Could all the American polls be wrong?
November 1st, 2008
-
Is American polling about to experience the 1992 catastrophe?
Let’s recap what we know. Every pollster in America has Barack Obama in the lead, and the vast majority of the state polls in key states imply that he should win the Electoral College quite handily. I want to begin with a premise that if John McCain wins, we won’t have seen a measurable 2-point a day shift in the polls - a Republican victory in the race for the White House will come with the realisation that the polls were complete and utterly wrong.
“Last-minute swing” is the favourite excuse of the humiliated pollster, and it gets a fairly short shrift from other pollsters and political punters. It does happen, but it is rare, and wouldn’t excuse the size of Obama’s leads in the last two weeks. There will be much hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth about the Bradley Effect if Obama loses too, but I think that would be facile. For reasons explained before, the Bradley effect didn’t necessarily happen even to Tom Bradley, and the experience from the Clinton v Obama primaries indicated that if it occurred at all, it was restricted to the ‘Liberal’ North East and to California.
I lost money on the New York, New Jersey and California primaries, because the polls showed a tight race that never materialised. I suspect the reason can be discerned from the geography - in 2008, the ‘Bradley Effect’ is not so much racists who have second thoughts about voting for a black man in the privacy of the polling booth, it is the eagerness of Liberals on the Coasts to say they would vote for Obama when they have little intention or incentive to do so. If the Bradley Effect does show up in the 2008 Presidential election, I think it will manifest itself as Obama’s margin of victory being unimportantly-limited in Democratic heartlands rather than costing him the White House.
- So if I am discounting the likelihood of ‘Late Swings’ and the Bradley Effect, why am I still nervous about my exposure on Barack Obama? Is it merely unbridled pessimism that has seen me use my Paddy Power winnings to purchase insurance at odds of around 8/1 on McCain? Perhaps, but there is a nagging thought that I feel compelled to share with PB.com - a nervousness borne of looking back at the 1992 General Election.
The polls at the time were essentially level, with perhaps a slight lead for Kinnock. It seemed impossible that Major would secure a majority, and a Hung Parliament beckoned. The Conservatives won by around 7.5%, and Labour hearts were broken. The British Polling Industry was forced into a wholesale methodological review, and it was Nick Sparrow at ICM who pioneered the ‘Past Vote Weighting’ as a means of stabilising the sample. This is now a fairly standard practice in British polling, and (thus far) has done much to prevent horrible, industry-wide errors (the 2008 London Mayoral race notwithstanding).
The American polling industry is a different animal - there are more pollsters, they are rarely as transparent as BPC members (you often have to pay for crosstabs); the industry is more wilfully commercial, and the variation in polls is often quite striking (which seems odd in a country that doesn’t even have the complication of a major third party). The normal approach to ensuring political (beyond demographic) balance, is to weight by party registration. Americans can only vote when they are registered, and when registering, they indicate whether they are Democrat, Republican or Independent. These weightings are implicit in the vast majority of American polls, but I wonder if this method is seriously-flawed.
- Party registration nationally in 2008 gives the Democrats about 43% of voters, the Republicans get 33% and Independents at around 24%. Consequently, the leanings of Independents are measured with particular importance, and most polls have shown Obama leading in this group. My problem stems from the fact that, as was seen with exit polls in 2004, Democrats (and presumably, therefore, Democratic-leaning Independents) seem far more likely to answer pollsters questions, and I wonder if this could mean that the Independent group itself is being misrepresented.
Imagine we could break the Independents into three groups - Dem-leaners, GOP-leaners, and non-partisans. Given that the lat two Presidential elections have seen very close races, I would posit that ‘Independents’ includes more people that voted for Bush than for Kerry (even allowing for turnout differentials - Independents are also more likely to vote in many states). The fall in percentage of registered Republicans in the last two years, and the growth in the number of Independents smacks of what we would call ‘Shy Tory Syndrome’ - not wanting to affiliate with the party, but not necessarily reconciled to becoming Democrats, or voting for the Democratic Party. My concern would be that if the ‘Independents’ being polled and giving a slight lead to Obama are largely Dem-leaners (the eagerness of Democrats to answer questions in the same way that Labour voters are over-polled in the UK), that the whole 24% of Independents are being miscast. Finding a way to ameliorate the ’spiral of silence’ would be the greatest challenge for the American polling industry since ‘Dewey Beats Truman’ became the worst chosen headline of 1948.
If John McCain wins, we won’t see it coming in the polls. If he wins, it will tell us that the pollsters got it wrong, and there will be no refuge in ‘Late Swings’ or the Bradley Effect. I sympathise with the pollsters working in a brutal commercial environment - any of them who recorded a 1% lead for John McCain in the last four weeks would have to be extremely brave to publish it. I can imagine that the safety in numbers of ‘but the whole industry got it wrong’ would be easier than shouldering the opprobrium (prior to a McCain victory) of being the only player on the wrong side of what currently looks like a landslide. I could even imagine a fearful and less scrupulous American pollster re-weighting the numbers to show ‘a modest Obama lead’ based on the huge advantage of Democrat-registered voters, or by tinkering with my opaque ‘Likely voters’ filter that can be more-justifiably thwarted by unparalleled turnout.
-
If McCain wins, I suspect that pollsters will have to consider breaking the ‘Independents’ into the three categories that I describe, and weighting accordingly to prevent political bias in their samples. Essentially, this would probably mean a form of past-vote weighting applied to the Independent category, which was the British solution adopted after the disastrous polling fandango of 1992.
I still expect Barack Obama to become President-Elect of the United States on Wednesday morning, but if his margin of victory is much less than the polls have suggested, or if the unthinkable happens and he loses, let us not afford ourselves the hand-wringing of the lesser excuses. This industry-wide catastrophe has happened before, and a solution was found. People might re-register their allegiance, but their history is not erased - past-vote weighting cured some serious methodological mistakes in the UK, and it might become a solution that the US polling industry will need to consider on November 5th.
Morus
Live White House race betting odds. Please use these links to place your bets as the commission contributes to the upkeep of PoliticalBetting.com
ALSO - contributions welcome for our new sister-site - “PoliticalBetting Channel 2″ which as well as hosting more reflective musings from our esteemed community should be bookmarked as the refuge in case of the main site being overwhelmed by traffic.
FINALLY - for those who are in London on Election Night, we have room for a limited number of punters and PB.com regulars at a superb betting trading floor near King’s Cross (food and beverages provided courtesy of EliteBet). If you would like to attend, please get in touch beforehand for details.
Guest articles, enquiries about the Election Night gathering, and other communications should be sent in the first instance to me at morus1516 [AT] hotmail [DOT] com.
MessageSpace Advertising
Even if McCain wins, he won’t win New Jersey — you hear me, Ave It you loon?!
Ave It is the rightwing Gabble.
I think the polling is just as likely to be masking an Obama landslide. It was suggested early on when the first voting numbers came through for Georgia that the proportion of A-A’s voting was “bound” to fallback to the mid twenties. Well guess what - it hasn’t! With 53% of 2004 votes cast, A-A voting is STILL at 35%.
PS Mighty Tigers strike back!
If that was the case then why did US pollsters get to within a point or two of the actual result nationally and in most of the swing states in 2004?
As I posted on the last thread they would have to be out by about 7% to change the result. With the considerably greater number of polls than we had here in 1992 and, as you say, the wide variation of them, added to what we already know from early voting percentages, that lacks any credibility. Polls with a 2% Dem advantage, polls with a 7% Dem advantage and so on, none have given McCain a lead in recent weeks.
Sorry I won’t be there on Tuesday, have to work the next day.
I’ll try and feed in useful and important info. from the comfort of my own living room though.
1. Except Ave It is tongue in cheek, where Gabble isn’t.
Remember seeing a dissection of the 2000 results on US TV, in those awful days when I had to go there on business trips…, and I remember one of the commentators starting off his post mortem on what we HADN’T seen. First amongst these was that the swing states everyone expected had not been swing at all. He mentioned the likes of Illinois, NJ foremost among these. Maybe also the “First State”.
Yes they could.
It’s a strange election that 3 days before it, we are simultaneously entertaining the thoughts of a landslide victory and a loss.
I think someone before the glasgow east by election coined the term “squeaky bum time”. That’s where we are now.
3-Am not sure on the 7% stuff. They only have to be wrong by a certain amount in certain states. A bit like the 10,000 voters to keep the Tories out.
If they are wrong in Virginia by 5% and give it to McCain then they arw wrorg by 5% on c 2.5% (Virginia’s RV proportion) = 0.1%. Of course they can then be spot on in California and so be 100% right on 10.7%. Voodoo math (sic)? Possibly. But polls only need to be wrong in the right (or wrong) places to turn over the election.
Also, in a poll of 500 (typical in the US?), 50 of those are likely to be in California. 10 in Virginia. How to compensate? Is it necessary to compensate?
Guess why I am not a statistician!!
3 - Pollsters didn’t do a bad job in the UK in 1983 and 1987, but then got 1992 horribly wrong.
The US pollsters could have used party registration successfully in 2000 and 2004, because the country was comfortably polarised - now there are loads of people who don’t want to call themselves Republican, but I don’t think you can infer from that that they are swingable voters. Past Vote Weighting means you judge the actual votes that they cast, rather than a non-binding question about party affiliation. Those were close together in 2000 and 2004, but I suspect won’t be in 2008.
Also, this is a different election for a number of reasons. Both candidates are fairly centrist, the economy has crashed, African American and Youth turnout spikes are being claimed, and early voting is much greater than usual.
I tried to explain that, even though there are many more pollsters, I think there is a danger of commercial viability pressures forcing an industry-wide consensus to a degree. 7% would be a huge defecit, but that is exactly what happened in 1992. I agree that early voting will limit such an impact, but by the same token the early voting suggests a much bigger margin than 7%, as is suggested at comment number 2
Sorry you won’t make it on Tuesday - hope to catch you at the next event!
The internals from today’s Ras poll that have Obama +4 have 20 per cent of AA voting McCain. Make of that what you will.
ARSE (BUTT) Afternoon Summary :
McCain 45% - 141EV .. Obama 53% - 397EV
Florida moves from Likely Obama to Toss Up Obama.
5. Illinois I should imagine could be deeded as a potential swinger as it had been GOP from 1968 to 1992, when Clinton won it back! The same with new Jersey!
6-I think it’s because of so may years in the wilderness the collective ranks of the great and the do-gooders can’t quite believe their luck. That the “dumbass” Americans are really going to buy their product.
Personally I think they want Obama will lose. Then they can continue their unalduterated hatred of the US. Perhaps reinforcing their views on racism, bigotry, xenophobia, etc. Oh yes, and “big oil” and the GOP stole the election. Naturellement! as Basil Fawlty said!
8-Is there really an increase in early voting like on like, or is it a case that more states allow early voting this time round?
11. I am referring back to 2000! Not now by the way!
Socrates and Ted, I have replied to you two on the last thread. I think it’s best to keep the discussion off this thread.
9. That’ the PA state poll BTW. Ras National has Obama +5.
9 benbobjim. That’s from the Pennsylvania poll.
12. An interesting analysis. However, I’m not sure that liberals in Europe secretly want Obama to lose just so they have an excuse to continue being anti-American!
7% is as far out as the state that McCain needs to get 270 EVs. RCP has that as Nevada 7% behind (Obama could lose Virginia and Colorado and still win with them) and with pollster Virginia at 7.2% behind (Obama could lose Colrado and Nevada and still win).
The only other option is that they are out by *more* in another state.
This is the table from pollster which shows this state by state. I am not looking at national figures, I am using state figures.
http://www.pollster.com/blogs/081101%20trends.png
Obama in sleaze allegations:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5061593.ece
Yes… as a disinterested observer I think that Obama will win, but that’s based on thought. My gut instinct is nowhere near as sure, tends towards McCain if anything, and my gut instinct has been right more times than not in close elections/by-elections. Is it a mistrust of all the razzmatazz, flim-flam and MSM certainties, or is it no more than a mischievous wish to see egg all over an awful lot of pompous faces?
Just glad I don’t have any money at stake, otherwise I’d have chewed my fingernails down to my elbows by now.
17. Correct – see my clarification. If 20 per cent of AA in PA vote GOP I am a Dutchman with large clogs and, for local PA flavour, a fetching Amish hat.
