Can you make sense of the GOP race?
December 22nd, 2007
As the polls converge so do the prices
At the top there is a collage of some of the main figures in the race to become the Republican nominee for the 2008 White House race - a contest that at one stage looked relatively simple but is getting more complicated by the day.
The chart shows the Betfair prices converted into an implied probability to reflect the changes in punter interest over the past year. The only one thing that we can say now with some certainty is the politician turned movie star, Fred Thompson is now looking as though he is out of it.
This race is down to four and the betting reflects the latest polling - there is very little to split Giuliani, McCain, Romney and Huckabee.
The challenge is that each of the front runners has a big negative against them. The former mayor of New York, Rudy Giuliani decided that he would focus on the states with most delegates and has put almost no effort into Iowa which will be the first state to decide on January 3rd. Could one of the other three take a lead in the early contests that makes it hard for Rudy to get back into the fight?
Mitt Romney has been throwing everything at Iowa and New Hampshire, the second state on the schedule, in a strategy that looked as though it was working until the past week or so. His big negative is seen to be the fact that he is a Mormon an element that has been magnified by the rise of the former Baptist minister and ex-Governor of Arkansas, Mick Huckabee.
And then there is John McCain - the Vietnam veteran who ran against Bush in 2000 and who a year ago was the favourite. Then he seemed to slip away until the past few days. His challenge of course is persuading voters that he is not too old.
Huckabee has been the big bet in recent weeks as he has made dramatic polling progress. He comes over very well on TV but would America really elect as President a creationist?
Huckabee also lacks the campaign funds of some of his rivals.
Me? I’m on Huckabee and McCain at very long prices.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Huckerbee is still 3rd favourite, but definitely on the skids - he now needs some seriously good poll news to re-kindle his profile.
Incredibly, I’ve just been able to grab some more McCain at 9-1 from Corals, compared with just 9-2 on offer from Hills, it’s not very often one sees that. I intend laying him at 6-1 or less on Betfair. Over the next 2-3 weeks at least 3 of the present contenders will fall, they just have to. At present I’m very green on Romney, McCain & Huckerbee and a lttle red on Giuliani, Paul & Thomson. My very best result, worth ££££££££££ (and then some!)would be Huckerbee to win the Presidency, but it just aint going to happen!
I posted on the other thread, but I will do it again. A very good article about the Iowa caucus and the polls:
“Iowa: Where Things Stand”
http://www.pollster.com/mystery_pollster/
“And The Role of Underdog Will Be Played By…Hillary Clinton?”
“It’s an unusual role for her but one that may just be the most useful to her right now, if she’s able to manage it.(…)Plus, it ain’t easy at the top, something Obama may be about to discover.”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/glynnis-macnicol/and-the-role-of-underdog-_b_77954.html
It is interesting looking at the current status of the betting here, where McCain finally, finally seems to be picking up pace again after his year in the doldrums. His reassuring presence makes me think about the unique qualities associated with a presidential, executive election such as that one. I remember reading the Reagan diaries recently and having it reinforced in my mind what a fundamentally decent person Reagan was. And to be honest, there have not been many presidents there, or politicians over here or anywhere else, who are like that. People whose chief concerns are not personal, partisan or even agenda-based (class representation, &c), but just approaching the issues of the world with common sense and making decisions, popular or not, because that’s what they should be (Truman may be another).
Of the current crop of candidates, this applies to my mind only to McCain. No other candidates, on either side, are detached from politics. This does not stop you from being a good president of course - and it certainly doesn’t stop you from being successful. I for one am a great fan of Clinton for instance. However there is something that sets aside good men from great men. I think that when electing a president who is supposed, to some extent, represent you as a people, it is a nice luxury to have. I cannot for the life of me see how someone like Romney can be elected. I think both sides are waiting to see if Huckabee on the GOP side or Obama on the Dem side have it; in the meantime they get distracted by pointless diversions like Thompson.
On this side of the Atlantic, I don’t think we have had anyone decent since - well, ever. Certainly not the likes of Churchill or Thatcher, who both carried a certain vindictiveness. Major comes closest to representing that strand of politician, ironically. Macmillan and Blair the very worst, followed by Baldwin and Wilson. Maybe Callaghan, possibly Attlee. Brown fares relatively badly in this analysis too, though Cameron is certainly not much better (we are now in the actor generation, post-Blair). The Queen, of course, has it - and I’m glad that the recent film went some way to “proving” this to the public!
enjoy ‘moderating’ do we?
The last link, at least for now!It’s everything we discussed here, but is much more resumed!:
“The Line: Someone Has to Win the GOP Nomination”
ttp://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/12/the_friday_line_someones_got_t.html#more
6-OK, again:
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/thefix/2007/12/the_friday_line_someones_got_t.html#more
7 Someone’s got to win but will it be McCain, height 5″7″ (same as me I might add), perhaps he’s the Sarkozy of US politics but auguries since WWII aren’t good for shortest contender. Still he’s got the hair & British/Irish name on his side….
I posyed this on an earlier thread, just before a new tread arrived. I’d appreciate people’s thoughts.
“Tony Blankley (former Press Secretary to Newt Gringich during the launch of Contract With America) has an article which is getting plenty of coverage (Daily Kos enjoyed it!)
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2007/12/none_of_the_above_gop_heading.html
In this article, he launches the possibility of a brokered convention for the GOP at St Paul. If even three candidates are viable by that stage, let alone four, this would be fascinating. GOP last had a brokered convention in 1948, Dems in 1952 - this is pertinent because before 2008, this was the last time neither a President or a Vice-President was running for the nomination.
Certainly the GOP field is more split, but what is interesting is the number of Superdelegates (normally elected officials or senior party figures - most are uncommitted until the winner is clear). There are only 138 GOP Superdelegates (out of about 2450) whereas the Democrats have a massive 765 Superdelegates out of 4000 (I count 848 total unpledged out of 4356 - everything is in flux, whilst the parties fight the states over reducing delegate count as a penalty for moving primaries forward in time).
