You can even bet on the time that McCain will concede
November 3rd, 2008
Is there money to be made guessing the timing?
After paying out on winning Obama bets a fortnight ago the Irish bookmaker, PaddyPower, has made another betting move which could infuriate those who still harbour hopes that somehow the polls are wrong and that 72 year old Senator from Arizona can win tomorrow.
They’ve opened betting on the timing of his concession speech- which is clearly linked very closely to the time-table of state results that we will see overnight. These are the price and the timings are in EST - so five hours behind the UK.
5/1 - Before 10pm Tuesday 4th November
7/4 - 10pm to 11pm Tuesday 4th November
11/8 - 11pm to 12pm Tuesday 4th November
3/1 - Wednesday 5th November 3 - 1
12/1 - Later than Wednesday 5th November
6/1 - No concession speech
Harry Hayfield did a great guest slot here a couple of weeks ago sketching out the timings for the night.
There are six key early states which really will decide it: Virginia and Indiana after the last polls close at 7pm EST: Ohio and North Carolina after 7:30pmEST , and Pennsylvania and Florida after 8pm EST.
Initially when states close their polling we will get the exit polls. It will take perhaps a couple of hours after that before we see these being backed up by real voting numbers.
My guess is that McCain will want to wait until, at least, until polling has closed on the west coast - 11pm EST - before making any move and that the 11pm - midnight EST slot is the worthy favourite.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Can we bet on the date that ‘Ave it concedes?
Why cocede too early? Gore ‘retracted’ his Florida concession didn’t he?
Early… McCain is not the type of guy who’d drag it out longer than necessary. He had ample time to get used to the idea, too. Quite frankly, he is probably not happy with his campaign. He’s not a natural attack dog and I’m fairly sure Palin was practically forced on him. Despite it all, I think he’ll feel a sense of relief, at least on some level.
Another interesting question is how he will concede. Will he address the problems of the Republican brand? If so, the loony part of the base will turn on him full scale. Will he blame it on the media and Obama’s “unacknowledged attacks”? We would then know that he really did want their love after all. He won’t get it even then.
I think McCain’s concession speech will be an important determinant whether the conservatives in the GOP will stand up to the crazies and fight for the future direction of the party or whether they will leave the stage to Palinism for fear of their own (fellow) activists.
In that sense, tomorrow will also be the first step towards the 2012 election.
It will be short and to the point. Tomorrow won’t be about blame etc but taking it on the chin with grace, which I hope that McCain will do!
3 He’s an honorable man, Friedrich. He will go out of the race the same way he came in - with courage, humility and a touch of class.
Mike’s right, I think. He’ll wait until the last American has cast his or her vote and then concede promptly and with good grace.
McCain seems to think “spreading the wealth around” is a terrible thing. When he watches Robin Hood, does he root for the Sheriff of Nottingham?
Making a conservative estimate of the ECV i’m going 338-200 Obama.
Why do they offer 6-1 on “no concession speech”? He could concede on 3rd July 2014. When do they pay out?
I recall in 1992 GHW Bush conceded in Texas at c.2.15am (8.15pm local time),so by my maths it was still only 5.15 pm in Alaska-he sounded as much relieved as anything that it was over.I personally feel,partially out of fatigue,and an older mans sense of values,that McCain will not hang it out too long before making the phone call to Obama
I think you vastly overstate the importance of McCain’s concession speech. First, I don’t think he’ll be using it as a platform for bitterness and casting blame. But even if he did, I don’t think its impact will last much beyond election day. McCain has never really been a leader of the GOP, either literally or spiritually (unlike Reagan, for example), and I think he’ll fade back into relative obscurity fairly quickly. The GOP will rumble on without him and uninfluenced by whatever remarks he has tomorrow night (but definitely influenced by the failure of his candidacy).
On topic, I think he’ll probably come out and make his speech soon after the polls have closed in California.
9- sorry, that is in reply to post 3.
Theres no way McCain is going to declare before the polls close in Arizona for fear of losing in his home state. Not sure he will wait for California to close though as theres not really much to play for apart from 1 or 2 seats in the house.
6.
“McCain seems to think “spreading the wealth around” is a terrible thing.”
He thinks this means every bloke gets a bit of the beer heiress!
11- I think it’s kind of silly to concede before the California polls close. After all, the concession has no legal significance and what difference does it make anyway to wait another hour or so? Carter was much criticized in 1980 for conceding before the California polls closed as it was believed to have unnecessarily cost the Dems several House seats.
11 Also,as the entire west coast of the US will be blue,surely it would be equally appropriate IMHO to concede one hour time zone earlier (which does include Arizona?)
CNN have this great tool where you watch the votes being counted in the states of your choosing, I’ll be using it it seems very handy to watch how the battleground states are going:-
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/your.races/index.html
From 441 on the previous thread - My confidence about Obama being re-elected doesn’t stem from support so much as history. I think I realised in 2000 that we were in for eight years of Bush (I had reason to hope in 2004 - but it was more hope than expectation).
The recent Presidents who haven’t been re-elected were Carter and Bush Snr. Whatever else you think of them, they were very uncharismatic people - did’t have much about them. Bush got in as Reagan’s third term and Carter because it was probably indefensible for Ford post-Watergate (and even then he made it close). Nixon, Reagan and Clinton were always more substantial figures and all three not only won a second term but won at a canter. Bush Jnr was more divisive but ultimately had a certain curious charm and a defining issue.
13 - Stars, the difference this time is most of Califorina has been gerry-mandered into safe seats with little to play for. Very different from the high number of seats in play in 1980.
1 LOL never!!!
I have faith that Ave it will not even concede on inauguration day! Isn’t that true Ave it
14- The fact that Obama will win the west coast states doesn’t mean that there’s nothing the GOP is fighting for there, though. If McCain respects his party (and I believe he does), he should wait until the California polls close.
IPSOS National Poll
Obama 53
McCain 46
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/election2008/story/55193.html
19
always time for the recount!!!!
20. Indeed it could for instance make the difference for Gordon Smith in Oregon in the Senate or Dino Rossi for Governor of Washington. How the latter is managing to make a fight of it is minor miracle for the GOP. If he could pull it off (very unlikely)he would become real star as a point of recovery in the Pacific Northwest and Rockies.
17- But why not wait to concede until the polls close in California? I still haven’t heard a good reason.
6. He would if he watched that dreadful BBC version.
9. Perhaps I phrased it to drastically. Given McCain’s limited influence or support within the GOP, I don’t think his concession speech will be important as such. I’d rather see it as an indicator for the internal state of the GOP. There was an article a while ago saying he would not have a huge crowd and that he might therefore have something less soothing and more forward-looking to say. If he really cares about his party in the end, he’ll take this one for the team. The neutral way, of course, is “congratulations to this historic win, thanks to my supporters for all the work they have done, the turnout is a victory for American democracy. Good night.”
Regarding the timing: is it even acceptable for a candidate to conceded defeat before all polls have closed? Republicans in many Western states have worked very hard, I hardly think it would be fair to deny them seeing this run its natural course. I would expect McCain to concede at the earliest reasonable time, but not earlier. I think he’d have to wait until Colorado is called, or his supporters will feel he’s running. I’d still consider that early if other states will not have reported by then…
19. Inauguration day 2013?
26 How do you view the UK/US party systems for single party Government, decisive or authoritarian.
McCain going back to obscurity? He’s been pretty well known for a long time, surely?
24 If he is getting whooped in Indiana and along the east coast, then it may be advantageous to the Republicans to say - “OK - I congratulate President Obama. But those still voting, I ask you to put some checks on his power by voting for my fellow Republican Senators and Congressmen.” That might just sway enough to win Oregon and Washington - and prevent the veto-proof majority for the Dems.
30 - I think it woudln’t work like that. Most of the voting will have been done even in the West by the time McCain starts getting whooped in the East so the margin will probably be insurmountable by the time anyone knows anything!
