Is Hillary recognising the reality of the numbers?
February 22nd, 2008
Was the Texas debate her valedictory?
The overnight debate in Texas between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama certainly lived up to its billing with both contenders performing very well. There wasn’t a victor and Hillary did not get in the knock-out blow in that many were suggesting she needed.
One of the critical moments came right at the end. The huge audience rose to a standing ovation as Hillary shook Barack’s hand and said “I am honoured to be here with Barack Obama… whatever happens, we’re going to be fine. I just hope that we’ll be able to say the same thing about the American people.”
The words sounded very much like a valedictory - as though she was recognising where she stood in the race. The sequence will be played and played on TV station throughout the nation in the next 24 hours and it struck me was that this could have the same impact of her tearful moment ahead of the New Hampshire primary. We shall see.
It was though she was trying to make amends for a moment earlier after she was booed when she tried to get in a pre-prepared line about the Obama plagiarism allegations. Referring to one of her opponents main themes she quipped - “Change you can believe in - not change you can Xerox”. Barack responded “What we shouldn’t be doing is tearing each other down, we should be lifting the country up.”
A feature of the Texas contest is that they have early voting with polling booths in shopping malls and other locations having been operational for more than a week. Both campaigns are putting a big effort into getting their supporters to vote early. In such a context you would assume that the best organised campaign would be the beneficiary.
In the betting the money has continued to pile on Obama who now stands at 1/4 for the nomination.
Can we use this thread for US politics and the following one for UK developments - many thanks.
MessageSpace Advertising
Mike. Transcribed from the end of the last thread as it is highly relevant to this thread.
“Watching the closing moments of the debate and the CNN analysis, they suggested this had elements of a valedictory address. I have never seen her pay such a warm tribute to her adversary before or acknowledge him so warmly. It was probably for her a last throw of the dice but also a reflection that she recognises she has very probably lost her own chance.
So what does she choose to do next? Following my theme earlier and challenging the prevailing wisdom, it is suggested she would never accept the VP from Obama and that he would never offer it. Is this the case? The Democratic party would love it. The US electorate would love it. The “Dream Team” would be strong odds on favourites for The White House. Hillary would be VP, the 2nd most important position in the country. As high an office as she is now likely to achieve.
So I’ve backed her at 20/1 for next US VP with vc.bet”
re 1. Did you see the observations by the leading US political blogger, Marc Ambinder -
If Clinton bows out graciously, she would probably end up with higher affection and prestige in the Democratic party than she started with.
2. Mike, I hadn’t seen that but I thought it was a very noble play from a position of acknowleged weakness. Whether it was also the olive branch that assists her future career and my VP bet, we will soon know. What is clear is that she will step away with dignity in the likely event of losing this contest.
But if she starts to play ball, how could he find a better VP?
4 - would she take it?
Hillary for VP? Colour me unconvinced.
One big positive Obama has this year assuming he wins the nomination is that the Republicans are already unenthused and hard to motivate. Add to that the reservations they have about McCain, and the Republicans are going to have a hard time turning out their supporters. Put a Clinton back on the ticket, even if it’s only as VP, and there’s a real risk of handing the Republicans a lifeline. Clinton-Obama may motivate right-wingers less than Obama-Clinton, but why take the risk?
Likewise, it’s not clear to me where the upside of putting Clinton on the ticket would be. If you’re trying to get an experienced heavyweight to counter McCain’s gravitas, you could do a lot better than Hillary. And to the extent that this has been polled, there’s very little sign that people who are voting for Hillary find Obama unacceptable; If Hillary isn’t on the ticket, they’ll vote for Obama instead.
Other people have made this comment before, but Hillary makes a lot more sense working with Obama as leader of the Senate.
Finally, I’ve said this before and accept there’s no evidence that it’s going to happen (and I think Gore has ruled it out), but I still think Obama-Gore would be a feasible combination. Cancels out Obama’s experience / substance negatives at a stroke, and since the VP role is fairly fluid it would give Gore a great opportunity to pursue his campaigns. And if that isn’t enough to tempt Gore, don’t forget that he gets to be president as and when Obama gets assassinated…
6 - Dark Edmund. Very dark. However, I agree with you on the unlikeliness of Hillary as VP. I don’t think she’d take it and I don’t think Obama would offer.
Tend to agree wit hEdmund about reasons for Hillary not being VP - is the Senate leadership available?
The reported comment is agreeable and also smart. If she loses, she loses with grace. But it also means that people with doubts about Obama can vote for her without feeling they’re part of a mean-minded gang, so she’ll probably go out with a better result than if she’d been harsh.
8 - Nick, Harry Reid only got the job in 2005 and his aggressive style suggests he really relishes the job and isn’t going to give it up anytime soon. If he were to stand down, I think a party conference votes to replace him. Hillary would probably have to be majority whip first. I don’t think this route is that viable. But I could easily be wrong.
Nick Palmer@8: “is the Senate leadership available?”
