Countdown to the primaries - the Monday selection
December 24th, 2007Leading New Hampshire paper says “No” to Romney
Given the overwhelming requirement for GOP second favourite, Mitt Romney, to get a good result in New Hampshire on January 8th the view of one of the state’s leading newspapers has to be taken seriously.
In an editorial on Romney the Concord Monitor declares: “When New Hampshire partisans are asked to defend the state’s first-in-the-nation primary, we talk about our ability to see the candidates up close, ask tough questions and see through the baloney. If a candidate is a phony, we assure ourselves and the rest of the world, we’ll know it. Mitt Romney is such a candidate. New Hampshire Republicans and independents must vote no.”
Ouch! Romney was governor of then neighbouring state of Massachusetts and a good clean victory in NH was seen as crucial. If he comes second in Iowa and fails in New Hampshire then his big might run into the ground.
What’s behind the favourite’s health scare?
One of the big stories in the past few days has been the admission to hospital overnight by the GOP favourite and former cancer patient, Rudy Giuliani. The ex-mayor of New York is under pressure anyway because of his decision not to campaign in Iowa - the first state to decide.
Many strategists are saying that his approach has been a huge strategic mistake because early band-wagons might start to roll which could be unstoppable. Click on the picture below to hear Rudi’s thoughts on how it is going.
With Giuliani appearing to struggle and the problems facing Romney I remain a Huckerbee and McCain backer.
How’s Obama going to get students to caucus?
The Obama campaign has done well appealing to young people, particularly the young in Iowa - but this doesn’t mean anything unless this support can be marshalled and enough of them flock to the caucus meetings on January 3rd. Generally these events are not successful in attracting younger votes an element that could be worse this year because many students are back home with their families - not at the place where they are registered.
A big issue in the final few days is going to be how the different campaigns can mobilise this vote. CNN had the following interesting feature - just click on the picture.
Latest betting
Hillary continues to remain a firm favourite on Betfair for the Democratic nomination although she has moved out a touch. It’s now Hillary at 0.56/1 with Obama at 2.35/1 and John Edwards on 18/1.
In the GOP race it’s Giuliani on 2.35/1; Romney 3/1, McCain at 5.2/1 and Huckabee at 5.6/1
The next US round-up will be on December 27th.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Does anyone know of a candidate who so deliberately missed Iowa and New Hampshire and banked on Florida/Super Tuesday, and won?
The closest I can think of in recent years is Al Gore in 1988, which failed.
Due to the funding system, most students go to university in the state. I would guess that the number going to the two big Iowa colleges from outside the state won’t be much larger than Iowans going elsewhere and coming home.
The Concord Monitor is only the third biggest paper in NH, and is liberal anyway. I don’t think it’s trashing of Romney is either surprising or affecting many GOP voters.
1. But Super Tuesday is so much more important this time, with about half the states involved. As long as Giuliani picks up one state (i.e. Nevada) before then, I don’t think it matters much that he won’t win states that aren’t considered his natural territory. The biggest danger in the early primaries is losing states you are expected to win.
I shall be in Nevada at the time of their primary. So will be interested to see what happens then.
From myself and Edmund:
A Merry Christmas and a happy New Year to you all.
Nollaig Subhach is Bliadhna Mhath Ur dhuibh uile.
Mike - have a mince pie and wrap the presents for the new little one!
And you can have tomorrow off too!!
3 It is more important, but the only candidates to win a nomination (for either party) post-WWII without really challenging in either NH or Iowa (second place or better) were Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and Hubert Humphrey in 1968. In both cases, this was because the sitting President pulled out after not winning the early contests (Truman & Johnson), so it was never a deliberate strategy.
I’m not saying that Giuliani can’t do it - if he wins Florida and California as well as New York, I think he is more than capable of winning it - I’m just saying that this strategy is completely untested, and it’s not like there are no other concerns (health, business dealings, and dressing in drag to kiss Mr Trump on TV).
If he wins without even contesting Iowa and New Hampshire, it will change the way strategists look at those states - Giuliani’s campaign is essentially describing their importance as overrated, and I think that means that if he gets the nomination, he will find both these swing states harder to win in a GE.
I think his must-win prior to Super Tuesday is Florida, if he won Nevada as well, I would put him back as favourite.