29- I think this election is McCain’s swan song. He’ll probably finish his term in office (it isn’t inconcievable that he could resign from the Senate before 2010), but will probably at least retire when his term is up in two years. What is left for him to fight for, particularly now that his party will be powerless in Congress? I would think that losing this election combined with losing all real influence in government will be enough to convince him to hang it up. Oh yeah, and there’s the total failure of his signature effort, campaign finance reform, to produce anything other than huge Democratic financial and electoral advantages.
31 Just remembered - Oregon is 100% postal, so scrub that one…agree, most votes will already have been cast. ould have to be on a knife edge to influence Washington.
PPP Indiana
Obama 49
McCain 48
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_Indiana_1103845.pdf
Reuters seem to think Indiana closes at 6pm.
35 Let’s face it - the likelihood on Indiana is all stations saying “too close to call” for hours…probably the same with most of the battleground states. Not sure when we will get firm calls. Maybe Virginia and Pennsylvania might be the best chance to give us a decent clue earliest.
28. If the question is for me (the numbers confuse me, I think they change whenever content is moderated), I’d say decisive. The UK is better than the US.
In Germany, we currently have a situation where party leader’s personal feelings determine coalitions and coalitions, not votes, determine governments. Just today, four “concerned” members of parliament ended the prospects for a change in government in the state of Hesse. I do understand they don’t like the LEFT party (which is very left-wing), but it simply wasn’t their call. Elections brought a center-left majority months ago, super majorities of all potential coalition partners voted for forming a government - but it won’t happen. That is not democracy.
Majoritarian democracy has severe problems too: nobody pays attention to Bootle or Kentucky. There are some ways to mitigate this (Alternative Vote), and the system seems to fail only rarely (see US, 2000). So in the end I think it’s more democratic than the back room deals of PR systems.
Feasibility and legal issues aside, I think the ideal system is PR with only two parties.
Obama’s grandma has died apparently…
Sad news - BBC says Barack’s grandmother just died. Couldn’t quite hold on for his big day. What emotions he must be going through right now.
39- couldn’t have timed it better for the sympathy vote.
Barack 2008- the perfect storm when even granny dies just on cue.
Yeah it is sad that Obama’s gran has died. However at least he won’t have personal regrets as he suspended campaigning to go see her recently. Still it is tough on him.
39 That is sad, what a loss for Obama whom she bought up and shaped.
On topic
Did they have this market in 2000, and if so did it pay out twice?
Rob
40 - That is the most malicious and spiteful sentiment. It is unworthy of a site such as this!
40. This cynical post does you no credit whatsoever.
Maybe McCain is going to announce he is quitting the Senate outside the Hotel?
AAronovitch at his complete nonsense talking best.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/david_aaronovitch/article5076302.ece
basically labour’s new line is that social mobility hasn’t really declined under them, it was actually all the tories fault, but due to more GCSEs being given out like confetti since Labour came to power then surely that means there will be lots of wonderful social mobility increases in the future.
32 - Yes, I think McCain might well resign before 2010 as he will have a tough re-election fight and why bother with it when you’re 74? Leaving will give his successor a decent shot.
But it will lead to the bizarre situation of his likely Democrat opponent (Governor Napolitano) picking her presumptive opponent. She has to pick a Republican I believe under Arizona state law, but how to judge it in her position? I suppose she’ll take the high ground and accept McCain’s choice.
40
That is unbelievably sad. My thoughts are with him.
Malcolm
44. don’t be so dull……………Tyson made me chuckle
40 - Tyson, you are a very naughty person..
Malicious, spiteful and cynical he may be, but Tyson is also right. There will now be a big sympathy vote for Obama, on top of everything else.
He’s gonna waltz it.
44-45- I guess you two were amongst the 50,000 complainants about Brand and Ross.
Surely Tyson just said what everyone else thought?
They were the 2 that complained when it actually went out.
BTW, can I just remind everyone?
He hasn’t won yet. Maybe gran just missed the worst day of her grandson’s life.
55
55 - I don’t watch Brand or Ross as I find them puerile and unbelievably unfunny.
Depends on when the US networks call it, I know that they are concerned over an early call as they have been criticised in the past for calling too early and affecting the turnout out west where the polls were still open.
I think Mccain will concede when Arizona closes.
47.
The fact that a previously sensible newspaper will pay good money to such a poor thinker and poorer writer shows that we are really nearing the nirvana of equality.
The man pretends, like all these fat-stuffed ex-commies, that he and his Blairite friends are not now bough-and-sold Tories in their kidneys.
56 I think Tyson is right - Granny can’t have hurt Obama’s chances…
His “win one for the Gipper!” moment? It worked for Reagan…
40. Come on Tyson, I know you meant that in good grace but those sort of comments are not going to play well!
I just wanted to comment on David’s insightful observation from the previous thread that Carter was the only president in a century to lose the White House in the next election after recapturing it from the other party. This was to argue that Obama is nearly a shoe in for re-election in 2012.
This is a compelling argument but not the only way to look at it. In the past century, the Democrats often had congressional majorities but those majorities were usually fractured between northern liberals and southern conservatives. As recently as the 1980’s, Reagan was able to peel off supporters from among those Democratic southern conservatives to often command House majorities even though the Dems nominally had a solid House majority.
Today is different in that the House and Senate will be controlled by solid liberal majorities and I expect Obama to face very little opposition to his agenda. If anything, he may be pulled to the left whenever he attempts to maintain his popularity by throwing a bone to the center. Whether the voters will still be happy with this state of affairs by this time in 2012 is a real question.
I presume that McCain will now offer to scrap his GOTV people tomorrow as a mark of respect? Respect that the operation is a waste of time anyway.
I’m less confident of Villa winning the Premiership than two hours ago.
Bah! Humbug!
Re Obama’s grandma. Tyson was merely being flippant. It’s not like the Obama family will be clicking on to PB.com in their hour of sadness.
I recall similar pieties being expressed here when Gwynneth Dunwoody died. Lighten up. This is a betting site and, sad but true, this will do Obama’s electoral prospects no harm.
64- Or maybe he’ll concede tonight as a mark of respect…
Antifrank’s daringly questioned a few times recently why most of us bother with politics - aren’t we wasting our time? There’s quite a good example of the sort of thing that makes politicians tick on Hopi Sen’s blog - scroll down to the ‘why we’re Labour’ bit:
http://hopisen.wordpress.com/
Obviously one can argue with the objective or with the success, but the underlying point is valid for any party. You have to be able to find the reward in this sort of thing - a collective objective that you’ve collectively achieved. If you get into antifrank’s argument about what you’ve done as an individual, then you’re on soft ground, unless you happen to be a party leader. But if you’ve a small share in something you think is wonderful, that’s worth more than most careers.
65. Agreed – he was being flippant, as I say above, he meant it in good grace I’m sure.
Terribly sad about Obama’s grandmother - sincere sympathies to the family, who aren’t likely to have a chance to grieve amidst the craziness of the next couple of weeks. At least she got to see the grandson she raised make history as the nominee, and to see him just before the end. Very sad indeed.
ON TOPIC - this is a great map of closing times from the Swing State Project (hat-tip to Daily Kos)
http://www.swingstateproject.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=3641
As you can see, Hawaii doesn’t close its polls until 1am EST, and I wonder if that might lead McCain to wait until then. I know its a cert for Obama, but then so is California. Makes the 3/1 look good value.
Very sad about Obama’s Mum, but she was an old lady, and I guess she knew by the time she went that he was to become the next President.
She’s at peace and he’s moving on to fulfil her dreams. It’s not all bad.
65. If Tyson had said she had been euthensed delibretly, then people might take up the point. But, it is sad for Obama but that’s it.
Maybe his Gran dying was why Obama showed his mind was not on which location he was in when he thought he was in Ohio and he was actually in Florida. It would effect me badly if i was in his situation - she must have been pretty old if Obama is 47!
69 - Addendum - Alaska closes at midnight, and it would not only be unfair on Palin to have conceded whilst her constituents are still voting, but could also screw over Ted Stevens.
I’d definitely go for the 3/1 with just a covering bet on the 11/8.
72 - Will he care too much about Palin?
69- I don’t think McCain would wait for Hawaii (and Alaska, for that matter). He should wait for California but need not wait additional hours for the two remaining states.
68- Benboy- I am currently contending with a close family member moving through to the other side. Why I was away from my favourite site this weekend.
