Things to do in Denver when you’re … a blogger
July 22nd, 2008
-
For one week in August, Politicalbetting.com will be reporting from Denver
Back in March, I sent in some application forms to the DNC and RNC so that PoliticalBetting.com could be credentialled alongside other media outlets to cover the Nominating Conventions from Denver and Minneapolis-St. Paul respectively.
The RNC gave us an unequivocal rejection (the Right seems less interested in what Senator Ted Stevens (R-AK) called “a Series of Tubes“ than the Left) but the Democrats have made some accommodation for the blogosphere. Whilst the Convention Centre itself is reserved for syndicated networks and their ilk, and the Floor reserved for an activist Democrat blogger from each state, there will be a New Media center across the street called the Big Tent.
Organised by ProgressNow.org in conjunction with Daily Kos, and sponsored by people like Google and Digg, there will be hundreds of journalists, bloggers, and political junkies covering all four days of coverage, finishing in the INVESCO Bronco Stadium to hear Barack Obama accept his party’s nomination. The Big Tent have a daily billing of top political speakers who will be addressing the massed netroots on the campaign and the message.
The competition for places at the Big Tent was also fierce - you can imagine that every political blogger in the country wants to be there - so it was with great joy that I opened my e-mail on Monday to find that the UK’s most-read political blog has been offered a pass.
So, on 23rd August, I will be flying out to Denver to join the political circus - I’m hoping to file regular updates on the particulars of the Convention, and perhaps pick up the gossip from the 50 states about strategy, on-the-ground activism, or even the whispers as to who party insiders suspect will get the nod to be VP. I’m taking a copy of Robert’s Rules of Order to understand the complex parliamentary shenanigans, and will try and make sure that you are the first to hear the pertinent rumblings of political news from across the Pond.
I am going to flatter, blackmail, and bribe my way to try and secure some interviews - Markos Moulitsas will certainly be in attendance and has agreed to a chat, and I’ll be meeting the BBC’s North America Editor, Justin Webb, so feel free to send me your questions for them both. I’m hoping some of the DCCC and DSCC crowd will be amenable to passing on their insights, and that the campaign managers for some of the close Congressional and Gubernatorial races will be prepared to sit down for five minutes too.
In preparation for the trip, I’ve been keeping a personal diary on Daily Kos, trying to make some friends and attracts some knowledgeable traffic from their 24m readers over to pb.com, and also to raise some awareness as to what is happening in both the UK and in the British blogosphere. I’ve been cross posting some of the articles here, writing some introductions to UK politics, and using up the drafts that aren’t good enough for all you discerning types! If you are interested in reading my diary over the coming months (more for the comments than anything else - there are some Creatures, and some absolute stars) you can find it here - you’ll need to expand most of the articles beyond the Intro, and don’t forget to answer the polls!!
Anyhow, I thought I would share the good news, and start to build some expectation of the sort of coverage you can expect if you stay tuned to pb.com. I think it is an enormous tribute to Mike that he has built a site that now has a global reputation, and is prioritised over American blogs in its coverage of US politics for the quality of its writing and the size of its overseas readership.
PB - the UK’s most-read political blog - goes Global!
Morus
MessageSpace Advertising
Ooh wow, this place just gets betterer and betterer!
That’s great to hear
Where’d you get the money for that trip Morus. You been doing some betting or something?
Denver is reportedly on my next tour of the US..or so I have been told by a friend in Colorado who wants me to go. So as well as the politics I’d find a travelogue handy.
YOU JAMMY TUT-TUT.
Sweet. Now if only they would legalise gambling and allow us to open up a concession…
But Shadsy, gambling is doing the Dark One’s work. As well you know.
That’s brilliant Morus, I’m jealous.
Could you possibly give a heads up when you post a kos diary? I noticed you’d already done a few.
You also might want to notify UK news organisations who might be interested in keeping up with you.
‘Too close to call’
by John Curtice, Professor of Politics, Strathclyde University
“But the days when the SNP found it particularly difficult to win the votes of Catholics are long since over. According to the Scottish Social Attitudes survey Catholics were just as likely as Protestants to vote for the nationalists in last year’s Scottish Parliament election.
Meanwhile, one feature of Glasgow East makes it potentially fertile territory for the SNP. At the last census no less than 96 per cent chose to say they were Scottish rather than British, more than in any Scottish constituency.
The task of the SNP has been to try to exploit that sense of national identity…
Unless the popularity of the Brown government is restored, Labour must worry the nationalists will be to mine this seam throughout Scotland in 2010 - leaving the party fighting for its life many a seat that has hitherto seemed invulnerable.”
http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2008/07/glasgow-east-constituency
Well done Morus. Very good news for you and the site.
Well done Morus, that’s great news! I love this site!
‘Labour party desperate to keep Union flag flying’
“The closing of the Scottish mind to Britishness, as it had been transmitted from the Victorian era, has come, slice by slice, since the early 1960s - as the nationalists took a seat in 1967, as the main parties adopted schemes of devolution and as Scotland’s intellectuals added nationalism to their socialism.
The [Labour] party needs, think the senior politicians, to put the Unionist case once more. Labour’s Scottish Westminster MPs see their comrades in Edinburgh as crypto-nationalists. The MSPs, for their part, believe that to adopt the tartan is necessary protection: many think there should have been more public rows between Labour in government in Edinburgh and Labour in government in London - so that the electorate could see that Scottish Labour was more Scottish than Labour.”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b5413a0e-5785-11dd-916c-000077b07658.html
I do hope you’ll raise my firing Ed Balls into space policy. It could be modified for American needs simply by replacing Ed Balls with George W.