4 Merry Christmas, marcia!
Having backed Guiliani ages ago at 3/1 for the GOP nomination, I laid the whole bet off last week at a smallish profit. He doesn’t look well to me, and doesn’t look like a President anyway.
The dressing in drag image bothers me, although I’ve never actually seen it. Sorry, I sound a bit like Romney there. I have no objection to anyone choosing to dress however they like but it undermines the gravitas the electorate expects from a Presidential candidate.
From a betting point of view there are great opportunities in opposing a false favourite. I’m with Mike, very happy to have McCain and Huckabee running for me.
4 Enjoy your visit to Nevada, Marcia, it’s a grand place. But do not neglect your duties to PB.com. Any hot news is to be despatched here forthwith so that we can capitalise on the betting opportunities.
Btw, but forgive my ignorance - “Nollaig Subhach is Bliadhna Mhath Ur dhuibh uile.” Wasn’t that what was written inside the ring Bilbo Baggins found?
Have a great Christmas and even better new year.
6. But the primaries only attained real significance from 1972 onwards. Examples of primary strategy before that are fairly useless.
Morus. Didn’t Clinton deliberately miss Iowa and go on to win.
The value has to be McCain and Huckabee, particularly the former.
It was the West Virginia primary in 1960 that finished Humphrey and proved that Kennedy could win an overwhelmingly protestant state.
“Team Romney’s ‘Worried’ About Iowa? And ‘Petrified’ of McCain?”
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjQ3MTAxZDBjMzJjYjU1NzdlYjQwZWQ1YTg4ZTBlNDY=
Happy Christmas to all!
The “momentum” idea of an election in which different places vote at different times (like the USA primaries, or UK general elections in the old days) reminds me of two of the electoral systems I have invented:
(A) FPTP with chronological tactical voting
The election takes place all on one day, and voting is by computer. When a voter goes to vote, they enter a booth where the computer gives them a list of candidates to choose from, but also tells them that “the number of votes cast for each candidate in this constituency so far is as follows:”. The core voters for each party, who are determined to vote for their one preference regardless of how others vote, would have an incentive to vote first. The waverers, not-sures, floating voters and (most importantly) tactical voters would go to vote late and would be given reliable information for the purpose. This would avoid the problem of people voting for A in preference to B and C, but then being disappointed at the election of C by a small margin, and wishing they had voted for B in preference to C. There would be a mechanism to wipe the voter’s memory after they have voted, so that information about the results could not be leaked nationally in advance.
(B) Simultaneous voting, a.k.a. FPTP with AV characteristics
Everybody is plugged into a computer, and is asked to vote for their first preference all at the same time (within perhaps a minute or two). When the time is up, the votes are counted, and the results of the first vote are given to the voters. Some tactical voters will think “if I had known that that was going to be the result, I would have voted for B instead of A”. Everybody then votes again, with tactical voting factored into the result because of knowledge about the first result. The same process is re-iterated perhaps 6 or 8 times until the result settles down on a fixed result which is not susceptible to any further tactical changes. Thus minor parties’ votes are (mostly) transferred to the top two candidates (especially in marginal constituencies) except for a hard core of minor party voters who don’t want to choose between the top two.
A variation of system B would be to have a version of AV in which non-transferable votes are retained by the last candidate to hold them, rather than being thrown into the
rubbish binnon-transferable pile.9 - fair point, but actually serves to eliminate the two exceptions to my point, not the point itself. If we only consider primaries from the McGovern reforms of 1971 onwards, no candidate has ever won the nomination without at least seriously contesting the early nominative elections.
10 - Iowa in 1992 is an interesting one. The Gennifer Flowers scndal didn’t break until after Iowa (before New Hampshire), but I think the Clinton team knew it was coming before Iowa occurred, and were apparently dealing with that rather than campaigning in Iowa. The other complication was that an Iowa Senator was running (Harkin) so the Iowa contest was a foregone conclusion.
I think the point still stands - whilst reasonable as an urban, anti-ethanol-subsidy, woman candidate not to throw money at Iowa, and whilst reasonable as a high-tax, big government type not to expect much from New Hampshire, to avoid the initial primaries as a group looks arrogant (big states only, and Super Tuesday), and is an untested strategy. If it works for him, perhaps it could be the tipping point to instigate a change to the primary system (such as the Delaware Plan - four state-blocs in ascending order of size keep it competitive until the very end).