Not at the moment… See rumours here (with denials from his office) that Harry Reid may want to step down in early 2009:
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/001578.php
Not sure whether or not if he didn’t particularly want to step aside he could be prevailed on to do so when faced with an Obama/Clinton pincer movement…
In the same vein, here’s a more recent, and entirely unsourced, claim about some rumours:
http://tinyurl.com/2qh96v
“Spoke with a few of my friends in D.C. today and they told me the nasty rumor that popped up in the beltway political circles the last day or so. The claim floating around DuPont is that a deal has been struck should Obama sweep both Ohio and Texas, Hillary will step aside for the good of the party. In return, Harry Reid will find a cabinet position in an Obama administration and Hillary will be elected Majority Leader by her greatful peers.”
I think Obama/Clinton (or Clinton/Obama for that matter) is too established in people’s minds as a ‘contest’ to then be re-packaged as a ‘ticket’.
[11] Well, I suppose BHO might want a pro-life Mormon in his cabinet…
Playing yesterday’s record I know, but I can’t be the only person who thinks that the Tories have come out of Northern Rock even worse than the Government. Hearing the false outrage from Cameron/Osborne without any credible alternative plans or suggestions has been pretty sick-inducing, and it’s about all they did when the bank run happened last Autumn. Not that I’m saying the Government haven’t loused up and made decisions for political rather than economic reasons, but I’m seriously worried about George & Dave having to deal with future difficulties having seen what they’ve done this time.
No Lib Dem leader has ever been able to play the ‘most competent on the economy’ card before - Nick Clegg has been given a real opeining.
And the lefty read upside-down thing: now you mention it yeah, I’ve always been able to read upside down better than most, never really thought about it before. Any other lefties want to reveal themselves?
“Playing yesterday’s record I know, but I can’t be the only person who thinks that the Tories have come out of Northern Rock even worse than the Government.”
Why? People aren’t interested in the opposition’s opinions, only in the competence, or lack of it, displayed by the government.
14-It amuses me when i see posts critical of Dave and George for harping back to last Autumn on NRK.
What does GB do at every question time without fail?-Harp back to the Tory administrations of 10+ years ago.
Polls will change when policy issues are put forward and discussed as well as when the economy turns down.That will happen this Autumn.
I haven’t yet put any money on Hillary but now’s the moment I’m sorely tempted to do so.
Put it like this: how will the map look if it’s Hillary who takes Texas and Ohio on March 4th?
I still maintain this isn’t over for Hillary.
As for the VP, can’t see it.
15 Sorry Sean - but that’s rubbish.
The Tories haven’t in my view opposed the Government well on Northern Rock, and they haven’t given me any confidence that they could handle any such events that occur on their watch. I’ll decide for myself what I’m interested in thank you - and I’ve every right to make judgements about the potential for Government of an opposition.
If you’re making a point about the wider impact of the Tories’ poor response, then I’d agree it’s limited. But can you find many people, even on here where you’re not short of Tory supporters, who really think the Conservatives have shone here? (Ave it 08 doesn’t count.)
18-Granted they have not shone but at least they did try and oppose a bill which takes us further down a totalitarian state with the inclusion of an opt out on the freedom of information act and a lack of an audit.
Are they just meant to sit back and allow all this to happen?
18 - tpfkar, Absolutely you have the right to make any judgements you choose, but as you are an active LibDem, I’m not in the least surprised about the nature of those judgements.
19: “Are they just meant to sit back and allow all this to happen?”
In the end, they did.
Praying for more spine when it comes to 42-day internment and compulsory ID cards.
[14] I’ve no idea in detail about how well or badly DC has ‘played’ NR. I hope he would have been brave enough to appoint an administrator, though I’m not confident. Nationalisation will cost the govt many times the amount of money. Govts can’t run banks. Govts can’t actually run anything. (Not quite true. They can’t run anything where cost matters. If money were no object, the govt’s admin is perfectly adequate).
But DC’s opinion of NR is of little relevance. What was the labour party leader’s views on ‘black’ (white) Wednesday, on the day? I don’t even know who the leader was at the time, let alone know his views. It didn’t matter then, and it doesn’t matter now.
Is this what Sean T was doing yesterday or is Ave It now writing for the Bangkok Post?
http://www.bangkokpost.com/topstories/topstories.php?id=126079
Damnit, peers have backed down over auditing and Freedom of Information:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7255834.stm
My suspicion is that the Granite situation meant that the government didn’t want to be forced to answer questions about it. I hope that’s not the case, as it would have rather negative financial implications.
Richard@17: “…how will the map look if it’s Hillary who takes Texas and Ohio on March 4th?”
Once the initial “back in the race” headlines subside it’ll look like she’s still way behind in delegates and relying on an exceedingly unlikely Hail Mary pass involving super-delegates ready to vote for the person the polling says is less likely to win the election or seating delegates the party said they wouldn’t seat.
Unless she wins them really big - over 60:40.
