The Iowa result dominates the UK “broadsheets”
January 5th, 2008
The betting markets stick with Hillary - just
The UK national dailies that used to be called “the broadsheets” get their first chance this morning to dissect Thursday night’s events in Iowa and they devote page after page to the outcome.
If there is any UK political news about it’s hard to find and clearly there’s going to be a high level of interest until well after the New Hampshire outcome on Tuesday night. Whatever the results in the “granite state” the US primaries look set to overshadow domestic developments. Nick Clegg’s first PMQ performance as Lib Dem leader is hardly going to bump a “Obama moves firmly into pole position” or a “Hillary come-back” story off the front pages or in the bulletins.
The one UK move that looks set to get some more attention is likely to be the first national opinion poll of 2008 - expected to be the Populus January survey in the Times on Tuesday.
Across the Atlantic commentators are waiting for the first post-Iowa polls on both the Democratic and GOP battles for the nomination. If the Democratic ones show an Obama boost that could well be a key factor in Tuesday’s voting in New Hampshire. Mike Huckabee’s win for the Republicans in Iowa is getting big coverage and looks set to push him up in the GOP surveys.
What will be interesting are the “head-to-heads” - where polling respondents are asked to rate prospective Democrat and GOP candidates against each other. If Obama is doing markedly better then Hillary that could be make the long-standing front-runner’s task even harder.
There’s still a long way to and the Betfair favourite for the Democrats continues to be Clinton at 0.87/1 compared with Obama’s 1.26/1. John McCain has now edged Giuliani out of his favourite slot in the Republican betting.
The UK betting is marginally more pro-Hillary than the IEM political futures exchange in the US and the US-focussed Irish betting exchange, Intrade. Bother have it at about 50% Clinton to 45% Obama
White House Race Links. Thanks to all those who have made suggestions to our new US election links section - see bottom of column on the right.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
249. Thanks for the link but I’m not sure how accurate that was. I know Hitler wanted to incorporate the Netherlands into the Reich, as he considered them ethnic Germans. I’m also under the impression he wanted to take a large chunk of Northeast France for German settlement.
Off topic I know but after the recent loss of data re child benefit and the rest here we have this
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7172440.stm
O/T According to an interview with the Telegraph, Ed Balls strongly suggests that the general election will be in eighteen months time.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=ZYJ3NJOORFIKRQFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0?xml=/news/2008/01/05/nballs105.xml
Hilary booed at big NH dinner twice Sounds like Obama supporters are out in force already…
Clinton and Edwards seem to have gone very negative in the last 24 hours. I can’t think that this is a good way of them countering the threat. Obama has to be careful though too, given how his supporters seem to be joining in.
This NY Times article is also v pro-Obama, highlighting all sorts of problems in the Clinton camp. The timing of the NH primary is looking very good for him - the press seem to have swung right behind him for now.
It also seems that there’s a Dem debate tonight in NH, which could now be of some importance.
Obama’s father was a Kenyan asian, and his mother from Irish protestant stock. Both rare in the US; no ‘natural constituency’ there.
I read on pb.com as recently as over the deputy leader of GB’s govt how important a resonating ‘back story’ was. Does this just work in this country, or were we talking bollocks to each other?
NH should be won by Obama given his lead among independents. What remains to be seen whether he can convert this to a lead among registered Democrats to take any more primaries where Clinton has a lead and independents have no vote.
OT — people are beginning to wake up to the dangers of mercury in low energy light bulbs, hitherto a panacea for global warming.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7172662.stm
Hillary Clinton will, of course, be hoping a large factor in Obama’s Iowa victory was that state’s sexism (or, perhaps, that Iowan voters were offended by her camp’s making that claim).
3 - Ed Balls might think there will be an election in spring 09, but he was not listened to over the election that never was so what is the chance he will be listened to on this one.
11. Possibly, but May 2009 has a good ring to it from a party point of view. It would keep the four year cycle going thereby creating a sense of control and business as usual. Plus it would tie in with local and European elections which while not a primary concern, is a bonus to the party.
Ultimately I think Brown must really fear waiting until the last minute, particularly after this autumn’s non-election. By hinting about it now Balls keeps a sense that the election isn’t actually that far away and I think the Brownites like to use this for keeping party discipline. But in my gut it sounds absolutely right. I’d make a May-June 09 election an even money occurance.
4: If I were American that sort of cocky behaviour by the Obama people would really put me off, but I like the Clintons so maybe I’m biased. Objectively it’s clear that Obama is on a media roll, and that should get him some good polls in the coming days both for the nomination and in potential match-ups with GOP candidates - I can’t see Clinton staying as favourite for long. At some point Obama will be tested, though, and we’ll see if the mood endures.
Paddy Power now have Obama priced at 4/7 to win New Hampshire.
Prior to staking £8,000 to win £11,000 yesterday I did suggest the price would tightrn to 8/15.
If Obama wins New Hampshire then it’s all over for Clinton’s to be the Democratic nominee.
Mike’s ante post wagers look very good indeed
7 David There is also the often-quoted idea that “majority populations” seem to become biased against “minorities” when they are large enough to have some sort of influential effect. When, as in the case of Obama, there are not lots of Kenyan Asian descendants or Irish Protestants, they tend to be looked on more favourably. Perhaps this can tie in with your “backstory’ concept to make an attractive candidate to all in the US. Ironically, visiting Kenya many years ago in the time of Daniel Arap Moi), I was told that he was an attractive president because he came from an ethnic base outside the main “competitors”.
Also to say, if this sort of stuff is reported big, publicly, it is my experience that most people say “We just want the best person for the job” - and I notice many Kenyan sources rubbishing the idea that the current troubles result from an ethnic conflict base. We see the same here when suggestions of positive discrimination in favour of any group are made!
