Guest slot: Ben Surtees previews Tsunami Tuesday
February 3rd, 2008
So will we be any wiser on Wednesday?
Super Tuesday, Super Duper Tuesday, Giga Tuesday, Tsunami Tuesday, The Tuesday of Destiny, even by the standards of the US media there has been a healthy amount of hyperbole used to describe the string primaries and caucuses being staged on Tuesday Febuary 5th.
To a certain extent, the hype is justified, while primary campaigns since the 1980’s have seen “Super Tuesdays” with many states holding simultaneous primaries or caucuses none have approached the scale we will witness next week.
In total twenty four states will hold party primaries or caucuses (21 Republican contests with 22 for the Democrats), the contest, covering every region of the country, will be a dramatic contrast to the state by state campaigning of the last month and will provide an entirely new test for the candidates in both parties.
The Republicans.On the Republican side, the party establishment and the media seem ready to anoint John McCain as the nominee. Certainly McCain’s victories in New Hampshire, South Carolina and Florida have placed him in a very strong position to clinch his parties’ nomination. However it is worth bearing in mind that the Arizona Senator enjoys little support from key sections of the Republican base and this has been reflected in the slenderness of McCain’s early victories.
Yet, despite conservative grassroots opposition to McCain, no candidate has emerged to successfully challenge him.
Mitt Romney’s poor performance in Iowa and New Hampshire seriously hampered his campaign from the off and while he was able to remain in contention, defeat last week to McCain in Florida and deteriorating poll number across the ‘Super Tuesday’ states could have dealt a fatal blow to his campaign, which is already scaling back it’s campaigning prior to Feb 5.
For Mike Huckabee, the preacher turned two term governor of Arkansas, the appeal to evangelical voters and especially the ‘home schooling’ lobby which secured his strong win in Iowa has not been repeated. Further more, the former Governor’s failure to expand his base of support beyond the religious right has seen him drift out of contention everywhere but the Deep South.
For the Republicans then, Super Tuesday could well confirm their presumptive nominee, McCain is well placed to secure victories in all the major states being contested and, with Romney struggling to regain traction and Huckabee largely marginalised, it seems likely that McCain will emerge from ‘Super Tuesday’ with a decisive edge in delegates that will provide a clear route to his party’s nomination.
The Democrats. While for the Republicans ‘Super Tuesday’ seems likely to effectively crown the party’s presumptive nominee, the race on the Democrat side seems far less clear cut. Both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama boast huge financial resources (Obama raised in excess of $30million in January alone!) and have succeeded in recovering from early setbacks, in a seesaw race which saw first Clinton’s third place finish in Iowa and then her surprise revival in New Hampshire before Obama’s landslide victory in South Carolina.
For Obama, the seesaw nature of the Democratic contest seems to have been beneficial, firmly establishing the junior Illinois Senator as a credible national candidate in the eyes of many. In contrast, Clinton has perhaps fared less well from the Democratic race’s unpredictability with both herself and her husband courting controversy through their campaign’s tactics that has revived some of the worst memories of their time in office. But, despite what has been a good week for Obama and a less encouraging one for Clinton, neither candidate enters ‘Super Tuesday’ with any significant overarching advantage.
Critically, in contrast to many of the Republican contest on ‘Super Tuesday’ delegates for the Democrats are awarded proportionally. As a result both Obama and Clinton have regions, states even individual congressional districts which they will be targeting to maximise their delegates tally.
A final key factor in the Democratic contest is the role of absentee ballots (with many having already been cast) which could provide a boost for Clinton in blunting Obama’s recent momentum.
With polls tightening in many of the key states being contested on ‘Super Tuesday’, the Democratic race seems likely to produce a patch work of results, further confused by variations in delegate tallies. What looks certain is that there will be no clear winner on the Democratic side after Feb 5, and with both Obama and Clinton boasting sufficient resources to continue their campaigns through until March or even April we could be in for a very long wait to discover who the Democratic nominee will be.
Ben Surtees used to be a prolific poster on PBC in the 2004-2005 period. Since then we only really hear from him on US issues.
MessageSpace Advertising
I am in two minds about Super Tuesday - I remember the Obamamania before New Hampshire and Hillary won - I see the surge in the polls in such a short time, the difference between the polls, and think is Obama really surging or is the New Hampshire thing all over again - I keep changing my mind on who I think will win on ST for the Democrats - it seems like McCain will easily do it for the Reps … but the Democrats is up in the air - we could still see a Hillary victor, an Obama victory or a statistical tie … very close indeed …
Don’t disagree with your analysis Ben, but would take slight issue with your last point about absentee ballots. Unless they were cast before Iowa - ie. last year - or if they are overwhelmingly cast by older white women, then I’m not sure absentees will favour Clinton.
Yes, they did in Florida, but she was the only candidate campaigning there (even though she promised she would not), was the only candidate demanding that Florida’s delegation be seated at the Convention and Florida has a huge ex-pat New York constituency: all three of which heavily favoured her.
If absentees have been cast since Iowa, I’m not sure why they would favour Clinton over anyone else - as you say, the see-saw should even things out.
[from last thread, though relevant]
106, 110, 111. Fascinating. Ta.
From a purely voyeuristic point of view I’d like the GOP race to tighten again. So much more interesting. Though it does look like the The Democratic Race is gonna have a decent West End run, all by itself.
I still think Hillary is gonna get the Nom and the Prez. But I wouldn’t wager a cent on it.
Good article Ben , thank you.
If Obama wins even slightly more delegates on Super Tuesday, I would be fairly confident that he will win the nomination. I’d expect Hillary to win 50-60 more delegates on the day. A lead of more than 150 for her would probably be insurmountable.
Assuming that no candidate has a several-hundred delegate lead after ST, and that both candidates score within the 46-54 range in Pennsylvania, Texas, Ohio, and Virginia (post ST), I don’t see any way that this doesn’t get resolved by Edwards delegates and Superdelegates.