Good luck, and let us know how you get on…
13 - Reid wouldnt encounter any serious congressional opposition should he wind up in an Obama cabinet and he probably offers somthing as a cabinet member… the big problem for the Dems is that NV (IIRC) has a Republican Governor and as a result Reid would be replaced by a GOP Senator who would then have plenty of time to acrew some degree of incumbency before facing an election… i think it might really depend on how well the Dems do in the Senate races this fall (and with likley pick-ups in NH and VA they could cancel out a NV loss).
It’s always a pretty desperate ploy for a government in trouble to point at the opposition, saying “They are worse.”
Northern Rock takes its place as a significant element in the vivid mosaic of Labour uselessness that will be imprinted on the public mind come the next election.
18 You can be interested in anything you like. Perhaps I should amend my statement to say that “apart from some keen Lib Dem supporters, the public are more interested in the government’s actions than they are in the opposition’s words.”
27 Matthew Norman on Gordon Brown in the Independent “If Northern Rock has solidified the perception that he’s a natural-born loser (and it has), worse is to come, and not just from the economy”
Its perception that counts - the public might just agree as Populus appears to show that nationalisation was the least worst option but that doesn’t mean they don’t take from the whole saga a negative view of the Government. As for the Tories the public will remember they opposed it. If in 2009 Northern Rock is floated off at a profit Gordon will be vindicated, if however off and on through next year or two press reports law cases, layoffs, complaints about unfair practices and Northern Rock remains in public ownership then it will remain a reminder of dither and incompetence.
25. Not so sure. She’s only just short of him at the moment. If she wins those two I can’t see her pulling out before Pennsylvania, and she’ll have the mo’.
I really don’t think this is all over by a long shot. March 4th is critical. If she does win them I think she’ll take the nomination.
24. The Freedom of Information act was never going to apply to NR. Trade secrets are exempt from the act. Only Public Interest along the lines of public safety/national security has a hope of overruling that exemption. Of course being exempt from foi does not mean that the opposition parties can’t ask questions about granite etc. It just means that they can’t demand commercially sensitive information.
Ben@26: Good point - looking it up, you’re right about Nevada having a Republican governor. Even if the Democrats were confident of winning the seat back in 2010(?), presumably they’d be very reluctant to give up a critical seat in the senate for two years. So disregard the rumour I linked to at 11 - it’s obviously cack.
21-Well what were they meant to do?
Have a riot in the chamber or carry out a scene reminescent of Heseltine when he grabbed the mace?
The Tories and LDs are not in power and therefore were eventually powerless to stop this legislation.
Please correct me if i am wrong
33 - Plus it was always going to be a dangerous game to keep the legislation delayed as it would have caused instability and would have been ultimately counter-productive.
29. Whatever happens, NR will not show a profit for the taxpayer. The only questions are a) how big the loss will be and b) how well the government hides it.
The opposition’s job from here is to ruthlessly scrutinise all the coming dodges and dives that the government will indulge in to try to cover up the scale of the taxpayer’s bill.
Meanwhile, sit back and wait for the fireworks when Sandler et al. tell the Labour junta that despite throwing colossal amounts of public money at NR, thousands of jobs in the NE still have to go.
Richard @ 17 and 30.
Save your money!!!!
Unless you intend to back Hillary as a very short term trading bet or a hedge against a decent Obama wager, then my strong advice is to keep your money in your wallet. Here’s why -
After watching last nights Clinton/Obama debate I have a sense that Hillary knows she is out and will wait for the Ohio/Texas primaries to deliver the electoral coup de grace. She pulled her punches last night and Obama delivered a polished performance that saw the debate taper out to a draw; that is in effect a win for Obama.
Hillary is, in my view, now looking to the future. Reconciled to defeat, if she damages Obama badly she will not be forgiven. However if she gracefully retires the option remains for her to take a shot in 2012 after a single term McCain presidency. It is her best shot now.
So, around March 5/6th she pulls out.
“A deal has been struck that if Obama sweep both Ohio and Texas, Hillary will step aside for the good of the party.”
Ah come on, if Obama sweeps Ohio and Texas it becomes mathematically impossible for Hillary to win, he wouldn’t need to offer anything to make that a done deal.
31 - Nonsense. The commercial confidentiality exemption is pretty narrow - a good analogy is the BBC which operates in a competitive commerical market. I can tell you it receives a large volume of FOIA requests and responds to most.
How the Guardian see Hillary’s situation.
http://tinyurl.com/yp7s7n
Hmmmm Barclays profits seven billion,Lloyds/TSB four billion. Yep! the banks are in crisis ‘orlright: I should have that sort of crisis!!
39. Good results for the nation’s pension funds. Maybe they can claw back some of the billions Gordon and his third rate chums have flushed down the loo.
I don’t see this arguement that the Tories have come out of this week worse. Thats like saying, in 1992, that Labour came oput of Black Wednesday worse because they supported ERM membership. Its absurd. Labour come out of this week worse, whatever the Tories do, simply because Labour are in power and they carry the can.
