Will it be any clearer after tonight?
January 19th, 2008Yesterday the Guardian asked me to give my assessment of today’s crucial elections in Nevada and South Carolina - this is what I wrote.
The Republican Race: There are two elections - the Caucuses in Nevada and the primary in South Carolina. There has been little interest in the former and the assumption on the betting markets is that this is sewn up for the Michigan winner, Mitt Romney, who has had reasonable leads in two of the last three polls. John McCain, who is a senator from the neighbouring state of Arizona was ahead in the other one. Mike Huckabee has also been getting respectable figures as has Fred Thompson.
My ratings out of 100 are:
Mitt Romney 55
John McCain 20
Mike Huckabee 20
Rudy Giuliani 1
Fred Thompson 4
South Carolina is a much tougher proposition with Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson looking for emphatic results. If Thompson does not do well here then he is probably out of the race altogether because he will simply be unable to find funding. This is a closed primary, so the advantage that John McCain had in New Hampshire of attracting a lot of independent support will not be open to him and, Unlike the UK bookmakers, I do not make John McCain favourite. I think that the state will give Mike Huckabee his second victory.
Ratings:
Mike Huckabee 38
John McCain 35
Fred Thompson 15
Mitt Romney 10
Rudolf Giuliani 2
The Democratic Race: There is only one contest this weekend - the caucuses in Nevada - where the feeling that the Clinton team appears to be getting a bit rattled, judging by Bill’s angry TV interviews in response to the plan to make it easier for Las Vegas casino employees to be able to participate at work. Almost all the surveys have been giving this to Hillary and one this week put her 27% ahead. John Edwards has also been polling well here. Even so my guess is that this is going to be a very close race with each of the three contenders wanting to chalk up a good result ahead of the key South Carolina Democratic primary next weekend.
Ratings:
Hillary Clinton 40
Barack Obama 35
John Edwards 25
The South Carolina Democratic primary takes place a week after the Republican vote in the state and a lot can happen in the meantime. This should be fertile territory for both Barack Obama and John Edwards, who was senator for the neighbouring state. About half the Democratic electorate is black and if Obama does not win by a clear margin here then it is hard to see how the Hillary Clinton bandwagon can be stopped.
Ratings:
Barack Obama 50
Hillary Clinton 40
John Edwards 10
All the White House race betting prices are here.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
I must my money is on Obama now. I never found him to be a particularly brilliant candidate but with the field now down to just him, Edwards and Clinton he definitely has the edge in popularity.
If he can’t use his unique qualities to win the next two primaries I think he’ll start to look like a has-been (Clinton doesn’t run that risk because she’s already been called that by everyone).
The period since New Hampshire has been the most absorbing of the campaign and I think it is still to play for for everybody even John Edwards. The great thing for Hillary from NH was that ability to recover and the confidence that brings. Obama has to do the same and he’s only got seven days to prove it.
The GOP race is electrifying as well and I’ve got money on just about everybody at good prices except McCain.
It really pains me to watch that Fox video clip and see such talented leftish politicians tear each other apart. The real objective is to win the White House back for the Democrats and the sooner the party can agree on one person and stop this massive internal schism the better.
How right Labour was last summer to all come behind Gordon Brown. That was such a show of unity which will have long-lasting benefits. There are no splits, no divisions, and all the effort is going into beating off the Tory threat.
For those who like videos, the latest batch of three on http://www.youtube.com/profile_videos?user=yd2008
give a decent overview of recent developments.
What are people’s opinions here of the likelihood of a Bloomberg run?
I personally think he’ll only run if the candidates of both parties weaken each other more and he’ll wait until it’s near certain who’ll be the candidate for each side. At the moment it doesn’t look like there would be any point.
Ideally he should want a Clinton vs Huckabee match, both Obama and McCain have too much centrist appeal to give him a space in my opinion.
3 “How right Labour was last summer to all come behind Gordon Brown. That was such a show of unity which will have long-lasting benefits.”
If you consider coming out of it with an unelectable leader a “long-lasting benefit”….
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2243504,00.html
“The personal details of 600,000 people who had expressed an interest in joining the armed forces have gone missing after a laptop belonging to a Royal Navy officer was stolen, the Ministry of Defence said last night.
Des Browne, the defence secretary, is expected to appear before MPs next week to explain the theft and why he has not revealed what happened until now.”
I wonder if those responsible will get an MBE…
I think Mike is wrong about the survey in Nevada putting Hillary 27% ahead. This is the ARG survey from early December, and this week ARG put her only 3% ahead.
ARG is often fluctuating very strongly. Today they have Huck 7% ahead in South Carolina, two days ago they had McCain 10% ahead. Of course this can signify a large swing that nobody else has picked up, or it can be just a bad sample. We’ll wait for some more fresh polls today.
I think this one will be very close, with McCain as my narrow favorite. It is much more important for Huck to win, although the McCain camp will start to get nervous if he loses. Then McCain needs to win Florida.
re 6. My point is that in a fiercely contested leadership election, or a US nomination contest things can be said that can leave lasting damage. Just look at how Gordon was able to swat Nick Clegg down in the Commons this week by bringing up Huhne’s “Calamity Clegg” allegation. That tag would not have been used if the two of them had not been fighting for the leadership.
Whether it is Obama or Hillary who triumphs both will finish the contest damaged in some way. The Labour approach is the right one.