It is more than possible that Superdelegates could be called upon to broker a solution - the GOP because there are so many (equally) viable candidates, and in the Dem race because the Superdelegates comprise almost 19.5% of the delegates, meaning the lead candidate will have to have a substantial lead (more than five-eighths) for the result to be a foregone conclusion prior to Denver.
As with all the issues I raise (Rudy to win NY state v not-Hillary, tied/NOM Electoral College, Ron Paul coming third in NH because he raises $5 for every dollar that Huckabee raises), it is not that this is remotely likely, just that it *might* be more likely than it initially appears, and is interesting even hypothetically.
It would be very interesting to see if anyone can get odds on a brokered convention, for either party, before the primary season kicks off.”
Ted @ 7 re height — President Bush is shorter than Gore and Kerry.
Me @ 6,7 re Someone has to win. That is my sentiment too. My own book is nicely green after laying McCain when he was favourite and backing Huckabee early, and I really cannot summon up enough enthusiasm for any one of these men to make me endanger that position.
If I were starting anew, though, I should investigate Giuliani’s precipitate slide in December’s polls, with a view to laying him. The question is whether it is due to more than his recent minor health scare.
I am still not convinced that the ultimate 2008 Republican Presidential candidate is yet in the field. Perhaps Newt Gingrich is worth a few bob as the “well, if my Party calls for me, how can I refuse?” lurking candidate. I think there is quite a tradition of “write-in” candidates in US politics. Perhaps he might let it be known on January 2 that, if people were to ask, he would respond….
I am still not convinced that the ultimate 2008 Republican Presidential candidate is yet in the field. Perhaps Newt Gingrich is worth a few bob as the “well, if my Party calls for me, how can I refuse?” lurking candidate. I think there is quite a tradition of “write-in” candidates in US politics. Perhaps he might let it be known on January 2 that, if people were to ask, he would respond….
I am still not convinced that the ultimate 2008 Republican Presidential candidate is yet in the field. Perhaps Newt Gingrich is worth a few bob as the “well, if my Party calls for me, how can I refuse?” lurking candidate. I think there is quite a tradition of “write-in” candidates in US politics. Perhaps he might let it be known on January 2 that, if people were to ask, he would respond…. He’s a very astute politicians and I wouldn’t be surprised if that has been his strategy all along - once the other candidates have spent months knocking lumps out of each other, he would win the beauty contest just cuz the others all look so dang ugly…
Apologies for the multiple posts - not sure how that happens.
Marquee Mark @ 12 re Newt Gingrich. Gingrich has already ruled out running, though he has been spoken of as a possible VP on the Huckabee ticket.
Gingrich is not popular. Although he led the successful “Contract with America” GOP takeover of Congress in 1994, most Americans blame him for the paralysis of government that followed. This would be an especial handicap against likely Democrat flag-bearer Hillary Clinton.
In reply to the question at the top - no. It seems genuinely open, not in the sense that there’s a close race between popular ricvals but that most Republicans don’t seem to feel strongly for or against any of them. The upside for them is presumably that it’ll be easier to get behind the winner next November.
O/T: this is an interesting development:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/dec/22/climatechange.carbonemissions
It moves on from the “how high do we set the carbon reduction target?” to “how the hell are we going to achieve it?”, in what IMO is a rational sort of way - don’t make arbitrary decisions, but weight the dice against big-carbon projects so that only the really worthwhile ones get through.
Climate change is a bit like the EU treaty in terms of electoral significance: not that many voters feel it’s a decisive issue and a lot of people actually don’t care, but those voters who do care feel it’s more important than anything else.
And they’re overwhelmingly in the Lab/Lib/Green sector of the electorate. The issue will be important for tactical voting on the left. My Green opponent at the 2005 election wasn’t especially left-wing or anti-PFI or pacifist: he even said he could imagine military action being necessary against North Korea, which certainly out-hawked me. But he felt that climate change was about planetary survival, and he got a decent vote on that basis. I’d like some of it back, and this will help.
re 17. A first step should be to close down the car-park at the House of Commons so that everybody, apart from the disabled, had to travel there by foot, bike or public transport. This could be the first stage of a national policy that would see parking for councillors at town and county halls up and down the country being closed down as well.
The mileage rate for using cars should be the same as using a pedal cycle.
All this would offer such great symbolism for while everybody wants to reduce carbon they generally want others to take the lead.
18 are MPs expempt from the Congestion charge, It wouldnt be surprising if they were>..
There is a real chance that the Republicans will end up with a brokered convention - the first in the postwar period.
The absurdly shortened primary timetable means that so many votes will have been cast before the weaker candidates are forced out of the race that we could see all of the big 4 win over 15% of the delegates by Mega Tuesday in early February.
That would provide each candidate with an incentive to carry on in the race right up until the convention. That could deny any single candidate enough support to wrap up the nomination early, in those circumstances even candidates who have no chance of winning will want to hang in so that they can act as king maker.
That would be a disaster for the Republicans, meaning a divisive bitter contest stretching on for months while the Democrats will have already decided on their choice long before.
18: good idea, Mike. There was a lot of opposition from big-car MPs when the allowance for large-cc engines was reduced so I can see this being controversial (some people with rural constituencies say they need their Jaguars to get about…), but that’s OK. A first step would be to charge a substantial fee for spaces.
19: no, MPs are liable to the CC like everyone else. Don’t be so cynical!
4. Anatole. Very interesting post. Not that I agree with a lot of it. Personally I would put both Carter and Blair in the “decent” camp.
McCain definitely comes over as a decent guy. And as you say appears reassuringly Presidential.
But there are two points about his candidacy that I feel have not been sufficiently underlined here. Firstly he is a really credible candidate. He looks and feels like the real deal. I know he is old but not in a Ming Campbell way. Secondly and most importantly, he could actually win the Presidency for the Republicans. I cannot see any other candidate having much chance against either Clinton or Obama.
The Republican party need to wake up fast to the fact that he is the only winner in their pack. It looks like they might be starting to do this.
