So what will Dave kick off with today?
April 23rd, 2008
Tax/budget seems the obvious choice - but will it be?
So it’s back to the the regular Wednesday PMQ clash between Dave and Gord in the commons. It seems ages since they last faced each other and it’s good that Ladbrokes are continuing with their weekly betting market.
Having failed miserably to guess on previous occasions I am reluctant to make a suggestion. From Cameron ’s perspective this is all about tactics and wrong-footing the Prime Minister.
What seems so obvious to punters is also obvious to Brown and his advisers and they come well prepared. So Cameron often uses a tangential approach.
We’ll see.
Click on the panel if you want to have a wager. Good luck.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Not sure asking about the Mayoral Election is in Order, is it (and surely that should be twinned with Local Elections anyway? I would be tempted by a couple of quid on Zimbabwe as the best of the outsiders, unless of course that’s a banned topic.
Sometimes there is only one subject which a Leader of the Opposition can credibly raise. This week it would look offbeat if David Cameron were not to ask some of his questions about the 10p tax band. However, I think he will build up to that, and start on a wider economic question (eg banks). So I pick the second favourite.
Looking at things might he have a bit of a go at Constitutional/Parliamentary Issues in light of the MEPs voting not to employ family members? He could tie it in to the slow progress of change at Westminster etc. Just a thought.
Presumably if he asked about Rising Food Prices, (as a tangential lead in to 10p tax cut hurting most those on low incomes etc.) that counts as Other Economic rather than Green Issues
2 - I think Cameron has to be very careful about how he handles the 10p tax issue. Firstly because he doesn’t want to get himself in a position of pledging to restore it, and secondly if any future Conservative Govt wants to take measures to simplify the tax system it is inevitable that there will be low income earners produced who lose out.
4 - interesting angle. With reference to 5, there is probably a lot of risk free political hay to be made out of the timing of the tax changes, without directly commenting on the merits in principle of the tax changes themselves.
I just think the 10p thing is too obvious, Cameron knows Gordon will be briefed up to his drooping eyeballs on it. This is about his first question, if he wants to maximise the impact of anything on the 10p stuff ask about something from left field. If I were Cameron I would ask something about Parliamentary expenses link it to trust in politics, get the pat response then launch into 5 questions about the tax issue linked to trust.
7. Good plan, link the way it was released and handled with trust in politics. How Brown and his government sneakily put it in, then tried to make out no-one will lose out. Bring up quotes that are obviously false etc about the subject from government ministers.
Looks like +9.4% for CLinton yesterday, but rounded it’ll be 10% (55/45) for the press. Upper end of expectations no?
As for the pollsters, RCP average had +6%, but interestingly it was two of the dodgier pollsters (Zogby/Suffolk) who were both spot on the result, while SUSA/Quinnipac were down at +5% (PPP were even +3% Obama!).
The 10p rate with a few references to Charles Clarke and how the government is falling apart at the seams.
With the breaking news this morning at 9am that the first Zimbabwe recount has given the constituency to Mugabe, I think a good, serious, non punch and judy question about Zimbabwe is a good outside bet.
Cameron seems to do best when he challenges Brown on things that he has said in the past. When Brown called off his Autumn election so that he could show the country his “vision for change” and to develop his policies further, would be a good starting point and he could certainly include taxing the poor in there somewhere.
Cameron does best when he is “helpful” to Gordon, and Gordon will have been prepared for the obvious 10p question and have a list of Labour achievements and dodgy stats about Conservatives. If I were him I’d lead with question on why the latest ONS stuff on child poverty etc had been delayed until May 2nd as a wide of inferring Gordon hides or defers, then something on yet another review, offer Conservative support in efforts to recompense losers in tax changes.
13 - If he were being cheeky he could liken the delay in child poverty stats to the election results in Zimbabwe. “Is the PM delaying the stats so that, as in Zimbabwe, they can be made to show the right result?”. It would absolutely infuriate Gordon.
14 - it would, but it would be incredibly cheap. The one is political manoeuvring, the other is a coup in a benighted country. The two should not be compared.
Just a thought - any chance Cameron leads on the St Georges Flag above Downing street… Not sure which of the above that would fall in?
15 - Probably. It is abundantly clear though that the figures on child poverty are being finessed to put the government in a better light.
European Uniion at 50/1 looks good value: lead story on news at ten last night and front page of the Metro today. Not sure what he’d ask, though.
o/t-the irish referendum in june on the Lisbon Treaty-any thoughts on England finally becoming a province of Europe!!!!
Cameron will start on education,then move on to tax.
First teachers strike for 20 yrs tomorrow…
ot - I believe that Clinton may well get the nomination. She buried Obama in every key demographic for November. If the Dems nominate Obama, PA might even be in play and if that happens, McCain is home.
I think the consensuses on Obama’s and then the Democrats’ victory are both wrong.