20. I doubt that’s going to cost him the election.
23. Yes, i think you are right but what it does do is highlight Obama’s overseas roots again and the fact that he is a “Newcomer”. It won’t break any independents but it will help get the GOP base out.
8 - No it is definitely higher in most states than it was in 2004, most noticeably in states with significant African American voters, who are concerned (legitimately or not) that they could be prevented from voting on the day itself.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/harbinger.html
24. Also if they can say that Obama met this aunt since the judge’s decision it could look bad on Obama rather like Osborne and the yacht.
In answer to thw question posed by your thread ,IMHO …No
I have spent time on the website Iowa Electronic Markets,sadly do not have the link,but it well worth a visit.
An extract
IEM Traders Give Edge to Obama, Democrats, While Franken Price Dips
In the final days of the 2008 campaign, traders on the Iowa Electronic Markets continue to favor Barack Obama and Congressional Democrats to win next week’s general elections, while Al Franken’s price is dropping fast in Minnesota.
As of 8 a.m. CT Thursday, a contract for Obama was selling for 85 cents on the IEM’s Winner Take All market, while a contract for John McCain was selling for 15.3 cents. The numbers mean that IEM traders believe there is an 85 percent probability that Obama will win the popular vote on Tuesday, while McCain has a 15.3 percent probability of winning.
The 85-15 price spread has been largely unchanged for about three weeks. Trading has been heavy in recent days, with more than 7,700 contracts trading hands Wednesday.
On the IEM’s presidential Vote Share market, Obama’s contract was selling at 54.7 cents, while McCain’s was selling at 47 cents. Those figures mean that traders believe Obama will receive 54.7 percent of the two-party popular vote, while McCain will receive 47 percent.
On the Minnesota Senate market, traders give Democrat Al Franken a 53.4 percent chance of defeating incumbent Republican Norm Coleman, who has a 49.9 percent chance of winning re-election. Those numbers, however, are significantly tighter than they were just two days ago; Franken’s contract was trading at 72.5 cents on Tuesday, while Coleman’s was at 32.4 cents.
Finally, on the IEM’s Congressional Control markets, Democrats are being given a 96.1 percent chance of maintaining control of both chambers of Congress. House Democrats have a 98.8 percent probability of adding to their majority and Senate Democrats a 97.5 percent probability of adding to theirs.
The Iowa Electronic Markets is operated by the University of Iowa’s Tippie College of Business as a real-money futures prediction market. Begun in 1988, the IEM is a research and teaching tool that has achieved an impressive prediction record, substantially superior to alternative mechanisms such as opinion polls. Such markets have been significantly more accurate than traditional tools in predicting outcomes ranging from political election results to movie box office receipts
25. If they have been given those provisional ballots many of those could be disreguarded as has happened before!
I’m useles: yet another repeat post from previous thread.
I’ve been taking a cursory look at the latest stats on early voting from:
http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html
It would seem that in those states that are very competitive for Obama [old red states] the numbers are well up on 2004. The Obama GOTV, I guess. Those that are less competitive - mainly in the GOP column - appear to be less excited about turning out early. The GOP have always had a great early voting advantage; I’m wondering if the less enthusiastic Republicans are still deciding whether to bother voting. It will be interesting on Nov 4th to receive reports on voter turn-out for that day from Republican strongholds outside of the south.
Malcolm
Undecided coming home in Hotline tracker.
51/44 (Obama +3, McCain +3)
http://www.diageohotlinepoll.com/
Link for 30.
28 - Early voting and provisional ballots are two entirely different things.
32. Yes, I know that but surely some of the AA who the Dems have boasted about getting on the electoral roll - will be having provisional ballots?
28. If AA are disenfranchised yet again in the south by such nefarious activities, I suspect there will be hell to pay this time round: Congress is Democratic.
19-What I was saying is, in the unlikely event the polls are only wrong in the GWB 04 states now trending BHO, then for McCain to win all these by a squeaker would only need his total vote to rise(using 538.com numbers) by 0.4%. These states have 20% of RV, so if polls are pro-Obama by 0.4% in another 20% of states where outcome does not matter, then polls are correct.
Voodoo math?? Most certainly! It jsut does not mean that a 7% across the board error is the minimum that will translate into a McCain win.
G, I have answered you on the last thread.
34. But it’s not against the realms of possibility - with such a fiecly contested election and Dog eat Dog parties: Nothing would surprise me!
I would have thought some recently registered potential AA voters will have voted early and used provisional ballots!
23. I sense slur fatigue among the electorate. Even if this story was major, which it isn’t, it’s impossible to separate out the truth from the shrill noise coming from Palin about whatever she decides Obama is this week. There was some really interesting internals in the WaPo tracker last night about whether people thought the attacks had gone too far: even many GOP voting conservatives thought they had to far, which tells you something. Worth taking a look at the write up.
34-Were they disenfrachised? How?
btw-Convicted felons have no vote in lots of states. Including, I believe (certainly in 2000), Massachussettes.
29. I think GOP total turnout could actually be down this year. In the swing states, maybe not though.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/10/big-empty.html
34-What will Congress do?
Voter registration and election procedure is left to individual states. Witness different closing times, early voting, registrattion timelimits. I really do not see Congress kicking up the stink that a new VRA a la 1964 would create.
39. In Floria last time many with names similar to convicted felons were kept on the list to be barred. Because they were only told about this when they turned up to vote, they did not have a chance to challenge it.
37. When they go to vote doesn’t someone tell them they are using a provisional ballot (whatever that may be) ? If not, and they willfully allow someone’s vote to be cast, knowing full well it is inadmissable, there is something seriously sick in the heart of America.
Great post Morus - very insightful.
I like Jan think the race will be a lot closer than the polls suggest as I believe the D/R partisanship splits in the actual voting will be closer to historic norms then many of the polls are using, and if you correct the polls for that the race tightens considerably, though Obama is still favourite.
I don’t have time to argue the toss on here now as I’ve got work to do, but might drop by later this evening and add a bit more on my thinking. Maybe Jan would like to drop by as well to add his take as well?
Re 1992, I don’t know what other people here were doing that night, but I was attending a student conference over the Easter break that year. On election night we all gathered to watch the result with a lot of drink to hand and of the 40 people I was the only one to (probably naively) admit to voting Con, and along with a sole LD supporter sat quietly at the back not knowing what to expect. I can’t remember too much of the details of the night due to the drink, just that that is was one of most surreal experiences of my life watching the hopes and dreams of 38 people literally collapse before my eyes.
Can anyone recall what odds the bookies were offering on the Tories as the polls closed?
42. If that is true, it is disgraceful. Utterly sickening. Every true democrat, regardless of their political allegiance should fight to stop this kind of horrific disenfranchisement. I guess early voting may solve some of the problem though (but not all).
Still think Obama will win. Haven’t had to use PP pay out cos I have McCain at 33-1.
I have concerns about polls with samples of about 600. I tend to think Obama’s rating is slightly overrated.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2004/Pres/Maps/Nov01.html
44-Excellent!!!
I guess only thing similar must have been the pictures on the BBC ‘famous faces’ panel in 2004 as their mood turned from celebration to despondency. I bet Melvyn Bragg wasn’t running around that night exclaiming how no wine was good enough for him THAT night!!
As for 1992, I meant to watch the results come in, but was in Spain at the time on an exchange studenty thing, so popped out for a few sharpeners instead. When I switched on the radio come the morning, I was as pleasantly surprised as Caveman!!
Sadly, I expect no such jolly cme Wednesday. Results trickle in at 5am here so my choice is:
-1)push on through
-2)wake up early
Experience has told me option 2 is better!!
45-Actually it is quite common for both parties to “challenge” potential voters in the US.
I am hoping you are as disgusted by this as by ACORN registering the inhabitants of the Magic Kingdom to vote?
Thank you for this post. I think it’s the most relevant and crucial one for a time and if the comparison 1992(UK)-2008(US) holds, it is important. It also plays nicely to my neurotic worries about the Dem’s outlook, so cheers for that… I guess.
The fact that many independents really are disenchanted former Bush voters does indeed make independents (and undecideds) a pool that should be more favorable to McCain. It is also true that the tangible enthusiasm gap between the candidates - which is perhaps most visible in the ground game (as described by 538.com) - may distort polling of that group. Here’s an interesting article by Mark Blumenthal on the issue:
http://www.nationaljournal.com/njonline/mp_20080626_8995.php
An effect would, however, only occur in the case of pollster weighting results by party id, if I’m not entirely mistaken. From my knowledge, at least the Battleground tracker currently doesn’t employ partisan weighting (see posting http://www.pollster.com/blogs/battleground_drops_party_weigh.php ) - and it shows a 4 point lead for Obama-
Another indicator would be the difference between the Gallup models (traditional and expanded). Since the traditional model does take into account past voting behavior in predicting turnout, a large discrepancy between the two models would indicate that a fair share of Obama voters have been consistent Republican voters before. That’s entirely possible (given the changed map), but of course less likely than actual independents breaking for Obama. This discrepancy has recently vanished.
An overall problem, of course, could be the US equivalent of the “Shy Tory” vote. Nate Silver discusses it in the context of the GOP convention here: http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/09/response-bias-and-shy-tory-factor.html
Given Bush’s abject ratings, McCain’s perceived “nasty” campaign, and the overall loser image of the GOP, it is of course possibly to expect that there will be response bias. Personally, I understand the “Shy Tory” vote as the effect of having the “evil competent” party run against the “nice incompetent” one. My impression is that Americans reject the GOP not on moral grounds but because they feel the party is not doing a good job, which runs deeper. Favorability ratings show that McCain is still seen as a decent guy and this is still about him, not Palin. At the same time, uneasiness about Obama has never been hiddedn, but has declined strongly since the debate while the reverse is true for McCain. In conclusion, I’m not sure “I think X is nasty, but at least they know what they are doing” applies to this race in any degree comparable to 1992.
Nevertheless, there are a large number of unknown factors in this election, which is to be expected of a “map changer” vote. Those factors include, but are not limited to:
- Ground game & general turnout. The case studies on 538.com and early voting figures indicate Obama’s ground game is extremely superior. McCain is shifting crucial last-minute resources away from GOTV to ads. This is not accounted for at all in the polls and may have very material benefits for Obama.
- Youth turnout. Early voting seems to point to less of a tsunami than expect, but we’ll see.
- Black turnout & vote. Many polls still show McCain with double-digit figures among the black electorate. Unlikely. Black turnout seems to be enormous and may beat even the sky-high expectations.
- The cell phone vote. That was supposed to save Kerry. Perhaps cell phone-only households have increased, but I’m skeptical here.
- The Bradley effect. Unlikely. If at all, it seems to occur as an extreme variation of the “Shy Tory” vote. McCain is a proper candidate, racists can find good excuses to vote for him and need not be shy about it.
- Undecideds breaking for the challenger. I think this will go to McCain. There are just so many former Bush voters among the undecides. Politico don’t think it’s going to be crucial:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/15074.html
- The “history vote”. This is my personal favorite because it hasn’t been considered much. If the impression is that this race is over and the result will be historic - would you rather be with the crowd celebrating this day or vote pointlessly for the boring GOP candidate? I could imagine a late break to Obama chiefly for the “party in the streets” factor.
In short, I think the solidly stable polls of the last days betray a considerable range of possible outcomes, even at the same level of polling. Given the considerable edge Obama has in the polls, I feel confident he will (narrowly) win even if there should be a considerable “Shy GOP” effect, but I nevertheless think that even at the same polling level, there are many possible outcomes on election day. It will be exciting!
re 44. I was a Lib Dem candidate in 1992 and we were as certain as it is possible to be that we were heading for a hung parliament. The result was devastating.
My biggest memory of my count in Bedford was the huge cheer from a pile of Tories when they saw on the TV that Chris Patten had lost his seat in Bath. What stupid dumb fools they were. Total cretins.
It was the departure of Patten from front-line UK politics that took away the main prop on which the Major-led party operated paving the way for Tony Blair.
If Patten had held on then I think that the next few years might have been different.
O/t Here (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/columnists/article-376407/This-war-And-I-hate-say-losing.html) is an old Littlejohn column about taking the Danish cartoons
“Virtually no one had seen the offending images in a little-read regional newspaper when they were first published five months ago. That is, until a bunch of helpful Muslim clerics decided to bring them to a wider audience.
