
This is by far the most conservative American region, politically and culturally. Likely improvement by Democrats over 2000 & 2004 will simply not be enough. Especially considering that the voters most likely to reject a Black man OR a White woman for president are southerners.
128 The 2008 WA State governors race will be a rematch between Democrat Christine Gregoire, elected by just +133 votes in 2004 versus her Republican opponent Dino Rossi.
Most recent polls showed Gov. Gregoire just a few points ahead of Rossi. Even worse, her job performance was rated positively by fewer than half the voters. Just as bad, most voters still think that Dino was robbed in 2004.
Governor Gregoire is NOT a touchy-feely kind of politico. Indeed, her personality is somewhat similar to Hillary’s. BUT her image is much more elitist, which is a huge problem with older, less educated women who are such a key element of Hillary Clinton’s base.
Governor is raising money by the bushel (though not at the moment, because there is a fundraising “freeze” before, during and after the legislative session). Rossi is behind in fundraising but has strong potential.
Look for this one to be another humdinger, including potential for yet another Gregoire-Rossi recount!
130 - Most of our discussion has been about Senate races. Obviously it is tough for Democrats to win here but not impossible, as they can tailor their messages to their electorate. An example would be Ronnie Musgrove, who is a very conservative Democrat but has a shot at competing for the Wicker seat in Mississippi. (Would have been helped if the Supreme Court had not been blatently partisan and scheduled a special election).
The point I was making is there are a number of seats across the South where the GOP are definite favourites but that it is possible that 1 or 2 of them become competitive by November (North Carolina, Texas, Kentucky, Kansas, Oklahoma). And if they do the Dems have the resources to give their candidate a shot. This time in 2006 nobody thought the Dems would pick-up Virginia. By comparison there are virtually no seats that the Dems are defending that are even remotely vulnerable (except Louisiana).
130. Who was predicting wins in the South, other than a Democrat retaining his seat in Louisiana?
133. Her seat. Mary Landrieu is the Democrat.
132. As 50% of Texas’ population is now black or Hispanic I don’t think its that unreasonable that a conservative Democrat could do ok there. Especially as the sunbelt has had a lot of immigration from the North in the last few years, diluting evangelical influence.
132 - Mea Culpa - was just skimming comments, always dangerous - really do owe you guys an apology!!!
132 - Looking at it from afar it seems to me that the Dems should invest a lot of time and effort in Texas. As you say the demographic trends are favourable but the Democrats seems to have been destroyed in the state by Bush and DeLay. Long-term Texas could become competative at a national level. The Dems I think have made significant progress in the House there, but it will take a lot more years rebuilding.
This year looks very tough though. Cornyn is not that popular but he has raised a hell of a lot of money and the Democrat has very little. Given its size I doubt the DSCC will invest resources unless it is close.
Republicans have just staged a mass walk out of Congress. Not sure what it’s about.
Southern US Senate races, these are still very tricky for Democrats, even incumbents, even conservative Democrats.
For example, only reason that a class act like Jim Webb won in VA, was because George Allen committed political suicide with his “Macaca” crack.
As for Texas, sunbelt immigration has also increased the number of transplanted Midwest GOPers also.
138. It’s over the Democrats seeking to hold Republican administration officials in contempt after they refuse to testify over the firing of federal attorney’s who disagreed with Bush’s spurious legal interpretations.
139. Midwestern Republicans are nowhere near as set in their voting habits as longterm Texans.
139 - Pryor and Rockefeller look very safe in Arkansas and West Virginia. Harold Ford was competitive in Tennessee. It is certainly tough for Dems but not impossible. This cycle the Dems don’t need any Southern states anyway to have a great year. If they could sneak one or two though they would probably get to 60 seats. Unlikely, but not impossible.
142. Are you counting the two Independents in your figures for Democrats when you mention Senate numbers?
143 - Yes. They caucus with the Dems. Sanders is to the left of most Dems, and Lieberman is solid on domestic policy.
144. Just checking. I agree with your logic. If the Dems get 56 seats there should be enough reasonable Republicans that the filibuster won’t work for them to entirely halt legislation anyway.
145 - If these predictions prove accurate there will have been a complete turnaround in party fortunes in 4 years. In 2004 the GOP had the Presidency and healthy congressional majorities. Bush said he would spend his political capital, and proceded to completely squander it. 2009-10 will be a massive test for the Democrats. They would have an opportunity to make big policy changes.