9.
9.4% is not good enough.
NC will wipe out the Pledged delegates and the cast votes she has gained in Pa.
@21:
“key demographic” = “people who vote for Hillary”?
and if you point out the Maths, my response is that superdelegates may switch based on electability.
If I was Brown I would be very worried about this article because of the author and who he represents.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/04/23/do2303.xml
20 - I’m not sure Cameron is in the business of getting on the wrong side of key public sector groups.
This post from last night needs repeating (perhaps weekly) OK it was 1 o’clock in the morning, Sean was in a reflective mood and may yet relapse, but well said Sean.
“89. Good luck Nick. And I really mean that.
The other day when we were having one of our rows - and I went back trawling through the comments to find one of your fibs - and you DID fib (but don’t we all) - I realised, when re-reading the posts, quite how aggressive I can be, and how you generally maintained a very civil tone, even under extreme provocation (usually from me).
I don’t resile from my remarks, I still think you are a fiendish spin-obsessed europhile party hack who tells enormous lies about immigration (etc etc turn to page 89), however I do respect your relative candour and your bravery in posting under your own name.
So. Put it another way. If there is a massive Tory landslide at the next election, which I devoutly wish for, to get rid of this dreadful government - I shan’t be totally annoyed if, despite it all, one small Labour outpost holds out annoyingly around Broxtowe….
by seanT April 23rd, 2008 at 1:17 am”
20 - But what does he say on the teachers’ strike? As far as I can see, Brown is on quite a strong wicket on that subject and the Tories broadly agree with him. Most teachers aren’t striking (NASUWT backed the award) and the rise is in line with the pay review body recommendation.
Other Economis Issues at 5/2 looks tempting with this article today which will shame NuLabour
Ministers and energy companies will today meet campaigners pressing for action to lift tens of thousands of low income households out of “fuel poverty”.
Ofgem, the energy regulator, is bringing together Government, industry and charities for a summit to address the plight of people struggling to pay rising gas and electricity bills.
A coalition of campaign groups yesterday released figures which, they said, showed the vast majority of pensioners and lone parents were now living in fuel poverty - defined as households spending more than 10% of their income on fuel costs.
Age Concern, the Child Poverty Action Group and National Energy Action, said that almost one in five households, or 4.5 million people, were now affected.
According to their figures, the average fuel bill for 65 to 74-year-olds has leapt to £1,000, a rise of 15% for a single pensioner.
NuLaboyr is losing “the grey vote” and IMHO David Cameron should lay into Herr Braun.
So Clinton’s last big state gains her +10 delegates ? Thats not enough.
She may limp on but its over..
The oddest sub headline for a while in the Times today:
“Times focus group finds Johnson is likely to be overhauled by Livingstone once the mayoral race begins in earnest”
When will it start seriously? What has been happening so far, a phoney campaign? Nothing serious apparently, like hustings, canvassing, polls, Boris in a Sun bus?
O/T - Lib Dems losing councillors on a daily basis it seems.
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/localgovernment/2008/04/another-day-ano.html
Perhaps Cameron should support Brown in the hosting of the Flag of St. George - obviously it is a cynical ploy by Brown but it is to be welcomed. Brown has failed with the Britishness debate so has now embarked on trying to promote England by hosting a Flag! All Brown needs to do now is put the Barnett formulea out to dry and it would be sorted - Interesting point this if they scraped the barnett formulea - he could keep the 10p!
…..and then of course food prices
Johnny Stern, managing director of MySupermarket.co.uk, told the Daily Express newspaper: “The conclusion is that supermarkets are passing on a sizeable amount of the increased costs.
“The average customer cares about the products they need to put in their basket every week that they don’t have any choice about.”
The figures are likely to increase pressure on the ministers over the Government’s official inflation level. Critics say it fails to reflect the pain felt by shoppers.
I am baffled as to how people can vote NuLabour and wait patiently for the verdict on May 1.
My hope is that Gordon Brown will “blow it” at PMQ’s and I make a last plea for Nick P to join the rebels lad by Frank Field,who is my choice to succeed Gord.
Maybe Cameron will go on the impeding Slump:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7362353.stm
32. That’s a lot in one go!
alex [5] says “….secondly if any future Conservative Govt wants to take measures to simplify the tax system it is inevitable that there will be low income earners produced who lose out.”
It is this sort of sloppy thinking that the poor are not important, we must be sure not to upset our wealthy friends, that is why many, including Labour MPs, are horrified with the what the labour Government has done.
There used to be phrase “From each according to their ability; to each according to their needs.” The Conservatives never believed in this, but the Labour Party used to.
20
Education. take a listen to this from Evan Davis on the Today programme. Listen in at 25.50 mins. I was appalled and complained to the BBC. The implication is that if the NUT can’t get on with Labour who have poured money into education…. well listen for yourselves and see what you think.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/today/listenagain/ram/today3_20080423.ram
@34:
I tell you what, if Frank Field ever became Labour leader, we Tories would be completely screwed.