13. Happy New Year Nick.
14. 4/7 sounds absurdly short. Surely the margin of victory between Clinton and Obama in New Hampshire is pretty important since it’s clear Edwards isn’t going to be in the top two?
7,15 Kenyan Asian? Are you sure? I thought he was a Luo, the main opposition group in the current Kenyan unrest. Not that I’ve taken a great deal of interest in the matter so I may be talking out of the wrong end.
12 Your (and Ed Balls’s) view of a May 2009 election plan seems to gain additional support from the fact that a regulation has recently ben passed IIRC, to allow local elections to be switched to Euro Day (June 2009). This would seem to be a regulation allowing clearing the decks. I must say, though, I have always believed Labour will still find it politically v difficult to call a GE in the shadow of the Euros. I do not agree with your contention “it will bring a bonus” to GB. In my view it would cede victory to the Tories, and that although they are still “thinking about it”, ultimately they will go for May 2010, now they have ruled this May out. Ironically had there not have been all the noise about Autumn last year, I still think May this year would have been a strong possibility. 2010 gives the LDs considerable recovery chances, 2008 would have been quite difficult.
13: One interesting point is how much of the media criticism hitting Clinton is coming from more right-leaning sources. Drudgereport has been very hostile in recent days. The right really do hate Clinton in a way that they don’t hate Obama.
18. I meant from a turnout point of view it’d be a bonus. Our voters seem to be much harder to turnout for local and european elections on their own. With a general election we do much better on getting our vote out. I don’t know if that is just my observation in the North East, but it seems to have been the case up here for years.
I think if the Euro elections coincided with the general election then the usual Westminster issues would dominate and Europe would take a backseat. I don’t think Cameron is on firm ground yet with regards to Europe and won’t want to be banging on about it during a general election like his predecessors.
7 Obama is not of Kenyan Asian stock - he’s black African on his fathers side ( he was a Luo). As for Irish protestants, the Scots Irish (Ulstermen) settled the Appalachian mountains across Virginia, Arkansas, Tennessee and Kentucky and there’s surely nothing more American than Bluegrass and Country music?
…and the government’s conclusion from the NR debacle is to give more power to the FSA, the most derided and out of touch institution in the City. You couldn’t make it up.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/01/05/cnboe105.xml
17 I was merely quoting from David at Post 7. I have had a look at someone’s genealogy on Google, and it is not really clear. I think the only clear thing is that he has a very mixed ancestry on his father’s side, and plenty of travel in Asia etc is involved. He is certainly not the descendant of a family which came and stayed in any one ethnic area. Interesting is his family’s and his own hawaiian connection.
Do any economists on here think that there is any prospect whatsoever of Brown pushing for Britain’s entry into the Euro during his time as Prime Minister?
On Obama’s website, (see below) it says his father came from a small village in Kenya, so its unlikely he’s Asian. His background his certainly very diverse, and totally different from most, ‘Black Americans’
http://www.barackobama.com/about/
20 I am sure you are right about turnout, Henry. But the “banging on” will be media-led, not Cameron-led, which will allow him to benefit without having to say too much about the issue himself. I am sure he has learnt that much from his predecessors!
[17] You may be right in Obama’s racial background. The phrase ‘African American’ usually refers to those of negro extract (all the slaves taken were negrooes?). There was a case of a white South African who claimed he was an ‘african american’, which caused him grief.
Maybe our future king’s degree subject of anthropology will become fashionable again.
24 No - sorry, I am not an economist, but unless a major recession or other event necessitates him breaking with all his past, no.
24 didnt he promise a referendum on euro entry?
White House Race Links. Thanks to all those who have made suggestions to our new US election links section - see bottom of column on the right.
Mike there have been quite a lot of head to heads done. The consensus is that Edwards performs the best out of all the Democrats and McCain performs the best out of all the Republicans. Clinton leads most of the Republicans (except McCain) but even a crank like Ron Paul (!) gets about 38% in a matchup with her. Polling Report (www.pollingreport.com) has the head-to-heads in its free section.
John Wilkes @ 19 re Hillary being bashed by the right.
Yes, Virginia, there really is a great, right-wing conspiracy.
Although Obama is a brilliant orator who sounds radical, his policies are decidedly anaemic. If the right-wing billionaires can’t have a Republican President, Obama looks least likely of the Democrats to endanger their bank balances.
21. The Scots-Irish are NOT rare in the US. In the Midwest and the South (esp states like Virginia, W Virginia) they are a (relatively) large group.
16.
Agreed 4/7 is a very short price but I think it will tighten up more.
If Clinton loses NH it would appear that she is out of the race for the White House.
Advice as to how she can win NH, my view is a catastrophe for the Clinton camp,but as Mike says “a long way to go”
Hillary Clinton
Go negative “She’s going to have to tear Obama down,” said Dr. David King, of the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. If Ms. Clinton has any chance of breaking Mr. Obama’s stride, she needs to take him out at the knees. But her campaign has made previous disastrous attempts to fling mud, including the suggestion by her New Hampshire campaign co-chair that Republicans would exploit Mr. Obama’s past drug use. To avoid the backlash that comment stirred, Dr. King believes Ms. Clinton, and her husband, will avoid character attacks but intensify their criticism of Mr. Obama’s ability to lead. “Either that’s going to work, or it’s going to be a catastrophe,” Dr. King said. “But I don’t see what other choice she has.”
32 — talking of American right-wing pressure groups funded by billionaires, I’d expect to see attacks on Huckabee stepped up.
Huckabee may be an ex-preacher but he read his bible backwards, starting with the Sermon on the Mount: helping the poor and all that. It is fashionable to knock American Christians but in my limited experience they are often extraordinarily generous people. In short, Huckabee is not on a mission from God to cut income tax for the super-rich.