146. Yes. And I think Obama would be smart enough to do so in a way that didn’t offend conservative voters by accomodating some of their grievances. The Republicans knew in the 1990s that if healthcare passed it would give credit to the Dems longterm, which is why they refused to work with any proposal.
I also think that the fear of liberalism that exists among a lot of Americans have will be greatly reduced once you have a Democratic President who speaks lovingly about America. The Fox News/talk radio have wildly exagerrated the things liberals represent and people will moderate when they realise its just not true. Those tactics are only successful as long as the GOP remains in power.
Is there a market on Sneate seats ?
Senate seats obviously
Well I hope that you are right. I’m not so optimistic myself. I think Obama would achieve some reforms but will face a lot of difficulties that are hangovers from the Bush era to deal with.
139-Wasn’t Webb a Reagan cabinet member, who changed party allegiance for the election?
In effect “almost” a Republican?
150. The biggest problem is the economy. Obama will have to choose between regenerating economic growth in the last couple of years or raising taxes to fund his programs. Getting the troops out of Iraq should provide some funds though.
On topic, is it possible that there HAVE been polls on the London Mayoralty, but the sponsors have kept the results quiet?
Clinton +16 in PA…
http://www.allheadlinenews.com/articles/7010035146
151 - A party switcher who rejected the Republican Party. Along with a lot of others I keep running into these days.
The “almost Republican” is Lieberman.
152 - But if Iraq descends into chaos after withdrawl will he get the blame?
151 - He was, but he opposed the Iraq war and is leftish on economic issues (he wrote some articles in the last couple of years arguing that significant redistribution is needed to stop extreme concentration of wealth). He is a cultural conservative. One of his aides was cautioned about carrying a gun in DC. He believes in the Scots-Irish culture, and thus is opposed to many cultural liberals. Overall he is a very interesting fellow.
147/50/2 etc. Jumping the gun a little here? Obama may be favourite to win the Democratic nomination and the Democrats may be favourites to win in November, but the combined odds still leave him odds-against.
153 Alan Could be. Although after getting burned by the Standard’s poll the eve of the London mayoral race last time (”Dead heat”) I’d be gunshy even if there was polling. I don’t know whether it was just the Standard trying to make a story, or whether polling races with non FPTP systems is something pollsters are struggling to get the hang of.
These London elections really are a depressing mess, the tone is negative throughout and I can’t see a reason why anyone would want to turn out for any of the candidates.
I think the Standard is definitely having an effect but nobody I know would want Boris Johnson in control. I don’t know a single enthusiastic Ken supporter though most think he’s the ‘lesser evil’.
Personally I’m going to vote UKIP, Green or whichever Independent is most deserving in both first and second preferences. I hope the three major parties get 50% of the 1st prefs combined, that’s all they deserve and it would serve as a long over due wake up call.
147 Very true I think Socrates. Obama’s genius is that he manages to appeal to voters on the other side of the fence, without really triangulating in the manner of Clinton and Blair.
Also, for all this talk about the south, I think Obama’s coat-tails are looking longest in the west. There are open GOP-held seats in Colorado, New Mexico, Idaho and Nebraska, of which I think the first two at least are decent Democratic prospects (and, incidentally, may be fought by a pair of cousins, Mark and Tom Udall). Then there’s the prospect of McCain standing down in Arizona.
157 - Actually I don’t think that is right. The Democrats have about a 90% chance of both a House and a Senate majority. The only real question is the scale of those majorities. The Dems have at least a 50% chance of getting up to 55 Senate seats. So, if Obama wins the Presidency it is highly likely he will have a Democratic Congress to work with.
160 - Idaho is very Republican although there is a slight chance that the Open seat goes to the Dems. However the GOP candidate beat the Dem candidate 60-40 for Lieutenant Governor. Nebraska would have been competitive if Bob Kerry had stood. As it is Mike Johanns should be safe.
48 “This time next year £100bn could be propping up Northern Curry, in a vain effort to ‘curry’ favour with voters in the North of England.”
I wouldnt put it past them…
161. Apologies - I meant the Democrats were favourites for the White House, but not by sufficient to make Obama an odds-on bet just yet. The way some of the earlier posts read, it sounded like he was already in the Oval Office!
I agree with you about the odds for control of Congress.