10- stuart- I am pleased for you that we have had such an exciting and relevant SNP by-election for us all to get excited in. You have been such an early morning stalwart for this site.
Now give you an option- 100 Scottish pounds today- no other options- would you put it on the SNP for a return of 110, or Labour for 102. Forget all the other bookies. What choice would you make, now, knowing all that you know.
The Big Tent !! Sounds a bit amateur, like a folk festival, although I’m sure it will be fine !!
Or maybe it is a reference to the fact that they would rather have inside the tent, rather than outside, if you know what I mean….
11 - You are obsessed with launching Mr Balls into orbit..
14
He is not alone…
Outstanding. Congratulations Morus - well deserved.
Incidentally, won’t the VPs be picked well before you go out there?
15 - But Mr Morris Dancer mentions it frequently and with vigour!
The site race42008 is claiming that several sources are saying they think Romney is confirmed as the veep pick, but I’m holding fire on the betting front at the moment…
http://race42008.com/2008/07/22/breaking-romney-vp-pick/#comments
McCAIN will fry the opposition!
19 But he’s selling his best points independent appeal, distance from Bush for nothing. Bit like Watford and Henderson Ha ha ha ha ha.
20 Punter - are you LD?
I might have to ring you up soon!!!!
21. Did you see the link in my post 177 a couple threads back?
18 Caveman - certainly the Betfair back market thinks it’s Romney - there’s around £150 to be bought at 1.76 and beyond that it’s 1.02!
Ladbrokes is the only bookie offering odds: 6/4.
18. The campaign behind him within the GOP has been massive.
I just wonder if he does get it whether McCain was enthuisastic. Mind you McCain seems to be able to make peace with enemies..including one of his Vietnamese captors… so maybe Romney aint such a big leap.
21 LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!! Brilliant
Ave it gains USA as well as Watford!!!
24. Apparently McCain was going out of his way at a recent BBQ to be nice to the bloke. Knowing that Mormons don’t drink, he made and offered him a coffee. Shame that Mormon’s aren’t allowed caffeine either!
Seriously though. This would be a terrible choice for McCain. It will help him with finance and in Michigan, but could really offend evangelicals, who consider Mormonism satanic, as well as people that don’t like greasy, smarmy businessmen.
Sorry Socrates I meant you at 22 of course!!!
8.18: New Thread (shhh it’s a secret)
So at 8.19pm…..
142: Tyson - good point. McCain, if he wins, must be one of the most likely POTUS to die in office of recent times. So (to my surprise) I am interested in reading the VP musings on here, as there’s very little in the MSM.
BTW - do you still think i’m xenophobic for being Euroscpetic? Or didn’t you read that one I have forgiven your cr@p post due to the fact I got a big fat bonus at work today.
by Jon C July 22nd, 2008 at 8:19 pm
26. I apologise for the atrocious apostrophe in “Mormons”. Ugh.
I’m not mad on Romney but he brings the base and that matters in this election. He might be a good strategic choice. I had hoped for Sarah Palin or failing that Bobby Jindal. But Romney brings a lot of heft, financial and political, to the ticket.
30. Palin would be a great choice. Jindal’s just too young at this point, and he needs time to moderate his image.
Romney will only bring in the non-religious part of the base.
18/23. Caveman/Peter. Paddy Power have 5/1. Won’t last long!
BTW
Congrats Mike on this undoubtedly huge coup.
If any UK site deserves it, it’s this one. All the best!
I think it shows McCain needs Michigan, or its curtains.
Congrats to the site and to Morus!
17
I am just as keen as Morris Dancer. Balls is utterly incompetent.
23. I would be wary of betting on Romney, it does not seem all that long since the two were viciously attacking each other. Is it really that sensible to have two quite liberal republicans on the same ticket? There most be other VP choices which could broaden the potential support base e.g. a woman or a right winger like Huckabee.
And congratulations to McCain when he wins in November!
McCain
McCain
McCain
McCain
McCain
McCain
32. StJohn, the 5/1 is to be elected as VP, not the GOP nominee which is 6/4. I’m not betting on this yet.
23. Hes at 2.7 Peter, £304.
32. Already gone! Now 6/4.
39. You are correct. Misread that. Egg on face!
37. They do seem to have genuinely made up. I’ve followed it very closely. Romney has really been batting for the guy on TV recently.
Huckabee offends the taxcutters in the party due to his “big” government views. Him and Romney both represent the two different halves of the base, with the other half hating each of them!
42 Good try stjohn - we’ve all been there - in my case several times!
42 Good try stjohn - we’ve all been there - in my case several times!
36 - Sounds like the basis for a Facebook group “Campaign for the firing of Ed Balls into space by means of field artillery!”
Flying man!!
40 Thanks for the update Yokel, tempting vs the bookies’ prices, but is it a ramp?
47 - Err, that’s for Mitt “Nathan Petrelli” Romney as opposed to Ed Balls, just in case anyone was misled.
31. I fully expect McCain will bring most of the god squad with him. Maybe evangelical, religious right round the edges wont go for him or just sit at home but McCain performed well in the Southern states despite a strong challenge from Huck, where you’d expect him to maybe get hit by the churchies.
In the absence of Huck I always suspected a lot of that vote would have went to McCain. I called it the ‘good man’ theory based on th enption that could see plenty of those churchies looking at McCain and saying he was a ‘good man’, one of those things that would make them plump for a candidate.