33
Isn’t it true that the majority, (or close to) of US Presidents have had Scots/Irish, (Ulster) ancestors?
MIKE , The comments counter seems to be inactive. When I looged on it looked as tho noone had posted a comment yet
36 - doubt it. America has largely been run by English episcopalians as far as I can see.
36.
Yes, you are correct. I meant to refer to 7’s not 21’s comment.
24. The rational answer would be no. But given Brown’s erratic and politically suicidal decision making so far, who knows?
24,40 re Euro entry — the long answer is that, like Mrs Thatcher and the ERM, it may depend on whether he is pressured into it by the Cabinet.
40. I can’t help but feel that sadly a lot of what Brown opposed as Chancellor was partly done for reasons of destabalising Blair and accelerating the succession. I’m just wondering in the current economic climate with the apparent growing strength of the euro whether it’s been entirely ruled out or not.
BTW - the second state to decide is having its caucuses today - and hardly anybody seems to have noticed. It’s Wyoming and today only the GOP will be involved.
42. Your thinking re Brown’s motives is probably correct. But at a practical level, even if you wanted to push for it now, there are two major obstacles - zero enthusiasm for the idea amongst the public and the unpopularity of the government.
39 glad to hear it - couldn’t work out your comment on my 21 post.
38 - Both President Bushes, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan & maybe Bill Clinton have/had Scots Irish connections - as did a few 19th century ones but historically the New England / WASPs did dominate.
44 Zero enthusiasm, yes …. in the popular media. Actually, a lot of individual people will say it’s a good idea, to reduce time and expense of changing money when going to Europe, which most people do these days at least once, and many for extended periods and several times a year.
On Betfair, someone has laid all the outstanding money on Clinton in NH. Only Obama has anything on the lay side.
46. OK show me the polling evidence for this enthusiasm.
48 Purely anecdotal - perhaps someone else has knowledge of polling on the subject. I am sure that Britain for europe and anti-EU groups will have done polling on this subject. May be a little dated, as it has not ben seen as a “live” issue by the media for a number of years.
Happy New Year too, HenryG (and everyone else). Capmbell’s diaries show that TB was keen to join the Euro but GB’s lack of enthusiasm made it impractical - obviously he couldn’t campaign for it if the Treasury was saying no. Certainly the old Sun jobe about the “toilet currency” has proved totally false. But I suspect Treasury reservations about a common interest rate remain.
My understanding of the election outlook is that it’ll be May 2009 if we have a decent shot at winning then, and later if we don’t. I’d keep this a secret if I didn’t think it was pretty evident!
http://www.yourconcord.com/primaryblog/gardner_predicts_500_000_turnout
interesting comments from the Concord Monitor about turnout and independents in New Hampshire which may indicate that it may favor
Obama if the thing that happens in Iowa is happening in NH.
“Secretary of State Bill Gardner is predicting a record half million voters will turn out for Tuesday’s presidential primary. Gardner is predicting 260,000 residents will vote in the Democratic primary and 240,000 will vote in the Republican primary. He predicts that 150,000 undeclared voters — who can choose which primary to vote in — will cast votes. Of those, he thinks 90,000 will choose to vote in the Democratic primary and 60,000 in the Republican.
He predicts that 50,000 New Hampshire residents will register to vote on election day. The previous record of 396,000 voters was set in the 2000 primary.
- The Associated Press
UPDATE: Doing the math … Gardner is predicting that undeclared voters will cast about 35 percent of the ballots in the Democratic primary and 25 percent of the ballots in the Republican primary. Those are now benchmarks against which to compare the samples in opinion polls. (Overall, he’s predicting that 30 percent of the voters will be undeclared voters, 34 percent will be Democrats and 36 percent will be Republicans. And that the undeclared voters will break 60-40 for the Democratic race.)”
49. Thought so. Last polls from a couple of years ago showed around 2-1 against. The pro-euro organisations have all folded.
The public aren’t stupid enough to be taken in by facile arguments about changing holiday money.
If McCain picks up New Hampshire I think he’ll be taking on Giuliani for the nomination, though he might be able to come back later if he doesn’t. On the other hand Romney can’t afford to lose there.
Oh my, Obama just traded at 50 for the Dem. nom.
As I said BEFORE Iowa, HC campaign going down the pan, she is not likeable AND there is serious ‘Clinton fatigue’.
Currency USD
Session lo/hi 48.0 - 50.0
Life lo/hi 0.1 - 50.0
Previous Close 46.0
Open Price 48.0
Last Price 50.0
Last Trade Time 11:19 AM, GMT
Today’s Volume 333
Total Volume 253604
Paddy and Lads still go 5/4 Obama.
Harry It sounds as if you are anti-Euro by persuasion, but that doesn’t make your view any more valid than anyone else’s. I could easily say that the 2:1 majority against the Euro you claim (where is the evidence btw?) has been brought about by the persistent propaganda pushed by the popular media. How come that most of the other EU countries seem perfectly happy with it?
The Obama vs McCain price for the 2 nominees last traded at 18 on intrade (9/2), so the 7/1 price with Paddy Power has some value.
56. I think joining the euro is sadly a real long-shot. But campaigning for it could be something that would bring the Lib Dems and Labour activists (temporarily) together agains the Conservatives. In the run up to a likely hung parliament this would be an interesting dynamic.
I guess what I’m really interested in is the economics. A few years ago the Eurozone was commonly seen in the UK as quite weak. But now I hear of supermodels in America insisting on being paid in euros rather than dollars and I just wondered if it were time for revisiting it.
10 - Clinton lost amougst female caucus goers by over 5 points… dont think sexism had anything to do with her poor performance there.