64 “For a Brit marooned in the United States it’s extremely depression when you can’t get a good Rogan Josh, Onion Bhajee and Naan Bread anywhere!”
A True Brit, with service experience in the Raj, will tell you that the so called “Curry Chefs” dont know curry at all.
They dont even know what a Vindaloo is.
And try getting a Pork Vindaloo. Good luck with that one.
156. Yes, Iraq could be a big problem and there’s no easy card he can play. The best he can do is argue it would have descended into chaos whether the US pulled out now or in ten years time. That assumes things do really fall apart now. If the Iraqi government half holds things together for a little while I don’t think it will seem much different to what’s going on now.
157. Not by my odds. I give him a 70% chance of getting the nomination, and about a 75% chance of winning the Presidency if he gets it. That’s odds on.
164 He’s 10/11 with Hills already
164 - Yes, I see what you mean now. I think it is interesting though to hypothesise what could happen with the Democrats in full control. There are big differences between the parties, but I get the sense that the Dems are more popular as a result of GOP unpopularity. Not sure how Americans will react, and whether there would be a 1994-style backlash. If they can win in Nov they would have the best chance since the 1960s to move American in a progressive direction.
168. 6% more Americans now identify as Democrats than Republicans.
Someone suggests that Bradfor & Bingley are due to follow Northern Curry.
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=BB.L&t=5d&l=on&z=m&q=l&c=
Will Gordon Brown put in another 100 billion?
Does Britain have another 100Billion?
How bad is this going to get? And how are the mob going to react when they find out Labour has treated them like Maxwell & Mirror Pensioners
167. He’s still 11/10 on Betfair last time I checked (which was just before writing post 157).
166. That 11/10 is made up of 2/5 for the nomination (and that’s pretty much exactly the odds you estimate), and an implied 1/2 for the presidency if nominated.
Actually, I disagree with you on this. I don’t think he should be quite as short as even the market has him, never mind the 1/3 you suggest. Favourite yes, but I think McCain has more in him than some are seeing just now (and Obama has less).
What did everyone make of Kens performance yesterday at the london assembly when he blew a gasket?
Has that got any political fallout or is it the usual Ken posturing?
Can he see the Lee Jasper crisis out without getting rid of him?
Does he think if he gets shot of him then there is a stigma of culpability attached to himself?
Still think Ken is favourite but not by much.
172 - Are there any articles about that?
Not that i have seen but it was all over the TV news last night.
The meeting had to be suspended because he lost control
160 - Think you are spot on the money re: Obama and the West. His gifts are tailor-made for this region.
And if he’s the nominee, by November rolls around Latino voters in the West and elsewhere (with possible exception of Cuban Americans in Florida) will on board for Obama. Because GOP has been working overtime alienating Hispanic voters, not just for 2008 but likely for a generation.
They will of course note that McCain is a honorable exception to Republican neo-Know-Nothingism. But so was W. And Latinos saw how much that was worth.
173 - Loosing control does not sound good for Ken.
Unless London Assembly sessions are usually a zoo or something.
On Senate seats for November, the D are vulnerable only in Louisiana and South Dakota, where Tim Johnson’s partial recovery from a serious stroke may cut either way if he runs again (sympathy v disability). The D should be favoured to gain in Virginia, Colorado and maybe New Hampshire where Sununu has poor ratings and is up against Jeanne Shaheen again; and have a decent chance in Minnesota and Maine.
So it looks like D holding both Houses in Congress. Ironically that may help McCain, if the electorate wants to split power between parties.
At the moment for myself I’d take McCain to beat either Obama or Clinton. (Not what I want, but based on current figures plus unknowns plus old fears). That’s a good old heroic US name, isn’t it?! Wasn’t Bruce Willis’s character in Die Hard called something very similar?
Big Union endorses Obama…
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/02/14/seiu-expected-to-endorse-obama/
Looks like the Bush administration is responsible for another fiasco:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/13/AR2008021302783.html?hpid=opinionsbox1
179 I blame Global Warming.
So it must be Bush’s fault.
177 - Unless Johnson has some kind of relapse I think he is now pretty safe. The GOP don’t have a credible challenger and he raised a lot of money in the 4th quarter.
New Hampshire is looking a better bet than Colorado at the moment for the Dems (Rasmussen has Udall a point down but Shaheen 8 points up). Also Oregon and Alaska are possible Dem pick-ups. Also New Mexico looks very good for the Dems.