And BTW, this Northern Rock debacle is far from over. It still has a lot of potential damage left in it and as I’ve already said, this could quite easily become Gordon Brown’s Iraq. A disaster that week after week, month after month, people keep coming back to with every new twist and turn. This is far from over.
36. You’re probably right Peter. I haven’t ‘lost’ a political bet for some years! Still fancy this one in some ways though - on a spread probably. But I probably won’t. Just don’t think it’s not quite over yet …
Barack just point blank refuses to be drawn into a sledging contest, but Hillary obviously feels that it is her best and only chance of beating him. Mind you, having already made the same point about speech-copying earlier on that day, it seemed a bit foolish to bring it up again as it came across as a little desperate.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
38. Yes but not trade secrets. Business plans would count as trade secrets. Also the bbc is an agent of the government in providing a public service. NR is not.
39 - The issue is though that the profits are down and that the banks have balance sheet issues and in order to repair them may in the short term cap their profitablilty. That is without the monoline insurers and Credit Default Swap looming disaster.
I am totally bemused as to why the Opposition parties fail to give NuLabour a pasting over their claim over “low inflation”.
Let’s clear this up once and for all.
Inflation is either the rise in the cost of living, or it isn’t. And since Labour are claiming that inflation is low, they’re lying.
41. It’s simply a Lib Dem fantasy. The Lib Dems are desperate for the Tories not to benefit from the NR debacle, therefore they are creating an alternative mental universe for themselves in which they are (once again) the ‘real opposition’ while the Tories are somehow complicit in the mess. Pity the poor dears.
14. Yes you are the only person.
45
I think predictions of the death of the UK economy are a little premature.
I have noticed that one of my neighbours, (hobby collecting vintage Aston Martins) who dabbles in the city, seems as chirpy as ever. When I see his body swinging from a tree I’ll start to worry.
New thread - Tory YouGov lead drops to 6%
You can watch the whole Texas debate here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VavoxMqOwM
All Rep and Dem debates are archived here:
http://www.youtube.com/user/yd2008
To assess how bad Osborne was in the NR debate this week you only have to look over his right shoulder at the very pained expression on William Hague’s face.
As Michael Portillo noted last night, Osborne should have taken the advice of Howe, Lawson, Lamont & Clarke on how to respond to NR.
They didn’t and their sheer inexperience and lack of direction has come across very strongly.
Contrasting this with Vince Cable’s responses makes them look very unqualified for governing indeed.
52. I dont think we should overplay how bad the Tories did on this one. Ultimately people care most about the governments handling. Only time will tell how it works out. However, I don’t think this week will have been good for Conservative morale. The Tory benches were really quiet both on Monday and Wednesday. The older members will probably be pushing for their voice to be heard more from now on.
38 James So why does the Royal Mail not have legislation exempting it from FOI provisions and has to rely on the commercial confidence provisions like any other company?
I suspect the government want to stop prying eyes looking at the mess that is the government risk and how it was adopted. 110 billion and counting.
Can we use this thread for US politics and the following one for UK developments - many thanks.
44 - The vast majority of what businesses do do not involve trade secrets (much though businesses love to think that everything they do is highly confidential). Subjecting NR to FOIA would introduce a barrage of queries about the value of hospitality received by NR directors at St James’ Park and such like, with adverse comparisons being drawn with treatment of employees.
On the BBC point, the public service aspect is irrelevant. The FOIA does not specify that the information has to be requested for any particular reason. The activities of the BBC are probably more “relevant” than those of NR as they relate to public service and public money whereas NR relates only to the latter. But that is of no consequence whatsoever - either the FOIA applies or it doesn’t, and if it does you have to answer questions unless they are exempt. The fact is the BBC operates in a competitive broadcasting market and its information is almost exactly as likely to be commercially sensitive as is NR’s - the fact that more of the BBC’s information is public service related doesn’t make it less commercially sensitive or less likely to trigger that exemption.
55/56 - sorry Mike posted before I saw your comment.
I note Rasmussen now has Hillary by 3% in Texas and ABC/Washington Post by 1%. Unless Obama runs into major problems I can’t see Clinton holding the fort over the next couple of weeks as the Obama resources pour in. I see parallels between Clinton and Davy Crockett!
Hillary’s line about the xerox looked like it came striaght from Cameron’s PMQ textbook- petty, rehearsed silly, and spiteful. Luckily she salvaged herself at the end.
Wins in Texas and Ohio are going to bring Hillary back in to this contest. 10% wins in both, and she is right back in contention.
58- that said it appears highly unlikely that she will win both, let alone with 10% leads.
Still some of us clutching at straws.
I wonder if the Oscars ceremony will influence this contest?
New projections for Ohio and Texas.
Lets not count Hillary out - my latest projections have her ahead in both Ohio and Texas.
Hillary still enjoys a healthy lead in Ohio (no new GOP polls).