Agree with Jan at 8. Despite the wider field we may be closer to a decision on the GOP side. If McCain beats Huck in SC and Rudy in FL he’s probably won. If Huck wins both he’s got a chance of wrapping it up on Super Tuesday (Feb 5). If Guiliani wins well in Florida, ditto. And the others seem to be also-rans even if Romney wins in NV.
Obama seems to have a fair chance of winning tonight and then in SC, getting some momentum, but Hillary can probably stall it in FL. If Hillary wins tonight and Obama in SC, the polls’ prediction, I doubt if we’ll see a clear leader till after Super Tuesday and maybe not even then, since the sheer number of contests will give everyone something to point to, like pb.com when we’ve had a night with 10 local by-elections (’the swing in Little Nodding makes it clear that our party is heading for victory at the GE’).
O/T: there may well be a test vote Monday on the proposal to have a referendum on the European Treaty - it’s an amendment to Second Reading, and would give a clear picture of whether those supposed 100 Labour rebels actually exist so we can deal with the issue before we get into the trench warfare of three weeks of committee on the floor of the House. It may not get called, though, as I gather it’s a backbench amendment rather than a Tory one which would always get called. (Could be wrong about this, second-hand info.)
Latest Zogby polling.
South Carolina Rep Mc 27, Huck 26, Rom 16, Th 12, (Huck and Rom gaining)
Nevada Dem. Cl 45, Ob 39 Ed 6
Zogby’s Edwards figure has been below other polls for a couple of weeks, but it may well be right, who knows.
9. But Brown has done a dreadful job so far, he’s managed to come across as hesitant over major decisions and unwilling to accept criticism. In fact a leadership election may have given the party more time to weight up the pro’s and cons of him, instead he’s come straight in and been doing crippling damage ever since.
9, actually the Conservative Two Davids approach is the best.
A genuine choice with no real antagonism and a convincing win for one candidate.
The 600,000 lost armed forces records could be much more serious than the 25m data discs. Why? The data discs could be stuck behind a sofa, but we know the laptop was stolen and is in criminal hands. 3,500 bank details are included, but (perhaps more worryingly) the armed forces would be a very tempting target for any terrorists.
13. I agree with that. The race helped spark the tory party into life a bit again, and massively raised the profile of both the David’s, who seem to have stayed friends since then.
12 Cuddles
Could you list for us the policy errors? I don’t mean the PR errors, like the non-election or the EU signing; they were plain for all to see. I mean the errors in policy, and policy direction.
Thanks.
Once the miscreant has discovered that the laptop is, ‘hot’ he’ll just dump it.
Spare a thought for a particular naval officer, who is already packing his bags, for a very long posting to the Falklands.
9 But there was a fiercely contested Labour leadership election - it just took 10 years and in the process severely damaged Labour. The current weak front bench, lacking any strong ministers (Straw,the most experienced, unfortunately as his name suggests bends to the prevailing wind) is a result of the “viral” campaign that Gordon ran denigrating and undermining any internal competitor.
15. Hmmmm, that would be difficult. A lot of his decisions have been about either continuing previous policy, or creating policy reviews (of which there are quite a few now) rather then making his own. In fact i can’t remember him making any major policy decisions.
6 Presumably if you say something long enough and loud enough it becomes true, does it?
9 Having an election for leader cannot be ill advised as you suggest. We would all be in the position of the Chinese Communist party (or the Tories prior to 1970!) where leaders “emerge”. Trouble is, you can’t guarantee a “civilised’ contest in the manner of Davis vs Cameron.
And if you look at some of the things said on the Republican side, they are potentially just as bad as on the Democrat.
we cannot sanitise electoral or party (or, for that matter, any other kind of) politics - it is about opposed views, and choosing right decisions. Those who stand behind various actions, views and decisions, are bound also to be under scrutiny. Ptherwise where is the point of democracy and elections?
Brown did not “swat Nick Clegg down” , professor (9). Brown could not swat anything. All he does is go into irrelevant rant mode, which makes Cameron’s rants look sensible in comparison.
I think a lot of people had high hopes of Brown when he took office, principally because he was not Blair. But he doesn’t seem to be in touch with reality, does he? Could you not give him some lessons, professor, in how to act like a prime minister?
18 You see the reason I ask, Cuddles, is that whilst I am on the whole fairly centrist in my political opinions, which are held lightly, I dislike humbug.
It seems to me that a lot of people complain that our politicians are all spin and no substance, that PR is more important than policy, and presentation more important than good government. If the same people then complain about Brown for what are basically PR and presentational errors, rather than specific errors in policy or policy direction, then that is humbug.
It pleases me to point out such humbuggery whenever I am able.
PtP Just to answer your question to cuddles, I think in general, if you didn’t like nuLab anyway, and therefore didn’t much like Blair’s approaches, you don’t much like Brown’s way either.
I think implicit in your question about PR etc, is an answer - that GB’s explicit initial rejection of “spin” and attempts to grab the moral high ground long since lost by Blair, has left people disillusioned and fed up that Brown is not “the change” he represented. Anyone who thought about it more than 5 seconds would have reaised that was unrealistic - had he been the change, how could he have worked for nuLab and to create nuLab over so many years? So, no major policy overhauls, just different words, more relaunches with new personnel etc.
