Are these the numbers that will swing it?
February 9th, 2008
For US election junkies it’s another late night
As we go into another weekend of frenzied activity in the race for the White House the above are the latest “head-to-head” polling figures from Real Clear Politics comparing how Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would fare facing up to the Republican John McCain in a general election.
The numbers are good for the junior senator from Illinois but still Hillary is leading when Democratic-leaning voters are asked who they would favour.
The closer we get to decision time these heads-to-heads with John McCain are going to play a major part, particuarly with many of the “super-delegates” who might, at the end of the day, decide it. For while Hillary is still strongest amongst Democrats such comparisons show that Obama can compete better against McCain for the independent and centre ground voters.
This weekend there are the following contests:-
Louisiana primary: 56 delegates at stake
Nebraska caucuses: 24 delegates at stake
Washington caucuses: 78 delegates at stake
Maine caucuses: 24 delegates at stake
All apart from Maine take place today. In the betting Obama is now the 0.75/1 favourite.
MessageSpace Advertising
Just got out of a mini/pre-caucus with two friends. I’m going to caucus for Obama. One friend is going to causus (at same location but different precinct) for Clinton. His wife supports Clinton, but wasn’t sure she could schlep the kids and actually make it. But her husband and I both told her she could bring the kids, stay long enough to sign in for Hillary, then split. And her vote for Hillary will still count.
So my campaign activity for Obama tonight has consisted of hopefully turning out a vote for Hillary!
1 A win for Democracy….
Obama now only 2 delegates ahead of CLinton
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/08/politics/p164038S02.DTL
Very much OT:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called on the Premier League to listen to the views of the fans before moving ahead with plans to introduce overseas games.
This from the man who ignores the public at every turn?
Last thread 155 Scipio
Charter of the Forest - Yes, I was unaware of the existence of this - although some of the “rights” - grazing pigs in the woods etc - most of us would have come across in early history lessons. I had imagined these grew out of Common Law. However, what wikipedia tells us is a “little known” document, and something which clearly had little real effect on the development of full democracy should hardly claim a major position in that way. I shall be interested to read more - but I shan’t go looking! I certainly don’t think it is really relevant to much of the debate we had last night!
There is a clear level of political engagement in the US. Televised meetings between the various candidates are watched.
Isn’t DC missing a trick here? Shouldn’t he be pointing out to GB the American way of promoting interest in politics–debates on TV between the various would-be presidents?
GB might try to claim ‘that people don’t want to watch this knockabout’. But that is not true—they do. And the most negative style, Romney’s, has relatively been the least successful. Some of the exchanges have been ’spicy’–but that hasn’t hurt.
4 - smacks of cheap populism to me.
4. Football fans tend to have a ridiculously luddite attitude towards all innovations. The FA and premier League should be commended for staying ahead of the game and giving fans things that they actually want but believed they didn’t in advance for sentimental reasons. Were it left to fans, football in this country would be in the same mess as rugby league.
That said, why what the Premier League does is of interest to a Raith Rovers fan is a little obscure? Surely SBS’s cynicism at [7] isn’t the case?
7 Not sure how effective it is as cheap populism as football is an area where nationalism is strong and Brown’s interventions in the English Premier League draw attention to his Scottishness and makes it look like a PR activity - much better to have had Andy Burnham make the statement.
O/T
David Cameron is to be appointing the new chairman of the Scottish Tories. Who exactly will probably be revealed in tommorrow’s Sunday Telegraph.
But as true-blue Tory journalist Iain Martin puts it:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/newscottishtorychairman.htm
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2032103.0.Concessions_won_by_Tories_become_new_campaign.php
So lovely to see that the three Unionist parties are so “united”
I cannot wait to see what becomes of their Scottish Constitutional Commission now!!
http://iainmacwhirter2.blogspot.com/2007/12/constitutional-commission-is-important.html
6. TV advertising also plays its part. For that to work in Britain, we need more money spent by political parties, not less, as is the conventional opinion at the moment.
8 - I think the reason football fans tend to oppose most innovations is that, historically, most innovations tend to make the experience of going to football worse, all-seated grounds being the stand-out example.
For millions of people, the Premier League’s proposals will have been by far the most important thing to come up this week. It’s entirely reasonable for the Prime Minister to express his views on the subject, and to express them forcefully.
There is nothing new in this: the blues and the greens, fans of charioteers, nearly deposed Emperor Justinian in the 6th century AD.
Does anyone have a link to state-by-state polls for those voting today (or indeed those voting tomorrow or Tuesday)? I’ve had a look round the RCP site but could only see nationals, head-to-heads and state polls for those who’ve already voted.
The assumption is that today’s elections should be favourable for Obama - fair enough, but it would still be good to see the numbers. They’ll be interesting elections on the Republican side as well, as while McCain ought to be safe for the nomination, my guess is that Kansas and Louisiana are more amenable to Huckabee’s brand of politics than to his, and the results might not go his way.
By the way, it’s not just Washinton state, Nebraska and Louisiana voting today for the Democrats - the US Virgin Islands also has its caucus-convention.
10. Stuart, thankful though we are for your educating us on the minutiae of Scottish politics, is there any chance that once - just once - you might actually do Mike the respect of posting on topic (when that topic isn’t Scottish politics)?
[6][12] I would want to see hard evidence that the level of political engagement is higher in the States than here. Historically, turn-out has been lower there in general elections, although this may no longer be true. Obviously, political junkies and punters like the primary system, but that requires a Presidency in the first place.
The only directly comparable elections I can think of are for the Mayoralties of London and New York, but even there I don’t know how New York works, in the sense of what City Hall does and what the boroughs do.
re 13. Maybe. But I think the problem is that Gord thinks that the way of endearing himself to the electors is to be doing or saying at last one thing each day which will make the headlines.
The problem with the soccer story is that this looks like an intervention solely designed to get publicity.