They lit the blue touchpaper and retired to watch the fireworks. They must be very pleased with their work.”
Sound familiar?
51
I have to disagree Mike. It was the economy - and specifically ‘White Wednesday’ that killed the Tories in Major’s full term. That was as a result of the misguided attempts to maintain the pound in the ERM and that was as a direct result of exactly the sort of EUrophilia expoused by Patten.
Chris Patten was part of the problem, not the solution and his presence in Parliament would have continued to hinder rather than help the Tories.
Okay then, lets play a little game, where we assume that polls are worthless. How else are we to judge who we think is going to win the election?
If we think of the difference between UK GE 1992 and 1997, which do we think best describes the US in 2008? Also, given what we know about the on the ground organisation and how that favours Obama heavily, or the relative attendance at rallies, there are enough signs about that Obama has a comfortable lead.
It is also reasonable to think that the partisan split is that much more stronger than in earlier decades, so the chance of a landslide is that much reduced.
Further, McCain has had a not so good campaign, particularly over the suspension of his campaign over the bailout. He had a chance, but he blew it, and he doesn’t have an overwhelming organisation advantage to fall back on [as it seems that Bush did have in 2004].
Vettel just went 2nd in Q2… come on, mini-Schumacher!:p
52-In fact, weren’t the Satanic Verses at one piint reviewed (unfavourably) by an Iranian literary journal c1988?
52. Ish. I don’t recall any firebombings of embassies or burning of flags. We haven’t had any economic boycotts yet either. And I don’t think there have been any murders yet. And as far as I know Woss and Brand haven’t had death threats. But otherwise, pretty similar.
52
Guy Fawkes was right!
Malcolm
Please, no more threads like this, my blood pressure cannot take it. If the pollster have it wrong, they will be the least of our problems.
54 - I don’t think we *can* judge who will win if we think the polls are worthless - but that doesn’t mean that they are any good.
This is not the first time that a candidate has inspired the young, the black, the dispossessed and the independents - they were unreliable bases of support for McGovern, and so whilst I think Obama should win this easily, I am uncomfortable still.
This isn’t a diagnosis of a problem with American polling that currently exists - we have no good reason to doubt them. This is trying to ask “in the almost unthinkable scenario of McCain winning from here, how could we have been so misled?”.
I think the knee-jerk responses, Bradley and Late Swing, will be rolled out, and I want to offer another explanation first. If that is of any use prior to the election then great, but that’s not what I was trying to do.
54-It looks a bit like April 1997 when all the Labourites and fellow travellers couldn’t quite believe it. Even then the polls oversetimated Labour, a fact conveniently obscured by the workings of our FPTP system.
In an exagerrated FPTP system as is the Electoral College small swings can be exaggerated. For example Obama wins Ohio and wins 340-198. Clear win. He loses Ohio by 1% and it’s 320-218. Still clear. Loses Florida by 0.5% then 293-245. Etc. Pennsylvania b 0.2% and then it’s 272-264. NH is a squeaker and its 4 votes go by just 3,000 votes to…Evil Mac. 269-269.
But then one of the NY electors votes for HRC and so McCain wins 268-267-1. No need to go to Congress and for Palin to become VP.
Unlikely? Of course! But shows how minor changes in poll leads can lead to big changes in the Electoral College.
Sporting have once again suspended their Presidential ECV market, which seems to be a daily occurance for them, but just three days before the US elections and on a Saturday afternoon, it’s just plain pathetic.
Thank goodness therefore for IG, who are currently offering a spread of 332-338 for Obama, a fall of 10 ECVs over the past 24 hours. This market is moving!
Screw all this “America” business. Let’s get to the important stuff.
It’s DISCO NIGHT on The X Factor.
I’m thinking it’s time for that boring old emotionally-blackmailing cocktail lounge singer to sod off.
Diana Vickers for the win.
Rasmussen - South Dakota
McCain 53 (-1)
Obama 44 (+7)
Obama scooping up undecideds but too much ground to make up.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/south_dakota/election_2008_south_dakota_presidential_election2
@62:
Would you say there’s been a narrowing of the race, Peter?
@64:
In the entire history of ever, have undecideds ever changed the outcome of any political race ever?
60. You must admit though, that should McCain by some chance pull it off, the wailing and gnashing of teeth from lefties is going to be enormously entertaining.
61 - If it’s a 269-269 tie, and one of Obama’s voters goes Faithless and votes for Clinton it would be 269 (McCain - 268 (Obama) - 1 (H Clinton).
Still, no candidate would have the 270 required, and thus it would still go to Congress under the XIIth Amendment.
The only impact of a faithless elector during a tie (assuming they don’t actually switch sides) is to allow Congress to consider the third place candidate by votes. Under your scenario, Congress could choose Hillary Clinton as President, but not if Obama and McCain had 269 each.
If McCain and Obama had 268 each, with a Faithless elector for Clinton and a faithless elector for (say) Palin, Congress has to choose between the top three as chosen by the Electoral College - don’t know which three they would choose from if there was a tie for third place.
Gallup 11/01:
RV
Obama 52 (nc)
McCain 41 (nc)
LV (Extended)
Obama 52 (nc)
McCain 41 (-1)
LV (Traditional)
Obama 52 (+1)
McCain 42 (-1)
What was that about Zogby?
Latest Gallup trackers :
Registered Voters
McCain 41% .. Obama 52% .. Unchanged.
Likely Voters
McCain 42% .. Obama 52% .. M -1/O +1
Likely Voters Plus
McCain 42% .. Obama 52% .. M -1
http://www.gallup.com/poll/111661/Gallup-Daily-Obama-52-McCain-42-Among-Likely-Voters.aspx
Gallup likely and expended 42Mc 52Ob
“In the entire history of ever, have undecideds ever changed the outcome of any political race ever?”
Can’t decide.
69/70
Betting Update
The general nervousness about the Obama position has led to quite big moves on the spread markets. SPIN is currently suspended but IG Index currently has:-
Obama 332-338 ECVs and McCain 200-206 ECVs
This is the first time in weeks that the McCain spread has been above the 200 mark.
Is it time for brave punters (are you there JackW?) to step in.
I’m not moving. I’m content with my Obama 320 ECV buy.
@67:
I think if McCain wins, it will be the opening shot in America’s Second Civil War.
70 - Both likely voter and the registered voter models have now converged. Must mean something but I’ll have to think about it!
57. It’s not the similarities between the two cases, it’s the attitude of the response. For Muslims to use the tactic of complaining after the event en masse about something that offends them is something The Mail et al see fit to complain about but the same tactic is seemingly fine for them to use when something offends them. I see the paper is now printing out-of-context sketches from 2007 to show how smutty the BBC is. Missing the point that a) They complain about PC gone mad but censorship is demanded when it offends Middle England b) They are seeking a change to the way the BBC runs and is funded which would see TV and Radio in this country become worse and more smutty.
Where was this level of outrage when the commercial channels were ripping the public off to the tune of millions?
69 - Beat you this time!
75 - Read an interesting article yesterday suggesting that Obama’s election would presage the end of the civil war that never reallty ended in 1865.
In five days Gallup likely voters moved from an Obama 2 point lead to 10 points - 2, 3, 5, 8, 10.
Gallup estimating turnout as 64%, up from its previous suggestion of 60%.
Early voting statistics…
http://elections.gmu.edu/early_vote_2008.html
O/T talking of close elections - count in Zambia Presidential Election is currently (137 constituencies out of 150)
Michael Sata - 666,194 (39.87%)
Rupiah Banda - 652, 354 (39.05%)
Sata has toned down his anti-Chinese (and anti-Indian) rhetoric but wants to impose 25% local ownership on businesses - his strength though is in urban areas already counted. Banda running as continuity candidate believed pro-business and for inward investment but concerns of his past history in Kaunda’s dictatorship (The old single party UNIP is backing him) - expected to gain still as rural votes come in.
Last election there were urban riots from disappointed Sata supporters and a victory parade led by Chinese ambassador from MND supporters.
64 UK Paul, re S. Dakota…
Yes, out of reach but suggests N Dakota is not and Montana also possible.
rasmussen has polled very little in the mid-West/Prairie States so big moves are easily possible.
Looking at the Gallup commentary it looks like those it believed *wouldn’t* vote in its ‘traditional’ model have been voting disproportionately in early voting, thus ‘locking in’ that vote which would otherwise been discounted.
Put simply, as many had suspected the traditional models have been wrong and the demographic changes in turnout explain why there has been such a strong shift in likely voter ‘traditional’ model. That model has been rendered obsolete by the early voting.
Disappointing defeat for Mighty Tigers. I had us and Stoke in a win double.
75. Silly comment Martin.
Are we expecting any polls in the Sundays ?
83. Winning ND would make little real difference to the overall result but it would be a huge “trophy state” for Obama. Imagine if the Tories were to somehow scrape victory in Bootle or Govan by about 16 votes, it would make little difference to the parliamentary numbers but it would be a hugely symbolic victory. I really think ND could go blue, and if it’s wobbling then given the lack of polling in other deep red states there could be some big surprises on Tuesday night, not necessarily Obama winning a state but getting within 10% in places like Texas and Kansas.
re 87. There is nothing that I know about and my guess is that if we see anything it will be on Glenrothes. All the focus this weekend is on the US.
84. Interesting analysis UKPaul. Which pollsters are most generous with their likely voter models? How does Rasmussen compare?
90 - Afraid I don’t know about that, I know Zogby is less generous but other factors have a softening effect on that.
76. My theory is that Gallup counts people who say they’ve already voted as a full vote, regardless of whether or not they voted in 2004/2000. Obama is getting his new voters out (with the possible exception of the youth vote) in early voting, and he has a big lead there. This may be the driver for the convergence of the traditional and expanded models.
many white democrats are White Working Class. Not all approve of a black President. Those that dont are unlikely to admit it. If they did they would be accused of being racist.
Do not underestimate the so called “anti-racism” machine and it’s PC stormtroopers.
84. Sorry for the repetition - didn’t see your comment!
I’ve tended to prefer Obama but two things got me thinking recently. Firstly the 30 min ad seemed over the top. Secondly listening to Obamas speech this morning I was struck by his attitude to McCain given that people think Obama will win. It just struck me as a mistake and I though he should have been magnanimous. I still think he will win but there is a bit of a whiff of Kinnock.
@86:
Not at all. ‘Real’ America and Hellbound Liberal America no longer share a common purpose. You can tell, because of the voracity with which politicians on both sides of the divide say it.
Sooner or later, America either needs to find a way to become one nation again, or it could end in misery.
93. Ah, Al Fresco, but how many of those guys vote Democratic in presidential elections anyway? I’ll wager most of them are DINOs.
Tangentially, the discussion on race is pretty debased when calling people out for not ‘approving’ of a black man running for President is seen as bigoted in itself.
Dick Cheney has formally endorsed McCain, the Obama campaign is helpfully distributing the video.
The only way this makes sense is if you feel threatened in staunchly conservative states where increasing conservative morale is overwhelmingly more important than winning independents or avoiding firing up the Dem base.
96. I really don’t think you can compare the current political division of the US with that in the 1960s, the 1860s or the 1770s/1780s. You are indulging in hyperbole.
Well just as long as Obama doesn’t yell three times, crescendo style, into the microphone “Well alriiiiight, well alriiiiight, well alriiiiight”, with the nation’s media picking up every last gloating syllable, then he should be alright!
100. Well Biden is a keen student of Kinnock so he should keep him right on that count!
IBD/TIPP:
O 47.9, M 43.4 (yesterday 48.2 - 43.8). So lead up from 4.4 to 4.5.
http://www.ibdeditorials.com/series13.aspx?src=POLLTOPN
Fresco
Still going with your racist drivel?
Malcolm
NRSC chair Ensign says Palin is not up for being president (for truth’s sake, he says the same about Obama):
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1108/Ensign_says_Palin_not_up_to_being_president.html
The message discipline of the GOP (or lack thereof) is literally (<- appropriate use of the word, for once) unbelievable. I simply don’t understand why you would say that, true as it may be in Palin’s case. It’s not going to help Ensign’s Senators either. Is it just the absence of a real authority figure in the party or does the non-loony wing of the GOP fear Palin so much they feel it’s important to bring her down no matter the consequences for this year?