So those disappointed by the lack of radicalism of ‘97 had their hopes raised, only to be dashed again. And for Tories, or viscerally anti-Labour people, he is worse than Blair, because his rhetoric has always been explicitly “Labour”, unlike Blair who appeared to be a pistachio-coloured Tory.
The Professor - how long we have waited for his return - only rivals the legendary ‘Adrian Harper’ as pbc’s greatest spoof poster. Indeed, such is the similarity of style, I would wager that they are, to use the phrase, somehow connected.
(Ms. Nuala ranks a solid third IMHO)
20: It’s noticeable in the Commons that the Tories are going for Clegg. At BERR questions last week Malcolm Wicks (declaration of interest - I’m his PPS) made an amiable crack at LD nuclear policy (’If the Liberal Democrats come to power, our streets will be lined with dark, cold homes where families sit huddled, reading the Thoughts of Nick Clegg’). It was said lightly and the LibDems present chuckled affably, but the Tories went wild, chanting “More! More!”
21. Is humbuggery legal? SeanT would know.
25 Funnily enough I was thinking of SeanT this morning and his characteristion of Brown (’…she ends up stabbing him with the butter knife’) which I found amusing and telling…but I digress.
26. Don’t think I saw that one PtP. Wish I had.
21 Too early top go through the policies errors Brown has made, because we really haven’t seen many Brown policies as such, but IMHO the policy on Capital Gains announced in October, the change in policy on independence of Academies and increased central direction for education, his appointment of Dr Darzi and acceptance of views on centrally directed disruptive change to the NHS, the apparent decision to continue Government support to Northern Rock for 5 years are mistakes. Most announcements are as you say presentational:
- carbon emission cuts in 2020 & 2050 will mostly depend on the next adminstration, seen nothing but announcements on studies, which means that reaching a renewables target for 15% by 2020 from current 1% or so will be impossible.
- 3 million new houses (a misleading figure as it is actually “homes” as many will be flats) by 2020 is probably now unachievable as it should have started already, it would mean 300,000 per annum against about 175,000 at most this year. Falling availability of cheap Polish electricians, plumbers and carpenters to support this huge increase as Poland growth takes off.
- Raise education spending per capita to match private fees by when? Can’t afford to meet agreements on public sector pay, Northern Rock debts on the public debt makes borrowing difficult.
If John Wheatley looks in, thanks for the reference to the book on one of yesterday’s threads. Sounds interesting.
22 Yes Tim, I thinks all pretty much how it is.
Of course, this is all very important for my betting, which preoccupies me greatly. I am heavily committed to a Hung Parliament. There are times when I think I may have got it wrong. This usually follows some inept Brown performance on TV. In my calmer moments however I reflect upon how much work the Conservatives have to do to reach an overall majority and now, more recently, I ponder whether Brown’s ‘failures’ have more to do with spin than substance, presentation rather than policy.
It seems to me a government can recover from presentational blunders (EU signing, for example) more easily than from what are perceived as policy blunders (Iraq). If I am right, my betting is probably right, and I can look forward to the next GE with optimism, as far as my wagers are concerned. If I am wrong, I may have to accept that I’m starting to lose my touch.
23. Yes but isn’t it remarkable how many people seem unable to spot his spoofish nature?
O/T
Please could someone provide an explanation as to why Gord has pledged £50million aid to China?
The £50m in aid Mr Brown has promised the Chinese to help tackle climate change will fund technology to boost energy efficiency as well as increase the use of clean coal and carbon capture systems.
It couldn’t possibly be paid in order to secure export contracts could it?
30 Yes, PtP, I am with you and Rod “bring on a Hung Parliament” Crosby on this, and nearer the time, I may well ‘put my money where my mouth is’.
28. The list is pretty long. Fair to say that GB has continued many of the failed approaches of his predecessor while adding a raft of further idiocies and confusing u-turns (PtP as a Labour supporter won’t agree of course).
And on top of this his presentation and media skills have been woeful to a degree scarcely credible. The Private Eye weekly spoof ‘Message from the Supreme Leader’ is so near reality they will have to stop running it soon.
28 Nice list, Ted, and helpful.
As a punter, it strikes me as a mixed bag - the kind of stuff you could debate interminably rather than clear policy blunders - and not in any case the kind of things that start fights in bars. It’s all a bit like his record as Chancellor, mixed with one or two serious minuses (tax credits would be my own favorite; you will no doubt have your own.)
So it’s a bad impression that we are left with, rather than a compelling case for getting the bas*ard out, and quick.
How many seat do the Tories need for an OM? About 125? Hmmm. Not much inclined to lay of my HP money - yet.
On the subject of policy errors, the desperation tactics on Northern Rock continue, with another £30bn guarantee now proposed…
UK government debt to be issued, backed by NR’s mortgage book. Possibly, just possibly, there might be a shortfall…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3213272.ece
34 Harry
See post 21 first paragraph for a brief characterisation of my general political outlook, and please grant that this is something I know more about than you.
Cheers.
37. Oh come on Peter, I know it’s not fashionable to admit to supporting Labour anymore - that seems now to be ‘the love that dare not speak its name’
But you’ve made your sympathies pretty clear in the past…ex Labour member, fan of Blair and Brown etc etc.
35 Like you I think HP most likely but presentation IMHO is more important than policy. Activists love discussing the detail etc but 659 detailed policies are meaningless to most voters. It’s in the end down to who pushes the right buttons - to an extent I think we saw this in NH when Clinton changed presentation, made herself more available to press and for questions, “exposed” her character, “found her voice”. The stage managed, no press (Chelsea refusing to talk to that child reporter), no questions machine turned around into an equally stage managed more personal campaign.