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/hillary-still-has-a-healthy-lead-in-ohio/
McCain widening the gap with Huckabee and Obama very close to Hillary.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/02/22/updated-texas-projections/
Incidently I believe that McCain will absolutely crush Obama in a manner not seen since 1984 (McCain would still beat Clinton but it’d be much closer).
1 I’ve seen worse 20/1 shots, StJohn, and backed them.
61. Matthew, I think McCain’s chances are under-rated by the market at the moment too. What makes you predict a blow-out for him though?
Am I the only one who finds the results of polls on the excellent RealClearPolitics site very confusing.
Hilary is neck and neck with Barack in the national polls, but he trounces her in the recent primaries/caucases. Hilary’s camp say that these are often Republicans/Independents enhancing Barack’s numbers to get Hilary off the ticket.
Well if that is the case why is Obama consistently ahead of McCain in the head to head races?
Is it because he can pull the Reps/Ind. in. If so he is odds on for November. Plus he can energise his electorate far more than John McCain. Considering the odds Barack has run the best political campaign of all-time!
Am I the only one who finds the results of polls on the excellent RealClearPolitics site very confusing.
Hilary is neck and neck with Barack in the national polls, but he trounces her in the recent primaries/caucases. Hilary’s camp say that these are often Republicans/Independents enhancing Barack’s numbers to get Hilary off the ticket.
Well if that is the case why is Obama consistently ahead of McCain in the head to head races?
Is it because he can pull the Reps/Ind. in. If so he is odds on for November. Plus he can energise his electorate far more than John McCain. Considering the odds Barack has run the best political campaign of all-time!
re 61. But your projection system was not very good in Wisconsin. On Monday you had Hillary with a 4% lead when in fact Obama ended up with a 17% margin.
I make that out by 21%
63.
1. Michelle Obama’s ability to rile the Republican base (I doubt that this is the last gaffe we’ll hear from the Obama camp).
2. Barack Obama’s antiwar stance will make the election about foreign policy rather than the economy. Even if you don’t agree that the Iraq war is innately popular, there is clear evidence that people are willing to listen to someone who can put forward a consistant plan for seeing it through to victory. In contrast, Hillary would focus more on the economy, on which the public is clearly closer to the Democrats on.
3. Obama’s reliance on students and 18-24 voters who tend to be less reliable is risky to say the least. George McGovern found out the hard way that they can change their minds between the Spring and November.
4. The shock of McCain choosing Lieberman as a the VP (or at least him attacking Obama at the Republican convention in November) will dominate the news when it happens.
5. Hillary supporters will flock to McCain (Hillary will support the ticket but many of her surrogates will not - especially if there are quite a few primary challenges from the left to Clinton supporters). I wouldn’t be shocked if many figure sat the election out, so that Hillary could make a comeback in 2012.
6. There is a serious question mark about Obama’s competance on foreign policy and the agendas of his advisors (Samantha Power etc).
7. Obama’s lack of experience will contrasts embarassingly with McCain’s. This didn’t matter so much among Democrats, but it will play poorly with moderates, independants and weak Republicans.
8. The Latino-American vote will go to McCain (or at least break even). This is not on some racist assumption but simply a recognition that McCain carried 75% of the Latino vote in his home state. Latino-American voters have been steadily losing their automatic identification with the Democrats and becoming more like typical voters.
9. He makes Kerry look like Rambo. This is probably unfair but true.
10. McCain will move to the centre after he gets a majority and will start to pick up the independant vote, much of which voted for Obama purely as an anti-Hillary tactical voting device.
66.
Actually, my final projection was Obama by 4.
http://thepoliticaltipster.wordpress.com/2008/02/19/new-wisconsin-projections/
Out of all the primaries I called on Samplemiser alone : I only got South Carolina and California (on the GOP side) and New Hampshire (on the Democrat side) wrong. Of course there were times that I got the margin wrong (and of course some of my attempts to guess the results were wrong) but the formula generally performed better than many, if not all, of the polls.
re 64. I think the national/state effect is caused by the very different nature of the polling question. If you are doing your fieldwork in the days leading up to a primary then the voting intention question is more real. For most people in the national polls the question is less real.
Hard as it might be for anoraks to recognise we have to remember that most people most of the time have very little interest in politics.
Re: 69 Mike my first ever posting and I am already labelled an “anorak”!! arrrrrggggghhh
Calling Matthew JCG Partridge. I feel the need to call out some of your rather outlandish tips.
Your website has improved somewhat these days, but only because it looks more and more like this one - perhaps it would be better if you developed your own style?
Re - Your reliance on samplemiser for this particular contest. Its always good to see people doing their research but looking in the rear-view mirror at polls in this US race seems to me to be flawed.
Obama is fighting a ground campaign the likes of which have not been seen in modern times. When Obama’s crew let loose on a state, everything changes so looking at old polls is of limited use given such a fast moving situation.