Meanwhile every demographic in NH is better for Obama than it was in IA… its a tough way back for Clinton and it will only get tough (still salvagable for the time being though).
56. I do regard Labour as a pro-european party and as such would be inclined to support the euro. I hardly remember any debate on the subject during the 18 month deputy leadership slog, so it’s no a live political issue. But, of all the six contenders I could only see Jon Cruddas being opposed to joining the euro.
57 Now 6-1 …. such is the the power of the Caveman!
Skybet still offering Obama at 8/11 to win NH.
59. What strikes me about Obama is that a bit like Bill Clinton he can speak so effectively to so many different audiences. He has a folksy tone one day and can reach a harder more intellectual elite the next. I haven’t got a sense that Hillary can match that. I don’t particularly like geographical stereotypes, but the New Hampshire I have in my head (!) can also love Obama.
34 - Thats about right, going negative is all Clinton can do now… it runs the risk of reinforcing her negatives against Obama’s positives and turning off independents (not to mention younger voters) but what else can she do?
64. It seems that Obama is cornering the change candidate market, without being particularly radical on a policy front. There are lots of ways to breakdown the support and the Iowa breakdown was very interesting. But when it comes down to it, Obama’s just more likeable than Hillary isn’t he?
Ben @ 59 re NH Dem primary. Agreed, Obama should win NH.
But this is due to his lead among independents, not Democrats. Obama needs to convert the momentum a second win will give him to a lead amongst his own party faithful.
Meanwhile, Clinton must limit the damage. Momentum is with Obama and so is the media narrative. How many Americans realise Obama won only a single delegate more than Clinton in Iowa? (Edwards was third in the delegate count.)
Clinton enjoyed substantial leads in the national polls prior to Iowa. It will be interesting to see how much this has changed.
61 LOL!
I thieved some sevens moments before you posted, PfP. You always feel good when that happens. You feel you’ve kind of backed a winner already.
Hat-tip to Caveman. These elections have got my year off to a flying start.
“Will N.H. Be Obama Territory, Too?”
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/04/will_nh_be_obama_territory_too.html?hpid=topnews
64. Plus the worst Clinton’s been saying about Obama is that he’s inexperienced and could make mistakes. But on one of the biggest issues - Iraq - he called it right so there’s not much credibility there in that line of attack. I think he looks the real deal and is actually the safe electoral option - Hilary Clinton may become the bigger risk to the Democrats winning the presidential election.
Does anyone know who according to the polls is the biggest republican threat to Obama if he were selected and by how much?
59 - True, he can do that ’soaring rhetoric’ thing one minute (as he did in his IA victory speech) and then can address a meeting in a charming, folksy style that owes more to Carter or Clinton than Kennedy.
The man is simply an awesome political talent… and there’s even the hit he might actually want to do some good with it
and its that (however ephemeral it might seem) more than anything is really firing his success.
Clinton just cant compare.
As for New Hampshire, it’s generally more affluent, younger, better educated and more urban than Iowa and all of that would be likely to help Obama over Clinton.
The contests which follow in Nevada and South Carolina offer more of a contrast, the former is far less affluent in general with a significant Latino community while South Carolina (like Iowa) is more rural but with a huge African-American community…
Edwards and Richardson could well do better in Nevada, while South Carolina is a fight between Clinton and Obama (although my sense is it will be defined by the results of the earlier contests – if Obama does well he will clear out in South Carolina over Clinton, if results are more mixed the contest will be more even).
69 - iirc McCain is the strongest GOP candidate in the hypothetical match-up polls… but Obama has been the strongest Dem in those polls for a while now.
So everyone reckons Obamas will overhaul Clinton’s lead in NH?
24. No chance. Anyone under about 50 who isn’t a Galapagos tortoise need not worry about the UK joining in their lifetime.
69 Henry
McCain is Obama’s toughest opponent. The polls have them very evenly matched. In fact McCain scores best of any Republican against just about any Democrat opponent.
I suspect some GOP supporters may have noticed this.
Detail is here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html
Off topic but… npower announced huge hikes in energy prices yesterday.
I guess the big cut most suppliers made last summer had helped keep inflation down. But, assuming that most suppliers follow npower’s lead, inflation could be heading up. And interest rates may therefore not drop. The “feelbad” factor could linger…
72 Yup.
Think again Yokel.
Btw, how’s our ROI bet doing?
24. All other things being equal, if Britain had joined the Euro when Blair wanted too, the current boom-bust cycle in the housing market would have been even bigger.
73
But is there an economic reason why? Lots of political reasons, sure…
My man Mc is gonna look mighty old against the kid but remember Regan
REAGAN: Ronnie, the caller said, how come you look younger every day when I see a new picture of you riding horseback? I said, well, Jimmy, that’s easy, I just keep riding older horses.
77. Thanks - that’s the sort of stuff I’m interested in.
HneryG @ 69 re head-to-heads. Go to pollingreport.com
http://www.pollingreport.com/wh08gen.htm
where they carry a variety of head-to-head polls.
Beware the funny American date formats for the fieldwork and remember things have probably changed post-Iowa.
76. Its steady Peter, the rush on Dalgleish eased, he went from 6/4 out to 3’s again wityhin days and Venables has resum,ed his position at the front though the market is tighter now. The Brady bunch option has also come in with PPs, was as big as 13/2 a day or two ago but was 5’s last night.
I have pitched against the overwhelming view on the board that Obama has NH sorted. Whilst there hasnt been a full post UIowa poll, Clinton has been hanging on in NH throughout the bump and the clear Obama momentum that was building in Iowa. Its perfectly feasible she’ll continue to hang on until Tuesday night.
Depending on the result, I’ll be a genius or considered an idiot who was deaf to the shout of the pb.com masses.
We shall see.