The way I rank it: Likely Dem (Virginia), Leans Dem (New Mexico, New Hampshire, Louisiana), Toss Up (Minnesota, Colorado), Leans GOP (Maine, Oregon, Alaska).
So the Dem pick-ups should be in the 1-8 range.
Romney has officially endorsed McCain and asked his delegates to get behind the senator. Huckabee can’t hold out too long if he wants the vice-presidential slot - McCain may decide he can afford the contest to continue (and may even want the attention).
175 - SSI, notwithstanding my earlier point about Obama, how far will westerners look on McCain as a favourite son? Clearly he’s likely to carry Arizona, but how far will (for example) Colorado and Montana voters see him as one of their own?
180. Yes, unregulated lending clearly isn’t his fault at all. The Attorney General’s office of every state must actually have been penetrated by the liberal-socialist-communist conspiracy thats captured every scientific institution in the world, right?
183. Neither will. Arizona is the Southwest sunbelt. Colorado is on the opposite side of the rockies and Montana is in the cold north.
>>>> Who has a view on Obama being laid out to 1.45 on Betfair?
This is a similar price to what we saw on Tuesday evening before the full enormity of Barack’s 3 victories were known.. any thoughts?
186 - and also before today’s national Rasmussen poll showing a huge swing…
186 - Clinton has also recovered slightly on Intrade (from 25 to 29). I think it is akin to a dead cat bounce TBH, people laying off and securing their profit rather than a reaction to any news. The only ‘real’ factor that could have triggered it are the opinion polls out today which show a) Clinton may be competitive in Wisconsin and b) Has her leading in Ohio and Pennsylvania by double-digits.
184 Thats not important right now. Right now whats important is who to blame.
186. Pedant corner. Surely, you mean enormous scale of victory. Enormity means wickedness.
Having said that the Betfair prices are very skinny. Seems people are sorting out their positions.
189. Accountability is a fairly important part of democracy, by most people’s standards.
Are the Guardian getting ready to back Boris? Or at least go half way and back Paddick?
190 another pedant writes - more properly enormousness not enormous. Though enormity in terms of the sheer outrageousness of Barack’s offence against Saint Hillary of Womenkind is an acceptable usage.
190. Usage vs technicality;
USAGE NOTE Enormity is frequently used to refer simply to the property of being great in size or extent, but many would prefer that enormousness (or a synonym such as immensity) be used for this general sense and that enormity be limited to situations that demand a negative moral judgment, as in Not until the war ended and journalists were able to enter Cambodia did the world really become aware of the enormity of Pol Pot’s oppression. Fifty-nine percent of the Usage Panel rejects the use of enormity as a synonym for immensity in the sentence At that point the engineers sat down to design an entirely new viaduct, apparently undaunted by the enormity of their task. This distinction between enormity and enormousness has not always existed historically, but nowadays many observe it. Writers who ignore the distinction, as in the enormity of the President’s election victory or the enormity of her inheritance, may find that their words have cast unintended aspersions or evoked unexpected laughter.
but thanks 190 and 193. It is certainly ENORMITY if you are Hilary…
It is all going to kick off on Question Time
191 Does that mean the UK is not democratic?
The Red Box on Boris V Ken: and a bit about someone called Brian?
http://timesonline.typepad.com/politics/2008/02/boris-johnson-d.html
183 - 185
McCain is definitely a Westerner, in both geography and attitude. Which can’t hurt anywhere in the Rocky Mountain states, even in distant Montana.
But the once widespread feeling that there was some kind of “war against the West” has largely disappated. So I really don’t see a whole lot of Westerners voting for McCain on a geographic basis.
BTW wouldn’t consider Arizona a slam dunk for McCain in the general, though he is indeed likely to win it.
188 - I’m one of this backing Clinton …. see my blog kickingbets.blogspot.com… only to cover Obama (16-1) and McCain (20-1)
195 Since Pb.com is being preserved in the recorded archives of the United Kingdom and will be a source of historical record to generation yet unborn, it is important that we protect correct usage, especially in these times of peril where threads on the US elections bring participation from ex-colonial and expatriate commentators whose local variations in language and definition may confuse those future historians as to the precise meaning of some posts.