65 Would you say there’s been a narrowing of the race, Peter?
Martin - I’ve been saying this for the past 48 hours, having detected a tightening in a number of swing state polls, despite good natured taunts directed at me from one or two distinguished posters on PB.
Also, anyone betting against the combined views of BOTH Caveman and Jan from Norway, needs to be very confident indeed of their betting position.
At last! Proof that Obamas campain is based witchcraft.
http://edition.cnn.com/video/#/video/world/2008/10/31/vo.peru.shamans.ap
104 - Ensign isn’t up to being NRSC Chair, and should keep out of the news for at least two years after this debacle. Half the reason the Democrats are talking about 60 seats is because the man conducted the most shambolic recruitment exercise since Indira Gandhi’s head of security.
They might give it to Cornyn (he’s not doing anything else useful) or Coleman (who is useless too), but it’s a bit rich for Ensign of all people to be talking about ability to do a job.
FWIW, I think this is the beginning of the blame game I wrote about last week - a moderate South Westerner eager to see Palin carry the can instead of McCain. I just thought the top tier (Governors and Senators) would keep their mouths shut until Wednesday. Seems not.
44. I do remember that it flip flopped a bit amongst some bookies but some did leave it very late. I was, of all things studying politics as a subject at the time and just hit the sweet spot with the Tories at 7/2 as largest party. Within a day or so the polls started to narrow with one if IIRC showing either a 1/2 point Tory lead or a Labour lead.
Morus, the one thing I take from your article is the idea that 33% of the US electorate are truly affiliated Republican. That number is just plain too small in reality. The US at heart is a fairly conservative place. You’d reckon on at least 40% come what may voting Republican.
McCain has been bashing simple issues and it is making some people around the edges doubt, but its an awful lot of ground to claw back. Unlikely he’ll do it, but if I’m honest, not impossible. If he did it would be a truly extraordinary result. Those who say there could just as readly be an Obama landslide are also correct. If Obama looks nailed on he can easily outpoll his pollster figures, but if that doubt gets any substantive hold, I do wonder about his ability to eke out that last percentage or two and always have done. The entire Obama campaign has been about looking like he’s won it before the day.
My gut instinct a couple of weeks back was that McCain would close the gap BUT my gut instinct now is that some last minute doubts are genuinely emerging. They need to grow much more for McCain to make it. The big moment for Obama was the economy, once the Wall Street and banking crisis hit its latest low on the rollercoaster that saw him really soldify his position. Forget Palin, forget everything else, Obama stretched as soon as those problems had their run in the news.
The magic word ‘narrative’, I have also noticed has changed a touch in the US (I largely ignore the UK media and pb.com comments beyond those of genuine punters as there is little unbiased comment on both sides left, in short much of it useless bull), there is more substantive comment around McCain’s claim that he’s slugging this out and is still pitching. Faced with defeat, it is critical that a politcian at least can give the impression still having a punchers chance. The appearance of Arnie is quite interesting too, its added just a little bit of electric. Moments like that may allow McCain to truly keep on battling until the last moment rather than just packing up in public eyes. Defeatism means a certain loss and probably a bad one as well.
If PtP is about, did you stick Jered on your Ten to Follow?
107. People like Ensign, and this goes for all parties, need to be led out the door and have his knackers kicked in.
I would have thought the polls won’t be far off, they have all pointed in the same direction with little movement for too long, unlike UK 1992.
In Obama’s favour is “time for a change”. This in enhanced by his forced distancing from the Clintons.
In McCain’s favour is a version of the shy Tory syndrome we see here. If it isn’t on to admit to a stranger that you are actually going to vote Conservative how much harder must it be to admit that you are going to vote against a black man. This is the only way I could see McCain winning and I wouldn’t take odds of less than 20 to 1.
109 cock
Pure entertainment; like watching the Tory party after 1997.
Malcolm
107. Politico has anonymous Republican attacks on Ensign, hoping he’ll be replaced. I think he will be. Coleman won’t get it after his performance running for his Senate seat, even if he holds on to it. And I’m starting to think that underestimating Palin is a bad idea, even if she did mess up this time. Look at it this way: she has a credible claim to be ‘next in line’, and her base is much larger than Giuliani’s or even McCain’s.
83 but suggests N Dakota is not [out of reach] and Montana also possible
PtP - yes, these were my two picks “south” of West Virginia on Ladbrokes’ firewall list, which I referred to on your earlier thread. North Dakota, at 33-1 last time I looked, seemed especially good value IMO.
We ought to be very wary of Exit polls this time. Mike’s thread on this was very good, and I’d been mulling on this for a while. If there are a significant number of Shy Republicans i.e. whites embarrassed to be voting for a white candidate in preference to a black one (yes, really) then they will not be sifted out by the exit polls.
So: warning. If the race is tighter on the night than expected, be prepared for further surprises as the actual vote count takes over the exit poll predictions.
114 Good point Richard and this will be more the case should the Bradley Effect become a significant factor.
I just hear on the news that one of Obama’s aunts was living in the US illegally. Do you think that she was also registered to vote illegally. Connect that up with the Acorn affair and you might have a real scandal brewing.
116. Yes, Good point - that would be outragous and really piss alot of GOP & Independents off. Speacially if Obama had met her since the Judges verdict on her being in the US.
Liverpool’s luck finally runs out. Fantastic!
I have just arrived and I haven’t yet read through the 58,000 new threads which have appeared in the last 24 hours since I was here yesterday. But in answer to the thread’s question: Yes, the polls are wrong. McCain will win.
I have said so consistently all the way through, and I have never deviated from it. I am now feeling more certain of it than I have done for several months, and it makes me feel sick.
When I was at university, I was suddenly and totally unexpectedly “dumped” by my closest friend, without the slightest explanation. I was so upset that I felt as if I had been disembowelled by a rampaging herd of rhinoceroses. Now it feels the same, although not as intensely. I am - in the words of John Major just before the 1992 general election - “stone cold certain” that McCain will win. I don’t even know if it will be because of ballot irregularities (possibly), or if it will be a big enough margin anyway (probably).
The only thought that I (as a Marxist) have to console myself with, is that an Obama presidency (if it happens) is likely to be disappointing and mediocre, compared with expectations, and that he will be a contiuation of the usual policies of imperialism and warmongering (albeit with fewer knobs on).
P.S.
It is perhaps ironic that I am a staunch Monarchist (albeit very left-wing) and that my sister-in-law is a staunch Republican (in the right-wing (American) sense) (she and my brother live in NYNY).
118. Maybe Harry Redknapp really is the messiah that we have been waiting for at Spurs!
114 re exit polls, Richard. I can see no reason why Republicans should not admit voting for McCain, and if there were a race-based shyness, surely it would apply to Black rather than White voters.
But I think you are right we should be wary of exit polls, as the sample weights are probably wrong. We saw this in the Democrat primaries. The trouble is that even if the weights have been adjusted for new voters, they have probably been adjusted wrongly if we believe reports from early voting that Black voters are turning out but young ones aren’t.
Somebody wrote I’m pretty sure I saw Michael Foot this afternoon, coming out of Waterstones in Oxford. If it wasn’t him it was a pretty close doppelganger.
Michael Foot was very frail when I saw him at Paul Foot’s funeral 4 years ago. If it was him, he would have to have been accompanied and supported by someone.
118 I think David Cameron should definitely seek to sign Harry Rednapp as Conservative Party Chairman.
I have put these in the same order as the McCain firewall.
I think that Obama has a % chance of winning:
90 Iowa
95 Michigan
45 Pennsylvania
80 New Mexico
95 Minnesota
75 Colorado
98 New Hampshire
30 Virginia
30 Florida
60 Nevada
25 Ohio
15 North Carolina
35 Missouri
10 Indiana
20 West Virginia
10 Montana
05 North Dakota
15 Georgia
10 Arkansas
10 Louisiana
03 South Dakota
10 Arizona
10 Mississippi
05 South Carolina
10 Texas
02 Alaska
00 Oklahoma
Evening all
Nothing I’ve seen or heard today suggests anything other than a big Obama win on Tuesday. The anti-Obama camp seems to have descended into either dejected resignation or frantic desperation.
The McCain camp plays the old “the race is tightening” card despite substantial polling evidence that it is at beat static in most places while the Undecideds seem to be breaking about 50/50 so nothing remarkable there.
Of course, the Obama supporters are struggling to believe it just as Labour activists did in the last week of April 1997. The imagination conjures all sorts of scenarios to conjure defeat from the jaws of victory but self-belief and self-confidence is vital.
Very quiet polling day but here’s one:
Florida (Mason-Dixon):
O 49, M 47 (same poll last week M 46, O 44).
http://www.pnj.com/article/20081101/NEWS02/81101015
119. John Loony
McCain will have to produce something unprecedented to win. Yes its not impossible and something tells me that it is possible, but its a seriously outside bet. If Obama cant seal the deal after 8 years of Bush and faltering economy then the guy is about as much use as a chocolate teapot.
I doubt I’ll sit up and watch the coverage based on what I see at this time because the election has long lost any excitement. I’m also working nearly all weekend so I’ll be well knackered anyway…..
124. John Loony. Very interesting. So we can roughly conclude that you would price shadsy’s Firewall market at Iowa 10/1, Michigan 18/1, Pennsylvania Even Money !!
O/T Well done Spurs. Cracking game and result. This Premiership season I would suggest it’s all up for grabs.
Arsenal keep losing so they are out. Man Utd have had a faltering start and then today concede 3 goals against Hull at home and just hold on for a win. Chelsea lose at home for the first time since The Battle of Stamford Bridge in 1066. Then Liverpool, who beat Chelsea at home give away a 1-0 lead to lose at Tottenham.
What can it all mean? Only one thing. A big surprise this season. I have just backed Villa, £3 at 320/1 to win the Premiership and further stakes, all small, down to 250/1.
You heard it here first.
This is the type of issue that may precipate either a bradly effect or the don’t knows braking for McCain.
Whether it would be enough though?
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/11/01/obama.aunt/index.html
On the Premiership - what odds none of the promoted teams being relegated, but Bolton,Wigan and Fulham go dowmn instead
128. Turns out I got 329/1 Villa, best price!
I see McCain is back in Pennsylvania again today.
PA really now looks like the key State. From his website it appears Obama is not going to PA today or tomorrow. Is he going back there before election day? I think it should now be his number 1 priority.
130. John Wheatley. That would cost me dearly! I have rather rashly laid all 3 promoted teams on the spread. This looks likely to wipe out any “potential” profits elsewhere. I still think and hope that the promoted teams will ultimately implode.
133. Hull look too handy to completely mess up.
128. The big 4 excluding Arsenal still look very strong. Chelsea and Liverpool both have 26 points from 11 games - ie on course for 90 points, an exceptionally high total.
Man Utd are on 21 from 10. That would be 24 from 11 if you assume they win the cancelled home game v Fulham - ie on course for 83 points.
I can’t imagine Villa doing better than 2 points per game - ie 76 maximum. That’s miles behind. Also no way the big 3 will all slip up - one of them is bound to get 85 points minimum.
Why is Palin not releasing her medical records? Lots of questions being asked.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/11/day-six-and-sti.html
I don’t comment about the US election for quite some time, probably because I really wanted Hillary to win and got a little disappointed about it. I share Jan and Caveman opinion that it will be closer than most think. If you see Obama’s lead in some battleground states, you will see that they are not that big. Not that they should be, that’s why it’s battleground state. But McCain may overcome a small lead or, as this article by Morus shows, polls can be wrong. I still think Obama will win, but just like others, I’m quite fearful that this may not happen, even if it feels like this is the only possible outcome.
Re the English Premiership,it looks like a 3-horse,and opposed to 2-horse race for the title.
I already feel Hull could and should reach c.46-49 points,and a c.11th-13th finish-I feel Stoke are a lot more brittle,and FWIW,I still strongly feel WBA will survive,albeit narrowly.
(And after being made freeman of Portsmouth,come next May I guess Haringey,the borough of Tottenham Hotspur,will be tempted to make Harry Redknapp a freeman for ,as he surely will,keeping Spurs up)
(Ah well,I’ll be in my local with my first pint in half an hour :lol:)
Strictly:
Snowdon looking tasty (and not just her legs). 12/1 on Betfair. She scored 35/40 (second highest). However, odds can change veeery quickly (as seen with Stevens’ score sliding to 7/1 and Lunghi’s to 8/1).
