Who is writing Hillary off now?
March 5th, 2008 
The delegate totals might be a problem - but the narrative’s changed
As I write the Texas results are not yet all in but the margins of victory in Ohio and Rhode Island are far bigger than that which was being predicted at the weekend.
Of course she still has a biggish delegate deficit - but what has struck me has been the ruthlessness of her team in raising alleged discrepancies in the overnight Texas caucuses. This, surely, is a marker of what we can expect over the disputed Michigan and Florida delegations and the super-delegates.
-
The Clintons are not going to give up lightly the chance of a return to the White House.
At current prices, Betfair has as I write 2.9/1 on Hillary for the nomination, it’s worth getting something on.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Well done Mike - good call and, if I may so, something little ‘ol me has been mentioning for some time too.
This woman is formidable. She might yet not make it, but by ‘eck she’s going to fight all the way. I personally now have her slight favourite for all sorts of reasons regardless of the current delegate count. For instance, I think with the narrative swinging her way the establishment super-d’s will ultimately back her. I also think she will raise a storm over Florida and Michigan. In addition the scale of her likely victory yesterday means she is in with a shout of getting right up to Obama’s delegete count at the close.
About a week ago I suggested that 5-1 was a great price to take on her. Wonder if anyone here went for it?!
Where Hillary can focus her effort, she does well. Otherwise, Obama seems the default choice across the country.
What does this mean for the November election?
Who is best placed to defeat McCain?
Does this result rekindle hopes of a Clinton-Obama ticket?
Hillary won the Texas primary too, a superb night!
I am. She looks to be winning only very narrowly in Texas and the win in Ohio wasn’t by a big margin either. When the number of delegates is counted, March 4th won’t have made much difference. Everyone was saying that she needed to win big. Clearly she hasn’t, whereas in contrast Obama clawed back from what could have been a whipping according to the polls of 2 - 3 weeks ago to a position of near-victory. Need any more be said?
She needs to think along the lines of the headline of an article on RealClearPolitics, “Hillary shouls save Dems - from herself.” The article is rubbish (IMHO), but the headline is a classic.
TEXAS
Bar is getting higher for Obama, he’s going to need close to 60% of the remaining vote and that’s too much to expect.
So sure looks like Hillary is winning the statewide primary vote. As I type, according to Texas SoS she’s +4 ahead right now in delegates allocated on the basis of the primary.
4. Nonsense I’m afraid. She has won big in Ohio - as the NYT leads - with an emphatic victory there. She looks to have a clear lead in Texas too.
4 - Writing her off? Crazy.
In Ohio I’m currently seeing 55% Clinton 43% Obama. That’s with 92% counted. If that’s not a big win … lol!
4 - She won in Ohio by 150,000 votes and is about 100,000 ahead in Texas. That’s a big swing towards her and you write her off?
Anyway, nice chatting to you all as always. I’m off to bed.
but is it too late for her? if these 50 superdelegates call for obama as rumoured then her momentum is uselss, the maths is nearly impossible.
Take a look at this interesting article concerning the pledged delegates:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240
It says it all about HRCs chances.I do not think that American politicians (superdelegates) would back a contender who is behind on delegates chosen by the people.
It can happen by us in Russia but if it happens in USA a lot of Obamas supporters will maybe not support HRC and McCain would win.
In the upcoming presidential election independets will hold the key.And Obama has been winning them in state after state.
Last time I was on the site, a 2-2 split in states was tipped as the value bet for last night. Did anyone have the balls to go for 3-1 Hillary? And what were the odds if so??
It’s going to be a long, long road to Denver… although I cant say the margins in either TX or OH surprised me, it was pretty clear in the 24/48 hours before the voting that Clinton was rebounding.
Whats most likley now is that Clinton and Obama split the remaining contests, Obama will probably win in the South out west (OR, WY, MT, SD, NC and MS) while Clinton is again likley to dominate in the midwest/ rust belt (KY, PA and WV), IN i think is more likley to break for Obama than the other midwestern states left and as for Guam and Puerto Rico I’ve got no idea.
Texas SoS primary delegate count is now
Clinton = 63 delegates
Obama = 62 delegates
Anyone heard anything about the Texas Democratic precinct caucuses?
Looks like Clinton will come out of Ohio with around +10% margin in the statewide primary vote, and a net lead in OH pleged delegates of +20 to +25
Along with Obama’s win in Vermont and her victory in Rhode Island, something for both candidates.
But more for Clinton methinks. IN particular, a strong rationale for battling on to Pennsylvania.
Am I right in thinking that it’s still unclear who has won the most Texan delegates because the caucus results are not yet in?
14 Looking forward, agree that Clinton looks good in Kentucky and West Virginia, while Obama has the advantage in Oregon, Wyoming, Montana, South Dakota, North Carolina and Mississippi.
But I see the other states differently.
Indiana may be next to Illiniois, but Hoosiers don’t like to have the fact rubbed in! Plus, southern Indiana is very similar to southeastern Ohio and is a bigger share of the statewide total.
As for Pennsylvania, this will be fighting ground. Certainly the last thing that Obama can afford to do is concede the Keystone State to Hillary.
Guam will likely go with Hillary, following the same logic as American Samoa. Or not!
16 Yes
Crikey it’s close. Clinton is definitely on a rebound. But this is not a huge huge night for Clinton.
But don’t forget she was expected to win these states by big big margins just a month ago. She has won well in Ohio but by just enough in Texas.
Her firewall has held and she’s still in the game - BUT she has major problems with the delegate count. This is not comeback kid territory - for Clinton its more rope-a-dope.
Moreover, in this never-ending dingdong battle we can expect Obama to come out fighting once again: maybe another endorsement, maybe some superdelegates: and he will respond to her attack ads (which seem to have swung people for her at the last moment).
He also has more money. And he will probably win the next two primaries.
So the narrative could change yet again within the next ten days. I’d say the markets have it about right. Obama is still odds-on favourite, but Clinton has a decent chance.
More importantly, I think I shall have beef in oyster sauce for lunch.
17 - Your probably right about Guam and Puerto Rico, although the last poll to come out of Indiana gave Obama a pretty solid lead, it’s a conservative, midwestern state with plenty of blue-collar Dems but its also much more rural than Ohio so i think Obama should be looking to win there.
Of course, having said all that i think it’s almost irrelevant who wins what, both candidates are likley to sweep ‘their’ core states and that leads us up to re-runs of Michigan and Florida and then to the Convetion… i dont see how Dean, the greybeards or the DNC are going to be able to interveen to stop the process now.
Nick Clegg’s arguments on his proposed referendum get more bizarre.
The Libdems only support referendums on clear “Yes/No” arguments. This is consistent with their position at the last election because the referendum on the constitution was “tantamount to a referendum on whether we should be in or out of the EU” (whereas a vote on the Lisbon treaty apparently isn’t).
One thing i don’t understand… if a vote on the Constitution was “tantamount to an in/out question on the EU”, why are France and Holland still in the EU?
A three way Presidential election could be quite interesting.
20 - Good point about Michigan & Florida. May well be that the most important thing to transpire from today’s results will be rerunning Michigan & Florida.
Which among other things would have the effect of showcasing the Governors of these two states.
I should have expected a Hillary rebound. I’d just put money on Obama…….
I heard Obama’s speech last night and though it was OK it sounded remarkably close in both delivery and content to MLK. Brilliant though MLK was he was a preacher not a politician.
It was too long and ended up sounding like a self indulgent eulogy to himself which wasn’t attractive. I’d seriously worry that the Americans are going to tire of this syrup and let McCain in.
23: I would expect Florida to go 60/40 for Clinton, and Michigan to go 55/45 for Obama.
It would be interesting to see what that does for the delegate count.
12. The argument about the super-d’s only backing the one ahead on delegate count at the convention is rendered completely void by the fact that Florida and Michigan have been penalised. Clinton can quite legitimately pull the rug out from under Obama’s moral feet on that score.
anyone know why the spreadfair american president market is suspended?
26: yes but…
Latest CNN caucus results have Obama 55/Clinton 45. Looks like the delegate change from this evening will be Clinton by 20-23.
Of course, Saturday and Tuesday will probably be big Obama wins. Soon after that, I forecast, it will be announced that Florida and Michigan will be rerun.
Here’s an interesting idea - as yet a bit undeveloped and very theoretical.
My view (interested to hear others) is that if Obama is the Dem candidate he will motivate Democrat voters to turn out at the GE. If Clinton is the Dem candidate, she will motivate Republican voters to turn out at the GE. Add to that the feeling that McCain tends to attract more Clinton-Democrats than Obama-Democrats and (if you go along with my thoughts) Obama is more likely to win and Clinton to lose in the GE.
Markets are pretty tight at the moment for both the Nomination race and the Presidential. They are moving about a bit of course, but if you take the Betfair mid-prices as I write (rounded to make them consistent):
Winning Party: Dem 1.53 Rep 2.89
Dem Candidate: Obama 1.35 Clinton 3.9
For President: Obama 2.11 Clinton 5.55
As a strategy:
A. Back Obama for President £1000 @ 1.35
B. Lay Clinton for President £620 @ 5.55
C. Back Clinton for Dem Candidate £999 @ 3.9
In total (give or take some payout timing differences):
Obama gets the nomination and wins the Presidency +£731
Obama gets the nomination but loses the Presidency -£1379
Clinton gets the nomination and wins the Presidency -£925
Clinton gets the nomination but loses the Presidency +£2518
So effectively if Obama gets the nomination you have Backed the Democrats at 1.53 (which equals the current price without knowing who the candidate will be).
If Clinton gets the nomination, you have Laid the Democrats at 1.37.
Even without my suppositions, that looks attractive….. Obviously the amounts aren’t available but I think an interesting concept nonetheless.
But wouldnt Obama still be ahead on pledged delegates if Clinton wins Florida and Michigan if they vote again.
She may win Florida like she won Ohio and then maybe win Michigan 52%-48%.She may even loose Michigan.She won it last without Obamas name on the ticket.
Clinton may still win the nomination but from the betting point it is way too risky to back her for nomination.It is better to stick to individual state betting.
28. I agree. The argument for re-running Florida and Michigan is overwhelming. Given how close the race is failure to do so will make the Democrats a laughing stock. I too think they will be forced to re-run them. There’s plenty of time afterall.
And with those in the race I think Clinton is certainly in with a great shout on the delegate count.
So, do we think it is time to back McCain as the Democrat fight rolls on into the summer? The counterargument is that this keeps excitement levels up. But that may be wishful thinking - McCain can spend a couple of months looking Presidential and raising money without spending it.
Listening to Nick Clegg this morning on R4 helped clarify what the Lib Dems seem to be up to, but not whether it’s a particularly good route for them to pursue. Their position, as set out by Clegg, is intellectually coherent, but doesn’t seem to be politically coherent - it was telling that the R4 interviewer didn’t seem to be able to unpick his position, and neither did Jeremy Paxman last night on Newsnight.
In contrast, the Tories’ position is intellectually all over the place, but makes political sense. And who knows if there’s any sense at all to what the government is proposing.
Anyway, Mr Clegg is left with a very difficult job holding it together today, but ultimately I don’t believe that it will have a great deal of impact on the voters, and in fact I wouldn’t be surprised if the LD’s poll rating goes up slightly in the next few polls given the extra coverage they’ve got (a sort of generalised form of Smithson Law - a GEneral Theory of POlling Relativity? GETPOR).
Newsweek has done the Hillary math - http://www.newsweek.com/id/118240/page/2 - and reckons she can’t overhaul Obama, even with the strongest following wind possible for the rest of the contest (including her winning a Florida re-run).
33. No. Clegg’s position is a mess of putrid lies. And he knows it.
His main contention is that the treaty is so different to the Constitution that we don’t need the referendum he promised.
So what are these big differences then? Go on? Name six? They took the flag out and the anthem, but these are still going to exist. Are they gonna haul down all EU flags once the Treaty is ratified? Yeah? Really?
What else. They.. er.. renamed it. They called it a Treaty. They changed the font. And we got a slightly better redline on the Charter though many experts think the redlines are meaningless.
And that’s it. That’s all there is.
Presumably this near identicality is why Giscard himself says the treaty is the same as the Constitution. The same document “but in a different envelope”.
But why do we have to take that old buzzard’s word for it? Andrew “traitor” Duff, the leader of the Lib Dems in Europe, the man who yearns for “the defeat of the English”, says the Treaty is very substantially the same as the Constitution. In the official EP report.
So which Lib Dim leader is lying?
Do tell.
Richard, I can understand your views on Florida delegates and Hillary, but why do you not think that Obama will sweep Michigan?
To me the omens there all point to a relatively east Obama win:
* It will almost certainly be re-run as a caucus
* It was only a very narrow win for Hillary, even without Obama’s name on the ballot
* It’s a Mid-West state
* It doesn’t have the big rural communities that Ohio does
* It a has bigger % of students than Ohio
* Demographically, it’s like Wisconsin, but with a much higher proportion of African Americans
So, any victory for Hillary in Florida (+25 delagates for Hillary), will be pulled back by a c. +15 in Michigan for Obama.
My new acronym after missing 50/1 on Obama and 20/1 on McCain is ‘Bet On Smithson Or Missout’. BOSOM!
Well, I missed all the fun last night - hope it was worth it for those who stayed up. With the results coming in somewhat different to the polls, never mind the ‘received wisdom’, there should have been money to be made.
I had been saying for a while that I expected Clinton to still be standing after this round; that Obama wouldn’t get the knock-out blow some were expecting - the national polling was still showing strong support for Clinton across the country and she was still making good campaign money. It’s when those background figures fall off that a candidate struggles (or a tactical blunder). Clinton was always going to be able to compete strongly and work off a good support base of general voters, before even considering her core groups.
Having out-performed even those expectations (a 3-1 win in popular vote terms is a very good result, especially given the size of the win in Ohio), this should see things through to the convention, short of a withdrawal for reasons not linked to electoral performance. It’s probably been said overnight, but I can’t be bothered trawling through several hundred posts to find it: ding-dong the witch is not dead.
In fact, she’s very much alive. Can she win the nomination? You bet she can (although I’m not doing at the moment as she’s unlikely to win the next couple of states and so her odds should drift out a little again). Looking at states that have held primaries, Clinton has done very well; Obama performs best in restricted caucuses. That is no doubt a fact that superdelegates will be considering closely, as is the known tendency for younger voters to make more noise but cast fewer ballots than older ones. There are nine primaries left and only three caucuses.
One question that might become relevant now: what happens to Edwards’ delegates?
Having suggested last week, that the Lib Dems had a greater % of rebels (against the party line on the Treaty referendum) than the other two main UK parties, yesterday the LD number jumped to 30%.
MPs Rebels Rebels
LD 63 19 30%
Labour 355 30 8%
Conservative 198 6 3%
The IWAR campaign clearly has had an effect on the LDs, but has it had an effect on Labour MPs which has yet to emerge? Will a larger share of Labour MPs in marginals abstain?
39.
Wow. 30%! Nick Clegg has a third of his party refusing to toe the line. What’s he gonna do, sack them all?
lol.
Clegg is a weak and naive leader. And surprisingly stupid. He shoulda told Shirley Williams to get stuffed, and just supported the referendum. Labour would still, probably, have won, so no harm done to the EU cause, but even if the referrndum was called the Lib Dems would have prospered as the sincere and coherent party.
Now Clegg is in a world of confusion, and looks incredibly spineless and deceptive. Idiot.
Quick observation on the peculiar LD position:
Yes to a referendum on staying in the EU cos they’ll back staying in and believe they’ll be on the winning side
No to a referendum on the Treaty cos they’ll back the Treaty and fear being on the loisng side.
Similarly the Tories want a referendum on the Treaty cos they’ll back rejection and reckon that’s what the country wants, but no to a referendum on staying in Europe cos they’ll be split, and will have to mainly camapign with the govt for a yes vote!
So a major PR game from the LDs putting principles aside for spin and no longer offering an alternative to the main two parties!
That’s certainly a good price for Hillary. The Texas caucuses look like holding her back, despite winning the Primary, but one more big win could see her really push Obama till the end.
I still think it’s Obamas to lose, though.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
41. No, the Tories don’t want an in-out referendum because we believe that it will distract from the current Treaty under consideration and allow it though ‘under the radar’. I agree with that assessment, though personally I would vote ‘yes’. If the case is going to be made for or against, it should be on the merits of the case, not the merits of staying in or leaving the EU.
Still, it’s an interesting precedent, perhaps in the future we might have a referendum to repeal or not the 1832 Reform Act (and all subsequent ones) next time there’s a change to the postal voting regulations
If Florida and Michegan are re-run, and Hillary wins them both and Penn I cannot imagine how Obama, even with more delegates will take the majority of the superdelegates.
Hillary wins every major state except Illinois, the ones you need to win, and more than likely the majority of votes cast. Bama wins the small states and caucuses.
Everyone seems to be assuming Michigan will be a Hillary win. Why?
38. Having just re-read my comment, I probably sound a bit too enthusiastic for Hillary. I agree with Mike’s assessment that 3/1 is value for Hillary, however, Obama is still rightly favourite.
A fantastic (if dense!) piece of geekiness which anyone thinking of backing Hillary would be well advised to read before parting with their money:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/4/162042/3056/80/468751
In short, she cannot get remotely close to Obama in the delegate count, because of the basic building blocks used to award delegates in the remaining races. Even if she won everything by a 24.5% margin! So if you are backing Hillary, you have to do so SOLELY on the basis that the superdelegates are going to override the wishes of those who have already voted for delegates. Even though several of the Democratic Party grandees have said that will not happen.
This narrative will finally sink in. Money to be made from riding the Hillary uptick - but then get the hell out of Dodge before she retires (next Wednesday morning after she has lost Wyoming and Mississippi, I’d suggest).