Absurd as it may seem, I made good money out of that theory. Plenty of them did vote for him or else he’d have been stuffed in a number of states states where I backed him. I see no reason why that wont continue.
50. I suspect many voted for him because they didn’t want Romney getting it.
30: Jindal!!! NOOOO
http://tinyurl.com/6cyyg6
Borderline creationist….
May need a Newscientist subscription for that one, so relevant bits are:
“The act is designed to slip Intelligent Design* in “through the back door”, says Barbara Forrest, a professor of philosophy at Southeastern Louisiana University and an expert in the history of creationism. ”
“Republican governor, Piyush “Bobby” Jindal, signed the bill into law. The development has national implications, not least because Jindal is rumoured to be on Senator John McCain’s shortlist as a potential running mate in his bid for the presidency.”
Someone give me a link to Obama’s campaign donations website again…!!
*Intelligent Design (sic)
48 I’ve had a modest £30 worth on Romney, I’m all red on the Rep Veep market, so if true, this will recover £50 worth.
Mike.
The betting link from the site, bestbetting odds, for the Republican VP nominee market takes you to Paddy Power’s overall VP market. I mention it here so no one places a bet inadvertently on the wrong market, as I have just done!
50? A strong challenge? Look at the votes McCain was getting after he already had the numbers needed for the nomination.
43. Do you think their new found freindship is genuine then? I am yet to be convinced, I really got the impression during the primary season of a real dislike between the two. I think as you said above that the Michigan factor and the potential to bring much needed funds to the campaign is probably the main reason behind this.
Perhaps the fact that Romney is in the running just shows the lack of talent within the party compared with the Democrats.
Its not going to happen but I would love to see Mccain choose someone like Condoleezza Rice as his VP pick. She ticks so many boxes which seem to be a pre requisite in this image based election - she is a woman, black and has performed well on the world stage.
48. 2.72…someone has shoved 8 quid in there. That looks like a honeytrap.
I personally never fancied Romney but I do confess that I did mention to a known Pber off forum about a very large campaign in the GOP to wedge Romney in there. It was very well organised, and very strong though I had no idea of McCain (stubborn old goat) would go for it himself, he was coming under pressure. I subsequently hinted at it on forum (if I remember correctly Socrates forwarded on some reasoning behind a Romney pick in response).
The Romney-ites even have a theory to how it can be played, bearing in mind that McCain reportedly really didnt like Romney. It would, say the Mitty’s, show McCain as man who thinks of the greater good, a man who can reach out across divides and so on. They reckon (and I’m not saying this is right or wrong but here it is anyway) that this will enhance McCain’s reputation on that front.
Again, whether McCain himself goes for it I have no idea but there you have it.
52. He’s also witnessed a demonic possession and exorcism, btw.
55 stjohn - a good lay opportunity if Romney gets the Rep Veep nomination, so not necessarily bad news.
Just spoke to an SNP mate of mine who has spent the last three days in Glasgow on the doorsteps, his view was “a bridge too far” for the nats.
Don’t know if anyone has posted this, but it looks like even Tories are backing Obama!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/conservative/2445951/Tory-MPs-abandon-Republicans-to-back-Barack-Obama.html
51. Romney was already on the slide by the time many of those states came around. If remember right I think his major play was in Georgia.
46 Field artillery is insufficient, He would never make it, There is no artillery on the market that could do the job.
Top end of an Ariane rocket will do me.
57. There has been thinking in the McCain campaign to announce their VP pick in the middle of Obama’s tour to stop his press coverage. However, more recently they seemed to turn against it, believing that it was best for the media to fulfil their Obamamania before the conventions.
New Rasmussen Poll for Colorado :
McCain 47% .. Obama 50%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/colorado/election_2008_colorado_presidential_election
62. But it was McCain vs Romney in Florida and on Super Tuesday. After that it was lining up behind the nominee.
James Gray defends George W: well it takes a s**t to defend a s**t
Other MPs sought to counter such attacks. James Gray, MP for North Wiltshire, said: “As far as I know he is a fine man as an individual.”
Mr Gray, who describes himself as having always been a Republican supporter, said that at the end of two terms “any president has difficulties”.
“I was very opposed to Iraq,” said Mr Gray, “but I think he has done pretty well, both in the economy and most areas of foreign policy.”
60 “a bridge too far” for the nats.
My view all along, although I’ve been backing the SNP on the basis that their price is too big and there’ll be a profitable exit on the night as minds become concentrated and betting volumes increase.
66. Well it was also Guiliani and his late storm in there and so on.
From my position Romney’s challenge was wobling early. Always a fear that he could build but in retrospect he was dead a fair way out.
Really enjoyable blog on Kos, Morus - and the whimsical polls are great. With your description of Labour I’m surprised they got any votes at all, though…must have been the mention of the magic word Blair.
I’ve been too busy to follow the US scene as closely as I’d like to. A glance at the polls suggests it’s still pretty close. Why is that, given the big lead in Democrat identification and the general perception that Obama has been making the weather? What is McCain doing right, or Obama doing wrong, that the game is repeatedly under 5%?
68. It had better get close. i have a bail out to do.
58: Really!?
US Politics is so different. Can’t get into it.