Reckon Snowdon’s odds will shorten.
Also, if you think Healey won’t win he’s now 2.42-2.44 or thereabouts to lay.
124 - Do you really think Obama has only a 30% chance of winning Virginia and 45% of winning Pennsylvania? According to RCP, McCain hasn’t had a lead in Virginia in ANY poll for a month and has rarely even been within the margin of error. In Pennsylvania, he hasn’t led in ANY poll for SIX months.
I’d more than happily give you evens on either result (although you’d get much better on any betting markets so I wouldn’t expect you to accept).
136 - I see the “reading between the lines” point there but cannot see it having an affect. She won’t release those records (and it’s not nice that the media expect her to IMHO) and nobody serious beyond the more unpleasant blogs will suggest why. People should just leave it.
Cricket - I see England are narrow favourites at 1.9. Stanford Superstars are 2.1.
Based on play this week I would make Stanford clear favourites.
136, Because she has 17 children and the rest were up for adoption….
That sort of all sh1t did nothing last time and probably wont this time either. Thankfully most of the USA looks to her basic suitability to do a job..and by the looks of it have concluded no.
136. By the way who is asking the questions Mike?
Is anyone offering odds on whether Obama will achieve a second term or not?
Great to see so many PB posters recognising the qualities displayed by the Mighty Tigers.
Despite today’s great win I feel that Stoke will make the drop accompanied by Bolton and Fulham. Middlesborough and Blackburn fans should not sleep too comfortably either.
Cammo however should sleep well because as sure as eggs is eggs his next address will be 10 Downing Street.
We’ve had to cut McCain from 13/2 to 6/1 at ladbrokes.
We have taken an awful lot of money on him over the last three days - punters are far from convinced that the polls will be correct. I guess one should have expected Obama’s price to continue contracting as time runs out and the polls remain constant but that doesn’t look like it will happen. I think Obama’s price is going to hold up pretty well until Tuesday.
145. Yokel, we’ve got a market on 2012. So have Hills. We are 4/5 Obama is re-elected.
148. Or loses on Tuesday and wins in 2012. Getting a bit carried away there.
147. I reckon we could be at 4/1 soon enough…
England win toss and bat.
1 TY!!!!! As ever Ave it dominates the debate on pb.com
But i’m glad you concede McCain could win!
PS bannedhorse - makes a change from someone saying ‘first’
England shorten to 1.81 after winning toss.
Ave it projects WISCONSIN too close to call…….
Ave it also says McCain will win Florida by 5%…….
124 John Loony may have no difficulty in differentiating between , but clearly he is absolutely clueless when it comes to assessing betting probabilities.
Morus,
I both agree with you and disagree with you strongly.
I agree with you that the polls could be wrong and Obama could lose the election.
However, I disagree with you that either this, or the 1992 election debacle, was due to problems with the polling methodology. Although polls up to 1992 had a wider margin of error than they do now (specifically because they didn’t restrict their samples to likely voters), the main problems was that a large proportion of the population decided that Labour’s proposed tax increases were not a price worth paying for better public services (although they ended up paying higher taxes under the Conservatives). However, they were afraid to admit this to pollsters, and either lied about who they were going to support or changed their minds at the last minute.
I am not American. However, I believe that my slightly left-of-centre views on domestic policy and hawkish views on foreign policy are shared by a significant number of ’swing voters’. After the annoucement of Palin I have moved from supporting McCain to being essentially undecided. I’m not thrilled at the idea of Vice-President Palin and I don’t want the increasingly underhand campaign tactics of McCain to be rewarded. An Obama victory would be groundbreaking. However, I am mindful of the consequences of an Obama victory for Afghanistan, Iraq and Israel.
However, if you asked me who I’d support right now I could give any answer from supporting McCain to leaning Obama depending upon my mood. If I was a US citizen I probably would have changed my mind again by the time that I had voted.
Rather than demanding that polling methodology be radically revised each time a poll gets it wrong, it would probably be better to accept that in an important election as this one, people do lie to pollsters and people change their minds. It should also be noted that, relative to sampling size error, American polls have been exteremely accurate in Senatorial and Congressional elections.
Disclosure:
I have a large Betfair stake on McCain (although I stand to make substantial profits whoever wins).
146. Can’t see Middlesbrough going down. In the top half of the table right now and although they are terribly inconsistent they will still be comfortably mid-table by May.
538.com is changing its model today to give greater weighting to more recent polls. Will be interesting to see what effect this has. Numbers will be run shortly but they have already said that it will improve McCain’s chances in Pennsylvania.
For reference, in yesterday’s run McCain had a 2.8% chance of winning the Presidency and a 1% chance of winning Pennsylvania.
147 Shadsy, if I didn’t know you better, I’d have said you might possibly be chasing after mugs’ money!
147. Interesting news Shadsy. Is it mostly “Canadian” punters making the big bets who may be closer to the ground than us?
Of interest I found this post today by Jim Geraghty at NRO chimes with up a lot my reading of the current US situation.
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZDQxY2Y0ZWIyYjMzNTI3Mjk1ZWZiNjJkNzgzNmNhYTY=
ABC / Washington Post:
O 53, M 44 (unchanged).
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/behind-the-numbers/2008/11/wapo-abc_tracking_nine_divided.html?hpid=topnews
It brings it all back!
Gore = Poor loser!
The Republicans have made a last-minute attempt to prevent Barack Obama’s ascent to the White House by trying to recruit an Oxford academic to “prove” that his autobiography was ghostwritten by a former terrorist.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/us_elections/article5063279.ece
An absolutely incredible thread. Suddenly everyone seems to be coming out with their feelings that McCain might just win this election. It’s like people have been to fearful to suggest it before but now cannot wait to get it down in print. This is despite almost any evidence whatsoever. All the evidence suggests otherwise. The early voting figures, the enthusiasm, the campaigns, almost 100% of the polls (and the national polls are showing widening gaps)…and yet, and yet, people seem to have this strange feeling that something is going to happen.
Please, voice of reason, comfort us in this moment of doubt.
It’s interesting to note that at this late stage 538.com, RCP and electoralvote.com have converged as regards their ECV projections, all giving Obama between 349 and 353 votes. Are they clustering around each other for “safety” or have they all got it about right?
Things just get weirder - here’s Rocky Suhayda, charman of the American Nazi Pary (yes it exists) “White people are faced with either a negro or a total nutter who happens to have a pale face. Personally I’d prefer the negro. National Socialists are not mindless haters.”
http://www.esquire.com/the-side/feature/racists-support-obama-061308
166. I dont really want MCcain to win, but the pure feeling of schaudenfraud of the pain of the obama lunatics in places like the BBC and on here, would make it all worth it.
It would take me back to 1992, the day after the election, all the teachers at my school seemed to be mightily depressed, and incredibly easy to wind up…
Laugh? They would be tears in my eyes…
166 My thoughts exactly, Wisbech.
Apart from one odd poll from Zogby today all the evidence of today’s polls points the way they have been pointing for the last month - Obama to be next POTUS.
Nor is there any ‘narrative’ which might justify a late swing.
Yet suddenly there is all this money going onto McCain.
Very strange.
166 wisbech yes McCain can win. I personally think he can win. I know most posters on here who are LD/Lab or otherwise soggy can’t see it!
Obama is favourite but mcccain can win!
170 PtP - you know more about betting than I do - but you can see whats really happening!
McCain moving into the White House Wed (sorry early Jan or whenever they do it)
STRICTLY
——–
Much more important - Heather Small - what a figure!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Can she be allowed to go to the final (not too worried about dancing ability)
167 No, I think they are about right, PfP.
Back form, not rumour. The form says Obama, with about 350 EVs. Everything else is froth.
170. And the Zogby poll was of c.300 people! And made front page news.
Obama cannot lose this (repeat ad infinitum till the nurses arrive).
Please, voice of reason, comfort us in this moment of doubt
Well, you should find post 163 pretty comforting.
173 McCain is surely as unstoppable as The Mighty Watford, Ave It.
164. The film recount is awful and ridiculously. It backs up everything Republican’s say about hollywood and the media. Every single Democrat is a caring saint, only interested in democracy and every single Republican a conniving underhand b*stard.
170. Nor is there any ‘narrative’ which might justify a late swing.
I think the fact that the Banking/credit crisis in terms of news has abated nulifies your point. The reason why Obama suddenly lept forward in the polls seemed to me the GOP splits on the solution to that problem and the crisis. It’s where Labour may run into trouble with the Gordon bounce - for many it is intengeble.
Indeed it was generally thought that the last POTUS debate was a draw if not edging McCain (Despite that horrible picture).
177
147. the polls arent that far wrong yet. McCain genuinely needs to have no more than a couple of poinst between him and Obama now and he hasnt got it.
What I’m more interested in is Obama not making a second term.
165. I know that guy! He’s really good, I actually turn up to his lectures.
RE UK polls, I have hunted round the main polling sites and cannot see any new polls out yet tonight.
174 PtP - you’re surely not accusing Jack W of having a frothing arse are you?
Tell you what though, if he proves to be correct, he really will be the top man.
169. Schadenfreude…but yes it would be fun…
I doubt England are favourites right now in the 20-20 but its bowlers could well save their backsides.
183. I don’t think theres any polls due this weekend. Next poll will be Populus on Tuesday evening.
England 31-3 after 7 overs.
Pietersen and Flintoff in - need to get going and fast.
Stanford now clear favourites at 1.51, England 2.9.
One possible factor in Obama’s favour, if the polls really are tightening, there is much less chance of him losing on the day through any sense of lethargy by the American voter, although I suppose this would invigorate McCain supporters too.
It would certainly be expected to boost turnout.
Pietersen out - big trouble.
Some light relief for those who think McCain can’t win
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=156702&title=Obama%27s-February-Wins
The last line is a gem…
the only thing which can save england now is - even if only chasing 90 will WI sorry Stanford bottle it as it is 10 years pay????
184 I think he could be correct, PfP. I’m just not prepared to put my balls on the block on this one.
The reason he could be correct comes down basically to methodology. The ‘old method’ pollsters have this as about a 4 point race. The ‘new method’ boys are nearer 10. I suspect the latter are more likely to be right but am not prepared to risk impoverishing myself over the matter.
Oh, and there’s also the GOTV issue. Some people think it’s the ace up Obama’s sleeve. Again, I suspect they are right but we won’t know until the game’s over.
I think Jack believes in both the ‘new’ method and the GOTV advantage. If he’s right, then 397 EVs, maybe more, is what we’ll see. Otoh, if he’s wrong on both counts, it should be about 311.
I don’t think my £50 at 50/1 on Obama is in the slightest danger, but who knows about my lesser bets on a sizable win, i.e. 350 EVs or more? I don’t and I’m weary thinking about it now. I’m happy to just to wait and see.
176. PfP, you are correct that poll is very comforting for Obama, but only IF you believe the % spread in Dems vers Reps turning out will be D+9.
In 2004, it was even,
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
and even in the depths of 2006 at the worst of the Iraq war it was only D+2
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/states/US/H/00/epolls.0.html
What gave the Dems that big win in 2006 was winning Indy’s 57:39
That WaPo poll shows Obama & McCain splitting Indy’s 48:48
We bat a long way down so not over yet. But batsmen will have to play fairly cautiously for next 5 overs.
O/T Tories threatening BBC
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/3362962/Tories-to-clip-BBC-wings.html
I wonder if it will alter their editorial stance at all.
178 G
“Every single Democrat is a caring saint, only interested in democracy and every single Republican a conniving underhand b*stard.”
I agree with the whole sentence, well said.
Malcolm
GOP for freedom!
Oh dear, the more and more that I hear about the BBC’s election night coverage, the less I want to watch it. This is from the blog mediabistro.com
BBC is no CNN. “At Some Point It’s Almost Parody”
Gail Shister
TVNewser Columnist
If you’re looking for bells and whistles on Election Night, the BBC is not your cuppa tea.
“I don’t think the BBC will ever be, or aspire to be, the bells-and-whistles network,” says CBS exile Rome Hartman, executive producer of “BBC World News America.”
“Fundamentally, we’re about great stories. Graphics help, and they’re cool. I have a lot of admiration for David Borhman and what he’s doing at CNN. But at a certain point, it’s almost parody.
“If the technology is just there as a ‘Gee whiz!’ it’s probably not the right thing. If it helps tell the story in a clear and understandable way, it’s perfectly fine.”
