Will Lib Dems be complaining about Luntz this time?
September 19th, 2008
Doesn’t the latest focus group highlight Clegg’s central dilemma?
Three years ago a Frank Luntz focus group on BBC2’s Newsnight so upset a number of Lib Dems on the site and elsewhere that there were formal complaints to the BBC and even suggestions that a conspiracy had taken place. Why it was argued - Luntz was a student at Oxford at the same time as Cameron!
Well I guess they won’t complaining today for Nick Clegg was the surprise “winner” last night - thus underlining the old adage that the more a test of public opinion is in line with your own views the more valid it is.
For me the programme was a massive missed opportunity - Luntz cannot come cheap and these things are costly to set up and make. Yet they chose to hold amongst existing and wavering Labour supporters in Manchester where, we were told, all the participants came from. If the producers had checked they would have discovered that there’s not a seat in city in the list of the top 200 Conservative targets. The main action will be two LAB-LD scraps. In Withington Labour will be hoping to regain the seat lost last time and Manchester Gorton could go on an 8.25% swing. Surely they should have found a location more relevant to the CON-LAB battle?
The negative views on Gordon Brown were predictable but Tories will have been quite concerned by the sometimes hostile views of Cameron. Tax came out as a big issue and it was here that the Lib Dem tax-cutting pledge seemed to score well.
What was very strange about the session was that when it started hardly any of the participants had even heard of Nick Clegg. At the end him and the Lib Dems came out on top.
The highlights, surely, the biggest challenge facing the third party - simply getting attention in the first place. They might have highly popular policies but that’s no good if nobody is aware of them. Clegg’s party will certainly get more coverage once the formal election campaign has started because of the broadcasting rules but in the meantime the party has a massive publicity challenge.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
‘Surely they should have found a location more relevant to the CON-LAB battle’
Yes but that wouldn’t have delivered the required result.
First post *s*
Doh
Phillipe and SaS, I have replied to you on the last thread. I’ve got to go out for a while now, but may pop back to check your replies later.
If the producers had checked they would have discovered that there’s not a seat in city in the list of the top 200 Conservative targets.
That is why it does not remotly bother me! Shame I got sh*t faced and went to bed early, otherwise it would have been interesting.
Certainly from your perspective as a LD, it shows the Labour vote can have in roads made into it. No point whining and moaning about a program - you sum up what I hate most about LD, Some (Not you) can be a bunch of cry babies!
Overall it seems a flawed group exercise. These things are only of any value if it is a properly balanced group. Fine to discuss a single party with a group who have at one point in recent history supported them - but to open it out from there to a more general discussion seems an odd methodology.
Plus watching how he operates, it is so easy to see how manipulation of the outcomes can be achieved. Also we know how much the BBC like to edit.
All in all, I am not going to lose any sleep over this one - I doubt very few people are.
Mike, why would it surprise anyone (or scare Tories) that Cameron doesn’t come across well amongst Manchester John and Jane Does who lean Labour? Isn’t that discovery something like observing that water is wet?
O/T : Mac will today attack Obama for profiting from a corrupted system while he, Mac, was trying to fight it
http://www.politicshome.com/mobile/blog.aspx?id=2964
Two years ago, I called for reform of this corruption at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Congress did nothing. The Administration did nothing. Senator Obama did nothing, and actually profited from this system of abuse and scandal. While Fannie and Freddie were working to keep Congress away from their house of cards, Senator Obama was taking their money. He got more, in fact, than any other member of Congress, except for the Democratic chairmen of the committee that oversees them. And while Fannie Mae was betraying the public trust, somehow its former CEO had managed to gain my opponent’s trust to the point that Senator Obama actually put him in charge of his vice presidential search.
I claimed yesterday that this is a winning strategy for Mac. I’m glad now that he’s now actualizing it.
The interesting thing about the Luntz piece is the effect it may or may not have on the MSM, and in turn on party strategists.
There are already calls in some sections of the Conservative Party-suporting media for Gideon to offer up tax cuts other than IHT.
“Will Lib Dems be complaining about Luntz this time?”
Nope. Hypocrisy is what the Lib Dems do. It is their speciality.
Latest Rasmussen tracker :
McCain 48% .. Obama 48%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
I think Luntz’s choice of clips made a difference.
Brown was Brown as usual. In his clip, Cameron was a bit intellectual in his use of words. Both spoke quite quickly. Clegg, on the other hand, spoke slowly using simple words - like Blair and Thatcher. This appealed. He was lucky it was this clip that was used. Cameron can also speak clearly using simple words. Brown just can’t.
7 - the point is that they were formerly Labour supporting waverers. Much of the broad but shallow Tory support reflected in their poll leads comes here. Cameron has benefitted from being the ABG heir to Blair amongst this sector, but there isn’t necessarily an enthusiasm for him; if there are other potentially more attractive options available, then that would be significant, surely?
12 Yes. They picked a clip of Brown in a dickie bow. No one looks good in a bow tie apart from James Bond.
Falkirk MP Eric Joyce, considered to be a critic of Mr Brown, denied he is set to resign as parliamentary private secretary – Commons aide – to Business Secretary John Hutton as part of claimed right-wing moves to destabilise the Mr Brown.
Mr Joyce, speaking from Glenrothes where he is campaigning for Labour in a by-election, dismissed rumours of his imminent resignation as part of an attempt to flush out rebels.
He said he had every sympathy with David Cairns, who quit as Scotland Office Minister in the row over the leadership, but added: “I am looking forward to Gordon having a good conference.”
http://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/Article.aspx/846978?UserKey=
Paranoia = big destroyer
Police swarming over Manchester city centre - Labour are a comin!
13- It just seems to me that, since Manchester is apparently a two-party town (and the Tories aren’t one of those parties), it appears likely that the Tories are simply not the alternative that people in Manchester would naturally turn to in expressing their rejection of Labour. For myself, I would analogize it to my inclination to vote Libertarian to express my disfavor for Republicans on occasion, but voting Democrat is simply not an option. As Mike suggests, it seems the best place for Luntz to do his work would have been amongst a population where all three parties are normal and acceptable alternatives.
I’m no fan of Lunz’s methods, interesting as these sessions always seem to be. He is a master of taking subliminal attitude’s based on the most basic things, and extrapolating them into political support for a candidate.
Where there is no substantive difference between a set of politicians on policy, then I can see how these attitudes could be critically important, but I think that policy direction and media narrative do far more to shape voting behaviour than these otherwise latent and rather transient attitudes.
I seem to remember that Liam Fox came out very well in the Tory session that lauded Cameron. In reality, there is precisely no chance that Fox would ever be leader, or if he was would be more successful than David Davies who came out rather badly.
It offers an interesting insight to one type of subconscious impression, but these attitudes are too easily led or built-up by his sessions for me to take them to seriously.
14 - I look stunningly good in full white tie. It’s the only time I look vaguely decent at all. If I had a choice (and the money) I’d wear it all the time…
O/T -Previous thread 359-Jack -Where do RCP say this represents old data!!!!
BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS **** BREAKING WIND NEWS
The breaking news is that WIND is reporting to JNN the contents of a new ARSE (BUTT) poll of polls that indicates :
McCain 46% .. Obama 50% .. Others 4%
The PISSED Jack W Index with added SOAMES BIG MAC weighting shows :
McCain 156 .. Obama 260 .. Toss Up 123
Changes Since Last Projection - Georgia moves from Safe McCain to Likely McCain. Indiana, Montana and North Carolina move from Likely McCain to Toss Up Mccain. Ohio and Virginia move from Toss Up McCain to Toss Up Obama. New Hampshire moves from Likely Obama to Toss Up Obama. Michigan, Minnesota and Pennsylvania move from Toss Up Obama to Likely Obama.
Toss Up - Up to 5% .. Likely - 5%-10% .. Safe - Over 10%
Eliminate Toss Up States - 270 required for an Electoral College majority.
McCain 232 .. Obama 306
Obama is the 44th President of the United States of America.
……………………
Sources :
WIND ….. Whimsical Independent News Division.
JNN ………..Jacobite News Network.
ARSE …… Anonymous Random Selection of Electors.
BUTT …… British Underpinned Tracking Totals
PISSED … Political Intelligence Seat Selector Election Determinator
SOAMES …System Of Amending Measured Election Scores
BIG MAC ..Ballot Indicies Grid Manifesting America’s Choice
Unfortunately for them, because the Lib Dems will only be left with 20 seats after the next election, this is the last chance for them to be relevant. However, as they don’t have traction with anything currently, the reaction of the public to the SNP is probably more relevant. It will soon be time to commit the Lib Dems (along with New Labour) to the dustbin of political history. If the Lib Dem MP on Question Time(albeit good looking)is the best they can roll out on the first of a new season, it shows the lack of talent through the current bunch. Couldn’t even remember her answer to the first question without having to fumble, stutter and put on her glasses to read her cue cards. Pathetic really, at least Salmond and Farage have passion about what they say.
12: ‘Both spoke quite quickly. Clegg, on the other hand, spoke slowly using simple words…’
Didn’t see it myself, but from your description clearly those thick Mancs were intimidated by the brisk, erudite language Brown and Cameron employed and thus turned chippishly against them. In contrast they warmed to the plodding, monosyllabic Clegg. Case Closed.
“Gordon Brown has lost Britain the ear of the White House”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/09/19/do1902.xml
An extract:
Mr Bush and Condoleezza Rice, the US Secretary of State, are more likely to turn to Mr Sarkozy for advice on how to tackle Russian belligerence than their erstwhile ally Britain. Mr Bush is also a great admirer of Mrs Merkel, which means that, having been for many years America’s closest ally, Britain has now been demoted to third place in the political affections of the Bush White House.
This is quite an achievement for Gordon Brown who, although Mr Bush was well aware of his role in hastening Mr Blair’s exit from Downing Street, was given a warm reception when he made his first visit to Camp David last year. But Mr Brown’s boorish behaviour – he discarded the presidential bomber jacket he’d been given by Mr Bush, leaving it on the plane home – set the tone for their dealings, and though the President maintains the regular video conference calls to Downing Street he initiated under Mr Blair, they are nowhere near as frequent, and the format is strictly businesslike.
“With Blair, the President felt at ease and comfortable, and they could talk things through,” said a Bush aide. “But there’s just not the same rapport with Brown. He talks to Brown because he has to, not because he wants to. If the President wants to see what the Europeans think about such-and-such an issue, there are other people he can call.”
297 (Previous Thread) Richard Nabavi
It’s conventional wisdom to sell off a proportion of your positive open positions from time to time. I closed out about a third of my Labour ’sells’, realising £655. I don’t think the fundamentals have changed though and if I were in your position, I’d sit tight.
The next danger period for Brown seems to be Glenrothes. I don’t think Labour can hold it, but a small defeat should be OK for him. A big defeat would, in Diane Abbott’s words, trigger Cabinet moves against him, but I still think he’d be unlikely to resign, so my bold prediction that he will see out the Calendar year still stands.