18 Good stuff… But where would Cameron’s chauffeur park?
Great poll yesteday. The yo-yo continues have the Tories overplayed their hand by being too smug.
re 20 & 23. When it was suggested that I run for the council many years ago it was pointed out that a not inconsiderable benefit was free town centre parking where there were always spaces for members.
18 Mike Not long ago you were arguing that people should not have their freedom restricted and should be able to move wherever they want. But now you want to restrict freedom of choice in the means to travel.
The first position led you to espouse unfettered immigration. Why does the same logic not prevent you restricting car use?
Increased population increases carbon emissions as the population size relates directly to the use of fossil fuels and will continue to do so until there are viable alternative sources of power for movement, heating and technology.
All the plans to save the ‘environment’ are rather a waste of time if the effect of the ever expanding global population is not put into the equation. Population pressures will simply overwhelm any good intentions as the demand increases for manufactured goods, housing, transport, health and other services, heating, cooling and entertainment, and the very addictive consumer culture spreads to a wider and wider population.
23
er No
One poll just like a swallow doesnt make a summer. I am surprised at this low figure , but its the trend that counts. If we see 5 more polls in the 5% range then its credible, if not its a rogue.
Given Labours current woes, it would indeed be remarkable if Labour were only 5% behind. I did wonder considering its the festive time of year, whether the breathalyser ought to be mandatory before answering any polling question.
21 Nick, Merry Xmas, glad you are having to cough up like the rest of us!
18: Mike, sounds like a strong populist call, but have you ever tried cycling up Millbank? Feels more like Wacky races with all the cars, buses, taxis and motorbikes charging past each other. Never had an accident but it was pretty nervy. And they’d need some new bike racks, pretty full as it is…
2. Interesting link, thanks. At the risk of posting advertising, we’ve got some markets on the percentage share of the Iowa vote for a few candidates up on the Ladbrokes web site.
17, Nick,
” Climate change is a bit like the EU treaty in terms of electoral significance: not that many voters feel it’s a decisive issue and a lot of people actually don’t care, but those voters who do care feel it’s more important than anything else.
And they’re overwhelmingly in the Lab/Lib/Green sector of the electorate.”
Not so sure that’s true. Looking at the ICM poll for the Sunday Mirror back in March (the easiest one for me to see claimate change versus party identification), 144 out of 1010 (14%) placed it as most important or second most important (as you say, not many).
Of these 144, 28 were Tory, 28 Labour, 31 Lib Dem, 8 Other (and presumably 50-odd not voting) - so it looks almost to be kind of equitably distributed. If you took a random person primarily concerned with climate change and asked who they supported, you’d have pretty equal chances of any of the “Big Three” parties (but most likely to say “none of them, mate”)
You could argue that a lower [i]proportion[/i] of the Tories and a higher proportion of the Lib Dems were worried. You could also say that they’re overwhelmingly in the [i]Con/Lib/Green[/i] segment, if you’re feeling mischievous
.
I’ve really got to get the hang of changing between BBcode (square brackets) and HTML (triangle brackets) when I swap between sites, haven’t I
?
20. Ironically, I posted almost exactly this point about six months ago - except I got the party wrong. At that time, the GOP field looked a lot more straightforward, whereas the Democrat one could have had four heavyweight candidates in it (Clinton, Obama, Edwards and Gore) fight themselves to a stalemate up to and beyond Feb 5.
How things change. While I don’t think it will happen, there is certainly a realistic chance that the GOP nomination could be undecided by the time of the convention. As a rough estimate, I’d say the odds of it happening are about 4/1. Normally the momentum factor (or perhaps more accurately, the lack of it) will push out a couple of the main candidates and some ‘event’ will do for another. Yet these four have been campaigning for so long that it’s likely that most things that might do for their chances are known already - and haven’t ruled them out - and the differing campaign strategies could give each a timely boost to see them through to Super Tuesday.
Marquee Mark’s post(s!) is an interesting one. While I don’t see any prospect of Gingrich becoming a write-in candidate, there is the possibility that if the vote does go to the convention, which thenn becomes deadlocked, other senior Republicans such as Gingrich could come into the frame. That said, these things happen far more frequently in fiction than real life.
This looks pretty damaging to Romney, I’d have thought - his explanation is something of a classic:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/us_and_americas/article3082350.ece
Re Clegg’s welcome statement on religious belief, interesting article from Parris on the religious beliefs of our PM’s!
http://tinyurl.com/32vgzn
Thought on the ICM poll, there’s no sense in polls till at least March, we’ll have a better idea then.
29 - or many people have been attracted tob Cameron by his environmental stance.
I wonder what Brown did to Parris to make him so bitter.
18. Another step that could be taken to halt global warming would be to confiscate ‘Dave’s’ passport! I’ve just seen that his latest frolic has taken him to China. If any other politician in history (or even an airline pilot!)has done more pointless travelling I’d be surprised.
Hopeful copywriters are famous for starting their scripts “Open on desert island….” which nine times out of ten this end up painted on the back wall of a studio in Battersea. What wouldn’t they give for Dave’s new job?
36, you don’t recall Blair’s farewell tour of the world?
36 - Yes, going to China; Very pointless. Future of China is of no relevance to a future Prime Minister.
35. I despise Brown with as much vehemence as Parris, and Brown has never done anything to me - apart from lie, cavil, deceive, frustrate, evade - and deeply, deeply irritate.
I know many people who hold the same opinion. I’m afraid you’re simply gonna have to accept that Brown just really GETS to people in a way Blair never did. Brown is widely reviled - and let’s face it he is widely reviled by many in the Labour party elite. Why?
He’s just a muppet. I mean him no ill-will, I wish him a very Merry Christmas, and I know how tough it is to have a cystic fibrosis child (my family has the same experience), but he’s just too damn annoying to be a successful PM. As a backroom boy, a Chancellor, his unfortunate persona was well-concealed. As a premier he is cruelly exposed.
36 and where are you just back from Roger? Hope it was somewhere you could cycle to and from
Attacking Cameron over travel/cycling/huskies/hoodies is so last year, politics has moved on from the Blair days and the Brown Bounce,and what might have worked last year won’t now, the image didn’t stick, Labour needs to find a better way of attacking the man.