Hi nick was chatting to a friend of yours up here Mick Connarty, he also so Labour would win on thurs, not big just a win.
game? I mean gap…
70. Maybe its the politics of the country itself. Maybe Dems are more motivated this time but the underlying orientation of the US is still right odf centre.
that should be said
72. You missed out, there was great money in it, especially if you think in big sweeps about it rather than intricacies.
Worked for me anyway.
I think this from Norfolk Blogger is worthy of a thread all its own:
“Time for the Lib Dems to wake up and smell the coffee when it comes to Cameron’s Tories
The Liberal Democrats electoral strategy for some years now has been focused almost exclusively on winning seats that would be naturally Conservative in leaning, and relying on a lot of good groundwork by the Lib Dem teams in those constituencies to build up a head of steam, sometimes against the national trend, to gain seats and hold them in sometimes trying circumstances. This strategy, however, is in need of a review given the polls and the way that Cameron’s Tories have conducted themselves in recent months.
I’m no fan of David Cameron. I’ve heard too many stories from people who know him, and this includes Tories, who do not speak highly of him as a person, but what is clear is that he has turned around the fortunes of the Conservative “brand”, removed the tarnish from it and has stopped people feeling embarrassed to be openly Tory. This is no little achievement and deserves praise and recognition. Three previous Tory leaders failed in this task, but with some assistance from Gordon Brown, Cameron has put a stop to Tory jokes and turned them very much on the Labour Party.
The most recent test of the Conservative’s new found strength were the by elections in Crewe and in Henley, which despite massive Lib Dem operations and a rather gaffe prone Tory in Henley, saw little Lib Dem headway and good results for the Tories. It is clear, therefore, that the long held Lib Dem view that “Where we work - we win”, is not always going to be the case. It seems highly unlikely that Lib Dem gains from Tories like we saw in 2001 in North Norfolk or in 2005 in Westmoreland and Taunton, will be seen again at the next election. Whilst I do not predict a swathe of Lib Dem losses in held seat (Lib Dems do, after all, have a good record of holding gained seats against the voting tide), it seems clear that the Lib Dems should be working on the basis of holding their ground against the Tories and should abandon any hopes of new gains. That does not mean local Lib Dem parties in potential future targets should stop working hard. A good example is the seat where I live (Broadland) which sould see the Lib Dems in a clear second to the Tories and a decent chance of taking the seat in 2014. But barring a minor miracle, seats like Broadland will not be won by the Lib Dems this time.
The new strategy for the Lib Dems must be about winning seats of Labour. This has, in the past, seemed like a very low priority, and the party has to wake up to the fact that it is possible to win from Labour from a long way back (just look at Manchester Withington in 2005 as an example). I remember speaking to a Lib Dem member of staff who worked in Cowley Street in 2003 and made reference to the Blaydon result in 2001, which saw the Lib Dem candidate destroy the Labour majority and make the seat something of a potential marginal. When I asked what chance we had of winning it in 2005 his answer was “None, we have better targets”. this spoke volumes about the attitude of the Lib Dems to targeting Labour seats. There might have been “better targets”, and indeed there may have been organisational problems in the constituency, but my opinion, right or wrong, was that if Blaydon had been a Tory seat more effort might have gone in to sorting the organisational problems.
There might have been some “lag” between the Lib Dems altering strategy to focus on Labour rather than Tory seats because of the prevailing feeling that the Tories under Cameron would implode, that they would simply collapse back to 32% in the polls and that it would be business as usual. However, it is clear now that Cameron’s Tories are teflon coated. Despite sex scandals, fraud and expenses wrongly claimed by MPs and MEPs, nothing seems to deflect from the Tories charge up the opinion polls. Even the Tory spokesmen make sense. The likes of Michael Gove, the Tories education spokesman, is an example of this. Gone is the strict adherence to the Chris Woodhead agenda of bashing teachers, replaced instead with a conciliatory tone that actually makes the Tories sound, rightly or wrongly, like they are on the teachers side. This is continued across the range of Tory Shadow Cabinet members and means that any chance of an implosion in Tory support is very unlikely.
No doubt there will be Lib Dems who will jump in and tell me that the party have been targeting Labour seat for some time, and this is true, but in my opinion not along a broad enough front. Not enough Labour seats have had a sustained effort from the Lib Dems and sadly some seats that are winnable for the Lib Dems won’t be won because the effort has not been put in over a period of years.
The Lib Dems need to make sure, should the Conservatives win the next election (which is highly likely), that the party does not slip back in to disproportionately putting resources in to winning Tory seats at the expense of developing a broad range of potential gains from Labour.
Time to wake up and smell the coffee for the Lib Dems.
Posted by NB at 17:51 4 comments
Labels: General Election Links”
69. Giuliani had fallen way behind on the Florida polls by the time he hit SC. His mistake was letting McCain win New Hampshire. If McCain had been knocked out early it could have been Giuliani vs Romney vs Huckabee, and who knows how that could have turned out.
I personally thought Romney was terribly flawed from the beginning and knew he wouldn’t get it. Equally I thought Huckabee could only win by another two splitting the vote right down the middle.
73 - Mick’s a nice guy - usually left-wing but thinks issues out for himself so you can’t be quite sure what he’ll think (always a good sign IMO).
My Tory opponent says she likes Obama but thinks him too left-wing - not sure how common a Tory view that is, though.
70. US polls are terrible at predicting turnout. See the many polls that were off in the primaries.
79. I look at it this way. The GOP got a dose of good sense from its base. They voted for the only guy with a chance of winning in November.
That, I think, was no accident.