The BBC’s “U.S. Election Night” will be broadcast live from the network’s Washington bureau to more than 200 countries around the world beginning at 6pmET. In the Colonies, it will be seen exclusively on BBC America and BBC World News.
Former ABC Newsman Ted Koppel will join co-anchors David Dimbleby and Matt Frei in the studio “to step back and paint the big picture,” in Hartman’s words.
In a cheeky twist, contributors will include Ricky Gervais, Christopher Hitchens, Richard Schiff, Jay McInerney and Gore Vidal.
Hartman, who describes his role in the program as “Helper-in-Chief,” describes the motley crew as “a star-studded lineup in every way.
“Entertainment and politics criss-cross. If Barrack Obama can be on “The Daily Show,” we can have Ricky Gervais on our program.”
Hartman worked presidential elections for CBS for 20 years. With numerous moving parts, they’re tough to produce for any platform, in his view. The pressure doesn’t change.
“It’s a complicated program to do, no matter who you are,” he says. “There are lots and lots of remotes and graphics. It’s a huge, numbers-driven story. The imperative to get it right is absolute.”
Absolutely. With a twist. “We’re the friendly outsider with the slightly arched eyebrow,” Hartman says. (We didn’t know Stephen Colbert was British!)
On Election Night, viewers wanting “the county or precinct level of results; the inside-baseball story,” won’t find it on the BBC, Hartman says.
“But if you want the sophisticated, smart view or what the election looks like from Kenya, the BBC is the best place to be.”
193, 194 Thank you both for those thoughts - like PtP, I’m becoming worry weary, although I have sold a chunk of my Obama ECV spread bet over the past week at prices between 338 and 352, having bought at an average price of 300. I’ll sell more if he weakens further in the next two days, hence my fixation with polls for Florida and Ohio.
OK we have lost.
Lets never get involved in such an obscenity again
It is blindingly obvious that if you want to know what’s going on in the US election, you look at US TV and US websites.
Just like if you were in the US on the day of a British election you would look at British TV and British websites.
Reporting by foreign stations is always going to be slower and far less in depth.
(Obviously I exclude PB.C from the above, though of course posters on PB.C are all getting their information from US sources).
202 and Ave it US…….
199. I think I’ll give ITN a try this election night. They very rarely do stuff like this now (you to do it all the time back in the glory days of ITV) so it’ll be interesting to see what they come up with. I’m not expecting much, of course, but maybe I’ll be surprised?
201. No, all the more reason to go back next year.
We’ll probably lose every year for 5 years!
204 was surprised itv are doing a programme……
196. This will be the opening salvo of a long and protracted Conservative Party revenge. The real “reform” of the BBC will have to take place in the second term of a Tory government.
207 lets sell off the bbc now.
Christine bleakley must stay tho. Quite like that…..
204
It couldnt be worse than the BBC that’s for sure , BBC election coverage has become a joke. I shall not forget cowboy Vine in a hurry.
Portillo reckons Gordo should call a snap election
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/michael_portillo/article5063064.ece
Stanford now shorter odds than Obama!
I’m expecting both the BBC and ITV to be linked to US networks for a large part of their coverage - I mean just how many full-blown OB units do they both have located in the States.
Just about every night, BBC News 24 (or whatever it’s now called) broadcasts a recording of ABC’s main news programme, which always strikes me as very odd - like we’re the [unofficial] 51st State.
210 it could happen - maybe called on 10 Nov for 4 Dec!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
National unity election
201. You’re right, it was embarrassing. I don’t even want to know the score. Blech.
England have plunged from about 10 to 5.6 on Betfair. Some very optimistic people out there IMO
Trip down memory lane. Seems so much longer ago than just two years…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NpVycRpa2L8
209. Oh come on, Cowboy Vine was TV gold. Its not everyday you get to witness complete and total car crash TV like that!
207. Absolutely. Note that Ofcom have called for a reduction in the license fee after the digital swithchover. That would be a good time …
208. The Bleakley is an absolute dote in reality. Very nice girl, well grounded.
209. They will be doing the same thing for the US elections, this time however the cowboy will be fat and armed with an M-16 to better fit with the American focus…..
210 In terms of damage limitation, an early GE simply has to make sense, but it should have been held in October for maximum advantage. March is probably now the earliest opportunity and by then Brown will be down 20% again in the polls and up the proverbial creek.
219 LOL all about the NI sticking together… I had never heard of her before strictly…. I do like it tho
220 yes of course gordon can’t have it in dec jan or feb. Spring 09 real chance now though
217. Hopefully Brown will call a GE - then he could ware a latex Neil Kinnock mask and an animated Yellow Taxi for the LD’s!!!
222 i think BBC/Vine is preparing the graphic.
If gordon waits until the spring then Ross can be on as comedian!!!!
QUE?
Mind you I’ve happy memories of Lancs skittling Essex for 57 in the Natwest final in 96 so maybe all hope is not lost
210. Brown can’t call an election until at least March, because he’d have his Scottish heartlands up in arms at having to campaign in the middle of a Scottish winter.
I think he’ll be tempted to go in spring though, but I suspect by then Labour will have back in big trouble and it’ll be put off until 2010. I’ve always thought (except when I had a little wobble in September 2007, mainly caused by people on here like GrumpyOldMan, Nick P and Roger) that this Parliament would go right down to 2010 and thats what I still think.
Back on thread - CBS News poll just out puts Obama 13pts ahead among likely voters. Those margins just keep increasing. Don’t you think someone would pick up on a McCain surge were it really happening? The polls are converging as we move toward election day, they weren’t far wrong in 2004 and I don’t think they’ll be too far wrong now.
I feel a lot more relaxed now and can safely go to bed. Just a shame Austin went out of X-Factor…
220
I agree “Things can only get better” is now a joke. they can only get worse. Gordon by nature is timorous when it comes to elections. The big question will be whether Mandy and Campbell will be able to induce him into calling an early election. I can’t see it myself, but you never know with Gordo. The only thing you do know with Gordo, is, whatever the decision, it will be the wrong one.
Sporting’s ECV market remains suspended as it has been for much of the day!
IG’s spread remains unchanged with Obama at 332-338 votes.
Obamas got this sown up. I mean, seriously, why would the electorate vote back in the party that has presided over the worst financial meltdown since 1929? As I’ve said before, The Republicans will be the first of many governments to be swept away by this recession.
A few more State polls out. See RCP list of today’s polls:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/latestpolls/index.html
229. Of course Brown will delude himself that America going left is good news for his electoral prospects. He’ll fail to understand that the same forces that will drive the GOP out of office in the US will also drive Labour from office here. Such is the delusion of the man.
227 I just hope Cameron & Co. has thought through the possible elephant trap of Brown inviting him to join a “Government of National Unity” for the term of the present crisis, i.e. at least the next two years. This must surely be a distinct possibility for Labour, again in terms of damage limitation.
218. No need to reduce the license fee. Once the digital switchover has taken place and bedded in:
- Transfer the Beeb from state ownership to an independent trust, elected by subscribers.
- Abolish the license fee and replace with a subscription/s
- Block access to the TV channels to non-subscribers
538.com forecast now run for today with model reweighted:
McCain win overall 3.8% (yesterday 2.8%)
McCain win Pennsylvania 2% (yesterday 1%)
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/
230 Unfortunately, they are ARG.
233. Agree with all that. But before that they can make a quick, easy start by making the TV licence an ordinary debt - ie no longer a criminal offence if you don’t pay. Would save a collosal amount of Court time.
199: That sounds seriously dreadful. The most important political decision on the planet, and we deploy Ricky Gervais? Yuk.
233
I really dont think you could do that in one hit. My preferred option is to state on day I of a Conservative Govt that the license fee will go and cut the license fee by 20/25% per year allowing (increasing) subscription and advertising.
I dont think either of these solutions will happen. More likely the License fee will be given in part to other broadcasters who will get airtime/another channel. After all why should the BBC get all the money in the modern era?? BBC 3 could be dispensed with immediately.
237 Nick I agree with you completely, It MUST be a first!!!!
234 …. OTOH, 538.com’s spiky chart has a much more spready-out look to it, with sizeable numbers of simulations for Obama appearing at just over the 300 ECV level. Until recently there was very little below around 340 ECVs.
237 we might have Russell Brand on when Lab lose in 2010…..
I LEARNT IT FROM A BOOOOOOK!!!!
232. Think that’s why they broke off the non-hostilities.
If Brown offers that option the Tories can simply turn round and say Brown created the problems in this country, took the credit in the good times. Now times are bad he can call an election and let the public decide - Brown knows they will give him the marching orders. Brown has not even got a GE mandate. Brown = Joke.
223. The Brown graphic for the next GE could be taken from Hitlers downfall. It could range from an obliterated Down street seen with Brown raising the white flag to a landslide defeat where Brown goes outside and Balls pours petrol in a trench………..
The psychology of this is fascinating.
On the one hand, we have the Obama camp, who, far from being relaxed and confident, are nervous and worried about “something” stealing victory from them even though all the evidence points squarely toward a huge victory.
Then there is the McCain camp, split between resignation, recrimination and desperation. The spokesman says “the polls are tightening” or “the polls aren’t showing what’s happening on the ground”…
Yeah, right…:)
Had said spokesman said “We’ve lost. Our organisation, such as it is, is being systematically outspent, outmanned and outresourced by a far superior machine” said spokesman would have been pilloried.
Being 6-10 points behind three days before an election is no time for honesty - it’s a time for desperate spinning in order to create even the atmosphere of a contest.
Not that the Obama camp will mind of course. The illusion of a contest and even the faintest nuance of the possibility of defeat keeps the supporters keen, the workers eager and the supporters prepared to vote.
It’s all part of the game. McCain will never say he can’t win - Palin will go on attacking Obama while Obama/Biden will eschew over-confidence to get the vote out.
The sight of McCain having to stomp through North Dakota, Montana and his home state on Tuesday in order to shore up his vote safe in the knowledge the war has been lost in Ohio, Florida and Pennsylvania should remind us all that politics can be a cruel mistress at times.
Evening all.
Depressing day sporting-wise all round, so far - ManYoo and Chelski win, Arse and Liverpool lose, so another dull two-horse race awaits.
Lewis stuck in fourth, really dangerous place to be on the grid with that first corner.
And now England being dismal (or perhaps not even that good).
Still, at least the most important game of the day saw us stick three past Carlisle.
226. Thanks for flagging the new poll. Cross tabs on the CBS poll now available. Note the the D+13 advantage (41:28) in the sample, which corresponds exactly to Obama lead.
http://www.cbsnews.com/htdocs/pdf/Oct08g-Saturday.pdf
An interesting point to note in the poll cross tabs. Obama and Clinton both got the virually the same number of votes in the Dem primary (18m each), yet the sample consists of 19% Obama voters and only 15% Clinton voters. I wonder what that missing 4% of Clinton voters are doing?
199:
“On Election Night, viewers wanting “the county or precinct level of results; the inside-baseball story,” won’t find it on the BBC, Hartman says.“But if you want the sophisticated, smart view or what the election looks like from Kenya, the BBC is the best place to be.””
Fair enough, I do want the inside story, and don’t give a toss how the election looks from Kenya, so I’ll be watching it on CNN, Sky, ITN and Fox, and any other channel that isn’t the BBC.
Ricky Gervais… Jesus wept.
Meanwhile, this evening on 5 live I heard a guy from Zogby desperately spinning for McCain. Give it up, mate, he’s lost.
237. Presumably it was going to be Jonathan Ross but he’s now unavailable?! It’s laughable - or at least it would be were it not meant to be serious coverage. The spending spending on gizmos and celebs needs to be dumped and put into decent analysis. After all, who are they expecting to be watching at half past two early Wednesday morning? We demand rights for political anoraks!
238. Plus, remove all advertising for BBC jobs (and all government jobs, for that matter) from the Guardian, and put them on a politically neutral website.
I’m sure this will happen anyway.
AND allow editorial bias in all other broadcasters.
Do that, and bear down on the license fee, and install a politically-balanced management, and you have the beginnings of a solution to the BBC problem.
239: we’ve more in common than you think, MTF. We care about politics; we think it’s important, even foreign politics. The TV producers think that American politics is a branch of the entertainment industry, to be covered like the Eurovision Song Contest.
