Are these the numbers that will swing it?
February 9th, 2008
For US election junkies it’s another late night
As we go into another weekend of frenzied activity in the race for the White House the above are the latest “head-to-head” polling figures from Real Clear Politics comparing how Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would fare facing up to the Republican John McCain in a general election.
The numbers are good for the junior senator from Illinois but still Hillary is leading when Democratic-leaning voters are asked who they would favour.
The closer we get to decision time these heads-to-heads with John McCain are going to play a major part, particuarly with many of the “super-delegates” who might, at the end of the day, decide it. For while Hillary is still strongest amongst Democrats such comparisons show that Obama can compete better against McCain for the independent and centre ground voters.
This weekend there are the following contests:-
Louisiana primary: 56 delegates at stake
Nebraska caucuses: 24 delegates at stake
Washington caucuses: 78 delegates at stake
Maine caucuses: 24 delegates at stake
All apart from Maine take place today. In the betting Obama is now the 0.75/1 favourite.
MessageSpace Advertising
Just got out of a mini/pre-caucus with two friends. I’m going to caucus for Obama. One friend is going to causus (at same location but different precinct) for Clinton. His wife supports Clinton, but wasn’t sure she could schlep the kids and actually make it. But her husband and I both told her she could bring the kids, stay long enough to sign in for Hillary, then split. And her vote for Hillary will still count.
So my campaign activity for Obama tonight has consisted of hopefully turning out a vote for Hillary!
1 A win for Democracy….
Obama now only 2 delegates ahead of CLinton
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2008/02/08/politics/p164038S02.DTL
Very much OT:
Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called on the Premier League to listen to the views of the fans before moving ahead with plans to introduce overseas games.
This from the man who ignores the public at every turn?
Last thread 155 Scipio
Charter of the Forest - Yes, I was unaware of the existence of this - although some of the “rights” - grazing pigs in the woods etc - most of us would have come across in early history lessons. I had imagined these grew out of Common Law. However, what wikipedia tells us is a “little known” document, and something which clearly had little real effect on the development of full democracy should hardly claim a major position in that way. I shall be interested to read more - but I shan’t go looking! I certainly don’t think it is really relevant to much of the debate we had last night!
There is a clear level of political engagement in the US. Televised meetings between the various candidates are watched.
Isn’t DC missing a trick here? Shouldn’t he be pointing out to GB the American way of promoting interest in politics–debates on TV between the various would-be presidents?
GB might try to claim ‘that people don’t want to watch this knockabout’. But that is not true—they do. And the most negative style, Romney’s, has relatively been the least successful. Some of the exchanges have been ’spicy’–but that hasn’t hurt.
4 - smacks of cheap populism to me.
4. Football fans tend to have a ridiculously luddite attitude towards all innovations. The FA and premier League should be commended for staying ahead of the game and giving fans things that they actually want but believed they didn’t in advance for sentimental reasons. Were it left to fans, football in this country would be in the same mess as rugby league.
That said, why what the Premier League does is of interest to a Raith Rovers fan is a little obscure? Surely SBS’s cynicism at [7] isn’t the case?
7 Not sure how effective it is as cheap populism as football is an area where nationalism is strong and Brown’s interventions in the English Premier League draw attention to his Scottishness and makes it look like a PR activity - much better to have had Andy Burnham make the statement.
O/T
David Cameron is to be appointing the new chairman of the Scottish Tories. Who exactly will probably be revealed in tommorrow’s Sunday Telegraph.
But as true-blue Tory journalist Iain Martin puts it:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/politics/threelinewhip/feb/newscottishtorychairman.htm
http://www.theherald.co.uk/politics/news/display.var.2032103.0.Concessions_won_by_Tories_become_new_campaign.php
So lovely to see that the three Unionist parties are so “united”
I cannot wait to see what becomes of their Scottish Constitutional Commission now!!
http://iainmacwhirter2.blogspot.com/2007/12/constitutional-commission-is-important.html
6. TV advertising also plays its part. For that to work in Britain, we need more money spent by political parties, not less, as is the conventional opinion at the moment.
8 - I think the reason football fans tend to oppose most innovations is that, historically, most innovations tend to make the experience of going to football worse, all-seated grounds being the stand-out example.
For millions of people, the Premier League’s proposals will have been by far the most important thing to come up this week. It’s entirely reasonable for the Prime Minister to express his views on the subject, and to express them forcefully.
There is nothing new in this: the blues and the greens, fans of charioteers, nearly deposed Emperor Justinian in the 6th century AD.
Does anyone have a link to state-by-state polls for those voting today (or indeed those voting tomorrow or Tuesday)? I’ve had a look round the RCP site but could only see nationals, head-to-heads and state polls for those who’ve already voted.
The assumption is that today’s elections should be favourable for Obama - fair enough, but it would still be good to see the numbers. They’ll be interesting elections on the Republican side as well, as while McCain ought to be safe for the nomination, my guess is that Kansas and Louisiana are more amenable to Huckabee’s brand of politics than to his, and the results might not go his way.
By the way, it’s not just Washinton state, Nebraska and Louisiana voting today for the Democrats - the US Virgin Islands also has its caucus-convention.
10. Stuart, thankful though we are for your educating us on the minutiae of Scottish politics, is there any chance that once - just once - you might actually do Mike the respect of posting on topic (when that topic isn’t Scottish politics)?
[6][12] I would want to see hard evidence that the level of political engagement is higher in the States than here. Historically, turn-out has been lower there in general elections, although this may no longer be true. Obviously, political junkies and punters like the primary system, but that requires a Presidency in the first place.
The only directly comparable elections I can think of are for the Mayoralties of London and New York, but even there I don’t know how New York works, in the sense of what City Hall does and what the boroughs do.
re 13. Maybe. But I think the problem is that Gord thinks that the way of endearing himself to the electors is to be doing or saying at last one thing each day which will make the headlines.
The problem with the soccer story is that this looks like an intervention solely designed to get publicity.
Is there somebody at Downing Street who has the balls to Gordon when he is being a t*t?
17 - the answer to your closing question is clearly no! It is all curiously reminiscent of the later days of John Major, who spent so much time trying to be populist without ever actually converting that into popularity.
9 - You mean that guy who stepped out of the Rocky Horror Show to go on Question Time on Thursday?
8. With respect, that’s complete nonsense (OK, that not with respect actually), and is an excellent example of the attitude I was talking about.
All-seater stadiums have been a massive boon to the game and I am convinced played a large part in the rise of attendences over the last 10-15 years. Yes, I know the turning point was a little earlier - the authorities starting to get to grips with hooliganism provided the first part of the increase.
The fact is that standing terraces were places where people could and did move relatively freely. They were far more conducive to the violent element and even when that was not present, were intimitading to women and younger children (and to short people - and I say that as someone who’s 6′4″). That was the case not just because of the mass of bodies crammed together, but because of the way the crowd could move around on the terrace. It was also physically demanding for the older element.
Since all-seater stadiums became the norm in the higher leagues, the atmosphere at games has improved markedly, the number of women and children - ie families - going has improved, it has probably done much to deal with terrace racism, and despite prices going up substantially, attendances have gone up more than at any other point in the game’s history. How is all that a bad thing?
ps. I recognise the irony of ticking someone off for going off-topic and then doing much the same myself, but sir - he started it.
17 Mike, No, no-one in Downing Street has the balls to tell Gordon anything at all he doesn’t want to hear.
14 Will the assumption that McCain has it sewn up strengthen Obama (and hit McCain) as independents no longer torn between supporting McCain or Obama choose the Democrat caucuses and primaries?
Back on topic: this figures should I think be something of a worry for Democrats who prefer Clinton - nothing more, nothing less.
- It would indeed be sickening if choosing the candidate they preferred led to the Republicans narrowly winning.
- The Clintons have had enemies for years who have thrown everything they can, so they are both more crisis-tested and less likely to have surprising skeletons.
- Despite the row over Bill’s remarks, Obama has not yet come under serious attack. I don’t think he showed himself all that steady under fairly mild fire - OK, but not burnished steel. The Republicans will direct a lot more fire.
So yes, there’s an issue, but probably not a sufficient one to warrant switching on that ground alone. Clinton needs if she wins to give absolute priority to healing wounds with the Obama camp, though. Offering a choice of the VP and whatever place he wants in the Cabinet would be a good start.
20. I’ve also managed to reference my own post and apparently rubbish it at the same time. I was referring to Andy’s reply at [12]. I think I’ll give up for now!
20: A bit worrying that you criticise your own post as complete nonsense!
23 - As I’m about to go out (to the football, natch) I don’t have the time for an adequate response, but suffice it to say I disagree quite firmly and I don’t know a single person with whom I’ve travelled to games for a decade who thinks all-seaters are a Good Thing. I guess we’ll have to leave it there, as I’m running late and it IS somewhat O/T…
I see that according to the ONS the Norther Wreck fiasco has added £100 billion to the national debt.
In the meantime the Germans again show the right way to deal with the NR type problem, difficult as it is to cut jobs, they are doing more than carrying on lending in the same loose way as they did before: “German investment bank WestLB is to lay off around 25pc of its workforce as its regional government owners agreed to provide €5bn (£3.7bn) of public funds to bail out the bank from its trading and sub-prime losses.”
A well-written light piece that relates to some of our threads:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/02/09/do0904.xml
The head-to-head figures are bad for Clinton.
But they may be seriously misleading. The critical assumption is that all voters are equally likely to turn out. This is not the case.
To oversimplify, core Democrats vote for Clinton, independents and disillusioned Republicans support Obama. We might assume then, as naive commentators do, that high turnouts favour Obama.
It is a perfectly reasonable assumption: base Democrats turn out first, supporting the party come what may, but it takes the soaring rhetoric of hope to attract voters who are not Democrats.
Obama makes the point explicitly when he claims everyone who supports Clinton will vote for him but not all his voters will support Clinton.
Why let the facts get in the way of a good theory?
Tanenbaum’s tables, ordered by which states supported which candidates, show it is Obama who has been favoured in low turnout races, whether caucuses or primaries in states like Delaware, Connecticut and Ohio.
http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2008/Pres/Maps/Feb06.html
Come November, if core Democrats stay at home and anti-Bush Republicans move to McCain, it may be Obama who is defeated where Clinton would have won.
[27] Always good to see Tories failing to pass their values on to their offspring…
28 Yes John, I think those current head to heads are very misleading. The campaign has barely begun and we all know how opinions can change during a campaign.
If I were minded to vote Hillary for the Nomination, I wouldn’t be put off by a five or ten point deficit in her head-to-heads with McCain. Twenty points and maybe I might think about it. Smaller differences I’d reckon she could improve on as the campaign gets serious.
I really doubt this is going to be much of a factor in the race to the line.
She should be more worried about the bad polls for the Weekend elections.
27 — laundryman! Reminiscent of Tony Benn needing to ask what a mangle was.
When I was in the launderette yesterday (and I really was, not having a laundryman, you see) the two political discussions overheard were the problems of pensioners compared with new immigrants, and the council’s parking restrictions and fines.
The first debate was quite nuanced, as you might expect from second generation immigrants, and seemed to blame over-generous child benefits.
8 - Leaving aside the issue of all-seater stadiums (even their staunchest opponents generally accept there was justification for their implementation, through the fact that they usually at some point employ the fact that technology has improved and therefore they can be brought back safely), I’m mystified as to the reasons why you think this Premier League thing will be “good for the fans”. It’ll be good for the fans in other countries who might get to see a game without coming to England, but for the fans in this country?
It’s another small step towards a continental league, and the destruction of the national and international game as we know it.
Continuing off-thread themes..The BBC really are leading the news agenda with lefty tosh this morning.Homophobic policemen, Committee’s talking about equal pay for women, an assualt on the church of England, reminding people of Conway and taht he was a Conservative and then McSporran stuttering away and sounding like an ar*e on an English sports topic.
It does seem odd that this so called ‘genius of a political strategist’ totally ignores the fact that the more people see him the more they dont like him.
The BBC are reverting to type so thats not surprising….
33 - I was under the impression that it was the Archbishop of Canterbury who has launched an assault on the Church of England.
Tim13
In all honesty I hadn’t heard of the charter until I heard the Radio 4 program mentioned on the wiki. The programs argument was that this charter, the little charter, was almost as important historically as the great charter and actually more significant to ordinary people because of the practical rights it gave them.
The charter was frequently reissued and was a live issue in politics really until relatively recently (19th century?). If you get the chance to hear the program I would urge you to listen to it. It is very interesting in its own right.
Clinton has just drifted by a percentage point on intrade. A poll? Timing seems wrong.
JohnL@28: Did you post the right link? I read through that page but I couldn’t find anything to suggest that Obama does better with low turnouts, or that low turnout races disproportionately help Obama. Plenty of evidence that he does well in caucuses, but that’s a different problem. Also tried Googling things like “democratic primaries by turnout” (after a false start with “democratic primaries by turout” , which Google helpfully suggested was supposed to be “democratic primaries by trout”, which turned up more hits than you might expect) and couldn’t find much of a correlation.