Talking of bad news on the economy, American unemployment figures have just spiked upwards leading to more worries about recession. If things do get worse fast, this might help Clinton who is seen as more protectionist than Obama.
82-If this helps, I also believe Clinton might win NH…
By the wasy, there is some non betting primary action in Wyoming today (GOP). Does it matter?
In a tight race it might with even just a few delegates at stake.
Its also a real poll, minus much of the intense media scrutiny which makes it potentially interesting.
78.. there are lots of economic reasons why - all the same ones that existed when the issue was seriously on the table.
Why would you destroy fiscal/fx/interest rate flexibility for an economy which is somewhat different in various ways from the bulk of Euroland is the heart of it?
86. But is our economy that different to the euro member nations? Do our high levels of home ownership make it so?
Yokel @ 85 re Wyoming. Be careful as a lot of the candidates are barely involved.
A lot of states moved their Republican primaries/caucuses forwards against the wishes of the national GOP which has retaliated by removing half their delegates (though Wyoming still has more than NH iirc!).
The New York Times has a list:
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/primaries/republicanprimaries/index.html
There was talk somewhere (can’t remember where, sorry!) that some Wyoming delegates might end up not being bound to any particular candidate.
84. It does, you always wonder if youve missed something obvious. At the very least I think NH is a toss up. As a result the betting outsider is being underestimated.
I have no long term exposure on Clinton to get the nomination at all and in fact layed her at short odds ages ago which looked a decidely ropey decision at many stages but I managed to bet to cover.
My only real long term benefit of a Clinton slump is a possible boost for Edwards but I have no real stake of any note in her winning or losing the nomination
88-”I have no real stake of any note in her winning or losing the nomination”
Me neither. I just believe she can do it. A month ago(I know this is a lot of time in politics) I read an article that showed why Hillary could lose in IA and still win in NH. Obama still face some problems, so I don’t think it’s certain that he will win, as many are counting.
87 our level of home ownership is not actually that different to many other Euro countries - eg Portugal. There are many reasons for not taking up the pretendy Deutschmark but home ownership levels isn’t one of them.
Re the Protestant Irish in America. Yes it is nonsense to say that they are insignificant. Indeed, after the English, the Proddy Irish - the Scots-Irish in particular - were arguably the most important ethnicity in the formation of the States - genetically, culturally, politically etc.
They were the other helix of Americ’a DNA, as it were.
The Scots-Irish were known as “God’s Frontiersmen” and they settled all the hard-to-settle bits of Appalachia etc. They looked down on the namby-pamby Englishmen who hugged the coast.
From the protestant Irish in America we get country music, and half of jazz, rock, blues, gospel, etc - which, I think, are fusions of vernacular Anglo-Irish musical idioms and black music from slaves.
They also provided many of the first presidents. Andrew Jackson, etc.
Consequently, to say that protestant Irish ancestry is somehow unhelpful to Obama is just daft.
Anyway, the point about Obama is that he is visibly a member of a minority. That’s his backstory. As such all other members of minorities in America (who constitute the majority?) will self-identify with him.
90. But the Euro member’s economies haven’t collapsed since they joined have they? In reality it is working as a currency. The question is would it be better or worse for us if we joined in say 2009? I imagine Snowflake would have a view. I’ll scout around the internet for a bit of a look and if anyone has read any good recent articles I’d be interested to see them.
90 It’s pretty different to the major ones, and more importantly financed differently too. It is said that the UK is more sensitive to short term interest rates than any other country.
The economy is a bit different too, with different patterns of trade and dominated like no other by financial services. We also have some oil etc which euroland essentially doesn’t… though that is reducing. Reserve holdings of our currency are wildly disproportionate. Our pensions setup is less disastrous (though still pretty disastrous) … drones on indefinitely.
90. Home ownership levels per se don’t make any difference but we treat housing much more as an investment than they do in most other countries. The recent willingness of banks to lend the absolute maximum that people could afford meant that lower Euro interest rates would have inflated the bubble even more.
To illustrate the cultural difference which still exists between us and France, recently I discussed property with a manager from a multinational company while driving through a nice suburb outside Paris. He was complaining about the high prices and said, “I would have to take out a mortgage over 25 YEARS to buy a place here!” As if borrowing money over 25 years would be outrageous.
92 It is not even talked about seriously by any of the major market economists. I took part in a Reuters poll in 1998 I think - I was one of just 8% who thought that the UK would “effectively never” join the euro - now I reckon that number plus the not for the foreseeable future would be over 75%.
You could claim that now the fall in long-term rates in the Club Med has worn off a number eg Italy and Greece are in very severe difficulty as their competitiveness is being destroyed, as has their freedome to do anything about it.
I think this White House race is very interesting because it has thrown up such a change in the likely sex or race of the next US president. Personally I think Clinton is the key from the democratic side but I think my judgement is coloured by Bill, who was a much better president than Bush has been (Think I will get agreement from most UK posters their!!!
). I do not rate Obama at all – I think he would have great trouble in presenting a solid leadership to the west and frankly I am sorry but I cannot identify with him at all (Maybe it is his race?) . I do think that if Obama gets the nomination for the democrats then a McCain one term presidency would be a very likely proposition. I do not think that Obama has staying power: he is a novelty and his reheated Bill Clinton line of HOPE is the only thing going for him.
Still on this side of the Pond if Obama beats Clinton and succeeds to the presidency then Brown could be put even further on the back foot as Cameron could present himself as a similar wind of change in Britain to the Obama wind in the U.S. I don’t think that Nick Clegg can transpose the Obama strategy as Clegg has made no headway at all. Clegg has failed already through his inability to penetrate the media. Never mind, when they chuck Clegg – Vince can always come back!!!