Humour though helps. Particularly dark and mischievous humour.
75 - Chin up Tyson. Some of us appreciate humour of the dark and mischievious kind- and I hope your close family member finds a gentle passage.
72 Morus
I just have this sneaky feeling that, honorable man though he is, McCain won’t give a sh*t what happens to Palin or Stevens electorally.
Really sad news about Marilyn Dunham’s death. Sympathy vote aside, it will be a timely reminder that he was brought up white middle class grandparents and might serve to negate the “Hussein” message that the serial moose murderer and her ilk have been throwing at wavering voters.
74 - One hour for the sake of Ted Stevens? I know McCain has said he should consider his position, but it’s one of the few winnable marginals the GOP have in the Senate.
72 Isn’t Stevens going to jail? Is Alaska the new Louisiana.
77 - Yeah, maybe not…value though (11/8 v 3/1)!
And re Tyson…loosen up guys. She was an old lady and he got to see her shortly before she went. Shame she couldn’t have held on a bit longer but it sounds like it was a normal end of a fine life.
Any predictions for how the good people of Dixville Notch will vote when we (hopefully) get the results by tomorrow morning?
80 He’s appealing … (cue obvious joke by PtP)
Seriously, if he wins the election and his appeal, he’ll be seated, but the Senate could well expel him if he only gets off on a technicality - it would take 66 votes though.
If he wins the election but loses the appeal, he’ll probably be jailed and so will give up his seat (special election: Begich v Palin!)
If he loses the election, I couldn’t care less.
72 - Morus judging by McCains remarks about Stevens conviction, the last thing he’s going to do is hold off any concession for him.
76- fleet- appreciated on all counts. The first time I have ever come up close and personal with death. Very strange time indeed.
84 On what grounds? I thought the US had to be error by the judge not error by jury.
83 - 19-9 to John McCain I reckon
84. Sorry guys but I’m afraid that any post that includes “granny dies just on cue” seems to me to be in very poor taste. I just cannot agree with those of you that think this sort of stuff is ok. A little more respect might not go amiss.
84 What if he wins and Bush pardons him? Can he still take his seat.
Re 89. My ref to 84 is in error. Sorry Morus. It should have been 82.
83 They went 19-7 for Bush in 2004.
However, in this year’s primaries:
Democratic Primary: (10 voters)[3]
Barack Obama - 7
John Edwards - 2
Bill Richardson - 1
Republican Primary: (7 voters)[3]
John McCain - 4
Mitt Romney - 2
Rudy Giuliani - 1
89. If media and politcians didnt get so cynical maybe the public wouldnt think so cynically.
87 - Mishandling of evidence by the prosecution, a juror who was retrospectively recused (after disappearing) based on a lie (she said her father had died, but she was at the horse racing). All fairly weak.
If he doesn’t win the appeal, Bush would probably still pardon him, but if he is a convicted felon, the Senate will probably kick him out (though not strictly on party lines)
84. There is poor taste and there is relevant. Tyson’s comment was in poor taste but hard as it might be, if her death could influence the result - and personally, I don’t think it will but that’s a judgement call - it’s fair game to discuss it, preferably sensitively though.
95. Grr. I’m mis-replying now. That was in response to Steve at 89.
79- Morus, it’s just that waiting on the concession speech/phone call gets a bit ridiculous at some point. Once it’s obvious based on actual vote tallies that Obama has won, McCain can wait a little while for the west coast polls to close, but it would be a bit embarrassing to hang on just for Stevens. Anyway, I’m guessing most Alaskans will have heard about Obama’s win by the time the California polls have closed.
40. Is an awesome LOL and I salute it.
All the best for your own situation, tyson.
No one has been expelled from the Senate since 1862.
All the people expelled were either found guilty of treason or supporting the Confederacy.
Most corruption charges tend to fail, unless the Senator resigns.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_senators_expelled_or_censured#Expelled_senators
Censure seems most likely outcome from this list
97 - You’re probably right - and he’s a decent guy who will not want to look faintly like a poor loser.
The 11/8 is a justified favourite, but I still reckon “Let all 50 states vote” makes 3/1 good value. I’d have priced it at 2/1 or tighter.
95- I tend to agree with you. This seems like a personal drama for Obama that he’s likely to bring up in his victory speech in some way, but will not affect voting.
Don’t think I’ll be playing this market - too unpredictable, though if PP leave it up during the night there might be value.
I remember PP once had a novelty market up on the first phrase in Obama’s convention speech which was still open when his campaign released the main talking points in advance to the press which won me a few quid.
OT I was just catching up on the ever readable Jay Cost who has an article on the Murtha race in PA. I had a rough idea what I thought a “gerrymandered” district was but this one takes the biscuit, or are there even worst cases?
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/11/murtha_in_tight_race.html
He makes an interesting point about how such changes don’t always pay off that could apply to the UK constituency changes. Ed Balls perhaps?
99- many thanks Nick.
Anyway, off to take Trotsky for a walk, and then for an early night.
Well, there has definitely been an upsurge in big players taking the 1/12 since Barry’s sad news broke. And plenty of money coming for Obama to win 370+ electoral votes.
Also seen money for Bill Richardson to be Next Secretary of State. He’s been backed from 20s down to 8. Not too sure what’s prompted that.
102 “…But will not affect voting.”
Correct, S&S. Nor should it.
Incidentally, you should be awarded some sort of recognition from the GOP for valour under fire during the campaign. Whatever the result, nobody here can complain that you have not represented the Republican point of view with honesty and determination.
Thanks very much and best wishes to you, whatever happens tomorrow.
105- Somebody mentioned the Obama cabinet situation earlier and of course the word on the street is that he’s likely to name much of his cabinet very soon. Other than Rahm Emanuel being tipped as White House Chief of Staff (not a cabinet position, but still important), I haven’t yet had the time to look into other likely choices. Does anybody know anything?
103. The good people of Morley and Outwood will, I am confident, do the nationa proud.
105 You must be laughing kitbags, Shadsy. First a big surge on McCain, then one on Obama. Tough race to make a book on, this one!
105 - I’ve been fighting his corner for months, and extolling his price since you put it up. Maybe someone’s listening!! I got on at 20s - he has the most perfect CV for the job.
Might be repeating what already posted but Rasmussen:
Colorado 0 51-47
Virginia 0 51-47
Florida M 50=49
Missouri all tied at 49
N Carolina M 50-49
Ohio 0 49-45
If correct O in the White House especially as Iowa and New Mexico
been given to him for a week or two now
@107:
Will he make Hillary health sec?
Job insecurity from a deal brokered by Brown isn’t going to help Labour in Glenrothes.
Bank of Scotland job fears over Lloyds £1.5bn merger savings
http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2465236.0.bank_of_scotland_job_fears_over_lloyds_1_5bn_merger_savings.php
107 - VP and WHCoS attend Cabinet though.
Tom Daschle is the other favourite for Chief of Staff, though David Podesta (Clinton’s final WHCoS) is going to be heading up Transition.
Hagel more likely to get Sec Veterans’ Affairs than Defense, no idea on Treasury, loads of candidates for State, and Attorney General is wide open since John Edwards fell off the radar.
112 - She wouldn’t take it.
This has a go at Obama’s Cabient
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mark-nickolas/what-might-a-president-ob_b_130747.html
112 - I suspect that Hillary will stay in the Senate.
106- Thanks, PtP, it’s always been a pleasure to exchange views with you here. It will be heartbreaking and I don’t expect to have the heart to watch it all unfold… I’ll likely make it an early night and witness the carnage in the morning. This brings me back to 1992, the last time the Dems won it all (but even then, their victories were not on the same scale as what’s likely to happen tomorrow). There is a sort of inner peace when it’s all over and one transforms completely into opposition, free to rail against everything, point out the flaws and foibles of the powers that be, and know that you have nowhere left to go but up. In a sense, it’s a much easier place to be than having to defend a government and its decisions (sound familiar, Labour supporters?). I’ve been there before, and I’ll soon be back there again. But thankfully life isn’t all about politics!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1008/15142.html
118 “Sound familiar, Labour supporters?”