9 - Actually, no I’m not sure that’s entirely true. The contests on both sides in 1968 [for example] were fascinating and crucially important, just not definitive. If anything, I think the balance was best in that year - Democratic primaries that allowed for momentum and challenge, but primacy given to the Convention itself.
Also, the NH contests in 1952 and 1964 dispatched sitting Presidents - nowadays, a loss in the early primaries would be a set-back, but not fatal. I think there is a case for saying that the primaries were of real and growing significance from after WWII onwards.
For those who don’t know it, Hunter S. Thompson’s “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ‘72″ is the best account of presidential primaries and convention politics ever written.
Re Mike Smithson from the last thread at 114 “Please let it be noted that I am showing great restraint and that I have not made any comment on the postal fiasco.”
No, go on, say what you really think!
BTW has anyone got a web link?
Yes, Hunter Thompson’s tome is a classic BUT anyone using it as a roadmap for 2008 better start hitting the medicine chest pronto . . .
And NH 1964 did NOT dispatch LBJ, that was NH 1968 which he actually “won” but was so badly handled that he really did lose it . . . in more ways than one!
Getting back to the current election cycle: Lots of very interesting SPECULATION on this blog, but unfortunately very little hard REPORTAGE from the front. Personally tried to inject some input from actual Democratic campiagn insiders BUT for my humble effort was pooh-poohed . . . in favor of more speculation!
And have yet to see ANY inside stuff from ANY of the Republicans? Don’t you know anyone who actually knows something across the pond, Mike? Or any of you other punters?
For next best thing, check out Adam Nagourney’s front page story in today’s NYT “Giuliani Hits a Rocky Stretch as Voting Approaches” which describes angst of Rudy’s campaign insiders (likely the national GOPers isolated by the Giuliani’s New York gang).
ONCE AGAIN I SAY UNTO YOU that you are seriously overestimating the problems facing ROMNEY. For example, the “anti-endorsement” you (and virtually every other media outlet on earth) highlight today. Clearly at effort to throw a monkey wrench in the Mitt Machine. BUT you appear unaware of the fact that New Hampshire voters have been reading about Mitt in their newspapers AND seeing him on their TV screens FOR YEARS. So anti-endorsement is a blow but not as near as serious as you might think AND should help depress expectations for Mitt which is a bit of a plus actually.
And can ANYBODY tell me why HUCKABEE apparently STILL cannot raise significant campagin cash . . . while folks continue to empty their wallets for RON PAUL????
OF course a sizeable chunk of whatever the Huck DOES manage to raise is going right into the bank account of . . . wait for it . . . ED ROLLINS. Now ask yourself this question: if the guy who is supposed to take charge of you campaign hasn’t won anything worth mentioning since 1984 (when Rollins did RR’s reelection, which wasn’t what you’d call heavy lifting) then WHERE does that leave his client???
Happy Cristmas to all on Pb.com
Very best wishes to everyone at PB.com and have a peaceful Christmas.
Merry Christmas to all of the pbc community!
(Signing off until Boxing Day)
18. Sea Shanty Irish. Some of us the other day suggested our best estimate of the odds/percentage chances of the various GOP candidates to get the GOP nomination. Care to have a go? Also Socrates? And Mike from NJ, who already has done this, an updated assessment would be welcome.
18 - Sorry SeaShantyIrish, it was indeed 1968 (I said dispatched not lost for a reason though!).
For the record - Dr Thompson’s book should absolutely NOT be used as a gambling guide - however, it will, if you follow the recipes, make election night even more fun than usual…
All the people I know on US campaigns are too junior to know anything useful for punters, and I imagine anyone senior enough would either remain tight-lipped or would be selling a line for a reason so couldn’t be trusted. What morsels do you have for our delectation?
On Huckabee, I posted this a couple of threads ago - Huckabee didn’t even get limited match funding, meaning either his campaign finance team are useless, Huckabee doesn’t want taxpayer subsidies, or he is simply not trying. Chris Dodd got $1.5m - that’s half Huckabee’s cash on hand. Forgive the speculation, but maybe he’s angling for VP. This time around the GOP is going to be faced with a tough, clever, well-funded Democrat, and a dispirited Republican base. Why not take the VP slot, and be the potential presumptive next time around?
http://www.fec.gov/press/press2007/20071207cert.shtml
“Clinton, Obama Are Odds-on Picks for Presidency: Albert R. Hunt ”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601039&sid=algv3pgbObzk&refer=home
Oh, BTW, merry Christmas everyone!