How can you poll this? http://tinyurl.com/269t7z
You also seem to not mention when you make projections any nuances in the particular state. I’m looking at your post “updated Texas projections” what about the Caucus? You don’t even mention it?
I’m looking at your post “Hillary still has a healthy lead in Ohio”. As you read polls - you’ll know that Hillary’s lead has been PLUMMETING in Ohio the last 7 days - how can that be described as “healthy”?
A Clinton concession … very nearly -
http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters?pid=288820
59 - 10% wins for Clnton are no use, she needs 20% plus as she’s so far behind in delegates.
65 - The delegate count will be relatively close but Obama has won because of better organisation and better timing, both skills necessary for being a good president.
I don’t think Clintonistas will contemplate touching McCain with a bargepole - and yup I think after TX and OH it is all over - it really sounds deep down at heart as though she knows Obama has the nomination sewn up.
So I am getting ready to hold my nose and support Obama after March 4 results come in - if she wins both I am still with Hillary if she loses I will back Obama for President.
I really think it is going to be a really hard task for Obama to take the White House - I just hope the Democrats are not making a mistake as Obama was elected on the back of Republicans and Independents - and will they support him in November ?
rej4sl @ 74.
Take heart dear chap. It’s an Obamaquake come November!
New Rasmussen Texas poll -
McCain 46% - Huckabee 37% - Paul 8%.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/texas/texas_republican_presidential_primary
More on the Clinton financing -
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/22/us/politics/22clinton.html?ei=5065&en=0e0a0772289a2b92&ex=1204347600&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print
From slate.com
Swinging Hypotheticals
Head-to-head matchups favor Obama in November’s battleground states.
By Mark Blumenthal and Charles Franklin
Updated Thursday, Feb. 21, 2008, at 2:16 PM ET
New head-to-head polls show that Barack Obama would beat John McCain in key general election swing states but Hillary Clinton would not. SurveyUSA released hypothetical matchup results from Wisconsin, Iowa, and Virginia, all states that figure to be key battlegrounds in November: McCain beat Clinton by seven, 11, and three points, respectively; Obama beat McCain by 10, 10, and six points, respectively. Obama won all three states in the Democratic primary, although John Edwards was still a factor in Iowa.
He is also a left footer, in football rather than in church.
What is a “left-footer” in a church context? It sounds vaguely naughty somehow…
79. John Loony. A Roman Catholic.
Hillary now hitting 16’s in the Iowa markets.
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Nomination08_quotes.html
80. Oh! I wonder why nobody told me that during the seven years when I was being indoctrinated with superstitious gibberish and mumbo-jumbo in RC primary schools?
1 St Jude (aka stjohn) - an interesting idea, seemingly very unlikely but by now means impossible. Wouldn’t this need, though, to happen quickly - she surely can’t say nice things about Obama one day and then go for his throat the next for this to have any credence.
Anyway, I feel I can’t just sit idly by and watch you land another winner at outrageous odds, so I’ve followed you in for a modest tenner with Victor Chandler.
83 PfP
StJude likes his long shots and this is quite a plausible one. I won’t be following suit, but may regret it.
83. Peter. The strength of her tribute to Obama towards the end of the debate was quite surprising. It was probably in response to her ill judged “xerox” plagiarism quip. But I didn’t think she had it in her to be gracious in defeat. Clearly she has. They would be a formidable team. Betting is all about value and to me 20/1 looks too big. Not expecting to collect but you never know!
85 stjohn - returning quickly to my usual cynical self, it could of course have simply been a means of trying to attract the sympathy vote (as she did with the tears prior to NH) - we shall see. VC are certainly more generous than Betfair on this one, who have her at 15-1. I suspect though that this is a very thin market.
84 I won’t be following suit, but may regret it.
To you PtP, I shall say just this - Barnsley at 35-1!
85 Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm………you’ve got me hesitating.
It would be a breathtaking move for Obama to offer it, and for her to take it. Instinctively, I can’t see it happening, and yet…
I reckon it’s a 10/1 shot, so there’s definitely value there.
Alright, you persuaded me. I’ll have a tenner with Victor.
Barnsley, PfP? Is this a football team?
New Rasmussen poll for Ohio -
Clinton 48% - Obama 40%.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/ohio/ohio_democratic_presidential_primary
89 The team whose injury-time dismissal of Liverpool from the FA Cup last Saturday made many a neutral smile broadly:lol:
90 It fits a pattern, Peter.
I must say without fear of favor I was impressed by her last nite. Trouble is, he was good too. They’re both strong candidates and there’s little to choose between them. That became very evident from the debate.
She’ll lose, I think, and in hindsite I think the blame will be apportioned mostly to her campaign team, and Bill’s unhelpful interventions. Plus of course she was up against somebody and something stronger than she could have imagined.
If she does lose, I’ll be wishing her well in whatever comes next - hopefully the VP, now I’ve had a score on it.
91 Oh, them. Yeah, not bad.
Not as good as 50/1 Obama though.