Very, S&S. Very familiar.
118 - I’ve loved having you and Sea Shanty Irish and all our other American/US-based contributors on the site too, S&S. When you’re next across in the UK, you really must let us all know. It’d be good to buy you a drink, and chew the fat.
109. It’s been fun. I’ll try to post a run down of some of our biggest positions sometime tomorrow.
At the moment, Indiana looks like a big one on the state betting - we’ll be cheering on Barry there. Missouri has been heavily backed to be the McCain Firewall in the last two days and is my biggest worry in that one. On the Electoral College market a narrow McCain win or a tie are our least favourite outcomes.
On the overall winner, I suspect that by tomorrow night it might not make too much difference either way, but it’s been a spectacularly busy day for us today and things could change.
118. S and S. “But thankfully life isn’t all about politics!”
Eh? There are many here who would beg to differ!
“But if you’ve a small share in something you think is wonderful, that’s worth more than most careers.
by Nick Palmer MP November 3rd, 2008 at 10:01 pm”
I’d be more than interested to know what New Labour has done that could possibly be construed as “wonderful”.
Even those who are self-confessed admirers of Blair and Brown accept that this has been, at best, a reasonably competent but somewhat timorous government, given to sensible pragmatism rather than daring radicalism. A government of managerial diligence and missed opportunity.
More dispassionate observers would say that this government was a monstrous calamity, which has ruined the economy, betrayed the people on Europe, created uniquely ideal conditions for the far right, and killed half a million innocent civilians in an illegal war.
“Wonderful”?
Oh please.
re 39 it is a pity - people often hang on against all medical predictions when something momentous is about to happen, e.g. 1st January 2000, child’s wedding etc.
118 - Yes, it’s been a pleasure getting your perspective and I hope you do feel able to add your views tomorrow (although I hope you can because you don’t feel too bad about it rather than because of a McCain surge!)
117 - Majority leader?
On Obama’s gran, sad news but I doubt it’ll have an impact. But will McCain suspend his campaign as a final throw of the dice
Not sure if Nick or Sean missed this before but FPT -
433 To SeanT’s earlier point about Brown’s claim that we are best placed to deal with the downturn; given his recent claim that he’d only promised “no more Tory boom and bust”, I expect him to say that he’d only actually said we were better placed to deal with the recession than we would have been under the Tories. Or some similar nonsense.
The trouble is that so many ignorant people believe every word he says. I’ve got friends, in fact I’d rather call them acquaintances, who are Labour through and through. When I speak to them now and say that he’s obviously now led us into an economic disaster, they actually reply “No, we’re best placed to deal with this”, or “But this started in America”, or “But he’s saved the world from economic downturn”, or “At least he wasn’t soliciting donations from Russians”. It really does beggar belief.
I know it’s part of Nick P’s job to agree with most of what Brown says but I can’t believe he really does. He seems like an intelligent chap and I hope that he cringes when he backs up Brown like he has to here.
Can he really believe that Gordon saved the world? That we’re best placed to deal with the downturn? That Brown can win an election against Cameron?
I hope if someone good does emerge to challenge Brown from within the Labour party (not that I can think of a likely candidate) that Nick will help that person to the best of his abilities. He seems a good guy and my only regret about a good Tory win would be that he’d almost certainly lose his job.
I think I’m calling it a day now - as long as the Democrats win I’ll make a few pennies, if McCain does I might need to search out the Beachy Head bus timetable again. I might yet escape from poor choices in the spring!
Sorry, I don’t buy that McCain will have a “tough” reelection fight. He’s been the incumbent for years, and now his status has greatly increased.
Some crazy speculation about the senate. Especially the Kentucky race between Lunsford and McConnel - There’s not a chance is hell McConnel is going to lose that seat.
Dems will not hit 60 senate seats.
If he loses the appeal and wins his seat then there’s all kinds of strange situations that come up iirc. Things like he can’t vote for himself (or couldn’t if he’d been finally convicted before the election). I wonder if there’s a provision for him to attend debates/votes/etc.
128 I’ll pick you up, Chris. I’ll be driving that way myself if McCain wins.
We could be PB’s Thelma and Louise!
129 - McCain probably won’t bother with a re-election fight. But if he does, and if Napolitano stands, it’s going to be tough. She has massive poll ratings as Governor. The fact people in the UK don’t know her from Eve is hardly relevant - she is a huge figure in the one place that matters.
Nite all. Need to get my beauty sleep. Late one coming up tomorrow.
124 seanT I’d be more than interested to know what New Labour has done that could possibly be construed as “wonderful”.
Well, not a lot, but it seems to me, from right-of-centre, that the complete list on the positive side is:
(a) Freedom of Information Act
(b) Civil partnerships (I must admit I had big doubts on this, but having seen the positive effect on the lives of various gay friends, I’ve changed my mind.)
.. and if you’re a Labour supporter:
(c) Minimum wage [but how hard was THAT for a left-of-centre government?]
(d) Fox-hunting ban [a disgrace, actually, but lefties think it's an achievement].
That’s it. Most of the rest is just spending, and in most cases wasting, money. After all, any fool can increase the NHS or education budget, so that’s not in itself an achievement. It WOULD have been an achievement if they’d got good value for money.
As for the other side of the balance sheet… it would take too long to list it here.
129 - McCain will have a tough fight against Napolitano if she runs. His in-state approval ratings were around 55%, whereas hers were hitting the 80s. He might not run again, too.
Kentucky, I agree, but I don’t think it’s unthinkable. McConnell has never been wildly popular, and this is a big tide. But I’d bet against it.
60 seats is still a long shot, but if Obama appoints Olyympia Snowe or Susan Collins to his Cabinet, it’s not too far-fetched.
111 - Correction, Ohio is M49 O49.
130 - I don’t think his conviction bars him from voting - more precedent that you can’t vote on your own challenge under Robert’s Rules of Parliamentary Procedure (the US version of Erskine May).
Ultimately the Constitution allows its members to set their own rules, so a simple majority would decide whether he could vote on his own challenge. What is more dubious is if Stevens (not being able to vote on his own challenge) could filibuster his own expulsion vote. That would need a 3/5ths Cloture motion to silence him, unless the Democrats (ironically) invoked the Nuclear Option.
Then it would only take 66-33 to expel, assuming all others voted. If some abstained, it would take fewer.
Dixville Notch. Fnar. Who needs Jack’s ARSE for mindless innuendo potential?
re 134 the non-fox hunting season opened this week with more hunts than ever.
On Obama’s grandma. Any death is a sad event for the surviving relatives and friends but all deaths are sadly, inevitable.
If a life is long, well lived and enjoyed then it is a success to be celebrated. Sadly, for many this is not the case.
Samuel Johnson said, on hearing of the death of an old friend, “He is gone and we are going.” Spot on. He also said, “Life has much to be endured and little to be enjoyed”!
A great man but rather lugubrious.
Napolitano for President, 2016?
141 - Far from unthinkable
139 Yes, luckily this attempt at nasty class-warfare against the traditional culture of one particular group hasn’t been very effective. But I expect Nick P thinks it is an achievement, even if he’d prefer it to go further.
134
You missed out their achievement of getting rid of junk food in schools.
Is the minimum wage really an achievement?
It was designed to be a floor,however,with the mass immigration policy of New Labour the floor has become a cieling.
127. Well, when someone is facing defeat for their party in the face, they have to delude with some sort of comforting words/thoughts. Lefties KNOW, like everyone else, that the UK isn’t best placed to deal with the recession and that we may actually be uniquely badly placed to deal with it, but they can’t say it, because to actually say it would be to admit their days in office are numbered.
There’s just been an interview of the Labour Glenrothes candidate on Newsnight Scotland, and I watched it in a state of mounting disbelief. After the very tough but fair grilling of the SNP’s Peter Grant last week, you might have anticipated more of the same, but tonight the main thrust of the questioning seemed to be “Why are you so wonderful? Perhaps you’d like the next seven minutes to expand on what makes you such a fab guy. Can I have your autograph?”