Though SeanT’s “juicer” posts may have already lost that battle…
Clinton wins New Mexico after recounts
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/02/14/clinton_declared_winner_in_nm_caucus/1552/
201
“Please download our free software while browsing the site”
Did anyone else get that pop-up when entering this site?
172, 173 The Evening Standard (of course!) covered it last night. The main brunt of his outrage seems to have been Dee Doocey (Lib Dem) who was chairing the particular Committee that was interviewing His Ken-ness.
202 and interestingly the article doesn’t mention how many delegates each candidate gets as a result. Even for the supposedly superior US election coverage, a casual viewer would think that Clinton gets it as a WTA reading that report.
204 - no, I didn’t get that, Stonch
Slow by-election results tonight?
206 - Clinton 14 Obama 12
208 - The count was previously 13-12 to Clinton so that’s one off the mountain she has to climb!
I know I am a broken record, but I still think that Hillary has an evens chance. Even given that there will be some more bounce from Barack’s latest wins, she still looks set for 3 big victories in Texas Ohio and then in Pennsylvania. And she has Bill Pummelling the machine. Given Barack’s slender lead in delegates why is it that all the money is with him? I think its close to being evenly matched. Does anyone else agree?
207 The Leyton byelection is semi live on the Walthamforestguardian website
210. Refer to Rod Crosby’s spreadsheet and then tell us you think she’s evens.
Labour only just hold on to Preston Tulketh majority just 23 LibDems almost pull off a shock gain full result to follow
210 - over 130 isn’t a slender lead in delegates when the up and coming ones are allocated by proportion of vote. To make that up over those three states with 492 delegates she would have to get 310 delegates and that’s a very, very big task.
She abandoned the smaller states because she thought they weren’t needed. She has since compounded that mistake by saying she was winning the significant states. How well do you think thirty five or so of the states are going to take that snub?
Tulketh Lab 423 LibDem 400 Con 292 Respect 84 Green 36
Result last May Lab 753 Con 523 LibDem 263
210. No, because between now and Texas, Ohio and PA, there are several states she isn’t going to win - pushing her further behind. And she may (or may not) win TX, OH and PA, but because it’s proportional, to close the gap she needs to win by margins she’s only managed in two states (one being Arkansas) to overturn Obama’s lead.
211. What exactly is “semi-live” Mark, other than an apt description of the Liberal Democrats? Is it comparable to “undead”?
212. latest update…
http://www.titanictown.plus.com/Democrats.xls
Another poor result for the tories slipping back in preston with the vote share down just over 10% does look like the form the polls tell us about
Another poor result for the tories slipping back in preston with the vote share down just over 10% does look like the form the polls tell us about
216 semi-live is a reporter giving progress reports from outside the count
I note everyone on at the moment thinks differently and I have looked at the spreadsheet - my point is not that he won’t be a few delegates ahead at the end, but that they will both be miles short of 2025. And the gap might well be 100 or so. The Super Delegates will then come under immense pressure and I just think the Clinton machine will be able to get a substantial majority of these - more than enough to make up the gap. And she will have won all the big states that matter - New York, Ohio, Pens, New Jersey, California, all but Illinois. It will be very debatable what the super delegates do - particularly if Hillary can get John Edwards and perhaps others such as Pelosi to support.
I am not saying she has to win - but I am saying she has a much bigger chance than the odds would suggest.
221 - “And she will have won all the big states that matter ”
Bong!!!
I just posted about their ’significant states’ blunder upthread, apparently New Mexico now matters but it didn’t used to, Missouri used to matter for a few hours too!
As posted on Daily Kos (Obama leaning but it’s cutting, whoever it’s from) -
“Iowa didn’t matter because it was a caucus state, and it’s undemocratic. Same goes for every other caucus state including Maine. The only caucus state that mattered was Nevada.
Idaho, Kansas, Nebraska, North Dakota, Alaska, and Utah don’t matter because they’re small Red states that Democrats won’t carry in November.
Alabama, Georgia, South Carolina, DC and Louisiana don’t matter because they have black people.
Washington and Minnesota don’t matter because they have educated white people.
In any case, Washington, Nebraska, and Louisiana don’t matter because everyone expected Obama to win them anyway.
Virginia and Maryland don’t matter because they have a combination of black people and educated people. Obama was also expected to win them anyway.
Illinois doesn’t matter because that’s Obama’s home state.
Missouri doesn’t matter because Clinton sent out a press release claiming she won it.