Morus. Congratulations on your invitation to Denver and best of luck! We will look forward to receiving your reports.
83. He’s just there for the beer….
78 The Libdems are addicted to attacking the Tories, they just don’t seem to be able to think any other way. This is evident almost weekly at PMQs, even with the most right-leaning leader they have had for years.
78
Re DC
You cant get to the top of the tree by being Mr Nice Guy all the time. There are bound to be dissenting voices, but they should be ignored.
“Increased public support for the social safety net, signs of growing public concern about income inequality, and a diminished appetite for assertive national security policies have improved the political landscape for the Democrats as the 2008 presidential campaign gets underway.
At the same time, many of the key trends that nurtured the Republican resurgence in the mid-1990s have moderated, according to Pew’s longitudinal measures of the public’s basic political, social and economic values. The proportion of Americans who support traditional social values has edged downward since 1994, while the proportion of Americans expressing strong personal religious commitment also has declined modestly.”
http://pewresearch.org/pubs/434/trends-in-political-values-and-core-attitudes-1987-2007
There’s still over £100 available at 1.7-1 on Betfair for Romney getting the Rep Veep nomination, so clearly not everyone is swallowing the latest rumours that the job’s his.
Turnout might be higher than expected in Glasgow East
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4380787.ece
78 Punter, I agree Norfolk Blogger writes a lot of sense.
The decline in Labour is a great opportunity for the Lib Dems but only if they focus on Labour seats.
Very OT, is anyone aware that US, British & French vessels are holding a joint exercise in the Gulf…reportedly simulating a blockade of the Iranian coast?
Excellent news for pbc. Congratulations to all involved. Hope the convention goes well.
Presumably you won’t be allowed to bet while you’re out there, which must be the only downside. Still, good luck with it all.
78 - Norfolk Blogger is always interesting and he hits the nail right on the head; there are some labour seats, a la Withington, where a concerted effort over the next eighteen months could see remarkable swings and gains.
Seats like Blaydon on a 6.7% swing and M/c Gorton at 8.2% (isn’t Kaufman retiring?) should be targetted heavily.
Congratulations, Morus. I won’t be submitting any questions to you as I think this is a great opportunity for your UK readers to explore the American political process and pose their own questions from a UK point of view. I hope you have a great time and will share with us whatever insights or surprises you find during your stay.
There’s another candidate debate in Glasgow East tonight on STV.
Theoretically it’s available on http://www.stv.tv/politics.
O/T Still no sign of Martin Day, I hope he’s OK.
88- I hope the rumor is indeed not true. I was greatly disappointed eight years ago when Bush chose Cheney as his running mate (although he was arguably a good choice for reasons that have been recently discussed here), and I will be disappointed again if Romney is the choice. He simply brings next to nothing to the table, injects no excitement into McCain’s effort, and brings his well-known weaknesses as a candidate into the McCain campaign. Can McCain really do no better than this? Again, I don’t know whom he will choose, but I hope this isn’t the choice.
It looks like everyone’s gone to bed, so I’m off there too.
Goodnight all.
IF anyone is still awake BBC Scotland Newsnight has just given an update on Glasgow East.
Prediction of turnout is now 30%. John Curtice understands 70% of the postal votes have been returned.
BBC Scotland have been sounding out leading Labour figures. They are very worried. Firstly they are worried a great many of their people will not vote. Secondly they are worried all the other parties arepicking up sections of their vote but especially the SNP are picking up by far the most.
Some Labour people are worried the SNP could win by 500.
John Mason says,
“There are women drug addicts and prostitutes, who would be much better off being serviced in the community”
Just back in and picked up the good news, Morus.
I’m sure you will do a fine job of spreading the word abroad for PB and have a fine old time in the process.
Well done and may the PB force be with you.
Congrats Morus - not least in having the nous to apply in the first place! I look forward to the updates.
98 - after a whole day’s campaigning I need my bed. I cannot say who will win on Thursday but a good portion of electorate who you do finally speak to are listening rather than the usual get rid of you from the doorsteps. That is what I have noticed in the two days I have been here. The frustrating thing is getting people in to speak to, after a good morning the afternoon was not productive in getting people in at all. The evening canvassers may have had better luck. I did detect a swing from Labour to the SNP. Will it be enough, I don’t know as it is only a small sample but the people I spoke to were fine and not the door slamming of days of old. Maybe in my Autumn years they are being nice to an old campaigner. A middle aged man who had not voted in the last election will be voting against Labour on Thursday as he was ‘fed up with being taking for granted’. How many more are there?
One funny thing I did see was an Ayrshire Labour MP going around the seat in his Daimlar dropping his canvassers off to knock doors in the street I was in. I was told by a voter that Labour had been already been knocking the same doors earlier that day. Is their organisation that disorganised?
Ave it forecasts that Glasgow East will be won either by Labour or SNP…….
Morus careful you don’t get yourself banged up. They do know this is a gambling site don’t they.
99 - Same story in the Times tomorrow WRT turnout.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/scotland/article4380787.ece
Here’s an article about the U.S. presidential campaign mentioning that there was one reporter and one photographer (!) waiting for McCain as his campaign plane touched down in New Hampshire. Can you imagine Obama’s plane landing and having only one reporter and one photographer waiting for him? The media in the U.S. are covering this election as if there were only one candidate in the race. They have totally abandoned their democratic duty in this race, and this incident is just one illustration of their shameful conduct.
http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=McCain+returns+to+NH+with+visit+to+Rochester&articleId=248d6f19-aaa4-40a4-b95b-b365fcaff562
106 should move things to Lab
By the way, have any of you read the Wikipedia entry on the Glasgow East byelection? Among other choice statements, you can find the following:
“The election is significant as it is the first relatively safe Labour seat to be contested since a downturn in political fortunes for the United Kingdom Labour Party and current UK Labour government under the Premiership of Gordon Brown.” -Was Crewe & Nantwich not a relatively safe Labour seat?