91 looking at sites via google yesterday the biggest group are apparently those of German descent - who seem to have had less effect than the the WASPs and the Scots-Irish in creating what we think of as “American”.
Nixon was of Protestant Ulster stock.
93, 94, 95, thanks.
92. This discussion about the euro is fantasyland. Quite apart from all the abiding economic arguments against joining - one-size-fits-all etc - it is politically out of the question.
There is simply no way of winning a referendum on the euro, not for the forseeable future - and beyond. The europhiles always like to kid themselves, when they haven’t heard from the sceptics for a while, that public opinion has changed on the EU - or that it is malleable. Blair liked to kid himself he could have won a vote. In the end he never tried. Why?
The settled and underlying will of the British people is eurosceptic. It’s nothing to do with the papers, its just what they think. If you don’t believe us, please please please please call a vote on the Constitution. Please please please.
Or indeed call a vote on membership. But you won’t even do that, will you? Coz you’re not even totally sure you would win even that.
Cowards. All europhiles are cowards, idiots, and anti-democratic w*nkers (Peter the Punter excepted).
When the Tories come to power you will see the settled euroscepticism of the British people finally expressed - in some shape or form. You can’t deny the will of the people for ever, though you’ve done quite well so far.
seanT @ 101 — more likely you will see the settled europhilia of the self-perpetuating political class.
100 a man who bottled an election when 10%+ ahead in the polls is hardly likely to try and win a referendum on the Euro is he?
On the Euro debate, I’ve often wondered why - if the arguments about the volumes of trade with a certain partner are valid, and the fears of being outweighted by a huger seperate economy “on the doorstep” - Canada hasn’t made moves to join the US dollar.
They wouldn’t even need to change the name of the currency. And travelling between Canada and the US is so common that changing money to travel between could well be a significant driver as well.
“Or indeed call a vote on membership. But you won’t even do that, will you? Coz you’re not even totally sure you would win even that.
“When the Tories come to power you will see the settled euroscepticism of the British people finally expressed - in some shape or form. You can’t deny the will of the people for ever, though you’ve done quite well so far.”
So when the LDs moved a vote on our membership in November how many Tories voted in favour Sean? I believe the answer was less than 10 with another 160 or so voting against. As opposed to the whole LD parliamentary party voting in favour. Rather hard to explain your beliefs in the face of the evidence.
(PS I’m no EU phile….)
102. Expect an election in 18 months, says Ed Balls
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=55IBHDNYIKZT3QFIQMGCFF4AVCBQUIV0?xml=/news/2008/01/05/nballs105.xml
Is Brown a broken record: A bit sh*t theatening an election as the opposition wants it and Labour would lose it.
98 - Nixon’s father was a Methodist who married a Quaker and converted to Quakerism. Nixon was raised as a Quaker.
102. True it’s unlikely. I guess my question was whether there’s a stronger economic case for joining it now than say ten years ago.
106 - As per wikipedia on Quakers - “Early Friends believed that an important part of Jesus’ message was how we treat our fellow human beings. They felt that honest dealing with others meant more than avoiding direct lies. Friends continue to believe that it is important not to mislead others, even if the words used are all technically truthful.”
Nixon a quaker? Hmm……
107. No as monetary policy would not suit the UK economy at this time. The only plus would be hiding behind the German trade surplus. I think the UK were 6% of GDP in the red last year.
100. I think the settled view of the British people is Euro-apathy
“Be wary of late New Hampshire polls”
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0108/7717.html
109. Thanks Martin.
Firstly, apologies for the length of this post, secondly, apologies if it repeats stuff said earlier on in the thread. I’m just dropping in before heading out this afternoon.
There seems to me to be too much being made of ‘momentum’ in the contests. Yes, it matters, but it’s not decisive. The media’s had one contest to cover so far. Once others have voted, the picture is likely to look a bit different. The race is not unlike a yachting contest in this respect, with the various candidates all circling in advance of the start, hoping to cross the line at the optimum time in the right direction and good speed. Those who do will take the lead - but are far from guarenteed much other than an early favourable wind.
The closeness of the two races could is likely to dissuade candidates from dropping out early. In fact, of the nine main candidates (6 GOP, 3 Dem), I’d be very surprised if fewer than eight are seriously contesting Super Tuesday (I refuse to use the really naff-sounding ‘-Duper’ addition. ‘Titan Tuesday’ I could just about live with), and it would be no shock were all nine standing - just about - in a month’s time. The only one I could realistically see dropping before then is Fred Thompson, who’s never looked that keen on the whole game anyhow.
There are good reasons to keep going. On the Republicans side, there are four candidates who could seriously stand a chance of winning. Ron Paul doesn’t, but then he never did, so there’s no real reason for him to withdraw until he runs out of money. If that’s the case, the longer things go on without any one candidate making a clean break - and with the differing strategies, none seems likely to me before half the states have voted and over half the delegates decided - the more likely a contested convention. And if a contested convention is on the cards, there’s no good reason for any candidate who thinks he could finish in the top two or be an acceptable compromise to throw in the towel.
A similar dynamic applies to the Democrats. While the likelihood of someone (probably Obama) breaking clear is greater than for the Republicans, simply due to the number of candidates in the game, the greater proportionality applied in allocating delegates brings things back together again, and then there are always ‘events’.
The candidates are under intense scrutiny and working extremely hard. Someone sooner or later will mess up with a verbal slip or perhaps a piece of investigative journalism bringing something to light. Suppose Obama is the candidate that falls - wouldn’t that give Edwards’ campaign a tremendous boost? I wouldn’t write him out of the script just yet, and of the seven who could be on the ballot paper in November, he’s the one in the weakest position.