Milliband vs Hague on Radio4. Fascinating debate, whatever side you’re on.
45. Similar reasons to Ohio, I should imagine.
47. Disagree on the retirement date. If 10 straight losses through February after Super Tuesday can’t knock her out, then the next two states to vote certainly won’t - especially after winning the popular vote in three last night, including both the big ones. She’s in now through to late April AT LEAST.
Hilary does have grit and determination and comes back from some hard knocks.
Bodes well if she becomes the first woman president.
This experience and her experience could resonate with voters especially when your coming up against John Mcain and the republican machine.
I agree with Roger as he says the voters might tire of Obama`s syrup and let Mcain in, which I think will be the outcome in the fall.
I know a producer who has sold his house in london and moved to Spain. Unfortunately he has my email address and I am now part of his round- robin of anti-EU emails. I find it hilarious to think of all these ex-pats sitting around their Spanish swimming pools devising ways of wrecking the EU!
Mississippi is 37% African American, 8 points higher than South Carolina, so that should be a blow out win for Obama.
Wyoming is both a caucus, and demographically and geographically close to some of Obama’s biggest wins (Idaho, etc.)
If he wins both big, he will have almost completely made up - in delegate terms - for the losses in Texas and Ohio.
51, and I think it hilarious to think of the two major leftwing parties lying to the electorate.
Whoops, I meant ‘offensive to democracy’ not ‘hilarious’.
Clegg on Newsnight had a slight slip of the tongue. He said the Labour party had “reneged” on its electoral promise, just once in passing. That means he knows and believes that the Treaty is the same as the Constitution and that Labour went back on their word, though when he referred to it again he used a better (from his perspective) term.
As for the Democrats, this is the worst of all worlds. Obama’s still the leader but Clinton won’t give up possibly for some time now so the infighting continues.
Utterly fallacious, and I suspect a vested betting interest.
Clinton not only can get close, she already is! With nearly 3000 delegates assigned to be only 90-odd shy is a less than 3%. That’s nothing, and she can quite legitimately point to all sorts of shenanigans in caucus voting etc. etc.
No, I’m sorry for you Obama backers but he no longer has any ‘moral’ claim to victory. Forget ‘high ground’ nonsense. The issue now becomes one of pure politics. Will she sway enough super-d’s to win? I think the narrative will become compelling. She has the momentum, and with major doubts emerging about Obama now he’s been put in the spotlight I think she’s the favourite from here.
50 “the voters might tire of Obama`s syrup”
It’s a wig??
40,
I disagree think Clegg comes over as clear and concise on this issue.
People understand it, unlike Cameron`s position.
I have spoken to many Conservative voters who like the fact its straight forward.
Richard; you still haven’t answered my question. Why do you think Hillary will win a Michigan rerun?
52. Except that relying on the black vote doesn’t do much to help his campaign - were it Clinton vs McCain, the Clinton’s traditional African-American support should make that block fairly solid, and in any case, Obama will desperately want to avoid being seen to be a ‘black’ candidate - and Wyoming is tiny (and very Republican), so neither is likely to do too much to help the Superdelegates to make their mind up.
The way she lowered expectations ahead of what should have been easy wins for her in Texas and Ohio means that she gets some good press this morning. Very clever and obviously keeps her going. But when the dust settles and the story focuses on very modest delegate gains followed by big Obama wins over the next week then I think people will realise these wins were simply not big enough.
58. Obama will - however - pick up +15 delegates over the next week. Which will all but eliminate the gains from Ohio.
Leaving Hillary 150 delegates behind on the pledged front.
(I’m not saying she can’t do it, but she’s still a 3/1 or 4/1 shot.)
Clegg’s position (and Brown’s for that matter) is that the Treaty is so different to the Constitution, he doesn’t have to abide by his referendum promise.
Does this thesis hold up to scrutiny? Maybe we should go beyond the M25 and ask a few European pols what they think about this issue.
Here’s what they say:
“The fundamentals of the Constitution have been maintained in large part… We have renounced everything that makes people think of a state, like the flag and the national anthem.”
Angela Merkel, German Chancellor - El Pais, 24 June 2007
“The substance of the constitution has been retained”.
Hans-Gert Poettering, president of the European Parliament - speaking to the Council of Europe, Strasbourg, 26 June 2007
“The text consists, in effect, of a revival of a large part of the substance of the Constitutional Treaty”.
Valery Giscard d’Estaing, former French president and chief architect of the EU Constitution - personal blog, 26 June 2007
“All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way”.
Valery Giscard d’Estaing, former French president and chief architect of the EU Constitution - EuroMoney seminar, June 2007
“The adoption of the substance of the European Constitution under a new name is a serious violation of democratic principles.”
Jean-Luc Melenchon, French Senator and one of the main leaders of the ‘No’ campaign within the Socialist Party - Le Monde,
26 June 2007
“The substance of the Constitutional Treaty has been preserved”.
Jo Leinen MEP - head of the European Parliament’s constitutional affairs committee - Agence Europe, 26 June 2007
“A great part of the content of the European Constitution is captured in the new treaties”
Jose Zapatero, Spanish Prime Minister - El Pais, 23 June 2007
“The good thing is…that all the symbolic elements are gone, and that which really matters – the core – is left.”
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Danish Prime Minister - Jyllands-Posten, 25 June 2007
“There’s nothing from the original institutional package that has been changed”
Astrid Thors, Finnish Europe Minister - TV-Nytt, 23 June 2007
“They haven’t changed the substance - 90 per cent of it is still there.”
Bertie Ahern, Irish Prime Minister - Irish Independent, 24 June 2007
“The EU Foreign Minister is the original job as proposed but they just put on this long title - High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and also vice President of the Commission. It’s the same job […] it’s still going to be the same position.”
Bertie Ahern, Irish Prime Minister - Irish Independent, 24 June 2007
“Despite all the compromises, the substance of the draft EU Constitution has been safeguarded.”
Elmar Brok MEP, Chairman of the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee - Euractiv, 25 June 2007
“The referendum which the Spanish approved the Constitution has been decisive, and 99% of its content has survived.”
Diego Lopez Garrido, parliamentary spokesman for the Spanish Socialist party - El Pais, 25 June 2007
“As long as we have more or less a European Prime Minister and a European Foreign Minister then we can give them any title”
Romano Prodi, Italian Prime Minister - speech in Lisbon, 2 May 2007
“It’s essentially the same proposal as the old Constitution.”
Margot Wallstrom, EU Communications Commissioner - Svenska Dagbladet, 26 June 2007
Of course it is possible that all of these people are lying through their teeth, and dear old Cleggy and Brown are the only men of principle telling it like it is, but.. well…. erm….
Memo to Europhiles: Stop Lying.
During Hillary Clinton’s 11 straight losses to Barack Obama, her aides and allies started talking about the Clinton roller coaster. She wasn’t in a death plunge, they said; it was just a steep drop before an inevitable upward rise. By winning the Ohio and Texas primaries Tuesday, Clinton got that lift, but her campaign seemed less like a roller coaster and more like Luftansa flight LH 044, a careening near-death experience that stabilized only at the last white-knuckle moment.
But what exactly did Clinton win? The Democratic race has come down to a contest of numbers versus narrative. The numbers are on Barack Obama’s side. Clinton won three of four primary contests but did little, or perhaps nothing, to eat into Obama’s pledged-delegate lead of more than 100. Barring a cataclysmic event, Clinton isn’t going to take the delegate lead from Obama, which means he can still make the case that he is the candidate of the people. He will argue that the 800-odd superdelegates who will determine either candidate’s victory should side with the voters. When Georgia Congressman and superdelegate John Lewis this week switched from supporting Clinton to Obama, he said he wanted to be with the people and on the right side of history. Obama will bank on the fact that the party of voting rights is not going to overthrow the will of the people to deny the nomination to the first African-American candidate.
Exit polls show Obama has support for his argument. Roughly two-thirds of voters in the four contested states said that superdelegates should vote with the people and not their own priorities.
59 - Big wins in Wyoming and Mississippi mean nothing. There is NO WAY that she will not be on the ballot paper in PA.
64 - I qualify. They don’t mean ‘nothing’ but mean very little and certainly not enough to cause a decision before PA at least.
64: who is suggesting she won’t be on the ballot in PA?
I’m just pointing out that Hillary has more of a wall to climb than some of her booster’s claim.
51 I once canvassed a guy who said he was emigrating to Spain to get away from those b****y immigrants
Er … Norman why are you posting directly from Slate.com? Without referencing? Tut tut.
Yes! the mists are clearing, I see it all, ‘A US President called Hillary and a (after the coup) a UK PM called errrm Hilary (Benn)’
Right! now lets get to work on those lottery numbers.
62 - But Sean, it’s a fact widely acknowledged in politics that each leader tailors their approach for their own market, and Britain’s negotiators have achieved, rightly or wrongly (and to a greater or lesser extend depending on your point of view), a different text for Britain than for the other countries of the EU. Therefore, it’s perfectly possible for the other EU countries’ leaders to be saying something different from Mr G Brown, and all to be telling the(ir version of the) truth.
Likewise, Clegg’s contention this morning on R4 that LDs don’t have a manifesto commitment to vote for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, if only because it didn’t exist at the time of the last GE, is correct. It’s politically dodgy, but not incorrect.
Looking at the logic of your position, you should be supporting an in/out referendum, perhaps as well as one on the Lisbon Treaty. By all means rail against the Lib Dems for their political two-step, but don’t do yourself the disservice of suggesting that they are in some objective sense factually ‘wrong’ in their stated position.
Also, after Pennsylvania the only states that look favourable to Hillary are West Virginia and Puerto Rico. Indiana, North Carolina, Oregon, Montana and South Dakota all look (geographically and demographically) like states that Obama has won convincingly.
56. people are confused by it? The tory position is very clear and easy to understand, they want a vote on the treaty because they feel its the same as the constitution, and therefore should be voted on. How is that complicated exactly?
In contrast the lib dem position is to change the question and answer that, ignoring the debate over the treaty entirely. In fact, I haven’t heard what they actually think of the treaty at all so far.
Nothing has changed, she still can’t get enough delegates and to turn that over at the convention would not just destroy the convention it would destroy the party for a generation or more.
The only surprise last night was the margin in Rhode Island, far too small to give her any extra delegates though. Ohio she needed to win by 20% and didn’t (if it was a Super Tuesday state she probably would have), Texas she needed similar and looks likely to actually lose it, having fewer delegates.
At the height of the Clinton Super Tuesday hype I made the right call on here which I hope people followed - back Obama and take the profit in the run up to Texas and Ohio. Now do the same, back Obama whilst others are looking in the wrong direction.
Follow the Clinton spin and lose out again if you want!
What’s the narrative after the next week or so? Simple, Clinton cannot win enough delegates, she can spread as much fear and divisiveness as she wants but that simple equation remains. Even with a rerun MI & FL he can’t win enough, last night showed that once and for all.
Is not so,that if Florida and Michigan want to vote again,then according to the rules they should hold a caucus.
But maybe I am wrong.
70. they dont have an explicit manifesto pledge to have a vote on the treaty, but their constant sidestepping of the issue onto a debate over whether we should stay in or not is pathetic spinning. They believe its what the public want, but they also believe the people dont care about the treaty. so basically their saying the issue is both popular, and unpopular.
68.Anatole,my apologies,I usually give credit to slate.com
Still nursing a hangover after the Gooners victory in Milan.I hope you all followed Herbert’s tip and made some money.
Nice surprise this morning. Skybet paid out promptly on McCain nomination. Let’s hope the paddies wake up soon.
Agree with others, Hilary is still in with a shout. But BO’s showing in the Texas caucus could reduce her net gains by more than she’d hope for.
Sean at 62. It seems a very tired argument to quote ad nauseam lines said by foreign leaders to prove that this treaty is in part the same as the constitution. If we could establish what part of this constitution/treaty you find offensive then your argument could perhaps sound less childish.
78. That’s unfair. I only appear childish to you because you are a decrepit old has-been, now thankfully retired to a sunset community, after a pointless “career” selling kit-e-kat.
Everyone must seem young to you. You probably think John McCain is an immature whippersnapper.
Try and be more objective.
65. I am gald you clarified that..what it actually means is that in terms of delegates OB will still be at least 150 ahead (depending on these 50 SP’s) this time next week and while I absolutely agree there is no way she is giving this up before PA and yesterday bought her time I think it was clearly not of a scale to confirm a full reprieve but rather a stay of execution. She obviously has a chance but its not a really good one.
Oh and 56. I am, I live with, I work with and I play with, lots of Conservative supporters and your ‘personal canvassing’ is either loblocks or spin…
Having said that…I know it would be too much to ask on the day of the Lisbon vote that we dont simply replay the intransigent EU lies form Lab and LabDemer supporters or EU rants and bile from sceptics but not wishing to disrespect peoples firmly held views it was and would be a total bore.
A vote on in or out seems popular to me.
Clegg has it right on this issue.
Can`t understand what Seant has got against, that apart from his beloved Dave did`nt suggest it.
Then it would have been a point of the highest political honesty.
Fox calling Texas caucus for Obama
The Obama phenomenon reminde me of the early days of the Carter phenomenon — when an unknown and ethereal Baptist Sunday school teacher waltzed through the Democratic primaries and into the White House.
In those early days, Carter did seem a hopeful and cleansing presence, offering a resurrection of national self-esteem.
The Carter bubble burst, and he ended up a failure of a President. Although I’d probably vote for Obama (because of the War), I’d expect an Obama Presidency to follow a similar trajectory.
80 - I think Bill may be arm twisting this morning so that block of Super Delegates is smaller than Barack Obama was hoping.
The undecided Democratic super delegate certainly seemed to shift her opinion over the course of the night.
With hundreds of supers not yet decided and a series of contests left it is too early to write off Hillary. She will probably be behind going into the convention but not by enough for it to be a foregone conclusion.
There’s also still the possibility of an Edwards or a Gore tipping this decisively one way or another. I reckon one of those guys campaigning actively will make a hell of a difference.
She must also have closed the gap significantly in the popular vote tonight. By over 200,000 last time I looked though I haven’t looked for a while.
81. Just want the vote we were promised, Dez, just want the vote we were promised.
If the Lib Dems insist we can combine it with an in-or-outer, too. If they insist. I’m happy to have a two part vote. Are you?
But the Lib Dems won’t insist because they are lying. They actually don’t want a vote on anything to do with the EU because they are cowards and anti-democrats and sh1t scared of losing.
So the whole Lib Dem game is a charade. Calamity Clegg’s Constitution Catastrophe. It’s sad. A once proud if small party reduced to very basic fibs, and embarrassingly silly gimmicks.
Tsk.
I know some people will say I’m overreacting and she’s still behind in delegates but I think Hillary’s favourite now. I’m disappointed by that. She’s got the narrative and, crucially, the final big state (Pennsylvania) - in many weeks time - is bang in the middle of her best region. Obama has a lot of work to do
Ant: PA has c. 150 delegates, North Carolina has c. 120. I suspect Obama will win NC by a bigger margin than Clinton wins PA.
Good Morning Campers …..
Has anyone got an accurate handle of the delegate count for Texas ??
Fox have called the caucus for Obama and the primary delegate count is almost tied. Thus the overall Texas delegate contest appears as was forcast as a win for Obama.
84. Presumably an Edwards or a Gore would want to be pretty sure that their intervention would be decisive before committing? Or would they take the risk of ending up failing to be kingmaker?
‘Clegg’s contention this morning on R4 that LDs don’t have a manifesto commitment to vote for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, if only because it didn’t exist at the time of the last GE, is correct’
No - it’s disingenuous in the extreme. Clegg justified this by claiming the Lisbon text was ‘totally different’ to the Constitution. That is a lie, as anyone knows.
Claiming something ‘didn’t exist’ ealier because it was called something else then is simply pathetic.
81 - Strange that almost the entire media class is pouring scorn on Clegg over his position then. He has screwed up royally on this and it is going to damage his chances of getting his message across in other policy areas because the press will take him just a little less seriously. If I were a Lib Dem member I would be furious to the point of apoplexy!
How the Daily Mash see Paisley’s retirement.
http://tinyurl.com/3dqx67
85,
Seant yes I would be happy to have a two part vote.
The first question being in our out, which would obviously be the main debate.
Clegg was not a very impressive sight at the Scottish Lib Dem conference in Aviemore. The BBC’s Brian Taylor was less than complimentary:
Indeed, I was moved on our webstream coverage to call it insipid… “
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/briantaylor/2008/02/post_3.html
90 Agree Harry. If a political party had a manifesto commitment e.g. not to increase VAT, but then introduced a new 10% “Spendy Tax”, I’m sure the electorate would just shrug its collective shoulders and say “Oh, alright then. They didn’t raise VAT. Can’t complain about that….”
Yeah, right…..
86. Yes, you are overreacting.
I have decided not to over-react. I learned my lesson after NH, and it was confirmed on Super Tuesday.
When everyone was saying Super Tuesday was a great result for Clinton (people actually came on here and said it was all over) - I took a longer look at the results and thought: hmmm… No… Obama has actually done quite well. Clinton has the headline wins, but he has more than held his own.
There’s a similar process here. Because the media love a narrative and because comeback kid is a good headline and because the Clintons are good at expectation-management, if nothing else, then on the face of it last night was jolly good for her.
But was it that good? She won Ohio well, but she was always gonna win Ohio well, and she didn’t win it by the seriously huge margin she must have been hoping for.
Meanwhile she just scraped Texas, a state she was expected to win by 20%+ a few weeks back. She may even have lost the delegate battle in Texas.
This is not entirely to belittle her tenacity and ability to absorb punishment, and to fight on, but then we shouldn’t be surprised at that: she was for so long the massive establishment candidate, with years of experience, an ex-president husband, she should be capable of a good fight, at the very least.