That leaves Delaware and Connecticut. Those are the only two states that apparently matter, giving Hillary Clinton a commanding lead among states that matter.”
UK Paul, Just for the record I am a passionate but very nervous Barack supporter!! Your derision is fine and you make the point well - but I think all the States I listed have rather more electoral college votes and I think this will sway the establishment. I happen to think Barack is a once in a generation superstar and she is a horribly manufactured creature of the past. But I worry that it may yet swing back to her. Time for sleep…
11.49PM: Winnie Smith has won the Leyton by-election for Lib Dems, polling 1,360 votes.
Labour’s Khevyn Limbajee was second with 695. Respect supporter Carole Vincent came third with 176, Conservative Edwin Northover was fourth with 108.
Green candidate Bill Measure polled 90 votes.
LEYTON: By-election latest live - Lib Dem Winnie Smith wins
By Carl Brown
Comment | Read Comments (4)
11.49PM: Winnie Smith has won the Leyton by-election for Lib Dems, polling 1,360 votes.
Labour’s Khevyn Limbajee was second with 695. Respect supporter Carole Vincent came third with 176, Conservative Edwin Northover was fourth with 108.
Green candidate Bill Measure polled 90 votes.
224 - snap
East staffordshire result
Streeton ward
Conservatives 661 Labour 366 BNP 327 Popular alliance 233 Lib Dem 205 28% turnout
Lib Dems doing very well so far tonight - as they did last week too. Where is the next election to declare?
223 - To allay your fears -
New York & California - A hamster could win NY & CA for the Dems.
Pennsylvania & New Jersey - A clever hamster could win PA & NJ for the Dems (well, Kerry did)
So, the supposedly significant states that Clinton won will vote Democrat anyway, apart from Ohio, and we don’t know what sort of vote each candidate will get there yet.
The candidate needs to be doing well in the swing states -
Iowa - Obama won
New Mexico - near dead heat
Ohio - who knows?
Nevada - near dead heat (and in a poll today Obama thrashes McCain here whilst Clinton gets slaughtered by McCain - go figure)
Colorado - Obama won
Florida - not contested
Missouri - near dead heat
Virginia - Obama won
Arkansas - Clinton won
You have to get down to Arkansas with a 5% swing needed before Clinton get a state with any sort of advantage.
224 - Was the Respect candidate the woman of the same name from last year’s Big Brother?
231There you are, Paul - if you had read Mark Senior’s “semi-live” coverage from the local paper, you would have known that she was the very same!
223. Don’t you think purple and red-leaning states will matter more than big states for superdelegates? And most the Democrats that have done well in such states are backing Obama.
228 Tressage - You spoke too soon. The Staffs result rather spoilt it!
http://www.oldbexleysidcupconservatives.com/
This made me laugh.
I’ve never seen a more awkward endorsement than Romney’s of McCain today!
E Staffs: everybody halved except for the BNP and LibDems (both intervening). The other results both very good for the LDs, though Leyton was a special case - andrea reminds me it was the one where the Labour councillor was found to have broken the law in things she claimed about her LD opponent. All the results so far poor for Labour and Tories alike, though the Tories could have done worse in Staffs as the councillor resigned under a cloud there too.
I already recognised that, Tim! Interesting though that the Tory in Leyton hoped to improve on 5.9% from last time. In fact he went down to 5.3%. Sad, isn’t it?
Add the BNP and popular alliance vote together in east staffs and it would of been close to a scare, believe popular alliance candidate beat 2 of the 3 labour candidates in may so they would of hoped for better
223 - I think you are right not to think it’s all over. But I think the odds accurately reflect her chances. I don’t think the superdelegates would overturn the a pledged delegate count advantage of a 100. However if Obama were less than 50 ahead I think it would be possible, although would look bad.
For Clinton to get the nomination she has to be close in Wisconsin and win by double-digits in TX, OH and PA. I would also keep an eye on the popular vote. Clinton is 700,000 behind. If she could get ahead (I think it unlikely but haven’t crunched the numbers, maybe a job for Rod) on this measure she could claim a mandate. Then there is still the whole issue of Florida and Michigan.
So, Clinton has to sweep the March 4th states. If she does that (depending on the margins, but probably needs double-digit wins) then it probably increases her chances to 40-50% and the race will go on. At tis point Clinton benefits from this going long, it increases the chances of Obama making a gaffe or Obamamania fading.