Is there somebody at Downing Street who has the balls to Gordon when he is being a t*t?
17 - the answer to your closing question is clearly no! It is all curiously reminiscent of the later days of John Major, who spent so much time trying to be populist without ever actually converting that into popularity.
9 - You mean that guy who stepped out of the Rocky Horror Show to go on Question Time on Thursday?
8. With respect, that’s complete nonsense (OK, that not with respect actually), and is an excellent example of the attitude I was talking about.
All-seater stadiums have been a massive boon to the game and I am convinced played a large part in the rise of attendences over the last 10-15 years. Yes, I know the turning point was a little earlier - the authorities starting to get to grips with hooliganism provided the first part of the increase.
The fact is that standing terraces were places where people could and did move relatively freely. They were far more conducive to the violent element and even when that was not present, were intimitading to women and younger children (and to short people - and I say that as someone who’s 6′4″). That was the case not just because of the mass of bodies crammed together, but because of the way the crowd could move around on the terrace. It was also physically demanding for the older element.
Since all-seater stadiums became the norm in the higher leagues, the atmosphere at games has improved markedly, the number of women and children - ie families - going has improved, it has probably done much to deal with terrace racism, and despite prices going up substantially, attendances have gone up more than at any other point in the game’s history. How is all that a bad thing?
ps. I recognise the irony of ticking someone off for going off-topic and then doing much the same myself, but sir - he started it.
17 Mike, No, no-one in Downing Street has the balls to tell Gordon anything at all he doesn’t want to hear.
14 Will the assumption that McCain has it sewn up strengthen Obama (and hit McCain) as independents no longer torn between supporting McCain or Obama choose the Democrat caucuses and primaries?
Back on topic: this figures should I think be something of a worry for Democrats who prefer Clinton - nothing more, nothing less.
- It would indeed be sickening if choosing the candidate they preferred led to the Republicans narrowly winning.
- The Clintons have had enemies for years who have thrown everything they can, so they are both more crisis-tested and less likely to have surprising skeletons.
- Despite the row over Bill’s remarks, Obama has not yet come under serious attack. I don’t think he showed himself all that steady under fairly mild fire - OK, but not burnished steel. The Republicans will direct a lot more fire.
So yes, there’s an issue, but probably not a sufficient one to warrant switching on that ground alone. Clinton needs if she wins to give absolute priority to healing wounds with the Obama camp, though. Offering a choice of the VP and whatever place he wants in the Cabinet would be a good start.
20. I’ve also managed to reference my own post and apparently rubbish it at the same time. I was referring to Andy’s reply at [12]. I think I’ll give up for now!
20: A bit worrying that you criticise your own post as complete nonsense!
23 - As I’m about to go out (to the football, natch) I don’t have the time for an adequate response, but suffice it to say I disagree quite firmly and I don’t know a single person with whom I’ve travelled to games for a decade who thinks all-seaters are a Good Thing. I guess we’ll have to leave it there, as I’m running late and it IS somewhat O/T…
I see that according to the ONS the Norther Wreck fiasco has added £100 billion to the national debt.
In the meantime the Germans again show the right way to deal with the NR type problem, difficult as it is to cut jobs, they are doing more than carrying on lending in the same loose way as they did before: “German investment bank WestLB is to lay off around 25pc of its workforce as its regional government owners agreed to provide €5bn (£3.7bn) of public funds to bail out the bank from its trading and sub-prime losses.”
A well-written light piece that relates to some of our threads:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/02/09/do0904.xml
The head-to-head figures are bad for Clinton.
But they may be seriously misleading. The critical assumption is that all voters are equally likely to turn out. This is not the case.
To oversimplify, core Democrats vote for Clinton, independents and disillusioned Republicans support Obama. We might assume then, as naive commentators do, that high turnouts favour Obama.
It is a perfectly reasonable assumption: base Democrats turn out first, supporting the party come what may, but it takes the soaring rhetoric of hope to attract voters who are not Democrats.
Obama makes the point explicitly when he claims everyone who supports Clinton will vote for him but not all his voters will support Clinton.
Why let the facts get in the way of a good theory?
Tanenbaum’s tables, ordered by which states supported which candidates, show it is Obama who has been favoured in low turnout races, whether caucuses or primaries in states like Delaware, Connecticut and Ohio.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Feb06.html
Come November, if core Democrats stay at home and anti-Bush Republicans move to McCain, it may be Obama who is defeated where Clinton would have won.
[27] Always good to see Tories failing to pass their values on to their offspring…
28 Yes John, I think those current head to heads are very misleading. The campaign has barely begun and we all know how opinions can change during a campaign.
If I were minded to vote Hillary for the Nomination, I wouldn’t be put off by a five or ten point deficit in her head-to-heads with McCain. Twenty points and maybe I might think about it. Smaller differences I’d reckon she could improve on as the campaign gets serious.
I really doubt this is going to be much of a factor in the race to the line.
She should be more worried about the bad polls for the Weekend elections.
27 — laundryman! Reminiscent of Tony Benn needing to ask what a mangle was.
When I was in the launderette yesterday (and I really was, not having a laundryman, you see) the two political discussions overheard were the problems of pensioners compared with new immigrants, and the council’s parking restrictions and fines.
The first debate was quite nuanced, as you might expect from second generation immigrants, and seemed to blame over-generous child benefits.
8 - Leaving aside the issue of all-seater stadiums (even their staunchest opponents generally accept there was justification for their implementation, through the fact that they usually at some point employ the fact that technology has improved and therefore they can be brought back safely), I’m mystified as to the reasons why you think this Premier League thing will be “good for the fans”. It’ll be good for the fans in other countries who might get to see a game without coming to England, but for the fans in this country?
It’s another small step towards a continental league, and the destruction of the national and international game as we know it.