It’s an interesting fact if true, so I’d be interested to hear if you’ve got another link, or if I’ve missed the place I was supposed to read on the one you posted.
20,David,Having met you at the April 2007 PB Party,I like and respect you,but I personally feel some provosion for standing should remain at football grounds-in my opinion,something of the atmosphere is definetly lost by all-seaters-I recall some restoration of small terraced areas in behind-goal kops has been mooted,and I personally would welcome a lively debate.Godd luck whoever your team is playing today!
30 peter the punter- good post, I remember Dukakis coming out of his convention with 18% poll leads over Bush.
These head to head polls are meaningless, the campaign is gruelling, and no candidate would be more tested than Hillary when it comes to the wire.
McCain is the turkey waiting for the democrats Xmas.
Was Jan 2008 really so ‘unusually busy’ for polls.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7233682.stm
I thought that there were comments on poor methodologies, sample sizes and how few polls there had been last month, especially when Peter Hain’s problems were brought to light.
35 Probably the Charter meant less as result of the agricultural & industrial revolutions; its rights would have been important to the mass of people, dependent to a great extent on subsistence agriculture, right up to the 19th century.
There is very little knowledge of the foundations of English rights and its associated struggles which perhaps explains why Governments find it so easy to negate them. Today the Telegraph reports what seems to be institutional bugging of lawyer-client communications, which the Government will defend as “necessary for public protection…innocent have nothing to fear etc.”. The fact it completely undermines the due process of justice and will make clients far less willing to tell their lawyers the full story, or close to it, for fear of their discussions being used by the state and thus limiting the defendants right to access full legal advice is apparently unimportant.
There are exceptions where interception of lawyer-client communication may be necessary, but these should surely be few and far between.
38 - there’s an argument that terracing won’t come back - not because of the cost or safety, but because bringing it back would push out those “middle class families” and “daytrippers” who go to the games, spend all the money in the megastores and won’t call for the chairman’s head.
You could see it in Arsene Wenger’s comments about international fans “deserving” to see their team play in the flesh. Next time you go on holiday abroad, have a little look round to see if travel agencies are doing weekend trips to Prem games. Bet you’ll find at least one.
Politically, the reaction to Brown’s comments by some of the football messageboards seem to be one of “oh, he’s saying that to get votes”. Not a good sign for him.
To keep this on-topic, Obama’s chances of winning will be helped by the news he’s supposedly a West Ham fan seeping through to the typical US voters’ conscience
28. Sorry, John, there seems to be a contradiction in what you saying here.
You say if the core democrats stay at home in November, then Obama would risk losing. But you also point out that Obama is doing best in the caucuses and low-turnout primaries i.e. among the core Democrats. So why would ‘core’ Democrats support him now but not in November?
30. PtP. I think it depends on how aware the electorate are of these Head to Head poll results. If they are aware that Obama currently and consistently does better than Clinton against McCain then it could prove that crucial factor to tip it his way. We are in the final straight now and the finishing post is in sight. If one candidate can steal a couple of lengths at this stage it will prove difficult to pull back.
My view is that Hillary is now damaged goods. She was the heir presumptive, the dynastic successor, the establishment choice, the chip leader, ahead in all the polls with a clear sense of entitlement that the nomination was her’s by right because she had put in the hours.
Despite this and an at times unedifying campaign she is only neck and neck with a promising novice who won’t be shaken off. She continues to polarise opinion. If she wins it will be a pyrrhic victory for her and the Democratic party. If Obama wins then he goes on to The White House
Edmund in Tokyo @ 37 re turnout in primaries — to measure this, I’m using the ratio of total votes to delegates. The key assumption here is the number of delegates is a rough proxy for the number of expected Democrat voters.
If there is any merit in this, then Obama won Georgia, Illinois and Alabama in high turnout races, but he also won the lowest turnout primaries in Utah, Delaware and Connecticut. Since Obama also won all bar one of the low turnout caucuses, it does look like low turnout is in his favour. It is an extension of the argument developed by Tanenbaum in the linked article.
The figures iirc came originally from the New York Times but I may be wrong about that since their immediate source is the back of an envelope here.
42. The point is attendances are miles higher now than in the days of terracing and the revenue generated now is in a different universe.
If you conducted a poll of people attending games now the vast majority would want the stadiums of today rather than the stadiums of yesterday.
There is a lot of nostalgic looking back to times that are best forgotten - how many people really want to stand on a crowded terrace with almost no access to toilets, let alone food and drink.
How many clubs are campaigning for a return of terraces? Answer - none because it is not what the vast majority of spectators want and therefore does not make business sense.
As we’re talking about football…
The thing that bothers me the most about the PL Abroad proposal isn’t the concept of playing abroad - clubs garnering more cash overseas isn’t all a bad thing for the fans back home - but the unbalanced fixture list.
Clearly the team that draws Derby County in the extra match has a significant advantage over the team that draws Arsenal or Manchester United. It isn’t a cup draw and if league places change due to which matches were drawn out of the hat (which they will) it is a fundamental lapse in the fairness of the league structure.
I’m aware that some sports (notably here, rugby league I think) have uneven fixture lists, but I don’t think they are a particularly good idea either.
Alan J @ 43 — no, there is no contradiction. The suggestion is that in low turnout states, highly motivated Obamamaniacs (as they style themselves) overwhelm core Democrats who may stay at home (just as core Labour supporters may have sat on their hadns in the later Blair years).
You can see the same thing in the Republican race, where Ron Paul does best in caucuses. (Scroll down on the Tanebaum link.)
And if you scan American blogs and web sites, it looks like Paulites and Obamamaniacs are similar types: educated, affluent, and disillusioned with business-as-usual politics. They are also highly motivated, and willing to put their votes and money where their mouths are.
47. Agreed. If they did it I suspect it would be seeded - ie 1 v 20, 2 v 19, 3 v 18 etc so all the top teams get an equally “easy” game and all the bottom teams an equally “hard” game. But it still would not be fair and there is no way round that.
It wasn’t long ago that Hillary’s main strength was supposed to be her supposed “electability”. I don’t think these numbers, in themselves, will have that much of an impact, but that’s only because, gradually and quietly and without anyone really noticing, people have already stopped believing in it.
46 - The issue here, as to some extent with terracing is “who benefits”.
Safety issues aside, the fact that attendances are higher now, there is more money, and the majority of the current match-going fanbase are not in favour of “going back”, is not the same as saying that the change has been “good for fans”. What has happened is that there has been a substantial culture shift and that many of the fans of 20 years ago have been driven out of the game, whether because they can no longer afford to go, or simply because they preferred the culture as it was.
It is perfectly feasible that long term exactly the same thing will happen as a result (not directly, it’s only the start) with the current proposals. Clubs will go global, over time (probably after the formation of continental leagues) ever more matches will be played abroad, and the culture and fan base will change again.
And you poll the match-going fans at that time and they will in majority be happy with the way things are, extol the new “best league in the World, with the best teams and the best players” and the dissenters will be sneered at for suggesting that there was merit in the old structure, based on nationality and local allegiances and gradually drift away.
Good for the game? A judgement call.
Good for the fans? Which fans?
48: But like with the Paulites there are a great deal fewer Obamamaniacs than the noise they create would lead you to believe.
49 - the proposal is that the top 5 (presumably from the previous season) would be seeded to be kept apart, and a random draw done.
I can’t think teams would be too happy with the idea that the Champions get the easiest “extra game”!
Any odds on the next Archbishop of Canterbury? How about Michael Nazir-Ali?
Like the Sun headline today “Bash the Bishop!”
46 - I’ll have to do a lot of research on attendances to answer your first point, but don’t make the mistake of comparing the 80s (where football was on its knees) to the 90s (where football was a fashion accessory). There are certainly more and more empty spaces at games now..
I think you’re trying to confuse the issue when you’re saying “If you conducted a poll of people attending games now the vast majority would want the stadiums of today rather than the stadiums of yesterday”. Yesterday, I was watching rugby league
from Warrington - a brand new stadium with terracing. It certainly looked no worse than the new all-seater stadia that have popped up over the last decade, and actually generated a lot better atmosphere than you hear at so many football games now.
There’s also the modern German terracing, which has build in-sensors apparently, which while I’ve never stood on those who have rave about.
Also, the “vast majority” of away fans stand at games. Just watch MOTD and see how many of them are standing up in their seats. Isn’t that trying to tell you something?
As for safety in all-seater stadium, just read about what Liverpool fans were doing at the all-seater ground in Athens at the 2007 Champions League final.
There is actually no safety excuse not to bring them back, especially with enhanced stadia design, better policing and stewarding. But as said above, there is no appetite for the clubs to bring them back because they’ll attract the wrong person.
Should point out here I do a fair amount of work in the football industry, and I’m also fortunate enough that my club plays at a level where they do allow terracing.
52. Yes, that’s why Obama only got a measly 7.5 million votes on SuperTuesday, coz he’s really only got about three supporters.
Actually, he got the same number of votes as Hillary. So on that basis there must also be far fewer Hillary supporters than you’d think.
Confusing.
54, not based on odds or anything, but I think Nazir-Ali could take it, or he could take over from Sentamu, who could be made Archbishop of Canterbury.
I doubt either would make such an appalling gaffe. I still can’t believe the Archdruid did.
57. I used to quite like the Archbop of Canterbury in a sort of “funny old silly beardy” kind of way. He seemed harmless, and meant well, I thought.
But then I read the actual speech he gave. Any idea that takes seventeen paragraphs of baroquely convoluted academic waffle to express is probably not worth expressing.
It’s just the most turgid, boring, piffling, passe, lefty, pseudo-sociological duvet-stain of an essay. Why bother? If you want adulterers to be stoned to death in Leicester Square just cough it up, man. And save us all the time.
58, I haven’t read that much, but there’s a quote (from radio I think) when he said, essentially, it was dangerous to have one rule of law for all, regardless of faith.
It staggers me how he could first of all see universal justice as dangerous, and secondly that he could not see why that comment would provoke such outrage.
And that’s without the needless mentioning of Sharia. He’s a Christian (apparently) so why not talk about Christian justice if you’re going to refer to religion?
57 - there is a lot in what Williams said. Sharia compliant financial products are becoming fairly common nowadays for example. He has been taken out of context. But I think he is so far up his ivory tower, he has no concept of how the media will take things.
The tendency has historically been for Archbishops to alternate between high church and evangelical. Both Sentamu and Nazir-Ali come from the evangelical wing, so either may be likely. I would have thought Nazir-Ali would be the likelier safe pair of hands, though I understand he was very ill a few years ago, so his health may stop him.
That said… I think Williams will weather the storm. Just. But go when he is sixty.
44 Could be, StJohn. I hope you are right.
I liked your analogy - “…she is only neck and neck with a promising novice who won’t be shaken off.” Your mind never strays far from the turf, I see.
Commendable.
Btw, I fancy Roman Villa at Newbury today. Any thoughts?
56: I was just suggesting that there are less Obama supporters, rather than Clinton haters and ‘I’ll vote for anyone who is black’ voters, than people think.
57 Weakness also exists in the Pope - don’t talk the peoples language nor understand how/when to make a point. Both are at base academics, and would probably be better in positions of influence rather than leadership.
Archbishop didn’t need to say anything about Sharia law as in civil/private dealings Muslims, Catholics, Plymouth Brethren, Jews, Hindus etc. have always been able to agree, voluntarily, to their own means of redress. Where he was wrong was in giving the impression these should have a legal basis equal to that of the justice system - any decision of the Beth Din can be overturned in civil terms by the courts if there are suggestions the decision was not entered voluntarily or there is a conflict in law.
If the archbishop is taken out of context, then he is not the first.
When Archbishop Fisher went to New York, he was asked by a reporter if he was going to visit any nightclubs in New York. His reply was an attempt at irony “Are there any nightclubs in New York.”
Cue newspaper headlines: “Archbishop’s first question on arrival: Are the any nightclubs in New York?”
60. The crucial passage in his dreadful speech is this, the last paragraph:
“If the paradoxical idea which I have sketched is true – that universal law and universal right are a way of recognising what is least fathomable and controllable in the human subject – theology still waits for us around the corner of these debates, however hard our culture may try to keep it out. And, as you can imagine, I am not going to complain about that”.
Basically he likes the idea of sharia law because it is a way of reintroducing religion - all religion, and quite dogmatic religion at that - into the public and legal sphere. He’s kind of piggybacking Muslim militancy. And he’s hoping to smuggle some of his enfeebled Christianity into the national discourse, under the burqas and the chadors.
News for you, Doctor Williams: f*** off. I believe in God but I do not believe in this pile of medieval piffle you seem to like. We had an Enlightenment some time ago, or have you forgotten?