I am also growing wary of the McCain-as-presumptive-nominee thing. He didn’t get the vote out in Maine, and I wonder if he is preferred to Romney, but that if turnout is low (supressed by people thinking it’s largely decided) Romney could win some key WTA states, and then there is a chance that the Anybody-But-McCain GOP establishment campaign kicks in. McCain needs California, New York and New Jersey to kill off Romney completely. California is the weak link for him at present if Zogby is to be trusted.
Well I think I will try and call it
Hillary -
Arizona, Arkansas, California, Connecticut, Delaware, Mass, Missouri, NJ, NY, NM, OK, TN (12)
Obama
Alaska, Alabama, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, North Dakota, Utah (10)
Most probably completely wrong but I call it 12-10 for Hillary
Ben are you really Ben? The style of writing seems to have changed a bit…… That said….
I enjoyed reading your analysis.
4 Have you seen the Sunday Times article on Cormac’s successor. Seems you’ll have to expand your list to include some Monk people have never heard of. Also they claim Peter Smith has Cormac’s backing which given his relations with the Vatican must be the Catholic equivalent of Lembit Opik’s support in a Liberal Democrat Leadership contest
Nail bitingly close,but I will put some cash on Obama to get the nod.
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Democrats Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton are running neck-and-neck in California, New Jersey and Missouri two days before the sprawling “Super Tuesday” presidential showdown, according to a Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released on Sunday.
Obama has a slight lead in California and is virtually tied with Clinton in New Jersey and Missouri heading into the biggest day of voting in a U.S. presidential nominating campaign, with contests in 24 states from coast to coast.
“It looks like we have some serious horse races going on with Clinton and Obama,” said pollster John Zogby said. “However it turns out, we can be pretty sure it is too close to be resolved on Tuesday.”
Here are my guesses for the Dems:
Clinton (Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Utah)
Obama (Alabama, California, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Missouri, Tennessee)
Thanks Ben.
It looks like being very close on the Dem side, and I would go along broadly with Rej’s call. It will them depend on the precise delegate count as to whether we still have a contest.
I also echo Morus’s slight concerns about McCain. All three would kill the contest stone dead. New York and Jersey have gone, but Ca is still in play and if Romney can sneak that, it’s still not over.
5, 9 - how does these pan out in terms of delegates? Are some winner takes all?
Democrats are all some version of PR -
7 No I haven’t - cheers for that, Punter.
Cormac has probably reaslised that supporting Alan Roche was a folly, and that Archbishop Peter Smith (of Cardiff, but not from Cardiff) is the only current member of the Bishop’s Conference of England & Wales (or the ‘Magc Circle’ as they are sometimes called) whom Rome could even stomach. He did apparently once have a ‘forthright exchange of views’ with the then Cardinal Ratzinger, but then find a senior candidate who never did.
New Stalking Horse for the Archbishop of Westminster job is Abbot Edmund Power, of the Basilica of St-Paul’s-Outside-the-Walls in Rome. A Benedictine, and likely to be an acceptable choice to almost all parties.
Off out to Sunday Lunch and a Trivial Pursuit championship - see you chaps later.
with my 12-10 to Hillary she takes the large states - but I don’t think I predict a large win in delegates - I think there are 1,688 at at stake so I would assume it would be very close in those terms …
Looking at the lates polls, with more than one backing up Obama being within reach of Arizona and New Jersey the potential vote for him is there. I think it’s all about turnout, will everyone be energised enough to come out and vote for him or not?
Here’s my reading of it as to how they stand with a couple of days to go -
Clinton
Arkansas, California, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Tennessee
Obama
Alaska, Georgia, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, North Dakota, Utah
Too close to call
Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Minnesota, Missouri, New Jersey
So many are too close to call that I expect them to be within five percent either way, and with delegates awarded the way they are that isn’t going to make too much difference.
In case anyone is interested, there are a few Super Tuesday specials up on the ladbrokes site. Who will win the most states, number of states won etc.
Sorry if that looks like advertising, but I spent hours researching the possible outcomes in North Dakota, Alaska etc and I can’t pretend we’ve taken too much business so far on these.
If I was going to call those ‘too close to call’ states, I’d go with -
Clinton
Alabama, Arizona, Colorado, Minnesota, New Jersey
Obama
Connecticut, Delaware, Missouri
From Zogby:
“On the Democratic side, California, Missouri and New Jersey are so close. Obama’s lead in California is by virtue of solid support in the Bay Area and among Independents (by 20 points), men (20 points), 18-29 year olds (31 points), very liberal voters (22 points), and African Americans (75%-14%). Clinton does well among women (11 points) and among Hispanics (64%-29%).
In Missouri, Obama has solid leads in the St. Louis region (16 points), with Independents (7 points), young voters (16 points), and African Americans (62%-26%). He also leads among moderates and men. Clinton leads in Kansas City (7 points), in the Southwest (16 points), and among liberals (8 points), women (5 points), and among voters over 65 (25 points).
“Obama leads in both Northern and Southern New Jersey, among men, and among African Americans (74%16%), while Clinton again holds Hispanics (19 points), whites (10 points), moderates (8 points), liberals (8 points), Jews (22 points), women (9 points), and voters over 65.
“It is all about delegates and these numbers suggest that both candidates get respectable votes and a lot of delegates.”
15. You’re probably right, the delegate count might be indecisively split. But in that case the spin becomes more important.
Who will be “perceived” as the victor? I’d say if Obama is close to Clinton in delegates (and definitely if he is ahead, however marginally), he can successfully spin that as a major victory, given his prior underdog status.
Similarly, if he takes one of the major, previously Clinton-o-phile states like California, then he will deffo be seen as having the greater momentum.