When the dust settles on this round I think we will call it a points win for Clinton. But to say she is now favourite is absurd.
Obama still has the money, the netroots, the enthusiastic activists, the promising upcoming primaries - and most importantly of all he has the delegates.
But Clinton might be worth a pop at any odds over 3/1.
OK ….. My brain has warmed up !!
My delegate estimate is that the range for the whole evening is between Clinton +2 to Obama +4
Overall Texas appears now to be an Obama win with a delegate lead in the 6-9 range.
Had to miss the fun after an 18-hour day yesterday, but instead of reading the news directly have read the overnight threads in the order they came in - good fun! Thanks to all who participated. How was the Elite experience?
Anyway - a good night for us Hillaryites (and a discreet purr from the Broxtowe cats, who have still only ever lost one bet), but I agree it’s still tough. In response to those who ask how she could possibly win, the scenario that I’d sketch wolud be this. The polls have already moved sharply towards her in the last week. On the back of today’s results, she regains momentum and builds a national lead, say 6-7%. Obama wins the upcoming two minor states but by less than expected. There’s widespread comment that the Obama rhetoric is proving empty. The Democrats decide to rerun MI and FL. She wins FL and PA by huge margins, and the MI causus narrowly. Further polls show she’s much stronger against McCain. The superdelegates go with the flow of popular opinion as it is then - rather than how folks voted back in January - and she’s home.
An awful lot of ifs there, but not impossible. As for some time, the value bet seems to me to be Republicans to win the presidency at 2.88 - McCain’s ahead already in the polls, why isn’t he at least evens?
89. Edwards still has a few delegates pledged to him. They could yet count if the Obama-Clinton balance of pledged delegates is very close.
Have either of them completely ruled out in their own mind the chance that they might not just be king-maker, but king?
Thanks to all the people that answered my question at 2 in last nights thread. Unfortunatly there seemed to be a server problem last night, so I couldn’t reply.
Off topic, does anybody know if David Cameron has yet sent a reply to Lib-Dem MP’s, after the letter Nick Clegg sent out yesterday?
90 - “Clegg justified this by claiming the Lisbon text was ‘totally different’ to the Constitution. That is a lie, as anyone knows.”
No, that is merely your opinion. There are many people in the UK saying the two documents *are* different. As Clegg himself said this morning, the Treaty is a third of the size of the Constitution, so there must be some difference between them!
It might be disingenuous - as I said above, the Lib Dem’s posturing will cause them trouble - but it is not wrong, nor a lie.
85 - Sean, I think you have to take the Lib Dem’s promise to have an in/out referendum at face value as it cannot be got wriggled out of. And I don’t think that there is much logic to the two-parter either, as you could have the bizarre position of the Treaty being passed and then EU membership being rejected.
As an aside, I should observe that invoking the ‘truth’ to support your basic problem with the EU seriously weakens your arguments. The facts don’t help you, and your efforts to enlist them to support your views do them a disservice. Do argue why you think the Treaty will be bad for the UK, or why EU membership is bad for the UK.
Interesting…
http://slate.com/id/2185278/
http://www.slate.com/features/delegatecounter/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/04/brokaw-obama-has-50-supe_n_89789.html
100. don’t think he’s bothered, clegg has no sway and his position is seen as being a mess, I doubt many tory MP’s, europhile or sceptic, will want to be associated with it.
100 - No he probably hasn’t stopped laughing at it yet!
98 Another tenner to the cats then, Nick - although for about fifteen minutes after the exit polls, it looked like the dogs might still have been onto an unlikley winner. But their hopes were cruelly dashed as, yet again, the exit polls proved to be crap!
97 Good morning Jack W - may I enquire how you have calculated the Texas delegate count as CNN only have 36% of the caucus results so far.
99. Prince, perhaps, in Edwards’s case. How likely is that?
This is pretty good Jack
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/candidates/#1746
91 - glad you’re not. Most Lib Dem members actually have more important things to do. Frothing at the mouth over the minutiae of Euro treaties is something most of us recognise wins precious few votes.
106 Goupillon, try this:
http://precinctconventionresults.txdemocrats.org/election08district
96. Spot on. She may well have won this battle but there are too few delegates available for her to overhaul Obama.
If Clinton goes dirty over Florida and Michigan I reckon the Superdelegates will come en masse to Obama. This is more importantly, about November, especially as McCain is in place. The Democrats can not let this linger or they will self implode with vitriol.
So what is the latest on the 50 new superdelegates that are to be confirmed to Obama? Also how much did he raise in Feb.?
101 - Woodpecker: “As Clegg himself said this morning, the Treaty is a third of the size of the Constitution, so there must be some difference between them!”
That’s because they reduced the font size and the line spacing. There are actually slightly more words in the Treaty. You goon.
I need to say this again.
Whilst it is clear that Hillary would have to produce a quite devastating performance to overhaul Obama overall we have yet again had some atrocious calls being made regarding the primaries
People make wrong calls and thats just standard but what is a problem is those who are calling based on the fact that they have a chosen candidate and literally refuse to see anything else other than their candidate.
For the initiated its not a problem, we can ignore it for others looking betting support its a stinker.
I must confess that I am not totally clear about the attitude of the Conservative Party over referendums. Under Thatcher and Major, the Tories were almost completely against them. The last Tory Leader who was in favour was the greaty lamented Edward Heath - so presumably the message that Cameron wants to trasmit is that the Tories are now thoroughly Heathite again. Fair enough. I can understand that.
But what precisely is there in the Lisbon document that the country would be voting on? What are the new elements that need to be aproved by a referendum?
I am given to understand that most of it is a reproduction of the content of previous treaties (which the Conservatives approved when in government without recourse to a referendum).
Would a rejection of the Lisbon proposals overturn Maastrict and Nice and all the rest? And if so, would a referendum on Lisbon not amount to an in-or-out referendum, which is what the Liberal Democrats were pushing for (but which the Tories, playing politics as usual, refused to support)?
I am very glad to hear that JH’s Conservative friends are not confused by Cameron’s antics. Perhaps they are too young and frivolous to be paying enough attention.
So, who is McCain going to pick as his VP?
109 “Most Lib Dem members actually have more important things to do.”
(Just in case Ave It isn’t around):
HAHAHAHAHAHAAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
According to the site I’ve just linked to Obama is 86 ahead with about 600 more needed. That sounds like anyones race.
91
Clegg has not learned lesson no 1 in politics kindergarten.
Keep it simple.
His arguments on Newsnight were so convoluted as to make my barin hurt - the two large G&Ts before hand had nothing to do with it.
Anyone suggesting that the average lector like me could understand what he’s trying to do - or gain from it - is frankly living on Planet Zog.
His policy is as clear as mud and just as transparent. Proves that his poor showing cersus Huhne on the leadership election was not a fluke .. the man is ineffectual as a political leader.
I suspect 12 months later “ineffectual” will be shown to be kind. The publicity he is getting is negative. Watch the polls in 3-4 weeks as the message seeps through to the electorate. He makes IDS look like a natural born political leader.
As for the US, if the Democrats chose Clinton, they’ll be like the LibDems.. chosing the wrong leader.On the basis of their past poor choice, I expect they may very will pick her.. and lose the White House. She’s last century’s politician.
Cheney?
101. Just give us the vote we were promised. Your lies are boring. They are boring everyone. Your party is boring. This argument is boring.
Boring boring boring boring.
Just give us the vote we were promised, and let the people decide. Stop ducking and diving and lying and fibbing and just do what you promised you would do. “Oh it’s only a third of the size of the Constitution.” Why is that? Maybe they used a smaller font?
As implied at 122 there is an answer here. The Treaty is actually about 8000 words longer that the Constitution, by some counts (depends whether you include annexes). Other experts say it is about the same: 63,000 words.
But the Treaty is still shorter in “size”. How? It’s because…. they did indeed change the line spacing.
http://tinyurl.com/238w9y
Stop lying. Stop insulting us. Stop treating us like idiots.
Just let the people vote on the Treaty - as you promised; and then we can all move on.
SeanT: Would it be OK to repost your post of 8:37am (#62) on my blog, with appropriate attribution of course?
118 - It is some feat to try to exhort colleagues to die in the last ditch for something that neither you nor they believe in.
121. Fame at last Sean!
subeditor: Ha! It’ll probably get more readers right here than it will on my blog.
Back on thread - given that Obama has won the Texas caucus - other than pledged delgates is there any other way of determining who wins.
The total vote clearly can’t be used because those who caucus had to be promary voters so there will be an element of double counting.
Just using the popular vote from the primary element also would not reflect the caucus campaign. So has Clinton actually won Texas?
[98] I deduce from this posting that the Labour leadership really really doesn’t want Obama to be the Democratic candidate - to the extent that I expect that any of its members who go off to toil for him can kiss their party careers goodbye, while those who work for McCain will earn Brownie (sic) points.
Because if Obama wins the White House (and I am beginning to think McCain is odds-on as the Democrats spend all their dosh fighting each other) Labour’s sycophancy to neo-conservative foreign policy will be exposed in all its tawdry, corrupt, murderous reality.
106 Goupillon. Hey ho and good morning to you.
I’ve culled the figures and had my tame number cruncher in the States do the numbers.
Overall in the Texas Delegate Two-Step, despite some impressive early footwork from Hillary she fluffed her late fandago and let Obama take the lead with a neat late spin from his waltz caucus.
Never mind Hillary …. Brucie says your my favourite !!
I missed this article on Monday from the Herald, Poll piles on pressure for referendum on EU treaty.
“But Mr Murphy told the BBC Politics show yesterday: “It’s clear that less than one in six people in East Renfrewshire voted for a referendum. The Conservative Party spent £50,000 so it was almost £5 for every person who returned a ballot paper.”
The local campaign in the area was called East Renfrewshire EU Choice and its spokesman, Richard Cooke, insisted the Tories did not put up the money for the exercise.
He said he was “stunned to hear a government minister tell such outright lies”, saying the Tories did not put in a single penny to the campaign and the figure for those in favour of a referendum was double what Mr Murphy claimed.”
113. On the nail. Too much cheer leading and not enough objectivity. That’s OK most of the time but silly on the day of the poll. And some of the US pundits seemed the least reliable
101. You must feel very foolish now.
I commiserate - being a Tory when Major’s clowns were announcing that ‘Maastricht puts the brake on Federalism’ was depressing, too.
128. It’s amazing, watching as labour politicians try and cover up or lie their way out of unpopular decisions. They keep going on and on about what the people want, but every time that goes against what they want they ignore the people and try to discredit the source.
Time for a quick post from work .
I said many times to all those who went heavily on Obama , not to right off Clinton . The contest will go to the wire and Hillary is an experienced fighter , Obama’s stamina is untested . The Mark Senior way of betting has now put me £100 green on both of them on Betfair with more to come as the pendulum swings .
Usual ravings from Conservative posters on here re Clegg , I find it hard to credit that they actually believe the drivel they are writing let alone it will affect a single vote .
125 - No she hasn’t - the 2-2 at 11/4 at Ladbrokes stands up!
In all seriousness, Clinton and Obama are no longer fighting the same fight.
He has won, if you think pledged delegate count is all that matters. It isn’t - pledged delegates give you a case for demanding that superdelegates (who really decide this) support you.
Her job is not to overhaul that pledged delegate lead (she can’t), but to win the popular vote, and the ‘important’ states, and convince the superdelegates that she should win (”if it were a national primary…”) the nomination on those grounds.
Obama needs to get close enough to 50.1% of pledged delegates to convince the superdelegates that it is all but over, and they should support him to unite the party quickly.
So it’s not about who won Texas - she did on vote, he did on pledged delegates - it’s about whose ‘moral’ case is stronger, and I think she probably edged it last night. He needs her to die soon - the longer this goes on, the stronger a case she will have.
126: Don’t be silly - I’m not the Labour leadership, and the party has always been pro-Democratic whoever the candidate is. The government is necessarily neutral. I like Hillary for all kinds of reasons that I’ve been espousing for months, but if Obama wins the nomination I’ll be rooting for him.
Marquee Mark: thanks, you’re a good sport. Do you want to send me the cheque to pass on or send it to them directly? Actually I think you did beat the cats once, didn’t you? - seem to remember sending a cheque to the dogs for you.
132. usual mark senior ravings, insult people who he doesnt agree with, then act like the entire debate is pointless.
Clegg’s ‘policy’ is about nothing more than being able to write leaflets in marginals saying, ‘We supported a referendum’.
End of.
It may save him a few votes, but the damage he has done to his reputation in the media and amongst serious commentators is huge and will cost him more in the long run.
Anyone who sees any great philosophy behind these politically expedient contortions needs to get their head out from under their own armpit. The lack of critical analysis by all but a few Lib Dems of their position and Clegg’s poor handling of it smacks of one thing…FEAR.
120 - “Just give us the vote we were promised. Your lies are boring. They are boring everyone. Your party is boring. This argument is boring.
Boring boring boring boring.”
You’re pretty dull yourself, Sean, if this is the standard of your debate.
There are no fibs or lies from the Lib Dems here, and your saying it repeatedly does not make it true, however much you may wish it. As I’ve said, the politics of the Lib Dems stance in this issue are questionable, but, IMO, pale into insignificance compared to the Tories’ inconsistency on Europe over many decades.
I do withdraw my comment about the size of the Treaty compared to the constitution, but my point about the difference between them being one of opinion still holds.
I say again - debate the merits of the EU and the Treaty, or shut up about it, as you’re not adding anything to the debate nor changing anyone’s mind.
Nick Clegg incompetent? Is that news? What does the key electorate (Sun readers) think of his performance? Er, none has heard of him, so his inadequacies are electorally immaterial.
Following last night, where is the smart money going? Apparently, the republicans are stil 7/4 in a two horse race, and great value. Especially that whoever becomes his opponent will have spent a gruelling 5 months having his weaknesses exposed by….his own side. Is Hillary value at 3/1? No, too unlikely to win. Is Obama value at 1/3? No, too short.
The surprise that the republicans haven’t shortened more.
121. No probs. I thought it was one of my more boringly sensible posts, but always nice to be appreciated!
136 - Indeed, fear of Farage. It comes to something that a party with a significant level of support is running scared of a party no longer troubling the pollsters arithmetic ability!
126. Innocent abroad. Your posting style has certainly changed!
110. Marquee Mark thanks - so Hillary is +2 on the primary and there are 67 delegates left to allocate in the caucusses which is splitting 52/48 with 36% of the results in so far. If we assume it is still 52/48 when all the caucus results are in the “average allocation” of delegates would split 35/32 Obama resulting in a +1 delegate win for Obama. Is it correct the actual overall result of the caucuses will probably be more favourable to Obama because of the distribution of delegates appears to be weighted to the Counties having large Black ethnic representations?
138. oh, so he’s not incompetant, just non-existant.
“Usual ravings from Conservative posters on here re Clegg , I find it hard to credit that they actually believe the drivel they are writing let alone it will affect a single vote .”
I can’t do better than quote Sandra Gidley on this, “I am mindful of the promise I made at the last election which was to support a referendum on the Constitution. I will not use semantics to wriggle out of a promise so, unless something unforeseen happens, I intend to support the call for a referendum.”
113 - The wrong calls have been because of the Clinton spin machine lying through their teeth about expectations.
How many times will people be taken in? Again and again I was saying not to fall for it but people were claiming that Obama must win all four states etc. as if it was gospel.
Maybe next time.
137. So you “withdraw” your comment about the relative size of the Treaty and the Constitution.
So what was that comment then? A lie? Or just a “mis-statement”? Or was it a fib? A dissimulation? An untruth? A falsehood?
The only other alternative is that you simply don’t know what the hell you are talking about.
Either way you are either: 1. prone to lying about this subject, or 2. you know nothing about it whatsoever. So I suggest you shut the F up.
127. Thanks Jack W - as you can see I have carried out a simple analysis which suggests your expert is not far out.
146 - to be honest, SeanT, I find the fact that Nick Clegg would peddle the “it must be different because it’s shorter” line more disturbing than the way Woodpecker (should that be Parrot?) uncritically regurgitates it. It’s right up there with Brown’s “nobody will notice if I turn up to sign it after the others have gone” mendacious idiocy.
On a non-vitriolic, non-EU-related, non-American, non-insulting note (I can do it), can I just say that this afternoon, here in Bangkok
I FINISHED MY BOOK!
Hooray! 115,000 words. 50 chapters. The Jericho Vault, by Tom Knox. Or maybe the Genesis Secret, by Tom Knox.
Anyway, it’s finished! Hooray!!!! And I wrote it in three months - all 400 pages.
Of course, this speed-of-writing indicates the book might well be slipshod, error-strewn, and rubbish, but I like to remember that Shakespeare is said to have written King Lear in 3 weeks.
My sincere thanks to all peebles, even the europhiles, who have put up with my wittering on about this for the entire winter.
KappunKAP.
147 Goupillon. It’s far too complex for my simple mind but the delegate maths has barely changed. Overall it’s looking this way :
Vermont - Obama +3 delegates.
Rhode I - Clinton +4
Ohio - Clinton +4-5
Texas - Obama +5-8
So, if the delegate maths this morning makes it a virtual impossibility for Clinton to recover, surely it was also true yesterday?
So, is she deluded, or merely hanging on as a way of shutting McCain out of the news?
my point about the difference between them being one of opinion still holds.
Well in the opinion of some people, the world is flat. They are deranged, however.
My view is that this is a “New Hampshire” effect.
In a large democratic inclined state; until which *very* recently Hillary has had huge, whopping great leads; even if Obama closes the gap substantially in polls in the last week, there has always a late “swing” back to Hillary.