Well done on McCain! That market has been a bit of a gift to spread players. I missed out on the McCain rush, but I did buy Obama cheap just as momentum switched. I have already seen the 6 point spread eliminated and have a small profit. Fun, eh!
Finally, I must mention Colorado. PfP is fond of pointing out that some States represent much better value than the main event. Colorado is a case in point. It is likely to be a pivotal State - if not THE pivotal State - so if you fancy Obama to be next POTUS, you are better off taking the 5/6 about him for the State rather than the 4/6 on the Presidency. Paddy Power is the man giving the 5/6 and for once I was able to get a decent sum down.
Paddy must have had three Shredded Wheat this morning!
Politico : GOP brand making comeback
A new poll … reports that independent voters have an equally favorable opinion of both parties, 50 to 49 percent, a one-point edge for the GOP. That compares to an 18-point Democratic advantage as recently as August…
…
The portion of the public that strongly supports the Republican ticket has grown from 17 percent in August to 25 percent today.
Over the same period, Republicans expressing “strong support” for McCain jumped 16 points. Independents expressing “strong support” for McCain rose 9 points. Meanwhile, Democratic “strong support” for Obama rose 7 points, while his backing from independents dropped one point.
Today, Pew finds relative parity in party enthusiasm. …
A recent CBS/New York Times poll shows … that 61 percent of Obama voters are enthusiastic while 47 percent of McCain voters say the same. That marks a 13-point climb for Democrats and a 23-point climb for Republicans in enthusiasm, compared to polling prior to both party conventions.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0908/13584.html
20 david l. Look at the link again. The top and then the shaded area further down. That is the latest data chosen for the average. Look below the shaded area and you see the older data that has fallen off, much of it with McCain leads.
23 - have you expressed that view loudly in Picaddilly Gardens?
PtP : if you fancy Obama to be next POTUS, you are better off taking the 5/6 about him for the State [of Colorado] rather than the 4/6 on the Presidency.
Real good advice, IMO.
I was not a fan of Luntz before and am not particularly now. He does “work the crowd” to reach a somewhat bogus consensus (a couple of people say X and he says, “that’s amazing - why do you ALL say that?” without giving a real chance for people to say “I don’t”).
There was a grain of truth in it though.
The Days of this world will say he is utterly useless but the reality is Clegg is a perfectly presentable guy who rarely gets seen.
Cameron is also presentable but there is an element of the Blair, “y’know, I’m a pretty straight kinda guy” about him and people know him better and so are a bit bored. The Blair comparison is not wholly a negative - Blair got three excellent election wins through the votes of precisely the people Cameron wants. But there’s a smugness factor there and he wants to bring it into check.
Brown is pretty much beyond help. The focus group appeared to pity him more than anything, which is dire.
As for having it in Manchester, I disagree with Mike. Just because the Tories don’t need those specific seats is not massively relevant. The Tories need those SORT of people, and their reactions to Cameron (which as I say were not massively negative but not adulatory) are relevant. I suspect several came from outside Manchester too, but that was not entirely clear.
I wouldn’t be slashing my wrists over this if I were a Tory and I’m not dancing a jig as a Lib Dem. It’s a bit of rather unscientific fun which teases out some nuggets of truth and some things that are rather misleading, much like all Luntz’s work.
Clegg is in the same position Ashdown was in 1988 - no-one knows who he is or what he is about.
He needs time, to get around the country a lot, and to identify one or two key issues that come up that he can take a distinctive stand on. (Ashdown had Hong Kong passports)
A winnable by-election or two would also help.
Barring an ongoing striong of gaffes he will almost certainly do better during the election when people see more of him, but he needs to do as much as he can between now and then to build a platform.
30 I would have thought it was Labour who need these sorts of people. If Labour managed to regain all those in the hall and those like them outside, it would matter less what Cameron did on the right.
I’ve just read SeanT’s posting at number 341 on the previous thread. Come on Sean - we all know that you are genius when it comes to fiction but we cannot take this seriously if presented as the truth.
33 - Mike, see Gwynfa’s post at 288.
I think we can all agree that the Brown/Darling Combo has once again stepped in to save the day….FT Index up nearly 400.
35 - You may agree with your own sentiment Roger - but I don’t think the vast majority will.
25 Thanks, PtP. If Jack W at 21 is right, there is still value in buying Obama, but I’m cautious on the US side because I don’t feel I have much understanding of the underlying dynamics.
On Brown, even if there’s a move against him later this year after Glenrothes, I now think it fairly unlikely that he would leave immediately, for all the reasons we’ve discussed previously. And we’ve had so many ‘XXX will be the final straw for Brown’ reports that I’m sceptical about Glenrothes making any difference. What are they going to know after Glenrothes that they didn’t know after Glasgow East?
33 Sounds more likely that Sean was up to this. Nobody can have that much bile without having to componsate in other ways.
I suspect half the time he comments here, he’s sitting in pig tails and a pretty dress. Fortunately we’ll never know for sure.
(I await the rebuke from some of our more rabid Tories saying “pigtails and a dress- what the blazes is wrong with that?”)
35 - They are the dream team. Gordon and Alistair are showing the leadership the country wants and deserves.
38 - Seant is Grayson Perry?
I wonder what the crowd of chumps Luntz assembled would have thought of Clegg had they been presented with a series of clips featuring his ‘greatest gaffes’ - pensions, public schools only for my kids, town hall meetings can’t decide on anything important, etc….
These exercises are designed to produce a certain outcome, and in their own terms are very successful. They have no validity beyond that.
33 to be fair that read like satire to me.
Good article by Peston
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/robertpeston/
21 I’m never going to get my “McCain is 44th president” ARSE poll now am I - never mind I win either way and frankly much as I might find her deeply attractive I’m not sure I want Palin being VP!!
32 - Well yes, they both need those sort of people, as indeed does Clegg. Cameron certainly doesn’t need all of them - he won’t get some and would happily see others stay at home. But he needs to appeal (if only so they aren’t motivated to vote against him).
Incidentally, they say there is one coming up tonight on the Labour hopefuls. Really, that is the more interesting one and presumably why they picked Labour waverers for the sample (I believe they are using the same group).
35. seanT’s spoof posting is infectious.
PS Excellent thread Mike. I’m sure all who watched Luntz last night will agree that what we saw was the Cameron bubble unravelling as we watched. (Please excuse the mixed metaphor).
27-Jack-I see what you’re saying however I find it slightly confusing as under caption ELECTION 2008 LATEST POLLS it clearly shows following:RACE POLL RESULTS
National Rasmussen Tr. O 48% M 48% TIE
” Battleground Tr. O 47% M 47% TIE
Confused.Com
25 PtP. Perchance a little caution on that comparative bet. Even in a tight Obama win there are many scenarios for Obama to lose Colorado :
Kerry + Iowa + New Mexico + one of the following - Nevada, Ohio, Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Indiana.
Agree that getting heard is the #1 issue for Lib Dems now. They do seem to have hit on a seriously popular and workable package with the Green Tax switch and new the latest addition of cutting even more taxes at the bottom. But the MSM is cheering on a Cameron victory, and large chunks of the population are currently saying they will vote for Cameron because the herd mentality is at work. It is currently “trendy” to vote Cameron…
33 - I’m sure it’s the honest truth. I heard the same story, except it was Jacqui Smith’s cleavage not Ruth Kelly’s hair.
44 kingbongo. Still time ….
Washington Post celebrates uproarious comedic hijinks of comedienne Sandra Bernhard, as she delivers knee-slappers about Palin being gang raped by black men:
“Forgive me if gang-rape jokes don’t greet my ears as oddly and subtly positive, as the Examiner suggests, and forgive me if gang-rape jokes aren’t “a rotating sprinkler that a spectator washes in most happily,” like the Washington Post insists.”
http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/09/19/sandra-bernhard-palin-would-be-gang-raped-blacks-manhattan
I guess interracial gang rape comedy is back in fashion, so dust off your favorite one-liners and try them out on family and friends for fun!
Paulson just annonuncing they will be pushing through legislation which will commit hundreds of billions of US taxpayer dollars into investing in toxic debt.
Twits
47 - Roger, what is you prediction for the general election in 2010? How big will Gordon’s victory be?
MMMmmm… Jacqui Smith’s cleavage…
43.
Agreed, it’s excellent, especially this bit:
[Banks' share prices] are surging in part because of the FSA’s crackdown on short-sellers but mostly because of the overnight news that the US Treasury Secretary, Hank Paulson, and the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, Ben Bernanke, are preparing a bold - or possibly impetuous - plan to tackle what can now be classified as the most severe and intractable malfunction of the banking system since the late 1920s.
there are a goodly number of scenarios where Obama does not hold all the Kerry states. PA and MI are both looking tight for him. So I would agree that caution is required in assuming CO = the ballgame.
37 Agreed, Richard.
re 34. Thanks - so I’ve blown the gaffe on the plot that was being hatched. Probably better that way.
I’ve always had this fear that in one of the anti-terror bills they will drop in a clause about “internet poisoning”. This will allow them to bang up without trial for months those who allow stories to be published that are not friendly to the government. You could hear a David Blunkett or a John Reid getting a huge ovation at conference when they denounced the “internet poisoners”
It’s not a Cameron bubble. But there is a lot of respect given to Cameron. So much so he has a sort of mythology built around him. He’s very good, and thanks to Labour in a very stong position, but he’s not as amazing as he thinks he is or as some people in Labour treat him.
48 - Click on the word “National” and it will take you to a chronological list of polls according to when they were carried out rather than when they were published. Battleground Tracking for example includes interviews as early as 11 September so is slightly older than two Obama +4 polls. This list and the graph below probably gives the best trend information.
47 lol, not trolling for Tory rage at all then?
Poor showing for DC amongst the Luntz lefties in Manchester and relaively poor performance from Alan Duncan on QT - got badly skewered by a naughty Harriet quoting Redwoods policy review as ‘Tory policy’ - however Harriet followed it up with a risible display re Brown’s leadership.
49 Noted, Jack. It’s not wholly identical to a POTUS bet but at the better odds, it’s a good surrogate.
46. Yes - 47. is another fine example.
63 and Lynne F seemed strangely subdued - not sure wat that was about. She did fine, but she was very very quiet and allowed herself to be pushed out of discussion
I see my word is being doubted. What can I say?
All I can do is repost the gossip I heard - in my own defence. The question you have to ask is: would I really make up something this ridiculous? I emphasise that my source is absolutely impeccable - not someone given to hysteria. Make of it what you will.
Here’s the post again:
I have a mate whose exgirlfriend works right in Number 10 close to a prime ministerial aide.
She says Brown has a collection of tiny china figurines which he keeps in a shoebox - tiny sheperdesses and horses and farmers and pigs and the like. She says most nights when he’s alone with his aides and the wife he gets them out and plays “farmy-farm” with the little dolls, making the horses jump over tiny hedges etc. He even takes the miniature cows to the Number 10 toilet so they can do “Brownpats” as he makes little mooing noises.