Idiot Welsh windsock.
Through arrogance, fear or whatever it was the labour party who let Brown become leader, even though they saw the polls saying what would transpire if he did. Are the democrats the same or do they really want to win the presidency? That’s the question.
3 - The MSNBC figures are likely to be more accurate, as they have worked on where the remaining delegates will go (and ignoring superdelegates who are not pledged until the convention).
39 - Dukakis got a convention bounce, like a conference bounce here it’s a different, and short lived, thing. The Obama lead has been there for ages now.
PtP @ 61 — Roman Villa has an extraordinarily high ratio of places to wins, and not necessarily in a good way.
66- sure Dukakis got a conference bounce. He was a poor candidate.
Hillary is no Gordon Brown- this analogy is wrong.
68 - She is a much better communicator but she carries with her more negatives than Brown did before he took over, just of a different kind.
Also, Brown wasn’t inevitable, but the labour party allowed him to become as such. There is the possibility that the Democrats may finally acquiesce to this same idea with Clinton but at least they are stepping back, whilst the primary process has been their potential saviour.
With a different leader it is more than plausible that labour would be doing better. A Denham, or a Johnson even, dealing with Northern Rock would not have a history to try and defend; they could be braver, more able to look to the future rather than the past.
67 Decent ew value, John L?
64 - SBS that was his own fault for not knowing americans have no sense of irony….
There’s a good quote about Shariagate on the Telegraph blog:
“Rowan Williams is a good man who’s gone stark staring mad. If you gave him a pearl-handled revolver and a decanter of whisky, he’d swallow the revolver and hit himself over the head with the decanter.”
61. Peter I have narrowed it down to Roman Villa and Palomar. I was very, very taken by Palomar last time out.
King Henry asks should we axe the archbishop?
Bash the Bishop, what are the moral minds at The Sun thinking, are they trying to imply something? The website has a ‘game’ of Whack Williams.
On the Rowan Williams tangent, I’m glad everyone else has finally caught on to the fact that the man’s completely bonkers. I first noticed that time he went off on some insane raving about somebody turning water into wine, walking on water and rising from the dead.
Look at these polls and tell me why MCCain isnt the value bet at 2 to 1?
FAO Peter the Punter and others. SPINs US presidential index will be available again after the latest round of voting has finished. general election suspends overnight in case of newspaper poll, reopens tomorrow am.
OT. Charles Clarke clearly believes that Brown is some sort of fruitcake, and I’m inclined to agree with him:
“There is a very big problem in Gordon’s mind. He is always thinking about Tony Blair,” says Clarke. “It’s a strange, tormented thing…….”
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=513229&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true#StartComments
75. Religious nutters went into a steep decline in quality, circa 1700. You used to get John Donne raving from the pulpit of St Paul’s, thusly:
BATTER my heart, three person’d God; for, you
As yet but knocke, breathe, shine, and seeke to mend;
That I may rise, and stand, o’erthrow mee,’and bend
Your force, to breake, blowe, burn and make me new.
or guys like St John of the Cross, speaking of the soul’s love for God:
Rejoice, my love, with me
And in your beauty see us both reflected:
By mountain-slope and lea,
Where purest rills run free,
We’ll pass into the forest undetected.
Now we have bearded liberal halfwit Rowan Williams, telling us:
Perhaps it helps to see the universalist vision of law as guaranteeing equal accountability and access primarily in a negative rather than a positive sense - that is, to see it as a mechanism whereby any human participant in a society is protected against the loss of certain elementary liberties of self-determination and guaranteed the freedom to demand reasons for any actions on the part of others for actions and policies that infringe self-determination.
As the man Himself might say: Sic Transit Gloria Mundi
OT, theres also an excellent piece in todays Mail by Peter Obrone, about how the ever ambitious Tony Blair is campaigning to become President Of Europe.
I don’t know about anybody else, but the sight of the wretched Blairs swanning around Europe as President and First Lady would be vomit-inducing, and would actually push me into campaigning for British withdrawel from this awful project! [face_sick]
76. Look at the competition McCain had to overcome to be (probably)Republican nominee. He’s had an easy ride so far.
Can I just say that I am writing an exceptionally unpleasant book. In chapter 32, a man has been flayed alive. And now the police have discovered his flayed skin, being chewed by a dog.
Heh.
Writing thrillers is FUN.
Sawadee.
76 - key points as follows:
1. Hypothetical polls are notoriously unreliable (look at the pre-Brown polls which suggested no bounce - in the event he got a big bounce… even if he did proceed to blow it).
2. Pendulum swing is an historical feature of American politics.
3. Turnout at Republican primaries has been low, and that in the Democrat primaries high.
4. McCain is not popular in his own party which has some advantages but makes it more difficult to mobilise a campaign.
5. McCain has a VP problem - he is under pressure to balance the ticket with a solid Republican favourite but that will hurt him among his independent constituency because a McCain VP will have a real prospect of becoming President.
6. Democrats will have more money this time than Republicans.
7. McCain has the feeling of a valiant loser - I get the impression of “if we are going to lose, let’s lose with this decent man”.
8. The economy is weak and the US is not happy. McCain is the best Republican candidate to distance himself from Bush - but when the campaign proper starts he will come under pressure.
He may yet overcome it all, but 2-1 doesn’t tempt me.
How I see the Democratic race panning out…
Over the next fortnight Obama will build-up a lead in pledged delegates of about 50-60 over Clinton, a significant lead in the popular vote, and will have “won” about 22 states (+DC) to Clinton’s 12 (excluding MI and FL).
In the next phase of the race starting in March, Clinton in theory will start to whittle that lead down, but it will go all the way, and she needs to win Puerto Rico. If Obama wins Puerto Rico, it’s all over.
If everything goes Clinton’s way she will end up with a 20-30 lead in pledged delegates.
However, if the momentum Obama generates over the next fortnight is sustained into March, Clinton’s fightback will be blunted, and narrow wins in the big states will not be able to compensate for Obama landslides in the smaller.
Oh, and those superdelegates are already starting to defect to Obama. A trickle may become a torrent, so by the end of the game, Clinton may only hold a slight advantage there.
I see Obama maintaining a significant lead (40-50) in pledged delegates all the way to the Puerto Rico contest on 1st June. It would be deeply ironic if the Democratic contest was decided by people who won’t even have a vote in November!
In other words the Democrats are heading for a train-wreck….
82, Sean, sounds like a fun read. I’m an avid Stephen King fan,so I quite like a bit of blood and gore.
83 On VP choice, this didn’t used to matter but has Dick Cheney created more than a role for himself under Bush but an increased role for Vice Presidents? Imagine Bush wanted a foreign policy VP while he concentrated on domestic policies (9/11 through that out of the window) - would McCain be looking for a strong domestic VP to balance his weaknesses in the economy? So a governor with a good track record?
SeanT at 79. “Now we have bearded liberal halfwit Rowan Williams…”
I think it’s nice for us liberals to have our own religious halfwit. It’s so boring laughing at all the conservative religious halfwits and their halfbaked nonsense all the time. Oh well, as the saying goes - half a wit is better than none
86 meant to type… 9/11 though threw that … but came out as ‘through’, brain faster than fingers or just stupidity?
Dick Morris looking at the upcoming democrat races below, much more level headed than most predictions (Roger, take note of these!).
As for my predictions, I agree with him as regards wins for Obama in Nebraska and Louisiana (although the demographic changes from New Orleans’ floods may help Clinton) and Washington as being too close to call. Clinton should take Maine, it’s the North East where she’s doing well and the caucus is on Sunday so no excuses there. Morris’ point about Hawaii is well taken, Obama’s heritage there may close the gap though, although I expect Clinton to win with a few points to spare.
Looking ahead I think Clinton will squeak Wisconsin and take Ohio easily (I disagree with Morris, I think the demographics are against Obama there). Texas, on the other hand, I think will turn out to be a much closer battle.
In summary then I’m going for
Obama - Washington (just), Nebraska, Louisiana (closer than expected), Virginia, Maryland, DC.
Clinton - Maine
The others are too far away and events may take over, but as of now, Clinton to take Wisconsin (just), Hawaii. Ohio (easy), Texas (quite close), Rhode Island and Vermont with Obama left with Mississippi and Wyoming. Obama has to use any momentum to change things here.
Here’s Morris -
“Over the next two weeks, nine states with as many total delegates as California will cast their votes. Obama should win Louisiana, Virginia, Maryland and Washington, DC, because of their large black populations. His Midwest strength could well give him victories as well in Nebraska and Wisconsin.
Washington state and Maine could go either way. And Clinton’s strength among California Asians probably means she’ll win Hawaii. But Obama will probably creep up in delegates as February unfolds.
Then come the real heartland primaries on March 4 - Texas and Ohio. Obama’s strength in the Midwest augers well for Ohio. Clinton has yet to demonstrate an appeal in this region, while Obama’s wins in Illinois, Minnesota, North Dakota, Missouri and Iowa indicate real regional strength.
In Texas, the Hispanic vote will be key. Clinton carried California even though Obama won among both blacks and whites. She prevailed among the third of ballots cast by Latinos. To carry Texas, Obama will have to close the gap among Hispanics. His support for driver’s licenses for illegal immigrants - which, at latest count, Clinton opposes - will probably be key in any drive to capture their votes.”
Maybe we could swap Rowan Williams for Rowan Atkinson - or did we do that anyway?
On the Oscars (if anyone’s interested), I snapped up a decent 4.2 for ‘Assassination of Jesse James’ for Cinematography on betfair, Philip Seymour Hoffman was at a crazy 40.0 so worth a few quid (the race is much tighter than that and I don’t see Bardem as being a shoo-in) and Ellen Page as third favourite behind Christie and Cotillard is fair but, to my mind, worth a punt at a double figure price.
Stingy prices for NCFOM as best picture and Day Lewis for Best Actor but they look good as regards getting a win (if you want to take the risk that exists when betting on the collective opinion of a few people that is).
Ratatouille is at 1.2 however - how can it not lose? That looks like free (ish) money to me.
Here’s something I prepared earlier, all about the difficulties of multiculturalism:
http://toffeewomble.blogspot.com/2008/02/naziphobia-redux.html
89. I disagree with your call of Clinton to win Hawaii - Obama was born there!
93 - As Morris says - “And Clinton’s strength among California Asians probably means she’ll win Hawaii.” I’m not sure that being born there is a strong enough reason for him garnering votes that Clinton is getting elsewhere.
re 84 Plausible, more likely than most scenarios, but not necessarily likely! What’s the popular vote tally today (inc and exc FL)?
94. It does give him a USP, though.
Anyway, pausing now to cheer on Wales. I know I should be neutral but the Scotsman next to me in the pub last week wasn’t!
82 Just the one dog?
85 Friends of mine live out in the wilds in Maine. At Hallowe’en they - rather bravely in my opinion - go and do “trick or treat” on Stephen King….
It’s in England’s interests for Scotland to win
83 - you make some good points and some bad ones.
1. Hypothetical polls are notoriously unreliable (look at the pre-Brown polls which suggested no bounce - in the event he got a big bounce… even if he did proceed to blow it).
— yes but look at the Brown vs Cameron hypotheticals…aren’t they looking quite accurate now? I see no systematic reason to think that the hypos are overstating McCain? Maybe they are understating him?
2. Pendulum swing is an historical feature of American politics.
—-it used to be in the UK up to ‘79 (and ‘97!’)
3. Turnout at Republican primaries has been low, and that in the Democrat primaries high.
—fair point
4. McCain is not popular in his own party which has some advantages but makes it more difficult to mobilise a campaign.
—yes but shd help him win center ground voters / independents
5. McCain has a VP problem - he is under pressure to balance the ticket with a solid Republican favourite but that will hurt him among his independent constituency because a McCain VP will have a real prospect of becoming President.
—very fair point
6. Democrats will have more money this time than Republicans.
–ok
7. McCain has the feeling of a valiant loser - I get the impression of “if we are going to lose, let’s lose with this decent man”.
—come on, thats not really an argument is it?
8. The economy is weak and the US is not happy. McCain is the best Republican candidate to distance himself from Bush - but when the campaign proper starts he will come under pressure.
—fair point
He may yet overcome it all, but 2-1 doesn’t tempt me.
— Hilary is devisive. Barak is inspiring but inexperienced and left wing. I agree they are favourites but I still think 3 is a value bet. I don’t see him drifting. Also wont the prolonged and uncertain selection contest hurt them both?
by James February 9th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
99 - Point 4 is about activists not voters, isn’t it?
Are the Republicans going to be able to come close to matching any Democrat GOTV movement, simply because the alternative is Hillary?
Brilliant 4-1 win for the Villa vs Toons.
Movement on the markets. Coral has Obama now at 8/13.
On intrade its 59% Obama, 41% Hillz.
Not sure why there is this tightening in Obama’s price. I’ve read some pundits in America who reckon Hillary has a good chance in Washington State.