[29[34] I’m not actually surprised that those voters who think that climate change is the issue above all others are distributed across the parties in this way. Such voters are likely to be aware that effective measures - if it’s not too late already - will be extremely electorally unpopular, and I for one do not think that a single-party government, whatever its colour, is capable of delivering them. Nasty medicine requires a far broader basis of support than the 20-25% of the electorate that is all a single-party government can expect.
But of course there’s no way to vote for, or even campaign for, a “grand co-alition” such as the Germans have. For that, we have to trust to the God Nick Clegg doesn’t believe in!
Jonathan 35 - Next time we meet I’ll tell you what the actions of GB did to me
I wonder how much carbon emission is used by PBC’s most big mouthed champagne socialist travelling to those homes in France. Possibly a little less than that used by Broon in his photo ops to Iraq.
32 Nick Palmer. Take a look at Politico’s website, and you will find pretty convincing evidence that Romney the elder in fact did march with MLK. But Mitt never saw it, so he is back to a Clintonian defense - it depends on what you mean by “is/saw”.
28 shadsy. The Ladbrokes Iowa markets would have more attractive to me if the intervals had been wider, i.e. 10 percent. As it is, this is pure guesswork, and off-putting to me.
42 Put you out of betting pocket..
Matthew Parris is tribally anti-Labour: it’s just less obvious than (say) Littlejohn because Parris has a genuinely pleasant and mellow manner. When Blair was PM he was permanently and viscerally hostile to Blair; he’s transferred it to Brown. Leaving that aside he’s always readable, and humane - his reaction to Mrs T’s chilling one-liner to the distraught woman shows his essential decency.
33.
Memory tells me that Lord Ashcroft’s ‘Smell the Coffee’ report put a lot of faith in January polls.
http://www.lordashcroft.com/publications/smellthecoffee.html
42 - Is it the Laura Spence thing again?
38. Alex. You’d be amazed at todays technology! You don’t even have to get on your horse and trap to talk to people in the next village anymore. There’s a new machine called ‘a telephone’!
PS. “Future Prime Minister”? A squadron of pigs have just flown over…..
Sounds like a Betfair market… What did Gordon do to Mike?
Yep Cameron should operate on the basis that he will not become Prime Minister.
Ps. “use the telephone” - do you really believe all of the stuff that you write?
47. January polls, at least from mid-January, yes - I’d give them some credence. But I never put that much store by polls in July or August, or those a couple of weeks either side of Christmas. People have too many other distractions and in any case, politics goes into a off-season.
22. I agree that McCain is the only candidate who could plausibly win the election for the GOP at this stage. Everyone else appeals, at best, to “a demographic”. McCain has some universal attraction - I’ve watched him address people live and even sceptical audiences listen because he is statesmanlike.
I don’t think Blair qualifies as “decent” at all - my point is not about only being detached from party politics, or making tough decisions. It’s about your first governing instinct being only the instinct of and for your people, not an agenda for a crusade or a battle, not your party, not your own ambitions. Reagan managed to embody all these things without overly intellectualising it; indeed it could be argued (as in Truman’s case) that he did it *because* he did not intellectualise it.
I guess Carter could fit this bill but history judges him as being just a little pathetic so I guess it’s difficult to tell!
44. Fair enough Jan. But there would have been some long odds on favs in there. You could always back two of the 5% bands.
re 50. You might add “what Bill Clinton said to Hillary when Mike S was them in the Oval Office”
36
I thought that you spent most of your time flying to other countries to do really useful things like making 30 second TV ads for women’s sanitary towels?
You were trying to impress us one time about how you had travelled business class,wow.
Alex. If you can’t yet understand the difference between ‘a publicity stunt’ and ‘a fact finding mission’ then let me help. All the Hilton/Cameron trips to date are the former.
Ted. I’m sure that’s what you wish! Wait till the mood changes as it certainly will and some future Labour PR man takes the trouble to count the air miles and compare them to other opposition leaders and ‘future’ and present Prime Ministers and then we’ll see whether the story has legs!
I stress again that McCain’s own team believes he needs to win NH This is still a tough job though very possible.
They may settle for a close second but his team are convinced that a win there is take off material.
57 - Yeah, but your definition of “publicity stunt” is “anything that Cameron does”, which leaves him struggling to satisfy you really.
46. NickP, Parris is a very smart journalist, even if his books are a bit sucky. So I think that’s a rather simplistic analysis of Parris’s attitude to Blair.
Yes Parris is a Tory. Ergo he dislikes lefties. But Blair, I think, confused Parris - as Blair confused many of us. I remember reading an article by Parris when he said he was disarmed by the friendliness of Cherie. I think the part speaks for the whole. Sure Parris came to dislike Blair by the end (as many did) as a devious chancer, yet there was always grudging respect for Blair’s political abilities, and sincere admiration of Blair’s charm and good humour.
As I say, Parris’s changing and inchoate feelings probably mirrored those of the country as a whole.
I’m coming to think that Blair’s departure is a disaster for New Labour - because he WAS the vital part of New Labour that made it sellable. Even at his most mendacious and contemptible, Blair had that likeability which meant he was able to absorb the blows, to shield Labour from voter anger, to take the punches aimed at the project as a whole.
Now Blair has gone the essential unlikeablity of New Labour is left for all to see - its juvenile shrillness, its bien pensant meddling, its authoritarian silliness, its utter, utter mediocrity.
Who is there to like on the Labour front bench? Even the previously promising Miliband has turned into an arrogant fool as Foreign Sec, (though he has time to save himself). Not one member of the New Labour elite has remotely the charm and personability of Hague or Cameron etc.
Charm in a TV age is vital.
Having said all that, in the seasonal spirit - a Merry Christmas to you Nick, and the cats, and your wife. We may have our hostilities but, hey, it’s Chrimbo. Hope you have a good one.
57: Laura spence, his ‘Marshall plan for Africa’, the tax cut that wasn’t one, the policy changes during PMQs, having Mrs T for tea, going to Iraq during the Tory Conference, opening open hospitals, 2018 World Cup bid, signing the EU Constitution v2 alone, to name a few.