Clinton, on the other hand, needs to win all the states she was expected to win, and she needs to win very well to get momentum.
Time is on Obama’s side. She needs to win now. I think she might do it, but I thought England were gonna thrash Wales.
That’s my amateur psephology. Now I must order room service.
Whoops, just noticed that Clinton appeared with Missouri in my first post - that’s what you get for copying and adapting a list from somewhere else, to be clear, Missouri is too close to call but I think Obama will edge it!
O/T but a bit of a US connection. The mayor of a Texas town has resigned after stealing a dog she had been caring for during neighbours holiday, after telling them it was dead. Her excuse “I can tell you that I did at the time what I thought was best for Panchito and what I felt was right in my heart. I am sorry for the division that the events of these last few weeks have caused. It was never my intent to bring any negative exposure to our city.”
Brought to mind Mr Hain’s and Mr Conway’s excuses but at least she resigned as against Wendy Alexander’s latest “I am also very clear that the Labour Party and Scottish politics would be ill-served by my resignation” after she was reported to the Procurator Fiscal.
Sorry Wendy but I think both would do OK after you departed.
Obama drew a massive crowd of 18,000 in the Twin Cities of MN yesterday and Hillary diverted to the Twin Cities today and has an appearance but not expecting big crowds - going to watch the Super Bowl apparently … her husband is watching it with Richardson so make of that what you will - could Richardson back Clinton, and seal NM and Arizona for her …and if he did I would change my Colorado prediction to Clinton
Not just Zogby showing California closing.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/02/03/MNF7UR6FE.DTL&tsp=1
19 I wondered when the Rugby might be spoken about
Conflicting polls for New Jersey - one just out has Clinton in the lead
http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/02/03/clinton_mccain_lead_in_new_jersey/9819/
Here are my projections for the ‘big six’ (The Seven WTA states minus AZ and UT and plus CA)
NJ, NY & CT = McCain wins by a landslide
DE & CA = McCain has a confortable lead
MO = McCain leads by inches
Detailed projections after the link
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/02/03/gop-projections-for-ca-ct-de-mo-nj-ny/
The annoying thing to note is that Republican delegate allocations are biased towards states that the Republican party carried in previous general elections. This means that New York and California are severely underepresented.
24. Yes. But let’s not dwell on it, eh? Ghastly business.
23. Very interesting article. Obama definitely surging in the final days…
Or is he? We all know how useless the polls have proved in this Dem race. They could easily be just as wrong here.
Jolly Exciting Though.
O/T Punter
Going back to Bexley….
But it’s scarcely more ferciously right wing than Bromley and Chislehurst
I think it is. Bromley and Chislehurst is relatively right-leaning, but it’s culturally rather different from Bexley, with a stronger professional/managerial element; the sort of place where the LDs generally make a good showing locally, and where the LDs were well-established as Bromley’s second party in local terms. Bexley is different: a nondescript swathe of inter-war terraces and semi-detached houses, at the lower-income end of the suburban range, with relatively small professional/managerial component compared to outer London, and significantly less prosperous than Bromley (except in a couple of wards, like Sidcup and St. Mary’s).
The type of voter who predominates here is exactly the kind who is least attracted to the LDs: the Estuary corridor on both sides of the Thames is, apart from isolated outcrops, one of the worst areas of the country for the LDs. The demographic groups that have helped them make strides elsewhere are absent here. The right-wing fringe has an established base here, and the Conway affair should help them.
Of course, the LDs have advantages. In the event of a bye, they can flood the area with activists from Bromley and other areas, and they’ve got Lord Rennard’s bye machine. But there’s no way I’d put them as favourites. With good luck, they can get second place; but it’d take exceptional circumstances to see them winning.
PS Nice piece Ben. Thankyou.
Post #24 Previous Thread from Dave(S):
Zogby polling.
California Obama 45 Clinton 41, Romney 37 McCain 34
If this poll is anything near being correct, then Wm Hills stand out odds on Obama of 2.25/1 look absolutely great value. These compare, for example, with Betfair’s 1.7/1 before their 5% commission charges.
Influential LA Times endorses Obama today.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-ed-dem3feb02,0,3530861.story
30. Likewise, given the recent tightening in the polls, why is Hillary still at a very ungenerous 8/15?
Seems pretty stingy to me.
2 – Adam
On absentee ballots, I’m going a little on what the Clinton campaign has been spinning about California where they seem confident that the absentee ballots will insulate them against any late Obama surge… with as many as 25% of votes coming from absentee ballots.
Having said that if Obama’s campaign could neutralise that advantage if it is able to drive up turnout amougst its supporters as it did in IA and SC (certainly Obama’s campaign seems confident of winning very big in the Bay Area and Up State in CA – but is it enough, even if it does overcome the Clinton edge on absentee ballots, to trump Clinton in LA and the South?).
4 – Morus
If Obama’s is seen to have “won” super Tuesday (which would still be a very impressive result for his campaign even now) then the contests throughout the rest of February probably favour him – Feb 9 (Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington and US Virginia Islands) – Feb 10 (Maine) – Feb 12 (DC, Maryland and Virginia… the “Potomac Primaries”) – Feb 14 (Hawaii and Wisconsin)… so if he does pull off a “win” on Tuesday then he’s probably well placed.
5 - rej4sl
Apart from CT and DE (I switch those to Obama – polls have him ahead in CT and DE has a large Afro-American vote) seems reasonable… also remember the delegate allocation is proportional (Obama has wide leads in IL and GA, but Clinton’s leads in place like NJ and MA have been very slim of late)… the state’s I’m totally unsure of are probably AZ, MN and MO (all the recent polls have suggested its close there, and then there’s CA!).