Continuing off-thread themes..The BBC really are leading the news agenda with lefty tosh this morning.Homophobic policemen, Committee’s talking about equal pay for women, an assualt on the church of England, reminding people of Conway and taht he was a Conservative and then McSporran stuttering away and sounding like an ar*e on an English sports topic.
It does seem odd that this so called ‘genius of a political strategist’ totally ignores the fact that the more people see him the more they dont like him.
The BBC are reverting to type so thats not surprising….
33 - I was under the impression that it was the Archbishop of Canterbury who has launched an assault on the Church of England.
Tim13
In all honesty I hadn’t heard of the charter until I heard the Radio 4 program mentioned on the wiki. The programs argument was that this charter, the little charter, was almost as important historically as the great charter and actually more significant to ordinary people because of the practical rights it gave them.
The charter was frequently reissued and was a live issue in politics really until relatively recently (19th century?). If you get the chance to hear the program I would urge you to listen to it. It is very interesting in its own right.
Clinton has just drifted by a percentage point on intrade. A poll? Timing seems wrong.
JohnL@28: Did you post the right link? I read through that page but I couldn’t find anything to suggest that Obama does better with low turnouts, or that low turnout races disproportionately help Obama. Plenty of evidence that he does well in caucuses, but that’s a different problem. Also tried Googling things like “democratic primaries by turnout” (after a false start with “democratic primaries by turout” , which Google helpfully suggested was supposed to be “democratic primaries by trout”, which turned up more hits than you might expect) and couldn’t find much of a correlation.
It’s an interesting fact if true, so I’d be interested to hear if you’ve got another link, or if I’ve missed the place I was supposed to read on the one you posted.
20,David,Having met you at the April 2007 PB Party,I like and respect you,but I personally feel some provosion for standing should remain at football grounds-in my opinion,something of the atmosphere is definetly lost by all-seaters-I recall some restoration of small terraced areas in behind-goal kops has been mooted,and I personally would welcome a lively debate.Godd luck whoever your team is playing today!
30 peter the punter- good post, I remember Dukakis coming out of his convention with 18% poll leads over Bush.
These head to head polls are meaningless, the campaign is gruelling, and no candidate would be more tested than Hillary when it comes to the wire.
McCain is the turkey waiting for the democrats Xmas.
Was Jan 2008 really so ‘unusually busy’ for polls.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7233682.stm
I thought that there were comments on poor methodologies, sample sizes and how few polls there had been last month, especially when Peter Hain’s problems were brought to light.
35 Probably the Charter meant less as result of the agricultural & industrial revolutions; its rights would have been important to the mass of people, dependent to a great extent on subsistence agriculture, right up to the 19th century.
There is very little knowledge of the foundations of English rights and its associated struggles which perhaps explains why Governments find it so easy to negate them. Today the Telegraph reports what seems to be institutional bugging of lawyer-client communications, which the Government will defend as “necessary for public protection…innocent have nothing to fear etc.”. The fact it completely undermines the due process of justice and will make clients far less willing to tell their lawyers the full story, or close to it, for fear of their discussions being used by the state and thus limiting the defendants right to access full legal advice is apparently unimportant.
There are exceptions where interception of lawyer-client communication may be necessary, but these should surely be few and far between.
38 - there’s an argument that terracing won’t come back - not because of the cost or safety, but because bringing it back would push out those “middle class families” and “daytrippers” who go to the games, spend all the money in the megastores and won’t call for the chairman’s head.
You could see it in Arsene Wenger’s comments about international fans “deserving” to see their team play in the flesh. Next time you go on holiday abroad, have a little look round to see if travel agencies are doing weekend trips to Prem games. Bet you’ll find at least one.
Politically, the reaction to Brown’s comments by some of the football messageboards seem to be one of “oh, he’s saying that to get votes”. Not a good sign for him.
To keep this on-topic, Obama’s chances of winning will be helped by the news he’s supposedly a West Ham fan seeping through to the typical US voters’ conscience
28. Sorry, John, there seems to be a contradiction in what you saying here.
You say if the core democrats stay at home in November, then Obama would risk losing. But you also point out that Obama is doing best in the caucuses and low-turnout primaries i.e. among the core Democrats. So why would ‘core’ Democrats support him now but not in November?
30. PtP. I think it depends on how aware the electorate are of these Head to Head poll results. If they are aware that Obama currently and consistently does better than Clinton against McCain then it could prove that crucial factor to tip it his way. We are in the final straight now and the finishing post is in sight. If one candidate can steal a couple of lengths at this stage it will prove difficult to pull back.
My view is that Hillary is now damaged goods. She was the heir presumptive, the dynastic successor, the establishment choice, the chip leader, ahead in all the polls with a clear sense of entitlement that the nomination was her’s by right because she had put in the hours.
Despite this and an at times unedifying campaign she is only neck and neck with a promising novice who won’t be shaken off. She continues to polarise opinion. If she wins it will be a pyrrhic victory for her and the Democratic party. If Obama wins then he goes on to The White House
Edmund in Tokyo @ 37 re turnout in primaries — to measure this, I’m using the ratio of total votes to delegates. The key assumption here is the number of delegates is a rough proxy for the number of expected Democrat voters.
If there is any merit in this, then Obama won Georgia, Illinois and Alabama in high turnout races, but he also won the lowest turnout primaries in Utah, Delaware and Connecticut. Since Obama also won all bar one of the low turnout caucuses, it does look like low turnout is in his favour. It is an extension of the argument developed by Tanenbaum in the linked article.
The figures iirc came originally from the New York Times but I may be wrong about that since their immediate source is the back of an envelope here.
42. The point is attendances are miles higher now than in the days of terracing and the revenue generated now is in a different universe.
If you conducted a poll of people attending games now the vast majority would want the stadiums of today rather than the stadiums of yesterday.
There is a lot of nostalgic looking back to times that are best forgotten - how many people really want to stand on a crowded terrace with almost no access to toilets, let alone food and drink.