“Due to the relative security of the seat, this by-election would be the first realistic opportunity in 2008 for the United Kingdom Labour Party (through the Scottish Labour Party), and the current UK Labour government under Gordon Brown, to poll well.” -Was Crewe & Nantwich, which occurred in 2008, not also a realistic opportunity for the United Kingdom Labour Party to poll well?
“Interpretation of the results may be difficult on the national level, as devolution in Scotland has produced distinct local policies for Labour in Scotland, and the seat is the focus for considerable local issues such as urban renewal, and Scottish issues such as independence.” -Will not the results be interpreted as having great significance on the national level, particularly if the Labour Party loses, regardless of the existence of local issues?
Some curious statement at good old Wikipedia, and maybe someone would care to comment.
104 Punter forecasts Championship 2008-2009 Bottom Watford Ha ha ha ha…..
110 Ave it forecasts that Punter is a ****!
106 - providing of course that the rumours of those votes seen during the verification process etc and figues posted on other blogs are hinting at are totally untrue. I personally don’t know.
103. Maybe they’re detaining you on the doorstep to keep you from campaigning. Last week, while canvassing for the SNP, I was engaged in lengthy conversation by a seemingly neutral and reasonably sympathetic constituent. He later turned out to be the Labour activist pretending to be a 93-year-old war veteran on Margaret Curran’s website.
109. Glasgow East isn’t relatively safe - it’s supersafe!
WRT your point, C&N wasn’t really a safe seat for Labour; since 1945, it had consistently been just beyond marginal status, and the Tories came within an ace of taking it in the 1980s….
WRT paragraph 3, it’s fair to say that a Labour-SNP battle has no direct bearing on the overall UK picture [SNP have done spectacularly well in previous by-elections without unduly harming Labour’s prospects South of the Border, or making the breaththrough in Scotland], but a loss would be more bad news for Gordon Brown, adding to the narrative of the wheels coming-off Labour’s wagon..
103 - too long in the tooth for that trick.
104. Con lose Glasgow East?
114. C & N has only existed since 1983! Before that Crewe and Nantwich were two separate constituencies.
116. A good result for the Tories would be to increase their vote share, even fractionally. The last time they did this at a Scottish by-election was at Berwick and East Lothian, 26/10/1978 [+2.6%]
117. True enough, although C&N wasn’t created by the simple agglomeration of the Crewe constituency and the Nantwich constituency.
My comments @114 refer to Crewe prior to 1983, and C&N post 1983.
Main story: Great news for pb.com - take it global!
107. I’ve thought that the attention that Obama is getting in part hinders him, he needs to make this a choice between him and McCain not a referendum on Obama’s personality. People also dislike being told what to do by the media. Also, every minor gesture of Obama’s is analysed, while McCain can get away with plenty of gaffes.
Completely unrelated to politics; but do you have cider in America and if you do is it popular?
114- Although, Rod, the statement in Wikipedia suggests that the results of the byelection could be difficult to interpret not because previous SNP successes have been unrelated to subsequent electoral results but rather because of the existence of local issues unrelated to national issues. But wouldn’t the voters of the constituency be expected to more or less distinguish between local and national issues and vote accordingly? That is, wouldn’t they generally vote for MP’s based on national issues and vote for MSP’s based on local issues?
Tonight’s by-election debate had the most contrived format so far, and I’m genuinely not sure what to make of it - yet again, Ms Curran came across as wholly unconvincing when answering questions. When asked if she supported the 10p tax abolition, she said “I think that’s a great question”. When asked if she as a Scottish minister had made representations to Gordon Brown when the issue first came up, she said “yes, that’s something I would certainly make representations about if elected”. When it was pointed out that wasn’t the question she’d been asked she finally conceded “no I didn’t make representations” and then hastily added “publicly”. The obvious conclusion - she didn’t make representations either publicly or privately, but hopes that by adding the word “publicly” people might vaguely infer that she did complain in private. She’s resorted to that kind of garbled obfuscation quite a bit, and I really don’t think it’s working.
But in complete contrast, when she had her turn at asking the other candidates questions, she was much more confident and forceful - unfortunately it seemed to me she talked over people to the point it came across as hectoring and patronising. Am I making it sound like Curran can do no right in my eyes? Possibly - not so much because I’m an SNP supporter, but probably more because I grew up in the west of Scotland and she reminds me of several horrendous schoolteachers I had to suffer over the years. She really makes me shudder sometimes.
Poor performance from John Mason of the SNP on the STV Glasgow East candidates debate. It looks as if the pressure got to him as cut short his answers and twitched nervously throughout the programme.
122. Depends on your (and the Scots’) definition of national/local!
As I’ve said previously this one is particularly hard to call because, uniquely, both parties are on one level or another “the government” - and governments don’t usually enthuse people at by-elections…
FWIW the Fox News panelists earlier called the GOP veep spot for either Romney or Ridge as the wildcard pick, but no announcement this week.