92,Peter,hi,hope you’re well.At least you’ve only got £20 on Hillz for the VP-a bit less than I recall you putting on the New Hampshire primary:lol:
67.
1) Michelle Obama attracts far more people than she alienates - one gaffe (and not a serious one) is pretty good for someone who is managing two kids on a National Campaign only three years after her husband’s first Statewide election. She is a good speaker and has conducted rallies on her own. Not seen too much evidence that she motivates the GOP base.
Yes, but if Obama is sensible enough to choose Richardson for VP, this could change very quickly. Crist would seal Florida for McCain of course.
2) You hear about Obama’s antiwar stance beause it was the primaries, and this was his major advantage against HRC. In the general, he will only talk about the economy and healthcare by choice, McCain will pivot to the military and foreign policy, and whoever gets their issue the most attention probably wins. Obama is consistent on the war, but he won’t mention it by choice come November.
3) There were good reasons students went off McGovern in ‘72, and Obama would do well to avoid them. However, I’m not sure I accept the premise he is ‘reliant’ on them. They’re a great added boost, but not that essential.
4) Never going to happen, and I’d be surprised if Lieberman even gets involved with the General Election - he won’t smear Obama, he’ll support McCain pretty quietly if he’s not on the ticket (which he won’t be)
5) Some will, but many of Hillary’s supporters are core Democrats, and have less they share with McCain than Obama voters. Turnout is key for women, hispanics and blue-collar men, but I wouldn’t say that they will ‘flock’ to McCain unless Obama goes seriously off the rails
6) Yes, but I don’t understand your problem with him having academic advisors with agendae (such as opposing genocide) - what is your worry here?
7) It was pretty embarrassing matching him up against Clinton and Richardson - experience is not the card with which to play this guy, especially when he’s attacking the Washington DC long-standing-backscratchers’ club. Experience is a double-edged sword.
9) GWB made Kerry look like Rambo - Americans have elected men who didn’t even complete their NG service (Clinton and GW Bush) for the last 4 elections, against veterans three of those times (GWH Bush, Dole and Kerry). Does America want another election about who did what in Vietnam? Not so sure.
10) Maybe - I think he is in danger of losing social conservatives (even igniting a right-wing third party candidacy) if he tries to become Arnold Vinick too early - I don’t think he’ll dare alienate them. I reckon the early game at least will be cast Obama as an uber-Liberal, but I’m happy to be shown to be wrong on this.
94 Hi Patrick.
New Hampshire is a distant memory now. Sitting on a nice portfolio now, thank you.
flowing the same ting
New Rasmussen daily Presidential tracker -
Clinton 41% - Obama 44%.
McCain 46% - Clinton 43%.
McCain 44% - Obama 44%.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
97. Excuse this nonsense post! I was trying to set spellcheck up on my computer and inadvertently sent the above post. Some will no doubt see more wisdom in it than many of my posts!
97 You been drinking, StJohn?
100. Not a question, surely a statement of fact!!
95. I believe Matthew’s long-term predictions can be summed up as “the more pro-war a candidate has been, the more likely they will win”, and then other justification will be provided. The idea Clinton supporters will flock to McCain betrays all evidence to the contrary.
99/100. LOL! No but perhaps I’d better start straight away! The sun is certainly over the yardarm in this corner of Birmingham.
97. On reflection I think it actually was one of my better posts. Je ne regrette rien.
93 - Did somebody on here get 50-1 on Obama then? I do wish whoever it was would mention the fact once in a while rather than hiding his/her light under a bushel
McCain may only be allowed to spend $9m until September.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/21/AR2008022103141.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008022102994
97 stjohn - I never realised you were of Irish stock, but then again perhaps I did!
93 Not as good as 50/1 Obama though.
PtP - Not quite so fast. He hasn’t won the Presidency just yet, let alone the Democratic nomination and won’t get paid for another 8 months, which as we know is a long time in politics. stjohn on the other hand got paid in 10 miutes!
BTW who recommended Obama at 50-1? I’ve forgotten.
Shh, James. It’s a better kept secret than Benedict’s blog.
107 LOL! Yeah, I know. I don’t really do football though. Sometimes I wish I did.
107. Pfp. Yes my £3 improved to £105 over 10 minutes. I think this equates to an annualised rate of return of 1,839,599 % on my money. Better than most savings accounts.
110. Or should that be 100,839,599 % ? Anyway, quite a lot!
McCain getting himslef in a heap of bother tonight - claimed yesterday not to have spoken to the Paxson CEO so couldn’t have been any influence. Now his testimony from five years ago flatly refutes that. It is becoming quite a story.
Get some insurance on Romney, guys. Just in case…
Re PJ at 90 - Hillary’s poll lead in Ohio as reported by Rasmussen appears very resolute at 8% and I wonder if, following last night’s debate, she might might now just close a tad on Obama.