23 - OK, here goes nothing:
Romney = 1.5 to 1
Huckabee = 3 to 1
Giuliani = 4 to 1
Thompson = 5 to 1
McCain = 6 to 1
Hunter or Dark Horse (except Newt) = 10 to 1
Gingrich = 100 to 1
Paul = 100 to 1
Shanty
I think the problem for Romney is simple and it underlies all the talk about him. It’s a phrase I came out with ages ago about McCain and has applied to a few in the GOP race since.
Fragile.
No one, I believe, thinks Romney should be a 10/1 chance in fact most punters still have him as a front runner but think he is over rated on his current price. In addition the story is in the early primary polls. In NH his lead is being eaten away by McCain. A few weeks ago Romney was double digits up, just as he was the boss in Iowa. In one he’s lost his lead, in another the main oppositon is closer than ever and Romney so far hasnt been able to reverse those movements to any effect, yet (and it can always change). Iowa looks lost and NH? I still think he’s marginal favourite to win it but even if Romney firms up later a fairly straight and logical strategy is to wait until at least Iowa where it looks likely he will lose at this point, then see if his odds drift to get on him.
If you are suggesting that there is groupthink on Romney based on a series of headline articles and a this side of the Atlantic bias you may well be right, thats a problem but people can, as you have, made up your own mind.
Equally for all the coalface talk, the predictions on McCain’s revival were led by a bloke from from that place in the heart of America, Norway. Few gave the old goat a prayer at one stage. The bloke from Norway was right and it took a few of us a short space of time to see the point and some of us longer. But i know some people are sitting on profits.
Thompson is another case in point. There was a strong thread from a few punters that Thompson’s high point was potentially his launch and after that he was going down and so it proved. Again, it was educated speculation and theorising based on what many saw from a distance. Again, some made good money out of it.
As for Huckabee, I am not sure many think he’ll get the nomination. I believe he is topping out and won’t make the stretch required to win. But he looks possibly like still being there at the end with a punchers chance so his odds could still reprsent some value though I’ve taken him a bit earlier and left him because I don’t think he’s a winner.
One final thing about the GOP. Some people do have contacts. I know of one poster who has a GOP contact who has proved very useful. The poster in question doesn’t want to raise that in their postings in case it over-biases people. Inside contacts arent everything they are cracked up to be as I’m sure you know. Not all the views of the poster correspond with the thinking of their GOP contact but where they do it is posted as straight points for consideration.
Mind you, point taken, Romney is most definitely not dead but he is under threat in NH. If he loses there I suspect the media will dump on him from a height and the average GOP member is just as prone to influence from those channels as anyone else.
Since there is some inside knowledge on the Democrats. A quick aggregated review would be welcome, again.
SeaShantyIrish - Were you referring to Joy and Russ Lowe the other day? Edwards was the first candidate to recruit a precinct captain in each of the 99 counties in Iowa (announced on June 12th of this year). They are the two from Waterloo in Black Hawk county - you described them as the very best?
Many of us have suggested that Edwards has an organisational edge in Iowa from 4 years ago, but are not close enough to know the precise impact of many of the individuals involved. What can you tell us?
Sorry, above was response to #22
#23 - ANYTHING that someone actually working for a campaign says is grist for the mill - trick is to be able to relay it WITHOUT compromising sources!
Only tidbit I have is that mood in top echelons of Clinton campaign is pretty ugly. BUT you really didn’t need a source to know THAT, did you? More to the point, key HC insiders think Iowa is lost cause; some are devoting month of December to blameshifting (from themselves to someone else); while others are working on New Hampshire firewall. Which again would seem to be Campaign 101. BUT then again some honchos faked their way through THAT class. Or more likely, they hit the Peter Principle at some critical stage.
Saw brief report re: Hilary braving the elements to attend “sparsely attended” meeting at Black church in Waterloo which is major concentration of African Americans. Tripping down memory lane, remember my own visit to (what I think is) the same church, back in Jan 1988 when JESSIE JACKSON paid a visit. On that occassion it was standing room only.