It’s fortunate for us he doesn’t want it.
Cameron should lead on the Grangemouth strike, it also directly affects Brown’s own constituency. There has to be some “dither” material in there somewhere. What is Mr Brown going to do? Scotland without fuel and English aid leaves plenty of room for mischief making.
31-It was a focus group drawn from the inner london boroughs.
They will be doing the same thing over the next few days with the outer london boroughs.
If you read the article it actually is not bad news for Boris
OT: Morley reckoned to be most patriotic town, hurrah! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/7351194.stm
Alas, Cramner is reporting that in Bradford St George’s Day parade has been cancelled due to ‘health and safety’. Didn’t seem a problem when a thousand extremist psychos minced about with “Death to the West” placards.
39.I’d rather have 10 more years of Frank Field than 10 more months of Brown.
24. Martin swing groups for the autumn; working class men, union members, voters without degrees etc.
40. You mean on the lines that diesel users in Kirkaldy are now paying £1.45 per litre.
What about asking Brown about the failure to apply rigourous costing and budgeting to the London Olympics?
Health checks for the Labour Front Bench - most will need to have blood pressure checked after Hoon announced that they need to go out and sell the removal of the 10% tax band.
@44:
Yes, it’s a very common Clinton tactic. Groups that vote for Hillary are “key”, those for Obama “irrelevant”. States that go Clinton are “key”, those that go Obama “irrelevant”.
It’s a fairly transparent ploy even for her.
@43:
The sad thing is Frank Field, like Vince Cable, is wasted in his party. He’d be much happier in a party where his intelligence and political acumen are respected rather than resented.
46. Maybe Obama will become the VP on MacCain ticket if Clinton gets in their by super delegate?
I shouls imagine failing that Obama will run as an independent. He could call his party Camelot.
Got to admire Hillary. Just watched her victory speech- superb.
I agree with Test (24)- the maths is one, but Hillary’s pull factor in the 4 key states- Ohio, Florida, Penn, and Michegan cannot be discounted.
The role of the superdelegates must be to pick the candidate they most think will win, even if this means going against the primaries.
If I was a super I would look very closely at the 4 key states, and who is in the best position to win these. I would also consider whether selecting Obama brings into play New York and New Jersey (even California) for McCain- absolutely must wins for the Democrats. Obama cannot afford defending solid, big win states whilst trying to reach into the swing states.
Obama though brings into play other states that Hillary would not stand an earthly- Carolina’s, Tennessee forcing GOP to defend these much more rigorously than they would like.
A thoroughly intriguing contest. If I was a super I would let them fight it out until June, but be drawn to Hillary because of her power in the key states.
47 hear hear.
47 I have never seen any sign that Vince Cable is “resented” in the Lib Dems.
[5] A revealing post from Alex: 2 - I think Cameron has to be very careful about how he handles the 10p tax issue. Firstly because he doesn’t want to get himself in a position of pledging to restore it, and secondly if any future Conservative Govt wants to take measures to simplify the tax system it is inevitable that there will be low income earners produced who lose out.
I disagree. I don’t think low-income losers follow ievitably from tax simplification, although Alex does a service in his implication that “simplification” is spin for “let’s get rid of progressive taxation”.
I am coming round the view that economic analysis has little of value to say about the design of taxation. On the one hand, “trickle-down” growth theory says that all boats rise on a rising tide, but the empirical evidence is mixed, to say the least. On the other hand, welfare economics supports progressive taxation, since the marginal utility of the next £1 to a poor person is greater than it is to a rich one. But this is only half the story since we don’t know the relative marginal utilities of the next £1 of government spending in each case (since that depends on how that £1 is spent).
So perhaps governments should set tax rates on political grounds alone! And this is the problem for Brown: he has introduced a tax change which he knows darn well he would have opposed tooth and nail had it come from a Conservative government. (Cameron has wriggle room - there’ll always be an economist to claim that it was wrong to make taxation less progressive in 2008 but quite alright in 2011 or whenever…)
@51:
I never said he was. I merely said that Vince Cable was wasted in the Lib Dems.
Frank Field is, however, resented. Not surprisingly, because he’s smarter than they are, and lefties hate that.
47 Ken Clarke and Portillo too.
51. I think the LD’s blocked his continuation of leader - when it was demostrated that Cable was head and shoulders above Clegg and Huhne the LD’s should have made Cable the leader. After all if Labour did not elect a PM, then why should a party that his at the fringes of politics require to elect one after the demise of Skeleton!
Nick Clegg (AKA - Neil Kinnock of the LD’s) seems to have disapeared of late. Maybe it is because no one takes him seriously?
@47:
The thing with Clarke is, he’s a Tory through and through, he just has an odd mental hiccup when it comes to the EU.