61 - not publicity stunts Ralph. See 59.
53 Anatole - Thoroughly enjoyed your posts this morning.
I was one of those contemptuous of Reagan when first touted as a future President, but I gradually warmed to him and now I regard him as one of the finest Presidents of the modern era. The reason is exactly as you say - sheer honest decency.
The nearest I can think of in the UK is John Major, although he was severely handicapped by a shambolic Party at the time.
62. Yes it really is rich for a Brown supporter to accuse anyone else of cheap stunts. Has there been any more opportunistic, or inept, politician in recent memory?
BTW you forgot all the policy issues surrounding IHT et al.
57 Roger, dream on
I think the Green lobby’s focus on air travel is a mistake, with its roots in a Puritan approach to the problem. While technology might come up with a suitable biofuel for aircraft it is the one sector of the overall energy market least possible to “green” - though economies could be made to reduce fuel use on the ground and make jet engines more efficient. Accept that air travel is the hardest to manage and look at where real effective gains could be made.
More effective is to attack those areas which have the biggest impact but in which changing technology or direction does not hit lifestyles - deforestation (around 19% of CO2 or equivalent generation) and electrical power generation. The UK has been pretty bad since 1997 on CO2 emissions (these are growing not declining) and recent Government decisions on coal powered generation without carbon capture will make it worse. Reforesting large areas of unproductive farmland to reverse the last millenium loss in the UK, support to reforestation in Africa, South America and Asia, offshore windfarms and, even though I have doubts, greater use of nuclear power would deliver major falls in CO2 emissions. Biofuels have a part to play - but not at expense of food production or forestry.
19: no, MPs are liable to the CC like everyone else. Don’t be so cynical!
They pay it and then claim it back on their expenses,any expense item for an MP below £100 does not require a receipt.
Yokel,PtP and others. How would you price up the GOP race? I will have a go.
McCain 3/1
Romney 3/1
Huckabee 7/2
Guiliani 4/1
Paul 20/1
Thompson 33/1
The Rags any price.
63 see 45 on Sean Fear’s article on Friday
63. Yes I guess Carter may actually be similar to Major, only we have a closer perspective on this side.
The thing about most leaders is just that they’re so … *political*. Can’t stand that - they should leave that to the punters!
65. The elephant in the room on the whole climate change issue is population. The world is grossly overpopulated if it is to survive in a sustainable fashion. This is even more the case if countries like China and India are to grow their economies to anything near to the levels seen in parts of South-East or South America, never mind Europe or North America.
Obviously, the problem with the analysis is that there is no easy way of reducing the population and even if there was, it would take decades to work through, which would cause the average age to rise rapidly - producing substantial problems of its own.
70. That should be South-East Asia, rather than implying areas near Surrey.
71. And the italics should have only applied to ‘Asia’. I give up.
re 67. I’m not so sure about Romney. His explanation of the Martin Luther King incident was excruciating and his continuation with attack advertising during the holiday period looks dangerous.
Giuliani has aged a lot and, given his health history, the fact that he’s been a bit ill is not going to help. I think the first phase is will now be dominated by McCain and Huckabee. If the latter wins Iowa then McCain has got to make sure that NH goes his way - and he’s reliant on Romney’s support declining.
32 - Nick Palmer MP. Re: Romney’s Clintonesque Semantics
Forgive me if I get the facts a little wrong, but my favourite semantic defence was David Willetts.
Some author of an independent report was found to be acting not so independetly of the Tory government, and he reported to the PM that “[so-and-so] wants our advice”.
This quote was leaked, and Willets insisted that by “wants” he meant “lacks”, as in “wants for our advice”! Everybody knew it was a lie, but it was quite a clever wriggle, so I think he got away with it.
I wonder what Nick Clegg thinks on the GOP nomination. Well he hasn’t been mentioned for a while.
74 see 45 on Sean Fear’s bit.
The Guardian’s regional analysis was highly intersting. Indeed maybe more significan than headline UNS. I think this is getting less and less relevant. Any analysis been done on seat implication purely on the regional analysis
47 the usefulness of January polls
There is some correlation particularly for the Conservatives prior to last 2 GEs using the average of January polls.
In 2005 the figures are
c lab ld
Jan avg 32 37 22
May GE 32 35 22
70: David ‘grossly overpopulated’ in what sense?
63.PtP. Are you really waxing lyrical about a President who secretly funded every right-wing bunch of hoodlums in South America who were prepared to take up arms against any legitimate government because they happened to have a different political ideology? (But I agree Anatole is interesting to read!)
65. Ted. Brown has tried to make a virtue of running his government without PR and admen. The result; Cameron has had a completely free ride and government problems have festered into crisis. It’s not coincidence that all successful companies spend so much on advertising and PR. They do it because it works. All Brown needed to do was read Cambell’s Diaries! Anyway I’ve no doubt that in the new year he’ll rectify this and the fightback will begin in earnest!
(PS. Just back from Almeria but working. And yes John F. Club Class because it always is. That’s the deal)
67 Did the following without looking at your numbers, StJohn…
McCain 33%
67 Did the following without looking at your numbers, StJohn…
McCain 33% 2/1
Romney 33% 2/1
Huckabee 10% 9/1
Guiliani 25% 3/1
Thompson 2% 50/1
Rags 1% 100/1
That’s pretty close to a level book, especially as nobody will want Thompson or the rags now. Note of course that I’m not offering those odds, which would be daft when I can lay cheaper elsewhere. It’s just an indication of where I think the value lies.
re 77. HF - you’ve made the common mistake of mixing up the UK vote share figure (including NI) with the GB ones. The polls are all based on the latter and the 2005 general election result was CON 33.2: LAB 36.2: LD 22.7
73. Mike. I agree. I don’t rate Romney and I haven’t got a cent on him. But I found the Pat Buchanan article someone linked to yesterday, (Me I think) quite persuasive.
My own position is very Green on McCain and Huckabee.
It seems that Guiliani and probably Romney are too short making McCain and Huckabee the value bets.