Gordon of course tried that in last Labour Conference - my father, my moral compass etc. - but the fact it crashed doesn’t mean it can’t work again.
30/33/35. I managed to get 11/4 a hung parliament around the time of the pulled “election that dared not speak it’s name” and 9/4 Tories most seats. I still think the Tories will get a small overall majority. RodCrosby’s analysis fails to factor in Brown’s individual unpopularity which I feel on it’s own is worth 5 percent to The Tories.
Herbert at 32: Replying with my Energy PPS hat on: It depends how serious you think climate change is, but the position is esssentially that:
a) Most scientists advise that it’s serious and can be affected by collective government action to reduce carbon emissions
b) If the Chinese don’t do anything about it, we’re largely wasting our time
c) The Chinese say they’d like to help but as a developing country can’t really give it top priority
In this situation it makes sense to offer technical help and assistance to enable them to do the job without having to prioritise it with their own resources over something basic. It’s probably a more useful application of the money than anything we could do with it for the same purpose in Britain. And quite likely it gets the Chinese used to using British enviironmental technology, which can produce future exports for us.
Don’t you think that makes sense?
38 I also puzzle some of the conservatives on here with some views that appear to be rather right wing, Harry. Casino Royale, for example, has asked me why I am not a Tory and Benedict has kindly offered to send me a membership pack from time to time. Perhaps it’s because I don’t buy all my politics at the same shop that I cause difficulties for those who like things niced and clear cut.
My apologies if that includes you, Harry.
39 Couldn’t agree more, Ted. Very well put.
33 Tim
My guess is that the odds on an HP will not really shorten much until we get very close to an election and it all becomes rather obvious, so no rush to get on. The price may even drift a bit in the interim.
42. I would be intrigued to see one of these membership packs. Why do they have to be kept on ice? Is a complimentary bottle of bubbly included? Is that why Peter from Putney joined the Tories? How big is Benedict’s freezer?
I think we should be told.
Breaking news 1.
Black bin bags full of British DWP records have been found in a public park in South Carolina.
Breaking News 2.
Specialist decontamination teams have been brought in to deal with the bin bags as they are found to be mixed in with Labour Party ddeputy Leadership donation returns and empty bottles of fake-tan.
Given that the Nevada caucuses start at 11am local time that’s only 9pm GMT so we might get some interesting results quite early. Maybe by 10pm. All these late nights at least once a week are killing me.
47 What, a young man like you Smithson? Get a grip, man!
47 - CNN are doing a programme starting at midnight.
Two points re teh headline article:
McCain looks to have stalled in SC right at the wrong moment and it could be a case of limping over the line before Huckabee catches up. I’;ve always called it for McCain though my only bet was on Huckabee who I felt might offer short term value. Mccain is showing a steady block which is similar the regular Huckabee polling figures. The problem seems to be that beyond tha say 24-26% McCain’s support is soft. The question is, where is it going? I think nowhere, its in danger of simply not coming out.
Thirdly if its a closed registered GOP only poll, I would strongly advise people to dig into the poll results. I think some of those included non-GOP people in their samples.
It may prove enlightening.
As regards the Democrats, I think the Clinton/Edwards exchange of supporters is becoming more obvious in NV than maybe before. If Clinton gets a good result in NV, and I called it for her a number of days ago, I think SC could be rather tougher for Obama than the polls suggest. Its the one from a betting point of that could offer something interesting if Clinton starts to get traction. Its worth watching to see if she starts to eat the ground up on Obama.
41.
Yes thank you Nick.
Must dash to Craven Cottage to see whether Arsenal can score 3 without reply against Fulham.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7197628.stm
Is the implication that the data was unencrypted?
It isn’t the first time MOD laptops have gone missing, and one wonders if any lessons learned from the last time.
Good administeration of government IT policies may appear to be less exciting than new imporved policy reviews, but it doesn’t instill confidence in any large government database projects for the NHS or ID cards.
Mike Smithson did a mistake regarding the Republican SC primary. This is NOT a closed primary. It would be stupid to conduct a lot of surveys including indepent voters who were not allowed to vote.
51 Enjoy, Herbert.
Me too, I must away. Horses to back.
Back tonite. Could be a long one.
53. That answers that then. I found that curious that they had included independents in their polls. In fact I’m sure one even had ‘Democrat’ amongst affilition figures when I looked at it the other night!
Thanks.
McCain is the man who should win it, but I’d worry about that 3-4% variance in his figures that looks soft. They need to come out. If he can get them out he should do it. If they decide to stay at home while the hard core voters come out themn Huckabee could well sneak in but its close even then.
Just to add I think the other key lies in 2 losers in the SC race. Romney & Thompson.
If either of those shed last minute it’ll be interesting. Thompson’s people perhaps trend to Huckabee and McCain m,ore strongly than others in the race but I think its the Huckabee inclined side of his support is the one that is trading back and forth.
A Romney fade would help McCain.
re 53. Thanks Jan and others who have emailed me - I have changed this.
As someone pointed out yesterday, Ladbrokes prices on Guiliani appear very generous. 9/2 for the GOP nomination (5/2 with Paddy Power) and 14/1 for the Presidency,(8/1 with Paddy Power).