She might be a value bet around now.
98. Not if England are to avoid the Wooden Spoon.
99 Trick- in response to point 5, McCain has a real opportunity when choosing his VP.
His current little spat with the talk-show hosts will make any Democratic attempt to paint him as an extreme conservative is likely to fall flat on its face. Hence he can choose a running mate as conservative as he likes.
On the other hand, choosing a more centrist VP can’t harm him either as the talk-show hosts are already sounding a bit shrill and looking a bit out of touch with the voters.
Good Afternoon.
The continuing shortening in the Obama intrade is a simple reflection of the next states in play.
In my view Obama will take Washington state, Louisiana, Nebraska, Maryland, DC and Virginia by a landslide. The Maine caucus will probably be tighter but end in a clear win for Obama.
The March races then become critical for Hillary.
105. Interesting. The Hillaryphiles I’ve been reading - on US blogs etc - imply that she must, and will, win at least one of those states you mention.
Otherwise she is Gone.
If Obama take ALL of those with a landslide he might have an emotional and moral momentum of irresistible force. He would have definitely seized the narrative.
Remember Giuliani! Don’t matter what big states you might win down the line…
102 - clinton now 2.4 on betfair…..seems she is definitely value at the moment….building on what others have been sahying over the last few days, it appears to me that they should both be around evens at the moment, and assuming todays votes go for obama and the next round go for clinton they should stay at evens for the next few weeks…..as such, it seems fair to say that either of them are value once they get better than evens?
seanT @ 105.
It’s very difficult to see a decent show from Hillary in the days to come and her team has been desperately downplaying expectations.
On Texas I read an interesting piece detailing that Obama may do much better than expected because his support amongst Mexican Latinos is almost level with Hillary as indicated by the exit polls in New Mexico.
I don’t know if anybody has read these briefing packs from Fox on the primaries going on this weekend, it’s really useful with some excellent demographic information on each state as well as historical stats. For a punter it’s a real informational treasure chest.
You can access it here:
http://www.foxnews.com/projects/pdf/foxnews_Feb9_Briefing.pdf
apparently the great Dick Morris is not aware of existence of WISCONSIN PRIMARY?
89 “His Midwest strength could well give him victories as well in Nebraska and Wisconsin.”
I think you missed that bit…
SSI @ 110
Are you aware of any recent polling in Wisconsin?
I believe the last poll was some weeks back, was inclusive of Edwards and had Hillary seven clear of Obama.
If Hillary wins one primary/caucus before March 4 it will be a major coup for her camp - I expect her to take OH, and TX easily if she does not them roll on Obama to the nomination …
and to make you laugh this is so true about the news networks …
http://nataliedee.com/020408/im-gonna-vote-for-mccain-cause-hes-a-white-dude.jpg
rej4sl @ 113.
May I ask you why you think Hillary will win Texas “easily”?
114 gut feeling
111 - did miss that, I stand corrected.
112 - haven’t seen any recent Wisconsin polling, would expect something sponsored in-state, say by Milwaukee Beacon or someone connected with U of Wisc.
113 - Clinton has to be given the edge in Maine caucuses, because 1) demographics favor her, similar to parts of NH & Mass she won; and 2) Obama’s New England field operation has been a disaster zone.
And Wisconsin is up for grabs in my humble opinion, balanced between students & upscale suburbanites for Obama, and bluecollar & rural Dems inclined to Hillary.
114 -115 Texas demographics definitely tilt in Hillary’s direction.
But Ohio is much less certain for her.
rej4sl @ 115.
Let’s hope that you don’t get a Texan Delhi belly!
SSI @ 116.
Thank you.
Big surge to Obama on intrade. Now above 60%. Early exit polls in Maine?
seanT @ 120.
More likely my post @ 105.
Once superdelegates have publicly pledge to a candidate can they change their mind and change their pledge?
Shame that McCain, Clinton or Obama don’t have the wit and real style of Mike Huckabee
http://youtube.com/watch?v=59LqPQpPsEM&feature=related
A poll yesterday put Clinton 50/41 ahead in Wisconsin, I can’t recall who did it though, sorry. In February there’s no way she won’t take any states - Maine, as mentioned looks good for her, as does Wisconsin (see above), there’s also a good feeling about her chances in Hawaii. I think that Washington could be close too if people reqalise that the caucus is the important one, not the later primary.
Roger was complaining about the Obama hype before Super Tuesday, on his behalf (and sanity) let’s be realistic here.
120 - Hardly likely, they haven’t even started to caucus yet.
sb @ 122. Yes.
112. American Research Group WI Poll today Clinton 50% Obama 41%
http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/polls/Wisconsin-February-2008.html
127 - That’s the one.
It is ARG I suppose.
The US Virgin Islands also vote today. Clearly Bill has visited recently!
124. Quite. I can’t see Obama winning all of them. She certainly should win Wisconsin, and maybe Maine. Hawaii is weird - Obama’s homeland, yet I’ve been there and it’s VERY Asian, I think 25% Japanese or something.
Clinton wins the Asian vote 3-1. Tricky.
That said, I think she is over-optimistic about Texas, Ohio and PA. Is she really gonna win all of those?
I think Obama will win
Washington
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Louisiana
DC
Maryland
Nebraska
and
Texas
and she will win PA, Ohio, Wisconsin and Maine
Hawaii to close to call.
Anyway it’s important, if we are to finally seal Hillary in her ancestral vault, that Obamaramas like us learn to manage expectations.
That’s been his only failing, electorally, so far - not quite matching the hype. Enough hype already.
Rasmussen has Obama up 55-37 in Virginia and 57-31 in Marland.
Cannot believe those margins, do they take into account postal votes
Clinton has now dipped below 40 on IEM. The lowest she has ever been, I think.
Slightly strange. Just market sentiment, I guess.
dave(s) @ 131.
There is also a Virginia SUSA poll that backs the Rasmussen and shows Obama up 59/39.
I am damping expectations for the Hillary campaign - that way if we win any February states we can say “that wasn’t expected”
Reasons I don’t think she can win in February
Wisconsin - see MN - but his is a primary and will be closer but still think Obama will edge it
Maine - is a new England state but a caucus and in Caucuses Obama does a lot better as they are undemocratic and people can’t vote in private and are persuaded to vote for people they don’t really want to support but can’t be seen not supporting because they may be seen as being Clintonistas
Washington SSI - told me that it was favoring Obama
Louisiana - demographics - black majority for Obama
Maryland/Virginia - see Louisiana
Texas/Ohio/Pennsylvania - she has to win these 3 to get the nomination
RI/VT - Hillary country
Any UK polls due tomorrow?
Interesting Vanity Fair essay on Obama:
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/03/obama200803
Hilldroids probably shouldn’t read it - it’s very nice about him. He has a REALLY f***ed up background. Fathers and stepfathers and half brothers and weird drug stories all over the shop.
Maybe that’s why I relate to him, unlike Hillary Coatlicue Clinton, The Skull Necklaced Death Goddess, and Lady of the Serpent Skirt.
82: Is the dog OK?
Public Policy Polling has obama 42-40 up in north carolina
http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_020808.pdf
Just read an interesting article about Barry on NYT - so have decided to order “Dreams from my Father”from the local library a little wait as they have 15 copies and I am 43 on the waiting list but will be worth it to have a jolly good read …
I feel I ought to elaborate on my Cotalicue reference.
Coatlicue is, as any fule kno, an Aztec goddess. She is also spookily like Hillary.
To wit:
“Coatlicue is the Aztec goddess of earth and fire, and mother of the gods and mother of the stars of the southern sky. Her daughter is the goddess Coyolxauhqui (i.e. Chelsea).
“Also known as the Mother of Gods, or the Devourer of Filth, “Our Grandmother” Coatlicue wears a skirt made of braided serpents, secured by another serpent, and a necklace of human hands and hearts. Meanwhile her feet and hands are adorned with claws. Her breasts are depicted as hanging flaccid from nursing. She lives by feasting on the corpses of men.
Coatlicue has transformed into modern Mexican culture as La Llorona, “The Weeping Woman”, said to carry the body of a dead child and weep at night in city streets.
You see what I mean?
137. I think the dog survives. But in my next chapter, Hugo de Savary, the debonair but narcissistic Cambridge Professor of Anthropology, gets “blood eagled”. Admirers of gratuitous Viking violence order your copies now.
there’s certainly one Betfair market PB.com doesn’t seem to influence - Boris is now out at 2.88. This must be good value given Sean F’s and Mike’s analysis?
134 - You are way off base in arguing that its socially unacceptable to be for Hilary Clinton in a Democratic caucus. Nothing could be further from the truth. Nobody out here is dissing Sen. Maria Cantwell or Sen. Patty Murray for supporting Hillary.
Am hoping my precinct goes for Obama. But will take what comes. And certainly won’t be dissing anyone in my patch or anyone else who is supporting Sen. Clinton, or uncommitted or Mike Gravel for that matter.
Now if some guy with a British-Minnesota accent shows up and says he just flew in from Twin Cities, might start getting a bit suspicous . . .
O/T I won’t ever look at lists of council by-election results in the same way after the one in Sean Fear’s post yesterday.
Was reading down the list and considering them from the political viewpoint when it suddenly hit me which individual had been elected to the seat which was the subject of a by-election on Thursday. It was an old friend who I had known for nearly thirty years before moving to the other end of the country.
Promptly started making a few calls to find out what had happened and discovered that she had died suddenly. Usually I find out fairly quickly about such things but on this occasion the news had fallen through the cracks and hadn’t reached me.
It rather brought it home that behind every by-election there is a human story and not infrequently a tragedy. One of the reasons that by-elections are not all that good as a predictor of other polls is that, expecially when there is a low turnout, those human stories can sometimes affect the result.
143 - Please accept my condolences on the loss of your friend.
What you say about by-elections is very true but generally overlooked. Particularly when the community has lost a leader and fellow citizen personally known and respected by the voters.
142 - That may be the case, but the problem with not having a secret ballot is that people can feel pushed into voting one way because they feel a public pressure on them to do so, even if no one is being intimidatory. However I don’t see why that should necessarily lead to a bias towards Obama.
However, I think it is right to argue that the kind of people who have the time to caucus are more likely to support Obama (richer, better educated, at college). Seniors may advantage Hillary, but some may find it difficult to spend an hour or two at a caucus. This can be seen from the SUSA poll for Washington which showed Obama ahead 50-45 among all voters but 63-33 among caucus goers. Also the different results from Utah and Idaho, the former was much close indicate that caucuses benefit Obama.
Obama Way Ahead Of Clinton In Tuesday’s “Potomac Primary”
http://blogs.cqpolitics.com/polltracker/2008/02/obama-way-ahead-of-clinton-in.html
145 - Personally much prefer primaries to caucuses, because primaries greatly increase turnout, and it is a secret ballot.
But think the type of pressure you describe is more theoretical than actual. Leastways that’s my personal observation from close to two decades of caucus attendance.
Similar objection has been raised to absentee voting and all vote-by-mail elections. Again, experience of west coast states does not support the thesis.
SSI I agree. I had no idea HRC voters were such sensitive plants!
145 - Come to think of it, after today will have exactly two decades of caucuses under my belt.
One phenomenon you do get, is people turning for a caucus because a relative or friend asked them to. For example, am guessing that there are kids too young to vote who’ve persuaded their parents and/or grandparents to turn out for Obama. Or Hillary for that matter; she does have some youthful fans too, esp. among feminists.
Nothing wrong with any of the above in my opinion. And wouldn’t necessarily count on Grand-Mama or Uncle Fester holding firm if she hears a good enough argument for the other candidate.
147 - I suppose it depends very much on the type of community that the caucus is taking place in. If people take the attitude that you have suggested then it shouldn’t be problematic. However where communities are polarised I guess it would be more of a problem. Also, I think family dynamics have an effect. For instance a wife may want to vote for a different candidate to her husband but vote with him in a caucus situation (or vice versa).
The turnout effects are the most serious problem though.
4.
“Prime Minister Gordon Brown has called on the Premier League”
In the Premier league, Gordon Brown is the Fulham to Tony Blair’s Wigan. Cameron, of course, is Derby County.
the headline figures may have an impact but equally may only have a minor impact because they dont show a definite trend and they dont show a definite gap against Hillary.
By the way its probably been worth backing Hillary in some of the upcoming events over the next few weeks
Am off to my Democratic precinct caucus in north Seattle, will send out a report on the flip side . . .
140: “Hugo de Savary, the debonair but narcissistic Cambridge Professor of Anthropology, gets “blood eagled”.” Yeah, whatever. So long as the dog’s OK.
140. What sort of dog is he?
156. Presumably its related to the Hound of The Baskervilles?
I didn’t know our regular Tory poster had a hound?