52.
I think it being the political ‘off-season’ is the point, people aren’t being swayed by this week’s newspaper headlines.
67. Looking at it positionally, I’d have Romney a touch longer. I just can’t see it at all with him and never have. Correspondingly Guiliani a bit shorter. The man can still win.
Huckabee’s position at the head of the market is deserved though I am shaking my head he’s getting the run he has.
What I’m beginning to think about Huckabee if we match him up with Bush in 2000. Bush had a lot of the religious types onboard as does Huckabee but Bush was also the GOP estblishment man whilst Huckabee is not. Thus I’m wondering if Huckabee has any more gains in him, at least while we have the full field running. The establishment votes are elsewhere and I suspect Huckabee is low on their list to transfer to as the race goes on.
US election. I would find it bizarre if that bumbling gentleman who managed to bore the blue rinses at the Tory Party Conference had anything like a 1/3 chance. 9/1 sounds much more realistic. My colleague from New York assures me it’s going to be Giuliani V Clinton and he thinks it could go either way. I’ve got my money on Huckabee. He just seems a perfect heir to Bush.
78. In the sense that I don’t see any way in which current standards of living can be maintained with the present population without using up irreplacable natural resources at a pretty rapid rate.
We have the luxury of an abundance of relatively cheap fossil fuels upon which the transport and energy sectors rely. That won’t always be the case and besides, as living standards rise, much greater pressures will be put to use these resources even faster. It’s not sustainable now and I don’t really see how it could be made so.
79 Well, as Joe E Brown said, Roger ‘Nobody’s perfect!’
Seriously though, I think I can excuse him on the grounds that he was prey to his Nation’s obsessive misunderstanding of communism, by virtue of which it was perceived as not just evil, but uniformly so.
He, like most US Foreign Policy advisers since time immemorial, failed to understand the diversity of Communism and as a consequence supported all manner of despots and dictators who were often far worse than the various Lefties opposed to them.
IMO, this has been the single biggest Forign Policy mistake of any Government since the second world war. Bit tough to blame Reagan exclusively for it. In fact, if by some miracle he had been immune, he would have got nowhere; he’d have been dismissed as a crank.
Off Topic relating to the ICM poll thread.
As I posted last night there seems something odd with recent ICM polls
So I’ve taken a look at the polls running back to ‘the election that never was’.
ICM have produced 7 polls; 4 for the Guardian and three for other papers and there is a suggestion that there is some sort of quirk in the Con/Libdem figures.
The ICM Guardian Polls give the Cons - 38,40,37,39 and the Libdems 16,18,21,18
The other three ICM Polls (Sunday Express, Sunday Telegraph, NOTW) give the Cons 43, 43,41 and the Libdems 14,15,19.
Now these poll groups have straddled each other, so chronologically the Conservative figures are: 38(G),43,40(G),43,37(G),41,39(G). To certain a certain extent the Libdem fortunes mirror this. Consequently, there seems to be a variance between the ICM Guardian polls and the other ICM polls of Conservatives 3-5% and Libdems 2-3%.
I don’t pretend to have any real idea why. Perhaps someone else has?
This gives an impression of volatility which is not anywhere near as apparent in any of the other major pollsters recent polls although there does seem to be a lesser Lab/LD volatility in the Mori polls.
Yougov, Populus and Comres all show similar relatively consistent trends - Conservative advance, Labour decline, Libdem recovery.
82 true but there is a close correlation albeit the C and LD are under forecast by 1% each and the LAB is 1% over the actual.
Which is a common occurence.
Morning all:
85-Yokel-”Traces of Bush in Huckabee’s campaigning”
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/mason/5395821.html
My projections (based on Samplemiser are):
(as of December 19)
1. Huckabee 29% 2. Romney 19% 3. McCain 17% 4. Giuliani 12% 5. Thompson 5% 6. Paul 4%
(as of December 19th - raw predictions)
1. Clinton 29% 2. Obama 26% 3. Edwards 20% 4. Biden 7% 5. Richardson 7%.
(augmented predictions to account for the caucus system)
1. Clinton 37% 2. Edwards 28% 3. Obama 27% 4. Biden 4% 5. Richardson 3%
87 David - You are a Neo-Malthusian and I claim my £5!
89 Anthony Wells has just started a thread on this very topic on his site . It is not possible to be certain but the phenomena with ICM may be caused by the sampling for the ICM Gaurdian polls being conducted on different day(s) of the week to the ICM Sunday newspaper polls . As there is generally only one Comres , Populus and Mori poll a month you would not see this sort of variation .
91. Yet again this article raises the ‘folksy’ aspect.
Its something us political snobs of Europe don’t tend to get and belittle but its a fact and it is important, particularly for the GOP.
The problem for Huckabee is that he’s going to have to go some to build the coalition that Bush did. There’s idea that Bush was swept into nomination and into the Whitehouse thanks to a bunch of bible bashers.
Those who hold this view are as ignorant and as full of crap as the people they seek to criticise. Bush built a wide enough base, twice. Huckabee, however? Don’t think so.
So the majority view of PB’s The Great and The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, naming no names, is that at current available odds Romney and Guiliani are too short, Huckabee could still be value and that McCain is too long.
PtP. Your ‘nobody’s perfect’ made me LOL! Somebody just texted me this;
Essex girl goes to the garage and tells the mechanic that her car is running badly. He fixes it in two minutes. “No problem just shit in the carburetter”
“Thanks very much. How often?”
93. Apart from the £5, I don’t think I’d argue with that.
If ukpaul or Bluemoon look in, I am off to the Villa v Man City match this afternoon. I will post my copy of the match here later. I have prepared three versions.
Yeeesss!!!
Shrug.
Sob.
97
Excellent! I have a thousand Essex jokes…thousand and one now.
97,100
Essex boy was in a filing cabinet.
Sorted.
95-”Huckabee, however?”