How many clubs are campaigning for a return of terraces? Answer - none because it is not what the vast majority of spectators want and therefore does not make business sense.
As we’re talking about football…
The thing that bothers me the most about the PL Abroad proposal isn’t the concept of playing abroad - clubs garnering more cash overseas isn’t all a bad thing for the fans back home - but the unbalanced fixture list.
Clearly the team that draws Derby County in the extra match has a significant advantage over the team that draws Arsenal or Manchester United. It isn’t a cup draw and if league places change due to which matches were drawn out of the hat (which they will) it is a fundamental lapse in the fairness of the league structure.
I’m aware that some sports (notably here, rugby league I think) have uneven fixture lists, but I don’t think they are a particularly good idea either.
Alan J @ 43 — no, there is no contradiction. The suggestion is that in low turnout states, highly motivated Obamamaniacs (as they style themselves) overwhelm core Democrats who may stay at home (just as core Labour supporters may have sat on their hadns in the later Blair years).
You can see the same thing in the Republican race, where Ron Paul does best in caucuses. (Scroll down on the Tanebaum link.)
And if you scan American blogs and web sites, it looks like Paulites and Obamamaniacs are similar types: educated, affluent, and disillusioned with business-as-usual politics. They are also highly motivated, and willing to put their votes and money where their mouths are.
47. Agreed. If they did it I suspect it would be seeded - ie 1 v 20, 2 v 19, 3 v 18 etc so all the top teams get an equally “easy” game and all the bottom teams an equally “hard” game. But it still would not be fair and there is no way round that.
It wasn’t long ago that Hillary’s main strength was supposed to be her supposed “electability”. I don’t think these numbers, in themselves, will have that much of an impact, but that’s only because, gradually and quietly and without anyone really noticing, people have already stopped believing in it.
46 - The issue here, as to some extent with terracing is “who benefits”.
Safety issues aside, the fact that attendances are higher now, there is more money, and the majority of the current match-going fanbase are not in favour of “going back”, is not the same as saying that the change has been “good for fans”. What has happened is that there has been a substantial culture shift and that many of the fans of 20 years ago have been driven out of the game, whether because they can no longer afford to go, or simply because they preferred the culture as it was.
It is perfectly feasible that long term exactly the same thing will happen as a result (not directly, it’s only the start) with the current proposals. Clubs will go global, over time (probably after the formation of continental leagues) ever more matches will be played abroad, and the culture and fan base will change again.
And you poll the match-going fans at that time and they will in majority be happy with the way things are, extol the new “best league in the World, with the best teams and the best players” and the dissenters will be sneered at for suggesting that there was merit in the old structure, based on nationality and local allegiances and gradually drift away.
Good for the game? A judgement call.
Good for the fans? Which fans?
48: But like with the Paulites there are a great deal fewer Obamamaniacs than the noise they create would lead you to believe.
49 - the proposal is that the top 5 (presumably from the previous season) would be seeded to be kept apart, and a random draw done.
I can’t think teams would be too happy with the idea that the Champions get the easiest “extra game”!
Any odds on the next Archbishop of Canterbury? How about Michael Nazir-Ali?
Like the Sun headline today “Bash the Bishop!”
46 - I’ll have to do a lot of research on attendances to answer your first point, but don’t make the mistake of comparing the 80s (where football was on its knees) to the 90s (where football was a fashion accessory). There are certainly more and more empty spaces at games now..
I think you’re trying to confuse the issue when you’re saying “If you conducted a poll of people attending games now the vast majority would want the stadiums of today rather than the stadiums of yesterday”. Yesterday, I was watching rugby league
from Warrington - a brand new stadium with terracing. It certainly looked no worse than the new all-seater stadia that have popped up over the last decade, and actually generated a lot better atmosphere than you hear at so many football games now.
There’s also the modern German terracing, which has build in-sensors apparently, which while I’ve never stood on those who have rave about.
Also, the “vast majority” of away fans stand at games. Just watch MOTD and see how many of them are standing up in their seats. Isn’t that trying to tell you something?
As for safety in all-seater stadium, just read about what Liverpool fans were doing at the all-seater ground in Athens at the 2007 Champions League final.
There is actually no safety excuse not to bring them back, especially with enhanced stadia design, better policing and stewarding. But as said above, there is no appetite for the clubs to bring them back because they’ll attract the wrong person.
Should point out here I do a fair amount of work in the football industry, and I’m also fortunate enough that my club plays at a level where they do allow terracing.
52. Yes, that’s why Obama only got a measly 7.5 million votes on SuperTuesday, coz he’s really only got about three supporters.
Actually, he got the same number of votes as Hillary. So on that basis there must also be far fewer Hillary supporters than you’d think.
Confusing.
54, not based on odds or anything, but I think Nazir-Ali could take it, or he could take over from Sentamu, who could be made Archbishop of Canterbury.
I doubt either would make such an appalling gaffe. I still can’t believe the Archdruid did.
57. I used to quite like the Archbop of Canterbury in a sort of “funny old silly beardy” kind of way. He seemed harmless, and meant well, I thought.
But then I read the actual speech he gave. Any idea that takes seventeen paragraphs of baroquely convoluted academic waffle to express is probably not worth expressing.
It’s just the most turgid, boring, piffling, passe, lefty, pseudo-sociological duvet-stain of an essay. Why bother? If you want adulterers to be stoned to death in Leicester Square just cough it up, man. And save us all the time.
58, I haven’t read that much, but there’s a quote (from radio I think) when he said, essentially, it was dangerous to have one rule of law for all, regardless of faith.
It staggers me how he could first of all see universal justice as dangerous, and secondly that he could not see why that comment would provoke such outrage.
And that’s without the needless mentioning of Sharia. He’s a Christian (apparently) so why not talk about Christian justice if you’re going to refer to religion?
57 - there is a lot in what Williams said. Sharia compliant financial products are becoming fairly common nowadays for example. He has been taken out of context. But I think he is so far up his ivory tower, he has no concept of how the media will take things.