We saw it in New Hampshire. We saw it in California. We’ve now seen it in Texas and Ohio.
I think the media, and opinion pollsters belie the sheer inertia of the traditional democratic base in these states. These big, blue-collar, salt-of-the-earth, traditional democratic states are genetically “pro-Hillary”. They can get just as swept up with the poetry and rhetorical narrative of the Obama campaign, and answer as much to the opinion pollsters, but when it comes down to a vote, these states voters demonstrate much more consistency and loyalty in their voting habits. Many more stick with Clinton.
Not withstanding the above, Obamas campaign has closed the gap hugely in the states listed above. He took the margin in California down from ~25-30% to 10%, he took New Hampshire from ~20% to 2%, he took Texas down to ~4% (and may be ahead on delegates), and even in Ohio, he closed a margin of 18-20% to 12%.
What screws it up for him is his poor expectation management. He allows himself to be “bigged-up” just a little too much. And exceptation management is critical.
I don’t expect him to win Pennsylvania. If it were re-run, he wouldn’t Florida. He won’t win silly places like Puerto Rico and Guam. He might not even win Indiana and Kentucky. So what?
He is a highly effective campaigner and a fast learner. He has an intelligent and flexible campaign team. He is an excellent communicator. He is adept at combating his weaknesses and fast at rebukes.
He’ll win the rest and seal it, but it won’t be until late May now. North Carolina and Kentucky will finally force Clinton to give it up.
And then the fat lady will sing..
[134] I’m not being silly. I notice you don’t say, Nick, that the Labour Party will support the Democratic candidate this time, whichever of them it is. And it would be consistent for them, surely, to support the candidate who supports their own foreign policy.
[141] Roger, I have a shed-load of reasons for despising NuLab, for whom I’ve never voted (unless you count Uncle Ken in ‘04). How long have you got?
At Ladbrokes, we’ll be waiting a while longer to get confirmed delegate tallies from both primaries and caucuses in Texas before settling on that. We stipulated that we’d be relying on CNN.
We’ll be paying out on McCain as the Republican Candidate shortly.
An infinite number of monkeys typing for an infinite number of years will produce a Shakespeare play. There is hope Sean.
149 - So when are likely to be able to engross ourselves in this magnum opus?
Thanks to McCain, I’ve won my first ever political bet
When do Betfair pay out?
[149] Congratulations, Sean. This sounds like a good time to test my theory that you use personal abuse on this site as a way of psyching yourself up to achieve your daily word-count.
I’m sure those who do that sort of thing would be interested to know your odds against either a film or a computer-game spin-off…
158 a&d. Many congratulations !!
Having played a key part in securing Ohio for Hillary, and given its status as a crucial swing state in November, would I be right in thinking that Ohio Gov Ted Strickland could now be an interesting long shot VP pick for either of the eventual nominees?
48. It was a terrible debate.
James “Commie” Naughtie - who pronounces his surname “Knockerty” like the pretentious idiot he is - gave Milliband about twice the airtime of Hague, sans interruptions.
As soon as Hague speaks… interruptions begin. “But, Mr.Hague, surely?”, “Mr. Milliband, do you want to come in on that?”, “That’s not the case is it, Mr. Hague?” - Hague hardly had a chance to rebuke Millipede.
Millipede waffled and waffled for well over a minute - in the petulant, patronising way he does - without one interruption from Naw-ker-ty and without a challenge.
They should have got Humphries. He would have ensure a proper debate.
@159:
Does that mean from now on SeanT will be Mr Lovely?
While I agree with SeanT on the basic dishonesty of the position (Ed Davey claiming an In/Out referendum was to fulfil their manifesto promise - laughable) it’s the perception of Clegg as a capable leader that is damaged. Having upwards of a quarter of your party vote against a three line whip isn’t good. Sending begging letters to your opponents isn’t good. Staging a walk out isn’t good. Making a fuss over a policy that was patched together isn’t good.
162. bet hague still came off better, both millibands are charismaless, slightly less so then ed balls.
Surely if the maths says nothing has changed then the shortening odds on Clinton just make better value for a late plunge on Obama?
164. agree, the entire stance is poor, but clegg has handled the situation very badly too. He’s managed to make himself look daft and his party look split.
156. Show us yer monkey!
157. Publication is scheduled for March 2009. Seems a long way I know, but then I wasn’t meant to finish until August of this year.
159. I think you are halfright. I do limber by the verbal muscles by lobbing some F-bombs on here. Like an athlete warming up. But I also think that, when the writing is fizzing along, I am extra energised - and I let off surplus steam by, yes, getting vitriolic on here.
Basically I’m a rude b*stard. But I still love you all, really. *sob*
154. “Roger, I have a shed-load of reasons for despising NuLab,”
I have to but it doesn’t stop me voting for them!
[163] I live in hope. However, if he carries on as before, I have a secret Doomsday Machine that will sort him out…
This does have a post Super Tuesday feel to me. Hillary doing better than many of us expected and appearing the big winner on the night, only for the final numbers to show that on pledged delegates she has gained little ground. It’s proving one hell of a battle!
I still struggle to see how she carves out a win without irreparably damaging the Democrat vote in the GE in November. But Obama is struggling to close this contest and put her away. Maybe Dean etc will start to lean on the SuperDs to get Obama over the line?
I’m beginning to be persuaded that McCain is the value bet. He is on the ticket now and if the Democratic race just gets down deep and dirtier it only helps his cause. My best betting outcome is a McCain Presidency and I think I’m about to add to it.
154. Labour won’t know what their foreign policy is until the new President is elected, surely?
162. Naughtie’s Labour sympathies have always been pretty obvious.
Yes, I bet the Dems are probably looking rather wistfully at Vince Cable now, and thinking “Why, oh why, did we go from an alkie to a corpse to a twat in quick succession when we could have had HIM instead?”
We should all be thankful that the Liberal Democrat’s capacity for self-destruction knows no bounds.
168 - Roger, only you could post something so counter to all logic.
What was the book called in the end? “The Blue Hotel”? “Tertullian’s Sermon”?
[168] Roger, when it gets a bit warmer I’ll pop on a bus down to Soho from Bayswater and Explain It All to You. It’s a completely painless therapy, and I’ll even pick up the bill for the coffee and cake…
You need never vote NuLab again.
Using the Clegg Algorithm I have found a great way to make my reports shorter - suddenly my report to the Principal on e-learning strategies is HALF THE SIZE of the similarly titled but totally different Strategies on E-Learning report rejected last month.
At this rate Clegg can reduce the amount of legislation in the UK by 2/3rds - now that’s a proper Liberal promise - reduce the size of the State. Go back to your constituencies and prepare to reformat !!
170 - McCain has always bet while Clinton remains in the race, the one near certainty from last night is that he will be the biggest beneficiary from the results in the Democrat’s race.
146 - “137. So you “withdraw” your comment about the relative size of the Treaty and the Constitution.”
Yes I did and gladly so, but to accuse me of lying is stretching your credibility somewhat - I was reporting what someone else had said, and acknowledged that it was wrong when “Harry” pointed it out. In fact the more salient point here is “animal’s” in post 146.
The important point here is not whether I know anything about this issue but that you have nothing to say other than an indiscriminate ‘no’ to being involved with Europe. No arguments, no debate, no analysis, no engagement and only indiscriminate support for a referendum merely because it gives a platform for your monotonal views. Nick Clegg might be ducking things politically, but you’re demonstrating intellectual cowardice in spades.
(OK, enough for now; I really must learn not to feed the trolls!)
177 - Should read “McCain has always been the value bet”.
176 -
Meanwhile, in the members bar, wags are wondering if they’d rather be workshopping EU policy with Nick Clegg or trapped in a burning car.
164 Is there a market on whether the Lib Dems will be onto their fourth leader by the end of this Parliament?
@Sean Fear/182
We’d better hope not. Cable is a formidable opponent and a serious threat. If the Dems ever decided to end their current run of EPIC FAIL and make Vince leader, he could do us some serious damage.
Hmmm, wonder how PMQ’s will be today, stormy?
178. Making a fool of yourself is now ‘feeding the trolls’ is it? Your capacity for self delusion really is remarkable.
158 Betfair have paid out already on HRC. Think I’ll get my cash out before they change their minds.
I agree with Yokel (113) that positions are being taken based on who you support rather than a cold dispassionate analysis of what’s going on. The Democratic race in my view is very much alive. I think the game is now less about delegates and more about the crucial question of who can beat McCain. The superdelegates will more than anything else vote for the candidate who they think will perform better in the GE. At the moment the numbers are with HRC performing better in the polls against McCain than Obama.
The men in grey coats won’t be knocking on the Clinton door yet. They will hold their counsel for the next month or so. I think they MUST see how Obama handles the pressure and whether or not he can make sustained inroads into the Hispanic and white w/c voters and women voters. He started too but it has definitely stalled. Without those votes I can’t see him winning the election even against McCain.
183 - I think that the damage or having gone through one leader every 15 months of a 5 year parliament on average would make a Clegg replacemnt’s task next to impossible.
Oh and I also felt Obama failed to fire last night in his speech.
178. I could, as I am sure you know, dissect the EU Constitution line by line and tell you exactly what I object to. But that would be a monumental bore for everyone, as well as being wildly offthread.
Basically go and read openeurope’s analysis of the Treaty: I largely concur with them.
http://www.openeurope.co.uk
What this debate is about, more relevantly, is whether we can trust out politicians (and this ties in with the whole Obama phenomenon).
I think people would like to respect their politicians again. But as private polls are showing, things are actually getting worse. Voters increasingly regard all politicians as lying, grasping, deceitful, self-serving, unprincipled careerist thieves.
The repulsive lies and halftruths spun by europhiles on the hugely important issue of the referendum and the treaty are making this bad situation dramatically worse. With your half-assed evasions and your pathetic spin you are poisoning the political arena. This damages us all. We all care about politics or we wouldn’t be here.
But the europhiles don’t seem to care. They just plough on, ignoring referendum results, reneging on promises, trampling over the people. It’s disgusting and it’s wrong.
At least some honourable MPs on the centre and the left are beginning to see this. The Tories realised it some time ago. Better late than never.
We need to start afresh. We need a new covenant between people and politicians. This must begin with the major parties honouring their solemn promise to Let The People Decide.
The Clegg demand for an “in or out” referendum on the EU is totally dishonest- why is he allowed to keep repeating it? It is impossible to vote on any simplistic question without first knowing the terms under which we would withdraw. Two referenda are needed. The first would ask whether the government should negotiate the terms- then the electorate would be asked whether the country should withdraw under the terms agreed. None of this ,of course will happen which means that withdrawal is impossible - Clegg knows this perfectly well. As I said-totally dishonest.
@SeanT/189:
That’s because most politicians really are lying, grasping, deceitful, self-serving, unprincipled careerist thieves.
I hate the implication that the people are mistaken, and politicians are noble really. They’re not. They’re scum and should be treated as such.
186/188. Are you the same poster?
“At the moment the numbers are with HRC performing better in the polls against McCain than Obama.”
Evidence?
All the poll match-ups I’ve seen have shown HRC at a distinct disadvantage to JMc, with the highest negative ratings of any candidate and polling evidence that she is a real turn-off for independents and Republicans.
She would also depress Democratic turnout.
I can’t see all those enthused, motivated and inspired Obama supporters fighting to get to the ballot-box in November if she pips it to the post because of superdelegates. Especially now the Republican candidate is someone as unthreatening and unpartisan as McCain.
Boulton & Co on Clegg’s Contortions. Glen Oglaza also rather cheekily wonders about “Anyone offering odds on imminent Lib Dem defections to the Tories?”.
Also Niall Patterson asks why there is Nobody Home? after a call to the Libdem main press office went unanswered.
Why is McCain’s price on Betfair still around 2.9? Intrade’s price has been around 2.6 for sometime and it seems to me from the current polls McCain ought to be somewhere near evens.
“At the moment the numbers are with HRC performing better in the polls against McCain than Obama.”
Not true, the only one is the Rasmussen tracker (and it’s a tracker so it gives the impression of being more than one poll).
As I said, people are falling for the spin, look at the reality instead.
189. My bad - wrong link.
That should be:
http://www.open-europe.co.uk
191 - No Martin most politicians are not, you do yourself a disservice by repeating that mantra, it is not my experience of most of the politicians I have come into contact with of all political persuasions!
191. Certainly the behaviour of politicians of all stripes over this issue over 35 years argues very strongly for the need for more referendums.
There is a lack of checks and balances in our political system now, and a dangerous gulf between the political class and the voters. Frequent referendums would go a long way to rectifying this. They would also help educate and energise the voters politically, something everyone says they want.
Having lived in Switzerland in the past, I have observed the positive effect on the standard of politicial discourse referendums both local and national have there. They keep the politicians in line and make the people feel really involved.
Test
134 Nick, I’ll drop the Nuthall cats a tenner. I already know the address (sigh)….
Isn’t it funny how before 9am and after 5pm we don’t get the sort of pro-Tory cheerleading bollocks that goes on then.
I assume it’s when the interns are thrown out of CCO on Victoria Street.
Hmm, I’ve got a long comment which just seems to vanish into the ether - not even held in moderation.
201. oh well done, have you been reading the best of roger?
192 Why would I want to post under two names?
The last GE poll from Rasmussen,
General Election: McCain vs. Clinton Rasmussen (Tues) McCain 47, Clinton 46, Und 7 McCain +1
General Election: McCain vs. Obama Rasmussen (Tues) McCain 47, Obama 44, Und 9 McCain +3
Yep it’s only one poll but it comes at a time when Obama has been really tested for the first time. It’ll be interesting to see which way they head in the next couple of weeks now that McCain is confirmed.
BTW …. Mike S …. what news of the extra super delegate allocated to the Smithson camp !!
I’ve just had confirmation from William Hill that they’re paying out on delegates too.
Has anybody been paid out on PP yet?
204. “Yep it’s only one poll”
Right, thank you. You’ve confirmed it’s only ONE poll. Despite saying the “polls” - plural - offered the evidence at 186.
Even in the ONE poll you cite, the lead is well within the MoE. And its a tracker. And trackers, by definition, fluctuate a lot.
Ernesto - you need much more evidence to support your hypothesis.
206 - Betfair settled Texas for Hillary…
Nope, tried again.
All I can think of its that Mike has banned the word “referendum”
133 I think I agree entirely with this post of Morus’ — all this number crunching of pledged delegates to show Hillary can’t catch Obama is immaterial.
Hillary will now go all the way to the Convention and argue that her moral case is stronger.
I am not particularly pro-Hillary, but it is clear that there is a reasonably strong case she can make. (Obama has also got a reasonably strong case to make as well).
O/T
Extract from 24dash.com
I am minded to “go in heavy” on Boris in the London Mayor campaign but am loath to back at odds on,any advice please?
London Mayor Ken Livingstone faces calls today to answer for his former race adviser Lee Jasper, who quit amid a string of allegations about the misuse of public funds.
Mr Jasper, 49, who blamed a “racist” media campaign against him for the decision to step down, had been due to be questioned by the London Assembly today over the claims.
Boris Johnson, the Tory candidate in May’s mayoral election, demanded Mr Livingstone take his place at the hearing.
The mayor’s senior aide resigned yesterday in the wake of a claim in the London’s Evening Standard that he sent intimate emails to a woman involved with organisations which received City Hall funding.
It followed a series of allegations, denied by Mr Jasper, of funding irregularities involving hundreds of thousands of pounds paid to community projects, with little or nothing to show for it.
209 Andy Cooke. Hopefully !!
……………………
The Iowa exchanges all over the shop. Hillary almost touched thirty before the delegate reality appears to has set her back to the low twenties
210 Gwnfa. Hillary’s ‘moral’ case being that she polled fewer votes, fewer states and fewer elected delegates. It’s the sort of Clinton morals that certainly enlivened hubby’s presidency. Close but no cigar Hillary !!
201. A party hack accuses others of being party hacks. How amusing.
I thought Hillary’s speech was pretty good last night whereas Obama just seemed to be going through the motions. Also wasn’t Obama’s geography lesson a little to close to ‘I have a dream…’?
…….. So let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire. Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York. Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania!
Let freedom ring from the snowcapped Rockies of Colorado!
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California!
But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia!
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee!
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi. From every mountainside…….”.
212. Ditto intrade. She was heading for thirty now she’s dropped a few points. But she’s still well above the teens she was in before yesterday.
Obama has dropped about ten - more at one point - but he’s also now steadied: in the low 70s.
The markets always overreact to these things. Same happened on SupeTues. If I knew anything about betting there might be value, for me, in these predictable pendulum swings. But I don’t so there isn’t.
*sigh*
210 Gwynfa - The next two States to vote are the Wyoming caucus and the Mississippi primary both of which Obama will win by big margins.
Also when the final delegate count comes out for yesterdays States it will be Obama again who will be the actual winner as opposed to the media ‘anointed’ one.
So yes Hillary is not dead but her prospects are still far from rosy unless she can start attracting a great many more super delegates than she has done already.
207 Yes it’s a hypothesis. That’s why I said it will be interesting to see how the next few weeks GE polls pan out.
I think in the poll that mattered last night there was significant evidence that NEITHER candidate has dealt a knockout blow yet. For those who like to test their hypothesis at the bookies that can only be good news.
[215] Haven’t you hired a few of those Californian curvaceous slopes in your time, Roger?
209 There is some phrase when discussing referendum that causes posts to be diverted to some ethereal site where all the most intelligent & well argued posts are visible (cos most never turn up here).
210: what has moral case got to do with it?
Of the super-delegates, a third will choose Hillary in advance, a third will choose Obama, and (perhaps) a third will choose whoever won the popular vote and/or delegate count.