One betting point. This market seems particularly prone to overreacting, possibly because the fevered commentariat coverage. I’ve made more money on the two nomination processes so far than I’ve made on any other political market because of that tendency. For example, I backed Hillary at 5/4 and laid off at 1/2 as she approached her ‘inevitable’ phase. Had I hung on I could have laid off at 1/4! Although I missed that point, I did get on Obama at better than 7/1 around that time - now looking very good - and backed Edwards at about 20/1 at the same time, which I don’t regret (he was only a 4% swing away from beating Obama, and a win in Iowa would sure have brought his odds into 5/1 or so). There will be a lot more of this behaviour: good luck.
107. One case is where foreign businesses chose to locate, for example with the rise of the tiger economies, would they choose to locate their european factory in britain where their revenue and costs are in different currencies and having to pay commission to get them exchanged. Or in france where they are in one currency and costs are less. At the moment britain has not had this adverse effect because of our pretty liberal employment laws (compared to france etc.) but if Sarkozy liberalises frances economy we might start to feel the effect.
109 - don’t think it is quite that bad.. yet. We still have a way to go to beat the US and the Antipodes. Mind you if the City goes pear shaped it will happen faster than you can say stagflation.
104. The reason Tories wouldn’t vote for a membership referendum is simple politics. Many of them are not sure which way they would vote - ! - and anyway they want to fight on grounds where they know they would unite and win - i.e. the euro and the Constitution.
It’s not hypocrisy, just politics.
What is hypocrisy is the Lib Dem call for a membership vote. You Lib Dems promised us a vote on the Constitution, but you have shamefully reneged on that - and you are meant to be the “Democrats”.
Now you offer this figleaf of a vote on membership, which will never happen because 1 you will never be in power, and 2. if you did somehow get into power you would never call it for fear of losing, or causing huge chaos in the run-up.
The membership vote is a sad little prank, an embarrassing ragweek stunt, which is no surprise, as the Lib Dems remain the perennial, laughable and contemptible students of British politics: parading down Whitehall with the traffic cones of immaturity on their pointy little heads.
To my mind, the main economic arguments against are (a) loss of interest rate flexibility and (b) fixing values of currencies against each other for all time, when the economic fortunes of individual countries will vary over time.
Italy’s economic competitiveness has declined since joining the Euro. In the past, the Italians could have let the value of their currency fall, to restore competiveness - an option which is no longer available. The result is that the EU economy consistently performs worse than the EU average.
There could equally be occasions when allowing the value of one’s currency to rise would be helpful, to head off a rise in inflationary pressures if the economy was growing very rapidly.
106. The other reason was that the Lib Dems (and Labour) wanted a referendum on membership as a proxy for the Constitution i.e. if you are not for the constitution then you must be against the EU, which effectively denied the Tory line a place in the argument. Hardly surprising that the Conservatives wanted - and want - to keep attention on the issue in question at the moment.
117 Whoops “The Italian economy performs worse than the EU average”.
113 Thanks, David.
Yes it’s been a great betting market to date and there’s the promise of much more to come.
Glad to hear you’ve profited - and propheted!
Atb.
“The reason Tories wouldn’t vote for a membership referendum is simple politics. Many of them are not sure which way they would vote - ! - and anyway they want to fight on grounds where they know they would unite and win - i.e. the euro and the Constitution. ”
So when the Tories vote like that its politics and when the LibDems do it it’s a hypocritical charade? Come on Sean you can do a lot better than that, I usually rely on you to be funny from both sides of the coin rather than being a sort of Ave it with entertaining prose.
117. Thanks Sean. Do you know of any campaigns within Euro member countries (such as Italy) to leave the currency? Maybe Andrea could help here if he’s around to reflect on the position in Italy.
96 Looked at the post Iowa speeches on YouTube last night. Compare Clinton and Obama; Hilary flanked by Bill and Albright (the past) and mostly older people gives a pretty uninspiring speech claiming to be “change”. Obama on a podium in the midst of mostly young supporters gives an inspiring speech about hope.
Clinton is the conservative Democrat choice, she’s got lots of the baby boom and older democrats. It’s an important voting segment, probably approaching half of the actual voters. That’s her strength, that she isn’t about change but about going back to the 80s/90’s. She’s the safer choice because she talks in their language. Think the US electorate median age is around 48/49 so she’s got the constituency.
Obama is about change, about a post baby boom generation. He is probably less attractive to the 60+ group but he’s the exciting choice, he’s about the future. Some in the older group might be attracted by the recognition he generates the same excitement JFK did, the feeling that it’s time for the new generation to take over from the old. But just as in the UK its the older voters who tend to turn out - that might be his biggest weakness.
There isn’t that same generational change feeling on the Republican side - whether mormon, war hero, preacher, actor, ex-mayor they all feel so 20th century still. The oldest one, McCain, actually comes across as less tied to old politics than the rest.
My feeling is that Obama needs to win NH to convince the conservative baby boomers that they really want change - that power should pass to the next generation.
118 much more plausible… but still I think made the Tories look awkward and will make it much harder for them to get back votes from UKIP. It’s still what Sean is accusing the LDs of - we will have to see whether his charge is fair come the spring.
122 There are certainly rumblings but I don’t think the campaign is big yet - for the reason that frogs don’t jump out of water that is slowly being boiled. If Italy were to leave the euro its economy would be trashed as interest rates exploded - but at some stage that may be the least worst option if the country simply cannot pay its debts which is the end I expect.
121. No. The Tories promised a vote on the Constitution. If they were in power they would give us a vote on the Constitution.
They never promised a vote on membership, it’s never been discussed, it wasn’t in the manifesto. Simple.
By contrast, you (like Labour) promised us a vote on the Constitution - but now you (like Labour) have reneged on this solemn manifesto promise. It’s pitiful and pathetic, and you should be ashamed.