Portillo’s moved on from Politics, though if he wanted to return, he’d still be a Tory to his very core.
54.
Neither ever got into the cabinet - those two charecters elected not to continue on the frontbench!
Cable is not overlooked, just wasted in the LD’s - he should have stayed in Labour really.
46- Martin- it is true that Clinton’s states are key. If the Democrats win 3 of Ohio, Penn, Florida, Michegan- then they win.
Also, Obama would have to spend big in New York, Jersey and very possibly California.
The unknown dimension is the states that Obama brings into play- ones that Hillary/ traditional democrats cannot reach.
As said- an intriguing contest, but trying to be objective it seems that Hillary is the more competitive candidate to face McCain in November.
“The unknown dimension is the states that Obama brings into play- ones that Hillary/ traditional democrats cannot reach.”
So, you’re saying, what? That Obama’s states are “key” too?
SAY IT ISN’T SO!
49 - Edwards was supposed to help in the South last time and the Dems got blown out all over the South. I actually think that Hillary shores up the current Blue states probably bringing Arkansas into the Blue column and would be ultra competitive in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida and the like.
47 - eh? Deputy Leader and Treasury Spokesman - hardly ‘wasted’ (unlike Field who’s stuck on the back benches). Or indeed Ken Clark…
56. I bet if Clarke or Portillo had offered there services then any leader of the tory party would jump at the opportunity to have them on board as said before the duo decided not to bother. Interestingly Clarke did the commision for Cameron on parliamentry reform!
Equally Frank Field is Labour through and through. Cable of course is Liberal/Labour/SDP/LibDem at heart.
@61:
Ahem, he’s wasted because he’s Deputy Leader and Treasury Spokesman FOR THE LIBERAL DEMOCRATS.
A big fish in an evaporating puddle is no place for a man of his talents to be floundering.
@63:
Equally Frank Field is Labour through and through.
Which makes you wonder what he’s doing in New Labour.
The Liberal Democrats have raped Vince Cables political career. Cable could have been a totum of the political establishment instead he is a dwarf in a bunch of piccaninies.
@66:
Oh gawd, e’s off again.
65 How we laughed…
66 Vince Cable is pretty influential. He’s done well, better than most politicians, definitely most Tories. Made Tory Twickenham a pretty safe LD seat. He should consider himself a success.
55. Clegg has dissapeared over the last couple of weeks, we’ll see how he is at PMQ’s though.
38: I listened to the clip, MTF. We obviously have different starting point, but isn’t it a factual question - essentially the Government’s put a lot of dosh into schools, should you be demanding even more? The respondent said yes they have, but not enough on salaries. Seems a reasonable exchange of possible views. The Tories don’t deny that Labour has put a lot of money into schools, they just say they’d have spent it differently etc. Perhaps they’d have spent it on salaries, though I frankly doubt it, don’t you?
I doubt if Tories here would actually like Frank Field as PM - what they like about him is his readiness to say awkward things for the Government, to the point that they wonder why he doesn’t cross over. But he’s even more hostile - in his polite way - to many Tory causes. The system doesn’t readily accommodate people who take their own view on everything, and it’s an interesting test of one’s view of the party system to imagine the Commons containing 650 different Frank Fields. It’d be lively, anyway.
27: Thanks, Icarus! And seanT too (thanked him already last night).
39 Frank Field is the only English patriot in any of the main political parties - that’s why UK politics is riddled with anglophobia. I would vote for Frank Field over any other politician from the main parties. Down with New Labour, Nu Turies and Nu Lib Dems. The big three are failing everyone and I’m sure betting markets reflect this.
70 most Tories would love Frank Field to defect, though, Nick. Clare Short caused problems for the government, but none of us wanted her. Or, say, Charles Clarke.
66. Only joking! I retract all of that - don’t want the word police on my back!
22: oh, sure, but she was never going to catch up on delegates in any signficant amount anyway. Her route to winning for a while has been solid wins in PA/Indiana/Puerto Rico, and then to somehow outnasty Obama at the convention. Barring a humungous Obama skeleton, which you’d expect would have appeared long ago, her ceiling of achievable results is pretty much limited to that.
Sorry to intrude on this love-fest, but I have met Frank Field, and he has the distinction of being the rudest person that I have ever met. Since I barely opened my mouth, this was for once not a reflection on me.
55, probably busy trying to make 40.
70. Good Morning Nick, You are certainly right about having 650 Frank Fields. From what i have seen of the Last week Labour have suffered with just a naughty forty!
Are you a member of the naughty forty nick?
@68:
Well, if he’s happy in himself that’s fine.
I’d hate to think of Vince waking up in a cold sweat at 3am every morning, having had a nightmare that he was a “senior Lib Dem”, realising that he actually is, and then sobbing himself gently back to sleep.