Don’t think so either, but he certainly can win in Iowa and in SC. He does not have an organization like Romney, but he has the support of home-schoolers and pastors in Iowa and this will help a lot in the caucus…
Blair converts in time for Christmas:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7157409.stm
94 Tks Mark for highlighting the new Anthony Wells commentary.
89 jsfl, I touched on this oddity in the ICM polls Guardian Vs Weekend yesterday which Anthony Wells writes about.
We need ICM to offer an explanation for the variances.
102. I think he’s topped out myself. He will show well all over the place but won’t win enough.
The next key question is who will be the first reasonable contender on the slate to drop out? The obvious answer is Fred and if so, where will his shares go?
92. Matthew, are your augmented predictions the percentage of state delegates each candidate might receive and if so, why would Clinton benefit so much more from the process than Obama?
105-About Fred, well, some weeks ago I ruled him out, now I’m not that sure. In Iowa, the third place is open, and he’s going to spend all month there. So I still think that he can get the third place,although I find more difficult with the McCain surge…
[70] Spot on. It puts all our collective ranting and gloating about this poll or that, this tax cut/hike or that, this scandal or that, into perspective.
Notwithstanding which, a very merry Xmas to all Peebies everywhere, of whatever political shape or colour… and their cats
99 - don’t forget tyson as well, three Man City fans divided by politics!
Ralph I have no idea of what an excessive global population is. What we do know is that the population is increasing constantly, and the expanding population demands consumption. This may be at subsistence level but everyone aspires to be better off.
The forest clearances in the Amazon and Indonesia and the burning to clear ground are the most obvious results of the expansion of population and aspiration.
Less obvious is the demand for water and the threat this poses to peace and prosperity in many parts of the world.
If the burning and clearances intensify global warming then water wars many become increasingly common as the rain will fall in line with the biblical injunction that to those that have will they receive, and those that have not will go short of water, crops and prospects.
Add to that the increase in carbon from industrialisation to meet increasing expectations and there is a risk of a perfect storm that current plans from Bali will never effect as that key change agent - increasing population - was ignored.
105 Fred’s shares surely go to McCain, don’t they Yokel?
Weren’t they buddies?
“For Clinton Campaign, Different Strategies at Play”
“And, perhaps most difficult of all, does she decide to take third place in the Iowa caucuses in order to help John Edwards win (and thereby deny Mr. Obama a potentially king-making victory in the first-in-the-nation vote here on January 3)?”
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/us/politics/21web-healy.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
111 Although I think Fred will endorse McCain, I believe his voters will be split. The original idea of the Thompson campaign was to offer a solid conservative choice, when McCain was found wanting as a maverick, so I think McCain will be lucky to get half of the Fred voters left.
94. I hadn’t realised Anthony Wells had posted but perhaps he is right that timing of the poll is a factor (with the latest poll additonally being impacted by the Christmas factor)
However, if this was the case wouldn’t it also be seen in Yougov polls? They also provide polls for multiple customers at varying times of the week or does the internet factor mainly negate the timing consideration for Yougov?
Given that this volatility is not seen in the recent Yougov polls, equally, could it be something do with either ICM’s weighting methodology (likelihood to vote) or simply the fact that the ICM polls are significantly smaller than Yougov polls and consequently just somewhat more prone to such volatility?
104. HF indeed it will be interesting to see if ICM provide an answer.
114 - One factor is when schools break up, this separate Scotland from most of England and Wales during part of the summer for example. Private schools breaking up a week early may also affect the results.
I hadn’t thought about it but yougov may be less affected as they don’t rely on the respondee being in this country.
103 - Well I was 100% wrong on Blair’s conversion date, and The Tablet was clearly better informed. It is extrememly unusual to be received into the Church on a date other than the Easter Vigil. Apologies for a poor tip on my part.
To my mind, Thompson is a no-hoper, but he has as much money as McCain and Huckabee combined at the moment, more even than Ron Paul, and trails only Giuliani and Romney in fundraising. I don’t think this gives him or Paul any better chance, but it does mean longevity in their campaigns. They can do Super Tuesday and beyond. That is what makes this primary season messy. The second tier are well funded, and the first tier are all carrying baggage. There could be six candidates still standing in April.
The Guardian today has Obama saying he would include prominent Republicans in his cabinet - Schwartznegger and Chuck Hagel are the two mentioned. If he does well, while McCain is struggling to get into better than third by April, what chances Obama would approach McCain (older, military background, campaign finance reformer) as a potential VP candidate? The two of them are the favourites of independents, and it would be a real hit on the Republicans. Again, a long shot, but there might be value there.
116 Kerry tried that no dice. I can’t believe Mccain would actually join a campaign against the GOP. He could though I see accept the Secretary Defense office if Obama offered it having won and assuming McCain did not get the GOP nomination. BTW I’ve picked you up at 45 on Fear’s Friday news
116 If you’re looking at a reprise of the Cheney/Bush tie up for the Dems and assuming the VP slot’s role tradition is that to fire up the base, Obama could do no better I think than see if he can persuade AG
Just read the following on the BBC news site and thought it was an interesting read and worth sharing after the thread on faith the other night.
Also may point at trends for the GOP nomination if the religious right are not as right as they were:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/7154551.stm
115. I hadn’t thought of the holiday dimension in those terms. Good point.
Thinking about it, the internet approach of Yougov may avoid a number of immediate factors such as holidays that could impact other types of poll. Pity the weighting methodologies are not more similar…
117/118 - Obama has the base of the Democratic Party pretty well covered. I think *his* VP candidate, as a junior Senator, must: (a) give regional balance, (b) be older, and more experienced (c) be slightly more right-wing, but appeal to Independents [McCain is all of these] (d) ideally have been a Governor, General or Cabinet Secretary (e) come from a big swing state. [McCain doesn't fit the bill on these last two].
McCain would be an interesting choice for Obama, though the safer choices for him would be Wes Clarke, Bill Richardson or Ed Rendell.
Re: Cardiff - spot on. Cardiff Central (Jenny Willets) is now one of the safest seats for the Lib Dems - not a massive majority, but an illiquid one, and responds to good local work. She probably deserved promotion, but can be flaky - Jenny Randerson would have been better for Westminster - she is wasted at the Senedd.