Yet another item (in NYT) was about fact that Chris Dodd & family are spending Christmas in Iowa. One issue of great concern to CD’s young daughters (age 6 & 2) was, how is Santa Claus going to find us in Iowa? Solution: post a sign under the chimney back home in Connecticut alterting Santa to the temporary change of address!
Yokel, so that leaves giuliani?
#28 was only using Black Hawk Co as theoretical example.
Conventional wisdom on Edwards (which his campaign has worked hard at) is just as you say: very well organized with Hawkeye grassroots. Which makes sense IF he was truly able to build upon his 2003-04 efforts. BUT is this real or hype?
#27 - Personally have a VERY hard time thinking that that McCain’s December surge is not really signs of three things:
1) Yo-yoing of GOP polling numbers by an electorate that has been and remains PROFOUNDLY dissatisfied with its presidential options;
2) Short-term tactical success of The Surge, which makes JMcC look like a profit AND diminishes the direct impact of the War as an issue;
2) Last bloom of a beautiful but dying flower, much beloved by journos BUT sadly greatly despised by many (perhaps most) actual GOP insiders AND activists; believe me these guys would rather LOSE the presidency that risk winning with what the regard as a rogue candidate (similar to the spirit that renominated TAFT in 1908, how’s THAT for a blast from the past!)
In short, McCain’s lazurus-like rehabilitation says more about the weakness of the rest of the field than his own strengths.
Same is true for Romney EXCEPT that his baggage is not so severe. Is essential 1) Mormonism and 2) pragmatic ambition. And my view is that the first is not as big a problem as it looks; while the second is no problem at all!
Marcia 4; one Celtic seasons greeetings surely demands another, in the language of the angels
Nadolig Llawen a Blwyddyn Newydd Da i chi gyd
27 You make excellent point (you are always doing that kind of thing, I notice) that what works for political BETTORS may well be different from what works for us poltical GEEKS.
While the two categories are not mutually exclusive (just ask our esteemed landlord) there IS a fundamental difference, methinks.
And JAN of NORWAY was on-the-money to spot that the funeral orations over the corpse of the late great John McCain (including my own) were somewhat premature . . .
BUT GOP politicos hate three things much worse than sin, or even Hilary: surprises, wiseguys and most especially insurgents.
Which is why methinks JMcC’s wake is postponed but NOT indefinitely.
29/31 I keep hearing that the Clinton Camp is in circular firing squad mood as well, but I (perhaps cynically) assumed that was all part of the ‘managing expectations’ phase (”2nd place is a successful outcome for a woman in Iowa” etc). Have you noticed how many papers/blogs have referred to Iowa’s inability to pick women for electoral office in the last week?!
Give you rate Romney’s chances better than many on this site, did you have a view on the Brokered Convention odds (about 4-1 for the GOP)?
After seeing “so” many posts about American politics, I decided to post one too
First, I believe that Huck can win in Iowa, and probably will, but it’s going to be close, because Romney has a really good organization.After that Romney will be weak, and McCain will be even more strong in NH, so McCain win there. The next primary will take more than one week, so McCain will have to hold his “momentum”, the question is: Can he?. After that it’s almost impossible to know what will happen, because we don’t know how the press will react to these facts, we don’t know if there’s going to be any more facts, and certainly don’t know who will be in the race. I have seen many here(including me) saying that Thompson is out, but a strong third place in Iowa, can put him back(not to win) and he has the money to carry on.
On the Democratic side, I believe that Edwards can win in Iowa, he has everything that he needs, except endorsements!If Clinton is behind Obama, then she will probably lose in NH, but we should not forget that the woman who presided the local Democratic pary is part of the Hillary campaign, and this can help a lot. The rest everyone knows,if Hillary wins any of other primaries before the Super Tuesday, then she will be the “Comeback Kid”, and everything can change again!
Sorry for the long post and again Merry Christmas!
Sea Shanty
Thanks for some typically interesting and thought-provoking posts.
Obviously it’s helpful to have reports from close to the action, but that’s not everything and can even be a bit dangerous. We recently had Alexander of Australia reporting on Howard’s campaign from somewhere very close to the PM’s hip pocket, but even so us hairy-arsed old punters still had to exercise a bit of caution. In Alexander’s case, his problem was that he bent over backwards to be objective and actually finished up overstating his man’s difficulties.