I know he is polling badly at present but that aside, he couldn’t have wished for the early primaries to have gone much better. All over the place. If he can win Florida then he is back in the race. Currently priced between 6/4-2/1 with Betfair/Intrade.
I’ve balanced my books a bit by backing him in both markets. Only one gaping hole in the book now. Hillary for the Presidency. Wish I had taken the 9/2 available before NH. I will settle for 3/1 now if anyone can oblige?
10. Nick, I’m sorry but I do find myself disagreeing with you rather a lot at the moment! I agreed with your analysis until you got to “but Hillary can probably stall it in Florida”.
How so? There are no delegates at stake: hence Florida is irrelevant practically. And if you’re referring to “mo”, if the huge “uncommitted” vote in Michigan was inconsequential, I fail to see how a huge Clinton vote in Florida (not that I expect it) would be any less so?
And on 57, just to refer to last night’s thread; the SurveyUSA poll is modelling a turnout of 89% GOP, 10% Inds and 1% Dems. Thompson will be hoping for a 1% turnout - and, coincidentally, a 100% hispanic turnout - because the poll bizarrely shows him winning the hispanic vote in SC by a landslide.
today’s timetable
Nevada Republican caucuses:
Begin at 9 am PT (7 pm GMT)
Straw vote begins at 9:15 - 9:45 am PT (5:15 - 5:45 pm GMT)
Precincts are asked to conclude at 10:00 am PT (6:00 pm GMT)
First results posted 10-10:30 am PT (6-6:30 pm GMT)
Results likely known by Nevada Republican Party by 12:30 PT (8:30 GMT)
Nevada Democratic caucuses:
Begin at 11:30 am PT (7:30 pm GMT).
Preference groups form at 12 pm PT (8:00 pm GMT)
Second alignment begins at 12:15 pm PT (8:15 pm GMT)
Results start coming into Nevada Democratic Party at 2 pm PT (10 pm GMT).
South Carolina Republican primary:
Polls open from 7 am to 7 pm ET. Close midnight GMT
58 “I will settle for 3/1 now if anyone can oblige?”
Presumably you want it each way, StJohn?
60 oops - first time should be 5pm GMT and not 7. I need an edit button.
O/T but I just heard David Miliband on R4 on the latest lost data story “We can’t legislate against people leaving their PC’s in their cars overnight” followed by some stuff about judging governments on the future.
Earth to David - You Can Legislate - you are the Government. It may be news to you but you have in fact legislated about data protection (in 1998), there is a law that says personal data must be kept secure. That’s the point David. Leaving personal unencrypted data, that your Government (MoD is in fact part of your Government) has obtained, on a PC overnight in a car is against the Data Protection Act.
If Miliband’s vacuous response is typical of the man then what hope is there for Labour after Brown?
61. Is it a handicap?
61/64. LOL!
re 60 Thanks Marcia.
59 - The Hispanic sample size will be so small - probably less than 10 - that the MOE will be huge making it pretty meaningless.
As for Florida there are no delegates at stake but a lot of votes. The difference with Michigan is that Obama and Edwards are on the ballot paper. If Clinton wins, especially by double digits it will give her a media boost going into Feb 5th. As I said to ukpaul the other day the results will be reported and have an effect. The question is the degree.
On SC today - my pet theory is that momentum on the eve of poll is crucial. Huck had it in Iowa, McCain in NH and Romney in Michigan - and each overshot what the opinion polls were showing. I still think McCain is favorite, but I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see Huck win either. From an interest perspective I hope McCain doesn’t win because that will keep it wide open.
dr spyn @ 52 re data loss — never mind encrypting the data: it ought to be standard practice to encrypt the entire hard drives of all government laptops. Any MPs or councillors on here whose laptops might carry constituents’ details (or any sensitive material) should also encrypt their machines. Laptops are too easily stolen to be unencrypted.
If criminals can be tagged, then so can MOD laptops.
I was reflecting this morning as I was walking my new dog, “Comrade Trotsky” just what a disaster Karl Rove will be seen for the republican cause.
The Bush presidency, engineered by Rove, has been catastrophic for the US both domestically, and more importantly for us internationally.
However, worse still his greatest mistake for GOP may have been in politicising the evangelical core so aggressively. This pact with the “devil” or rather “jesus”, which first helped propel Bush to the nomination in 2000 (the SC trouncing of McCain), and used again in his re-election in 2004 may make any half way decent candidate unelectable in the eyes of the GOP evangelical base. Infact if Huckabee wins SC tonight, and goes onto win Florida he must be de facto be the favourite.
So a disastrous presidency, a headbanging base, loss of the congress, senate, and presidency for 10 years or more could well be Rove’s legacy for GOP.
67. Plus there’s the chance that the delegates will be reinstated.
63. Yes just heard Milipede’s comment too - this was a terrible faux pas, expect it to be withdrawn or modified within 24 hours. Most govt ministers don’t understand anything about IT, hence ridiculous statements like the one he just made. Gordo apparently has a new chief of staff but so far it isn’t obvious.
Nevada had a very low Democrat turnout last time. Polls show Clinton ahead but not by far. Apparently there is some sort of row about an advert being run by Obama supporters accusing Clinton of being anti-Hispanic.
In short, I haven’t a clue how I shall bet tonight.
72. Even Michelangelo needed the right materials to work with!
Read all the recent posts and decided to buy Labour seats and buy Boris. This as a Scottish Tory.