This, I imagine, is the normal sleeping pattern of a Lib Dem MP. But Cable deserves better.
Mike, please hurry up and install a filtering system on this board like on Slashdot, so we can filter out noise like Martin Day if we want…
75. Frank Field has one of the safest Labour seats in parliament, he would be a fool to change parties and ditch a staging post like that. He is more infliencial by doing what he does within the Labour party than outside. People often confuse Frank Fields support on some issues for a sign of impending defection - you will be waiting a long time for that.
You look at most defectors they have less inflience post defection than they did pre-defection. They can also suffer serious credibility problems like QD, who defected to Brown’s tent.
My wife’s school (a primary with a nursery - 550 pupils) is a success. The problem last month was how to hide the budget surplus or they might lose it, and how to continue to take in 75 a year (3 classes of 25) rather than the 70 the LEA have decided is the right number).
The problem is how to devise a soft touch education planning system that allow good schools to flourish without being too soft a touch for the inevitable failures and worse. Not an easy problem to solve.
75 - Maybe he objected to your name…
@79:
Think of him as Brechtian Estrangement. A Verfremdungseffekt to interfere heavily with your working day.
Bugger, hadn’t seen the new thread. Anyway, here’s my thoughts on the last one.
“Haven’t read through the thread so I’m probably repeating what others have said but I said it would be 9% and it was, if only I’d put money on it.
Anyway, treading water in these primaries isn’t good enough for Clinton. The one area where she bests Obama as regards beating McCain is the Appalachians (Ohio partly, PA the same, West Virginia etc), Obama has already shown that he beats her in the Midwest, the pacific North west and the South West. She isn’t pulling enough ahead, delegate wise any increase for her is derisory, hardly worth the millions of dollars spent by her supporters.
To be a winner she needed two votes for every one for Obama (i.e. a 30% plus lead), she may get these in Kentucky and West Virginia but not pulling out that sort of win in PA and not being likely to in NC, OR and IN means that anything she does is meaningless.
It still won’t get through to her though, the concern is that she will try and manufacture more ways to ‘obliterate’ Obama and drag her party into another decade or so of oblivion. Over to you DNC.”
Also, whoever was trying to play with PV figures, you need figures which include all the caucus states before you can say who is ahead by how much, remember that they are states that were overwhelmingly favourable to Obama.
@82:
To be honest, we should be thankful that when Frank and Antifrank met, they didn’t mutually annihilate into a shower of photons with the explosive power of 1 trillion Hiroshimas.
That would have been bad. Although funny.
70 listen again Nick, and listen to the inference about if the NUT couldnt get on with the Labour Govt….. The inference is clear and IMHO political. That’s what riled me.
Firstly, Congratulations to Hillary …. this dead cat is bouncing more often than zebedee !!
I thought a 7% win and she’s performed better at 9.4%. She racked up excellent numbers outside Philadelphia and its suburbs and subsumed Obama’s very good total within it.
The delegate count is looking in the +10 to 12 range which was the expectation on the lower win threshold of 5-7% so the bigger win hasn’t harvested any delegate dividend. See link below.
So the circus moves to NC and IN in two weeks, where Hillary will lose all her net gain from Penn and more !! In the mean time the steady flow on super delegates to Obama looks set to continue.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/4/22/11912/6533/642/500733
72-Kate Hoey perhaps!!!
@88:
Hoey’s a Tory, not a Conservative. Though really, she’s an Ulster Unionist.
85 - Very funny. Just snorted tea all over my keyboard and caused co-workers to cast curious glances in my direction…
Martin [77] I don’t think PPS’s, like Nick, are allowed to sign early day motions. Though there apparently were 60 labour MPs at the meeting with Darling which may have included some PPSs - Why weren’t the whole party there? Does any one on the back benches actually support the Government on this?
70. Absolute garbage - Frank would be 20x better than Gordon - thats from a Conservative.
84- ukpaul
“Obama has already shown that he beats her in the Midwest, the pacific North west and the South West”
I agree for the Midwest and Northwest.
But in the South West? He lost the popular vote in California,New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Oklahoma and Texas.
How did he “beat her” there???
91. Maybe i should not have put that on there (77) - only a bit of political jousting! No harm intended! I am well aware he would not say even if he was a member of the naughty forty or fabulous fifty or for that matter the Serious sixty that is starting to gain currency.
@93:
Obama won Texas.
87- JackW- though this dead cat looks very competitive in the key states.
What is the role of the superdelegate if not to overrule the will of the members, and pick the strongest candidate? No point having them otherwise.
There appears to me to be an extremely strong, and getting stronger cases for the supers to go for Clinton.
Hillary’s win in Penn seems to have been discounted on the Iowa Exchanges :
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/quotes/Nomination08_quotes.html
79. Well if you filtered out all the people with a bone to pick with the government or make fun of the LD’s you would only have Nick Palmer, yourself and a few others on here.