There are a lot of factors at play and I would be wary of writing Clinton off but she has to have a very good next 2 or 3 weeks, and it could all be over by March 5th.
221. The superdelegate gap is currently 83 to Clinton, and apparently narrowing all the time. It’s down from 96 only a couple of days ago.
The point I made over a week ago was that the superdelegates alone are unlikely to be enough to overturn the Obama pledged delegate advantage. That appears to be coming true. Obama currently ahead on PDs by about 135 (and rising). SDs to Clinton by 83 (and falling). Equals Obama ahead overall by 52 (and rising).
That is why Clinton is desperate to have FL and MI seated. But if the DNC have any sense they will defer any decision until the last moment, in the hope that one candidate is so far ahead FL/MI will make no difference…
241 - I predict that is what the DNC will do, but what if it turns out that they would make the difference?
242. Well, in that case they’ll deploy Plan B; for which I am sure they are feverishly casting-around as we speak….
243 - To my mind the only fair action is to rerun the primaries. I know they have discussed having caucuses but Clinton would reject that (and the Dem Senator for FL has already said it would be unacceptable given turnout would be much lower, although he is a CLinton supporter). The only thing I’m not clear about is whether that is legally and/or financially possible.
Boris, the Serious Politican…..
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/02/boris_invites_ken_to_get_on_hi.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boriss-manifesto-hell-teach-ken-how-to-ride-a-bike-782548.html
244. Fair to whom though? The candidates? Well they all agreed to abide by the DNC decision to disqualify any queue-jumping state - even though Clinton certainly didn’t abide by the spirit of that decision. Fair to the states? How is it unfair to them, given they were told quite clearly what the consequence of their actions would be and chose to call the DNC’s bluff. Fair to the voters? Sure, it’s not fair on them - but is it the DNC that’s unfair or their incompetent State Democratic Party?
It can be argued either way that allowing these two states to rerun at the very end is a proportionate punishment (it’s how push-ins to the dinner queue always got treated at school), but organising state-wide balloting is way expensive and cannot be justified; which is why caucusing has been mooted. The tipping point against re-runs though is that because the race is so close, allowing these states any say would give them as much disproportionate influence as they sought when trying to go among the first. And that’s no punishment at all, ultimately.
240. I agree completely with that analysis.
246. It’s somewhat unfair to the state party’s, especially Florida’s, seeing that the decision to hold their primary earlier was made by the Republican majority legislature.
The Daily Show points out that Obama’s sensational run of eight victories have all happened in February. A tribute by voters to black history month, perhaps? As the show’s “Senior Black Correspondent” points out ‘How else do you explain a brother winning in Maine?’
Ha. ‘Come on, this is Maine! They consider Lutherans coloured!’
249 Maureen Dowd relayed a similar joke in the New York Times.
“February is Black History Month. And unfortunately for Hillary, there’s no White B*tch Month.”
She seemed to think there could be a backlash from women at the glee surrounding Hillary’s current difficulties.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/13/opinion/13dowd.html
246 - It would be fair for the voters primarily. Why should over 2 million people be disfranchised because of a procedural issue, about when states vote? As I’ve said before I think the whole system is riddled with absurdities and anomalies. In most races that doesn’t matter, in close ones it does.
We are now dealing with degrees of fairness and I think putting voters first should be the priority. Why should there be a price on democracy?
On the whole prmary system I can understand why Florida and Michigan were annoyed about the privileged status if NH and Iowa. If somehow Cornwall and Suffolk had a preferential place in electing our political leaders I would be annoyed. I understand the argument that it gives non-establishment candidates a chance to break through (although establishment candidates still usually win).
But there are lots of small states why do Iowa and NH get to go first every year? Given no sustantial reform why shouldn’t the other states seek to have their voices heard. So I think you’re characterisation of Florida and Michigan as being naughty makes the situation out to be more black and white than it actually is.
Of course, nothing will change because of inertia and vested interests. I think the only thing that would change it would be a constitutional amendment and that aint going to happen.
252. Well first, it is black and white: the DNC (which comprises delegates from all states - it’s hardly an unrepresentative body) agreed rules and consequences for breaking them. Two states chose to ignore those rules, and clearly (from their submissions since) didn’t believe the DNC would enforce the consequences. That’s as black and white as it gets, isn’t it? Cause: effect.