I am afraid many of the Tories especially from the south end of this island both misunderstand and underestimate GB. He is British Scot and as different from TB as a Unionist is from a Fenian. Unlike TB who basically played to the Islington chattering classes GB cares little for them. However he knows where his roots and much more in touch with the common man.
In the next 3 years I think that GB will squeeze the public sector so he has room for good tax cust before the next election. He will tighten up immigration, drop the irrelevant political agendas of Nu Labour and switch his international focus to helping British business. As in Scotland those who dont fit in such as Peter Hain or Ken Livingstone will be hung out to dry. This will maintain discipline.
I am not sure this will be enough to win Labour the next election but I cant see the Tories getting a majority.
63,72 re Miliband and laptops. Miliband is of course wrong about the law and (me @ 68) it is simple and painless to encrypt all hard drives.
But what of the politics? I really do not know what people see in Miliband. It has come to a pretty pass if he is the alternative to Brown.
75. Impressive, but I wonder why we haven’t seen any of this brilliant political craftsmanship from Brown yet?
Instead of being in touch with the common man I see Brown as being instinctively devious, but woefully inept. He cannot trump his opponent or win a success in policy without making a hideous blunder to cancel out the good publicity.
See, for instance, his “tax cut” in his last budget that actually hits the poorest because he abolished the starting rate. Yep, really in touch with the common man there.
By the look of things it is too risky to bet on GOP SC primary.McCain is a slight favourite ( but not on Intrade) but Huckabee has the momentum according to the last polls on RCP.
Mike Smithson- just to say really appreciate you putting up these interesting clips on the leaders.
It is sad to see the Democrats taking chunks out of each other. The way I see it is that this is Hillary’s last stand, her one and only shot at the White House. A slim chance maybe that she will try again if Obama wins the nomination and loses the presidential campaign, but I cannot see this happening. The Democratic campaign will decide the presidency.
Obama on the other hand could be high profile for another 4 campaigns. If he loses well against Hillary this time, he will still be around in 8 years time- his next realistic shot (or 4 if Hillary loses the campaign).
Strategically for the Democrats it will be better for Hillary to win, and to hold Obama back to fight future campaigns when the GOP machine is likely to be back in order, and much harder to beat. That way they have a realistic chance of holding onto to the White House for at least 12 of the next 16 years, and maybe all 16 of them.
73. I find it distasteful how *both* sides in the Democrat spat are trying to undermine each other with comments and other such nonsense regarding race. At first I thought Clinton was the one who kept putting her foot wrong; now I’m not so sure.
Obama’s supporters are definitely no saints either when it comes to the mudslinging.
19 Tim13 “Presumably if you say something long enough and loud enough it becomes true, does it?”
Seems to be Browns approach on inflation, unemployment, tractor production east of the Urals….
79. Thanks Tyson - I try to choose clips which give a real sense of how the campaign is being reported on American TV.
which is why, Tim13, Brown will not win the next election (in the sense of being Prime Minister 7 days after the next General Election). I’ll back my position with £100 bet - will you back yours for the same amount?
this local Las Vegas TV channel will be doing a live video stream from 5 p.m.
http://www.klas-tv.com/Global/story.asp?S=7736157
67. Kieran, yes, I was being sarcastic about Thompson - the hispanic vote is indeed all-but-non-existent in SC; my point was just that for some reason he’s winning about 60% of that vote there (with Romney second and McCain trailing), which is odd given their immigration positions. And yes, before anyone yells at me: usual disclaimers about legalised hispanics not at all favouring illegal immigration.
73. Matt, there is no chance of the delegates being reinstated without re-running the entire thing (unless Clinton wins without them, in which case who cares) - for similar (if not quite identical) reasons as Michigan not being reinstated: how can you give Clinton the delegates for her deceitful, dishonest conduct of staying on the ballot and punishing the others who abided by the DNC ruling and either withdrew from the ballot or did not campaign in the state? There is no court in the land - even one stuffed with Clinton appointees - that would endorse such gross vote rigging.
79. Tyson, the flaw in your argument is that in eight years time who knows who will have emerged as a star in Dem ranks? Obama was unheard of in 2000. Edwards would have been the best candidate four years ago: he isn’t even the third best today. Carpe Diem should be etched as the first of the political ten commandments: politicians and selectorates who seize the day tend to win; has-beens like Clinton tend to end up losing.
21 Peter the Punter “I am on the whole fairly centrist in my political opinions, which are held lightly, I dislike humbug.”
Humbug, I say, humbug!
Adam- I think though that people do not realise just how inexperienced Obama is. He is such a great performer his shine will not diminish, and will be president of the USA in his career.
Obama is a different league to Edwards who would have been steam rollered by Bush in 2004. Edwards is a much better candidate in 2008 than he was in 2004, which shows just what tough competition the Democrat race is now. Cheney demolished Edwards in their TV debate.
Experience counts for something- the Edwards of 2008 would have probably beaten Kerry in 2004 who was then a much more accomplished performer than Edwards.
Shalom from israel. Where it is sunny but weird. Re obama - FWIW he has said this is his only candidacy. Win or lose he won’t run again. So he says!
86- ptp- is a centrist to the core.
For centrists though NuLab has been much more appealing for the last 12 years or so, that is why it has been in power.