49 - The idea of key states is meaningless. It presupposes that history is static and that Bush/Gore will be endlessly rerun. Look at the way that the US electoral map changes over time, this Autumn will probably be another time that it changes.
Okay, just so people understand the actuality, here are the states that Obama is (at the moment) likely to beat McCain in. Figures, as here - http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/ , region names as per their annotation.
NEW ENGLAND (34 delegates)
Massachusetts
Connecticut
New Hampshire
Maine
Rhode Island
Vermont
ACELA (62 delegates)
New York
New Jersey
Maryland
Delaware
Washington DC
New Jersey
RUST BELT (17 delegates)
Michigan (but too close to call)
NORTH CENTRAL (48 delegates)
Illinois
Wisconsin
Minnesota
Indiana
SOUTH WEST (19 delegates)
Colorado
Nevada
New Mexico (too close to call)
PACIFIC (77 delegates)
California
Oregon
Washington
Hawaii
257 Delegates with 270 needed, 13 could be picked up from Pennsylvania (which is too close to call) or Ohio. He does not need PA, FL, OH and
Clinton maths in a following post.
@96:
The role of the superdelegates is supposed to be to support the winner so that they win by an even bigger margin.
The notion that for the first time in history they will overrule the clear democratic will of the people because they’re strangely drawn to Hillary’s flawlessly lovely personality seem… unlikely.
93 - As regards subsequent polling, just because someone wins a primary somewhere it doesn’t follow that they get the most support, especially if it was a closed primary.
99 - End cut off, ahould read “PA, FL, OH and MI”.
100 - My understanding was that the Supers were there specifically to overrule the activists if they chose a McGovern style loser.
85 - I wish I contained that much latent energy! But thanks for making me laugh on a wet Wednesday
96 Tyson. Hillary has been making her rust belt states only count to super delegates for months. The return has been paltry.
I expect Hillary to pick up some more SD’s this week. I understand she has been holding them back to maintain momentum. Nevertheless the essential dynamic of this race hasn’t changed since Super Tuesday - She’ll finish behind in delegates pledged and probably SD’s, in the PV and state and caucus won. How does she change the maths?
It’s now 46 MPs signed on to Field’s amendment - so obviously Gordon & Cooper’s assurances haven’t assured. Looks like Darling (and Gordon?) realise its not winnable and are going to offer something concrete. Good for backbenchers but bad for Brown.
http://news.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,91211-1313716,00.html
@104:
Let’s say you and Frank are average British men, weighing in at 160Kg between you.
If you were to mutually annihilate, the energy you’d release would be:
E = M * C^2 = 160 Kg * (3 * 10^8 m/2)^2 = 160 * 9*10^16 = 14400000000000000000 Joules.
There, that’s loads of latent energy.
107 - then how come I can’t get out of bed in a morning?
100 But if by the end of this, Clinton and Obama are neck and neck in the popular vote, the Superdelegates would have every right to choose Clinton over Obama, even if Obama has more pledged delegates. Tyson’s quite right that they must choose the candidate who’s most likely to win, which is not necessarily the candidate who has the most pledged delegates.
Sorry. Called away for a few minutes. Here’s the Clinton figures –
NEW ENGLAND (30 delegates)
Massachusetts
Connecticut
Maine
Rhode Island
Vermont
ACELA (62 delegates)
New York
New Jersey
Maryland
Delaware
Washington DC
New Jersey
HIGHLANDS (11 delegates)
Arkansas
West Virginia (too close to call)
RUST BELT (41 delegates)
Pennsylvania
Ohio
NORTH CENTRAL (31 delegates)
Illinois
Minnesota
PACIFIC (70 delegates)
California
Washington (too close to call)
Hawaii
245 delegates total and needs 270, would really need Florida, otherwise she needs to improve considerably in New Mexico, New Hampshire, Oregon etc.
As such Clinton’s key states are those.
Is there a market anywhere on turnout in the London Mayoral election?
the snooze button on the alarm clock has 14500000000000000000 J
99. To add to ukpaul’s list I’d add ‘too close to call’
Iowa, Virginia, both Carolina’s, North Dakota, Nebraska and ……. Texas !!!!
110 Sorry, Ukpaul, but what’s ACELA stand for?
Tyson asks “What is the role of the superdelegate if not to overrule the will of the members, and pick the strongest candidate? No point having them otherwise.”
The role of the superdelegate is obviously to give unswerving support to which ever candidate you happen to support.
96. The super delegates are of course entitled to overturn the result of the primaries if they wish. But would it be wise? The result would surely be a deeply embittered Obama faction, some of whom would probably abstain or vote Republican in the General Election. Hillary’s ‘victory’ would then be hollow indeed, one that would probably turn to dust in November.
[110] I knew you couldn’t trust Clinton. She gets the New Jersey delegation to vote twice!