Therefore, for Hillary to win she *must* narrow the delegate deficit to 100 or less. And that’s going to be tough, tough, tough, even if Florida and Michigan are re-run. Go to the Slate delegate calculator and play. Assume Hillary does 60-40 in Philadelphia, and 60-40 in West Virginia.
Now, see what assumptions are needed to bring Hillary’s pledged delegate deficit down to less than 100. Essentially, we need to see either a (perfectly possible) Obama implosion; or Florida and Michigan to be seated as is.
Be very wary of overreacting to Hillarys wins…
We’ve been here before, after New Hampshire, after Super Tuesday.
Let’s see what the position is in one weeks time.
I bet (and I will bet as soon as BO drops below 1.50 on Betfair) that the media narrative will turn against Hillary again.
Why? Because it’s “good copy” and because Hillary will soon manage to take the gloss off her own win, acidic and unattractive as she behaves whenever shes ahead.
Obama will still win.
O/T - Guido hears that Ken might re-hire Jasper if he wins a third term.
http://www.order-order.com/2008/03/ken-i-will-re-hire-jasper.html
Certainly have! Even Cindy Crawford once!
213 I didn’t say I agreed with Hillary. Hillary’s case will be: who can beat McCain? Who won the swing states that the Democrats have to carry?
I think Morus’ take at 133 is very perceptive. As is Ernesto’s at 186.
Can we now say that Mr Clegg’s honeymoon is officially over?
Is there any book on when he will go?
223. “O/T - Guido hears that Ken might re-hire Jasper if he wins a third term.”
Probably by listening to the BBC News yesterday.
223 Do you think Ken is going senile?
I agree that Obama will probably win but there is good “copy” on both sides. Undoubtedly the media, consciously or not, have given Obama a bit of a kicking in the past few days. In reaction to that he’s performed OK but not brilliantly. That has taken some of the gloss off from his performances so far.
I think the reaction of the men in grey coats will be significant in the next few weeks. If the remaining grandees start to line up alongside Obama it’s over, if not then she still has a chance albeit a small one.
228 - Well it certainly isn’t designed to improve his coverage is it?
149. Sounds like a really bad Dan Brown book.
183. I think the Tories should be fearing Cable already. His credibility on Northern Rock has made Cameron and Osborne look very lightweight. Read Michael Portillo’s article in the Times.
The question is often asked as to why people are so fed up with politicians? However, I’d like to know why is it that politicians are so fed up with the voters? Why do they despise us so much? Do they think we are THAT stupid? Seems to be happening right across Europe, although as someone pointed out above, Switzeeland may hold some of the answers.
On Topic (for a change): As someone who wrote off Hillary 6 months ago, I suppose I can’t change my mind now. I think the closer people get to the ballot box the more cynical (realistic?) they become. Maybe electing Obama doesn’t seem quite so appealing. However all the evidence is that he is more likely to beat McCain.
109
Dan,if as you say voters don’t care about the EU why are so many Lib Dem Mp’s in the south ignoring Clegg and voting for a referendum?
Latest net delegate counts:
OHIO: HRC + 13
TEXAS: HRC + 1
VERMONT: BO + 3
RHODE ISLAND: HRC + 5
That’s HRC +18 up on pledged for the night. Not enough.
Her “Ohio” advantage looks particularly disappointing given her 11% margin of victory.
On popular vote; and this excludes Iowa, Nevada, Washington and Maine, where figures haven’t been released and all of which Obama won, which would make the number even better for him; the numbers are:
Popular vote total for 2008 Democratic presidential nomination
Excl. FL Incl. FL
Barack Obama 10,300,410 52.35% 10,876,624 51.49%
Hillary Clinton 9,375,213 47.65% 10,246,199 48.51%
Totals 19,675,623 100.00% 21,122,823 100.00%
(from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Results_of_the_2008_Democratic_Party_presidential_primaries)
Unless the pledged delegate and popular vote mandate for Obama changes, Clinton ain’t going to seal it on superdelegates.
I also can’t see any way she’d get away with seating Florida without a re-run, but even if she did, it still doesn’t close the gap. And the numbers improve still for Obama with the currently omitted states.
232 - we’ll see later today how many vote for the Tory referendum proposal.
What happens to the Tory proposals when the treaty is approved? Will they call for a referendum on all other EU treaties? Or just the ones the political editiors of the Sun and the Mail want?
O/T,on a personal note,could I ask Mike Smithson if there’s any news on yuor daughter Cayt’s imminent happy event?
233. “That’s HRC +18 up on pledged for the night. Not enough.”
Sorry, should read HRC +16 up for the night. DOH!!
154: Innocent, happy to rephrase it any way you want. Labour’s sympathies will be with the Democrats whoever the candidate is, the Tories will mostly sympathise with the GOP, though there are some individual MPs who like Obama. The pattern is always the same, with the single blip when Howard cheesed off the GOP by demanding that they slag off Tony Blair. You never get official endorsements but there will be lots of Labour MPs and organisers working for the Democrat candidate. I think you may have misinterpreted my tip on McCain at 2.88 - it was simply a suggestion to people who bet, not a personal preference.
In general I think non-Labour people underestimate the solidarity between Labour and the Democrats, and the continental social democrats too. I was the guest speaker at the weekend at the Swiss Social Democrat conference. They are both very anti-Iraq and anti-nuclear, but they are enthusiastically pro-Labour. There was a Socialist International gathering that I went to just after the Iraq war - people simply agreed to disagree about the war. It’s one movement, with disagreements on specific issues. Obviously the Democrats are not part of the SI, but the underlying mutual sympathy is clear.
bbc reporting lib dem front bench resignation.
237. But in reality, in terms of politics, the Democrats are closer to not only Cameron Conservatives, but pretty much all mainstream conservatives of the last thirty years. Someone like Thatcher, Hague, Clarke, Major etc would easily be comfortable within a Democrat party, with even people such as Redwood and Tebbit, could live within the Democrats quite easily. The Republicans really are step away from the Conservatives, with the Neocons been nothing more then big spending conservatives.
238 - Who is it?
240 Nick Clegg.
Good line from Cameron on courage and convictions. Brown unconvincing but still trading blows. It will probably look worse for Brown on the news bulletins.
No details yet. just this:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/2008/03/lib_dem_resignation.html
240. Nick Clegg.
241. HAHAHA!!
Nice one Sean
Great minds think alike!
234. hey plonk€r..look at 238.you’re spinning against events..
Was Clegg not watching the Cameron/Brown exchanges?
Kramer or Heath?
231. Cable will be prominent at the next election even with Clegg as leader - pushing the govt on economic policy and tax reform.
If Clegg has any sense, he’ll have Kennedy and Campbell heading up his party’s Scottish campaign, and send Cable and Huhne (if Eastleigh permits) barnstorming across England and Wales. With a bit of luck Ashdown might be tempted back into the fray.
The Lib Dems will have more heavyweight spokesmen at the next election than they have had since Alliance days. I think they’ll be able to mount a more effective campaign than they have since ‘97. For all Clegg’s weaknesses, he’s surely likely to have a better grasp of his brief than Kennedy did in 2005.
Why doesn’t Clegg just give his MPs a free vote? It’s the least worst option surely.
On buses: Brown has shot down his backbencher (”off-peak”).
248. Heath I would have thought. What triple figure majorities drive you to.
I did well on the CNN share thing - and got a win in both TX and OH for Hillary even though the TX market was way in the red - kept my bet on - thinking she would do a 3-1 today …
Could also be Nick Harvey or Alistair Carmichael.
250 — since Clegg won’t be in government, he could have promised whatever referendums he thought might be popular in the country.
Missed the Cameron - Brown exchanges. Was it All Europe All the time?
4 on Europe. 2 on Jasper
Nick Palmer writes at 11:59. Last minute before entering the chamber?
249. You don’t think lembit will feature heavily in the Welsh campaign then? May be a good thing. I was pretty unimpressed with his defence of Hain, when virtually everyone thought he should resign.
Clodhopping Clegg is the stupidest leader in recent Lib Dem history. He could have avoided all this but he was scared of big Shirl in the Lords.
Dumb and dumberer.
Come on you Dems. Le’s be havin’ this referendum. Then the pain will be over.
256. What surprises me is why Clegg doesn;t just drop the subject. he asked a question on Europe too. He has lost a lot of credibility on the matter, perhaps not in the wider public, but certainly amongst the press gallery and the national media, which will hurt him as he has to fight to claw any respect back.
256 — Four questions of solid disagreement on Europe (with both leaders speaking calmly and Cameron pressing home the promised referendum point).
And then Clegg starts by talking about Cameron and Brown agreeing! Free political advice: be prepared to vary your spiel depending on what happened 30 seconds earlier.
260. Clegg thinks he can just bluster it out at PMQs. The problem is that every time he gets angry he is mocked by all sides. I can’t see that changing.
O/T - why is noone else commenting on how extremely well Cameron/Hague have handled this EU issue??
They’ve handled it BRILLIANTLY.
For the first time in over 20 years, the Conservative party is fully united on Europe and (stunningly) looks the MOST united of all three, plus have the moral high ground and public on side, with no UKIP threat.
Cameron has also played no small part in splitting the LibDems right down the middle at no cost to himself.
Absolutely incredible.
Some might say this is even more significant an event than the October Tory Conference.
Vince “the cable” Cable, your party needs you. Take Clegg round the back and give him a pistolwhipping. Knock some sense into the eurofairy.
Then give us our fecking referendum and Labour are scotched.
It’s so stupidly obvious it’s… stupidly obvious.
225 - Thanks Gwynfa - I think we’re in pretty much the same boat.
I recognise how hard it is, still, for Clinton to win this, but that’s not because of delegate count.
For her to win, that remaining third of undecided Super Delegates have to be convinced to vote against the candidate with (marginally) the most pledged delegates.
The might (stress might) do that if she wins to overall, national popular vote, which if you include Michigan and Florida she almost certainly will, though it is a stretch if they are excluded.
If she is marginally behind in both popular vote and delegates (say within 100 delegates and 250k votes nationally), then there is only a very slim chance that her ‘big, swing state’ argument will win it. It is a good support if she already has the popular vote, but is worth less on its own.
Either way, it is not about who gets the most pledged delegates, it is about whether pledged delegates or the national popular vote should be the key indicator of electability, and thus drive the Super Delegates’ decisons at the Convention.
So - what chances Obama wins the most pledged delegates (a given?) but Hillary wins the national popular vote? How about if you include Florida and Michigan, or re-run them? This should be the probability that we use for assessing her chances.
When was the last time one of NuLab’s MP’s asked an non sycophantic question to McBroon? They even manage to screw up the planted questions, residents of the Calder Valley must wonder how international women’s day helps them. Broon must love set up questions from his placepersons.
Clegg shouted down again.
Where the hell is Masstrange?
McBroon announcing another review on the voting age, and a ‘citizenship’ ceremony.
264. But Sean, do you really think Cable would have done that?
How about Huhne? (i think he would have, btw)
Well well, what a cracking question time, suggest you take a look guys. At last Gordo seems to have got into his stride - the line about Dave being a hostage to his eurosceptic backbenchers hurt him, because it’s true. Even Harriet is looking happy.
265. “The might (stress might) do that if she wins to overall, national popular vote, which if you include Michigan and Florida she almost certainly will, though it is a stretch if they are excluded.”
Completely incorrect I’m afraid Morus.
See my post at 233.
Pay Out Day! Skybet, Bet365 and Coral have all paid out on McCain winning the GOP nomination. William Hill and Paddy Power still holding on to the money.
With all this Lib Dem chaos, I’m reminded of a Hague speech in which he mentioned the four stages of the Lib Dem’s. It was a classic.
268. The Russians are retreating from the suburbs of Berlin in disarray, mein Fuhrer!
Bill Burton of the Obama camp indicating that he now expects to win the Texas Caucus by a double didget margin. If accurate it will push the Obama delegate win in Texas to 7+ delegates.
263. It’s not so much that Cameron/Hague have played the EU thing well (though they have been good and united - that hunger for power!); it’s more that Labour have played it quite poorly.
What’sm ore, the Lib Dems, for whom this issue should be a gimme (we’re democrats! let’s have the vote we promised!) have played it quite catastrophically.
Smithson’s Rule that EU issues don’t count might limit short term damage. But the overall impression of the Lib Dems, right now, is of that busload of loonies from One Flew Over The Cuckoo’s Nest, when they went on their day trip and just wandered vaguely around, singing weird songs, falling over themselves, and wearing socks as hats.
Perceptions like this can be hard to shift.
Why the obsession with GP’s hours? Most workers will take the day off sick even before seeing the quack.
Morning and evening surgeries for dentists would make more sense, as almost most dental conditions do not mean you are too ill for work.
Rather than attacking GPs who are generally popular, the government would do better to recreate the old occupational health system.
268 Well Brown couldn’t have got any worse could he?
268. “- the line about Dave being a hostage to his eurosceptic backbenchers hurt him, because it’s true. ”
No.
Dave is a hostage to his voters. As all Conservatives understand they also are.
Your lot hold your voters in contempt and only behold themselves to Gordo.
Susan Kramer “walks out” of Shadow Cabinet (updated) also David Heath.
http://broganblog.dailymail.co.uk/2008/03/susan-kramer-wa.html
265 - She will find it very difficult to win the popular vote, even if she gets another 100,000 from the Michigan results.
She’s now 300,000 behind, take that to 200,000, add in a wider range of states in the future than there was last night and the fact that those totals miss out some of Obama’s caucus state strength and she looks as though she will finish behind by both those measures.
The only thing that can save her is an implosion by Obama.
[84] - “I reckon one of those guys campaigning actively will make a hell of a difference.”
A positive, or negative, difference to the campaign that they endorse?
In terms of numbers there are two things to look at:
1) Pledged delegates
2) Popular vote
Obama is almost certain to have a lead of (1), the only way for Clinton to win over supers in that case is to have a lead in (2).
She has cut the Obama PV lead by 300k. According to RCP Obama is on 12.64m to 12.05m for Clinton,a gap of about 600,000. This is without Michigan and Florida (if you include both she has a slight lead).
The remaining states probably benefit Obama, net.
Obama - Mississippi, Wyoming, North Carolina, Montana, South Dakota,
Clinton - Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Kentucky
Lean Obama - Oregon, Indiana
The baest case scenario for Clinton is to win her states heavily, and take Oregon and Indiana. Her problem is that Obama is likely to win his states big. Overall she needs to cut his popular vote lead here by 100-200k.
Then she will argue that Florida and Michigan should re-run their primaries (not caucuses, as that would have much lower turnout etc.). She would then need to win the PV here by about 400k to have a lead at the end.
Obama is the clear favourite, he is ahead and his path to the nomination is more plausible. Constructing scenarios for Clinton involve a lot of ifs. Those ifs might work, but are unlikely to.
Important things to look out for in the coming days and weeks -
1) Fundraising - how much did Obama make in February? How are the campaigns competing in terms of organisation and spending. If Obama and allies are able to heavily outspend Clinton for 6 weeks in Pennsylvania it may be too much for her.
2) Superdelegates/endorsements - if these continue going for Obama it will help him regain momentum. Bill Richardson is interesting, he said yesterday was D-Day. Will he think Clinton has done enough?
3) Party grandees - are people like Dean, Pelosi and Gore going to start hinting that a deal needs to be done soon for the sake of the party?
278 - the story is nonsense - Kramer had another meeting to go to.
[280] - The “guys” in 84 are Gore, the loser of 2000, and Edwards, loser of two nomination contests in a row and losing VP candidate in 2004.
Lots of things to watch and think about over the next few weeks:
1. Although catching up in pledged delegates seems very unlikely can Clinton win in the popular vote before the convention?
2. Now the Repbulican contest is over will lots more republicans vote in the democratic contest? If so who will it help? Will it for example dilute the AA impact in places like N Carolina and Mississippi?
3. What will now happen to the McCain/Obama and McCain/Clinton polls?
4. Did Rezko have any impact yesterday? Will it cause any erosion of Obama support over the next few weeks?
5. Will Obama ever make a short speech or will he gain the reputation of a ‘Captain Windbag’?
274. SeanT.
True. But you have to give due credit to Camerons/Hagues leadership to play this gently, and not fall into Gordons trap to paint the Conservative party as EU fanatics, without relinquishing one ounce of opposition to the treaty.
The whips have been fantastic in keeping the rebels down to 5/6 MPs too and letting Bill Cash (peace be upon him) and his ilk oppose the treaty with fervour in HoC debates, without this passionate opposition dominating the party.
My view isn’t that this is *just* a hunger for power. I think Conservatives truly have learnt their lesson.
268. Oh dear. I nominate this as the saddest post of the day, due to the bleakly obvious nature of the spin.
Why bother? Really? Why bother? You only have one life.
284 (5) Obama is the Dem’s answer to Fidel.
@Dan/282:
And you believe that? Naive.
263. I was thinking about this the other day while watching the Portillo documentary.
The trouble with your point is that the Tory party has become united via the mechanism of the total victory of the eurosceptic wing of the party. It’s not so much unity as takeover.
Even Cameron won the leadership (in part) by promising to be more Euroscpetic than Davis.
So I think the issue is for Cameron is that while he’s purchased unity in the Conservative party, it’s a unity that will fracture horribly as soon as it comes into contact with the sort of decisions any prospective government will face. It’ll be cries of betrayal all round if cameron ever does get to be PM.
However, I suspect he doesn’t care about that now, quite understandably.
181, But “does a deal need to be done soon for the sake of the party?”
You can argue this both ways.
A Barack Obama who has withstood all-out attack by the Clintons and more detailed scutiny by voters might be a better contender for eventually beating McCain than a Barack Obama who knocked out Hillary last night. A close race is an interesting race and maintains extremely high media profile.
So, having the fight continue all the way to the Convention is good, provided the Democrats can finally coalesce around the victor.