O/T People betting on the Halifax house price index should read their quarterly report here: http://www.hbosplc.com/economy/includes/19_01_08greater-london.doc
They say Greater London house prices fell 6.3% in the last quarter of 2007. Not a prediction but a figure based on completed sales.
89. Yes but in the 1970s and 1980s Labour’s centre of gravity was close to Moscow (something you would doubtless approve of). Not very appealing to ‘centrists’, and especially not to the extent they would actually have joined the party.
88- shalom seanT- memories of a 9 month stint in Israel on a communist kibbutz near kiryat shmona, a particularly lovely Israeli soldier from Haifa, and some great substance abuse come flooding back. A fantastic country.
Back on thread do you believe Obama on this one? He is saying it exactly to counter those Democrats who would like to back Hillary now, and keep the Obama powder keg free for future campaigns. I would do the same.
Don’t know if someone posted:
“Watch It, Democrats. You Could Still Slip Up.
But I’d still rather be cautious than cocky about our chances — particularly if New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg decides to run. Only in Manhattan would he ever have been considered a Republican, and his message of social tolerance, fiscal discipline and managerial competence is more likely to hurt Democrats than Republicans.(…)this should be a Democratic moment. But a referendum on racism and sexism in the spring does not seem like a prelude to victory in the fall. Keeping the election focused on the manifest failures of conservative Republican leadership is the only way the Democrats can grasp the opportunity at hand.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/18/AR2008011802870.html
Why is the Fink cheering Clegg on torake politics to the right. He can’t be fantasising about the Lib Dems replacing Labour
92 Impossible to say who the Republicans will come up with in 4 or 8 years time they may very well have a new star of their own or they may crumble. It is better for the Dems to press home their advantage now remember Congress, on their nominees coattails, than squueze home under Hillary and have little fat reserves for leaner times
Tyson, i hav my doubts about obama’s vow. But he has said it emphaticaly. Anyway ciao, gotta watch some druze play footie, then catch my plane.
American Research Group has Huckabee leading by 7% in South Carolina. Contrasts with Zogby showing 1% McCain lead. See Real Clear Politics:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_primary-233.html
All the momentum is with Huckabee - surely he should be very strong favourite.
95. In four years time, expect the GOP to be talking up Bobby Jindal, the wunderkind Governor of Louisiana.
87. Tyson, sorry I disagree: Edwards is a far worse candidate this time because he has swung too far to the populist left. In 2004 he had a much more moderate platform that highlighted the “two Americas”.
The hang-up on experience so many Clinton fans have is, with respect, at best bogus - Kennedy had little experience; Eisenhower had virtually no political expertise; and even though George W. Bush had been governor of Texas for six years, do you really regard him as having a detailed grasp of policy?
And let’s get something straight about Clinton: her experience happens to be wife of a president, of spectacularly stuffing up healthcare reform, and of debating for endless hours in the Senate - and we all know what extensive service in the Senate does to a candidate’s electability…
The President appoints a huge team of highly experienced advisors and cabinet secretaries if I was to accept the premise behind the “experience” jibe - that Obama isn’t qualified to lead.
Leadership is more than experience. It is inspiration, unity, saying to opponents: “we may not agree but let’s see if we can get closer together and even if we can’t we don’t have to shred each other so that future attempts to resolve our differences become impossible.”
Clinton’s experience is of slicing and dicing the nation: of organising and manipulating to get things done in a hostile political environment - and in the process prolonging and deepening that polarisation. Whatever her strengths, she cannot - literally, it is beyond her ability - to end this division. Her “experience” is the very problem, not the solution.
America desperately needs a clean slate, just as it did in 1960 with Kennedy, just as it did in 1980 with Reagan, and in 1992 with Clinton; not more of the same poisonous division.
SC: I have taken some Huck at 11/8 at Willhill to hedge my McCain positions. This is wide open, time to cash in.
59 and 99: Adam, thanks for your polite disagreement - I’m no expert on US politics and you could well be right. The difference in FL from MI is that all the candidates are on the ballot paper - none of the ambiguous ‘uncommitted’ stuff. Also, it’s the last one before Super Tuesday, so any momentum from there will be important.
As for the experience thing - what impresses me about Hillary is not so much that she’s been around for a long time (which you see as a drawback, I think) but that she has an impressive command of facts and policy options. Obama might have that too for all I know, and I hope he does, but he’s taking a while to demonstrate it. I’m cautious about people who use inspiring rhetoric on top of fuzzy policies, but I agree the rhetoric *is* inspiring and if he wins the nomination I hope he wins the presidency and it works out.
As for health policy, frankly it’s such a struggle to get a US consensus on that that I don’t blame her for not succeeding. Some of the people who use it against her were among the opponents who made it impossible. It’s a bit like British Tories filibustering the Hunting Bill and then complaining that Parliament spent too much time on it.
85 - Whether Florida delegates get reinstated is up to the DNC, not a court. Also, it is not as unfair as you suggest. Obama, Edwards and Clinton have done exactly the same thing with regard to Florida - kept on the ballot but not campaigned. Regardless, you seem to be confusing what is ‘fair’ with what is likely to happen.
88 - Sean what are you doing in Israel? Thriller research? What’s the response like to Y’srael Beitanu leaving the coalition. Are Shas next to follow suit following poor poll ratings?