I really am starting to get the impression that the media are giving the weak Labour candidate a much easier ride than the others simply because they sense - perhaps subconsciously - that he would literally fall apart under tough questioning, and the results wouldn’t be pretty. Even so, simple fairness and balance should mean that they start taking that risk.
141 - She’s a bit of a confirmed spinster. Sadly, it would probably be an issue.
144 - Well, I personally don’t think it’s an achievement, but I’m sure nearly all Labour supporters would.
67 I had a look at Hopi Sen’s blog and I agree he does represent Labour very well
“That’s what the leaflet rounds and the patience with idiots gets you. That’s why we put up with the rain, the pointless meetings, the unreasonable bosses and the even more unreasonable constitutents”
The unbelievable contempt that thinks of people as idiots. The amazing belief that for some reason your boss should agree with your crusade and the frankly incredible arrogance that sees constituents as unreasonable objects in the way.
Sums up authoritarian Labour with a martyr complex perfectly.
Big day tomorrow for all of us PBers; so it’s goodnight from both me and my wistful melancholy.
149 Yes, Hopi Sen is much better at arguing Labour’s case than the government is.
146. Newsnight have form for treating the SNP like this.
Its makes [us] Tories fell less picked on.
Are there many of the RSPB’s million members in Glenrothes?
http://www.birdguides.com/webzine/article.asp?a=1482
As for seanT/Richard Nabavi’s question, there’s not a lot of point in debating it here, because we simply won’t agree. For instance, I’d say that reducing waiting times for operations in my local hospital from a maximum of over 2 years in 1997 to a maximum of a few months now is enormously important, but Richard will say it’s just spending money, and anyone could have done that. Well, yes, and if Tory governments did lots of that sort of thing, we might all be Tories. If you’re genuinely curious about the sort of things that turn Labour supporters on, see http://www.labour.org.uk/why_im_labour .
But I wasn’t actually making a pro-Labour point: the post would apply equally to Tories thinking about a Tory government. I was answering antifrank’s recent arguments here that politics is a waste of time, as no individual ever achieves much, and arguing joint achievement of whatever it is you want your party to do. If politicians insist on proving their success as individuals, they’re on shakier ground.
147 - Eight years ago there were no African Americans who were Senators or Governors in the US. No-one would have believed a black man could become President only two terms later.
I wonder if the eagerness to see a woman on the ticket would mean that if she won the nomination (would stand a good chance if made Obama’s Attorney General, or a Senator by then) I think the women’s vote would carry her home.
The US is much more tolerant in the centre ground than its given credit for - the only thing that 90% of Americans say they wouldn’t vote for is an Athiest. 91% would vote for someone of another race, and over 75% say they would vote for someone who was gay. I wouldn’t rule anything out.
5/2 is still available on Obama to win Montana. Still VG value IMO.
155. With Bet365
And with that I’m off to sleep - hope to see some of you tomorrow night. Email morus1516 [AT] hotmail [DOT] com for details.
153. Nick, You have forgotten the Big achievement of Labour in power:
NO MORE BOOM AND BUST!
132. Why do i keep thinking of ice cream??
153. “Are there many of the RSPB’s million members in Glenrothes?”
If there are, they’ll be more than outweighed by those who will applaud the SNP government for bringing 6000 jobs to Scotland. And as the leader of Aberdeenshire council has just pointed out, with a low unemployment rate in her own area, many of those jobs will be filled by people from other parts of Scotland (presumably including the Glenrothes constituency).
Idle curiosity - Red Meteor: does your name imply that if you did achieve independence you’d be on the left?
154. so, Bush has delivered a safer and more tolerant society???
161. I am on the left (with or without independence), but my name was a fairly random choice. I realise now I should have thought it through a bit more carefully!
153 I am sure most people are well aware what Labour would like to claim as to why they do things. The reality of this government has been an Authoritarian nightmare (I understand you have a total blindspot here) combined with economic mismanagement and waste that is leading us into (by many estimates) the worst downturn in 80 years.
I thought it was Labour’s Jack McConnell who feted Donald Trump to invest in the area?
161. I see Prezza has been dispatched to Fife! (According to the Times Politics section).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5076062.ece
Could be a good move move from the Labour point of view! Given Prezza gracing the screens on ‘class’ - he might help Labour. Personally i hope Labour is defeated in this by-election and hopefully a deceant Labour Leader is found instead of the current cachiad.
Back on thread -
I agree with Mike that Obama won’t concede until the West Coast polls have closed, especially if it is remotely close.
Where I disagree with him is that IMHO the entire day of 5 Nov offers far greater value at 3/1 than the measly looking 11/8 for the single hour between 11pm-12pm on 4 Nov and so for me it’s definitely a case of remember, remember the fifth of November!
Good luck to all PB’s punters tomorrow!
Very interesting piece on why the election of Obama (time for change) over McCain (this is no time for a novice) will be bad news for Brown as it’ll blow his arugement that its experiance that counts, right out of the water.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/rachel_sylvester/article5076339.ece
165. It’s got a labyrinthine history, but basically the Lib Dem chairman of the Aberdeenshire Council planning committee (who is a member of the RSPB, I believe) used his casting vote to block the development. There was a huge public outcry (mainly because of the lost potential jobs) and Aberdeenshire council tried to overturn the decision in full session, but lacked the legal powers to do so. Then the SNP government broke the logjam by calling the application in, triggering a process that led to today’s outcome (after a statutory public inquiry).
Re. 168. Of course Brown will go rushing off to Obama’s side at the earliest avaliable opportunity. He may even try and take credit in some way for Obamas victory. And he’ll delude himself that the US turning its back on the Republicans will mean that the UK will stick with Labour. In rushing off to be seen with Obama he’ll just reinforce how old andout of touch he is compared to Obama and that just like in the US, it IS time for a change here, too.
170. He (Brown) may even try and take credit in some way for Obamas victory.
135- McCain will probably have retired by 2010 and, besides, I doubt the Dems will be winning too many open seats in 2010, let alone defeating incumbent Republicans. You never know, but I doubt that the political atmosphere will much resemble the sweet one prevailing for the Dems this year.
164 Have you any idea how shrill and stupid that sounds when the news is full of stories about a global credit crunch?
You want a worthy achievement that Nick Palmer can be proud of? Well the OECD’s report shows clearly that the Labour Government has reduced inequality in this country, describing the decline as “remarkable.” That is due largely to the combination of minimum wage and tax credits. The minimum wage was supposed to be going to cost a million jobs, according to the Conservatives. Now they seem to accept that they got that one wrong big time. Of course I’m sure it will be abolished along with the BBC and the renegotiation of the Treaty of Rome in the fantasy land of the right wing nutters that seem to dominate this otherwise worthy piece of cyberspace.
RedMeteor. So let’s get this straight.
The SNP are in favour of the development. So is Labour as Jack McConnell invited Trump in. And the LibDems are against. I suspect that leaves the Conservatives supporting it since it’s pro-business.
So with a minority aginst what is the fuss all about?
173. Minimum wage was a good thing to do and the Conservatives were wrong to oppose it. It was definatly one of the reasons I voted for Labour in 1997.
173: Be nice to the right-wing nutters - they have so much to put up with. For instance, Cameron coming out against Tory policy, in defence of the BBC:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/03/bbc-davidcameron
Meanwhile, LIBOR falls for the 18th consecutive day - that particular part of the credit crunch (interbank lending) seems genuinely on the mend.
174. I don’t think even the Lib Dems are against it - their local MP Malcolm Bruce was on television praising the decision tonight. Basically the SNP government will probably get some credit for breaking the legal logjam and ensuring the development could go ahead in accordance with the public’s wishes - calling in the application was a bold move. As things stood, the committee’s original decision (even though it was taken by a small minority of councillors) seemed set to be the last word.
173 Have you any idea how shrill you sound.
Let us quote from this report
“Since 2000, income inequality and poverty have fallen faster in the United Kingdom than in any other OECD country. However, the gap between the rich and poor is still greater in the UK than in three quarters of OECD countries.”
So in other words as the Tories have been saying for two years Labour targetted the poor just below the poverty line to bring them up above that line. However the poorest have remained well below that line, and the richest have got richer which has meant that those on low and middle incomes are the people who have paid for your little feelgood moment and have the lower pensions and massive debt to prove it.