6 – Tressage
I am indeed… as to the writing style, I’m in the middle of my dissertation so I suppose my prose might have taken a bit of a knock…
28 Perhaps so. Favourites way too strong a tag. But I think Bromley and Chislehurst and Dunfermline are object lessons. Throw in the depressing vote effect (prob 5% at least) of an MP going under a cloud and it would make Cameron very undelighted I would say at the prospect of an Election
The problem for Romney is that he’s got nowhere to gain signficant numbers of delegates - even if he wins California, he’s already lost the huge chunk of winner takes all states in the NE and Arizona, he’s 15% odd behind in Illinois, and McCain will almost certainly win Missouri’s 58 WTA. On top of all that, McCain looks surprisingly likely to hoover up Georgia, Alabama and Tennessee.
Romney might conceivably edge the “big prize” of California, but that only means he catches McCain by 5-20 delegates at most. Meanwhile, in the WTA states McCain gets 312 (New Jersey, New York, Arizona, Missouri, Connecticut, Delaware), while Romney only gets Utah’s 36, maybe Montana’s 25. McCain then stretches his lead another 50ish in Illinois, Georgia, Alabama, Tennessee, where he’s well ahead of Romney. All the other ST states are
……. under 50 delegates, and McCain is ahead by 25%ish nationally so will further move ahead there.
Even worse for Romney, 4 days after ST there is Louisiana, where McCain has a deal to seal up pretty much all 46 delegates.
32 If you fancy Hilary in CAL, despite my post #30, Paddy Power has the best odds at 4/7.
As of yesterday in California:
“Voter registration already has hit a record for a presidential primary, with 15.7 million voters, or about 68.5 percent of those eligible to vote, Secretary of State Debra Bowen said. Of those, some 5.5 million have requested absentee ballots.”
They need to return their vote by 8pm on Tuesday. I wonder how many of the 5.5 million have still to be returned?
As to the state-by-state results, I’d say neither candidate has much of a lock on any…
Clinton can rely on NY and AR for sure (though her lead in NY is nowhere near as wide as it once was), she’s probably likely to do well in the states with large Hispanic communities (AZ, NM as well as southern CA) add to that a strong position in TN and the North East (MA and NJ, then again her leads have been shrinking rapidly in both)… that should could be sufficient to give her the edge… but how much of an “edge” is anyone’s guess.
Obama seems to be focusing on the western caucuses (KS, CO, ID, UT and Alaska) these are all traditionally republican states but the democratic electorate is frequently pretty liberal (even somewhere like Utah – in fact Obama got 15,000 at a rally in ID the other day, which by any measure is pretty impressive). At the same time (like Clinton) he has two states he can rely on IL and GA (but in both his lead would seem much wider than Clinton’s in either NY or AR and both have large delegate allocations)… he can also probably clinch both CT and DE.
That leaves you with a string of states that are just too close to call… MO, CA, MN and AL (I’d be tempted to throw AZ and NM into that mix but i think Clinton will secure those on the back of her Hispanic support - although her support within the Hispanic community is nothing like as solid as Obama’s has been amougst Black voters whats more Hispanics remain less likley to vote in primaries than Black voters), it’s likely that that is where the result (or failing that the post Feb 5 “narrative” is decided).
interesting article about fundraising - Democrats raising more than Republicans
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/02/AR2008020202084.html
Yup, Ben, that’s what dissertations do to you….
rej4sl - Out of interest what is your take on the Minnesota Senate Race this year. Will Franken be the nominee and do you think he will beat Coleman?
ST is looking closer and closer. There have been polls in 14 states. If you take an average Clinton is leading in 10 (California, New York, New Jersey, Massachusetts, Missouri, Minnesota, Tennessee, Arizona, Alabama and Oklahoma) Obama is leading in 4 (Illinois, Georgia, Colorado and Alabama). Out of the other 8 you would expect Clinton to win Arkansas and New Mexico and Obama to win Kansas, Utah, Idaho, Alaska and North Dakota. I’m not sure about Delaware.
As has been said though Clinton doesn’t have a double digit lead in any state except New York, and in a lot of states she is ahead by 3-4% and there are 10-15% undecided. The momentum is with Obama but will it be enough? On current polling, assuming undecideds split in line, and states award proportionally Clinton is looking at a lead of about 30 delegates coming out of ST, no where near enough to wrap things up. Plus Obama is more likely to benefit from focussing on states after ST. The more voters see him the more they like him.
The question I have is how the media are likely to report ST. If say Clinton wins 14 states and Obama wins 8, but only ends up with about 30-40 more delegates, do the media portray Clinton as the clear winner and frontrunner or that things are still wide open?
30/37. Good spot PfP.
****FREE MONEY****.
Have £35 on Hillary to win California with Paddy Power at 4/7 and £17 on Obama to win the same contest at 9/4 with William Hill. Total stake £52. Return on Wednesday £55. 6% profit after 3 days. Annualised profit 600%.
more conflicting polls - this includes one for California has Clinton with a comfertable lead.
http://www.victoriaadvocate.com/795/story/189952.html
28 - that analysis is spot on. There is a huge difference between Bromley and Bexley.
34 - Yes. Cameron won’t want one. But I don’t think any of the three main parties would want one. Labour obviously has nothing to gain here, and a seat like this could very well prick Clegg’s bubble if underperformance occurs. The only parties who’d really go into a campaign with high private levels of confidence would be UKIP and the BNP, who might get into double figures. This is all hypothetical - but, if Conway does go, than it’s best for the Tories that the bye takes place in May. LD momentum would be lessened if the Mayoral campaign smothers the coverage; there’d be an extra incentive to get the solid Tory vote out; and, win or lose, attention will be focused on City Hall rather than Bexley Civic Offices.
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/01/31/senatepoll/
Kieran - a latest poll has Coleman and Franken in a close race to take the MN senate seat up for grabs. Franken is favorite to take the Democrat nomination - and he is the best bet the Democrats have to win this Senate seat.