The tendency has historically been for Archbishops to alternate between high church and evangelical. Both Sentamu and Nazir-Ali come from the evangelical wing, so either may be likely. I would have thought Nazir-Ali would be the likelier safe pair of hands, though I understand he was very ill a few years ago, so his health may stop him.
That said… I think Williams will weather the storm. Just. But go when he is sixty.
44 Could be, StJohn. I hope you are right.
I liked your analogy - “…she is only neck and neck with a promising novice who won’t be shaken off.” Your mind never strays far from the turf, I see.
Commendable.
Btw, I fancy Roman Villa at Newbury today. Any thoughts?
56: I was just suggesting that there are less Obama supporters, rather than Clinton haters and ‘I’ll vote for anyone who is black’ voters, than people think.
57 Weakness also exists in the Pope - don’t talk the peoples language nor understand how/when to make a point. Both are at base academics, and would probably be better in positions of influence rather than leadership.
Archbishop didn’t need to say anything about Sharia law as in civil/private dealings Muslims, Catholics, Plymouth Brethren, Jews, Hindus etc. have always been able to agree, voluntarily, to their own means of redress. Where he was wrong was in giving the impression these should have a legal basis equal to that of the justice system - any decision of the Beth Din can be overturned in civil terms by the courts if there are suggestions the decision was not entered voluntarily or there is a conflict in law.
If the archbishop is taken out of context, then he is not the first.
When Archbishop Fisher went to New York, he was asked by a reporter if he was going to visit any nightclubs in New York. His reply was an attempt at irony “Are there any nightclubs in New York.”
Cue newspaper headlines: “Archbishop’s first question on arrival: Are the any nightclubs in New York?”
60. The crucial passage in his dreadful speech is this, the last paragraph:
“If the paradoxical idea which I have sketched is true – that universal law and universal right are a way of recognising what is least fathomable and controllable in the human subject – theology still waits for us around the corner of these debates, however hard our culture may try to keep it out. And, as you can imagine, I am not going to complain about that”.
Basically he likes the idea of sharia law because it is a way of reintroducing religion - all religion, and quite dogmatic religion at that - into the public and legal sphere. He’s kind of piggybacking Muslim militancy. And he’s hoping to smuggle some of his enfeebled Christianity into the national discourse, under the burqas and the chadors.
News for you, Doctor Williams: f*** off. I believe in God but I do not believe in this pile of medieval piffle you seem to like. We had an Enlightenment some time ago, or have you forgotten?
Idiot Welsh windsock.
Through arrogance, fear or whatever it was the labour party who let Brown become leader, even though they saw the polls saying what would transpire if he did. Are the democrats the same or do they really want to win the presidency? That’s the question.
3 - The MSNBC figures are likely to be more accurate, as they have worked on where the remaining delegates will go (and ignoring superdelegates who are not pledged until the convention).
39 - Dukakis got a convention bounce, like a conference bounce here it’s a different, and short lived, thing. The Obama lead has been there for ages now.
PtP @ 61 — Roman Villa has an extraordinarily high ratio of places to wins, and not necessarily in a good way.
66- sure Dukakis got a conference bounce. He was a poor candidate.
Hillary is no Gordon Brown- this analogy is wrong.
68 - She is a much better communicator but she carries with her more negatives than Brown did before he took over, just of a different kind.
Also, Brown wasn’t inevitable, but the labour party allowed him to become as such. There is the possibility that the Democrats may finally acquiesce to this same idea with Clinton but at least they are stepping back, whilst the primary process has been their potential saviour.
With a different leader it is more than plausible that labour would be doing better. A Denham, or a Johnson even, dealing with Northern Rock would not have a history to try and defend; they could be braver, more able to look to the future rather than the past.
67 Decent ew value, John L?
64 - SBS that was his own fault for not knowing americans have no sense of irony….
There’s a good quote about Shariagate on the Telegraph blog:
“Rowan Williams is a good man who’s gone stark staring mad. If you gave him a pearl-handled revolver and a decanter of whisky, he’d swallow the revolver and hit himself over the head with the decanter.”
61. Peter I have narrowed it down to Roman Villa and Palomar. I was very, very taken by Palomar last time out.
King Henry asks should we axe the archbishop?
Bash the Bishop, what are the moral minds at The Sun thinking, are they trying to imply something? The website has a ‘game’ of Whack Williams.
On the Rowan Williams tangent, I’m glad everyone else has finally caught on to the fact that the man’s completely bonkers. I first noticed that time he went off on some insane raving about somebody turning water into wine, walking on water and rising from the dead.
Look at these polls and tell me why MCCain isnt the value bet at 2 to 1?
FAO Peter the Punter and others. SPINs US presidential index will be available again after the latest round of voting has finished. general election suspends overnight in case of newspaper poll, reopens tomorrow am.
OT. Charles Clarke clearly believes that Brown is some sort of fruitcake, and I’m inclined to agree with him:
“There is a very big problem in Gordon’s mind. He is always thinking about Tony Blair,” says Clarke. “It’s a strange, tormented thing…….”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=513229&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments
75. Religious nutters went into a steep decline in quality, circa 1700. You used to get John Donne raving from the pulpit of St Paul’s, thusly:
BATTER my heart, three person’d God; for, you
As yet but knocke, breathe, shine, and seeke to mend;
That I may rise, and stand, o’erthrow mee,’and bend
Your force, to breake, blowe, burn and make me new.
or guys like St John of the Cross, speaking of the soul’s love for God:
Rejoice, my love, with me
And in your beauty see us both reflected:
By mountain-slope and lea,
Where purest rills run free,
We’ll pass into the forest undetected.