I am sure you did not support Labour to be proud of effectively fiddled figures. Frankly you should wish for a more honest and effective Party perhaps after the next election you will get the chance of one.
here is the report that Labour are crowing about. by all means have a look:-
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/22/41528630.pdf
176. Well Cameron isn’t going to declare war on the BBC right now is he? Why would he? He doesn’t need the hassle of going into battle against the Beeb. Their time will come, but Cameron will not just have to win the next election, but the one after that (unless he gets an unexpected landslide in election one) before he’ll get drawn into a battle.
I mist say, I get the impression you Labour think your policies and world views will linger on after you’ve been voted out? I can tell you, this country will change in fundamental ways. The Tories aren’t just going to sit in office and do nothing.
@176:
Awww. Dave’s just giving the BBC one last chance to reconsider their ill-advised brinkmanship with the Conservative Party.
Very decent of him, I think. Turning the other cheek, and all that.
176. NO MORE BOOM AND BUST!
Look going on about Libor is not much good Nick, when people cannot get Mortgages due to a collapse in Lending from banks and building society derived from Brown’s regulatory failure. If the Financial Services part of the economy had not been allowed to rot from the mis-regulation by the framework Brown implemented I and many others may be in work. As it is the Lloyds TSB / HBOS merger is going through - In whose interest is that? Reduced competion & 30,000 more job losses? The state has backed HBOS why reduce competion further and jobs?
Is the government so stupid to think that the new linked up company is suddeny going to lend money at last years levles. No they will not - indeed i should imagine much Cherry picking of the best prospects will go on. The consumer will suffer! Those people who might vote for you next time but if they find out you put up no opposition to giving Financial insitutions the whip hand and £700 Billion of tax payer money.
Think about it, only Labour could be so inept and so useless to give taxpayer money to insitutions and give them the whip hand!
176 I see so I am a right-wing nutter because I don’t agree with your spin. Good argument Nick.
152- Iraq > NHS
An extraordinarily quiet evening on PB this evening — just 180 posts over the past 4 hours, on the eve of what promises to be a hugely important day tomorrow, both politically and from a betting perspective. It’s a funny old world!
183- sorry, that should have said 153!
I’ve just recieved an e-mail from the McCain camp this evening!
Most interesting!
184. Maybe everybody is getting an early night before tomorrows “all-nighter?”
186…. And??????
184. I think people are just building up their strength so they can bear listening to Wolf Blitzer and co repeating the same moronic phrases over and over and over again. I think I might give CNN a miss, actually. But, then again, what’s the alternative? Jeremy Vine in a cowboy hat telling us (in 1992 style) that several key swing states have unexpectedly gone for Ralph Nader?
188. Actually, I’ve just realised that’s no worse than the American networks in 2000 calling Florida for Gore, then Bush, then nobody.
On final point on BBC reform, I giess its a bit like fox hunting. I very much doubt Cameron is that bothered about the BBC one way or another. I’m sure he has far more pressing things to worry about. Thats pretty much the attitude Blair took with fox hunting. But the BBC is something that gets conservative members and right wingers very excited, just as fix hunting did/does with most lefties. In the end, Blair went for the fox hunting ban because he wanted to do something to please his own side. It gave him a stronger position to be able to bargain with his party on some of the other, more radical things he wanted to do. That, in the end, is why Cameron will reform the BBC. I doubt he’ll be much on it, personally, but it’ll be a bone to throw his party at one point or another.
187.
It’s a bar graph saying McCain is ahead in Michigan (17), Pennyslvania (21) and New Jersey (15) - the white democratic vote breaking against Obama! 
No, seriously it is a get the vote message pretty much the stump speech that McCain made about fighting since he was 17 for the country etc! Just to make sure nobody thinks i am spinning or party to betting sensitive Information: the first 2 lines and a half were a joke!
124. Northern Ireland? I’m not too current but things there don’t seem as bad as they used to be.
One final point on BBC reform, I guess its a bit like fox hunting. I very much doubt Cameron is that bothered about the BBC one way or another. I’m sure he has far more pressing things to worry about. Thats pretty much the attitude Blair took with fox hunting. But the BBC is something that gets conservative members and right wingers very excited, just as fox hunting did/does with most lefties. In the end, Blair went for the fox hunting ban because he wanted to do something to please his own side. It gave him a stronger position to be able to bargain with his party on some of the other, more radical things he wanted to do. That, in the end, is why Cameron will reform the BBC. I doubt he’ll be much on it, personally, but it’ll be a bone to throw his party at one point or another.
146″I really am starting to get the impression that the media are giving the weak Labour candidate a much easier ride than the others simply because they sense - perhaps subconsciously - that he would literally fall apart under tough questioning, and the results wouldn’t be pretty. Even so, simple fairness and balance should mean that they start taking that risk.”
I agree with your opinion that the media are giving the Labour party as a whole a much easier ride in recent weeks, and I also agree with why you think that. But most importantly, you make the killer point with your last sentence.
I missed the SNP candidate’s turn in the Newsnight spotlight, but I was pretty disgusted at the way the Tory candidate’s moment in the limelight was tackled and treated. So you can imagine my surprise at their handling of the Labour candidate tonight.
Yet again, Newsnight did not deliver in a fair and balanced way. I quite liked the format of tonight’s interview, I thought it a much more informative and interesting way of tackling the candidate and the issues. Just a shame that they did something entirely different last week with another candidate.
194. I watched BBC News one evening last week and Nick Robinson just talked to the Labour canidate as he went round the constitiency. I could not believe it they did not show any other candidate just a Tory & LD big cheese no SNP.
I thought it out of order.
195.I cannot believe the BBC really don’t see what they are doing right now.
196. They know exactly what they are doing - the BBC needs Tory/LD/SNP News oversight monitors inserting if the Tories win the next election. Impartiality is great but it should be Impartiality for all. The monitor system would work by any BBC article, Broadcast or website having a prominent Biased flag on it. Maybe you cannot change what they broadcast but you can mark it as biased ie. *PRO-LABOUR BIAS* or *PRO-TORY BIASED* etc.
If McCain concedes before the polls close on the West Coast he’ll have dealt a death blow to every single downticket race there, as well as Yes on Prop 8 in California, and he loves his party too much to do that (although if it were only Proposition 8 at stake I can see him letting it die). As for Alaska, Stevens is really, really not going to get re-elected, so it comes down to whether McCain feels like being generous to Don Young, the state’s only congressman (not that Young has much of a chance either in this environment). I believe that McCain will feel it more important to make his speech while a large number of Americans, particularly Republicans are still watching. I’ll be very interested to see if he has something to say on what the party should do next, after what I anticipate will be an 8-10% landslide against them.
193 Also pleased the (admittedly urban) foxes that happily live within a quarter of a mile of my front door-admittedly there’s a few woods in my necks of the woods (pardon the pun,there are some nice coppices/parks closeto me,in north-central Bournemouth).
AND-I am not against country sports end of-I have no objection to someone going out in the New Forest with a full-bore rifle going hunting-its just the mthod of execution that offended myself,and many,many others.
Final point-urban foxes round where I live are getting very tame-last week I stood 5 yarrds from a vixen happily eating the remnants of a take-away-I hope her and her cubs are well.
Final,final point (and quite predictable)-GO-O-O-O-B-A-M-M-A-A!!!
195, 196, 197. I am a Conservative supporter who actually does not go along with the widespread view on this site of BBC bias.
The trouble is that people are selective. I remember last week there was one day when the lead story on BBC1 10pm News (and probably other bulletins) was all about Brown breaking his Golden Rules. The whole report was as devastating as it could be for Labour - lots of clips from years gone by of Brown saying how important the rules were and then a graphic of them literally being smashed - done as a pane of glass being completely smashed.
Funnily on that day there was no mention at all on this site of BBC bias!
The bottom line is that the Conservative Party has not accused the BBC of bias on a systematic / regular basis (they may have complained about individual stories). Presumably if they thought they had a good case against the BBC they would have done so. They haven’t.