The staff’s big fear is that he will take his “farmy-farm” set to the Commons and be caught on TV playing with it just before PMQs. He’s come pretty close already - during the non-election debate, a miniature sheep apparently fell from his breast pocket onto Ruth Kelly’s hair, and was there right through the broadcast.
Amazingly no one noticed, but they reckon it’s just a matter of time.
48 david l. The “Latest Polls” is normally the current days polls as published. The average will include a few days information, although at the present rate the average will change several times a day as we’re getting around 10 national polls per day including the trackers !!
Roger -
I suggest you get a text book on supply and demand. Imagine a share can be traded at any price, between 100 and 300. The average price would be 200. Now imagine an interfering and inept government stepped in and said you could not sell the share at less than 200 (short sell it). There would still be people buying at 300, and the minimum price would be 200. The average price would rise to somewhere up to 250. A rise of 25% without actually doing anything in terms of the underlying company. Smoke and mirrors. Like Brown and Darling have just “achieved”.
Sadly I doubt if they allow books in the institution you undoubtably inhabit. Could over excite you or you might use the staples to self harm.
67 “I emphasise that my source is absolutely impeccable - not someone given to hysteria.”
You spent quite a bit of time with your daughter recently, didn’t you, SeanT?
Not at all impressed with Frank L. Having done a fair amount of focus group commissioning in past, I’d have been shocked if what I’d got had been that agenda driven by the facilitator. It was close to the focus group equivalent of push polling. What to conclude? Given the mis-selected sample and the set-up outcome (”well if you don’t like him and you don’t like him, what about this one?”), I think its conclusions are close to worthless (other than to NC’s inner circle trying to shore up the leader after a pretty dire conference). I’m hoping (but not expecting) better from tonight’s look at alternative Labour candidates. Having said that, whilst the data is junk, the conclusions are not - LibDems are underpolling at the moment as all eyes are on Labour, Tories and the economy; they’ll pick up come a general election (if not hold their current position). The current SF spread on the LDs seems to be about right at 45-48. More fun to be had profiting from any temporary upswing in Labour numbers off the back of GB’s re-emergence into the public eye as saviour of the Banking sector. It can’t and won’t last. And I can’t see any new leader doing better - whether Cruddas, Miliband or Straw, the extent of the poison infecting the party at the moment doesn’t provide them with much of an inheritance to prosper from.
Mm - not clear just how Mancunian these people are. But really there are only a few seats I can think of outside of the City of Manchester where people would describe themselves as Mancunian where the Tories are in with anything of a shout - in order of plausibility, Bury South, Stretford and Urmston, Worsely and Eccles South, Stalybridge and Hyde, Wythenshawe and Sale East. And really it’s only the first of these I’d imagine CCO might be expending any energy salivating over.
Not only that, but there’s only two seats on the radar where this fondness for Nick Clegg might be of interest - Manchesters Withington and Gorton - and I don’t think there’s much expectation of Withington swinging back to the red column next time (though I’ve expected Gorton to go yellow next time for a while now).
I think what this tells us more broadly is that Clegg IS capable of taking wavering Labour votes in the north. There aren’t as many of these targets as people suppose (maybe 6 - 8? - Gorton, Liverpool Wavertree, Sheffield Central, Newcastle Central, Blaydon, Durham, Oldham East and Saddleworth, Hartlepool at a real push?) - but these represent the Lib Dems best hopes of the appearance of some sort of movement in the face of stiff Conservative challenges in the south. These aren’t the sort of ultra-middle-class seats the Libs have been used to winning and they’re changing their appeal accordingly.
I know this is an old chestnut, but I wonder if Clegg’s fixation (in the mold of all before him) of attacking the Tories first no matter who’s in government is necessarily a bad thing in this? On refelection I think it’s a reasonable approach. You don’t persuade someone by rubbishing the party they instinctively support; they’ll only act defensively. You persuade them by pointing out where you agree; by implying that you’re both on the same side really. Attacking the Tories is in my view a vehicle for mopping up votes that would otherwise go to Labour. Of course, this sits rather ill with their apparent sudden conversion to the small state, but I think that oversates the extent to which Labour voters are wedded to big-statism.
Roger makes Gabble look like seanT.
67 - I heard something similar, but it was tiny models of Greek soldiers, not farm animals. Apparently, Brown uses them to re-enact the Trojan War; so when he’s feeling really stressed, he’ll head back to No 10 and reach for a Trojan.
The chief executive of Lloyds TSB in Scotland has denied the £12bn takeover of HBOS would lead to thousands of compulsory redundancies in Scotland.
First Minister Alex Salmond said he understood the merged bank would be run from the Mound in Edinburgh.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7624962.stm
‘Scots Boss?’
http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/news-feed/2008/09/19/scots-boss-86908-20743595/
49 - Agree caution between ‘near-arb’ markets is always needed, but if Obama can’t win Colorado, I’d be surprised if he could win Nevada, Virginia, Florida, Ohio, Indiana or North Carolina.
Apart from Nevada, winning any of those implies a fairly comfortable win - over 300 ECVs almost certainly.
The question is whether the 5/6 on Colorado is value compared to the 1/6 implied odds (5/6 Colorado minus 4/6 Obama POTUS) of Obama winning Nevada but not Colorado. Is that right?
71. Few in Bury, Wythenshawe, Sale, Hyde or Stalybridge would describe themselves as Mancunian, in my experience.
I agree with other PB’rs that while its often hard to know how manipulated the Luntz focus groups are, Luntz himself often says some astute things and as a media favouirite he creates as much as discover’s popular perceptions.
bottom line - youv’e got to think about what he shows.
For me what stuck out was the tax issue and how isolated the woman who kept defending GB seemed.
Both are obviously perceptions that go against Labour and the Strategic question for us Labourites is whether we can change both those views , just one or none ?
For LD’s I dont know, the immediate situation that spring’s to mind is how some voters said they liked Tory policies in 2005 until they knew they were Tory.
Clegg also seemed to be doing his conference speech wheras Cam and GB werent .
67.
That is amusing!
Interestingly I though I had seen a small metal (Bronze) farm yard animal on his lepel once or on his suit pocket? Has anybody else noticed this?
68-Jack-Gotcha-Thanks.
47. Can’t agree. What was happening wasn’t about personalities (on Cameron side) it was about cursing everyone and promising tax cuts. Understandably, the public mood is at times veering towards the nihilistic and ultranegative - “we hate you all and we don’t want to pay out any cash for anything (cos we might not have a job tomorrow)”. NC’s short extract played to that pretty well, so got some good numbers on the funny electronic scoring thingies. If the Tories can create a (semi-credible) narrative around reducing Government and cutting taxes over the next few months, he’ll get a response. People are already tired of being lectured on how times are tough and we all need to behave responsibly and take hard decisions. They may be in denial, but that’s where they’re at!
The Mac Team on the right track (again)
Another good Mac Ad on Obama’s connections to Fannie Mae.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/09/19/mccain-ad-jim-johnson/
First Minister Alex Salmond said he understood the merged bank would be run from the Mound in Edinburgh.
Oh dear…big trouble brewing here…
New Strategic Vision polls for New Jersey and Washington State :
New Jersey
McCain 43% .. Obama 47%
Washington State
McCain 42% .. Obama 47%
http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/newjersey_poll_091908.htm
http://www.strategicvision.biz/political/washington_poll_091908.htm
67 - Utter tripe. The little figurines are in fact made of glass, not china and Gordon is waiting in vain for a gentleman caller (who he refers to as Mr Jim O’Cameron) to come and whisk him away from the sadness and drudgery.
75 - Don’t know that’s right. Colorado is a slightly more likely win than Virginia or Florida say but not by a huge amount and one McCain/Palin off-the-cuff remark on tobacco or Cuba say and that’s it.
47 Roger - the only bubble that collapsed this week was the Brown-Darling credit boom which finally exploded with scores of thousands of job losses from just a couple of days of disaster on the markets.
The conservatives have a 28% lead in the polls. Gordon Brown’s bunker team are in denial (well, most are). They are just like the Tories were by ‘95, 13 years ago - waiting in vain for a “game changing moment” to arise, long after the wheels fell off. No need to be complacent, i know . Dislodging a socialist government is difficult. People are scared to leave the protection of Big Brother Brown. But it will be done.
75 Well the diference is small, Morus, but you make the point for me. In theory, you’d expect the Colorado odds to be tighter, not better, than the POTUS odds - so 5/6 (Co) is definitely value comapared to 4/6 (Potus).
71 - The problem with the list of seats that you give is that not a single one is likely to change hands at the next election, and even if they were would not have any outcome on the election as a whole. This is the Lib Dem problem - they are fighting in irrelevant battlegrounds.
Whether they hold Manchester Withington from Labour or not is about as relevant as whether Sinn Fein hold Belfast West in terms of the difference to the election (and the country) it will make.
The alternative title for this thread is of course - Will all the CCHQ inspired posters on here have instructions to stop praising Luntz and be told to rubbish his methodology and findings . Clearly the answer is Yes . Note also how after shrieking doom and dtsaster at recent stock market falls some of them think today’s strong recovery is bad news too .
75 Morus. The margins are tight. However I’m a little cautious simply because I feel the AA demo is being underplayed in some swing states but clearly not in Colorado with so few AA’s.
79 david l. You’re welcome.
87. Nurse…
87 - I think the issue Tory posters have is that the “evidence” from the programme contradicts evidence from by-election voting figures and opinion polls. I take more comfort from foucs groups of either 30,000 or 1,000+ than from focus groups of a handful.
I reckon the LDs should be ecstatic with the amount of airtime they get. Is it not still five:five:four - con:lab:ld as set by the Committee on Political Broadcasting?
On recent performances that ratio should be something like three:three:two and even that would too much since so much of the LD vote is tactical rather than affirmative.
And assuming Labour get trounced at the next GE, and the BBC plays fair and adjusts the ratio accordingly, then Labour’s demise will accelerate because they’ll have half the airtime they currently get.
47
Spot on again Roger!
At 52% share in the polls the Cameron bubble is sure unravlleing fast!
Are you trying to be funny or just another of your idiotic comments?
87 The impact of todays strong recovery remains to be seen - drastic market movements in a volatile time are never clear-cut. It must be remembered that a false market is being created as short selling will not remain permanently off the menu, and the UG government ‘appear’ to be committing towards a trillion dollars of taxpayer money into buying up bad debt and letting the banks ‘off the hook’ - its a bit like telling us all that everything bad we have ever done is absolved as long as we promise to be good in future - therefore we learn nothing from our mistakes.
Oil is also up - inflation remains a problem.
90 - But the focus group is not measuring the same as polls. Clearly the Tories have a big poll lead. Clearly that is encouraging for them. But most people do not pay close attention to politics every day. It is surely relevant to know (albeit in a flawed way with Luntz) whether people like different leaders more or less the more they see of them and why?