BPIX poll for Mail on Sunday
CON 45%
LAB 31%
LDEM 13%
None of this from the BBC surprises me in the least? It all sounds very elitist and introverted. Let’s face it, that’s the Beeb to a tee.
249. I can never understand why BBC jobs are advertised in that paper anyway! It’s not like the BBC has not got any webspace or way of advertising!
BPIX in the MoS tomorrow has 45/31/13 Con/Lab/Lib according to Antony Wells
Slightly lower Tory lead than last BPIX in line with current trends, woeful Lib Dem score
250 Even the Eurovision Song Contest has Terry Wogan!
I’m trying to imagine Paxo’s tongue in cheek closing comment on Tuesday’s Newsnight as he flags up the Beeb’s upcoming U.S.election coverage.
Note about any polling for tomorrow and Monday via 538 -
“As a final word of warning, proceed cautiously with any polls that were in the field last night. Friday nights are difficult enough to poll, and holidays are difficult enough to poll, but when a Friday night coincides with a holiday (in this case, Halloween), getting an appropriate sample is all but impossible.”
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/todays-polls-111.html#comments
253 Tory landslide 120 majority and Lib Dems down to a rump on those figures.
Caveman are you running an all green book?
247. Doesn’t bother me either way mate, I make big money whoever wins.
Interesting that you mention Zogby is spinning so hard for McCain. The guys reputation was shot after he called 2004 for Kerry. Why does Zogby of all people want to go out on a limb again?
Why is everyone so anti the BBC? As I seem to remember the BBC’s coverage 4 years ago was cautious and more in tune with the actual result than the American networks and internet who were discussing who would be in President Kerry’s administration.
Just because the BBC does archiac things such as not calling states until some actual votes have come in is no reason to criticise it.
In any case I’d take Jeremy Paxman over Keith Olberman and Sean Hannity every day.
259 Because of dread phrases like Jeremy Vine’s Graphics and guests include Rick Gervais, let alone the admission they aren’t interested in the detail.
BBC is selling this to 200 countries and they admit in advance they aren’t up to the standard of their chief commercial rival in advance?
253. GET IN! Nice.
How long before Mark Senior, Roger, or Nick Palmer (et al), come on here and say BPIX cannot be trusted, their results are meaningless, etc etc, despite all of them being perfectly happy with BPIX a year ago - when the company showed some surprisingly cheering news for Labour.
Frankly, after seeing ComRes’s appallingly slanted questioning, as revealed on that thread earlier, I’d say ComRes are the pollsters deserving of suspicion, right now.
Anyway, nice score for Cammo. That’ll cheer him up this weekend - though maybe it will disappoint, as well: there’s no way Brown will call a snap election, with figures like that floating around.
261 I havent seen mark senior for a while. Think he has given it up…….
256 FWIW, on Baxter, this poll produces:
Con…..385
Lab…..220
LibDem…15 (3 London Cabs)
I know BPIX isn’t Mike’s favourite pollster, but I would suggest that this might be a good time for him to cease selling Tory seats on the spreads.
249. The BBC need to get the message that a Tory Government is on its way, and its supporters will be expecting blood on the floor.
The Conservatives should choose someone who is fairly chummy with the director general to let them know the score.
The score will start at 3.5%, and will rise and fall over the next fifteen months, and represents the annual license fee increase the BBC could expect under a Tory government.
We could remind them of the kind of formula that we imposed on BT post privatisation (rpi -3%, rpi -5% and i think for a while rpi - 7%).
I believe an rpi - x% would be healthy for the BBC, they would hate it, but i believe a threat of such an imposition might make them sort their house out.
261 yeah, its a good solid mid 40s poll once again for the Tories, their solid position maintained.
The hardening socialists are making things interesting but there is no evidence anywhere of the Tory vote weakening to any significant extent.
363. LibDem…15 (3 London Cabs)
258. Caveman.
My 247 was in no way directed at you. The “give it up” comment was to McCain’s spinner at Zogby.
Harmison ha ha ha!!!!
You got what you deserved. Now f**k off permanently!!!!!
Another intriguing stat in that BPIX poll. “73% of people think the present BBC license fee is unjustified”.
This rather blows away the argument, seen on here a few times in recent days, that the BBC is this beloved national institution, that any politician who attacks it is committing suicide, that Strictly Come Dancing is the televisual equivalent of Beethoven’s Late Quartets.
I don’t think this truth has percolated as far as liberal left elitists yet - but NOT EVERYONE LOVES THE BBC. In fact, most ordinary people would probably be content if it was broken up, and the license fee therefore halved; while many rightwingers would like to see it dismembered, as being irredeemably lefty.
This is a potentially fatal pincer movement, from the right, which will comprise the next government, and from the general public, which is moving into an anti-tax mood; this double pronged attack could actually kill off the Beeb, unless the Corporation gets it act together, and sorts out its problems.
They have only a few years remaining in which to do this. Start by fixing the bias, guys.
@259:
Paxman is, in many ways, the exception that proves the rule.
Our Jeremy clearly holds the BBC’s political coverage in *almost* as much contempt as we do.
257. Yes Yokel, but I’ve speculatively shifted to a bigger McCain position. Put a load on at 10’s on Betfair a few days back. Holding on for the moment to see if it tightens further.
Good post earlier. Spot on about the McCain and the campaign. He doesn’t look like Dole yet. The Arnie thing was well timed and the crowds for Palin seem to be getting bigger. With Biden locked up to avoid gaffes, it looks like they’ve got a 2 on 1 adavantage that could prove handy in last minute campaign swings.
I’m also interested to see if there’s some anti-media coronation “groundswell” building up over there that we’re not picking up on here that’s driving the international money Shadsy is seeing.
Their campaign kind of reminds me of Hillary when she kept on going after Super Tuesday, winning all the big primaries against the media shouts to just give up. I made more money backing her in these races than I did on Obama, and Obama just seems to be playing “prevent defence” again. I think Bush tried to do the same in 2000 and he nearly got caught.
LOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooOL
Now Brown really is deluded and his huncho’s:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/02/do0203.xml
As i said before Brown will try claiming some of the credit if Obama wins!
261. How reliable are BPIX, since they aren’t BPC etc?
260.
Am I the only person who likes the BBC’s graphics? In any case the BBC’s strategy makes some sense - they’re never going to beat the US stations in getting the top analysts (who are going to be on the US stations trying to make sure that late voting supporters on the West Coast don’t give up out of despair or complacency) so having people like Gervais and Hitchens fills a niche in the market.
Of course if they make it all about the ‘off the wall’ presenters and seriously skimp on the analysis that would be stupid - but my guess is that Gervais is probably going to have no more than a cameo role.
I also have to say that occasionally some of the less orthodox presenters can capture the pulse of the election night better than the usual talking heads. The interview of Don King on election night 2004 after it finally became obvious Bush was re-elected was definitely a highlight (though the fact he spent most of it praising Blair and Britain for their role in the Iraq war may have swung it for me!).
Look, I admit that the BBC have being hyping the ‘Brown saves the world’ meme (which is why everyone on this site is complaining about the BBC all of a sudden) but it is more to do with media groupthink rather than actual bias.
Groan - I check into pb.com, and find it’s full of people whingeing about the BBC. Again.
Is that all people talk about on here any more? It even seems to have overtaken the EU as SeanT’s favourite obsession….
269. Everyone says charges are too high, unjustified etc. I’ll offer a sporting bet of £10 that after one term of Tory Government, the BBC is still public and the Licence fee is still in existance.
272 lol Martin, indeed. If Obama needs the advice of the political equivalent of someone who ‘always liked them even before they got commercial’ then he will surely get on the hotline to Downing Street.
‘Mr President? You just let me know what it is you are thinking about and I’ll tell you all about how I have been campaigning to get it sorted since the year dot - whatever it is, I have been actively involved in formulating world policy on it.’
269 Another intriguing stat in that BPIX poll. “73% of people think the present BBC license fee is unjustified”.
Isn’t that akin to asking people if they consider petrol is too expensive?
271. Oh i know all about backing Hilary in tight races..including at one stage over 100-1 in NH on the night when her own people were saying it was really tight. Everyone seemed to ignore it.
If somehow this race was publicly seen as tight on the day before, like a mere % or two I think McCain could nick it but right now, it looks too much to do but I suspect your money could be easily layed off shortly.
275
Pay attention Bob. The BBC comments are in response to a newspaper article addressing the very point many people have speculated about - namely whether or not the incoming Tory government would do anything about the BBC. This is then backed up by a question by a pollster. Now you may not like the fact that the BBC is now distrusted and widely seen to be biased but right now it is a legitimate topic for discussion and if you don’t like it then that is your problem, not ours.
Did anyone see ‘Recount’ on Channel 4 this evening, a film about the Florida 2000 fiasco? Seems odd watching this now as a first-time supporter of the Democrats and having seen what an unmitigated disaster Dubya proved to be, whereas 8 years ago I was naturally inclined to support the Republicans and thought the Democrats were trying every legal route they could to steal Bush’s victory - it quite amused me at the time to see how Bush’s cronies managed to pull it off. How times change…
Let’s hope Obama doesn’t have to overcome similar obstacles this time round.
Great film, anyway.
280 - “legitimate” or not, it seems that every thread on here of late turns into a debate about the BBC.
About the Glenrothes by election:
“Murray Ritchie: great expectations lead to failure”
http://scotlandonsunday.scotsman.com/12700/Murray-Ritchie-great-expectations-lead.4652317.jp
272.
To be fair Brown did semi-endorse Obama (or more accurately his housing plan) during the brief moment after the convention when everyone thought Palin would be McCain’s ticket to the White House. I don’t think foreign leaders should get involved in the politics of another country (and I find it bizarre that some on the US right are touting Sarkozy’s criticism of Obama) but unlike Cameron, Brown’s change in attitude towards Obama was based on something substantive (probably the selection of Palin) rather than an attempt to jump on a bandwaggon.
280. Moreover, in the wake of Manuelgate, the whole nation is suddenly talking about the BBC, not just the nutters (amongst whom I am proud to number myself) on pb.com.
So it’s a legitimate question.
I accept it is also a slightly repetitive one, and I’d like to argue about something else, but there are no lefties on here tonight to argue with, and I find myself unexercised by the betting opportunities in the US prez.
I think Obama is gonna walk it.
282
perhaps because recently the BBC has given up any pretence of either neutrality or ability.
And the Recount film was awful. I say this as someone who agrees that Bush was a disaster. But the film was so one sided in its portrayal of the main protagonists as to lose any credibility.
Well after a week of complaining about the BBC, I enjoyed Andrew Neil’s straight talk with David Owen who talked about a demoralised Treasury who are fed up hiding bad news Enron style.
The wonderful programme about 112 year old Henry who fought in WW1 had my whole family engrossed, it was very touching.
England unimpressed by Standfords pitiful millions - they would rather play like jokers and embarass themselves for free.
‘Shall we set a challenging total fellows?’
‘No, its only two thirds of a Ross suspension each, lets set them f*ck all’
Harsh I know but woeful from England - thats what happens with you drop the Jimmer in favour of some fancy boy spinner
288 for Standford read Stanford
281-I saw Recount, but not today. I remember I quite liked, but it made me angry because I thought how would it be if Gore was president? And he almost won…
290 - I suppose if Gore had become President, there’d have been no war in Iraq and we might still have Tony Blair as PM, on the cusp of securing a fourth term.
So perhaps Bush winning did have a silver lining…
Just to repeat a Q. Does it matter that BPIX aren’t (iirc) in the BPC? What difference does that actually make?
Stanfords need 7 off 8 overs with 10 wickets in hand…..
England have as much chance as Forward Wales do in Glenrothes
279. Missed that night I’m afraid Yokel. I remember reading the posts the next day and it looked like a wild ride!
I laid off my NH win bets beforehand but I lost a bit by backing Obama to outperform his poll % and its a lesson I learnt for the rest of the primaries.
Re the US GE, I’ll likely focus on the states market from hereon out. I got on Mac to win the NH primary at 25/1 and I’ve got a feeling he might pull one out in the GE there as well. It looks like a difficult place to poll well, and I don’t see “spread the wealth” going down too well in the “live free or die” state.
267. No worries LS.
Anyone got any tips for the Brazilian GP tomorrow?