Although I think it is very close between the two of them - Franken is very popular, and Coleman seems to be as well. I would call it a toss up at the moment - but if Franken does not win the nomination then Coleman will I believe easily win the Senate seat.
also to note in MN we have had few polls for the Caucus here on ST but the one we had with Hillary leading was a weird poll which is being reported here as one to ignore - as they did not ask if the respondee was going to vote - just how they would vote !!!!
44 Nine points isn’t that big in the context of other polls, Marcia, and also give the huge leads she enjoyed not so long ago.
My guess is she’ll edge Ca, no more; and that might just be good enough for Obama.
Anyway, nuff of that. Rugby’s on.
Nice one stjohn - you’ve really got the hang of this odds game, or are you just showing off?
Good luck to Villa this pm.
46 And yet Wales won yesterday so clearly anything is possible now. If you’ll excuse me I have some more gloating to carry out
51. Not showing off PfP, just taking a small risk free profit. Of course you can multiply those stakes by 10 if the bank balance and bookies allow. Something I’ve managed to do. You can get a decent feed for £30 you know.
Yes hoping for 3 points today.
49 - she should edge it in California with the large Latino vote.
47 - Yeah I’ve been folloiwing the race because I like Franken. I don’t trust that poll though it oversamples Democrats. If you model to 2004 party ID breakdown in MN you get Coleman 47 Franken 38 which is in line with most polls. Still not over, because when you have an incumbent below 50 they are always vulnerable.
Franken has been raising lots of money and MN has a Democratic lean. I was just wondering what your take on the reaction of Minnesotans to him is. The GOP are obviously going to use his past/ New York lifestyle at him. Do you think that will work, make him look unSenatorial? Or will most people treat him as a serious pol? He sure seems to be working hard. Would love to see him win.
44 Clinton, 45 percent; Obama, 36 percent in California.
Ouch!!
Sky Breaking News: Gordon Brown “knows nothing” (about bugging)
It’s becoming a familiar defence for Gordon.
53 You can get a decent feed for £30 you know.
Gold plated baked beans?
52 - If England end up with the wooden spoon, Punter, I think we ought to use it on you first….
43 stjohn - When PtP arranges the inaugural PB.com Midlands party, you’ll have to explain to me how you balance the opposite sides of a bet to optimise the risk free profit (or is this too in Mike’s book?). I do understand odds, whether in fractions or percentages and even the binary concept operated by Intrade and IG, which was getting you so excited 2-3 days ago. But the balancing of opposing stakes, that strikes me as quite clever.
54 - Looking at the Mason-Dixon poll in CA it is probably overestimating Clinton’s lead. Their sample is 60% white, 25% Hispanic and 9% Black. California is 47% White, 33% Hispanic and 6% Black. However Black turnout is likely to outperform Hispanic turnout significantly, they are more likely to be Democrats and more likely to vote. Eg Nevada is 7% Black and 20% Hispanic and they both made up 15% of primary voters.
Thus a breakdown of 55% White, 25% Hispanic and 15% Black is more likely. According to this poll Clinton leads by 2 among Whites, 50 among Hispanics and Obama wins Blacks by 51. So, Clinton has an edge but it is likely to be 4-5 points at most.
Looking at the Field poll (which has Clinton up by 2) there is a similar picture. The White vote is evenly split, Clinton wins Hispanics by 33 and Obama wins Blacks by 36. They have Hispanics comprising 20% of the vote and Blacks 12%.
There are just so many cleavages in this race. Race, Geneder, Age - if a poll overrepresents one group they are going to get it wrong. That’s why the polling is even less reliable (even if you have bigger sample sizes).
PfP. The example above is quite easy. Decide to have £35 on Hillary at 4/7 then the return is £55. To achieve the same return on Obama at 9/4 then simply divide £55 by the Betfair equivalent odds for 9/4 =3.25. 55/3.25= £17.
60 - decide how much you want to return in total, and divide by the decimal price in each case. e.g for an arb of evens (2.00) against 6/5 (2.20) you could work off a return of £220:
£220 / 2.00 = £110 stake
£220 / 2.20 = £100 stake
Total stake £210, return £220, guaranteed profit of £10.
I like the guy - he is so down to earth - but he is up against Coleman the incumbent who has been edging away from being a Bush clone - so far Franken comes across pretty well - most Minnesotans are pretty liberal in leaning so that will bode well - but we can also be very harsh if someone puts there foot in it - a lot of politicians have fallen here …
The Republicans last time made a big mistake by putting up Mark Kennedy who no one liked - and Amy Klobuchar won by a landslide which was destined - this time the Republicans have an incumbent but with the Democrat inclination in the November elections it could work against Coleman here - personally I think Franken will do well here but maybe when Minnesotans see more of him after the nomination is complete we will get a better idea.
His local ads for Senate are great - one of the people kind of ads - and his policies are bent towards Minnesotan values as well - all in all it will be a very close race at the moment .. I tend to discount what if polls - I like polls when we know who the candidates are and people have to make a real choice.
62. Crikey. I actually understand that. Thankyou.
I’m still not gonna bet, but thankyou.
62/63 - I’ll have to retire, there’s a new kid on the block these days…
I look forward to THUNDERSTORM THURSDAY in 2010 when Camo wins with an unprecedented majority of loads…….
26, 35. Someone from a US pollster on BBC News 24 said California was Winner Takes All.
Real Clear Politics says it’s not. Can anyone confirm for sure?
26 Matthew The annoying thing to note is that Republican delegate allocations are biased towards states that the Republican party carried in previous general elections.
The Democratic allocations work the same way, New York getting more delegates than Texas. Even within a state, the delegates are biased towards districts with a higher Democratic turnout in the last two elections.
For example, in Alabama the 7th District gets 7 delegates whereas the 1st, 2nd and 6th district only get 4 delegates, the others getting 5. The 7th district has a Democratic congressman (Artur Davis) and was created explicitly under the Voting Rights Act to be a majority African American district (which implies an overwhelmingly African American democratic primary electorate).