Face the people, make your argument, win the vote - or lose. That’s democracy.
122 No I don’t. I think the general view is that even if they don’t like it (opinion polls showed most Germans didn’t want the Euro), there’s not much they can do about it. And, while I don’t think the Euro has done much good, it’s not been a disaster either (although I think it does cause real problems for Italy). I think it would take some major financial turmoil (on a par with events of 1992/93) to make it both desirable and feasible for any member of the Euro to pull out.
Italy is caught between a rock and a hard place. There’s no doubt that euro membership is crushing its exports, but, at the same time, euro membership enables the government to borrow money at lower rates of interest than would otherwise be the case.
Ted @ 124 re Obama the change candidate.
The irony is that Obama’s policy positions are hardly radical. Like Cameron, he represents change without promising it. Let sunshine win the day!
126. Wouldn’t the tories campaign for a yes in the event of a referendum?
123. Good post Ted. I think you’ve nailed the key foundation of Hillary’s appeal - the older age group. Which, if anything like this country, can be a potent group and be more likely to turnout to vote than any other.
Among the Iowa Democrats Clinton was ahead 34:21 among the 60-64 year group and 45:18 among the 65 and overs. I’d suspect her health policies will have resonated strongly with this older group. Can she reach beyond it and can Obama cut into it?
I hope not. In the unlikely event that the government did call an in/out referendum, the Conservatives should call their bluff and campaign for a No.
127. Agreed. In a sense the real test for the euro comes now. It is meant to cover all members of the EU - that’s in the Constitution. Even those with opt-outs - UK and Sweden etc - are meant to join at some point.
But politically and economically this is nonsense. Slovenia is a shoo-in. But Bulgaria and Romania? Can one currency, interest rate, central bank, really cover such a diverse array of economies?
The euro has yet to face a severe recession. Let’s hope it never happens, but if it does - then some parts of the EU might go into a major slump. At which point, theoretically, the richer members would be obliged to bail out the poorer economies. Are Germans gonna accept much higher taxes to help Calabrian farmers or Portuguese fishermen?
In Britain we feel the strains between England and Scotland, London and the North. Richer regions resent helping poorer ones, poorer ones feel chippy about richer ones. And we are an island nation with one language, etc.
I accept the euro has not been a disaster. I never thought it would be. But it won’t work for Britain, politically - and I wonder if it is already far beyond its optimum size (which is probably France, Germany and the Benelux).
131. I meant on the consti..treaty
128. I know, this is what must make it infuriating for Clinton - Obama embodies change because of his style and background. Although HRC would be the first female President and from what I understand has the more radical policies on healthcare, she seems old hat and dry as sticks. I wonder how any other women would have done against Obama. Were there ever any credible talked of female contenders among Democrats or Republicans a year or so ago?
Ok - so the Tories never promised a referendum on anything with Europe. It’s fair enough that we don’t push them on this.
But an in or out referendum would be the Tories’ worst nightmare, wouldn’t it?
126 Face the people, make your argument, win the vote - or lose. That’s democracy.
So why didn’t you?
Why did the Tories vote against? Just because something is not in the manifesto it doesn’t follow that you are against it (though if you have a million page manifesto like we tend to there is a bit of an argument…). It does however follow if you vote against it.
FWIW I think a 3 question referendum on membership, the treaty and eur membership all at the same time would put the whole thing to bed whichever side of the argument you follow.
135 - I mean never promised when in power…
re 128 I think that you are making the mistake of believing that voter behaviour is determined by policies. In this media age it is so much about personalities and style. The reason I’ve been betting on Obama for nearly three years is that his approach seems best suited to the generational changes that comes as the baby boomers move from being active players to pensioners. That’s why the young are flocking to Obama and why Hillary is finding it hard with large sections of the electorate.
An associated thought is that the rise of Obama probably makes it more difficult for McCain. The idea of someone approaching 70 running against someone in their mid 40s looks crazy. Alas almost all the GOP alternatives are hovering around the 60 mark apart from Huckabee.
“At which point, theoretically, the richer members would be obliged to bail out the poorer economies.”
Theoretically no - it is explicity ruled out in the treaty. Practically….? I’m glad I will be watching from a safe distance.
128 but that’s the strength. Being the change but comforting the fearful that its OK to let go of Nanny’s hand. Voters don’t really pick up on policies - its we political anoraks that like those - they pick up the messages.
So “tough on crime” worked without Blair having to say exactly what he’d do, “Labour isn’t working” carried the subliminal message “but we know what to do” without Thatcher having to produce a detailed costed programme.
Clinton & Brown are the status quo candidates - tough times need experience etc. Trouble is that the tough times are to an extent their responsibility (or at least their generations one) - its Sir Ian Blair or less successfully Charles Clarke saying “I’m the one who knows how fix it because while it happened on my watch I’m the one best fitted to resolve it because of that experience”. Doesn’t necessarily convince does it?
132. ‘In Britain we feel the strains between England and Scotland, London and the North. Richer regions resent helping poorer ones, poorer ones feel chippy about richer ones. And we are an island nation with one language, etc.’
A very strong argument SeanT. Any casual mention of the Barnett formula to Labour members in the North East gets people fired up about the ‘injustices’ of Scotland’s funding. The North-South divide still is a sore point too.
140 - “Clinton & Brown are the status quo candidates ” that is why Edwards saying that change won in Iowa is so significant. Edwards may well pull out and back Obama… running mate?
HenryG @ 135 — it surprises me the GOP did not use Condaleezza Rice to shoot Hillary’s fox (and Obama’s too as it turned out). If Cheney had retired on health grounds with his dodgy ticker, Condi could have been appointed Vice President six months ago.
Spin and SF arb on Ob. Pres on 0 10 25 mkt.
Shame about the SF commision.