87. I am sure you would complain to the BBC about such a sleight!
94 - No, I think by-election results are more representative of how people vote than focus groups. Please don’t try and argue there is a better measure of voting intentions than actual votes in an actual by-election. Not even Roger could spin that one.
New ARG polls for Indiana, North Dakota and Washington State :
Indiana
McCain 47% .. Obama 44%
North Dakota
McCain 52% .. Obama 43%
Washington State
McCain 44% .. Obama 50%
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2008/IN08.html
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2008/ND08.html
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres2008/WA08.html
94. Yes, it is relevant, but it’s also important to bear in mind the existing mind-set of the very few people in the group.
86/90 There were even orgasmic Conservative posters on here the other day sayinf the Conservatives were foing to come from 3rd place and 10% of the vote at the last GE and win seats such as Withington , Newcastle North and Birmingham Yardley .
96. Actually there is. In by-elections people know that they won’t actually be changing a government (even though their effect in actuality is no different than at a general election) which means they feel freer to protest vote and think about local issues and individual candidates than in a GE.
‘HBOS Scottish jobs plan attacked’
Apparent moves to protect HBOS jobs in Scotland at the expense of those in England are “totally unacceptable,” says Labour’s Halifax MP.
… the takeover document says the focus “is to keep jobs in Scotland”.
There have been suggestions that Labour is looking to shore up support in Scotland, where they recently lost Glasgow East to the Scottish National Party and face another tough by-election in Glenrothes in either October or November.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/7625478.stm
(Don’t believe I am discussing it but) would you believe the results of a Conservative focus group in Henley on Thames or the Crewe and Nantwich by-election result as more relevant to voting intentions?
Today’s stock market rise has been entirely engineered, with months of pre-planning by a vast swathe of financiers, to lure Gabble back here. If not today, I fear we may have lost him for good…
99. Doctor…
88 - Fair point on the sampling. I wonder if the same problem exists with Native American and Latinos in Colorado as with African Americans in Florida, though.
The other thing that concerns me is that they are being understated for good reason - even registered AA voters are less likely to turn out than white voters - this could be the election than all changes that, but I can understand the fear of ‘overstating’ black voters by assuming similar likelihood to vote, and that in turn spawning ‘Bradley effect’ stories if participation rates don’t increase as much as expected.
83 - You’re right, it’s not a huge amount more likely than VA and FL, but statistically significant, I think. Also, Palin and McCain are *much* less likely to gaffe on Cuba or Tobacco than Obama-Biden!! And McCain’s most serious gaffe (that will come back to haunt him) is about opening up the Colorado River Water Compact - people in Colorado care more about water rights than anythign else. I’ve had goldfish to whom water was less important than the average voter in Denver or Boulder.
99 - Unlike you Mark, who always are straight down the line and unpartial when it comes to the Tories.
94. But Luntz doesn’t tell us that - he tells us that if you present a carefully selected and limited audience with carefully selected clips of different leaders you can make that audience warm toward the politician of your choice.
Remember when they used to do panel polling, where a supposedly representative sample of floating voters would be repeatedly polled to see how their opinions shifted during election campaigns? The panels were a hopeless guide to the final result so they stopped it. This is an even more slanted version of the same thing.
The Luntz focus group
What they did not include was the obvious that (drum role…..)
Nick Clegg is as gaff prone as Neil Kinnock: 30 B0nks, £30 and miming whilst he should be singing!
Clegg has divided his party not once but twice, over Europe and now on taxation.
The LD’s will be slaughtered in many of the seats they hold at this time whatever local elections or Luntz Labour focus groups say.
The final thing that Luntz failed to mention was the Yellow Taxi!
60- If such a bill had been enacted, you’d already be hanging out with the ravens at the Tower of London for post 67.
102. Focus groups are designed for complex answers rather than voting intentions.
I’d trust polls (not necessarily national ones, but marginals/regional/etc) over by-election results.
Silly boy Sean - those farmyard animals are all sheep Gordon is just reshuffling his cabinet!
101. Good isn’t? The government’s policy toward financial institutions appears to be 100% driven by political considerations, i.e. where the job losses might be. First NR, now HBOS. Thank heavens we have such people at the helm in these difficult times.
Is Albumen til I die a reincarnation of ‘Ave It?
81 - typical - Scots Chancellor and Prime Minister uundoubtedly have had a word to save their own skins in Scotland. And how much arm twisting and bribery is going on behind the scenes that we don’t know about.
99 - Could do, but irrelevant anyway - to win these the Tories would have such a large majority anyway it would be irrelevant.
I heard some Lib Dem voters thought they could hold onto Chippenham. Astounding.
100 - So the good people of Crewe and Nantwich and Glasgow East didn’t think their votes could change the government?
101 - Another Labour MP disgruntled with Brows leadership? Who would have believed it!
105 Morus. The evidence from the primary season is that AA turnout will spike. But by how much? …. the same is true of under 35’s and latinos. Certainly Camp Obama believe their GOTV operation will maximise those demographics.
I don’t understand this obsession over shorting ‘in times of volatility’ - stock markets crash, its a natural part of the free market economy - you can’t have a fully stable free market
99. Mark Senior - wha wha wha
:cry: 
The LD’s are doomed - DOOMED at the next election, the Luntz focus group is not even a fig leaf of cover for you.
Mind you Mark, your new shiny and horrible LD Nasty Party is just the right place for you! No doubt you will be shouting for the unemployed to be shot as you are always on about unemployment. LD’s (I.e. YOU! Should knock that on the head as Labour’s economic policies have raped the economy) should be careful on that measure as unemployment is going to rocket.
119. I don’t understand this obsession over shorting ‘in times of volatility’
Well quite,
Everyone knows in volatile market, only stable investment is porn!
Interesting point from a hedge fund manager on Sky News - if shorting is so bad then why are CEOs not coming out when their stocks are high and stating that the stock is vastly overpriced and investors should sell immediately to get the price down to a more realistic level?
120 Another post that just illustrates your unsuitability for employment . Sadly it is you that are DOOMED .
Coming up at 6pm on PB - a special guest slot by Bob Worcester on the MORI 28% Tory lead.
123. Orderly…
98 - Surely by your “by-election” measure, the Lib Dems would have won several General Elections!
I think polls are the best measure of likely election outcomes, by-elections are a good measure of the depth of the hole and how strongly people feel (I think the Kincardaine and Lanbaugh by-elections in 1991 were a good indication with hindsight that Major would be okay as he lost them but on more modest swings), focus groups are a good indication as to how people will fare in an election campaign (but if they start well behind, having a good campaign doesn’t help).
123. Mark, if I were you I would desist from taking the piss out of Martin because of his employment situation. There are plenty of other weaknesses in Martin’s approach, but you are just being a bully. Pure and simple.
123 - How plesant you are Mark.
126. have you got any evidence for the third of those propositions?
I think the focus group shows that Cameron is not perfect, but I still think that this offers little to the other parties. Labour are floundering, Lib Dems are not very visible. On current form Cameron will win the next GE with a sound majority. The cracks in his character may appear once he is PM. However, he is still impressive and the public look likely to vote him in. So essentially the focus group doesn’t really show us much other than that Clegg might be a bit more useful than the mediocrity that summed up his first year.
127 Stuart , you are not me - thank goodness .
117. No, they knew that it would still be a Labour government the day after the results. Meaning they’re more prepared to use their votes as a protest etc.
123.
You really are a bleeter! How come you are posting in the day? I would have thought you would be at work knocking out prosthetic Penis’s? I hope you are not abusing work resources in posting your perverted rubbish on here.
The LD’s are staring down a barrel of a Gun electoral terms - they got too close to Labour and now nobody believes a word they say. LD’s are starting to look not just Wrong but extreme in lurching from one ideological lilt to another. Your whailing posts just reinforce the fact that your party has become impaired and Nick Clegg looking at the latest polls isn’t just going to lose Sheffield Hallam but get Humilated!
184. previous thread:
“If the polls are still dire come Glenrothes, and Labour lose - he’s gone. If they win, he survives until 2010.
I wonder if Cameron will be quietly asking Tories to vote tactically in Glenrothes - for Labour…”
by seanT September 19th, 2008 at 11:01 am
Here here!
Double whammy.
re 133. OK Martin - that’s it for the day on this topic. We all know your views.
129 - Yes:
1. Polls are sometimes wrong for methodological reasons but have a decent predictive record.
2. Swings at by-elections are usually much larger than swings at the following General Election historically. I gave the example of Lanbaugh and Kincardaine - cases where the swing was easily enough to win an election for Kinnock but actually much less than earlier in the Parliament, correctly implying anger at the Tories had cooled Major could win in 1992.
3. Focus groups are newer, but the Luntz focus group which lauded Cameron was correct in that Davis was ahead at the time but the more people saw of the candidates, the better Cameron did.
So I am not entirely talking out of the top of my hat!
Perchance Mark Senior is a tad pissed off with the endless mindless abuse he all too often receives from the usual suspects, including Martin.
Yes, a harsh comment from Mark, can’t say I blame him too much or that perhaps it wasn’t overdue !!
FTSE up over 400 on the day - presumably reality will set in over the weekend and will lose 200+ on Monday morning!
118 - Jack W - genuine question, because I’ve not looked at this as closely as you have:
The AA spike we saw in the primaries, assuming this is what would be seen in the GE, was it:
a) higher registration, same likelihood of registered voters to turn out and actually vote, or
b) no major difference in rates of registration, but higher turnout of already registered AA voters, or
c) higher registration, and measurably increased turnout amongst registered AA voters, new and old?
I suspect (b) is unlikely, but if pressed, I reckon (a) is marginally more likely. That is why I asked.
When will someone from our utterly useless mainstream media ask Brown or Darling why it is that there is a clause in the Lloyds/HBOS deal that signifies the importance of saving jobs in Scotland but not England and Wales. This needs to be answered as quickly as possible, though one of the media ‘elite’ will have to ask the question first.
130- Lots of people have good reasons to despise Cameron just as lots of people had good reasons to despise Blair. Still, as viewed from the other side of the Atlantic anyway, Blair was a formidable and impressive politician and Cameron seems like the most impressive one to come along since Blair. I expect Cameron will fall one day just as Blair did, but he should also have a long and dominant reign, also as Blair did.
132 - and they didn’t think a defeat for Labour might hurry the losers out of the door? You seem to disagree with 99% of the public and the press on this point. Are you honestly saying the results in Crewe and Glasgow have had no effect on the likelihood of Labour being out before 2010?
” the takeover document says the focus “is to keep jobs in Scotland”. ”
Outrageous. What about the North of England. Jobs in Halifax and industrial W Yorkshire are hardly easy to come by. losing a load more will be terrible.
136. I wasn’t questioning 1. and 2. there, only 3….and I don’t think it was rocket science for Luntz to ‘discover’ that Cameron was a more attractive personality than Davis - almost anyone acquainted with both men would have known that.
I think the Luntz effort re. Cameron was aimed at boosting Cameron’s profile among Tories and the media, and was successful in that. I don’t believe it had much significance beyond that.