287. Good point. I also thought Michael Palin’s Timewatch, about the last soldiers to die in the Great War - one of them a minute before the 11am Armistice - was excellent and rather moving. It was on this evening.
See. A bit of me wants to love and admire the BBC. After all, I pay for it, so I’m happy when its good.
So - why can’t they just stop being such lefty dorks and wise up, before they get eviscerated?
I mean, why advertise so much in the Guardian? Why do it? Don’t they realise it just annoys rightwingers intensely - and pointlessly? One day there will be a rightwing government, who will seek revenge.
It’s such an easy thing to fix. Stop advertising predominantly in leftwing newspapers. Bish bosh, job done, Tories happy - and neutrality preserved.
291-lol. It wouldn’t make much of a difference here. We would still have the same leaders and everything…
292 corporeal - no difference at all, but they are not obliged to publish their methodology etc and so we are not able to get the detail we do with other polls etc - in terms of reliability, they have been close at the last GE, so we can’t really know… I tend to look at it in terms of general trend and it supports Tories 40s, Labour around 30 or just above and Labour slightly narrowing the gap but not at the expense of the Tory vote.
291 If only..
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
As one of my friends just said: Don’t think we’ll be invited next year - next time they will want a challenge!!!!
We got what we deserved.
“I mean, why advertise so much in the Guardian? Why do it?”
Because it’s basically the trade paper for the media industry?
Calls for Scottish Sec Jim Murphy to resign over HBOS in the Sunday Herald
284.
Don’t be naive, the only reason why any politician endourses another from other countries is because they hope some of the luster will rub off. They are like pigs in shit - all of them, Cameron, Brown, Clegg, the lot of them.
Indeed Brown is probably the worst, I can just see him trying to claim the credit: Brown is such a sad man!
What a pathetic excuse for a politician!
300. Yes, because most media types are left wingers, and that is of course the root of the problem at the BBC - it has become a self-justifying, self-reinforcing leftist culture zone.
Even handed political coverage is impossible in such an atmosphere, and the cosseted funding situation also breeds a culture of complacency which means the political coverage is not only biased, but crap, too.
287 I have watched dear old Henry -gorgive my forgetting his surname,but he is ‘Henry,born 1896,the eldest survivor (albeit of 5 as I know-2 in GB and 3 down in Australia) of World War I.
His generations privations,suffering in the 1914-8 War almost make World War II (in which my grandad served) look tame.Forgetting ALL political prejudices,I salute Harry,and his comrades.God bless ya! (P.S I would bet 10,000-1 against my living to 112! :lol:)
292 Mike certainly thinks it’s important in terms of demonstrating their transparency. Ultimately their credibility, like rival firms, will depend largely on the degree of accuracy of their polls.
304 Allingham I believe
300 - Quite, all this stuff about advertising in the Guardian is just clueless. Why would you advertise somewhere that potential recruits aren’t going to look? You might as well ask why law jobs are all advertised in the Times.
The idea that all these rightwingers are prevented from getting jobs at the BBC simply because they can’t bring themselves to buy the Guardian once a week is laughable. They could even get it free online!
http://www.sundayherald.com/news/heraldnews/display.var.2464996.0.0.php
link to murphy story
Oh dear. Spin, spin, spin, but the Tories stay ahead.
Brown must be thinking; what’s to be done? who can we bribe? Should we bring in the blind man?
Well, in the meantime, let’s get Alistair to encourage the tabloid editors to rubbish George Osborne. Use words like posh, privileged, Bullingdon,
Shock horror! Public don’t like paying for things! Public think license fee is too high at time when highest paid ’star’ is suspended from job!
309. This blind man?
A hysterical David Blunkett told the prison service to call in the army and “machine gun” inmates in order to regain control of a riot-torn prison, the former director general of the prison service, Martin Narey, claims today.
In a response to the former home secretary’s memoirs, The Blunkett Tapes, Mr Narey said that Mr Blunkett “shrieked” down the phone to him that he did not care about the possible loss of life among staff or prisoners during efforts to retake Lincoln jail, which had been taken over by rioting inmates in October 2002.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2006/oct/17/prisonsandprobation.ukcrime1
BPIX is a very important poll tonight in my view. After 2 polls with leads under 10% this suggests the adverse momentum of “Brown has saved the World” + the Osborne nonsense has been reversed.
307. No one said that!
The reason why i mention it is because the BBC is a big draw: A leader - I would think all the jobs advertised in the Guardian are ones where people could look on the BBC website to find them. No need to waste money that could pay higher wages for the toilet cleaners and canteen staff!
312. You’re comparing polls from different pollsters. Beware the wrath of PB.
My flatmate and three of my other friends are BBC journalists. They work hard - shit hours - for lower pay than they’d get elsewhere. Maybe that’s why Tories don’t work for the Beeb?
291. I think Obama makes Gore look like a very small politician by comparison. However I wonder if Gore might be an Ambassador under an Obama administration?
312.MikeL, I did wonder if the half term holidays and the Scottish Tattie Holidays might have effected the last couple of polls. What I have noticed this year is that people were beginning to tighten their belts financially early on with higher food, energy and petrol costs.
I have never seen so many people chose to take their family holiday in October rather than in the Summer in the hope of a cheaper deal.
315 - same reason “rightwingers” tend to favour the private sector across the board. Like to have a moan about the pensions, obviously, but never moan about the higher pay they get.
315 Indeed, earning one thousandth as much as Jonathan Ross, according to the man himself.
314. I know. But BPIX are pretty solid and I think it’s significant.
315.Stonch, give over! I worked in the NHS years ago, the hours were long and the pay was cr*p, but we were still accountable when it came to delivering good care.
The BBC cannot carry on in its present format at this cost to the taxpayer now we have so much choice. They also got to be accountable for the service they provide to the public, and they have to be impartial.
That Murphy story really is serious. The man has always been a ruthless and manipulative **** of the highest order and it sounds like he has finally been found out.
European Parliament Elections: I predict
London: Con 4 Lab 2 LD 1 Green 1
S.E.: Con 5 Lab 1 LD 2 UKIP 1 Green 1
S.W.: Con 3 Lab 1 LD 1 UKIP 1
Eastern: Con 4 Lab 1 LD 1 UKIP 1
E.M.: Con 3 Lab 1 LD 1
W.M.: Con 3 Lab 2 LD 1
Y & H: Con 3 Lab 2 LD 1
N.W.: Con 3 Lab 3 LD 1 BNP 1
N.E.: Con 1 Lab 1 LD 1
Wales: Con 1 Lab 2 PC 1
Scotland: Con 1 Lab 2 LD 1 SNP 2
N.I.: DUP 1 SF 1 UUP 1
Total: Con 31 Lab 18 LD 11 UKIP 3 Green 2 BNP 1 SNP 1 PC 1 NI 3
I think the UKIP vote will go down to about its 1999 level, but those votes will mostly swing back to the “main” parties rather than go en masse to the BNP.
Florida early voting update - now 46.9% of 2004 total vote. Party ID:
Dem 45.6% (2004 - 40.7%)
Rep 37.8% (2004 - 43.5%)
No/other 16.6% (2004 - 15.8%)
One thing which is good about the USA election is that it is all on the same day, and (with the exception of two states) the same electoral system for electing the Electoral College members. At least it isn’t like the EU, where the Parliamentary election is on different days in different states, and with a substantially different electoral system in each one. That is more like how the USA was in the early 19th Century - with some states not even having a popular vote for their EC members.
—–
It would be fun to be on the winning side of an election landslide if we lived in a culture where it had never occurred to anybody to (a) do opinion polls (b) bet on the result. It would be even more fun if vast numbers of voters on the winning side decided to lie systematically and pretend that they were supporting the losing side, specifically to give the losing side a bigger-than-expected kick in the teeth when the results come in (a bit like a 1992 campaign with a 1997 result).
140. I don’t do betting, just predicting (and I’m a pessimist).
156. Those are predictions, not betting odds.
321 - have all the high profile resignations at the BBC in recent years just passed you by?
61. But then one of the NY electors votes for HRC and so McCain wins 268-267-1. No need to go to Congress and for Palin to become VP.
I presume you mean 269-268-1. But that would still be not enough - a candidate needs at least 270 (an absolute majority, not a simple plurality) to win without reference to the Congress.
How much have we seen VP Cheney on TV during the last 8 years? Not much. We’ve probably seen more of Palin in 8 weeks than Cheney in 8 years. Palin being VP doesn’t matter at all, except if McCain dies.
322.What about the previous leaks over HBOS and Lloyds?
The BBC provide zero cost to the taxpayer.
Key States early voting update:
Colorado - 69%
Florida - 47%
Nevada - 67%
North Carolina - 66%
(All numbers are % of 2004 total vote).
327&321. Are we standing in for Gabble tonight when it comes to silly meaningless comments like those?
Er… someone mentioned Henry Allingham. Was there a programme about him? What/when? If so, I’ll have to check the BBC iplayer.
333 - the first point stands for itself. The BBC are accountable, just for different things and in different ways than you would like. The second is slightly flippant but still factual. There are many on here who argue that the license fee should be abolished but funding for “public service broadcasting” should continue. In other words they want to increase direct taxpayer, and therefore Govt control over the BBC and its output. That’s not going to do anything for “bias”.
Noticed in the comments in the Herald piece reference to a Glenrothes poll with Labour in the lead 26.5% and the Nationalists on 23% with a quarter undecided (which indicates rest on 20%+?).
http://www.teletext.
co.uk/news/national/
426dbab1433b4c5a5c34
321bff31ffd2/Labour+
edging+by-election.a
spx
Inevitably if you cut the license fee the things that will actually go from the BBC will be the things that the critics want to remain. The BBC suffers because the nature of its funding means that it has to try and cater for everyone who funds it. That is why you have channels like BBC3 (you get fewer people arguing for the abolition of BBC4 surprise, surprise, because that is the sort of channel that the critics watch). Large numbers of license fee payers couldn’t care less about “public service broadcasting”.
336 Copied link from comment - correct one below. 19% say won’t vote for any candidate so doesn’t look like any likelihood to vote in published figures,
http://tinyurl.com/5w5hnb
New thread on BPIX
311: Um, this is a two-year-old story, thomas - check the link name!
338: Interesting and apparently encouraging. But I don’t recall a previous poll showing the SNP 13% ahead in Glenrothes. I vaguely recall one that turned out to be Scotland-wide.
306 Thank you for filling that piece of info in/Too tired,emotioanly and physically to go on much longer-other than,George Osborne,on Thursday,cleraed clear-blue-water by dissing within-3%-of Maastricht borrowing to at least soften a recession somewhat-this confirmed my view,long held that whilst Dvid Cameron is at least trying to re-take the cntre-ish ground,his no.2,his Shadow Chancellor,frankly is a lose cannon.
2008 is now dying,59 days as we speak.2009 may very well present a window of opportunity for those who have standard variables/trackers-unleaded is now comfrtably below £1/litre-I will say no more than those who diss Gordon Brown as a dead man walking may very well live to eat their words-within12 months from now!
But Mike, could you surely not say that about the current polls in the UK showing a massive lead for the Tories (as they did for Labour in 1992) and then end up with another Labour vcitory..?
335.”The BBC are accountable, just for different things and in different ways than you would like.”
Sorry, but that is complete rubbish!
331
garbage. The licence fee is a tax like any other.
331. And national insurance is not an income tax….
The TV license is a tax, it fits all the definitions of a tax, what is unusual is its hypothication.
To say it is voluntary, is to say having windows in your house during the 18th century when we had a window tax was voluntary.
More households pay a tv license tax, then pay income tax, then pay council tax, then own a car.
What else would you call a charge which comes into existence through an act of parliament, has criminal sanctions for avoidance, funds a public organisation, 99.8% of households are liable to pay it and the rate is set by the Government?
342 - perhaps you could outline your meaning of accountability, perhaps by outlining how it compares with elsewhere in the public (and private!) sector?
Ok it is 99.8% a tax
Although actually nowhere near 99.8% of households are liable for it.
Obama will win by a landslide, that;s of every body get up and vote…OBAMA/BIDEN 2008-2016!!
This is too funny. I just stumbled upon this–so are you all really betting on our election? (I’m from Massachusetts) Well all I can say is if the polls are wrong and Obama loses, we’re going to have quite a problem here in the U.S. Screams of fraud will be nothing. I suspect there will be riots.