IDS on the BBC almost admitted that he would vote in favour of leaving the EU (with the new treaty) if there was an in-out referendum. Seems that the Tory Euro sceptics should put up or shut up.
270. What about Betfair?
now come on 286. be kind, he gets paid 39.5p plus vat for every verified astroturf posting.
O/T Apparently Gordon Brown just announced in the Commons a 3.8% rise of the minimum wage
268
Agreed.
Commiserations:you normally win when in EU rant mode:-)
Congratulations: on the book.
I posted this early yesterday - it’s why I think she *could* steal the popular vote:
“339 - She is 900k behind at the moment. (Florida, she beat him by 300k; in Michigan, she beat Undecided [read Obama] by 900k). Even if FL and MI were re-run, I think she beats him in the popular vote in those states by 600k combined.
Of the remaining states;
Obama wins OR, IN, NC, MT, SD, WY, MS, VT (total congressmen=35)
Clinton wins KY, WV, PA, RI, OH (total congressmen=46)
(Congressmen roughly proportional to population)
I think she could win Texas on Popular vote (but certain to lose on delegates) - let’s call it a draw for now (16 congressmen each)
On population, Clinton takes states accounting for 62 congressional districts v 51 congressional districts for Obama. Each one has 600k people, so 400k voters, so maybe 100k voters who actually vote in the Dem Primary (has ranged from 80k per district to 150k per district in this campaign).
If Clinton wins states with 6.2m democratic voters in the primary, and Obama wins primaries (only WY is a caucus) in states with 5.1m Democratic voters, that helps her.
If we take ‘winning’ to be approximately 55%-45%, Clinton would win 3.575m v 2.625m in ‘her’ states (margin of 900k), whereas Obama’s states would give him a margin of 510k (2.805 v 2.295), it is not difficult to see how she could triumph in the popular vote - in fact, give Obama’s strength in Caucuses, it would make sense that the delegate count flatters his strength in the popular vote.
I know there’s a huge amount of extrapolation here, but it is far from impossible, and leads me to believe she will continue to PA, win that state, and then begin to make a case for ‘Popular Victor’ to the Super Delegates. 6.2 at Betfair looks like value to me.
by Morus March 4th, 2008 at 7:24 pm “
277. William Hague thought he understood the voters on Europe and that’s why he lost an election on the back of it. Dave knows that Europe is not a major concern and that’s why one of his attempted reforms is to stop (in his words) “banging on about Europe”.
He has succeeded in moving the party towards the centre as regards public spending, support for the NHS etc as well as more affirmative action for women and ethnic minorities in his own party.
He has not succeeded at all as regards Europe - the party has sailed off to the right and over 60 MPs now belong to the risible BOO movement. Boo-hoo for Dave, it’s a big problem for him and by the end of today it will be a bigger one.
Apologies
295 shoudl be
286 not 268
291. “Seems that the Tory Euro sceptics should put up or shut up.”
Seems that the Libdems should just shut up.
For the record, I think the ‘pressure to quit for the sake of the party’ is only ever going to surplus to Obama’s requirements.
I don’t think Gore, Edwards, and Pelosi will wade in until heis victory is essentially certain (popular vote AND pledged delegates) when it is not necessary. That’s why last night and the media response have been important - they don’t want to be seen to be suppressing a popular candidate if they still have a theoretical chance.
282 Was it
“Sorry I’ve had enough. I’ve got better things to do and had planned a coffee and biscuits with X anyway before this rubbish came up” sort of other alternative meeting rather than
“Sorry, I’m such a ditz, double booked myself and while this is important, “Shadow” Cabinet and all, this other meeting with my hairdresser took ages to arrange” type of meeting?
289. But in a way the same happened to Blair. Labour united around him while reviling many of his beliefs - including an illegal war! They had been so long out of power they stopped caring. And as long as Blair kept winning they somehow didn’t mind.
Once in power, Cameron will need to throw red meat to the sceptics. I predict they will engineer a eurorow, and move Britain to some kind of official semidetached position. A law will be passed that means any more handovers of power require plebiscites.
That will silence the sceptics. For a while. Eventually there may be a reckoning, as you say, but as long as Cammo keeps winning, and does the above, that should be good for, ooh, two terms of unity.
Is McBroon proposing a review to push forward enhanced ‘political’ education, a lower voting age and some sort of citizenship ceremony. Not sure how this would be received by pupils, schools and parents, and I doubt that many teenages would buy into this ‘vision’. Do Pbers have a view on the political maturity of teenagers?
If this is the best McBroon can come up with then he might as well retire.
297. How, exactly? Throughout the debate over the last few weeks the tories have been united behind Cameron. Whatever the personal views of his MP’s, Cameron has them towing the party line. The lib dems are in a mess, with front bench MP’s dissagreeing with their leader. Labour have a back bench revolt to deal with. How does this all equate to Cameron being in trouble?
297 Can you name me the 60 Conservative MPs in BOO?
Here’s a starter
http://www.betteroffout.co.uk/sup01.htm#MEMBERS_OF_PARLIAMENT:
225. Cheers Gwynfa. I noticed a post here last week where odds were posted of HRC pulling out this week. Hope nobody took them.
302. the sceptics have been silenced for more reasons than Cameron doing well, more to do with old wounds from the 90’s. Most of them are now more worried about splitting the party again than having their say over it, so have kept quiet and towed the party line. This will not change until the tories have been in government for a while, they won’t want to go back to the wilderness.
301 According to Brogan, Kramer’s meeting was with the Speaker.
(And in my book, that’s a damn less important than a hairdresser’s appointment!)
304 - I think it is because the Captain is on the good ship Insanity on a cruise round fantasy-land!
305. theres only a few there, nowhere near 60.
297. Why is the BOO movement risible? I can’t see myself joining it (!) but the Swiss and Norweigans do okay. Is there really that much to be afraid of?
291. He said he would have to give it some thought not that he would vote to come out. Perhaps he might abstain, or is that just the prerogative of the Lib Dems?
” I disagree think Clegg comes over as clear and concise on this issue.
People understand it, unlike Cameron`s position.
I have spoken to many Conservative voters who like the fact its straight forward.”
Disagree, Clegg is trying to walk off the pitch with the ball instead of taking part in the penalty shootout. Cowardly really.
Typical Lib Dem tactics. Move the debate using ’sure to fail’ ammendments in an attempt to either deflect damage or create a position from which they can blame someone else for not supporting them.
Clegg has to be careful, he is heading for a nasty backlash if he keeps this up. He’s managing to upset pretty much everyone at the moment.
307. Also the sceptics know they have completely won. The europhile wing of the Tories, still so powerful in the early 1990s, has been reduced to a tiny rump of has-beens and never weres. There’s no need to rock the boat anymore, the argument is over.
Semi-detached status is already here. We are out of the euro, outside Schengen. These precedents will be used to carve out further areas of ‘devolution’ by the next Tory government. There won’t be a dramatic fanfare-accompanied ‘withdrawal’, but a slow, quiet edging away from the EU which will achieve much the same thing.
291, he didn’t, he said he’d be torn between the two choices.
Decent PMQs. Cameron was solid on the treaty but should’ve asked all 6 on it. Brown managed not to shake too much and indulged his surreal sense of humour (claiming the Tories had changed their minds not the government).
Both eclipsed by the continuing disaster also known as Nick Clegg. All he had to do was back the Treaty, and he’d have a united party, but the government under pressure, please the voters and keep his manifesto commitment. As it is, he’s managed to allow both Tories and Labour to mock him effortlessly, disunited his party and infuriated democrats and sceptics.
And, even better, he actually raised the issue himself at PMQs!
Tragically, it’s the British people who will pay the price for Calamity’s ineptitude.
289. “The trouble with your point is that the Tory party has become united via the mechanism of the total victory of the eurosceptic wing of the party.”
“Total Victory”
Exactly - that’s my point!
The victory *has* been total. The issue isn’t even debated any more. There are no more Tory europhiles. They have ceased to be. They are dead parrots.
Rather like Tory supporters of the corn law… Rather like Tory supporters of the Empire… Rather like Tory supporters of corporal punishement. Gone. Gone. Gone. (Well, apart from a pitiful few…)
They aren’t new Tory europhile candidates coming through. There aren’t active Tory europhile campaign groups. There isnt a debate going on. Even Ken Clarke has almost given up.
And they aren’t coming back.
I just don’t see “Europe” as being an issue again. The debate will be on *to what degree* a Conservative government is Eurosceptic, but never again a pitched battle between the pros and the antis.
Them days is over.
You also have to consider that the people of Britain are also, as a whole, pretty bloody Eurosceptic. So it won’t matter if Dave has to come out swinging against the EU from time to time to appease the crowd, since the people will love it to.
Does anyone think that had Brown did what he said he would, and put Lisbon to a referendum, that he would have had a hope in hell of winning?
Exactly.
313. Key problems with Clegg’s position. a) it’s complicated b) it’s a bit different from 2005 pledge c) it looks like he is “playing” politics d) abstaining is hardly a strong position e) it’s very funny
@Casino Royale:
There may be no Tory Europhiles left to speak of, but there are still a large block of Tory Europragmatists, such as myself. You’re mistaken if you think all Tories, or even a significant majority, are of the Better Off Out variety.
I still think there’s a chance to repatriate significant powers whilst remaining a member, before needing to use the nuclear option. Now, I may (as some Eurosceptics suggest) be entirely deluded, but I think it’s worth a try first.
Total withdrawal remains a last resort at this stage.
Of course the Lisbon treaty has more words than the half-baked so called “Constitution.” It has to have for all the opt-outs the UK secured! The ones that ensure this is substantially different for the UK whether it is or not for the countries whose politicians sean with a silent wat conveniently quotes above.
So does he not understand the opt outs or does he conveniently ignore them? and does this constitute a fib, a lie or a political convenience on his part?
319. I am also a europragmatist. Leaving the EU is the last possible option, however the EU in its present state is unworkable. It’s corrupt, wound up in red tape, and highly unpopular. It needs sorting root to branch, something this treaty will NOT do.
319. That’s a position almost all mainstream Tories would agree with.
320. astroturf alert
@Cuddles/321:
Aye. Which is why Lisbon would have been resoundingly rejected by the UK populace, were Broon not a fraud, a coward and a liar.
Imagine a country in which our PM wasn’t scum. Oh what a country that would be.
319. Not at all Martin, you are correct. Don’t think I said all Torys are BOO variety? I just said the “eurosceptic” argument (no more integration, too much already in some areas) had won.
It is now a question of *to-what-degree* we are eurosceptic/europragmatic (whatever you like to call it) and where we draw the line on sovereignty and repatriating power.
That is a debate I am happy to have with you and - more importantly - I’m totally relaxed about having it.
302/307/314. I think you make my point for me somewhat. If a Cameron government goes to the next European summit, as far as I can tell their line effectively has to be no further handover of powers, no social chapter extensions, no security or defence co-operation.
No, No, No!
It’s in effect, the final victory of Mrs T over the Tory party.
Now, this will be utterly unacceptable to our EU partners. So a putative Cameron government will be faced with a huge strategic choice. Stay true to their Euro agenda and end up with a foriegn and constitutional crisis, or negotiate and be charged with betrayal at home.
Now, Harry suggests that our EU colleagues will accept a gradual British “semi-detachment”. Aside from whether that’s good for the UK, he might have a point, but I suspect that the European countries will not be as keen as he expect to allow the UK to enjoy this position as he expects. Winning the opt outs he talked about was hard work. Why would it be in their interests to give Britain what he suggests? The only reason they do so ultimately is they think Britain’s presence is a net plus for the EU. If they stops, the might consider telling us to s**t or get off the pot.
323. Thats the main reason I agree. The EU has spent years whinging about how the media make it unpopular, when in fact they’re doing a good job all by themselves. Pointless rules and regulations, intefering in everything, ignoring the french farmers etc etc. The europhiles have failed to put any counter to this bad press, and have just made the EU more and more intrusive instead. This has resulted in britain disliking the EU so much, that Brown knows he cant win any referendum (even an in or out one would be close).
315.”Tragically, it’s the British people who will pay the price for Calamity’s ineptitude.”
They are certainly the biggest losers in this fiasco, I will be watching the vote tonight with a keen interest in how Sir Robert Smith and Danny Alexander vote on this issue.
The reason Cameron wins this battle (as far as public opinion is concerned) and Brown and Clegg both lose, is because Cameron has the moral authority of being the only one sticking to his manifesto commitment. All the rest is smoke and mirrors. Nonsense designed to confuse the electorate. All three parties stood on a platform of holding a referendum on the constitution and only one is sticking to that commitment. End. Of. Story.
I’d like to see Cameron tying Brown’s referendum cop out in with;
His “coronation” as Labour leader after bullying all rivals from standing against him.
The “bottled election” and Brown’s cowardice.
323 - Stop being so personal. Your comments do nothing to further your argument and are just silly childish abuse.
325 - Whilst mentioning Mrs T it is worth also mentioning that nobody wanted to give Britain a rebate until Mrs T went there and slapped them around until they gave us the rebate she wanted. This rebate stayed until this government signed it away in a most craven act of political surrender. The lesson being that we can get others to accede to our point providing we have a leader with a spine and the political will to argue the case!
No wonder this site has turned into a Tory circle-jerk.
316. I don’t disagree with you about the tory party. You just seem to confuse the fact that the Euro sceptics utterly control the tory party with the suggestion that this means the Euro debate is over. It might be in the Conservative party, but it isn’t anywhere else.
296 - Morus - She ‘won’ Michigan by 100k over undecideds. Total wins in Florida and Michigan were 450k.
Take the states that voted last night out of the equation and what do you have?
Obama wins OR, IN, NC, MT, SD, WY, MS, (total congressmen=34)
Clinton wins KY, WV, PA, (total congressmen=24)
She is currently 600k behind. She needs to win the remaining states by 100-200k and then win a rerun in FL and MI by similar margins. Pretty unlikely, but just about possible.
329 - Your comments do nothing to further your argument and are just silly childish abuse.
331 - No wonder this site has turned into a Tory circle-jerk.
Pot. Kettle.
Michael Crick’s blog at the beeb is saying that a Lib Dem front bench member has resigned over the vote tonight. Guido is saying that up to four may end resigning.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/newsnight/2008/03/lib_dem_resignation.html
If true, it’s not good for Clegg, a terrible performance in PMQ’s and then this
325. The EU would have rather a large problem without the British financial contribution, for one thing. The EU is actually in a weak negotiating position because of this - and they know it.
The only theoretical leverage they could have is some kind of threat to disrupt trade - but this is legally impossible while the UK remains an EU member, and virtually impossible even if the UK were outside due to international agreements - apart from being self-defeating given the importance of the UK as an export market for the rest of the EU (bigger than the US).
It’s notable this kind of threat was never made either at the Thatcher or Major governments when they demanded concessions.
Whenever Britain has fought for opt-outs and rebates, it has got them. The same will be true in future.
I have crunched the numbers and would just like to note that following my evening of betting on US politics I am no less than three pence up in total. Result!
330.James, well said!!!
Morning all. Are we suing Betfair over Texas yet?
O/T off to try persuade canbet/iasbert to settle up on McCain
331, it’s almost as if sticking to your manifesto instead of refusing to give the people what you promised is a recipe for respect, if not popularity.
By the way, anyone know when the vote is due to take place?
Yet another thread turns into an Anti-European wa*k-fest. The ignorance on display seems to be directly proportional to the venom. I guess you guys just can’t give it a rest- but Jeez you make it boring for the rest of us…
341. The arrogance and condescenion you display is also directly proportional to the angry bluster. But it’s kind of entertaining to read, nevertheless…
331 I have been posting on here for well over a year now Flumpers and people were saying that then - personally I miss your boundless and totally tribal enthusiasm for Welsh Socialism - you should post more often!
the site is at its best when
a) discussing betting on politics
b) discussing the Oscars
c) taking the Mickey out of Roger
d) taking meandering but friendly detours into totally OT but interesting topics such as the machinations of Court Life in 15C Florence.
341. when the level of opposition is you, then you can see why its mostly anti-european both here and in the country. Cant win, so will insult is your motto?
342 Unlike your posts which are inane drivel and never entertaining to read .
345. I would say pot kettle but thats already been used.
345. Stop sulking Mark.
Clinton hints at sharing the ticket ……. but who tops it in Hillaryworld !?!? ….. silly question.
http://wcbstv.com/topstories/clinton.obama.ticket.2.669799.html
Thank you kingbongo! I have a fan
WRT the locals in a few week’s time. Labour here in Swansea has been campaigning hard now for months, what with weekly canvasses, leaflets etc etc. I suppose the silver lining from loosing the council 4 years ago is that it has given the local party a kick up the backside and it will never take voters for granted again (not that it ever should have, but a long time in control distances you, inevitably).
I wonder how Clegg’s misfortunes will affect their local votes? Mike German is a complete lame duck for the LDs here in Wales, but their council leader is in the local rag every bleeding day - and old Liz herself in coming to town on Friday to open the re-furbished leisure centre (the closure of which cost Labour the council 4 years ago!)
Why is everyone so upset? Surely it’s a matter of public record that Brown is a liar and a coward, especially over Lisbon.
I feel entirely justified in using the word ’scum’ for a PM who goes back on his word, and demonstrates overt cowardice and contempt for democracy.
330/336. I find both your comments intriguing in the way they reveal the mindset of the Tory party on this issue. We need to stand up to Europe, show spine, slap them about a bit and so on. That way they’ll be forced to give us our money/rebates/opt outs because fundamentally they can’t do without us.
Fundamentally it sounds like you believe that the EU does very little for the UK, that we ourselves have little reward for membership so it’s only a question of how much we stand up to their wiles and stratagems. Fair enough, that’s your view, but don’t believe it’s the view in the rest of Europe, or even in the UK as a whole.