HBOS share flying - any chance that the shareholders will turn round and say ‘no way’ to the sell-off as Lloyds are coming in way way too low?
143. Crazy and desperate of the government to do this in a week where unemployment has shown the biggest monthly rise since the early 1990s. This is a ‘core-core’ vote strategy…
Halifax will presumably be absorbed into Cheltenham and Glos.
145 - That’s precisely what I would do if I had shares in HBoS.
136 It all depends what exactly you are trying to measure, doesn’t it? As I understand it, the Luntz group on Davis vs Cameron was investigating a very specific question, namely ‘of these candidates, which comes over better?’. Nothing much to do with policies or popularity of the party etc, more ‘who will do better on TV?’ And he certainly got the right answer, on that specific point. Bear in mind also that Cameron would have been almost unknown to the participants, and Davis probably not very well known, so preconceptions were not a big problem.
I’m not really sure what the question was in this latest exercise. People have already made their mind up about Brown, and probably about Cameron. In addition, in both cases, factors such as dissent in the Labour Party and the general economic climate would reflect back differently on the different candidates.
So all it really shows is that Clegg, who was fairly unknown to the group, came over quite well, but without a control group this is hard to assess. So the point is, what, exactly?
I don’t trust any BBC “balanced” audience ever since the Questiontime after 9/11 where they packed the audience with muslims to slag the US ambassador off.
For those debating the Colorado odds, which I think look like value.
http://coloradopols.com/
If Brown and darling are seen as giving greater priority for saving jobs in Scotland than England and Wales, they will never be forgiven. Since the game is basically up for them, I hardly suppose that matters, but since Brown deludedly wants to soldier on, someone should tell him.
Is there going to be another Luntz session on newsnight tonight, looking at potential Labour leaders?
re 143. There are many more LAB>CON marginals in Yorkshire in the vicinity of Halifax than in Scotland. The Brown-Darling commitment makes no political sense but then they seem to have passed caring.
146 - I’m not aware that the government is running this particular bank just yet. Maybe, just maybe, not everything you hear is (1) true or (2) the fault of the government or (3) the result of cynical electoral politics by the Labour party. Get a grip.
144 - Well, I agree and have said here that I am not a huge fan of Luntz and find his approach of “forced consensus” unsettling. But he did correctly call it that the more Tories saw of Cameron, the more they would like him. And he tipped Vince Cable as being much more appealing to the public than conventional wisdom had it - which appeared to be about right.
I suppose a stopped clock is right twice a day, but it isn’t nonsense and it is not by accident or foolishness that all parties and many commercial organisations use focus groups as well as conventional polling.
148 thats what I thought - they are currently trading a penny or so under the proposed price and this is now creating a new aritficial ceiling - any shareholder cna surely see that it is only the derisory purchase price offer that is stopping the shares flying up even igher now that the FSA have obligingly protected them from shorting.
After all, HBOS is well capitalised, why would it allow 40k to be put out of work unecessarily?
HBOS shares are 230p, LLoydsTSB 300p. Each HBOS share will be be replaced by 0.8 of a LloydsTSB share so prices are about correct.
146. Most of Labour’s core vote is not in Scotland. This is stupid stupid stupid…
136 -
Langbaurgh - 4.6% swing Tory to Labour
Kincardine - 0.6% swing Labour to Tory
How do these results suggest a win for Labour? Kincardine was actually a swing away from Labour? Labour needed a 5.7% swing to win in 1992?
Repost from previous thread -
“S&S - Philippe etc.
Limbaugh is a symbol of the support that McCain needs but that is toxic to many people. It is about how *McCain* deals with Limbaugh, not about Limbaugh. Will he, as Obama did with Wright, cut him off and denounce him?
If he does than that can only be good for McCain, if he says nothing then we can only presume that he either supports Limbaugh or that he is scared of losing his support and supporters.”
It’s a subtle ploy and a difficult one for McCain; if he starts complaining then there is a link in the public’s eye with Limbaugh, unless he denounces him, in which case, a section of Limbaugh’s audience goes off in an electoral huff.
156 - Yes, tonight.
154. Indeed
155. If you think this isn’t cynical politics, then it’s you who needs to get a grip, dear boy.
158 - so its not price dependant? its 0.8 Lloyds for an HBOS regardless of value?
143: It’s talking about the group HQ, which is in Scotland. Most of the inevitable rationalisations (call centres, branches) are spread throughout the UK, but HQ jobs aren’t.
Glenrothes. WillHill has the SNP at 2/9 and Gordon to leave office in 2008 at 13/8.
Surely the value is on Gordon to leave office? If you think a loss in Glenrothes would be the end, then why would you bet on the SNP?
Any advice?
143. It is a massive employer round here (West Yorkshire), It is ironic that Brown and Darling wish to save Scottish jobs at the expense of English ones when the Halifax was the major part of that institution.
I really do think Labour have taken the worst decision they could on this politically and from an electoral view, the Tories should be leafleting Halifax, Calder valley, Colne Valley and Huddersfield big style at Labours sell out. Indeed there is a big office in Leeds as well in the centre so it could spread out.
The SNP may well take seats off Labour due to a rise in unemployment but a sell out on the scale West Yorkshire will suffer may be irreversable for a generation in some of the marginals around here. Labour’s best bet would have been to not lobby for Jobs in either England or Scotland. Instead Brown the cluts, turn a crisis into a disater for Labour. The man is absolutly barking - MAD!
On the rather weak attempt by McCain in his ad to try and claim that, oh no, it’s not he that is in the clutches of lobbyists.
“The McCain campaign is clearly exaggerating wildly in attempting to depict Howell Raines as a close adviser to Obama on “housing and mortgage policy.” If we are to believe Raines, he did have a couple of telephone conversations with someone in the Obama campaign. But that hardly makes him an adviser to the candidate himself–and certainly not in the way depicted in the McCain video release. ”
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/09/obamas_fannie_mae_connection.html
Unsurprising I suppose.
145 - This shareholder will vote against the “merger”, if only out of sheer cussedness. Unfortunately, the 800 million shares owned by the 2 million little people are virtually useless against the big boys with their billions.
Here’s some more deliciously revealing anti-democratic sentiment from those lovely people the europhiles.
The Irish Broadcasters have been discussing the insolence of the electorate in voting No, and how such impertinence can be prevented in future.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2008/0918/breaking37.html?via=mr
Some example quotes:
“The mere fact of a question being put to the people in a referendum does not mean that genuine balance and effective scrutiny requires both sides be given strictly equal time on air,” Chairman of the Independent Broadcasters of Ireland, Mr Willie O’Reilly said.
“In the Lisbon debate I believe that this artificial requirement was a self-fulfilling prophesy. By giving equal time to both sides we gave the No case more credibility and less scrutiny than it deserved,” he said.
Mr O’Reilly told the Does the Medium Matter conference hosted by the Broadcasting Commission of Ireland (BCI) that the rules for 50:50 balance in a referendum “make a megaphone for any argument regardless of its own merit and or the credibility of its proponents”.
“The reasons there are laws on broadcasting is because we as a society rightly believe that there is a vital public interest at stake.
“It is surely not in the public interest to hand over half the air time as of automatic to one side in the crucial issue of a referendum simply because they show up on the day”.
Yes, you read that correctly. He thinks giving the Yes and No sides 50/50 split in broadcasting time was a mistake, because the No argumants were simply without “merit or credibility”, therefore they should have less airtime than the obvioiusly superior Yes arguments.
I wonder what split he favours? Maybe the Yes side should have had 85% of the airtime, and the No side 15%? Given the relative “merit and credibility” of the arguments? But why stop there? Why not go the Full Mugabe, and give the Yes side 100% and the No side a neat round 0%?
Europhiles. Tsch.
154. Mike Smithson - “The Brown-Darling commitment makes no political sense but then they seem to have passed caring.”
It is instinctive. Brown and Darling did not even think about it. Their every intuition tells them that Scottish jobs must come first. If you do not believe me, read the Claim of Right for Scotland, signed by both Brown and Darling. Read it very, very carefully… Now do you understand?
161- Unlike Bush, McCain has never been close to Limbaugh. Indeed, Limbaugh has historically been very negative on McCain and only begrudgingly accepted McCain as the party standard bearer in this election as the lesser of two evils. Thus, any comparison to the intimate and spiritual Obama/Wright relationship shows total ignorance of the history between McCain and Limbaugh.
The other thing I wonder is how the government will react if, for example, HSBC, who have just pulled out of a £3.3 billion deal in Korea were to try and increase their market share in UK banking - woud the competition commission be told to look away again?
I know this is an unlikely scenario but has Darling not made a rather cumbersome rod for his own back?
165 I think you wil find the HQ of TSB Scotland is in Edinburgh. But the only person who works there is the one who bags the post up and sends it to Lloyds TSB at London or Bristol. I think Brown has pulled off a masterstroke here in his aim of total self-destruction, (1) he will anger the English now who believe it is their jobs at risk and (2) he will anger the Scots when they realise that although the HQ will be there, the jobs will not be. Who said you can’t anger all of the people all of the time? Also - surely there are not 40,000 people working in Scotland for HBoS, so even of all the Scots were laid off there would still be English job losses as well?
142. The press are never going to run a story “Big defeat for Labour, but it doesn’t matter as much as you think”.
Yes it weakens Labour, yes it makes them more likely to lose. But people go into by-elections with a different mindset than a GE, and the results are far exaggerated. Not to mention the campaigns are different, the coverage levels are different etc etc. I think polls are far more reliable as predictors of the next ge.
Well, this just adds to my criticisms of focus groups from the prior thread. You need to have a decent bellweather kind of area, and the national picture is most definitely not a Labour-LD battle.
Even without the rest of the flaws in focus groups, the pisspoor participant group makes it utterly worthless.
Worse still, it’s more bias against the Conservatives. If you had 30 chaps from Henley they wouldn’t rate Labour. Not shocking 30 Mancunians don’t rate the Tories.
170. Extraordinary.
from the BBC
“In an eve-of-conference letter to Labour MPs, Mr Brown urged them to “restate the case for our party and values”.
He said voters needed to see the choice at the next election was between “a Conservative party which still believes in helping the few and not the many and a Labour party which believes in fairness and opportunity for all and has the policies to deliver”
Presumably he is pleased that fuel and food price increases hit everybody, but the poor disproportionately. That the poorest and public employees have their pay restricted and the poorest earners pay more tax since the 10p tax band abolition. Meanwhile the boss of HBOS gets his windfall!
The winter is going to be awful! Don’t be poor under Labour!
172 - So there’s no problem with McCain calling a press conference to publically distance himself from Limbaugh’s politics then?
Good, I await this over the next week or so.
You *are* sure it’s going to happen aren’t you?
We’ve already seen in this election that it’s not enough to be against something, you have to be *visibly* against it. When pitting Wright against Limbaugh, I wonder which one is really closer to the man they are compared too?