Now we have bearded liberal halfwit Rowan Williams, telling us:
Perhaps it helps to see the universalist vision of law as guaranteeing equal accountability and access primarily in a negative rather than a positive sense - that is, to see it as a mechanism whereby any human participant in a society is protected against the loss of certain elementary liberties of self-determination and guaranteed the freedom to demand reasons for any actions on the part of others for actions and policies that infringe self-determination.
As the man Himself might say: Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
OT, theres also an excellent piece in todays Mail by Peter Obrone, about how the ever ambitious Tony Blair is campaigning to become President Of Europe.
I don’t know about anybody else, but the sight of the wretched Blairs swanning around Europe as President and First Lady would be vomit-inducing, and would actually push me into campaigning for British withdrawel from this awful project! [face_sick]
76. Look at the competition McCain had to overcome to be (probably)Republican nominee. He’s had an easy ride so far.
Can I just say that I am writing an exceptionally unpleasant book. In chapter 32, a man has been flayed alive. And now the police have discovered his flayed skin, being chewed by a dog.
Heh.
Writing thrillers is FUN.
Sawadee.
76 - key points as follows:
1. Hypothetical polls are notoriously unreliable (look at the pre-Brown polls which suggested no bounce - in the event he got a big bounce… even if he did proceed to blow it).
2. Pendulum swing is an historical feature of American politics.
3. Turnout at Republican primaries has been low, and that in the Democrat primaries high.
4. McCain is not popular in his own party which has some advantages but makes it more difficult to mobilise a campaign.
5. McCain has a VP problem - he is under pressure to balance the ticket with a solid Republican favourite but that will hurt him among his independent constituency because a McCain VP will have a real prospect of becoming President.
6. Democrats will have more money this time than Republicans.
7. McCain has the feeling of a valiant loser - I get the impression of “if we are going to lose, let’s lose with this decent man”.
8. The economy is weak and the US is not happy. McCain is the best Republican candidate to distance himself from Bush - but when the campaign proper starts he will come under pressure.
He may yet overcome it all, but 2-1 doesn’t tempt me.
How I see the Democratic race panning out…
Over the next fortnight Obama will build-up a lead in pledged delegates of about 50-60 over Clinton, a significant lead in the popular vote, and will have “won” about 22 states (+DC) to Clinton’s 12 (excluding MI and FL).
In the next phase of the race starting in March, Clinton in theory will start to whittle that lead down, but it will go all the way, and she needs to win Puerto Rico. If Obama wins Puerto Rico, it’s all over.
If everything goes Clinton’s way she will end up with a 20-30 lead in pledged delegates.
However, if the momentum Obama generates over the next fortnight is sustained into March, Clinton’s fightback will be blunted, and narrow wins in the big states will not be able to compensate for Obama landslides in the smaller.
Oh, and those superdelegates are already starting to defect to Obama. A trickle may become a torrent, so by the end of the game, Clinton may only hold a slight advantage there.
I see Obama maintaining a significant lead (40-50) in pledged delegates all the way to the Puerto Rico contest on 1st June. It would be deeply ironic if the Democratic contest was decided by people who won’t even have a vote in November!
In other words the Democrats are heading for a train-wreck….
82, Sean, sounds like a fun read. I’m an avid Stephen King fan,so I quite like a bit of blood and gore.
83 On VP choice, this didn’t used to matter but has Dick Cheney created more than a role for himself under Bush but an increased role for Vice Presidents? Imagine Bush wanted a foreign policy VP while he concentrated on domestic policies (9/11 through that out of the window) - would McCain be looking for a strong domestic VP to balance his weaknesses in the economy? So a governor with a good track record?
SeanT at 79. “Now we have bearded liberal halfwit Rowan Williams…”
I think it’s nice for us liberals to have our own religious halfwit. It’s so boring laughing at all the conservative religious halfwits and their halfbaked nonsense all the time. Oh well, as the saying goes - half a wit is better than none
86 meant to type… 9/11 though threw that … but came out as ‘through’, brain faster than fingers or just stupidity?
Dick Morris looking at the upcoming democrat races below, much more level headed than most predictions (Roger, take note of these!).
As for my predictions, I agree with him as regards wins for Obama in Nebraska and Louisiana (although the demographic changes from New Orleans’ floods may help Clinton) and Washington as being too close to call. Clinton should take Maine, it’s the North East where she’s doing well and the caucus is on Sunday so no excuses there. Morris’ point about Hawaii is well taken, Obama’s heritage there may close the gap though, although I expect Clinton to win with a few points to spare.
Looking ahead I think Clinton will squeak Wisconsin and take Ohio easily (I disagree with Morris, I think the demographics are against Obama there). Texas, on the other hand, I think will turn out to be a much closer battle.
In summary then I’m going for
Obama - Washington (just), Nebraska, Louisiana (closer than expected), Virginia, Maryland, DC.
Clinton - Maine
The others are too far away and events may take over, but as of now, Clinton to take Wisconsin (just), Hawaii. Ohio (easy), Texas (quite close), Rhode Island and Vermont with Obama left with Mississippi and Wyoming. Obama has to use any momentum to change things here.
Here’s Morris -
“Over the next two weeks, nine states with as many total delegates as California will cast their votes. Obama should win Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland and Washington, DC, because of their large black populations. His Midwest strength could well give him victories as well in Nebraska and Wisconsin.
Washington state and Maine could go either way. And Clinton’s strength among California Asians probably means she’ll win Hawaii. But Obama will probably creep up in delegates as February unfolds.
Then come the real heartland primaries on March 4 - Texas and Ohio. Obama’s strength in the Midwest augers well for Ohio. Clinton has yet to demonstrate an appeal in this region, while Obama’s wins in Illinois, Minnesota, North Dakota, Missouri and Iowa indicate real regional strength.
In Texas, the Hispanic vote will be key. Clinton carried California even though Obama won among both blacks and whites. She prevailed among the third of ballots cast by Latinos. To carry Texas, Obama will have to close the gap among Hispanics. His support for driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants - which, at latest count, Clinton opposes - will probably be key in any drive to capture their votes.”