@114:
Acela is a high-speed train network, and a name for the corridor it runs through:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acela
113. You want to bet on Texas going Dem Jack?
With all the heat and fire of the contest and final result in Penn a few factoids have been overlooked.
Firstly Hillary needed a complete shut out in Penn to have a chance to win the overall popular vote. She failed. Secondly and clearly related the pledged delegate race is over. Obama has won that too.
10p tax… but approaching it with Brown ‘dithering’ on a decision angle…
@120:
‘A factoid is a spurious (unverified, incorrect, or invented) “fact” intended to create or prolong public exposure or to manipulate public opinion. It appears in the Oxford English Dictionary[1] as “something which becomes accepted as fact, although it may not be true”, namely a speculation or an assumption. The term was coined by Norman Mailer in his 1973 biography of Marilyn Monroe.[2] Mailer described a factoid as “facts which have no existence before appearing in a magazine or newspaper”, and created the word by combining the word fact and the ending -oid to mean “like a fact”.[3][4]‘
Crime might be 1st question - linked to Mayoral Elections, Local Elections and always good to reinforce a Tory ace when the government is down. Newlove’s line on petty crime etc
#37 Icarus
alex [5] says “….secondly if any future Conservative Govt wants to take measures to simplify the tax system it is inevitable that there will be low income earners produced who lose out.”
It is this sort of sloppy thinking…
It’s an assertion - I don’t think much thought went into it, just spin technique.
113 - I think the electoral math argument for Clinton doesn’t work but your post Jack W shows the dilemna.
There is a risk with Obama. He is doing well in traditionally GOP states; the Dakotas, Nebraska, Alaska, Texas, Virginia, North Carolina. However history shows that as we get closer to the General Election states move towards their partisan preferences. That’s why Obama is not going to lose Massachusetts even though McCain is competitive in polls against him. The flip-side of this is that Obama is weaker than Clinton in the big 3 swing states of OH, PA and FL. And these have been key states for longer than 200 and 2004. OH has a long history of siding with the winner.
The problem with Clinton is that although she is competitive in these industrial states she struggles in two other key areas; the mid-west (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa) and the East Coast (Washington and Oregon). Overall though its pretty much a wash in terms of electability.
106 Ted, thanks for link the article today said “The risk from a party strategists view is that as the row rumbles on it will have a major impact on the campaigning for those elections which are coming up in 10 days”.
The Postal voters have already started voting and the polling station voters have 7 1/2 days before they start voting.
Why Labour strategists think they have time to let this drag out just shows how politically inept they really are!
In many local seats, over 1/4 of the vote has already been cast.
We now have the remaining 3/4 of the people that will vote, being reminded about the 10p maltreatment of the poorest workers day after day.
Has there ever been a more inept example of political stupidity? (Well maybe since the October non election dithering).
119 Yokel. I said to close to call. Texas demographics have changed significantly over the past 12 years and the village idiot is returning home. Further Dem registration has gone through the roof and recent congressional contests have had the GOP floundering and the polls in the state are quite interesting !!
IMO, Texas is in play and will require time and $$$$ from McCain to keep it in the red column.
I think Cameron should be awarded some bonus questions in the interests of fairness, as there is simply too much the PM needs to be questioned about for it to be done in just 6 questions…
If ever DC needs to go for the jugular, it is today.
Fatally wound him Dave, finish him off for good and the election’s yours for the taking. Labour will be stuck with a floundering and mortally wounded beast until May 2010 and won’t have the balls (or Balls) to get rid of him…
re 52 it’s not Cameron’s job to get Brown out of hole, or to tell the government where it’s going to find the money from so there aer no dangers to Cameron raising the 10% issue. Also the Tories could abolish it the same way as Labour should have, by above inflation increases in the personal allowance - which benfis every tax paper - and freezing the level of pay at which the basic rate starts. In that way no tax payer would end up paying more tax.
“We now have the remaining 3/4 of the people that will vote, being reminded about the 10p maltreatment of the poorest workers day after day.”
Best of all the first payslips for those hit by the changes will be landing the day before polling. Such beautiful timing, only a complete idiot could have designed it to fall that way.
Ah - he did, didn’t he…
I reckon it’s unlikely that either Texas, or the Carolinas, or Nebraska are really at risk for McCain, even if he polls worse than Bush did in those states.
benefits every taxpayer = costs a lot of money
surely?
Anyway, it will be interesting how much impact this actually has on the mayoral election, as I can’t imagine that Ken supports the change.
130. the majority will see a tax cut, of course, especially amongst “swing” voters.
DC might not mention tax - he might not want to herd rebels back under Browns wing by stirring up the hornets nest.
Bit of a birds and bees metaphor mixup here - sorry.