175 - I think we are posting at cross-purposes. I agree polls are a better predictor of election results than by-elections. My point was that both are infinitely more superior than a focus group.
160 - I had recalled the Langbaugh swing being greater and am happy to be corrected, but it was still twice what was achieved at the General Election.
In Kincardine, I think you are looking at inaccurate Wikipedia figures. In fact it was LD +12.7, Tory -10.1, Lab -8.2. Although that is a small swing to Labour only, the fall in the Tory vote is in theory encouraging for them given they were always likely to be squeezed. But it was nowhere close to being replicated in the general election and, in reality, it was quite mild for a by-election against a current government.
170- When will they ever learn… democracy just doesn’t work! I guess it’s no accident that anti-democratic sentiment and love of the EU go hand in hand.
171. They are so scared of Salmond - and losing in Glenrothes - Brown and Darling will promise anything. So English jobs must be sacrificed to preserve Labour’s core vote in Scotland. It’s the squeaky wheel what gets the grease.
The Times article is quite explicit about this: the protection of Scottish jobs is in the HBOS takeover rules, no mention of English jobs.
As Albion says, this is idiotic short term foolishness. If this allegation proves true it will be explosive, and lose Labour many thousands of English votes. If it isn’t true then it will lose them thousands of Scottish votes, as the Scots realise they’ve been had. The whole calamity is bad for the Union.
What are they playing at, down at Number 10? Bizarrely inept.
178. ‘The many not the few’ line worked well when the Tories were committed to things like patients pasports, but it’s past it’s sell by date now (not the only thing).
Clearly cameron isn’t stupid enough to be going after the ‘few’. You don’t win elections that way. Marrigae tax proposals don’t help the few. They help the many. The problem is that those ‘many’ tend to be more privieged. Brown has yet again shown himself to be utterly unadaptable and stuck in his ways.
181 So where do your figures come from if not Wikipedia?
180 - But I think your mistake is to suggest focus groups are trying to predict elections. Nobody claims Luntz’s focus group places Clegg in number 10. What it says is that there are aspects of his presentational style and message that people like when they see it (and they rarely do see it). Focus groups allow parties to play to their strengths and mend their weaknesses.
Sneaking in ahead of Jack…
Marist (all Likely voters)
Ohio - Obama 47 McCain 45
http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/OHpolls/OH080919.htm
Pennsylvania - Obama 49 McCain 44
http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/PApolls/PA080919.htm
Michigan - Obama 52 McCain 43
http://www.maristpoll.marist.edu/MIpolls/MI080919.htm
Note that the likely voter figures are as good as (MI) or better (OH, PA) than the registered voter figures for Obama.
As we get to October then people make up their minds definitely and this is the key figure to look for, I’m not sure we are there yet as it being better than registered voters but come the debates then it will be.
170 - I think he is correct that rigidly enforcing airtime rules can be counter-productive. The next referendum in Ireland is likely to be on children’s rights. Surely no-one would argue that every broadcaster give 50:50 airtime to both sides of the argument and cover in detail the inane witterings of, say, a Dutch-style pro-paedophilia grouping? He has an important point and seems to be arguing from a broadcasting rather than political viewpoint but obviously it’s much more fun to present it as attempted censorship by Europhiles.
166 Whelan
There are two points which can explain the odds differential.
1. It depends how badly Labour lose Glenrothes. A near miss might feel like a win.
2. If Glenrothes does prove terminal, the death throes could easily last into 2009.
The odds on both look about right to me.
185 - Parliament publishes election factsheets which are generally more reliable:
http://www.parliament.uk/documents/upload/m12.pdf
179- Why should McCain call a press conference distancing himself from Limbaugh’s statements? Is Obama going to call a press conference distancing himself from every public figure who supports him who has ever said anything impolitic. Yours is a silly line of argument, sorry to say.
I’m trying to work out what I think of new FSA rulings on short-selling (incidentally they have just been copied by the SEC in the US).
I think I’m infavour of a ban on ‘naked’ short selling, but opposed to banning real short selling, I suppose because the former is infinite, whereas the latter is finite (and so mirrors stock purchase and sale). Is that ridiculously convoluted?
http://money.cnn.com/2008/09/17/news/companies/sec_short_selling/index.htm
182. What’s remarkable is how open the EU-elite and their fellow travellers now are about how democratic opinion needs to be overriden in order to further their aims - and how open they are about their contempt for the voters. Do they think no-one is listening, that no-one cares?
I’ve been a fan of Luntz (really) ever since his anaylsis pointed me towards getting on Cameron as next leader at 6/1. Yes the methods do look awfully contrived and steered on tv - and i doubted him for a while because of this. Now I just think - I don’t care how he gets his results - his results are correct. This is the best piece of news the Lib Dems have had in years.
Signatories include Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling:
The Claim of Right states:
“We, gathered as the Scottish Constitutional Convention, do hereby acknowledge the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of Government best suited to their needs, and do hereby declare and pledge that in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount.
“We further declare and pledge that our actions and deliberations shall be directed to the following ends:
To agree a scheme for an Assembly or Parliament for Scotland;
To mobilise Scottish opinion and ensure the approval of the Scottish people for that scheme; and
To assert the right of the Scottish people to secure the implementation of that scheme.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claim_of_Right_1989
http://www.alba.org.uk/devolution/claimofright.html
http://www.scottish.parliament.uk/nmCentre/news/news-99/pa0023.htm
in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount
in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount
in all our actions and deliberations their interests shall be paramount
… it is simply in their DNA.
@ 141 Cameron now has two baleful examples to consider of “how not to change the leader” - Thatcher and Blair.
I think if he is smart and wants to be remembered as the guy who won five elections for the Tories, he will quit 3 years into a second term, in the summer. The candidates can then set out their stall, address the conference, and the winner can have 18 months in post before seeking their own mandate.
Tend to agree with the Tories here that Luntz should primarily be seen as part of the entertainment industry - like a number of political pundits, his programmes are first and firemost centered on himself, secondly on producing an interesting result, and only as a minor objective giving a balanced picture. Like any programme that surveys opinion, it *may* show up something of interest, but it’s so dependent on the clips that he choose that the phrase ‘push poll’ sums it up pretty well.
183. I didn’t know this but there is apparently a relatively major HBOS centre in Newport (according to the Times). Undoubtedly some of the people there will live in England, but if the Tories don’t want to antagonise the Principality, they better not simpl refer to ‘English’ jobs.
188. And there we have a splendid example of what I mean, with a not-so-subtle attempt to equate euroscepticism with paedophilia. Charming.
@ 154 Mike, perhaps they figure if they lose badly in Yorkshire they lose the next election, whereas if they lose badly in Scotland, they lose Scotland altogether and never win again.
194, it may point to Lib Dem success against Labour, but it is surely a fruitless exercise to have a focus group in an area where the probably next government does not stand a chance?
You couldn’t look at a SW Lib Dem-Tory contest and use that to work out what the GE result would be.
“179- Why should McCain call a press conference distancing himself from Limbaugh’s statements? Is Obama going to call a press conference distancing himself from every public figure who supports him who has ever said anything impolitic. Yours is a silly line of argument, sorry to say.”
191 - Aha! At last you see how ridiculous all the stuff about Wright (and Ayers and so on) was. It is indicative, however, that Obama has gone on the record to denounce Wright but that McCain has been less forthcoming about Hagee.
As for Limbaugh, does he disagree with him or is he too desperate for the votes he may bring to avoid saying so? If he’s so weak that he has to do that then it makes him look craven at best.
188 - I’m not sure that opposing a specific children’s rights bill is synonymous with being a member of NAMBLA - the bil could have other flaws, and it is those that would be given equal time. If you don’t give equal time, it is undemocratic, which is worse than getting the wrong result.
Also, do you honestly think that this is comaparable? I understand that the general case the man is making (and you make with your children’s rights view) can be made (though I think it undemocratic and silly) - but is the right and wrong of the European Treat so black and white as being for or against paedophilia? And how do you make that case without sounding patronising and antidemocratic.
The fact is that the point of the referendum is to make the decision as to what is right and wrong. I don’t care of there are alloted quotas or not, but prejudging which side is right and which is wrong *prior to the referendum* strikes me as just ridiculous.
The other point is that this is not only odious, it is also politically-retarded, because *of course it will be spun that way*. It’s too f***ing easy.
At best, the man is an eeijit. At worst, an enemy of democracy. To the Irish equivalent of the Tower with him!
188. You stupid horrible twat. He thinks the No side should have had less time than the Yes side, simply because he doesn’t agree with the No side. Can’t you read?
Here, this is what he said:
“By giving equal time to both sides we gave the No case more credibility and less scrutiny than it deserved,”
He then says:
“It is surely not in the public interest to hand over half the air time as of automatic to one side in the crucial issue of a referendum simply because they show up on the day”
If this isn’t an expression of a desire to censor the eurosceptic viewpoint then I don’t know what is. Perhaps I could find a jpeg of him pouring molten lead into the mouth of Nigel Farage. Would that do?
lol. Europhiles. They get caught out, as the blatant, anti democratic liars they are - and their response? To lie about it, blatantly.
186 - Again I agree. Other posters were spinning the focus groups to mean something in terms of election results. My whole argument was that they are irrelevant compared to opinion polls and by-election results.
190 - thanks for the link. My only issue is that this document (covering facts for a period ending 1992) was revised in 2003. The figures look better for Labour in the document than the source I have. Mmmmm conspiracy, government spinning facts again? It really is the Ministry of Truth if facts from 1992 are re-written in 2003.
201 - Yes, well that’s the point Mike makes…It’s all about the swing voters and if the Lib Dems are going to get the Labour ones then that’s half the battle…
201 - I am not sure there is as much of a difference as you think between soft Labour voters in a Tory target, a Lib Dem target and a safe seat. Sure, many of those people will be making a Labour/Lib Dem choice at the General Election but only because the Lib Dems will relentlessly remind them that the Tories are not relevant in Manchester. In terms of basic concerns and impressions, there is not that much variation.
Cameron probably would have done better among southern English soft Labour voters, including in some important marginals. There is something about his style that grates more with northerners perhaps. But the location hardly invalidates it completely.
203 - I dont think he was prejudging though. He made his speech after the referendum campaign. He clearly resented the fact that, due to the balance rules, the broadcast media had to give both sides certain levels of coverage whether the points they had to make merited coverage or not. Of course that is politically retarded because it is so easy to spin against - but he isnt a politician.
139 Morus. I’ve never known you to ask a ungenuine question …. apart from those enquiries about Peter the Punter’s frocks !!
AA Turnout. Simply put it was a mixture of a higher differential turnout of registered voters - old and new. The average was a little under 150% but in some states turnout spiked at a massive 170%. It’s one of the reasons why many pollsters were so off beam in their margins of Obama’s wins, NC and SC spring to mind.
202- You clearly don’t follow my point about the relationship between Obama and Wright being completely different from the nonexistent relationship between McCain and Limbaugh. Given that, there’s no reason to continue this fruitless discussion.