Maybe we could swap Rowan Williams for Rowan Atkinson - or did we do that anyway?
On the Oscars (if anyone’s interested), I snapped up a decent 4.2 for ‘Assassination of Jesse James’ for Cinematography on betfair, Philip Seymour Hoffman was at a crazy 40.0 so worth a few quid (the race is much tighter than that and I don’t see Bardem as being a shoo-in) and Ellen Page as third favourite behind Christie and Cotillard is fair but, to my mind, worth a punt at a double figure price.
Stingy prices for NCFOM as best picture and Day Lewis for Best Actor but they look good as regards getting a win (if you want to take the risk that exists when betting on the collective opinion of a few people that is).
Ratatouille is at 1.2 however - how can it not lose? That looks like free (ish) money to me.
Here’s something I prepared earlier, all about the difficulties of multiculturalism:
http://toffeewomble.blogspot.com/2008/02/naziphobia-redux.html
89. I disagree with your call of Clinton to win Hawaii - Obama was born there!
93 - As Morris says - “And Clinton’s strength among California Asians probably means she’ll win Hawaii.” I’m not sure that being born there is a strong enough reason for him garnering votes that Clinton is getting elsewhere.
re 84 Plausible, more likely than most scenarios, but not necessarily likely! What’s the popular vote tally today (inc and exc FL)?
94. It does give him a USP, though.
Anyway, pausing now to cheer on Wales. I know I should be neutral but the Scotsman next to me in the pub last week wasn’t!
82 Just the one dog?
85 Friends of mine live out in the wilds in Maine. At Hallowe’en they - rather bravely in my opinion - go and do “trick or treat” on Stephen King….
It’s in England’s interests for Scotland to win
83 - you make some good points and some bad ones.
1. Hypothetical polls are notoriously unreliable (look at the pre-Brown polls which suggested no bounce - in the event he got a big bounce… even if he did proceed to blow it).
— yes but look at the Brown vs Cameron hypotheticals…aren’t they looking quite accurate now? I see no systematic reason to think that the hypos are overstating McCain? Maybe they are understating him?
2. Pendulum swing is an historical feature of American politics.
—-it used to be in the UK up to ‘79 (and ‘97!’)
3. Turnout at Republican primaries has been low, and that in the Democrat primaries high.
—fair point
4. McCain is not popular in his own party which has some advantages but makes it more difficult to mobilise a campaign.
—yes but shd help him win center ground voters / independents
5. McCain has a VP problem - he is under pressure to balance the ticket with a solid Republican favourite but that will hurt him among his independent constituency because a McCain VP will have a real prospect of becoming President.
—very fair point
6. Democrats will have more money this time than Republicans.
–ok
7. McCain has the feeling of a valiant loser - I get the impression of “if we are going to lose, let’s lose with this decent man”.
—come on, thats not really an argument is it?
8. The economy is weak and the US is not happy. McCain is the best Republican candidate to distance himself from Bush - but when the campaign proper starts he will come under pressure.
—fair point
He may yet overcome it all, but 2-1 doesn’t tempt me.
— Hilary is devisive. Barak is inspiring but inexperienced and left wing. I agree they are favourites but I still think 3 is a value bet. I don’t see him drifting. Also wont the prolonged and uncertain selection contest hurt them both?
by James February 9th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
99 - Point 4 is about activists not voters, isn’t it?
Are the Republicans going to be able to come close to matching any Democrat GOTV movement, simply because the alternative is Hillary?
Brilliant 4-1 win for the Villa vs Toons.
Movement on the markets. Coral has Obama now at 8/13.
On intrade its 59% Obama, 41% Hillz.
Not sure why there is this tightening in Obama’s price. I’ve read some pundits in America who reckon Hillary has a good chance in Washington State.
She might be a value bet around now.
98. Not if England are to avoid the Wooden Spoon.
99 Trick- in response to point 5, McCain has a real opportunity when choosing his VP.
His current little spat with the talk-show hosts will make any Democratic attempt to paint him as an extreme conservative is likely to fall flat on its face. Hence he can choose a running mate as conservative as he likes.
On the other hand, choosing a more centrist VP can’t harm him either as the talk-show hosts are already sounding a bit shrill and looking a bit out of touch with the voters.
Good Afternoon.
The continuing shortening in the Obama intrade is a simple reflection of the next states in play.
In my view Obama will take Washington state, Louisiana, Nebraska, Maryland, DC and Virginia by a landslide. The Maine caucus will probably be tighter but end in a clear win for Obama.
The March races then become critical for Hillary.
105. Interesting. The Hillaryphiles I’ve been reading - on US blogs etc - imply that she must, and will, win at least one of those states you mention.
Otherwise she is Gone.
If Obama take ALL of those with a landslide he might have an emotional and moral momentum of irresistible force. He would have definitely seized the narrative.
Remember Giuliani! Don’t matter what big states you might win down the line…
102 - clinton now 2.4 on betfair…..seems she is definitely value at the moment….building on what others have been sahying over the last few days, it appears to me that they should both be around evens at the moment, and assuming todays votes go for obama and the next round go for clinton they should stay at evens for the next few weeks…..as such, it seems fair to say that either of them are value once they get better than evens?
seanT @ 105.
It’s very difficult to see a decent show from Hillary in the days to come and her team has been desperately downplaying expectations.
On Texas I read an interesting piece detailing that Obama may do much better than expected because his support amongst Mexican Latinos is almost level with Hillary as indicated by the exit polls in New Mexico.
I don’t know if anybody has read these briefing packs from Fox on the primaries going on this weekend, it’s really useful with some excellent demographic information on each state as well as historical stats. For a punter it’s a real informational treasure chest.
You can access it here:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/foxnews_Feb9_Briefing.pdf
apparently the great Dick Morris is not aware of existence of WISCONSIN PRIMARY?