I suspect this pattern is not uncommon and wonder whether it helps Obama or not?
68 - it is NOT WTA
http://www.cadem.org/site/c.jrLZK2PyHmF/b.947937/
68. none of the democratic contests are winner takes all
I’m going to be prudish, but could you not choose a more appropriate headline, Mike?
69 Furthermore, the allocation of delegates based on the vote at the district level is subject to a formula that can mean clear wins do not necessarilly transalte into more delegates.
The DNC rules are as follows:
D. District-level delegates and alternates shall be allocated according to the following procedures:
Step 1: Tabulate the percentage of the vote that each presidential preference (including uncommitted status) receives in the congressional district to three decimals.
Step 2: Retabulate the percentage of the vote to three decimals, received by each presidential preference excluding the votes of presidential preferences whose percentage in Step 1 falls below 15%.
Step 3: Multiply the number of delegates to be allocated by the percentage received by each presidential preference.
Step 4: Delegates shall be allocated to each presidential preference based on the whole numbers which result from the multiplication in Step 3.
Step 5: Remaining delegates, if any, shall be awarded in order of the highest fractional remainders in Step 3.
The implications of this are as follows (based on my rudimentary maths skills)and assuming only 2 candidates get over 15% of the vote.
3 delegate district.
Winner gets at least 2 delegates. Only if winner over 85% gets all three.
4 delegate district
Split 2:2, unless winner over 62% then 3:1. If winner over 85% gets all 4
5 delegate district
Split 3:2, unless winner over 70% then 4:1. If winner over 85% gets all 5
6 delegate district
Split 3:3, unless winner over 60% then 4:2. If winner over 75% then 5:1 if over 85$ gets all 6
7 delegate district
Split 4:3 unless winner over 63% then 5:2 If winner over 79% the n 6:1 and if winner over 85% get all 7.
GOP Cal is WTA iirc.
California GOP is WTA in each congressional district (three delegates per district). Gives a strange dynamic, because there are some areas with almost no Republicans at all, and some where Ghenghis Khan looks like a socialist.
73. So effectively there would be no point putting any resources into a district with an even number of delegates, given a reasonably close race.
74 The GOP Cal race is winner takes all but determined district by district with a statewide kicker. All the districts in the GOP race have equal weighting as well, which is why candidates are campaigning in obscure parts of the state.
76 That’s how it looks to me Shadsy. The potential complicating factor though is that on a district level, some races may not be close, given the practice (both Voting Rights Act driven, and Republican gerrymandering) of trying to draw district boundaries which concnetrate African Americans into one district.
All this uncertainty about polls and delegate allocations and momentum and anti-momentum makes me think that it would be fun to have a general election without any opinion polls. If it were possible to have a whole 4-week election campaign without any opinion polls being done or published, then the 1997 result (for example) would have come as an even bigger delight than it actually was. 1992 would have been interesting as well.
Having said that, I am not in favour of any attempt to ban or restrict opinion polls - in the conrtext of FPTP they are a fundamentally important part of the process of making the result more efficient.
CA GOP voter/delegate distribution:
“An analysis by The Star of voter registration statistics shows that 54 percent of Republicans statewide are concentrated in just 18 congressional districts. Combined, that majority of GOP voters will pick 54 delegates to the Republican National Convention. The 46 percent of GOP voters who live in the other 35 districts will combine to select 105 delegates.”
http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/jan/29/primary-to-test-gops-delegate-selection-process/
Question is whether the 46% are more moderate than the 54% - if so then it favours McCain.
76 In addition, a quarter of the elected delegates are on a statewide basis, so you might still want to get othe vote in your good districts.
64 - Thanks, will keep a look out for progress. Hopefully Franken will do it, he’d certainly liven up the senate a bit.
72. Idiot.
By that reckoning the word “hurricane” should be verboten, cause of Katrina. The snooker player Alex Quite Bad Storm Higgins will be disappointed.
Indeed I think someone died in Tewkesbury during the floods, so maybe any reference to “rain”, “drizzle”, “showers” or “dampness” should be banned from any post or headline hereafter.
I’d say people like you are a wet, sucky, bottomless slough of despond, but that would be an insult to the victims of the Perranzabuloe Quicksand Tragedy of 1879.
OT -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7224692.stm
Tories literally propose “nanny state”.
83 - political correctness usually results in a deluge of complaints.
83 - Lol. I still can’t work out why you waste your time on this site. It obviously isn’t to test your own views in debate because you are so certain about everything you think. And it obviously isn’t to try and persuade other people of the merits of your views because you can’t go past two posts with some who tries to challenge you without insulting them.
So I guess you just haven’t got anything better to do.
I’m always wrong on my US predictions, so I’ll go for a thumping Clinton victory on Tuesday
Actually - I see it the way Ben does above, likely to be Clinton winning more states, but not enough delegates. The recent posts on voting methods - many thanks especially to Paul M at 73 - really do change the dynamic, and in fact a small WTA state will have far more influence on the result than a proportional one.
However in a non-close WTA contest, your vote doesn’t matter at the end of the day, I wonder if a similar proportional method (we do something similar for the Euros iirc, involving dividing the votes of the party who have won a seat, taking the next highest, dividing again etc) would get turnout up if millions of people felt their vote could influence a seat in a way that they don’t at the moment.
Finally, apologies to Punter for not replying to him this morning as I went out for a run straight after posting. However your earlier post did read like deliberately positioning your party for a bad result at a Bexley bye-election rather than accurate analysis, and Tangent’s responses did seem more on the money for me. Just getting a bit tired of constantly seeing posters downplaying their party’s chances in bye-elections/locals and talking them up for the next General, there are plenty of offenders on all sides imho.