Good luck in WA - we won’t be doing the long trek to Seattle I don’t think - just freeze ourselves here in the Twin Cities for a little longer - my partner and I would not be dissuaded at a caucus but there are a lot of people who would - but like you said maybe the difference between the vote is that to go to a caucus you need to be more politically motivated or able to have 2 hours off to go - a lot of people don’t have the time or the motivation - if there had been a primary in MN we would have voted but we did not at the caucus - and I guess there are a lot of people out there -
Funny thing is locally on the local political show on TPT there was a debate on whether MN should go to primaries the Democrat wanted it but the Republican did not - go figure -
Will there be any exit polls from the primaries today?
Obama is the America’s (and the world’s) best hope to defeat Islamist terrorism.He has better judgement than both Mcain and Hillary put together.
84. Update…. Contrary to some media reports it appears Puerto Rico does NOT apportion its delegates by winner-takes-all…
http://www.democraticcentral.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1472
http://www.411mania.com/politics/columns/68679
If that be the case, I am calling this. Obama will go to the convention with more pledged delegates than Clinton…
160 — by blowing up Pakistan?
I learned today from watching CNN that Guiliani is to blame/credit for McCain having such a lead for the Republican nomination.
At his supporters’ instigation, New York, New Jersey and a couple of other North-Eastern states changed from proportional to WTA primaries (assuming Rudy would get the delegates).
161 - Are you making this call on the basis that CNN make them? That is very close to a statistical certainty i.e. greater than 99% probability. If so, I would say you’re being very premature. Obama is certainly the favourite and probably has a 60-65% chance of getting the most pledged delegates but a lot could happen in the next month, and Hillary is certainly not out of it just yet.
Fox predicting Huckabee will win Kansas
He wins two thirds of the delegates, but that isn’t enough is it?
82 etc. so is it the same man who gets blood-eagled and flayed alive, or different men? Surely, no one could be alive after having been blood-eagled?
I’m not sure what is the worst possible death, but flaying alive must be pretty close to it.
Yep looks like Huck may have it.
161 Rod - You are correct that Puerto Rico distributes its delegates on a proportional system rather than winner takes all. The glitch however, is that apparently Puerto Rican democratic politics put Chicago to shame in terms of machine, so in practical terms they generally ensure that all 63 delegates go to the one favoured candidate.
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2008/2/6/puerto-rican-poll-power.html
Kansasa is interesting as it was a decent place for Mitt before he dropped out., He had sold support there.
…solid…
168. Huck still 6/1 with PP to small stakes.
Reports on Nebraska from Daily Kos (I know, Obamaville) are very encouraging for Obama. People are reporting votes ranging from 66-33 upwards in his favour, with Clinton failing to reach viability in one very large precinct.
172. now at 4’s
169. I know, I posted that article yesterday. But…… the conclusion of the article is valid. It would be ABSURD if it happens. The tinpot dictators of Puerto Rico may have got away with strongarming the delegates in the past, when it didn’t matter and no-one noticed, but do you really think they’d get away with it if the entire race depended on it and the World’s media have descended en masse on San Juan?
Thought not…..
172. Great spot again Caveman. I managed to get some on at 4/1.
Did you much on caveman?
Theres no money on Betfair at all for him…zero
177. Market suspended showing 3/1 on Hucks. Just missed out.
Holy good god what a hoot on Huck!
Caveman, ya genius ya.
177. Got on at 8/1 this morning as I thought Kansas may play out similar to the next door Iowa caucuses. Logged in just know and
someone had just picked up some of my lays on intrade at 2/1 so I knew something was up.
sure i will have won bigger since i didnt try to lump on at PP’s in case i got knocked back but…this one could be sweet.
Since i dont have any bigger insight and i have no idea how accurate Fox reports are i got mccain at 5 on Betfair to same stakes to boot. 2 x 4/1 bets…..guaranteed winner unless Ron paul does something…..
Kansas: CNN reporting 60% Huckabee, 24% McCain, 10% Paul, with 55%+ reported.
180 Thanks Caveman. I thieved a bit of sixes. Needed it today. Yokel will know what I mean. (Sorry Yokel, we all make mistakes.
)
How sure are we that Huck has actually done this?
Go Huck, go!
Huck now 97 on Intrade! What a spot, Caveman!!
remind me to vote for you in the next PB Poster Of The Year comp.
CNN projects Huckabee wins Kansas with 62% of vote; McCain 22%; Paul 11%.
175/169. Where do the candidates, or indeed the parties stand on the ‘Puerto Rico’ question i.e. status quo vs. statehood?
I remember Hillary last week saying she wanted DC to become a state.
183. Aye well, no one died though some of those ones looke dripe for the knackers yard!
Huck looks a winner but I thought a same stake safety on McCain would be ok..its still good profit.
You can see why i sat tight on that wee bet on Huck as well, though this wasnt the state I thought he might show best in and frankly wasnt looking. The logic is good though as this was a good Mitt state so maybe McCain will have a thorn in his side for a while.
Could Pastor Fred Phelps (who was once quite close to Al Gore) bring himself to endorse Huckabee.
Damn it! - just switched on to see I’ve missed all the fun by 40 minutes. Any more like that Caveman?
What are the other possibles for Huck?
191. Depends on how much of Mitts base he can take but Kansas was a decent state for Mitt.
Nebraska looking like Obama landslide…
http://www.action3news.com/Global/story.asp?S=7847675&nav=menu550_1
191. Louisiana? I think it unlikely that Huckabee will appeal in Washington (state) or the ‘Potomac’ primaries on Tuesday.
http://www.king5.com/news/specials/politics/stories/NW_020908WAB_live_updates_caucus_KS.a6cfcdeb.html
Washington straws…
“By 12:36, KING 5 Assistant news director Laura Newborn says that the Obama supporters outside the school have already run out of buttons and stickers….”
195. which means?
196 - They didn’t have enough buttons and stickers.
196 they didn’t take enough buttons and stickers
191. IN, ID, KY, MS, NC, and TX all look possibles for Huck…
197/198. Same difference eh lads….
James Burdett @ 197.
Yoy can never have enough Cadburys buttons!
199, idaho is partciularly interesting.
195 through 198. Reminds me of the old one:
At a sparsely-attended political meeting, the organiser is observed carrying chairs into the hall where the meeting is taking place, despite the fact that the place is nearly empty.
Next day’s news = “Extra chairs had to be brought in for a meeting of …”
197 lol!!!
I am not someone who bets (but I love this site) and am therefore apprehensive about making this point, but looking at the exchange odds Barack looks twice as likely to win as Hillary. Do people really think this fits the facts? Surely given the number of delegates they each have, the reality that nobody can win before the convention and that she has thas the machine - can this really be right?
201 - Totally agree!!
Looking good for Obama in NE
http://www.nebraska.tv/Global/story.asp?S=7848107&nav=menu605_2
and WA
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/seattlepolitics/archives/131511.asp?from=blog_last3
205., No it isnt right. It only looks right if CLinton looks like losing Ohio & Texas
208..or, not and..sorry.
today’s Gallup tracking poll
http://www.gallup.com/poll/104260/Gallup-Daily-Tracking-Election-2008.aspx
Obama so popular in NE supporters were leaving before being counted… Hmmm
http://youdecide08.foxnews.com/2008/02/09/nebraska-democrats-overflow-caucus-sites/
James @ 205 & Yokel @ 208.
To coin a phrase. “It’s delegates stupid!”
To my view Obama is racking up a significant number of big wins especially in caucus races and mid sized state primaries that will offset possible narrow Hillary wins in bigger states.
I believe super delegates will follow the money, momentum and likely long coat tails of Obama. Hence his price on the exchanges and conventional bookies.
Again I remain confused, why is he favourite, when even now, Gallup has her comfortably ahead? Sure he is going to win tonight, but we also know that when it goes to Texas and Ohio she is going to win.
snippits from Washington’s meetings
http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/davidpostman/index.html#022247
213 - Gallup might be including big places which have already voted for her like New York, California and Florida, so if she’s only evens on delegates with those under her belt… Texas I think she wins, Ohio is less clear after the drip drip effect of Obama wins over this week.
212. PJ. Do you think there is value in backing Obama at current prices?
213. And Guiliani was winning the Republican race, and we knew he was going to win Florida …
212. They wont move in any numbers though until Ohio & Texas start to clarify. If hilz looks in trouble then they’ll shift in teh kind of numbers needed.
213. Yep, but he’s winning his states 60-40 and 70-30, while she’s winning hers 55-45… It’s close, but I think he is going to emerge after Wisconsin with a 60+ lead in the pledged delegates. She may whittle that back, if every thing goes her way, but it’ll be an uphill struggle…
219, Delegate numbers……
Louisiana bucking the trend - expect a low turnout
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0954927620080209?rpc=401&
More straws from NE…
http://www.bellevueleader.com/site/tab2.cfm?newsid=19280126&BRD=2712&PAG=461&dept_id=556991&rfi=6
but low turnout in LA may hurt Obama…
http://thehill.com/campaign-2008/high-turnouts-in-neb.-low-in-la.-for-dems-2008-02-09.html
What’s the explanation for the Louisiana turnout? It seems pretty odd.
After New Orleans it’s hardly surprising that Louisiana has little time for politicians.
The question is the amount of momentum Obama will pick up from the wins he will get in February. As McCain becomes the clear GOP candidate (the result in kansas aside) the pressure will be on for the Dems to pick a candidate. That’s why March 4th to me is crucial, whoever is in the lead in terms of pledged delegates will have a big advantage.
Clinton has to win Maine, Hawaii and Wisconsin (or at least 2 of those 3), to stop Obama picking up too much momentum. She then would hope to sweep March 4th (Ohio, Texas, Rhode Island and Vermont). Obama I think is very vulnerable if he is behind at this point as people like Howard Dean will push him towards a deal where he runs as VP. Clinton on the other hand can keep going for longer, she knows this is her one and only chance.
st john @ 221.
When you’ve missed the boat on a big price the temptation is to not to chase a much thinner price. However in this two horse race I believe with all the form we have that Obama remains value but the more so for the general election in November than the Democrat nomination.
O/T Massive blaze in Camden, North London this evening.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7237119.stm
O/T … and just when you think the MPs’ expenses issue is over, …
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3342043.ece
228. Will Gordon Brown call in the police???
I’ve just dipped into Austin Mitchell’s blog for the first time in a while, and he’s on top form. Top bloke:
My Family and Other Animals. A Statement by Austin Mitchell
04 February 2008
In view of the number of media enquiries I would like to make it clear that I do not, never have and never will employ any member of my enormous family in my office or by my parliamentary allowances.
They’re such a load of ignorant layabouts that I wouldn’t trust them working for Grimsby, my parliamentary activities, or walking my dog.
http://www.austinmitchell.org/news/general-ramblings/my-family-and-other-animals.–a-statement-by-austin-mitchell.html
Those who bet with Paddy Power on Huck to win Kansas may have a problem.
I just checked my account and my two bets had been refunded. Customer Services (0800 565275) told me their trader had voided the bets because they were taken after the result was known (in an email apparently timed at 8.37pm.) Naturally I objected and pointed out that I had placed both bets before the results were known and they had been taken. What’s more I had gone on to part lay off the bets elsewhere, which I couldn’t have done if the results were known.
They’re going to look into it and asked me to call back in the morning.
Let’s see what they say tomorrow.
SeanT would appreciate this comment from Austin on the Reform Treaty:
‘Watch the futile debate on the European Constitution. We can’t alter, reject or consult the people on it. Total farce.
But none of this is worse than the fools, knaves, creeps, sycophants, grovellers, aspirants, pillocks, idiots, Euro-dafts and other riff raff who rise intermittently to read briefs given to them by the whips about what the EU will do for the environment, race relations, child protection, the war on dandruff, the regular brushing of teeth, removal of tattoos and body hair, breast enlargement and the Second Coming, of Tony Blair presumably. Pass the treaty. Paradise begins!’
http://www.austinmitchell.org/news/general-ramblings/goodbye-january.html
231 Not PP’s style at all - pay up and smile, that’s what I say.
early exit poll data from Louisiana
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2008/02/09/early_la_exit_poll_highlights/
231 Sounds to me as if someone at PP c*cked it up and is now trying to protect his backside.
232. Nice to see there are still one or two Labour MPs who are not complete quislings.
226. PJ. Thanks for that. I’ve got him at 12/1 and 8/1 for the Presidency. So I wasn’t an early bird like Smithson and Co. If he gets the nomination then - expect him to go on to The White House. But I would say current prices are about right.
Cleveland Plain Dealer (OH) endorses Obama…
http://blog.cleveland.com/openers/2008/02/plain_dealer_endorses_obama_mc.html
230 This story was posted here a day or so ago.
231. Got the same message, I am throughly miffed because i had a hedge.
This wont got down well with me at all, not least that market was still open. I beleve Hicks odds fell from 6, 4 and then from what Henry G said to 3’s before suspension which means someone was still operating that market.