49,64 Jack W, PtP - It’s also quite possible that Obama could win Colorado and yet fail in his bid to become POTUS.
188 - Yes, Neil, but surely there are many *other* sources of valid arguments on the no side of that referendum? Just as there are many *other* sources of Eurosceptic arguments than Al Murray’s pub landlord.
I think a referendum on any subject can support a 50/50 split. We’re talking about changing the constitution - the ‘no’ side clearly can’t be all that absurd because that’s what we’re doing right now. Although even an absurd subject - say, ’should the government spend this year’s roads budget on building a really big catapult with which to hurl gigantic lumps of chalk into the North Sea’ - can withstand a 50/50 split on airtime as the arguments in its favour are so weak. If you think the arguments in favour of your proposal are so watertight then make the case!
One of the problems the Europhiles have is seeing their opponents as anything other than red-faced shouty stereotypes. The more they tar ALL of their opponents with this brush, the more that their more moderate voices of Euroscepticism will bristle and harden.
205 - I suspect it’s more likely they revised the contact numbers at the end as the dialling codes changed in the interim. The 1987 results can be cross-checked anyway and confirm the position for Kincardine.
Just thoughts out loud-By common consent this is supposed to be a right-wing blog.& yet when it comes to the Rep.representing right-wing views,the number of anti-Reps(especially re.Palin )really surprises me.Anyone care to comment.
204. It’s worse than that - they aren’t even lying about it anymore. They are positively revelling in their anti-democratic contempt for the electorate.
199- Don’t you see? Euroskepticism is in fact worse, since pedophilia harms only children, but euroskepticism harms everyone!
The scary thing about mass media is that they have the power, if they harness it (as the Irish gentleman suggests he’d like to do next time), to control the debate. If only the dissenting voices could be silenced, the “correct” outcome could be brought about and everyone would receive what’s best for them. There should be a criminal statute to cover what he would like to do, punishable by imprisonment (call it a “hate crime” against democracy).
209 JackW
Afaiaa, Mike stipulates no dress code at PB.com. What a man chooses to wear whilst posting is his business and his alone.
208. Yes, those damn balance rules. That horrible democracy thing. Those awful voters.
What balance would have been right in your eyes Neil? 60-40%? 90-10%? Who decides beforehand on the exact arrangment? Who determines which arguments have merit and credibility and therefore deserve more airtime? Mister Willy O’Reilly? Neil the Knob from pb? Who?
Tell you what. Here’s an idea. It’s called… democracy. The idea is you give both sides of an important constitutional debate EQUAL AIRTIME without prejudging which side has “merit and credibility” - and then - here comes the crazy bit - you let the voters decide and then you honour their decision!!!
I know, it’s radical. Call me an eejit for even suggesting it. I am aware it goes against all the principles on which the EU is based - i.e. corruption, sleaze, elitism, lies and hyocrisy - but you know what it might just work better than your plan of DECIDING THAT THE PEOPLE ARE STUPID.
ITS THE MINISTRY OF TRUTH
213 - Look on You Tube there is a video of the results for the Kincardine by-election results being given. The figures stated by the returning officer are the ones in Wikipedia, not on the governments document re-written in 2003.
211 Quite, PfP. It’s not exactly free money, but a decent value bet for all that.
211 - Perhaps less likely though? If Colorado is won then it is very likely neighbouring New Mexico would be won (it has always looked a much stronger bet) while Iowa has always looked the most likely pick-up anywhere. Obama’s most likely loss is New Hampshire but that would leave a tie and Obama would likely win on 12th amendment. Could just conceivably lose another state but quite unlikely if he has won Colorado.
212, swap bits of chalk for Ed Balls and I’d say Yes:D
216 - *lol*
217 - I always post wearing a dinner jacket
213 - James you misread it. The election results in the document you pointed me to are the same as Wikipedia. Get your facts right in future *s*.
Remember, spinning figures as you have done gets found out.
211 PfP. Good point. If Obama outperforms in the West, taking New Mexico, Nevada and Colorado in addition to Iowa but loses Michigan, then McCain wins 277/261
217 PtP - Of course, as long as there is full disclosure.
219 - Wikipedia and the Parliament document agree on votes cast though (see page 16) so your point is meaningless. They disagree on the 1987 result and hence the swing.
212 - I dont think there is any evidence that this guy is a europhile. He is not condemning all eurosceptic voices or arguments, specifically those made by elements of Ireland’s ‘no campaign in the run-up to the Lisbon referendum. I presume his alternative proposal is to leave it to the judgement (professionalism?!) of broadcasters to decide what is worth covering rather than forcing them to cover anything put out by a particular side. All I am saying is that it is probably worthy of debate and that condemning this as attempted, euro-driven censorship is a bit shrill and silly.
224 I think it should be a PB rule that everyone posts wearing a cravat……..
224 Tabman. Any nothing else ??
214 - “By common consent this is supposed to be a right-wing blog”
No, it really isn’t. Mike Smithson is a Liberal Democrat, and the comments come from Labour, Conservative, LibDem, SNP, Plaid Cymru, English Democrats, UKIP, BNP, Republicans, Democrats, Greens, and plenty of us non-partisans.
The site is officially non-aligned (which is why it topped the Non-Aligned Category in Mr Dale’s Blog Awards again this year) designed to focus on polls and political betting markets.
The loudest voices will always be those in the ascendency, which is why there are more UK Right Wingers posting at the moment, but had you been here a little over a year ago, it would have appeared quite the opposite.
Well, a great day for the FTSE, finally ending at 5311.3.
Only 75 points to go to claw its way out of the bear market.
Incidentally, the FIRST time it ever broke 5300 was on 1st October 1997, when it closed at 5317.1.
Just putting things into perspective
228 - Got it. Unfortunately no video on you tube of the 1985 declaration so can’t check which are right.
Still don’t trust Brown though. Or you again.
232-Point taken.
228 et al. David Boothroyd’s site (which I’ve always found to be very reliable) corresponds to the Parliament papers:
http://www.election.demon.co.uk/1983SC.html
I’m inclined to be sceptical of the wikipedia result for the by-election since the figures in the percentage column sum to 139.1%.
Peter the Punter as seen in dress down Friday mode attending to her PB duties :
http://dogfightatbankstown.typepad.com/blog/images/bearded_lady.jpg
Bye All.
Off to pack bags for the great event in Manchester. Am a delegate this year for the first time! Should be a mix of high drama and mind numbing boredom in the hall. Looking forward to finding out what’s going on in the hotel bar afterwards.
Will report back if people are interested. You-nit-eeeee.
FTSE now 5390 after hours on Tradefair. There will tears Monday morning!
231 - maybe a little Cologne …
229 - That is precisely the patronising view of the electorate that I have a problem with, irrespective of which side he reports. Why should the media class decide which side gets more attention - that’s precisely the sort of anti-democratic distortion of a constitutional referendum that the policy is designed to avoid.
I’m not saying I agree with quotas - there are free speech issues, if nothing else - but this is completely the wrong argument against them
229. Now we have, in fact, reverted to dissembling mode.
Another point on the Luntz thing. It doesn’t neccessarily matter if the outcome of his methods is accurate or not. People have a natural herd instinct and if you successfully persuade them that there is a group consensus then most people will at least partially conform to that even if in reality most of them disagree with it.
It was a bit like that in Labour circles. You could sit in a room with a lot of Labour activists listening to endless mad b*ll*cks, then go and talk individually to a load of Labour voters and there’d be zero common ground, absolutely none. But, if you got 3 or 4 of these same voters together then they’d talk different and conform more to what they thought was the group consensus.
(When I say activists I mean the policy type ones. There’s a whole different set of original Labour types who do the actual legwork.)
229: “condemning this as attempted, euro-driven censorship is a bit shrill and silly”
That remark is absolutely characteristic of the sneering, de-haut-en-bas contempt that Eurocrats feel for their electorate. Thank God that the worm appears to be in the process of turning.
241, the greatest travesty is that we’ve had to rely on the good people of Ireland to put an end to the treaty. Had the spineless Lib Dems actually kept their promise, more backbenchers of Labour would’ve rebelled and it may well’ve been lost by the government.
232 - Morus, I would antedate that different feeling to prior to the 2005 GE, when there seemed roughly even numbers (albeit many fewerin total) from all parties.
214. Don’t make that mistake, it’s just that the Tories, are the raucous public school types. Those of us on the left are quieter; after all, we have history on our side!
237 LOL Jack!
But no, not me.
It’s an old family photo of my mother, taken I think when she used to work for David Lloyd George.
229- you said “I dont think there is any evidence that this guy is a europhile.”
Well, apparently he said the “No” campaign was given more credibility than it deserved by receiving equal air time. Is there any way to read this other than that he is a europhile? Maybe his view is that the “No” side had little credibility, but he nonetheless agrees with them?
238 Let us know if you spot Ben Bradshaw!
(posted wearing a large maroon velvet cravat and cummerbund set, just for Kas)
New Rasmussen poll for Indiana :
McCain 49% .. Obama 47%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/indiana/election_2008_indiana_presidential_election
236 - Who would have thought we would be here in 2008 still discussing the result of the 1991 Kincardine and Deeside by-election.
Time to pack up and head for the pub me thinks. I’ll get my anorak….
238 - Ooh, on which subject, for anyone who’s heading to Manchester for the conference and fancies a bite to eat in convivial surroundings I can heartily recommend Dimitris (tapas bar) on Deansgate opposite the Beetham Tower. I was there last night and it was tasty and good value. It looks packed but there’s loads of space in the back so might not be.
Kind of looking forward to the Labour party conference coming to town. Last time it happened a man from Aslef gave me an apple.
253 - is the Grinch still going?
248 PtP.
… is “work” for D L-G a euphamism ??
Are you in fact Mi Lord Punter ??
251 Indiana shouldn’t be this close if McCain has a prayer of winning in November. That is three(?) within the margin of error in a few days.
247 - you’ve a great deal to be quiet about.
250 are you trying to get me interested? You old smoothie you
(posted wearing a properly tied cravat- and matching pants)
241 - We let the print press report the campaign as they see fit, why not the broadcasters? It is a debate worth having. It is a debate that is much, much wider than European issues. If the guy hadn’t made the point in relation to the last Irish EU referendum (but to, say, the next Irish referendum on children’s rights) then we would never have had the shrill “europhiles want to stifle debate” comments here today.
249 - “Is there any way to read this other than that he is a europhile? Maybe his view is that the “No” side had little credibility, but he nonetheless agrees with them?”
Yeah there is and that’s one possibility. I would have voted ‘no’ if I still had a vote in Ireland but that still doesnt mean I think that some of the arguments that the ‘no’ side came up with and got plenty of coverage for (eg the treaty will reintroduce the death penalty, will allow the state to lock up children etc..) were anything other than ridiculous. Of course the ‘yes’ side was also very silly at times but didnt ever seem to plunder the same depths. So it is possible to be a ‘no’ voter and disagree with the main organisations supporting the ‘no’ campaign (Libertas and Sinn Féin).