350 - You may feel justified, but it doesn’t stop you being a twit!
351. we’d be able to find out what the publics opinion on europe was, if we were allowed a referendum on the treaty.
Those wanting to bet on the Lisbon Treaty rather than just talk about it might fancy Paddy Power’s 5/1 on a ‘no’ vote in the Irish referendum in the summer. The last poll showed a clear ‘yes’ lead but with a massive 64% undecided. Before the first Nice treaty a clear ‘yes’ lead in the polls turned into a ‘no’ result once the undecideds made up their minds. If Bertie Ahern is still in power in the summer he’s going to find it very difficult to sell anything to the electorate. The referendum should pass, but 5/1 seems to me to be good value.
I have just phoned Hills to ask them when they are going to settle my McCain bet - they say that they will not do so until ‘its official’, whatever that means
341.My, my we are getting down and nasty with the insults Cicero.
Meanwhile over at the coffee house blog “Europe dominates PMQs”
“Nick Clegg simply disgraced himself, accusing Brown of colluding with the Tories to block an in-or-out referendum “that the British people really want”. What rank dishonesty. “There is not much principle, Mr Speaker, in recommending abstention” said Brown. Exactly the right response. Cameron covered his face and shook his head while Clegg spoke. Exactly the right response. Brown says he agrees with Clegg that the Tories are being driven by Eurosceptics – if only.”
291
Talking about IDS,I thought the Lib Dems had their IDS moment with Ming but it seems that they saved that for calamity,Huhne was absolutely right with his description and we haven’t had to wait long at all.
Deary deary me, the euro outies are trying to bore us all to death today it seems.
Funny enough none of them apart from the beast of bodmin (who has the distinction of being the only one among them who is actually readable) ever even mentions betting when they post here.
Perhaps we might run a betting angle on what percentage of posts the respective euro-bores will clog this thread with before it dies of un-natural causes !!
My money is over 80% !!
351. I think most people in the UK don’t think EU membership is on balance a particularly good deal for Britain any longer, though the degree to which people think it is a poor deal varies a lot.
From my own perspective, the cost-benefit balance was broadly neutral/mildly positive up until Maastricht - and has become increasingly negative since.
@358
Dismal Europhiles fly upset that people see through their Britain-hating treachery shocker?
I AM FLABBERGASTED, I tells ya.
351. Sorry Hopi, you make sensible comments on Europe much of which I agree with but I am not sure many of us ‘minor sceptics’ give a damn about what the rest of Europe thinks and I am fairly sure that a healthy majority of the UK are sceptics of one sort or another, thats why Brown wont call the referendum..he is scared he’ll lose. Its pure politics..as a result I agree with some of what Martin says in terms of Brown being cowardly and mendacious but as I have posted before I do think he is a decent man…he is just a misguided politician acting like..well..a misguided politician.
I agree that the site works best when all sides of the spectrum are posting..astrotrufers like 320 dont add much though. I think Red Flump is as entitled to bring us up on calling Brown ’scum’ as we are on getting on those lefties who spew nonsense about ‘nasty little tory toffs’.
there are a couple of LabDem posters though who its difficult to remain polite to..
358. might as well have copy and pasted that comment directly from mark senior.
356. The coffee house blog is increasingly becoming a partisan Tory platform, without any pretence of objectivity. Clegg has made some mistakes but it is hardly the calamity that some are calling it as.
As ever on Europe, the Tory press and blogosphere need to get a bit of perspective.
Incidentally, isn’t this whole affair a belated gift from Michael Howard to his (practically anointed) successor? It was Howard who spent the first months of 2004 harrying Blair on the EU Constitution and secured the referendum commitment that Labour have come to regret (IIRC the Lib Dems backed Howard on that call).
I don’t think you’ll get anyone to take you up on that bet Jack, I think we’ve in for a long session of them today……
cuddles, you have noticed we discuss betting here. Just thought I’d mention it as it seems to have passed you by dear boy…
359 Jack, do you really think it will be as low as 80%? Think of all the posters who were here last time you were a regular contributor - where do you think they have all gone, and why?
“Calamity Clegg”
Teehee. That’s one camp musical I wouldn’t go to see.
364. I don’t think he’s a calamity, he’s just bodged up this issue quite badly. Whether or not it gets worse will depends on the vote later today, and how many of his spokespeople have resigned.
Read this on Drudge Report and it brought me down to earth with a bump after last night in Milan.
I am presently enquiring from bookies their prices on a knighthood for Arsene Wenger after Arsenal win the Champions Trophy shortly.
NEW YORK (CBS) ― Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton hinted at the possibility of a democratic “dream ticket” with Sen. Barack Obama.
Speaking on the Early Show on CBS, Clinton said “that may be where this is headed, but we have to decide who is on the top of the ticket.”
Clinton said the race between her and Obama remains “incredibly close,” with just “smidgens of difference” between them.
Clinton’s remarks after her campaign won two big states yesterday: Ohio and Texas. She also won Rhode Island. The wins enabled her campaign to break Obama’s 12-state winning streak and pick up some momentum of its own.
Speaking later on the Early Show, Obama congratulated Clinton on her victories while maintaining he would be able to wrap up the democratic nomination.
“We still have close to an insurmountable lead in delegates,” Obama said. Obama said his campaign had won nearly twice as Clinton as well as a greater share of the popular vote.
(© MMVIII, CBS Broadcasting Inc. All Rights Reserved.)
364. I agree its probably not a calamity but thats probably because not that many people are interested in it…hint for everyone to move on…
365 Galloglass. Well, I have been known to stray off thread with the odd dalliance into the finer points of Jacobite history ….. but ye gods !!! …three hundred and more posts on Europe !!!!
It’s enough to want one slop some paint in the great hall and watch the ensuing event with relish !!!
263 Why has noone commented on Hague/ Cameron etc….
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article3485788.ece
She has.
364. Where the blogosphere leads, the country follows….:)
What short memories you lefties have - in the mid-1990s it was almost impossible to find any press comment that was favourable to the Tories - deservedly so, to an extent. Had the blogosphere existed then, it would have been overwhelmingly Labour.
The tide has gone out for you guys, I’m afraid.
355: yeah, that’s pretty much what canbet said. Didn’t bother asking iasbet, they’re essentially just a skin so would have the same answer.
Might be they settle up when things become more obvious, eg Bush receives McCain at White House, and a week or two of him being referred to as the Republican nominee. Also, Ron Paul might formally drop out.
366. I see you’ve had condescension lessons from him too, pip pip.
332. I wasn’t confusing anything of the sort.
My comments clearly refer to the Conservative Party ONLY. It’s quite clearly there in black and white.
Go back and read again.
362. I suppose that’s my point. In opposition it’s easy not to give a damn what the rest of Europe thinks. Trouble is government can’t operate like that. Harry said earlier that every time Britain demanded opt outs it got them. It’s just as true to say that every time Britain won opt outs it made concessions. The Tory policy appears now to be no more concessions, on anything. I can’t see that working out well.
Funnily enough when we were in opposition I was about the most euro sceptical labourite I knew. I wasn’t clear on the point of the single currency, further powers to the EU, didn’t understand why’d we supported ERM, was glad we had opt outs etc etc. Indeed I’d probably have called myself a minor sceptic too.
Today I believe there’s much wrong with the EU (agriculture, anyone?). But I also believe that it’s fundamentally a good thing for Britain, that we need to be part of it economically and strategically and that it’s changing for the better. Which is why I can’t support a response that begins from fundamentally an opposite position and proceeds inexorably to the logic of Euro-abandonment.
367 - Indeed… I sometimes feel a bit like the person who’s still going to the same old pub, and wondering where everybody else has gone, and why they didn’t tell me they were leaving…
355 I’d have thought it obvious - it’s when he’s endorsed by the convention.
378. I disagree with your last paragraph entirely - it’s really just a rehash of the discredited europhile Tory arguments of 15 years ago - but at least you are addressing the issue.
Unlike some of your fellow lefties whose mature response today has been to stick their fingers in their ears and chant ‘na na na na na we’re not listening’.
365/367 Galloglass/Augustus. Sorry folks … I’m off to find the paint !!!!
Given that Lib dems and Clegg have been criticized for being invisible,then will any publicity be goood publicity.Personally I doubt it will make much differnce either way in the polls.
rogerh
374. “Where the blogosphere leads, the country follows.”
This isn’t a partisan point, but I don’t see any causal connection. The 1999 Euro-elections were seen by many as a great Tory triumph on Europe, and I’m sure those who are now Tory bloggers and posters on this site thought that Europe would be a strong card for the Tories to play in 2001. Almost a decade later, the Tories are still in opposition with less than 200 seats.
However, withdrawal from the EU has to be an option. You can’t storm into the Justus Lipsius with a scowl and demand to unilaterally disengage from the CAP, the CFP, the Social Chapter, environmental and immigration and asylum policy, without something to threaten President Blair with.
If he says “what if we say no?”, and you’ve already ruled out withdrawal, your single biggest stick for beating Blair’s European Council with has just evaporated.
So it has to be an option, albeit one we’d rather not take if possible.
To go on topic for a second, can I say what I said after Super Tuesday:
Obama won last night.
In fact he won it more than he did Super Tuesday. Yes, I know it sounds crazy, but its true. Clinton can not now come close in delegates or the popular vote. She will probably be 150 delegates behind going into the convention, and 450 of the 800 superdelegates have already decided. (I know they can change, but she won’t have a strong enough moral case to win over those who have already pledged for Obama).
That means she will need to win over 70% of the remaining unpledged superdelegates on an argument of “I lost the popular vote, I lost on delegates, I lost on the number of states, but I’ve won the big states and I am tougher with McCain.” And this is when senior figures have told the superdelegates they shouldn’t overturn the people’s will.
She needed to rack up delegates and she didn’t. She hasn’t got better than a 10% chance at the nomination.
378. I concede its a good point and I am pretty close to you on your last para as well. I am definitley an ‘innie’ but whilst conceding the complexity and difficulty of negotiation within the EU I believe that probably for different reasons both Brown and Blair gave way too much away on the budget and lisbon and that there is scope to be much more ornery over CAP etc..
Please, please, please, please, please…
…can we stop this thread being a stupid Euro argument. There is far too much insulting. To paraphrase Obama “there is far more that unites us than divides us.”
@388:
No there isn’t.
Wow. Just to say: I agree wholeheartedly with posts 386 and 387 despite them being on completely different subjects.
378. Other than the EFTA, what do you consider the key advantages of being in the EU? (I would prefer to be in the EU, personally, but its marginal.)
My main problem with the EU is the mentality of the thing. I believe the way for institutions to get better is by having to prove themselves to the people, otherwise the board get sacked and a new lot comes in. But this simply doesn’t happen with the EU. The same people stay in power year after year, decade after decade. If the populace ever objects to what they’re doing, they simply go over their heads. It’s as if they think a democratic mandate is a nice bit of legitimacy if you can get it, but if you don’t there’s nothing to worry about.
I’m not going to be one of these fanatics that compares the EU to some sort of fascist tyranny, but I think a good comparison of where the thing is heading is the GDR. The people at the head of the East German state genuinely thought they knew what was best for the people, and that if the people were wrong they would deny them their say. What the people of East Germany got wasn’t a brutal society, but a bureaucratic state that simply expanded, trampled on people’s rights in the name of greater progress and didn’t pay attention to people’s concerns. Just because the people at the top believed in what they were doing didn’t make it any less awful.
This is the mistake europhiles make. They assume that because the people at the top have benevolent motives it will be all be alright and we’ll end up with a nice democratic, responsive and accountable federal state. Despite all the evidence pointing to the fact that democracy and accountability is the last thing on the Euroelites minds.
382 If you have a spare tin or two, Jack, please could you let me have one of them? Any colour will do, as long as it’s slow drying.
Boulton on sky reporting that 3 frontbench libdems will vote for a referendum then resign their shadow cabinet post.
They’ve all got itchy cleggnuts.
391. Interesting comparison.
Incidentally, I think the EU is really a conservative - Christian Democratic construction. In so far as it tends towards protectionism, it insulates elites from popular scrutiny, and it provides plenty of largesse to target at constituents - this is the Toryism of the 1860s, and to some extent of the corporatist 1950s.
In any case, as we’ve seen over Northern Rock, EU competition rules may make it impossible for the government ever again to control the commanding heights of the economy.
391. Well, to take just one example that might appeal to Conservtive free market types, If it wasn’t for EU rules on state aid, I think we’d have made much worse decsions on support for industry under both Conservative and Labour governments. other countries would have made worse decisions still.
I also think having the ability to negotiate on issues like CAP, regional policy, infrastucture, security, euro wide standards and other issues is really important. These things are usually so dull that even I get bor by them, but they do matter.
I think the problem of democratic legitimancy is a real one, but there’s an issue here for euro pragmatists too. If we went for an elected European leader, that person would have an authority and a voice far beyond that of the current EU. If they wanted more integration they’d have a democratic mandate for it. So be careful what you wish for, I suppose.
Personally I think the irony of Lisbon is that it’s a treaty that does more than anything to define the union as a coming together of seperate nations, not a homogenisation. I think it puts more power where it should be, with the democratically elected national leaders. To that extent, it’s a huge victory for pragmatic europeans, but a crushing dissapointment to both federalists and sceptics.
391. An otherwise very good post, but…
“What the people of East Germany got wasn’t a brutal society..”
I’m not sure the victims of the Stasi and the Red Army would agree.
286 - I’d bet at 6/1 on Hillary to be the nominee, so a 10% chance sounds a little stingy, but certainly no more than 17% (5/1).
Also, I’ve only just realised that the Cleggnut has really stupid hair.
393. Calamity Clegg!
Despite my delight at the Lib-Dem difficulties, I’d still have preferred (much preferred) them to have done the honorable thing and voted en-mass for a referendum.
With Conservative, Lib-Dem, SNP, PC, DUP and Labour rebel support, there *might* have been a chance of forcing the governments hand on this and we’d have had the vote we all promised.
It’s all the fault of Clegg.
Clegg. Clegg. Clegg.
David Cameron backs John McCain in US race..Oh dear
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/01/24/wuspolls224.xml
396. Be careful - you appear to be arguing in your first paragraph that bureaucratic government is preferable to democratic government if the outcomes are deemed to be ‘better’.
That’s certainly what a lot of the EU-elite believe, but similar views have also been expressed by, inter alia, the South American military governments of the 1960s and 1970s and the Chinese Communist Party of today. I’m not sure you would want to be seen as singing from the same song sheet as that group.
395. Well I think it’s a combination of Christian Democrats and Social Democrats, who are actually much more in agreement then historical right-left divisions would have you believe. They believe in the good order of the country as decided by them. They accept a market system is the best strategy for growth, but they want a lot of intervention in the economy as they are suspicious of capitalism generally. They also are very willing to buy off support for various demographics and lobby groups with generous subsidies etc, a small price to pay for their vision of Europe coming about. The Social Democrats have also now accepted the Christian Democratic view of the people on a social level - that they have to be restrained and controlled otherwise people’s innate bad attitudes will run wild, so a good deal of social checking up is needed. Both also believe in a centralised single-state Europe as a strong power, one which can promote this Christian-Social Democrat view abroad.
Obviously the “democrat” term in these philosophies is rather hollow.
401 That was over a month ago, and it wasn’t an ‘endorsement’ in the American sense - he just said some nice things about McCain (and Obama) during an after-dinner speech. All the same, probably not wise to talk about a specific candidate until they’re President Elect.
401. Its the Telegraph that say he hasbacked McCain. He has done no such thing. He has praised him as he has another candidate.
Its just the DT up to its usual tricks with DC.
Personally I enjoy seeing Europhobes foaming at the mouth and worry when there’s reasonable criticism. Mr Coxall can’t even guess how motivating I find him.
I would agree with Socrates that the EU is too much an intergovernmental project (like the UN or the WTO), from which people in Britain feel as detached as any other mostly indirectly elected body - the European Parliament has filled the gap in many countries where media reporting is more Europe-friendly, but not (yet) here.
A minor sidelight on the EU issue which may have strategic significance is that the mutual aggro between Tories and LibDems in Westminster is much greater than Tory-Labour hostility - not just on Europe but right down to low-profile things like the Energy Bill Committee. I think that Clegg would have real trouble in delivering the parliamentary party into supporting a Tory government in a hung parliament unless the mood changes markedly - and real reluctance himself.
401,
Do try to keep up, chap
That was over a month ago.
He “praised McCain” out of he Republican delegates (which, according to the article, “…as the contest between the candidates in the Republican primary race is so close, Mr Cameron may have made tactical error in coming out so strongly for a contender whose victory is still not assured. “. The key basis of the praise was McCain’s firm stance against trade protectionism.
As it turned out, not so big an error, there.
Of the Democrats, in the same article, he said: “I’m enjoying watching Barack Obama. I think he’s a brilliant speaker, I think his optimism and sense of hope for the future is inspiring a lot of people. It’s great to see. Too often [politics] gets down to hope and fear and I think it’s wonderful when hope wins.
“I’m enjoying watching him, I must say. I think he’s compelling.”
If Clinton wins, that might be a faux pas; if it’s McCain vs Obama this November, there’s nothing to bring up, really.
Oh what a calimity Clegg!!!
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1308117,00.html
403. I think that sums it up pretty well.
406. Nick - we find smug ‘ex’-communists like you very motivating as well.
“I think that Clegg would have real trouble in delivering the parliamentary party into supporting a Tory government in a hung parliament unless the mood changes markedly - and real reluctance himself”
He may have rather less of a Parliamentary Party to deliver, after the next election.