238. “Bill Clinton says his wife excelled at “making positive changes in other people’s lives.” Consider that construction. Then listen as Obama talks of bringing people together to change their own lives.”
Ouch..
Found this snippet from a recent NC poll done by Public Policy Polling. They asked people if they supported John Edwards when he was running, and 48% said yes despite the fact that he only averaged around 20% in polls ther. Just shows how unreliable polling can be, and how unreliable people are at remembering their political choices.
WA looking like Obama landslide…
http://www.theolympian.com/breakingnews/story/354577.html
239. I’m terribly sorry.
241: It’s striking that the things Obama supporters really, really like about him sometimes leave the rest of us cold. “Then listen as Obama talks of bringing people together to change their own lives.” - does this actually mean anything at all? What would he do or not do to “bring people together to change their lives”?
“Making positive changes in other people’s lives” is pretty vague too. But at least one can imagine some things that Bill might have in mind - tax changes, improving the economy, etc. Much more detail needed, but not hopelessly vacuous.
231 their trader had voided the bets because they were taken after the result was known (in an email apparently timed at 8.37pm.)
That being the case, PP should at least honour all bets placed before 8.37pm, which seems to include everyone who posted here up to the point when Henry G was refused, his post having apparently been timed at 8.36pm.
244. Henry can you confirm that you saw Hucks odds on Paddy Powers at 3/1 before the market was suspended?
246. Peter I think some of these things are thresholded electronically, rather than by human intervention but certainly if the odds fell say from 4’s which i got him at and 3’s then clearly thats a live market still in place.
Someone is probably getting a rollicking down at PP Central but realsitically I cant see them having shipped more than few grand on it.
228,229 - He didn’t break the law though, because the law is pretty lax in that respect. It’s perfectly clear if you read to the end of the article.
247. Yes, that’s right. I thought I’d take a bit of it, maximum stake was £33 or something but when I clicked on it a window popped up saying that the selection was not available and the market had been suspended.
246 Of course, the precise timing of bets “accepted” by PP will be shown on each individual’s account with them.
251. 8.30pm dead was mine.
231. PtP. They’ve done the same to me! I had 40 quid at 4/1. Now had my stake refunded but I’ve had no email. I don’t think they have my email address.
This is very poor show. Surely the onus is on them to monitor the market? I would have thought that until every vote is counted then there is no official result and the market is still in play.
I am surprised that a decision like this has been made at this time of night. Someone at the top of the chain should make a decision like this.
I am not impressed. Please let us know how you get on.
I PPs will look at this one ok. The evidence is fairly good that they had a live functioning market and were simply asleep at the wheel.
242. Yeah, I noticed that. I think if you look at the wording of the question, it invites voters to say ‘yes’ if they supported Edwards at any point, rather than asking if they’d back him if he was still in the race. Also it’s a moderately leading question.
Alan J (228). The Sunday Times article ends with:
“Purnell, a former adviser to Tony Blair, bought his London flat in 2000, according to Land Registry records, before he became an MP. When he sold the Bloomsbury mansion flat in October 2004, he avoided capital gains tax because he said it qualified as his main residence.
However, from April 2003 if not earlier he was telling the Commons authorities that his London flat was his second home and claiming about £20,000 a year in housing subsidies.
Purnell was elected an MP in 2001. He confirmed this weekend that he bought his Manchester constituency home in June 2002 and at that point it became his main residence. That would have enabled him to claim housing allowances on his second home in London.”
He at least doesn’t appear to have evaded any capital gains tax (CGT). The last 3 years of ownership of any property which has been the taxpayer’s principle private residence is treated for tax purposes as if it was still the principle private residence, even if it is not. This was introduced to give people who wanted to move plenty of time to sell their property at times when the market was difficult without having some of any capital gain subject to CGT.
As James Purnell bought his Manchester home in June 2002 and sold the Bloombury flat in October 2004 there would consequently be no CGT liability. Many people in this situation plan to sell their property within 3 years to avoid CGT and that may well have been a factor influencing the timing of Mr Purnell’s sale.
253. StJohn I suggest you email in or phone.
I’ve emailed using the further price drop from 4 to 3 as showing a live market.
I also did have a hedge on McCain via Betfair its not a zero sum game for me. It was small beer money but still.
252, etc As a matter of interest, what’s the appeals procedure with PP and other bookies. Of course, it is always far better that such issues are settled amicably.
a discussion piece on whether there should be a primary and an end to the present caucus system.
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/011923.php
Seven to One for Obama in parts of WA…
http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2008/02/live-inside-washington-caucuses-it.html
All that goodwill, which PP tries so hard to engender, will soon disappear should they operate in such an apparently cavalier fashion as this. The evidence appears clear - if they are saying that their market was suspended at 8.37pm, on receipt of an email, then all bets placed prior to this time must be allowed to stand - end of!
its notable that when a tory expense scandal broke almost all the Conservative posters here basically agreed the book should be thrown at Conway.
The Lefties first repsonse is to look desparately for excuses and to squirm and squiggle for ways to defend their own.
It totally sums up the difference in response between Cameron and Brown. Conservatives acknowledge wrong doing and move swiftly to act. Labour dive back into the bunker and dither and look to semantics to escape blame.
Maybe one way to hurt Paddy Power is to take the 11/8 on Ed Balls to be the next Chancellor. If the Sunday Times is to be believed, Darling has lost the confidence of the City. Not something you have to build an winning strategy on. Couple this with Digby Jones’ remarks and you can certainly see a case for Balls taking over before the election.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3341875.ece
If results, endorsements, polls, etc. continue in such an overwhelming fashion in Obama’s favour, what are the chances that Hillary will pull out prior to Texas and Ohio to avoid unnecessary humiliation?
O/T Wendy Alexander will not be pleased by this article.
http://tinyurl.com/29mjup
Huck to stay in until McCain goes over the top in delegates…
http://www.rttnews.com/sp/todaystop.asp?date=02/09/2008&item=1&vid=0
264 There is no chance that Hillary will pull out , seem to remember Obamists speculating the same sort of thing after Iowa . This will go to the wire , the prize is the presidency and however wins it will be President , McCain will lose to either .
Just got back from my precinct caucus in Seattle.
Results:
Total attendance = 59 voters out of 252 active registered voters (23%)
Precinct elected 5 delegates:
Obama = 44 votes = 4 del
Clinton = 13 votes = 1 del
Undecided = 2 votes = 0 del
Here are results for all six precincts that caucused at the same location (local senior center):
Obama = 24 delegates
Clinton = 7 delegates
Uncommitted = 1 delegate
Note: the parts of WA cited by sources Rod has kindly posted are upscale liberal strongholds, like my section of Seattle.
Yokel and others - re Paddy Power.
I’m not going to lose sleep over this. I’ll call them in the morning.
It will probably be settked amicably. These things usually are. I’ll be astonished if PP will risk their reputation on something like this where there’s plenty of evidence around to show what happened when.
Cach you all tomorrow.
264. She can still win if MI and FL are put into her column, or the superdelegates don’t break, or Obama implodes (with the help of the Clinton dirty-tricks machine) All unlikely, imho, but I’m sure she’s working on all these angles now…
Apparently Chelsea’s pleas to the superdelegates are being diverted to answerphone…
http://news14.com/content/headlines/592701/super-delegate-talks-about-position/Default.aspx
I’ve just clicked on the detail of my bet. It was struck at 8.33pm. My stake has been refunded and deemed a late bet “as per Will Byrne”. I will await events tonight.
261. I agree with PfP this is not the kind of publicity Paddy Power could do with. Perhaps Mike might want to lead on this one tomorrow? When is a bet a bet?
so the Obamatrons are doing well in WA as expected - well done SSI - and now you got Louisiana and Nebraska to look forward to - bad month ahead for us Clintonistas - just hope you are right about us taking Wisconsin and Maine and it being close in Hawaii
268. What’s your bet statewide, SSI? 66%-33% for Obama?
264 Assuming she doesn’t take Louisiana (and if you think she can, you can get 49/1), Maine is big for Hillary now. She needs a narrow win at least to stanch the bleeding. If she loses narrowly, she can still plausibly angle for the VP slot, but I just don’t see her taking the presidency, barring some game changing event before March 4th. Maine is how Hillary changes the narrative and scores her Wisconsin win.
Washington might want to go for a primary - chaos in some areas
http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2008/02/live-inside-washington-caucuses-madness.html
If Hillary wins any of the 7 this month - we will be waving flags from our rooftops - it seems really unrealistic to expect any good news this month - but who knows we will see - this is all Obamatron territory from now on until OH,TX,PA and then the contest is over if she does not win those 3
269 You are able to maintain an enviable level of calm PtP, this has me excited and I didn’t even have a bet!
256. Thank you Ray Boulger - a post providing some light rather than just heat.
The Sunday Times have just updated their article with a quote from Purnell’s spokesman making the same point.
It’s a pity that the paper could not have been upfront about this rule within the original article or are we to believe that this is news to them??
Just added to the article:
“A spokesman for Purnell said he had not broken the rules or been inconsistent: “James has correctly followed both House of Commons and HM Revenue & Customs rules. He has not broken any rules and it is wrong to suggest otherwise. James bought his constituency home in June 2002. He sold his London home in October 2004. No capital gains tax was due on that sale. The Taxation of Chargeable Gains Act 1992 provides an exemption from capital gains tax where the property has been the individual’s only or main residence and it is then sold within three years. “
269 PfP - I have long experience of dealing with bookmakers. Disputes are rare. If this one is not settled amicably I will be amazed.
Sleep well. I will.
Looks like Ron Paul has quit…
http://politics.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/09/2122220
273 - More like 60/40 is my guess, give or take a few points either way.
274 - Maine is tough turf demographically for Obama, and apparently his ground game there is no great shakes (as per NH and Mass).
271 I imagine someone at PP is aware or will guess that a significant element of the betting emenated from PB.com, incl probably by some lurkers also. By reading the comments on here, it will be self evident that they are in something of a hole - like PtP, I expect them to honour these bets.
PS Well done Villa!
275 - Chaos is way overblown. We had people hanging from the rafters at our caucus also, long lines, and ran out of sign-in sheets.
No big deal. People waited patiently, everyone who attended got to sign-in and vote, vigourous debate was had, and delegates were elected.
Still much prefer primaries to caucuses, but what is happening today in WA State is NOT chaos, it is TURNOUT.
277. I’m with you on this one PfP. I’ve been betting with the bookies for over 30 years and I don’t ever recall having an issue like this.
I hold the bookies and their integrity in settling bets in the highest regard. This episode in our small corner of the betting world does little to enhance their reputation. And I’m guessing the total exposure is relatively small.
Very disappointing.
284 - What do you guys think may be the cause for the aberation in this instance?
281 Obama’s campaign has done a credible job of lowering expectations for Maine with their ‘accidental’ leaks of pessimistic projections. If we’re talking pure demographics, a Kossack with a talent for statistical inference has made a nice analysis showing a narrow Obama win in Maine. I think this is over optimistic, given the organisation problem, but there’ll be a compensatory effect from his good publicity tonight. I think he edges Maine (60% probability of a win). Bear in mind, we’re talking a caucus, the very next day after three landslides. I think we can apply crowd psychology here.
285. I think they took their eye off the ball SSI. Why someone chose to void the bets beats me. Shooting themselves in the foot after the stable horse has bolted if you ask me.
282. Peter. Yes very pleased with the Villa today. And also Wales.
More WA straws. Looks like a landslide…
http://www.nwprogressive.org/weblog/2008/02/washington-caucuses-roundup.html
Many thanks for the inquiries about my thriller plot.
As Sean Fear rightly points out, it would be difficult to survive being flayed alive. It would also be quite unlucky if you then went on to be “blood-eagled” - i.e. having your lungs ripped out of your back, as per the Viking sacrificial rite.
So, no, the victim is not one and the same. The poor unfortunate who is flayed is the hapless caretaker of Cranford School, who discovers the gang of psychotic old Etonians ransacking the “Nineveh Porch”. Thwarted in their quest, the gang turn on him, strap him, upside down, between some football goalposts - and flay him.
The dog who eats the flayed skin is, I think, a police dog. Called “Angus”.
I honestly see him taking Maine quite easily - I just think his camp is playing propaganda games - Hillary does not do well in Caucus territory … if this had been a primary I would have said the odds on favorite was Hillary - but not in a caucus - I would say Obama is 60% certain to win … if Hillary makes it - it will be a remarkable feat
290. If you think Obama is 60% certain to win, then surely it won’t be a ‘remarkable feat’ for Clinton to win? She’d win in 2 out of 5 throws if your right.
oops- ‘you’re right’ not ‘your right’
290.. Please rej4sl. We are all old hands here. You don’t have to play the Expectations Game with us QUITE so blatantly.
“he’ll take it quite easily”, “he’s 60% certain to win”, “if Hillary makes it, it will be a remarkable feat”.