255 I’d always assumed she was his secretary, Jack. She was always, I believe, taking things down for him.
[Ooops, Missus...!]
253 - I lived in Manchester for about 7 months, and there are quite a few bars serving decent food, as well as some really good restaurants.
For bar food - Zync (next to the Manchester Eye) is pretty good, as are the burgers and pizzas at the Wine Bar, the Grinch.
For proper food, there is a Gaucho Grill, though my particular favourite was the Grill on the Alley and San Carlo, which has to be one of the finest Italian restaurants outside of London.
254 - Great minds don’t think alike, but we clearly do!
Yes, still going when I was there a couple of months ago…
259 - It is a debate worth having, but anyone who couches it in terms that sound like awarding coverage according to which side’s arguments have more merit is fundamentally flawed.
Give complete free reign, or have fair quotas - but the idea that you modify quotas dependent on what the media class judge to be meritous is just downright wrong.
256 MM. Indeed. If McCain’s internals for the state correspond then we may expect a few visits and some cash thrown at the state. Camp Obama still believe they have a shot there and on those numbers they can’t be written off.
Afternoon all,
Just a flying visit
I usually rate Luntz’s focus groups but this was dire nonsense. I agree with others who have commented in a similar manner. The whole approached seemed designed to give a predetermined outcome which favoured the Libdems. Reasons being:
1) The group selected were Labour leaning - given that around 70% of the electorate do not lean toward Labour anymore the results of the focus group only reflect the views of 30% at best. Hardly representative
2) Choosing a Labour stronghold area is hardly going to reflect the national mood. Most in the group selected will have been indoctrinated with a hardcore anti-conservative viewpoint if they are still Labour leaning given the Government’s record.
3) As Mike points out it’s irrelevent in terms of a General Election result. The Conservatives don’t need to win seats Northern cities to win the General Election comfortably. IMHO if they really wanted a clear view they should have chosen London or Birmingham as the battle for those cities will be telling.
4) The clips selected were not like for like and they seemed to choose a clip for Clegg which did little more than state exactly what everyone else is thinking (and what the vast majority of MP’s whatever colour they represent are saying). Of course it would gain support from those in the focus group.
My conclusion. Newsnight succeeded in continuing to produce its preposterous liberal left wing propaganda that is now the trademark of the increasingly irrelevant BBC Current Affairs department. It’s meaningless….
TTFN
263 - I dont remember him suggesting modifying quotas. Indeed there is little detail on what he would prefer; it may well be a free reign, hard to tell from the report.
262 - glad to see it, I haven’t lived in Manchester for 10 years but used to go there often.
Scottish clause in HBOS deal is totally unacceptable, says Labour MP
- Halifax MP tells Gordon Brown to ’set aside’ Glenrothes byelection and give same job guarantees to England’s HBOS employees
There are fears Gordon Brown faces more of the same at Glenrothes, with many parliamentary Labour party members seeing the byelection as his last chance to redeem his flagging leadership.
Edinburgh was the second financial centre in the UK, said Kerr [Shadow cabinet secretary for finance and sustainable growth], and Brown’s intervention in helping to broker the deal undermined the Scottish National Party’s call for independence.
An independent state of Scotland could not have responded adequately to a crisis facing the whole of the UK, he said.
“The prime minister has protected jobs by allowing this merger to happen,” Kerr told the BBC.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/sep/19/gordonbrown.hbosbusiness
268, btw, what do you think of the Glenrothes by-election? The bookies think it’s highly likely the SNP will win. Any chance of a Labour hold in your view?
What happens if the market slides after the trillion dollar buy out of toxic debt - and what happens to the credibility of a central bank/government carrying a trillion dollars of toxic debt?
I am really really rather worried by this plan - its not a single entity being released from ‘moral hazard’ - its the entire banking system.
The free market is being written anew - ok, we can debate the merits of that - but surely we are going to be left with a partially restrained market still subject to an in part free market as regualted areas and areas still operating as a free market collide…. I really don’t know how to put it not being an economic whizz kid, but 10%iosh in a day in a volatile market with no clear endgame after a week of catastrophes…..
When it looks like it, feels like it, smells like it, you call it what it is…. I call this very frigtening
269.
Always a chance Morris! I never take the electorate for granted. And I never, ever, ever underestimate the Scottish Labour Party. They are a formidable foe, and I have been around for too long to naively think that they are a push-over.
McCain citizenship lawsuit latest
http://tinyurl.com/3vdjuh
A question for the finance experts:
Was HBoS really in lots of trouble with liquidity etc, or was it a quirk of naked short selling?
If this merger didn’t go ahead, might HBoS actually be ok?
If this merger is later shown to have been not strictly necessary (HBoS not really in as much trouble as perceived), and it was ushered in too hastily by the PM, causing tens of thousands of job losses, could not his deliberate association of himself with the deal be the thing that finally destroys his Premiership?
273. But presumably the shareholders can still stop the deal. If HBOS was okay, surely that should eventually show in the share price. From what I remember, it was Lloyds who took an interest and then the government got involved.
Unless of course, things were going on behind the scenes that we didn’t know about. I’m no financial expert btw.
273 - no, HBOS is in trouble, for much the same reasons as NR. It has relied on the wholesale debt markets to finance an aggressive expansion. Now that the debt markets have dried up, it will struggle to roll all of this over, leading to a liquidity crisis. The short sellers were, in fact, behaving entirely rationally.
270 The plan is a disaster for markets. The fact that banks will be able to offload their rubbish positions onto the taxpayer is just the continuation of the ‘Greenspan Put’ philosophy. The problems with markets in the last 20 years have been the understanding that govts will cut rates, bail out banks, in fact do anything they can to keep GDP growth on track. This is a serious error.
Markets are over bought in every sense. The cheap money and idiotic expansion of the monetary base can only end in tears. We are headed for the worst recession in living memory as the lax financial conditions are unwound.
House prices will be 50% lower in 1 years time.
273
NHBOS releis on the wholesale markets for funding.
It needs to raise approx £130 Billion in the next 12 months. Approx £30 will come from mortgage repayments.
With interbank lending dead, and conficdence in HBOS dead as well, it would have been unable to raise the cash.. possibly .. almost 75% certainly.
So it faced administration…
265. You can say things about the editing process, but I don’t see Luntz allowing the BBC to intefere with his results, and I don’t see him being biased towards the Lib Dems somehow.
Latest Gallup Tracker :
McCain 44% .. Obama 49%
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx
Two new articles up. The Bob Worcester slot and “Lib Dems get big conference boost with YouGov”
278. There is the conflict of trying to be interesting or even otrageous in the piece, with maintaining respectability. Some might think Luntz is a showman, but he holds the status he does because he has a reputation for being right. Witness Cameron in 2005 and Brown in 2006. In neither case can it be said he came to the obvious conclusion, but with hindsight he was pretty accurate.
276
The Japanese tried the long game and had 20 years of deflation… And yet the Japanese economy is still alive.
The US is trying the quick fix. If many of the bad debts are really bad, the taxpayer picks up the bills.
And who is buying the debt the US government is issuing to fund the buyout? Foreign Governments mainly..
Recycling dollar surpluses from oil and export goods earnings.
It’s a giant Ponzi scheme… and when the dollar falls.. which it will one day, the foregn holders of US bonds will lose their shirsts and trousers etc..
The US taxpayer will pay interest on the bonds. Well err he will not. The US Government will issue more bonds to fund its deficit…
When the crash does come, it’s almost certain to be total..It may not happen for another 20 years or ever,
“Toxic debt” = 1,000,000,000,000 dollars
World population = 6,725,000,000
US population = 305,000,000
Paulson bail out of bankers = $150 for EACH man, woman and child on the planet or $3,300 for each American.
Couldn’t we be doing something better with the money?
Surely someone, somewhere should be facing criminal charges?
275 Short sellers generally behave rationally - at least as far as they are concerned. What you now have is a market which rewards bloated estimates and is always looking to hype any piece of good news, because capital growth is the only way to make money. When you had shorters in the market, they could basically make money when they suspected they were being spun a line by a compamny which was not in as rude a health as it would have you believe. The political equivalent would be knowing that a political party was spinning to you - but not being allowed to vote for the opposition.
Politically, it might suit Brown and Darling to move to a market which is only looking for the good news; but it is not a market which is fully functioning.
284 - preachin’ to the choir, MM. Personally, I think it’s insane to be further reducing market liquidity right now.
273. I have heard that HBOS was in talks with L. (I cannot spell that name!
) for 7 weeks, think the short-selling just precipated it quicker. I got this off a very reliable source with close links to the organisation! 
I doubt it is a liquidity problem at the moment but house prices are going to fall big style and there would have been a time if house prices fell by 25-40% that it would become technically insolvant - that is liabilities greater than it’s assets.
Interestingly for those who follow my job hunting (Usual in response to one posters taunts) I did attend interview with them , must be 3-4 months ago and they were struggling then and a big cheese in a one to one meeting said in a macro-economic/ Housing discussion that there internal figures indicatered upto 30% falls in house prices!
The short selling in other words would just have undermined confidence, the business is sound at the moment but in the future, when house prices fall……..
210 - Oh, I follow it, I just disagree with you. You overegg any connection with Wright.
It’s not very becoming to try and claim that people must misunderstand you when they merely disagree.
#273 - See http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2008/09/19/16123/hbos-where-are-the-shorts/
Also …Alistair Darling added that without the deal the outlook was “very bleak indeed…We were onto their (HBOS’s) problem for several weeks. It didn’t just suddenly happen…”
It’s deposit ratio was 177% compared to 90-142% for its rivals. HBOS had an estimated £12.5bn funding requirement in 2008 (Merrill Lynch). It’s downgrade to A+ effectively shut the term market for economic spreads (ML again). It was hosed.
286 - Martin, see Madasafish’s analysis at 277 - they didn’t have a short term operating liquidity issue, they were staring at a medium term financing liquidity issue. They could see this coming a while off - certainly more than 7 weeks ago.
This was a pointless exercise. A group of pro left predominantly labour leaning voters? Any comments on Cameron are meaningless - Did hardline Labour leaning voters like Thatcher? Yet she won 3 elections.
Whats clear is that voters are up to their ears in taxes - but the clips shown did not really expose the duplicity in LibDem policy and did not show them saying no to nuclear and coal.
Sorry I think some of the comments are complacent. These are floating voters and their perceptions as a group are interesting and tell us something about floating voters. Again its dismal for Brown. The comments and numbers suggest that Conservatives are very likely to win but they also suggest that although there is a big yearning for change people also want it to be a bit gritty and authentic. That’s a valid message in my view.
Mike,
I was probably the Lib Dem who led the hardest charges against Luntz two and a half years ago, and they had NOTHING to do with them apparently being at Oxford at the same time, and was based around rather more serious concerns
FWIW, to my knowledge neither Luntz nor Cameron have publicly denied that Luntz has performed consulting services for the Conservative leader.
Oops.
LINK