Applying to the GOP Nomination all the wit and wisdom of many decades hanging around the UK’s many insalubrious betting establishments, I should say it’s surprising to see a leading candidate, such as Romney, haemorrhage support in the polls so close to an election. Then of course there’s the man himself. It’s not the Mormonism - I never bought that line - but you would never mistake him for Santa Claus. He kind of comes across like a clean-shaven Richard Nixon. Sorry, but I wouldn’t buy a second-hand policy from him.
Then again, there’s the head-to-head polls. They are all saying - shouting even - the same thing. McCain gives the Democrat candidate the hardest run, whoever that candidate is. That has to be worth something.
I don’t know who wins this one any more than you do - suspect it’s McCain, but maybe Huckabee. I have all four bases covered though, just in case.
If it’s Paul, I come over personally to eliminate the guy.
Merry Christmas! (Or should it be ‘Happy Holidays’? Makes you puke, doesn’t it? )
36 Yeah, it’s not just who wins, Me, it’s by how much. Hillary and Mitt can both survive narrow defeats, but a huniliation is a different matter.
All very tricky, all very good for punting!
Christmas wishes to you too.
Peter, am honored to accept ANY greetings you care to broadcast for ANY winter solstice holiday . . . especially those around the globe that get little kids all excited . . . am guessing that includes 99.46% of pb.com adicts!
AND to cover all the bases . . .
. . . FESTIVUS FOR THE REST OF US!
Shanty
The great irony is that McCain is in so many ways classic old Republican stuff, small government, low taxes, strong defence and so on. In 2000, Bush was the establishment man who also happened to have the religious right well organized and onboard.
This time who is the GOP establishment man…Romney? Guiliani, Thompson even? It certainly isn’t Huckabbe.
30. Guiliani is having a bit of a poor patch at the moment and really he is the one shedding support most alarmingly in some states, not Romney. Obviously because Romney was leading in the two early states the focus has been on him and the rise of his opponents but Guiliani’s position is just as ugly in some areas.
I can’t, however rule Guiliani out at this stage at all because he still has the front runner position in plenty of places. The only two I would rule out with some solidity are Thompson & the horridfically bad public speaker that is Ron Paul. If pushed I’d rule out Huckabee as well. I had the pleasure of watching the GOp debate in Florida whilst in the state and it became obvious why Huckabee has appeal. Very amiable man who comes across very well. But this is not 2000. Huckabee may have much of the religious vote behind him and some other strands but theres large parts of the party that he doesnt seem to be carrying and I can’t see him doing in the end up.
McCain is both someone I like but worry about, Already his shortening odds have made me money and I think he has a shot but he’s got to take NH, and thats according to his own strategists. Thats a tough task.
As regards the Democrats, I started off backing Edwards and laying Hilary with a strategy set out here a hundred times. Hilary is at last hitting the bumps in a big way. As for Edwards…..
The one final thing I would say is that pone of the two, if not both parties is going to plump for a person they feel can win in the real race for the Whitehouse, someone who can build the coalition of voters needed.
Huckabee proposing a 23% Sales Tax, and abolition of all other federal taxes and the IRS:
http://www.latimes.com/la-na-salestax24dec24,0,5286232.story?coll=la-home-center
The conservatives at the Brookings Institute think it’s a crackpot plan, but there are clearly plenty of people who like the idea. I am prepared to consider any idea which re-introduces the word ‘jackalope’ into political discourse.
Merry Christmas all!
OT. The other day there wasa quiz question about the Conservative Party gaining two seats in general elections from 3rd place. One was Lincoln 1979; what was the other?
Some great posts, especially from Yokel. I have made this point before but will offer again. If the Republicans want to win then they should go for McCain. No one else looks like a possible winner against either Clinton or Obama.
Whether the vagaries of the US Primaries allow for this reality to be recognised and expressed electorally I don’t pretend to know.
38-Merry Christmas to you too, PtP!
41-Morus:
“Tax lunacy”
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/tim_watkin/2007/12/tax_lunacy.html
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/quin_hillyer/2007/12/the_republican_party_all_hucked_up.html
Very OT - Orange have banned this website for all payg mobile customers, unless you go a public phone shop and ask to be allowed to view ‘adult content’, or provide them with credit card details. What a joke, I have been trying to view pbc all day…
44. Believing in a flat tax isn’t loony. Believing in scrapping income tax is.
42 - Montgomery????!!! Super Delwyn!!!