89 “His Midwest strength could well give him victories as well in Nebraska and Wisconsin.”
I think you missed that bit…
SSI @ 110
Are you aware of any recent polling in Wisconsin?
I believe the last poll was some weeks back, was inclusive of Edwards and had Hillary seven clear of Obama.
If Hillary wins one primary/caucus before March 4 it will be a major coup for her camp - I expect her to take OH, and TX easily if she does not them roll on Obama to the nomination …
and to make you laugh this is so true about the news networks …
http://nataliedee.com/020408/im-gonna-vote-for-mccain-cause-hes-a-white-dude.jpg
rej4sl @ 113.
May I ask you why you think Hillary will win Texas “easily”?
114 gut feeling
111 - did miss that, I stand corrected.
112 - haven’t seen any recent Wisconsin polling, would expect something sponsored in-state, say by Milwaukee Beacon or someone connected with U of Wisc.
113 - Clinton has to be given the edge in Maine caucuses, because 1) demographics favor her, similar to parts of NH & Mass she won; and 2) Obama’s New England field operation has been a disaster zone.
And Wisconsin is up for grabs in my humble opinion, balanced between students & upscale suburbanites for Obama, and bluecollar & rural Dems inclined to Hillary.
114 -115 Texas demographics definitely tilt in Hillary’s direction.
But Ohio is much less certain for her.
rej4sl @ 115.
Let’s hope that you don’t get a Texan Delhi belly!
SSI @ 116.
Thank you.
Big surge to Obama on intrade. Now above 60%. Early exit polls in Maine?
seanT @ 120.
More likely my post @ 105.
Once superdelegates have publicly pledge to a candidate can they change their mind and change their pledge?
Shame that McCain, Clinton or Obama don’t have the wit and real style of Mike Huckabee
http://youtube.com/watch?v=59LqPQpPsEM&feature=related
A poll yesterday put Clinton 50/41 ahead in Wisconsin, I can’t recall who did it though, sorry. In February there’s no way she won’t take any states - Maine, as mentioned looks good for her, as does Wisconsin (see above), there’s also a good feeling about her chances in Hawaii. I think that Washington could be close too if people reqalise that the caucus is the important one, not the later primary.
Roger was complaining about the Obama hype before Super Tuesday, on his behalf (and sanity) let’s be realistic here.
120 - Hardly likely, they haven’t even started to caucus yet.
sb @ 122. Yes.
112. American Research Group WI Poll today Clinton 50% Obama 41%
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/polls/Wisconsin-February-2008.html
127 - That’s the one.
It is ARG I suppose.
The US Virgin Islands also vote today. Clearly Bill has visited recently!
124. Quite. I can’t see Obama winning all of them. She certainly should win Wisconsin, and maybe Maine. Hawaii is weird - Obama’s homeland, yet I’ve been there and it’s VERY Asian, I think 25% Japanese or something.
Clinton wins the Asian vote 3-1. Tricky.
That said, I think she is over-optimistic about Texas, Ohio and PA. Is she really gonna win all of those?
I think Obama will win
Washington
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Louisiana
DC
Maryland
Nebraska
and
Texas
and she will win PA, Ohio, Wisconsin and Maine
Hawaii to close to call.
Anyway it’s important, if we are to finally seal Hillary in her ancestral vault, that Obamaramas like us learn to manage expectations.
That’s been his only failing, electorally, so far - not quite matching the hype. Enough hype already.
Rasmussen has Obama up 55-37 in Virginia and 57-31 in Marland.
Cannot believe those margins, do they take into account postal votes
Clinton has now dipped below 40 on IEM. The lowest she has ever been, I think.
Slightly strange. Just market sentiment, I guess.
dave(s) @ 131.
There is also a Virginia SUSA poll that backs the Rasmussen and shows Obama up 59/39.
I am damping expectations for the Hillary campaign - that way if we win any February states we can say “that wasn’t expected”
Reasons I don’t think she can win in February
Wisconsin - see MN - but his is a primary and will be closer but still think Obama will edge it
Maine - is a new England state but a caucus and in Caucuses Obama does a lot better as they are undemocratic and people can’t vote in private and are persuaded to vote for people they don’t really want to support but can’t be seen not supporting because they may be seen as being Clintonistas
Washington SSI - told me that it was favoring Obama
Louisiana - demographics - black majority for Obama
Maryland/Virginia - see Louisiana
Texas/Ohio/Pennsylvania - she has to win these 3 to get the nomination
RI/VT - Hillary country
Any UK polls due tomorrow?
Interesting Vanity Fair essay on Obama:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803
Hilldroids probably shouldn’t read it - it’s very nice about him. He has a REALLY f***ed up background. Fathers and stepfathers and half brothers and weird drug stories all over the shop.
Maybe that’s why I relate to him, unlike Hillary Coatlicue Clinton, The Skull Necklaced Death Goddess, and Lady of the Serpent Skirt.
82: Is the dog OK?
Public Policy Polling has obama 42-40 up in north carolina
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_020808.pdf
Just read an interesting article about Barry on NYT - so have decided to order “Dreams from my Father”from the local library a little wait as they have 15 copies and I am 43 on the waiting list but will be worth it to have a jolly good read …
I feel I ought to elaborate on my Cotalicue reference.
Coatlicue is, as any fule kno, an Aztec goddess. She is also spookily like Hillary.
To wit:
“Coatlicue is the Aztec goddess of earth and fire, and mother of the gods and mother of the stars of the southern sky. Her daughter is the goddess Coyolxauhqui (i.e. Chelsea).
“Also known as the Mother of Gods, or the Devourer of Filth, “Our Grandmother” Coatlicue wears a skirt made of braided serpents, secured by another serpent, and a necklace of human hands and hearts. Meanwhile her feet and hands are adorned with claws. Her breasts are depicted as hanging flaccid from nursing. She lives by feasting on the corpses of