62/63 Thanks stjohn & Aaron - I think I’ve grasped that now, I’m just getting my matchsticks out for a dry run!
The point is that nobody would have thought to call this “Tsunami Tuesday” if it wasn’t for what happened in the Subcontinent. Ie. it is implicitly not “Tsunami Tuesday” so much as “Asian Tsunami Tuesday”. So basically elevating it from “Super Tuesday” to “Tsunami Tuesday” is done for no other reason than to give it a status of magnitude which is ridiculously overhyped for a simple contest to determine the Democratic challenger to the US Presidency.
83. During the floods last year I was amused by noticing the fact that “Tewkesbury” backwards is “Why Rub Sek Wet”. It is almost as funny as “subtitles” backwards being “Sell Tit Bus”. That’s what happens when the TV people helpfully put words on the screen.
90 - Too much Countdown watching methinks!
Anyway why call it “Tsunami Tuesday” before the event? Once the results are known, and Clinton and/or Obama have won every single state, then perhaps such a description would be justified.
87 I’m always wrong on my US predictions, so I’ll go for a thumping Clinton victory on Tuesday
That’s not so surprising really, when the polls are all over the place, e.g. posts #30 & 44 above.
BTW I hope you’re wrong re a Clinton thumping victory.
72./83. Perhaps we should just call it “Stupid Tuesday” in order to mock those who foolishly think that the outcome will make more than a tiny difference to the long-term balance of U.S. imperialist aggression against progressive countries.
90 - Sel Tit Bus, surely?
Thanks for all the replies - I was asking about CA GOP.
Super Tuesday, Tsunami Tuesday, Super Duper Tuesday, Giga Tuesday, Tuesday of Destiny - are all names heard so far - I much prefer Tsunami Tuesday though although I can’t pronounce it without making my partner laugh as I always pronounce the T on Tsunami
94 - Just as a matter of interest, which “progressive countries” do you have in mind?
What about ‘AVIN IT MASSIVE TUESDAY’?
or even better - “Minnesota Votes “- at least we got some state visits out of it - funny to see that Obama came and addressed the masses, and Romney came and addressed the elite on the same day … and HRH Hillary of Clinton is going to watch the Super Bowl here today - but McCain has not even campaigned here and our dear Governor who loves McCain so much is off outstate campaigning with him - what a snub - would be funny if he lost MN but not much chance of thatone
John Loony, “sell tit bus”??
You remain quite possibly my favourite poster on here, and certainly the most accurately-named.
Alex. I would like to withdraw my comment when I called you an idiot. The word quite accurately describes you, as Iam sure you accept.
However it has been brought to my intention that using that word is an insult to the 17 innocent idiots who died in the horrific “Stampede of Stupid” in the oversubscribed Chicago Cretin Convention of 1934.
I now think you are a “t0sser”, but I just hope no one has died as a result of a badly hurled caber in any recent Highland Games.
Drudge has new Rasmussen numbers showing Obama ahead in California (changes from 29/1):
Obama 45 (+5) Clinton 44 (+1)
McCain 38 (+6) Romney 38 (+10)
And in Georgia (changes from 22/1):
Obama 52 (+11) Clinton 37 (+2)
McCain 31 (+12) Romney 29 (+13) Huckabee 28 (-6)
Nice to see Scotland get drubbed, makes up a bit for yesterday.
103 Scotland as ever = lol
61 Thanks Kieran, that’s really helpful. I was very surprised to learn that California has only a 6% Black population.
With the trend continuing towards Obama and these polls being 2-3 days old in terms of the fieldwork, I still think Wm Hills’ odds of 9/4 appear attractive. Presumably, we can expect a cascade of polls over the next 48 hours.
103 I think not. Enjoy the Woodi I mean the Calcutta Cup match
102/105 No sooner the word …….
That sounds better for Obama!
101 - You can go your own merry way. However you get your kicks.
What will stop McCain is a Huck collpase which is what some on the right of the party are urging for as we speak, an abandonment of support and transfer to Romney. Whether they will get it I have no idea. Huck steam are not buying that move and don’t like Mitt anyway but the voter base for Huck could be vulnerable.
Have no doubt however that some within the GOP are still trying for all they are worth to finish McCain but they are running out of rope. It isnt just arsewipe rent an opinions like Limbaugh in the media.
McCain needs to squeeze out every vote still like he is an underdog.
On the Dems, I would now be more interested in Obama as a betting proposition than ever, as someone who never entered the market in his favour before, and who made plenty going against the Obama hype (NV & NH). Have yet to enter and may not depending on his odds but ground is shifting, I think partially because of McCain’s ascent. Whether its worth backing laying Obama/Clinton overall I am not yet sure but im hoping again for some fun in the primaries.
Edwards exit is critical and its possible, so I have been warned that the assumption (mine included) that Edwards vote base would tilt in favour of Clinton might be incorrect. What I think is that we may see a split, state by state of where former Edwards votes tilt. Given Clinton’s lead in some states it doesnt necessarily matter if Edward’s voters there go heavily to Obama but in others the direction of tilt could make things interesting.
101 - it is no longer allowed to call somebody a “w&nker” after Stephen Milligan’s unfortunate death whilst engaging in a certain activity.
106. Yeah yeah yeah. Let’s not overdo it, Taffy. Wales didn’t so much win yesterday as England collapsed in a pathetic leaderless heap.
There were two teams at each other’s throats in yesterday’s game: England in the first half, and England in the second. Unfortunately the latter England just edged it. Wales were sort of bitplayers - mere spectators - rude mechanicals brought onstage, simply to nudge the plot along.
All that said, enjoy the (fleeting) fruits of victory! It was a cracking game. Could be an exciting Six Nations.