24. 3/1 Clinton seems generous. A shame he’s legally prohibited from laying those prices.
Some great posts here tonight. Believe it or not, the best backed runner over the last two days has been ….. Ron Paul at 14/1. To win the whole thing. Happy Christmas.
Yokel, you hit the nail on the head when you talk about nominee(s) capable of building the necessary coalition to achieve victory next November.
From that perspective, note that the two candidate who’ve actually achieved this in the not-so-distant past are:
OBAMA who won US Senate from Illiniois in 2004 with 70%, including strong backing from suburban GOP & Independent voters in “collar counties” around Chicago; and
ROMNEY who was elected Gov of Mass in 2002 by 5% margin of victory, by maintaining coalition of Republicans, Independents and Democrats alienated by Dem statehouse establishment.
Note that Biden, Dodd, McCain, Giuliani and even Huckabee can all lay claim to significant bipartisan support at some point in their electoral and/or legislative career. Something Edwards, Richardson, Kucinich, Thompson or Paul (except the latter right now thanks to his anti-war stance) have a much harder time doing (though am sure their press people could give it the old college try).
BUT only Romney and Obama have demonstrated their ability to put together a winning voter coalition in a top targeted, highly competitive big state race. (Leastways MA ‘02 and IL ‘04 started out that way; and Mass is a big enough state thanks to Boston.)
OF course in both contests they clearly had the wind at their backs. FOR example, the Dems made a boneheaded challenge of Romney’s Mass residency, despite the fact he was a bonafide inhabitant; while Obama was not only the beneficiary of a state GOP corruption meltdown AND the self-destruction of his Dem AND GOP opponents.
Which means that both Mitt & Barack are lucky guys . . . and reckon I don’t have to tell you guys how THAT is a very handy thing in politics . . .
Re: Rudy Giuliani, if you remember he funked running against Hilary Clinton for US Senate on health grounds in 2000. Hardly shocking if he funks out again for health reasons in 2008.
Wheras think we can safely say that neither Hilary nor John McCain will EVER give in before they are well & truly beaten. And even then wouldn’t be too sure!
49 Any idea why, Shadsy?
There seems to be no objective reason whatever for regarding Paul as anything other than a fringe candidate. His poll returns suggest he should be closer to 100/1 and not very good value at that. His political programme appears to designed to appeal only to the most marginal elements of the electorate.
Where’s the money coming from?
Re 51, Peter the Punter, BTW, Merry Christmas and thanks for organising the party!
Merry Christmas to all persons and cats on pb.com!
Peter, see below for last page listing itemized receipts from latest Ron Paul for President filing with FEC:
http://disclosure.nictusa.com/cgi-bin/dcdev/forms/C00432914/312938/sa/ALL/2
Found this googling “fecinfo” which used to be indepenedent website but is now apparently tied in with Congressional Quarterly, see new link:
http://moneyline.cq.com/pml/home.do
Without hindrance of actual analysis, feel that Paul is getting his bucks by tapping into stratum of high-tech or related professionals (or people with this outlook) who have some disposable income, are interested in politics & political issues BUT are alienated, discouraged or simply untouched by two major parties. Based on Seattle reality (any fuzziness may be on your own screen) not a few Dems are giving Paul the odd greenback, in part because he affirms that there is at least ONE Republican who isn’t a neo-con-artist . . .
51. No idea Peter. We’ve racked up really quite a large liability against him, and it’s all on the outright market rather than the GOP nomination. I suppose you’ve got a possible run as an independent on your side if you back him, but as you say the price doesn’t seem very appealing given all known evidence.
It’d be great if it was a Huhne-type operation to shorten his price. I guess he’s got to spend all that money somewhere. And presumably he’ll legalise gaming when he’s in office. Everyone’s a winner!
Shadsy, is there any info on the average size of bets for Ron. Because I think that when it comes to his campaign contributions, he is almost certainly posting a low average contribution, meaning he’s getting relatively small (but also replenishable) amounts for a large pool of donors. Was wondering if there might be something similar with the betting?
Happy Christmas all pb’ers. Just got all the pressies wrapped for the little ones and catching up.
On the betting front, some mad Iowa polls from ARG (who have a rep for this) have moved the intrade primary markets, especially on the Dem front where they have Hillary at 34%, Edwards 20% and Obama only 19%!