I know we’ve learnt to our cost not to rely too heavily on US polls, but with her maintaining this sort of lead and only 10 days to go, her current odds of 0.88/1 on Betfair looks like value to me. Mind you, so did similar odds available just a few days ago on her winning Texas, where she’s now 1.6/1. The difference being however that she seems to be holding firm in Ohio.
111 stjohn - Tesco have calculators priced fron £2.99 - invest!
112 MM - I missed this story, is it a big deal? He’s as good as home and hosed anyway, isn’t he?
114 Only (slight problem) that most calculators are only 8 digit ie go up to 99,999,999-onviously one can shift the decimal point for the purpose of calculation
115 This is swiftly moving up the agenda - from a Newsweek story:
http://www.newsweek.com/id/114505
111 This year is a leap year:therefore there are 52704 tranches of 10 minutes in 2008.The logarithm of 35 is 1.544 to 3 places:therefore 52704* this figure is a lof of 81378.56.So your rate of interest is 10 raised to the power of 81378,plus 2 to allow for the shift in the decimal point for percentages:
I make this 10 raised to 81380.56-nearly the RPI of Zimbabawe:lol:
113. Peter. Come March 4th, voters in Texas and Ohio have the opportunity of being a part of history. Barack Obama is going to be the Democratic Presidential candidate in 2008 and probably the next POTUS and first ever black US President. The voters of Texas and Ohio can seal the deal for him and end the nomination race. My feeling is that they will do so and that he will win both contests.
117 OK Mark, I’ll check out the Newsweek story shortly - but presumably from what I’ve already read, it’s about Iseman having worked as a lobbyist for Paxson in Sept ‘04 - yes?
119 stjohn - in Texas, yes I agree, but it’s definitely not what the polls are saying in Ohio, at least not yet.
120 McCain said yesterday he had never spoken to the CEO of a company Iseman was lobbying for - except five years ago under oath he said he had indeed spoken to this same chap. Either he was lying on one occasion or the other - or (even worse!) his memory is going…
118. Patrick. That looks impressive! My figure was way out. Didn’t know you were another maths whizz kid.
122 Yes, I agree, it doesn’t sound too good for McCain. Trying to imagine how such a story would run in the UK, say during a leadership campaign some time prior to a GE, you’d expect the candidate concerned to set out his/her position in a TV interview, in Brown’s case, undoubtedly conducted by Andrew Marr.
PfP @ 113.
Last week Clinton’s lead was 14 points, now down to 8%.
I predict Obama will close again next week and by polling day ???
Essentially the more voters see of Obama the more they seem to like him.
4th March I expect Hillary to be zip from 15 and concede the race within two days.
New polls from ARG in the other two states voting on March 4th.
Rhode Island -
Clinton 52% - Obama 40%.
Vermont -
Clinton 34% - Obama 60%.
http://americanresearchgroup.com/
127 For peace of mind, I’ve just invested £2 on Romney at odds of 149-1!
123,I took,and failed narrowly,AO maths in 1987 (basically half an A level in maths) In my day,a few people still used log tables-I find I can bizarrely enjoy playing with on-line log tables-oh March 14th is imminent ‘Pi day’-the 14th dy of the 3rd month-I won’t attempt to go into decimal places on that one:lol:
PfP @ 127.
What about Huckabee naked on the B52 on the moon having tea with Elvis!!
106, 115 - These stories could turn out to be pretty damaging for McCain in the General.
1. Obama will have a huge fundraising advantage if McCain is forced to accept public funding for the primaries. Yet even if he is able to wriggle out of it he will still be behond. There are estimates that Obama is on track to raise $50m this month. He now has over 500k donors, many can donate again. If he maintains his fundraising momentum he could end up collecting $400m+, with the advantage that most is coming from ordinary Americans rather than special interests. The McCain snafu also undercuts his argument if Obama backs out of public funding for the General.
2. These stories about McCain could hit his image if they continue. They undermine his claim to be a straight-talker, and they associate him with business as usual in Washington playing right into the Obama message of change and making it easier for him to claim that McCain will be more of the same. To have any chance of winning independent voters McCain must preserve his image as a man of principle.
Doubt Elvis would be enamoured to that prospect:lol:
130) shh. Don’t tell Matthew JCG Partridge - he is super bullish on McCain, predicts LANDSLIDE vs Obama.
129 PJ - I know, I know, but stjohn’s got me going on these long odds bets and we’re only talking about £2 here.
Plus, should I won, I’d drink for months off this in The Green Man on Putney Heath. In fact, I’ve only got to find one old boy to buy me a pint whilst I explain this “insurance” bet and I get my money back!
I’ve been fiddling some numbers from recent polls. In the general, if Obama wins all the states he got last time minus Wisconsin, then he only has to get four (or three bigger ones) of:
Wisconsin (leading by 1%)
Iowa (leading by 10%)
Nevada (leading by 12%)
Colorado (leading by 7%)
Missouri (leading by 5%)
Virginia (leading by 6)
Arkansas (no polls)
Ohio (behind by 2%)