A remarkable feat? To win a state right next door to the ones she has already won quite handsomely? In her political homeland?
291. I think it’s now about 90% likely Obama wins the most “straight” elected, pledged delegates… Only a stitch-up can deny him the nomination…
Nice link for WA http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/davidpostman/ … some folks saying FOX has LA as close (which would be a surprise - so not sure i belive that), nothing out of NE but turnout there was massive and it’s a caucus so…
282 etc Don’t the bookies usually have a get out rule for flagrant error in the odds ?
294 - That is a ridiculuous assessment. If that was the case the betting would give Obama an 80% chance of the nomination. Things are favourable for him this month but if Hillary picks up a few wins she could sweep March 4th. I think Obama is the favorite, likely to win the most pledged delegates but his chances are still much lower than 90%.
No point in playing the expectations game on a UK based site (precious little point playing it on any political site, actually, but it seems to pass the time for a lot of people). Betfair makes Obama the favourite, although by too much, I think. Obama certainly won’t ‘easily’ do anything in Maine, but he has a very good shot at really shutting Hillary out tomorrow.
simple - Obama has won 6 out of 7 caucus states so far - he is going to win in NE and WA tonight both caucus states - making it 8 out of 9 - he won more delegates in the other caucus state NV - Hillary just does not do well in caucus states … most commentators are putting this in the Obama column
297. I stand by by prediction. I called Super Tuesday pretty well, if you were around…
I think Obama will emerge from Wisconsin with a total lead of about 70+ “straight” delegates over Hillary..
Stick around…
Interestingly I’ve just read that Tony Rezko is to stand trial on March 3rd, the day before Ohio and Texas. Not likely to be great news for Obama if the race is still live.
any news on the U.S. Virgin Islands any idea who will win in that gem of a place ?
299 Hillary has won the popular vote in caucuses in Nevada, New Mexico (probably) and American Samoa.
NM was not a real caucus - and in NV Obama won the most delegates “_
300 - I think the term ‘pledged’ is more appropriate than ’straight’. I wouldn’t be surprised to see Obama win, but I think it silly to say his chances are above 70%. There are too many unknowns and potential for events to intervene. Also, I wouldn’t worry too much about a a stitch up. I think the superdelegates will support whoever has the most pledged delegates. The only spanner in that works is Michigan and Florida. However, the superdelegates may help Clinton withstand the Obama momentum, as she will maintain a delegate lead as reported by much of the press.
Fact - only 2 sitting Senators have been elected President. Both died in their first term - Harding (1923 heart attack), Kennedy (1963 assassinated).
Let’s keep our fingers crossed whether McCain, Clinton or Obama wins!
“Unlucky” Clinton loses on the toss of a coin…
http://blogs.thenewstribune.com/politics/2008/02/09/in_chehalis_obama_and_clinton_supporters
306. Helpful. If McCain wins, fair chance he’ll die of natural causes. If Obama wins, fair chance he’ll be assassinated, at least according to the British Nobel Prize Winner….
http://www.kutv.com/content/news/watercooler/story.aspx?content_id=a4cde7fe-3b62-4d17-add3-4a1a020d632e
My caucus - brief report.
Already gave you the results, here’s the story:
I arrived a hour early with other volunteers in charge of getting things going in our six-precinct area. Before I got to the location, made sure I had three calculators around my person, also spare black pens and legal pad.
At the site found my caucus was meeting in the basement, good news because we got a separate room that turned out to be the perfect size.
Few minutes I got there, so did the Obmama captain for my precinct, and also the 6 precinct area. Nice kid who lives in my building, a college student.
Then the throngs began arriving. First step of proces was getting people to sign the proper sign-in sheet for their precincts, which is critical to having their preference recorded and counted.
This created a significant bottleneck, but the line kept moving and there was enough space in the main room for voters to hear the general instructions.
Then we broke into our individual precicnt caucuses. After checking to see that everyone was signed in, we proceeded to business. As folks debated the merits of the two candidates, I talleyed the votes with the assistance of our “caucus secretary” who volunteer for that exalted position.
Then the results of the first round were announced. Total of 59 votes, with Obama = 40, Clinton = 14, Undecided = 3, plus 2 people who left the preference line blank. Explained the math, which at that stage yielded 4 delegates for Obama and 1 for Clinton. Except that if the two “blanks” aligned with the three undecideds, then that group would be entitled to 1 delegate and Obama would only get 3 delegates.
So we had more debate, of a pretty high caliber I might say, though I kept my own mouth shut (for a change.
Which proved a smart strategy for my candidate, beecause the results of the 2nd round were:
Obama 44 (+4)
Clinton 13 (-1)
Undecided 1 (-2)
Blank 1 (-1).
Which yielded 4 delegates (and alternates) for Obama, 1 for Clinton.
Then the various factions selected their delegates and alternates, who will go on to the next level of the process, which is the legislative district caucus scheduled for April 5.
Everyone appeared to be in good spirts, regardless of their prefered candidate. The Obmama people were pleased to have done so well, while the Clinton people at least got a delegate, and more importantly had their point of view heard and respected.
Key point: the total Democratic caucus attendence in my precinct represented one-quarter of voter registration. Not Democrats only, but everybody that’s registered. Incredible.
304 - Why wasn’t New Mexico a “real” caucus?
24% of Washington votes in according to CNN and Obama is on 65% to Clinton 33%. That’s huge.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Mexico_Democratic_caucuses%2C_2008
It was a caucus in name only - as far as I recall they said people voted in secret so not caucus and people left when they had voted - so really a primary - weird that Obama won more delegates again on less of the vote
311. Do I win “best pundit” prize again?
See 273…………..
311 - The Clinton spin will be interesting, as she had been in the state a fair bit over the last few days and was being backed by both it’s Senators… having said that if Obama wins anything like that emphatically in WA the margin will trump the expectations game in his favour (as happened in SC)… although results in NE (unlikley), LA or ME (on Sunday) could derail that of course.
Interesting to note that the Obama campaign has already put out a complaint over voting irregularities in LA.
311 That’s beats the prediction I linked to @286 by over 11%! He’s doing well so far.
NPR is reporting that turnout in Louisiana is low, which could be bad news for Obama.
311 - are the figures mentioned for the delegates awarded and not actual votes?
245 - I love this one…
‘It’s striking that the things Obama supporters really, really like about him sometimes leave the rest of us cold. “Then listen as Obama talks of bringing people together to change their own lives.” - does this actually mean anything at all? What would he do or not do to “bring people together to change their lives”?’
This of course sounds exactly the sort of rhetoric that one Anthony Linton Blair used to use.
Most of us (Nick Palmer clearly excepted) thought Blair was open to exactly this criticism.
NE is comming in and showing a big win for Obama (69-31).
WA is looking very strong for Obama as well… all waiting on LA, where IIRC the polls will still be open a while longer.
314 - Her campaign will argue that it was a caucus which benefitted Obama. The SUSA poll demonstrated it yesterday. it had Obama winning 50-45 among primary voters but 63-33 among caucus goers.
The Huckster won all 36 delegates in Kansas today.
Polls close at 2 in Louisiana?
NBC calls Nebraska for Obama… 67-32….
CNN has just give Nebraska to Obama, huge margin.
This is where it gets risky to Clinton, if Obama gets on a roll, by the time they get to Ohio and Texas he could be looking like a winner and Clinton will be on the ropes.
Yup polls close 8 P.M. CT, 9 P.M. ET, or 2AM UK
317 - they are precinct delegates, Marcia
322 - IIRC it’s 8pm Central time… so yeah 2(ish) our time.
320 - True, but the margin and the fact she’s spent a fair bit of time (and more importantly money) there over the last two or three days can only reflect badly for her campaign’s efforts to dissmiss the result, putting more pressure on them to pull out a strong showing in ME… also there is always the delegate margin to consider (will Obama be able to substantially increase his lead this evening?).
325 - Thanks.
312 - very similar to the standard GOP caucus format. Fact is, people had to show up in person (with very few exceptions) over a couple hours, which sounds like a caucus to me.
My updated prediction now is Obama will emerge 90+ “straight” delegates ahead, post Wisconsin….
Likely to be 40-50 ahead going to the convention….
Nebraska - heard on NPR, that after Obama’s visit to Omaha yesterday, the headline in today’s paper was “Obamaha”
318. Well actually Ben, it was quite evident that Tony Blair brought people together because he built a coalition that won Labour three general elections for the first time ever - the first two by record margins.
And you do it by stopping talking solely to the hardcore base of your party; stopping using language that drives people from your party, stopping advocating policies that are unpopular; and setting out a realistic programme that maximises the likelihood of as wide a group of people supporting your party.
This isn’t rocket science, except (it seems) to Clinton supporters, to Conservatives between 1992 and 2005, and Labour activists prior to 1994 (and a fringe minority that persists even now).
yup a firehouse caucus - a bit of a mix between a caucus and a primary but the secret ballot makes a total difference to the result - I can bet if all the caucus were secret ballots then the results would have been a lot closer and maybe a couple of Hillary wins
330. I’m forecasting an Obama lead of over 100, Rod.
324. Yes. Looks like he’s outperformed expectations in WA and NE. Yo-bama!
However, such is the nip-and-tuck nature of this race, it would hardly be surprising if Hillary snuck a win in LA, thus completely nixing any momentum from the other two.
He just needs a win in LA, any kind of win, and he’s on a serious roll.
The news I read is that turnout in LA is low, but with a high proportion of black voters (about half). Make of that what you will.
330. Rod - is that prediction assuming Florida and Michigan will remain excluded?
332 - I think you mean “Dan”, rather than me there.
Thing is, Hillary had to fight for these states. The proportional system means that every state she gives up both piles on delegates for Obama and frees him to fight for delegates in “her” states. It’s done her little good though - Obamamania has taken hold.
Is there a link to a stream from FOX… they seem to be one of the few networks giving the results to night a whole lot of coverage?
337. I do indeed, Ben. Apologies.
338. …Apart from Alabama, where the stupidity of the Voting Rights Act (and the Democratic Party system) gave Clinton the majority of delegates despite losing the state by 14%.
334. I’m being cautious. My central prediction is 110, highest 123, lowest 97. I’m saying 90+….
336. Yes, excluded, depite Clinton’s whingeing….
Washington called for Obama..
342. 67% Obama…
335 To win in LA, Hillary needs as big a margin amongst non-blacks as Obama holds amongst blacks. Yeah right. He wins Louisiana, probably by at least 55-45 (I would say more, but special circumstances apply there which I don’t feel confident of interpreting).
so if LA has a low turn out with 50% blacks I would assume a massive Alabama style victory for Obama - making it 3-0 this evening as expected but very good results all the same - well done Obamatrons
The question in terms of the nomination is the effects of these wins (and those on tuesday that are expected) on later contests in Wisconsin, Ohio and Texas where Clinton leads in the polls. Momentum has not had much of an effect so far, except neither has been on a winning run as long as Obama is likely to get. However I think it is a mistake projecting with any confidence what happens after next tuesday. There is just too little information.
Washington is such a beautiful state…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/23593800@N07/show/with/2251604854/
340. To be fair, Obama got more delegates in Nevada, didn’t he? Despite losing the popular vote? So its swings and wotsits.
341. I simply can’t see the Dems seating the Michigan and Fla delegates, without causing the most enormous civil war and crippling the party. It would be a slap in the face for all the eager young people - and black people - that Obama has recruited.
“We don’t care how you voted, we’re breaking our own rules to make sure Hillary wins”.
I know lefties are dim, but they’re not that dim.
I imagine the powers-that-be will bust a gut to make sure that the Nom is decided without Fla and Mich becoming an issue. They will pressure the losing candidate (in votes, states and delegates) to stand down.
Thing is, I can see Obama standing down in that situation. But Hillary? Hm.
346 - While she’s heavily favoured in both TX and OH, the only recent poll out of WI was ARG, and… well, it’s ARG! WI is very like MN and is also likley to be flooded with Obama folks from IL added to which there is a bigger student population than in MN, it’s a state Obama should do well in… although some credible polling would be interesting.
Must say that I’m gratified that WA State Democrats are reporting 48% of the statewide precinct delegate elections, from hundreds of locations.
Whereas the WA State Republicans are reporting 0% from many fewer sites. Lame.
345. Not quite as expected. Some Clintonista blogs, like myDD, were predicting she could sneak WA.
Clinton spent two days in WA, and had several massive rallies. The size of her defeat must be a bitter pill.
All eyes on New Orleans…
the thing about WI is that it is really two or more states in to one - the parts in the west close to the Twin Cities are an extension of the metropolitan area and would be similar in characteristic whereas parts in the east are totally different …
332 - indeed - but Obama is at least as good as doing that as Blair - Hillary comes over all clunky which is why I found Nick Palmer’s post so extraordinary. Someone who could never criticise Blair, but now supports Hillary attacking Obama for lack of substance…
346. I disagree that momentum hasn’t had much of an effect so far Kieran, unless you’re attributing the Clinton poll collapse in state after state when voters come to actually choose, to something else?