In other news, it definitely doesn’t look like John Edwards will get a call for the veep spot either now…
http://www.bloggernews.net/116851
124. I’ve noticed the short answers from John Mason, which is frustrating as somebody who wants to see him to drive home his points, but there is a certain virtue in concision, and at least nobody could ever accuse him of being a windbag! Overall, I don’t agree with you about his performance. The best thing about it was that he came across as gentlemanly and courteous - he took Curran’s endless hectoring in good humour - which does make Labour’s portrayal of him as some kind of dangerous extremist look a bit contrived and silly. Funnily enough, he seemed to discomfort the Lib Dem candidate simply by asking him questions on topics like Iraq and the local income tax where the two parties agree. The Lib Dem Iain Robertson really seemed frustrated he wasn’t being allowed to have an argument on every question! Having said that, overall Robertson was the most impressive of the four candidates.
By the way, Ms Curran made a very telling slip when she was answering questions - “I don’t think voting against your own government is always the easy thing to do.” No, not when the Labour whips have got to work on you, it’s not.
Davena Rankin “wins” the debate, according to the Hootsmon. Margaret Curran gets arguably the worst write-up.
Incidentally, I’m not sure why Curran was so insistent that Mason give examples of issues on which he would “stand up to Alex Salmond”. This might be relevant at Holyrood, but I don’t see why it’s such a big deal in this election since Salmond isn’t in charge at Westminster. Gordon Brown is, so he’s the one who needs to be stood up to.
121 - “I’ve thought that the attention that Obama is getting in part hinders him, he needs to make this a choice between him and McCain not a referendum on Obama’s personality. ”
McCain has been getting less press but they are giving him a much easier ride. In any case, it’s the right wing commentators who have consistently been pushing the line that the election is a referendum on Obama, the rest of the media are just being suckered into following the same line.
Personally, I’d like a lot more focus on McCain, especially for his policies to be explored in detail.
If you mean alcoholic cider, or hard cider, it does exist here in the U.S. but is pretty rare. You can occasionally find it in some bars but it something of a novelty item.
Obama seems to believe all the coverage he’s receiving is a good thing, to judge from the lack of complaints from him or his entourage. The longtime media establishment reporter Andrea Mitchell, no enemy of Democrats, recently bemoaned the slavish coverage Obama is receiving from the U.S. media in the Middle East, complaining that the Obama campaign is even editing the video before it is broadcast to ensure that only the most positive images are seen. Also note the recent refusal by the New York Times to publish McCain’s response to an editorial authored by Obama.
Ususally this sort of coverage of one candidate, coupled with virtually ignoring the main opposition candidate, is the stuff of third-world pseudo-democracies. Note the avalanche of criticism of Italy’s media both during Berlusconi’s previous stints as prime minister as well as during the most recent election there, with the implication being that unfairly positive coverage of Berlusconi would brainwash voters into voting a particular way. Is the same condemnation warranted here? Well, welcome to the good old U.S. of A.! I think I’ll have to find myself a glass of cider…
Oh yeah, that’s here, by the way. http://tinyurl.com/5ox95v
130. I think a lot of it is demand driven, Obama sells newspapers.
I also think Obama is making a bit of a mistake, he is getting painted as the darling of the Liberal media/elite by the right.
It’s swings and roundabouts, Obama gets all the positive but also all the negative coverage, McCain gets no coverage.
Good Morning.
1. what impact would Romney have on the Democratic pick ? If all Romney brings is money ( not a huge issue for Obama ), the base ( probably not an issue for Obama this year) and a state ( not much of an isue lokng at the EV projections) how does he respond.
My feeling is that the obvious democratic match for Romney is Hillary. she’ll add little new but will reinvigourate the base.
However would Obama be better off makng the big gesture that Mcain would have flunked. does he move outside the main stream and go for a woman, Sebelius ?
Also would 2 males on the GOP ticket not make a Female Dem more likely ?
If true i think this is very disapointing. I think Mccain neds to do something bold to regain a bit of intiative.
132- If the coverage ends up adversely affecting Obama’s candidacy, it won’t be the first time that the mainstream media has inadvertently harmed a candidate they were trying to help. The biggest danger is that their fawning coverage serves to hide flaws that only emerge later, closer to the actual election, at which time they cause greater harm than they would have had they been revealed earlier.
On the subjct of Norfolk Blogger. Well he is well read in LD circles and because hes so viciously anti cameron it may jolt a few people that he is writing articles taking the threat seriously.
The problem is that the party’s members, money , activists and staff are where they are. Its industrial mass is in the south of england and there is not much we can do about it at his time scale.
Look for more nashing of teeth on friday if we come fourth in Glasgow or loose our deposit.Both quite possible.
Re. the Wikipedia page, I’ve made a couple of edits.
I’ve deleted the word “relatively” in the lede and the sentence about the first opportunity for them to poll well.
My edit summary was: “C&N was relatively safe. GE is safe. (On paper!) C&N was also an opportunity for Labour to poll well; they didn’t.)”
It seems to me there might be an anti-obama, media backlash.
American don’t really like it when other countries are telling them who they should elect.
136- I hope your edits aren’t “edited”!