197.Martin, they could start by using the same interviewer and team to put together the questions and short pre interview film. Tonight we got lots of nice shots of the Labour candidate surrounded by supporters and being helped by Sarah Brown. He got to almost set the pace and agenda of this interview tonight, which was in fact a nice change from the usual confrontational format that immediately puts the politician on the defensive which always tends to see them clamming up and playing it safe.
The confrontational style of interview does not play well when you are trying to an in depth focus on a by election candidate.
But, last week the Tory candidate got the David Davis’s Daily Politics segment played back at him, and had to field questions about Osborne being on a billionaires yacht! Oh and the polls. The poor viewer watching would have been hard pushed to realise that this was supposedly a candidate in the Glenrothes by election. If you think the UK wide political reporting is cr*p, you are lucky you are saved from the Scottish BBC political coverage.
It was a different interviewer, one of the young turks trying to do a Paxman, but failing, not least because it was so out of
196- Maybe the folks at the BBC see what the American media are getting away with in terms of shilling for their left-wing hero and they feel they should be entitled to do the same. It must be particularly galling to them to see their American professional compatriots about to celebrate a glorious left-wing resurgence as they’re mired in covering the collapse of the British left and rise of the Conservatives. It can’t be! It mustn’t be! It’s not fair!!!
It’s difficult for me to gauge whether the BBC is really (this) biased. On the one hand, conservatives tend to have little sympathy for public broadcasting, on the other hand I don’t watch any TV myself, although I’m in London for a while now. I should actually, after all I paid the license fee after the notification letter evoked images of cars full of people in black uniforms stopping in front of my building to drag me away into the night for the crime of watching television without paying… but I get carried away.
The point I originally wanted to make is that the BBC is an extremely renowned organization outside Britain, I can only underline that as a foreigner. In many European countries, including Germany, the BBC is really seen as a symbol of Britain. After the monarchy, of course. As someone studying media, I can tell you that in many other countries, it is the BBC that puts Britain on the map for people. It’s not just their (admittedly) inflated self-perception.
As someone who likes Britain, I’d just like to believe that a possible future Tory government will want to actually reform the BBC, not put it on a slippery slope to abolishment or privatization. I’m not sure there.
If anyone’s still looking to bet on Obama, betphoenix have him at 1.17 (was 1.2 till I hit it!), everyone else is 1.07 or so. Market closes at 4am UK time though.
200.”Presumably if they thought they had a good case against the BBC they would have done so. They haven’t.”
First point, Cameron has finally raised this issue today where others in the past have not. But considering our lamentable attempts at opposition in the early years of this government, our acceptance of the BBC political coverage was just as bad.
I will criticise the BBC where I think they are failing, and have no problem praising them when I think they do a good job. Panorama tonight was a good example of the BBC at its best. But I won’t accept that you either have to praise this organisation on high, so therefore if you criticise it you must hate it anyway and that undermines and weakens your points.
I watched two separate Glenrothes candidates being put in the spotlight by Newsnight Scotland. And the appalling difference in the way the programme handled each candidate was very evident to see. The BBC doesn’t get to set its own agenda like other news channels because we all pay for it, they simple need to be impartial and aware that they must be fair and balanced. For too long they have not been, and they have got away with it when they should not have.
201.Weird, last bit of my post disappeared.
“but failing, not least because it was so out of context with the issues in Glenrothes”
Ok it’s political spin but this analysis for Georgia bears repeating:
African-American voting was 35%. 25% is the historic level. As for totals after election day comes and goes, Adelman [Georgia Communications Director, Obama for America] said, “anything over 30% and we’re gonna win.”
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/on-road-atlanta-georgia.html
See link to article below which summarises Cameron’s position on the BBC.
He will keep the BBC and the licence fee in its current form. But I expect him to be much tougher on BBC extravagence. I expect him to probably freeze the licence fee for 3-4 years - ie a fairly significant cut in real terms.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2008/nov/03/bbc-davidcameron
202.S&S, some would let the BBC do what it likes when it comes to political reporting, they often point to Fox News as the alternative.
I would sometimes put both under the same political bias, just in different political camps.
202. Before Stars and Stripes gets carried away again with this left-wing BBC stuff, I should point out that the imbalance in the BBC coverage of the Glenrothes by-election has nothing to do with the left/right spectrum. The SNP are the main challengers to Labour and they’re a broadly left-of-centre party - in fact to the left of Labour on a good few issues.
210- But isn’t nationalism anathema to modern leftist thought?
211. No. Unless you’re talking about ‘ethnic’ nationalism, but if the SNP were that sort of nationalist party I wouldn’t support them in a million years. They’re not.
210.”The SNP are the main challengers to Labour and they’re a broadly left-of-centre party - in fact to the left of Labour on a good few issues.”
Oh I am sorry, political bias become something entirely different when its the SNP vs the BBC. Note to myself about making sure that its a Holyrood vs Westminster (SNP vs the world) argument.
Because its not like the Scottish BBC has been anything but left vs right for many years, its just simple become a problem now when its about two left of centre parties slugging it out in a by election.
I will never forget the wonderful segment about the Libdems before the Scottish elections, they were being totally invisible initially, but that was seen as a being a totally viable and clever strategy.
Give me a break Christina, I was having a dig at S&S not you. I can’t take another spat with you at this time of night. On the narrow issue of the Newsnight Scotland interviews I think we’re in agreement (in fact I’m struggling to see how anyone objective could watch those programmes back to back and come to a different conclusion) so let’s just leave it at that.
Assuming that there is a BBC bias one way or another, wouldn’t it naturally swing somewhat rightwards once a Conservative government was voted into power? I can’t imagine that an enterprise that depends upon a government-collected fee would go out of its way to spite said government, but I may well misunderstand the nature of the beast.
Mike - to earn bragging rights on PB, can we have a simple competition early tomorrow on how many ECVs Obama wins and, as a tie breaker, the State in which he had the lowest percentage margin of victory over McCain.
To start the ball rolling, my guesses are 366 ECVs and North Dakota.
212- So the Scottish Nationalists are to the left of Labour and aren’t ethnic nationalists. I think I’ve got it… Scottish Nationalist = Communist! I’m glad at least the BBC still has it in them to stand up to the Reds.
215.Diane, that would be a bad thing too, but I cannot see it happening any time soon, the left liberal bias is too ingrained in the BBC’s make up. Mike Smithson hit in on the head when he suggested that the BBC were too intimidated by the party in power at any one time. Watching the Scottish BBC’s about face when dealing with the SNP in Scotland over the last 18 months really brought that home to me.
We have four political parties in Scotland, and their handling off the Libdems last year in the Scottish elections paid deference to the fact that although they were one of the smaller parties, they were in coalition with Labour in power. I am a great fan of good forth right political debate, and sometimes the only place you get that is on BBC Parliament which has been a great success. I have thoroughly enjoyed some watching some fantastic jousts in the HoC’s. Only spoilt by the way that a very important issue is then brought down to who has the bigger majority rather than who won the debate.
I really cannot stand PMQ’s or First Minister’s questions, neither does anything but provide a few sound bites for the 6/10pm news.
195 Martin Day re Nick Robinson’s pro-Labour bias.
That will be the same Nick Robinson who chaired the Conservatives at Oxford, and who was also national chair of the Young Conservatives.
Bias is in the eye of the beholder.
217. So you’re saying anything to the left of New Labour (Peter Mandelson, James Purnell, et al) is by definition ‘communist’? You crack me up, S&S, you really do. Back in the real world, Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel are probably to the left of New Labour.
The SNP are a social democratic party (remember we were talking about Bernie Sanders a few days ago?).
220- Sanders, you mean the guy who calls himself a socialist who isn’t really a socialist? This is just too much to come to terms with on a blog. Do you have a newsletter I could subscribe to?
221. Well, I think it was Friedrich who advanced the view that ’social democracy’ and ‘democratic socialism’ could be regarded as synonymous, so by that broad definition Sanders could technically be regarded as a socialist. Could we compromise on that? My point was that Sanders clearly isn’t a nationalising, punitive taxation imposing, Clause Four loving socialist in the sense of Tony Benn or Jeremy Corbyn. Personally, I have always taken the view that - a) people like Tony Benn are socialists, b) people like Shirley Williams are social democrats, and c) people Tony Blair aren’t either. Others may have different definitions, but you’d have to use the most ridiculously broad definition of ’socialist’ to cover Obama - and in doing so you’d cover George ‘bank bail-out’ Bush at the same time, so it would be a bit of a pointless exercise.