110 - Whoops, in the Obama list I said Indiana when I meant Iowa! Neither is close enough in Indiana at the moment.
being “under Brown’s wing” probably is more like having an angry bee or wasp sitting on you, than a bird
133 - Lots of people will but most of the people who will see a benefit have plenty of other reasons not to vote Labour.
Possible outside bets for Obama, Virginia, North Carolina, North Dakota and Alaska.
BBC reporting a u-turn on 10p tax http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7362283.stm
139. Hot policy 2 days before an election … hmmmm.
131 Sean. IMO with Obama as candidate the shape of the electoral map changes significantly. We are not in 00/04 re-run territory.
Indeed I would suggest that there is a sporting chance that Obama might run the board and leave McCain floundering with a handful of the old south, some mid west and Arizona. I look forward to the betting opportunites with relish !!
140 - Let’s see the shape of this first. Wonder if Cameron will come up with a ‘policy on the hoof’ type quote.
@139:
“the chancellor said he would assess the average loss to pensioners aged 60-64 and childless people. ”
Why only them?
Right, now we need “sources close to the Prime Minister” to deny it.
142. Sounds like an administration nightmare - typical Brown..
142 Makes Cameron’s first question to be 10p tax look even more certain - if such a thing were possible!
143. Propensity to vote?
137. If you are right, Ave It will be having a field day, as Labour’s vote share goes into single digits.
I don’t think you are.
Anyone know when Betfair are planning to pay out on Penn?
139: they just don’t get it do they?
How will that help people like my parents who are neither retired nor have young children - just fairly low-paid jobs but not low-paid enough to get any tax credits?
I think they will be even LESS likely to vote Labour if the Govt starts giving compensation for pensioners and those with kids, whilst ignoring them.
This could get WORSE for the Govt the more they fart about trying to get themselves out of the biggest hole Gordon ever dug for them.
They have completely lost the plot.
143. they are the only people who see a tax cut (and only then if in a very specific income bracket)
147 - Not at all, only the most naive person would think that people will look at the things that annoy them about the government and say but its all ok because I’m £20 a year better off.
145. I do hope so. I can upgrade the weeks shopping if it is!!
There are some strange states ebign bandied about. Indiana for the Dems??
Colorado, NM, NV-what effect would a SW senator have in pulling these states into the (R) line.
I still think it will rest on the classics of Pa, Oh, Mi, Fl. [NJ-an outlier?]
127-Village idiot? Gordon resigning will affect the US campaign? Thought hsi visit there went well below the radar!
There is already a way to increase the personal allowance and then gradually reduce it once an earnings threshold is reached
From HM Customs and Revenue:
“Personal allowance for people aged 65-74 (1) 2008 - 9 £9,030
(1) - These allowances reduce where the income is above the income limit by £1 for every £2 of income above the limit. They will never be less than the basic Personal allowance or minimum amount of Married Couple’s allowance.”
A variation on this would sort the problem simply through the tax system.
Hattersley clearly knows nothing about opinion polls listening to hi on the Daily Politics
151. You may well be right, but the original post was claiming that the tax changes would have a major effect on the election, so I was only talking about the (possible) effect of the tax change on the election.
What a shambles. The most telling thing is the backbench rebellion, a sure sign that party discipline is collapsing. This is not a particularly big issue, though it is symbolic. If I were Gordon Brown, I would be most worried about MPs’ willingness to parade their consciences in an effort to secure a significant personal vote for themselves - that is an effective vote of no confidence in Government strategy.
Alliance and Leicester down 10% on day.
http://newsvote.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/fds/hi/business/market_data/shares/3/23135/default.stm
Another bailout ?
The most popular selections for today’s first question have been
1. Tax
2. Zimbabwe
3. Iraq.
I urge the Leader of HM Opposition to raise a health related matter first.
155: ‘Hattersley clearly knows nothing about opinion polls’
Why not?
153 - Typo, I mistook my IA for my IN.
In terms of numbers Clinton will need all four of those states, Obama can get by with just two, given his strength elsewhere.
@160:
I imagine it’s something to do with Hattersley’s being a dimwit.
Frank Field withdraws his amendment - Sky.
Field withdraws his ammendment.
163/164. Panic !
Brown is in office, but no longer in power.
A few days ago Gabble rounded on me when I said that people earning £9,000 a year would lose out and they’re covered by the minimum wage. A colleage’s wife received her April pay slip yesterday. She works as a pharmacist (so hardly minimum wage territory) 1 day per week because of childcare issues and is livid that her pay has gone down - she is not alone in that position. Boots has been getting so many queries that they have now put up a notice in staff rooms saying that the reason why people’s pay has gone down in entirely due to the government and has got nothing to do with Boots.
Note that this is Tory “GP access” week - DC speech on Monday, opposition day debate later today - so NHS might be a better bet than usual. The recent pattern, though, has been for DC to lead on something international to look statesmanlike, and then go domestic after that.