110 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
I forgot to mention that Clinton looks in a bit of difficulty in Missouri. Obama has been really been boosting yet Clinton, in a 2 horse race has much added to her figures at all with Edward’s absence. She is still ahead but thats tricky position to be in.
Worth taking a look at and draw your own conclusions of whether she will hang on or not.
‘Wales didn’t so much win’ England 19 Wales 26. Your point is
Ditto Arizona where her lead looks vulnerable but would take a direct switch vote.
109. Yokel. If Obama wins the nomination then Edwards withdrawal will prove to be the tipping point. I think it was yours truly who first suggested here that the received wisdom re Edwards voters switching more favourably to Clinton, may not be correct. Wishful thinking on my part but it’s starting to look that way.
109: I’m not convinced even a total Huckabee collapse makes much difference at all, as his voters don’t seem to fancy Romney much. In Florida, their second preferences went 24% McCain, 19% Romney, 12% Thompson, 12% would not vote, 5% Giuliani. You could argue that those Thompson second prefs would move to Romney, but you could say with far greater certainty that Giuliani votes would be McCain’s.
Same story in the other states, where Huckabee voters are much more favourable to McCain than Romney - perhaps because of the nastiness in the Iowa contest, whereas McCain and Huckabee clearly like each other.
116 Ah, yes, but Itold Yokel.
116 Anyway, why aren’t you at Craven Cottage?
118. Don’t follow you PtP. Are you claiming the credit?
Anyone think Mitt is too big at 8 to win in CA?
I don’t think he will and that the Zogby poll is duff but is there a bet/lay?
117. It might, it might not, what I’m flagging is that what is being tried.
116 - I think I argued that it was too early to tell, and that it could go both ways, but that was hardly sticking my neck out. I know think Obama is value for the nomination. In terms of delegates i can’t see Clinton leading by more than 100 after ST, and likely to be less than 50. The danger for Obama for me is not now falling behind in terms of delegates but losing the big states - California, NJ, Massachussetts - and medium sized states - Minnesota, Missouri, Arizona narrowly giving the impression that Clinton is the frontrunner.
Plus, if McCain has wrapped things up there will be more pressure for the Dems to as well. However things are looking good for Obama - the polls are moving in his direction and there are still a significant number of undecideds. As Yokel says Clinton seems to have a distinct ceiling to her support.
105 I still think Wm Hills’ odds of 9/4 appear attractive
Sidney has just woken up methinks - Hills have now more than halved their odds on Obama winning California from 9/4 to 11/10.
Was it something I said?
120 Oops. Read that the wrong way round.
Yes, I suggested it to Yokel long ago. Corse, I stole the idea from you in the first place.
119. I’m watching the match on telly. Not very good so far. O-O with just over half an hour to go.
What does craven mean? Often precedes fool I think? Not a complimentary adjective, that much I know.
95. I was being fnetik
121 - Have you seen the Rasmussen poll that puts Romney level with McCain (see upthread) in California? That plus Zogby suggests it isn’t sewn up for McCain.
Well, round here we call it Shrove Tuesday….
124. Yeah sorry about that, couldnt be all my money earlier today though. He’s still available comfortably odds against on both Betfair & PP’s..
I think Clinton could buck the trend and hold CA but with the latest poll giving Obama ahead I’m hoping for a flip flopping market to get on Clinton.
121 It’s better to lay McCain at 1.12 Yokel. That does indeed look promising, if only to bet later when the price drifts, as it surely must on the poll figures we’re seeing.
110. Speak for yourself - I refer the Honourable member to my message at c. 2am today a few threads ago.
128: Yeah, could be worth it at those odds. Check it’s popular vote though - Romney could quite possibly win that but lose the delegate race statewide, if he fails outside heavily GOP areas.
And what does Shrove mean? I’m pretty sure that it isn’t a synonym for pancake.
I have tried replying to 98 three times but it keeps getting disappeared, so I’m trying again
98. The DPRK
1-0 !
98. Cuba
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695249479,00.html
First poll I’ve seen from Utah.
Romney 84 (!) McCain 4
Obama 53 Clinton 29
Well, Romney could always run for Governor of Utah.
98. Iran, Iraq
128. I also think its bollocks Kieran and its McCains state to lose but the markets often go nuts poll by poll.
Having said that, there’s been 20 sitting on Betfair for a bit at 8.0 so clearly people are pretty unenthused so far and dont think its good odds.
I just dont think Romney has what it takes to win there but he can out up a strong showing. Also Roney is desperately trying t gain a one big state win on Super Tuesday to stay in and theyve picked CA as the likeliest target.
98. Grenada
98. Laos, Vietnam
134 - Shrove is an old english word for confessing, once you had confessed your sins you were shriven! I may of course be wrong.
After carefully weighing up the evidence, I can exclusively call Utah for Romney.
http://www.deseretnews.com/article/1,5143,695249479,00.html
(Romney 84%, McCain 4%)
!
116. At the risk of being provocative, maybe the sexist vote is proving more obdurate that the racist vote? I’m only half joking.
As I understand it Edwards did very well amongst working class white males (and maybe some lower middle class men, too). The presumption was that these guys would now switch to Clinton, as she is more popular with lower waged people.
But maybe the well known adage - “Hillary reminds American men of their first wife” - comes into play here. These guys just Don’t Like Hillary, so they are switching to Obama instead.
It would explain his surge. Not sure if the polling figures back it up.
The imponderables of race and gender make this race entirely unpredictable, and possibly un-poll-able.
134 “Shriven” i.e. absolved of sin. Last day before Lent. Seriously, as Shrove Tuesday is such a big day for a party in some parts of the USA (eg New Orleans) do they postpone their Primaries until a day which is more boring?
98. I tried writing S-m-lia but it must have been stopped by some sort of subversive-messages filter
1-1. Sad face.
Is there any evidence that Zogby boosts Obama’s shares?
142 - the Vatican, Belarus…
98. And lots of others