Next, “why should there be a price on democracy”? Well, that’s a rather trite point because elections cost money - huge amounts of money. I could equally respond: why should Florida taxpayers fund a hugely costly re-run election because of an internal, stupid decision by their political parties? If Florida and Michigan Democratic Parties wish to fund the primaries themselves fine. But we both know they couldn’t afford to.
Third, I’m happy to justify the role of Iowa and New Hampshire (for reasons other than that which you cite) but this isn’t the point: the point is rule-breaking. From your post you’d think this issue hadn’t been debated ad nauseum for the past four years. It was. A decision was taken. Two states chose to ignore that democratic decision-making process. They paid a consequence. Should the voters of FL and MI be pissed? Absolutely. They should kick out the incompetents that head their party (preferably starting with the utter waste of space that is Senator Bill Nelson - an abject representative).
The constitution (I presume you mean the US constitution, not that of the DNC?) doesn’t define electoral administration, so a constitutional amendment wouldn’t do anything, but as you say, wouldn’t pass anyway. However, I suspect the DNC’s rulebook will be radically different come 2012 - I doubt there will be super delegates (at least in their current form) for a start.
253. Perhaps this could be solved by Obama’s campaign paying for the cost of a rerun.
It is not black and white because although the DNC made the rules, that does not make them fair. Not all decisions made democratically are right. It is unfair that one set of voters are disadvantaged vis a vis another set of voters. According to your logic no action that breaks rules is just, thus ruling out civil disobedience.
I can guess why you justify IA and NH going first. Probably some patronising guff about them having a tradition of inspecting the candidates record, and making a more informed decision than other voters. Well if candidates lavished atention on other states I’m sure people would pay more attention. But regardless of the arguments surely you can see that the other states have a point, and that therefore the issue isn’t black and white. There are reasonable arguments on both sides. Perhaps Florida and Michigan should have acted differently but given their view that the system is unfair it is understandable why they are seeking to break it.
And in any case as Socrates pointed out, it was a GOP controlled legislature in Florida that made the decision. The Democratic Party there had no choice in the matter.
On the funding point, it is very simple. You should work out the morally correct position and then seek to fund it. Otherwise you are putting money concerns above what is right.
As for the constitutional amendment point, I did mean the US constitution. And I realise that at the moment it doesn’t define electoral administration, but it could. That would be the point of the amendment. Take it out of states hands and create a system that is fair to all rather than privileging the few or being absolute chaos.
254 - Or the campaigns could split the cost.
20. “Is there some God-awful LibDem style rubbish ‘alternative’ electoral system whereby the winner doesn’t necessarily win? Someone apparently ‘topped the poll’ but didn’t win ?????”
No - it is a strongly democratic, accountable system which reduces the need for tactical voting (i.e. guesswork) and always results in the winner winning.
In all the many many years I have been studying electoral systems, I have never come across any electoral system in use in public elections anywhere in the world in which the winning candidate(s) is/are not the one(s) with the most votes.
20. and 257. P.S. Oh, and AV is fairly useful in stopping people like the BNP getting elected…
258. I’ve come to the conclusion that the best electoral system would be an all party “primary” using AV, and then the front two have another couple of weeks before a one on one election.
257/8 - You are right of course. AV is one of the most democratic systems because it recognises all the preferences that people have, and as you stay stops the dilemna over tactical voting. In some senses it is better than PR because it isn’t so blunt.
Tories would be up in arms if we adopted it of course the basis that LD and Lab voters would second pref each other. A) If that did happen so what? If there is a centre-left majority it should be heard B) It probably wouldn’t happen anyway. As we have seen in polls LD 2nd prefs change. Anyway another pointless debate as it will never happen.
259 - The Americans have trouble counting ballots with crosses, never mind preferences. How would they cope?
159. I tend to agree with that attitude - I will probably vote Green or whatever lefty in the first round; until now I have always been strongly in favour of choosing the least-worst candidate in any election - and I have never spoiled a ballot paper. But now I am thinking that my probability of voting in the second round is only about Ken 30%, Boris 10%, spoilt 60%.
257 - Have a look at Maltese elections where Mintoff rigged the STV to ensure Labour could not lose even when they did
262. The Maltese amendment was to ensure most seats for the party wich had most first-preference votes - i.e. strengthening further the point I made.