I was mentioning here a few days ago how my wife’s friends think Obama is going to solve all the world’s problems as an example of how impossibly high the expectations are around the Obama presidency. Here’s another hilarious example for those of you who thought I was kidding… a real live American woman swooning over The One, convinced that she won’t have to worry about paying for gas or for her mortgage once Obama is President:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P36×8rTb3jI
223. Just for the sake of balance, could I point out I saw a woman on the news tonight who said - “people are voting for Obama because they want change. Well, the Germans thought they were getting change and they got Hitler.” You really can’t legislate for stupidity like that.
224- Although my point was not that there are foolish Obama supporters but rather that expectations both at home and abroad among an alarmingly high number of people for what Obama will accomplish is really amazing. I don’t believe there’s ever been a guy elected president carrying such astounding expecations around the world.
Obama reminds of Tony Blair. He’s all style and no substance.
Obama is not going to bring about real change in America. If there was even the remotest threat he might change the way politics is done in Washington, he would not be standing up tonight giving his final rally speech on the cusp of winning the presidency.
226- If you’d like my frank opinion and best guess, Obama will govern in the time-honored tradition of all American administrations that are handed overwhelming congressional majorities of the same party: he will govern as far to his party’s extreme as he can within the time the voters give him to do so. Only when the voters take away from the Democrats at least one of the levers of power will any semblance of moderation return. We’re in for a wild ride over at least the next two years, and probably the next four. Many people think Bush governed in an extreme manner, but he never had the complete filibuster-proof control of Congress required to truly govern from his party’s extreme; as Al Jolson once said, “You ain’t seen nothin yet.”
Meanwhile, on this side of the pond (and in the Independent):
Banks bailout fails to boost Labour ratings
“Gordon Brown’s rescue package for the banks has failed to boost Labour’s standing with the voters, according to the latest “poll of polls” for The Independent.
“The weighted average of the polls taken in October shows the Tories on 43 per cent (down one percentage point on September), Labour on 31 per cent (up four points), the Liberal Democrats on 16 per cent (down one point) and other parties 10 per cent (down two points). These figures would give David Cameron a majority of 62 at a general election.
“The mood of new-found optimism that seems to have enveloped the party at Westminster in recent weeks certainly seems to be out of proportion to the scale of Labour’s recovery,” said Professor Curtice.
“Labour has simply moved from being in dire trouble to being in deep trouble.”
Sorry to bring up parochial trivia.
227, S&S. I suppose I agree with you, in a sense - he’ll govern in accordance with a set of genuinely held principles that he’s clearly set out as an author, senator and presidential candidate. He certainly won’t be as conventionally/cautiously centrist as Bill Clinton. That doesn’t mean “to his party’s extreme”, though - I think on some issues he’ll be a centrist, but on some others he’ll be very left indeed, more so than most, or all, in his party. As an example of the former, perhaps affirmative action. As an example of the latter, some aspects of foreign policy, and definitely support for those on lower incomes.
228 — it’s the economy. Lower interest and food and fuel prices should increase Labour’s numbers but job losses will decrease them. We have yet to see the net effect.
If Labour MPs were euphoric over some headlines, it just shows a lot of MPs know damn all about politics.
227,229 Obama’s reign. Like Clinton, he faces a lot of work to repair the American economy after the outgoing party of sound money has once more left record deficits. And that’s without the credit crunch.
A note of caution - LIBOR rates have come down only because the markets are being “fiddled” by taxpayers’ money being offered at artificially low rates.
“The interbank cost of borrowing dollar, sterling and euro funds extended their slide on Monday, according to the latest fixing from the British Bankers’Association.
The fall in Libor rates was seen in response to massive liquidity injections from central banks around the world, which have helped eased funding needs in the interbank market.”
http://www.reuters.com/article/usDollarRpt/idUSL326606320081103?rpc=401&
November 4th will go down in history as the say Viewed won the Melbourne Cup, returning A$46.50 on the TAB (Australian totalisator).
232 re cash injections and Libor.
Isn’t that the point?
Dixville Notch has voted
McCain - 6
Obama - 15
The End of Journalism
Just a little over-the-top, but the hypotheticals at the end of each section are interesting.
235. Source?
237 - it was broadcast live on MSNBC
Thanks.
CNN.com says:
While New Hampshire is a perennial swing state — with 4 Electoral College votes at stake — Dixville Notch consistently leans Republican. The last Democrat it picked was Hubert Humphrey over Richard Nixon in 1968.
President Bush also won the town in a landslide in the past two elections: He captured 73 percent of the vote in 2004 (19 residents picked Bush while six preferred Sen. John Kerry), and secured 80 percent of the vote in 2000 (21 votes for Bush, 5 votes for Al Gore.)
But the result could be close this year given Democrats now outnumber Republicans there.
According to Donna Kaye Erwin, the supervisor of the voter checklist, Dixville Notch has five registered Democrats, four Republicans and 11 undeclared voters.
235. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dixville_Notch,_New_Hampshire Gives 16-6 in favour of Obama, the first time Dixville Notch has voted for a Democrat since 1968! I’m guessing there was some pretty heavy canvassing there this year.
234 - John L - yes, indeed, but we must not allow ourselves be lulled by politicians into thinking that it is the result of non-banking institutions coming back into the financial markets - the key indicator of “confidence” - and therefore the end of the credit crunch.
No-one trusts the banks or their balance sheets anymore. It is a truism worth repeating that trust is like virginity. Once lost it is very difficult to regain.
236 - “Imagine the reaction of CNN or NBC had John McCain’s pastor and spiritual advisor of 20 years been revealed as a white supremacist who damned a multiracial United States…”
In fact, McCain was associated with a bunch of controversial religious figures - the anti-Catholic, Elders-of-Zion-conspiracy peddling John Hagee, Ron “Allah the demon spirit” Parsley, and so on. I guess CNN and NBC just forgot to notice those guys, or more likely the National Review forgot to notice that CNN and NBC noticed, because they have such an overwhelming need to paint McCain as a total victim of the liberal media.
Meanwhile, on the FTSE, yesterday’s gain of 1.51% was the fifth consecutive gain, four of which have been under 2%. Meanwhile, the day’s range was the lowest since 24 Sep 08. My personal volatility measure has fallen to its lowest level since 2 Oct 08, although it’s still comfortably within the top 75 of all time - though the last 20 drading days’ numbers are all in the all-time top 50.
It feels like it’s calming down a little, and the numbers I have don’t disagree with that. Whether it’s simply a case of the markets taking a breather before today’s election, I don’t know.
It still didn’t make mirthios’s first optimistic target, though it did get very close…
[After writing that, I've just checked the Nikkei, which is up over 5%...]
One more note on that:
yesterday’s gain of 1.51% was the fifth consecutive gain
…making a five-day gain of 15.3% - the biggest ever five-day gain. The previous high was 14.6%, 13 Mar 03 to 19 Mar 03 (climbing away from “Blair’s low”.[*] On that occasion, the index climbed for a further two days, and after seven trading days was 17.5% above Blair’s low).
[*] Mirthios’s terminology
The last time the FTSE gained in five consecutive trading days was 18 Dec 07 to 27 Dec 07 (six days, total gain 3.5%, biggest gain 1.39%, the rest all under 1%, and the first two days in the sequence were under 0.1% gain).
Before that, you have to go back to 29 Aug 07 to 4 Sep 08 (total gain 4.5%).
So the USA will probably vote in Obama?
If they do then we are all in trouble as it is equivelant to Blair getting in by a landslide in 1997.
Look at Blair’s history - he could certainly talk the talk, but could not walk the talk, in spite of being given the highest public mandate in modern UK history.
Democrat supporters and the 95% of blacks voting for Obama all have very high expectations, and I guess Blair’s history will repeat itself in the USA.