97 - The problem is both ARG and Zogby are pretty unreliable. The ARG poll shows incredible volatility. The figures with changes from 2 days ago: Huckabee 33 (+10), McCain 26 (-7), Thompson 21 (+8), Romney 9 (-11), Guiliani 3 (-1), Paul 2 (+1). That goes against all received wisdom on interchanges of support, with both Huckabee and Thompson rising. And this poll really skews the RCP average. Without it McCain leads by 2.4%.
So Huckabee isn’t the strong favorite but has a good chance. I’d say McCain is still the slight favorite, but only just, with the chances split 55-45.
New thread - “My first-hand experience of the power of Hillary”
101 - Nick, I agree with you about the scale of the health problem in the US, but it goes to hubris that she believed she had both the ability and the mandate to be uniquely qualified to succeed. Hubris is a necessary quality in a President, but ask yourself this: is the US more polarised and divided than it was in 1993, or less? It’s very much more so - and given she couldn’t build consensus in more benign circumstances, do you really believe she’ll make any progress in 2009?
Let’s be realistic: a Clinton win would instantly reunite and re-energise the defeated Republicans who would fight tooth and claw to avoid giving her a victory on such a massive issue: they’d be conceding a second term to her straight out the gate. Equally, a Clinton loss - her second defeat on healthcare - would instantly relegate her to “Clown Carter” status and another one term president.
Sure, those of us sympathetic to and supportive of the Democrats could blame the Republicans for the failure to get a deal, but in the meantime, that’s four, eight, twelve further years of millions and millions of Americans going without vital health coverage.
I know you’re in politics to do things for the people who depend on a Labour government, Nick. Equally, the point of a Democrat is to get things done for the most disadvantaged. It needs more than just being able to rail off fifty facts and figures on any given issue instantly: it’s as much about the capacity to get things done. Clinton will be blocked-up from day 1 even with a Democrat House and Senate. The GOP simply won’t be able to do that (at least for a while) with a president with a national mandate, for whom a sizeable chunk of their base and a huge number of independents has voted.
85. Tyson, you’re incorrect. The DNC took the decision but you don’t appear aware that Florida Senator Bill Nelson filed a lawsuit under the Voting Rights Act to force Florida’s delegation to be seated. I believe that’s currently in abeyance, but if you think this won’t end up in litigation, you’re far more optimistic than I!
3 How right Labour was last summer to all come behind Gordon Brown.
Haha ……is this guy kidding ….haha, haha, haha…God my sides are aching….haha….
In Florida the only really useful figures are how the independents and cross party voting goes. Even then it might be because of the assymetric nature of penalties imposed so only a vague straw in the wind. In a swing state if a candidate looks to be getting a lot of independent and cross party support then they are the best pick for the nomination for their party.
79 - It may well be 16 years until Obama’s next chance. Given that presidents tend to be given the full eight years and that they swing from party to party it may well be 2024 and I don’t think he’ll wait that long. Of course if McCain is chosen he could beat Clinton and there may well be a chance for Obama in four years if McCain decides to be a one term president.
Would not a McCain GOP candidacy be doomed as ‘more of the same after 8 yeras of Bush’-for ALL her faults,even if 48% vote against Clinton for McCain,1% for a third candidate and 51% vote for Clinton;these states would change hands:
New Mexico+ Iowa GOP by
110-continued-(Moderator-what happened?)
New Mexico +Iowa won by under 1% by Reps 2004 12 EVs
Ohio won by Reps by 2.1% by Reps 2004 20 EVs
Florida won by Reps by 5% by Reps 27 EVs
These 4 states would turn Bush’s GOP victory of 04 by 286-252 to a Democrat-Clinton victory of 311-227-I actaully feel this will be quite close to the mark-ie the GOP ‘lose well’,and hope to fight anothe day come 2012
83 Marquee Mark
My position at moment is on Hung Parliament - I am not at all sure who will end up PM out of that position, and I wouldn’t back GB either to lose it, as you do, or to hold on. Very brave of you offering £100 on it! Perhaps someone else would like to take you on?
101 - Nick
I spend about six months of the year in the US, dividing time between Florida and North Dakota. Everyone I know from Demleft to Repubright assure me of one thing; a Clinton presidency would maintain the huge political divisions in the US. Even within the Democratic party there are huge divisions, all based on the candidacy of Hillary Clinton. Just read Daily Kos to get a flavour. She may be a policy wonk, but does the US really need to continue the Clinton/Bush saga for another 4/8 years?
I feel that if McCain and Obama are the candidates then there would be a clear choice for Americans and that as the candidates are good friends the election process would be less divisive and the healing that the US so desperately needs might begin.
Malcolm
110 and 111 - Patrick, you can’t apply national swing to individual states in the way you can over here.
And we have a pretty good idea that Clinton can’t guarantee to bring Iowa back into the Democrat column for instance; and she could pile up vast Democrat majorities in the North East and continue to lose the midwest and whatever competitive southern states might be in play for the Democrats narrowly again - can you see a Clinton polling well in Virginia, a state that could be in play for the first time in several generations?
But even accepting your premise, why set your sights as low as another 51/49 squeeker that will divide the nation AGAIN; when you have the alternative of a Democrat running the board on a scale not seen since Lyndon Johnson? A win isn’t enough - to draw a line on the post-Vietnam divisions we need a uniter not a divider and a clear win (from one side or the other).
Romney has just won Nevada with only 2% of the districts reporting. He has a 25% lead over McCain with Ron Paul in a close third at the moment.