408 Foolish man. Never give a command unless there’s a fair chance it will be obeyed.
For the first time in 16 years membership opf the party I’m genuinely at a complete loss as to what the party is doing. I’m strongly opposed to a Lisbon referendum for ereasons of principle but I said weeks ago that the appropriate way forward was a free vote.
1. clearly the commons party is badly split.
2. we promised a referendum on the Constitution in our manifesto
3. While I don’t agree that this treaty is the constitution ultimately its a matter of judgement. If we back a ref on maastricht and now one on In or Out its difficult to argue that any great principle is offended by having on Lisbon.
4. the low politics of this suggest the party just doesn’t have the political capital in the bank at the mo for another leader to immolate himself in his first hundred days. Just give people a free vote and be done with it.
While its quite possible that we might get a point or two out of the extra media coverage in the short term the loss of credibility with the political class will be far worse in the longer term.
406.
Clegg would have real trouble delivering anything.
[That gives him more plenty in common with Gordon.]
410 - It isn’t inconceivable that he may have less of a Parliamentary Party before the next election!
@Nick Palmer:
I’m not foaming. As I said, I consider myself a Europragmatist. There seems to be very little doubt here that although both the Clucking Fist and Cleggnut have behave dishonourably over Lisbon, only one has come away making himself look like a complete tit.
Interestingly, Urban Dictionary gives a description of ‘clegnut’ which is a perfect metaphor for Cleggy and his relationship to the British body politic.
411. Yep - Wonder if they want Skeleton back yet?
Mind you maybe we should be kind to Clegg as we want him to stay! If Vince Cable was the Lib Dem leader………! How gutted the Lib Dems must be to be led by Mr Bean and not Mr Cable.
396. Which decisions are those? Even if you are right, which I’m not convinced about, I would rather a democratically elected leader made the wrong decision than an undemocratic elite made the right one. Long term, democracy is going to make sure more decision-making is better.
As for negotiating on issues, all it ends up with is a buying off of various factions. The CAP? Let’s buy off French farmers. The cfp? Let’s buy off Spanish Fishermen. Common standards? Let’s buy off small Italian food merchants. Infrastructure? Let’s buy off poor rural communities in Eastern Europe. Oh, and while we’re at it we’ll give ourselves a whole load of perks and jobs for life.
Of course, these sorts of backroom deals happen in any system, but the sheer consistency and scale of it in Europe is unbelievable. The reason? Because there is no democracy, there are no competing arguments. The ONLY way to get something through in Europe is to have a huge deal with a lot of back-scratching and buying off the various interests. And the single-minded desire to have a centralised Europe means they have to buy off various groups to make up for their lack of democratic appeal.
Of course, you might say democracy can come later. But will it? What reason do have to believe that? If we keep transferring power the elite is getting what they want and never have to surrender their control. We need to stop it now. Until they realise their dream isn’t going to happen until they open up to transparency and fair elections, we’re never going to get a proper democratic system.
Utterly stupid politics from Clegg from beginning to end, what the hell is he doing?
My support for Huhne is looking more and more prescient anyway, what a disaster, conjured out of nowhere.
412. “3. While I don’t agree that this treaty is the constitution ultimately its a matter of judgement. If we back a ref on maastricht and now one on In or Out its difficult to argue that any great principle is offended by having on Lisbon.”
Could you argue your case on this? I genuinely haven’t heard a single Europhile argue the differences between the two treaties.
Maybe Huhne will challange for the leadership in the “national Interest”!
:lol: 
412/418. Clegg hasn’t a legg to stand on.
Won’t be long until he’s just referred to as C’.
412.
Yellow[?] Submarine. The LDs in blogland have been suffering abit of internel denial on this [in comparison with Tory Homers - a small number of which are easily exercised about - not much.]
Never easy to say something like that, especially in front of a tough crowd. Hats off to you. I for one will do my best to lay off [for a bit].
406. But the European parliament isn’t democratic at all! For a start, it’s only one branch out of three major ones. Secondly, its by far the least powerful of those branches. Thirdly, the God awful electoral system means the MEPs are chosen before hand by (largely integrationist) party elites in the various countries. You simply can’t claim it’s down to media bias in the UK.
There’s a good way to prove me wrong. Give me an example of a European election that has caused a change in direction in any area of EU policy. Can you even name one?
I think the tragedy for the Lib Dems is that the Tim Farron and David Heath whilst doing the right thing are now more likely to get dumped by the electorate due to the damaging split in the party that Clegg’s intransigence has provoked. I actually feel sorry for the hard working activists in marginals who are seeing their efforts flamed for no great principle. If I were a Lib Dem I would be utterly incandescant.
@423:
Labour, of course, had a choice between STV and a horifically undemocratic closed list system. Guess which one they chose. Go on, guess.
425. Are you an STV advocate Martin?
@424:
Lying to the electorate and insulting our intelligence is “doing the right thing”?
From Real Clear Politics on last night:
Last night Clinton made only modest gains among the pledged delegates. As of this writing, no estimate for the delegate allocation in Texas was available, but through the other three states Clinton only netted 26 pledged delegates. This bodes well for Obama, and it is consistent with what we had expected.
However, with some votes left to be counted in all four states, Clinton netted about 330,000 votes on Obama. Those RCP popular vote counts have shifted. Clinton cut Obama’s lead that excludes Florida and Michigan by more than 30%; she cut the lead that includes Florida by more than 50%; and (as of this writing) she seems to have erased Obama’s lead in the count that includes Florida and Michigan.
This definitely puts her in striking distance of the popular vote lead that includes Florida. She has to win the remaining vote by about 6 points to draw even with him on that count. While it is far from assured that she will do this, it is quite plausible. [She'll have to win by about 10 points to draw even in the count that excludes Florida and Michigan - so that remains more difficult for her to achieve. I'll offer more precise estimates on all these figures after the votes have been fully tabulated.] If she does eliminate it, I think she will have an argument to take to the super delegates. That’s not to say it is the more compelling argument; Obama will have a good one of his own. The point is that if she catches him in the vote count that includes Florida, she will have an angle on victory. She took a big step toward catching him last night.
Final point. The Obama campaign is proclaiming they won the Texas caucus by double digits. Indeed, that seems to be the case. Nevertheless, they need to be careful not to proclaim this too loudly. How will it look if Clinton wins a majority of the more than 2.5 million Texans who voted in the primary, but Obama wins the caucus in which about 100,000 people participated? That might help Clinton because it is evidence that the caucuses are not a good gauge of voter preferences. Obama needs to talk up his pledged delegate lead, without reminding people of how it is heavily dependent upon the caucuses. The Clinton camp is going to start attacking these caucuses.
396. No, I’m arguing that when democratically elected governments voluntarily agree to abide by a common set of rules, then the outcome is often better than the prior free for all.
417. I too prefer a bad democratic decision to a good undemocratic one. However, I also believe that right now, the best democraic process comes from the legitimacy of the national governments. I want the elected national governments to be the well spring of power in the EU, rather than the commission. I think we’re winning that battle too.
Sorry to say that while I’ve really enjoyed this discussion I’ve got loads of real work on, so will no longer be able to take part….
427 - Martin, come on dear switch the autopost off!
423. Even if the EU *was* democratic, I wouldn’t be in favour of it.
I wouldn’t accept QMV decisions on key areas of policy forced upon Britain, against her will, by the voters of foreign states.
It’s called the “Demos”.
People need to be able to accept decisions that they are not in favour of from a body that they regard as having a legitimate right to enforce those decisions on them. If not, democracy doesn’t work.
Our “Demos” is Westminster. Not Brussels.
[406] - “I think that Clegg would have real trouble in delivering the parliamentary party into supporting a Tory government in a hung parliament unless the mood changes markedly - and real reluctance himself.”
Well…
1. Clegg is having real problems delivering his parliamentary party to any position at the moment.
2. Clegg seems to be trying to prop up the government already - though you wouldn’t have thought a government would need propping up when it has a notional majority of 60-odd.
The prospects of a hung parliament recede even further..
@Jack Peterson:
Regarding STV, depends on the arena. Not for the house of commons, but I’d consider it for council elections in England.
The point is, that under the TEU, member states can choose a closed list or STV for the EP. Trust Labour to choose by far the worst one.
STV is at least democratic, which is more than can be said for a closed list. It is, of course, unfortunately proportional too. Which is what rules it out for commons elections.
STV isn’t particularly democratic and having the public change the direction of government anyway, in the same sense that the Westminster system is at kicking out one lot and getting another and a change of direction in is. I can’t think of any Euro-parliament election that has changed anything.
359
Jack,jacobites,your childish opinion polls based on toilet humour,stage managed departures and returns to the site not to mention your craving to always be the centre of attention.
You clearly haven’t heard the one about people in glass houses….
@434:
Well, of course, it’s not supposed to be democratic. That’s why it’s restricted to a proportional system. The EP is expected to assent to commission proposals, it’s not supposed to challenge them.
The Commission always gets very bitchy on the rare occasions MEPs find some balls.
In case any one hasn’t picked up on this Sky are reporting that three Libdem front benchers have resigned. Guido is covering it.
431. And you’re perfectly entitled to think that, and it’s a very reasonable position. But other people are entitled to choose they want to be part of a European demos. And we should have that debate, we really should.
But the only way to have this debate is to bring in a democratic EU first. Once the thing was opened up to democratic pressures, then we wouldn’t need referenda on further integration or not. We would have that argument every European election. If the Eurosceptic side was won, there would be an incentive for the MEPs to moderate their views and voting records to reflect that and eurosceptic MEPs would have an advantage as they fought europhiles. We would then have a British delegation which reflected the views of the British people, and go to Brussells with a mandate to repatriate powers. The people’s views would then be in the system pushing for change, and not just a referenda result that can be sidestepped or asked again until the EU gets the answer they want.
Or, alternatively, if you think the integrationist side is right, then you could have a competitive election where similarly minded MEPs would argue their case and perhaps convince the British public it was a good idea. If they got a mandate they could then go to Brussells and work for their side.
It’s called democratic representation, and it’s worked wonderfully in the past. Just let the people decide and allow an influx of debate, innovation and popular legitimacy.
434. Of course not - they aren’t supposed to. They just provide a democratic veneer for what is intended to be an undemocratic edifice.
435 simon - naff off - I love the toilet humour Of Jack W
I think he’s wrong about BO, but realy enjoy Jack W’s stuff.
Can the powers that be start a new thread so we get of euro nonsenses PLEASE
440. i think mike be busy with other problems at the mo.
@440:
BETTER OFF OUT of this thread?
436. Yes, the European Parliament is expected to play the kind of subordinate role English parliaments did in the Middle Ages and early Tudor period…and possibly not even as significant a role as that.
429. Twenty-seven democratically elected national governments negotiating behind closed doors and coming to a deal. A deal which the public can’t tell which part belonged to which government and has no way of holding anyone accountable for bits they disagree with.
Very democratic.
“Can the powers that be start a new thread so we get of euro nonsenses PLEASE”
Yes let’s please start a new thread.
“Who will benefit from the Lib Dem Euro fall out?”
@445:
Vince Cable.
440
The toilet humour is about your level,so not surprising you like it.
Enjoying the Parliamentary debate just now, Ian Davidson is in full flow and Chris Huhne(first time seen in a while…..) is acting as his side kick and trying to be helpful in setting out the Libdem position where it has been unclear.
re 423 - no you’ve got that wrong. The EU doesn’t say how Euro MPs should be elected. It was Labour who chose the entirely undemocratic (and the reason why I’ve spoiled my vote in the last two Euro elections) closed lists. Ireland for example - both north and south - elects its Euro MPs by STV
418 I have to agree. Utterly self-defeating politics from the LibDems. Their policy has looked ridiculous for weeks, and now it’s ended up in self-harm.
And I also have to agree with Casino Royale at 263 that — tactically speaking — it’s been brilliantly handled by the Tories.
Whether through Tory cunning or Clegg’s blundering, the LibDems have ended up impaled on Europe. Unbelievably stupid.
O/T What is the world coming to?
1 - William Hague can accuse the Lib Dems of becoming “separated from their cojones” and is not accused of unparliamentary language (great line “At some point in recent months they have become separated from their cojones. These unfortunate objects are to be found impaled on a distant fence.”)
2 - The Daily Mail prints a photo which has full frontal male nudity (though size of member apparently reduced by airbrushing claims model)
3 - Hillary Clinton manages to be the Comeback Kid yet again - Obama isn’t any good at sealing the deal is he?
agree with all said on Hillary’s inability to close the delegate gap but her often attacked spin operation managed to move the goal posts from overwhelming victories required in Texas and Ohio to just winning Texas and an OK result in Ohio being a massive victory. Think its going to Denver now.
Nick Clegg’s aversion to a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty reminded me of this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anwy2MPT5RE
Only Monty Python can truly represent the Libdem position. Clegg clearly doesn’t like spam!
Enjoy!
@449:
STV is better than a closed list because it’s democratic enough to allow the electorate to remove people from office. Unfortunately, it’s also proportional, which means it’s not democratic enough to actually allow voters to effect any meaningful change.
449. Even STV is not particularly democratic when there’s more than a couple of candidates in each constituency. Just look at the delegate race in most of the districts in the Democratic Primary. In a district with 8 delegates, we already know that 5 of the delegates are going to get in beforehand, even with a biggish swing.
A democratic system depends on being able to knock people out of power. In a STV system with enough seats per constituency anyone with any name recognition is guaranteed to get in. The last couple of seats will be fought between those political nobodies added in by the party elite.
On topic (new thread please)
Has anyone any views on the “Dream ticket” that HRC mooted.Betfair has them at 9.0 and 6.0 on the VP betting.
I can’t see it myself but am struggling to see why HRC would raise it so soon after last night. Is she trying to soften her image? Make herself more popular in the eyes of the suits? I’ll have to dig out a West Wing and try to suss out the Toby-esque scheming that may be at work.
Afternoon all
My thoughts on today’s events are here if anyone is interested or still sane:
http://aloadofoldstodge.blogspot.com/2008/03/nick-clegg-is-too-sane-to-be-in.html
I see Gordon Brown has shown true Europhile colours - at least we know that Labour is for Europe with no referendum. Cowardice yes, deception yes. The European super state is only two months away from completion. We will soon be full EU citizens - lets live it and do something about it. British no, German no, French no but European. The EU socialist monster is about the win and win big time, there’s no way out now. Permanent socialism here we come. Labour wins the next general election on the strength of the elegibility of all EU citizens resident in the the UK can vote. Commonwealth citizens lose their rights as do expats and a record number of German and French born candidates become MPs for the future Euro Labour Government. Tories follow suit and Christain Democrat candiates from Germany are shipped into win marginal constituencies in London.
You say, Nick (406) that you find Mr Coxall stimulating….. or words to that effect. I wonder if you do not, perhaps, see him on a daily basis - perhaps even seated somewhere on the Tory back benches. Several of them sound a bit like him.
But “stimulating” only in that he remnds one of how dreadful the Tory Party can be.
@458:
I can confirm that I’m pretty sure that I don’t stimulate Nick Palmer on a daily basis on the back benches.
Would that I could. *sigh*
[457] Nurse.. the screens
455 - It’s about not allowing the Party Elders (I know, but can’t think of a better name) to force her to quit.
If she is still viable OR she is making noises about a ‘dream ticket’, they will not step forward and weild the knife.
By pretending that she’s going to jump, she stops them from pushing her. That buys her time to move away from the edge, so she can resist them trying to push her later on.
Gordon Brown would be loving this - all eyes are on the car crash that is Nick Clegg’s handling of this issue, meaning focus is switched away from his far more serious miscondcut.
455. I had just logged back on to mention this. I think its a clever move by HRC.
1. It makes it harder for Obama not to recipricate and offer her a slot. I’d always assumed she’d not be interested but..
2. it softens her image and gets a buy one get one free thing going.
3. it stops him pulling a similar stunt first.
4. a gaurentee that obama would be on the ticket may help shore up her super delegates.
162 Agree. The Lib Dems are as much use as Frank Spencer - out of touch with reality. Gordon Brown also loves Europe and hates England with lots and lots of passion.
So Gordon Brown says the last time we had a Euro referendum the ‘Yes’ camp won with a big majority, and insists they will win again. Go for it, I would rather the ‘Yes’ camp won the referendum than there be no referendum and accepting the treaty.
448. Ken Clarke in great form in the Commons.
New thread
National Rasmussen Tracker:
Clinton 48 Obama 43
McCain 48 Obama 43
McCain 46 Clinton 45
Will be interesting to see if other national polls start to show her doing better against McCain.
428 Robert. That’s a good piece. The Clintons are clearly going to attack the caucuses.
“Obama needs to talk up his pledged delegate lead”
Problem with that is that the argument becomes “You’re stuck with me now, it’s too late” which is not exactly compelling, especially if the reason for this arguably is due to caucuses and a media honeymoon period. He can’t limp over the finish line - he needs a different angle.
Libs can’t afford to lose David Heath from frontbench. Watching Commons on telly, he seems to be one of the few Lib Dems that other MPs listen to.
432 I should think the Conservatives can’t believe their luck. Not only are the Lib Dems looking incompetent, but (as you point out) they are providing ammunition for claims of ‘Vote Lib Dem get Labour’.
In the short term, Clegg may have deflected pressure from Brown over a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but in electoral terms it could be highly detrimental to Labour.
I don’t believe Charles Kennedy would have got into this mess.
My maths on Texas (sorry if repeated upthread):
HC is +4 on primary delegates with 99% counted.
OB needs to win caucus by 6% to draw level (67 delegates up for grabs), currently 4% ahead with 37% counted.
That would leave him 1 delegate down on HRC in Texas overall.
He needs a quick response to the changed narrative, because the numbers are clearly still well in his favour. I would imagine his team have scenario-planned for this eventuality?