I do not wish to make a detailed response to the numerous points which have been raised in response to the discussion about statistics of deaths in communist countries, because it is not the main purpose of this website. But in reponse to the people who have accused me of being “disgraceful”, “despicable”, “unpleasant”, or (worst of all) a “holocaust denier”, I think I need to make a few points:
(a) The mission statement of the Stalin Society (of which I have been a member since late last year) says “The Stalin Society was formed in 1991 to defend Stalin and his work on the basis of fact and to refute capitalist, revisionist, opportunist and Trotskyist propaganda directed against him.” For me, the most important part of that statement is “on the basis of fact”. I am not interested in whitewashing or denying the truth about what happened in the history of the 20th century, and I only want to enlighten people with the truth of what happened on the basis of historical evidence. If people have been murdered by dictatorial regimes, then I condemn it just as much as anybody would.
(b) However, that does not mean that I have a duty to give carte-blanche to people to repeat the inaccurate or exaggerated figures which have been propagated frequently by reactionary historians on the basis of dubious evidence.
(c) The figures of “100 million” which were given in “The Black Book of Communism”, and similar accounts, are based on unscientific methodology, selective and arbitrary definitions, and are one-sided in terms of what are included and excluded. Several of the components of the figures have been shown to have been exaggerated and based on incorrect calculations (for example the extrapolation of population statistics which do not account for differences in birth rates). For example, I honestly believe that the death toll of the Great Leap Forward was 12 million and not (for example) 40 million, and that of the Ukrainian famine was 1 to 2 million, not (for example) 7 million as is sometimes claimed. The inaccurate and arbitrary nature of the total figure of 100 million is demonstrated - quite apart from anything else - by the fact that the figures claimed for China and the USSR respectively are 72 and 20 million respectively (according to the “Black Book of Communism”) but 30 and 62 million respectively (according to the “Economist” magazine).
(d) Stating that a death toll was greatly exacerbated or worsened by natural factors (such as floods or famines) or by non-governmental agencies (such as kulaks, counter-revolutionaries or foreign invaders), and acknowledging that a communist government is not single-handedly responsible for a disaster as a deliberate one-sided act of policy, does not constitute “holocaust denial”.
Whenever I have been to public meetings or weekend schools arranged by the Stalin Society, the Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist) or others, I have never been told that I have to swallow a particular dogma or version of history. I have often been told that every individual should seek the truth for him/herself, and that is all I have wanted to do.
To the somewhat excited people who have bombarded me with insults, I merely suggest that they should read the same sources from which I have found useful information:
“Trotskyism or Leninism?” by Harpal Brar
“Another View of Stalin” by Ludo Martens
“Soviet Preparations for Nazi Invasion” by Carlos Rule (Stalin Society, 2007)
“The Fight Against Bureaucracy in the Soviet Union” by Carlos Rule (ibid, 2001)
“The Purges of the CPSU in the 1930s” by Ella Rule (ibid, 2005)
“Lies Concerning the History of the Soviet Union” by Mario Sousa, translated by Ella Rule (ibid, 1999)
“On Stalin” by the New Communist Party
and in particular
“Lies, Damned Lies and Anti-Communism” by the Communist Party of Britain (2007)
which explains the errors and distortions of method in calculating the figures.
P.S. I hope that those who disagree with me will accept that I am being honest in stating the historical truth based on the evidence as I find it. I have no desire to whitewash anything, or to lie, or to perpetrate “disgraceful slurs” (as one person put it).
The purpose of being a Marxist is to desire a better world in which everybody has their basic needs (food, water, housing, education, health) met on a rational basis instead of allowing a billion people to go hungry. It is for that reason that I find it sad that some people choose to label me with motives of malice or dishonesty.
I don’t think you’re dishonest, John.
I think you’re deluded.
135 - I hardly think that the media have been hiding any ammunition on Obama, moreso that they have pounced on every potential titbit at full tilt.
What has happened is that has been the case, yet the republican talking points are to suggest that Obama has been getting an easy ride. I mean, what planet have they been on for the last six months?
142- It’s not a matter of hiding things, but merely not looking for them. Eventually, as it often happens, little guys like Matt Drudge in 1998 or alternatively Republican operatives turn up stuff that the massive mainstream media somehow overlooked, but at a time when it is most unhelpful to the Democratic cause. If the media actually attempted to do their jobs, they might prevent this from happening, but their biases blind them to realities that would be discovered and revealed through competent journalism.
142- Meanwhile, mainstream media figures no less prominent than Dan Rather, anchor of CBS’s evening news program for decades, cooks up a fictitious slime story about Bush’s national guard service a few months before the 2004 election and never admits he was wrong in spite of the complete lack of credible evidence supporting his allegations. No biases here, boys and girls. Just good, honest journalists…
143
I backed Clinton in the primary in part because I thought her campaign operatives would have found the dirt on Obama and that she in desperation would use it if she had to.
I still wouldn’t be surprised if she has a file on him…
145- It wouldn’t be very Clintonesque for Hillary to put all that juicy info on Obama, whatever it is, into the shredder. No, it could possibly be useful at some later date so it’s best to keep it somewhere safe.
106 Chris A
“Morus careful you don’t get yourself banged up. They do know this is a gambling site don’t they. ”
On the contrary, he’ll probably be overwhelmed with Democratic delegates trying to have him place bets on their behalf !
140. “The inaccurate and arbitrary nature of the total figure of 100 million is demonstrated - quite apart from anything else - by the fact that the figures claimed for China and the USSR respectively are 72 and 20 million [92] respectively (according to the “Black Book of Communism”) but 30 and 62 [92]million respectively (according to the “Economist” magazine).”
You’re a spoof aren’t you?
Robert’s Rules of Order is all very well and good, but it will never replace Walter Citrine’s “ABC of Chairmanship”. Does the Democratic Convention do Compositing?