I think Cardiff North will swing Tory, because that’s it’s natural setting. Cardiff South is Alun Michael, and he is still quite well-liked on a personal basis. Once he retires, Labout could indeed lose it. Personally, I think the Vale of Glamorgan could swing away next time as well, if the Tories invest there.
115 “I hadn’t thought about it but yougov may be less affected as they don’t rely on the respondee being in this country. ”
Perhaps not but are they then relying upon people on their holidays going to a poolside internet cafe and filling out an online political poll ?
121 Thanks. I think Gore ticks those boxes. On the base I mean Obama has them now but he’ll need someone to do the fire breathing for them in the Campaign. And Gore would have them eating out of his hand with the memories of 200. Obama could focus on the sweet talking. The price though would surely be another uber powerful VP
Cardiff yes I think Labour will take another monstering next May putting them furher on the back foot. On the seats Cardiff North we both think its game over there already. I don’t know if you think as I do the Westminster majority could well exceed the WA majority. Cardiff South. Yes but I think the majority will take a serious knock. The interesting thing as to Labour being beaten or not eventually is whether the Tories or Lib Dems emerge as challengers, adfter the Lib Dem surge in 2005. What’s your thinking. Both have strong areas of strength Cardiff for the Lib Dems, Vale for the Tories and not too strong in the other area. Once Michael retires and I don’t see him being a Pia Khabra so it’s surely one more time only and it’ll be wide open.
That really leaves Cardiff West. I can’t see that as being vulnerable though in the medium term do you.
VoG yes quite likely although Smith will fight very hard and probably be in with a shout long after all the other (even numerically safer)vulnerable Labour seats have been taken
This is brilliant: http://www.cqpolitics.com/wmspage.cfm?parm1=28
Al Gore would never take the VP slot again. Evan Bayh or Bill Richardson are the most likely for Clinton or Obama.
Regarding the Republican nomination, McCain-Pawlenty is the one I see emerging if McCain continues his advance. I don’t see Huckabee as a prospective VP for any of the candidates bar Giuliani, who seems to be running out of steam.
124-Indeed, thanks for the link!
Yokel @ 95 re Bush’s wide base. Trouble is, Bush has ruptured the coalition of different Republican voters by disappointing them.
The religious right were bound to be disappointed on gay marriage or abortion since these aren’t really matters for the president in any case.
Small government types have seen a massive expansion of the White House.
Big government types have seen no real benefits from Bush’s social agenda.
Neocons have seen their dreams of democratising the Middle East by force turn to ashes.
Fiscal conservatives are faced with an exploding deficit.
Advocates of a strong military have seen stalemate in the Middle East and sabre-rattling from China and Russia.
Isolationists have seen an interventionist foreign policy.
Intellectuals have seen the President at best ambivalent to creationism.
The only group who have done well are the super-rich who have enjoyed substantial tax cuts.
The question for us as punters is how these different constituencies will cast their votes, and to whom they will transfer as first choices drop out?
“The question for us as punters is how these different constituencies will cast their votes, and to whom they will transfer as first choices drop out?”
You may like to read this:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/21/iowas-conservatives-unbound/#more-3434
It does not answer all your questions, but it’s a good guide…
32 - I saw that one too. I actually have a bit of sympathy with him over the “saw my father marching” claim - I think you can ’see’ something figuratively. See what I mean?
But the hunting part is just hilarious: he doesn’t own a gun or have a hunting license. Ah, that sort of lifelong hunter!
My 128 is in reply to John L at 127, but again, that’s was obvious…
123 - I would go with that. I know when the LD bandwagon last rolled into Wales it was Cardiff South that captured their attention, so I think they will inherit from Michael. Cardiff West is probably safe for a few terms yet.
I’ve never understood why VoG is safe, but it seems to be. I think if the Cowbridge vote (highest per capita income in Wales) gets engaged, Smith could see his majority stretched, but not overturned in one go.
Personally, I don;t think Gore wants to lead the celebrity golf circuit ever again. I think he has retired - he’ll campaign, as party elder, but I don’t think he is offered, or would accept, a place on the ticket.
I have to go and catch a train to Cardiff now, and don;t yet know if I’ll have internet access, so I will wish all of you a Merry Christmas just in case.
Morus
130-It should read “that was”…
67/81 stjohn & PtP - Since you respetively rate McCain as a 3-1 and 2-1 shot for the GOP nomination, I trust you’re both filling your boots with lots of 9-1 still available from Coral.
O/T Something for the Weekend Sir? Why not try, from Paddy Power:
Neither Matt nor Alesha to cry on live “Strictly” final - must be visible tears (6/4)
I know PP is Irish, but just who dreams up these bets?
99 Oh no, don’t worry about me stjohn, I’m only hanging on Villa’s every point.
tpfkar @ 119 re the religious right being more left.
Huckabee is under fire from law-and-order types for being too prone to forgiveness, and from the anti-immigration lobby for paying benefits to illegal immigrants (”I don’t understand how a practising Christian can turn his back on a child from this or any other state”).
So Blair is said to have finally gone and done it and converted to Catholism. I gues he will be missing Christmas then beacuse he will be stuck in a confessional saying Hail Marys for the next week or two over Iraq War lies
With respect, an Obama/McCain ticket is probably the most unlikely combination possible (though a recent film came close with an imaginary Clinton/Lieberman ticket). McCain and Obama completely and utterly disagree on foreign policy, along with nearly everything else. If you want to talk about a cross-party ticket talk about McCain/Lieberman or Obama/Bloomberg but Obama/McCain just sounds plain wacky.
133 Thanks PfP but my boots are full to overflowing. McCain is my biggest winner in what is looking a very nice market for me now.
PP cannot be faulted by originality and wit. If only they didn’t knock me back so much, I’d call them decent bookmakers.
131 Enjoy the trip. If you’re still there in response. Cardiff South- Interesting but thus far the Lib Dems have not cracked the Tory vote in the Vale. They did not again last May. If they can’t do that they’ll have to do it the hard way just beating Labour in Cardiff alone. But