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/iarep8-715.html
http://americanresearchgroup.com/pres08/iadem8-715.html
Shadsy, that 50/1 you’re offering for Obama less than 20% looks interesting now, though this is probably a rogue poll.
Thanks Shads/Sea Shanty for the help, but it still doesn’t solve the riddle, although it’s interesting that the bets are largely for outright winner rather than GOP nomination.
I guess we won’t know for sure until the Nominees are known, if then.
It isn’t going to keep me awake tonite though. And that’s all from me for now folks. It’s nearly Christmas!
Best wishes to you all.
PtP @ 51 re Ron Paul. “Where’s the money coming from?” is the key question and answer.
Ron Paul (or his supporters) has been raising huge amounts of cash via the web. Anyone watching the FEC returns or just surfing the web will have an inflated idea of Ron Paul’s chances.
Paul is the anti-Bush Republican candidate, opposed to the Iraq war and to big government in general.
It is not impossible he will spring a surprise. Polls already show him creeping into fourth place despite being largely ignored by the MSM.
50. McCain is probably more popular among Democrats than Republicans.
56. Sea Shanty, as you know it’s a relatively small number of us who are interested in punting on these things to be honest. But of those who are getting involved, the Paul fans are the ones putting the bigger stakes in. We’re talking bets of hundreds rather than thousands. It’s starting to add up to a big figure though.
57. Caveman, it won’t take much to change that price. Especially if it’s your money.
Merry Christmas to all punters and party hacks.
60.Which tends to support my point that he is the most electable Republican.
If Peter Jacques is about, merry xmas and the same to one and all.
Damn Santa delivery. I paid extra for a premium service where he was meant to deliver between midnight and 1am….I’m still waiting.
Ever since it was outsourced to TNT it just hasn’t been the same…
Ah well, no doubt I’ll pop on here tomorrow once the clan gathering is over. Until then have a good day and for those who don’t do god, think yourselves lucky you are getting time off…
64. Did you not get a good part in the nativity play at school? I would have thought you would have made a good shepherd, but some of the sheep might have been traded at an appropriate price?
Merry Christmas everyone and wishing you and your families a peaceful and prosperous new year (with emphasis on the prosperous).
Just back in from church and a happy Christmas to all.
p.s. I trust that in this season of goodwill all the MP readers of this site will instantly see the inflationary drawbacks of their 2.8% pay rise and vote overwhelmingly in solidarity with the NHS, local government, teachers, civil servants, police and armed forces to introduce it in stages. After all it matters not a jot that the level was determined by an independent review body.
Happy Christmas to all PBCers.
57. Just for the record, American Research Group (ARG) is trash. Don’t even bother looking at their polls; the only guarantee is that the candidates are within 30 points of where ARG puts them. Yes, 30. (The odds of Obama and Edwards being down at 20 and 19 in Iowa are so staggeringly small that my point should be immediately proven.)
ARG has a proven record of overestimating certain candidates for long periods of time, then suddenly switching. They had McCain leading South Carolina well into the summer while everyone else had him in third by July; similarly, they had Giuliani leading Iowa long after everyone else showed double-digit Romney leads. (There are no great examples of this for the Democrats, mainly because the Democratic race has been much less fluid in terms of candidates rising and falling.)
Giuliani made it very well-known that he was reading Christmas stories to poor children in Harlem (in New York City) today. He should really lay off on trying to seem like a nice guy; he just isn’t, and it’s not something he can run on. (Honestly, repugnant though it may be, sticking to the message of “9/11″ is probably his best strategy.)
A new poll in New Hampshire from the University of New Hampshire shows Obama leading Clinton by 2; this is significant because UNH is easily the most reliable New Hampshire pollster and they had Clinton up by 12 last week, though that was likely a rogue (as they had Clinton up by 3 or 4, can’t quite recall, the week before that, and the 12-point lead was confirmed only by ARG while contradicted by various others who showed a close race the whole time).
Really very much a waiting game in these elections now; campaigning has died down for Christmas and probably will only fire up slightly thereafter. Although they’re worth mentioning, I wouldn’t trust polls from a few days ago until after New Year’s, which means we may go into Iowa with no good polling at all (though I’m sure someone will conduct a poll on 2 January).
Anyway, Merry Christmas to you all.