I’d say that Iowa clearly all-but destroyed Clinton’s huge lead in NH; those two results and the Clinton campaign’s OTT reaction to them boosted Obama hugely in SC; and SC propelled him into serious contention on Super Tuesday…and while it’s too early to say, Super Tuesday appears to be cementing him as the front-runner this weekend.
I agree that momentum hasn’t propelled Obama to a landslide win, but given how far he was behind before Christmas, and in national polls is now ahead, I’d call that momentum - wouldn’t you?
349 - Oh, I don’t trust ARG any more than you. They make Zogby look good. SUSA look like they’ve been on the money pretty much again tonight. I just don’t see how anyone can predict the Wisconsin result with any confidence, and we don’t know what effect these wins plus a months campaigning will have in Ohio or Texas. Obama is favourite for the nomination, but he doesn’t have an 90% chance.
She looks beaten on stage in Richmond, VA. Reading from a script, slightly tipsy even?….
Why does the GOP have a Washington caucus today (for 18 delegates) and a Washington primary on 19 February (for 19 more delegates)?
Can people vote twice?
Anyway - Virginia is going to be tight - Hillary is spending tonight’s campaigning in Richmond with Bill speaking somewhere else (I didn’t catch on CNN - but in Virginia).
That suggests they have a chance. So far the Clinton campaign has managed the expectation game very well - the Potomac primary - shoo in for Obama then Clinton wins Virginia - burst bubble.
I’m still confident that Obama will win 7-0 before March 4 so I already have 2 in the bag only 5 more to go
353. Oh sure, I agree that Nick’s criticism is bizarre, but then anyone who’s backing Clinton on the basis that she’s electable needs to lie down in a dark room until they come to their senses.
340. Yes, he did, Sean - but he didn’t lose Nevada by anything like 14% - it was close: any win of the size of Barack’s in Alabama shouldn’t give him a minority of delegates. But because the VRA requires districts to be gerrymandered to pile the black vote into one majority district, which I suspect Obama won by about 85%, but probably lost the other six districts narrowly, and because the electoral system used by the Democrats awards delegates on the basis of CDs, he got well and truly stuffed.
And Clinton ended up with equal numbers of Iowa delegates too (and more than Edwards) despite finishing third there.
354 - I think Obama’s rise can be explained more by greater exposure, and greater examination of the choices as the election approached. Much of Hillary’s early leads can be attributed to higher name recognition, she was the establishment choice. Clearly Iowa had an effect for Obama, and NH helped stabilise Clinton while SC boosted Obama. What I’m contesting is the size of these effects. I don’t think it inevitable that these wins will propel Obama to the the nomination, but it obviously helps him.
As I said I do think Clinton has to pick up some wins before Ohio and Texas. Namely Maine, Hawaii and Wisconsin, or at least 2 of those.
This is a good graphical summary of where we stand tonight, being updated very promptly. Obama leading 3-1 in pledged delegates so far in WA and NE. I really hope at this point that Obama supporters realise that if Hillary wins on pledged delegates (excluding FL and MI), she’ll have won a very hard battle and will fully deserve the nomination.
CNN Exit Poll - Obama 53% Clinton 45%
59-28 Obama
Obama, in the exit poll, does slightly better with women. Not sure if that will hold.
CNN exit poll indicates that Obama’s won the majority of the female vote in LA - by a LARGER share than he’s won amongst men!
361. Problem is, Obama is (usually) winning massively where he wins, Clinton (usually) winning narrowly where she wins…
The math(s) favour(s) Obama…
355 - I think your about right, WI is a hard state to call but i’d have thought it more likley to plum for Obama than Clinton… then again that’s gut as much as anything.
In the race as a whole I’m not sure Obama is favourite yet… Clinton is struggling but doing just enougth to hold on (as she did on ST - though a big part of that was the role of absentee ballots), her campaign must hope it isnt heading for a situation where Obama’s “tide” (if that is indeed what it is) catches them (it has already done so in terms of the national polls, while it washed over them long ago in terms of fundrasing)… a big plus for Obama is that Hillary Clinton could never credible claim the title of “under-dog”.
the major problem with this nomination is that Obama and Clinton are so close that it is really impossible for one of them to drop out - even if Hillary loses the next 7 we have 3 big ones coming up OH,TX,PA and it will need to be decided by then - I don’t want it to limp on until the convention in Denver - I don’t mind who wins at this point - but I still prefer Hillary ..
367 - But Clinton is winning bigger states with more delegates. Also, after this weekend the caucuses will be pretty much over which is where the massive wins have generally occurred. Obama is clearly the favourite now but count out the Clintons at your peril.
361. I know the polls show Clinton winning Wisconsin, but given the huge uncommitted vote in Michigan when she was the only candidate, the fact it borders Illinois, and Obama’s strength across the mid west, I don’t think she’ll win there. And for similar reasons, I think her lead in Ohio’s soft too.
Maybe Maine (she should win there at least). Texas probably goes Clinton given hispanic vote, but then again New Mexico…
re 360 Remember that Nick backed Brown for Labour leader and Hain for deputy
Huckabee slightly ahead in the CNN exit poll, stake your bets.
Now that is a contest I would look forward to
Huckster v Obama/Clinton
357 - WA has both precinct caucuses and preference primary, with GOP using each process to allocate half of state’s pledged delegates to GOP national convention.
Both parties dislike the preference primary, but the WA Secretary of State is a Republican and so the party trys not to embarras him.
And yes, voters can vote in their precinct caucus AND in the preference primary. Democrats aren’t using the primary for any delegate alloction. But I’m still voting twice for Obama.
Huckabee - 44%
McCain - 42%
Paul - 6%
Romney - 6%
CNN poll (although they always leave you to calculate it yourself!)
Obama is behind in the VERY early data from LA. Another nailbiter?
He needs LA to ram home the momentum.
Louisiana again shows that in the South there is a much starker racial divide than in the North. According to CNN exit Clinton won the White vote 69-28 and Obama won the Black vote 86-14.
Didn’t Louisiana Republicans have a caucus a few days ago too - Ron Paul did very well (second, I think)..? Why are they having a caucus and a Primary?
Also it is the older voters that are keeping Clinton competitive. In Louisiana 37% of voters are over 60 and go for Clinton 57-40, while under 30s only make up 8% and gor for Obama 65-35. This is, I think the oldest electorate yet in the primaries. From CNN exits.
377 - Won the exit poll and so far we’ve had 2/3000+ precincts report in… exit polls will probably be inacurate to a greater or lesser extent (and that’s probably more the case somwhere like LA than in other states) but i wouldnt read much into such small returns. Either way it’s going to be a pretty stark break down in the result there…
371 - I’d expect Texas to go with the Democrat machine - but Obama has to be competitive in Ohio - because if he isn’t in the Primaries he’s not going to be in the General - and Ohio has to be Dem if McCain is going to be beaten to the Whitehouse.
I make Obama the winner in LA, 57-42. He can afford a black turnout as low as 37%.
380. Don’t forget older white Louisiana women (like Kathleen Babineaux Blanco) tend to blub at inappropriate moments, so little wonder they plump for the cry-baby candidate…
Louisiana - Romney(!) running 2nd with 1,500 votes counted:
McCain 41, Romney 25, Huckabee 24
380. To be precise, it is old stupid sad racist people who are keeping Clinton competitive. Lonely lesb1an spinsters who didn’t even make college etc.
Young funky cool smart nice happy caring sharing people go for Obama.
Hooray. He’s catching up.
The CNN exit, as posted by ukpaul, has Obama up 53-45. That is right at the edge of it’s margin of error, as it was based on 700 odd respondents. In other words the chances of a Clinton win are small (below 10%).
382. Disagree Dan. I mean I think Obama will win Ohio in the general, but it’s not going to be a critical state next time because with Obama as nominee the electoral map gets completely redrawn: I very much doubt McCain does well in the west, mid-west or (much of) the south (outside Florida); whereas he may, oddly enough, be strongest in the north east.
I’ve just got 40 on Betfair for Hillary in Louisiana - which is silly money…
386 - Well it’s lucky for the Conservatives that there are quite a lot of old stupid sad racist people in this country who provide them with a plenty of votes.
The early results in LA could be absentee ballots of course… Edwards looks very high and Romney is very high in the GOP tally, then again, as i say, it’s very early and it could just be the distortions a small number of returns thus far.
386 A terrible exaggeration. She also gets gays, Hispanics, Orthodox Jews, reflexive feminists, and, in caucuses, new boyfriends.
391. I was half-joking about the “racist” bit, then I found this quote, from the CNN Louisiana exit poll, on the DailyKos:
“10% of white Clinton voters [in Louisiana] admitted that race was the most important aspect of their decision.”
WA State GOP precinct caucuses
16% of precincts reporting
McCain = 27%
Huckabee = 26%
Paul = 21%
Other = 26%
Am guessing “other” includes uncommitted.
394 That’s a poll result that raises the question: “for how many was race the second most important aspect?” And so on.
390 50 was available for Hillary on Louisiana just before polls closed….
http://www400.sos.louisiana.gov:8090/cgibin/?rqstyp=elcms2&rqsdta=020908
This site seems very slightly ahead of CNN
389 - I hope so. My money is on Obama and the Republicans. If the Dems are stupid enough to pick Hillary - MacCain wins. Otherwise Obama (or Edwards) should win.
393. Hell-o. Hu-mour. D-errr.
another site giving the result from LA - you can see who the ‘missing’ votes from the CNN site are for
http://www400.sos.louisiana.gov:8090/cgibin/?rqstyp=elcms2&rqsdta=020908
Never mind the Democrats lads and lasses, Huckabee looks alive and very well….
397, You can still get 50 on betfair, or lay Barack at 1.02. I wouldn’t, but I don’t disagree that it’s marginally worth a punt.
397 - unbelievable…
Edwards is getting 10%+ of the vote in Louisiana. And people say Southerners are stubborn.
Based on Louisiana parish returns, clear that absentees are major part of the very early vote returns, though many parishes, including Orleans (city of New Orleans) or East Baton Rouge (city of BR & suburbs)
400 I think I out-deadpanned you there, apologies.
404. Its typical Dan, the exchanges have been showing Obama walkovers in many of the next few races after Super Tuesday for days.
I’m delighted to say the hype is so big its now rarely challenged by many punters
obama 12% ahead in LA
Quite an interesting discussion on CNN about Florida and Michigan for the Dems, they are saying that there might be caucus’s in each of those states before the Convention, as it’s too expensive and time consuming to run another Primary.
Boy, if that were true the Clinton would love that.
407. You did indeed. Kudos and Respect! lol.
The racist stat is quite depressing though - 10% of Clinton voters admitting Barack’s race is a factor in not voting for him.
In the South there obviously isn’t a Bradley Effect - cause people just come right out and say it.
Obama pulling head anyway. So the sad lonely stupid racist lesb1an spinsters can go fish.
Someone is very confident of Barack winning - 1.01 to lay nearly two grand.
This is turning into a bad night for McCain. He got hammered in Kansas, is struggling in Washington and looks like losing in Louisiana. He’ll still get the nomination but it doesn’t bode well for him in November. Although, arguably caucuses distort things as they are skewed to the most committed supporters.
obama 14% ahead in LA
If Obama wins by single digits in Louisiana does that mean Clinton made a strategic error focussing on Washington?
cnnpolitics.com reporting that Louisiana exit poll is 60% female and 68% over the age of 45. Now assuming that’s reflecting the overall voters - that’s Hillary’s demographic?
411. They’ll also be vegetarians, so no fish.
obama 16% ahead in LA
After 7,000 counted:
McCain 39, Huckabee 36, Romney 16
One theory I’m reading is that Clinton’s Texas Firewall strategy is a load of cobblers.
She simply didn’t expect to have to campaign beyond Super Tuesday - so she didn’t have a post-Super Tuesday strategy. The Ohio Texas thingy is just something they made up in Clinton Central on the back of a fag packet last week.
It makes sense. Would also explain why she totally ran out of cash - she didn’t expect to need money after Super Tuesday either. So now she’s gone all Giuliani out of Desperation - “I’ll win the big states”. She has no choice.
Heh.
413. It is, and those who backed Huck over the last few days, of which i have to say there werent many on this forum might get some value out of it.
420. She was only 10% ahead in TX in the last pre-Super Tuesday poll…. That’s as much use as a chocolate fireguard….
Clinton should not win LA,in fact she shouldnt be close so if she gets with yards, its not bad.
415 Kieran
Its all about the delegates and congressional districts though - she went where she had the best chance of getting incremental delegates - eastern Washington State. She probably knew that she would get hammered in New Orleans and Seattle, and do OK in the rest of Louisiana.
Clinton crashing on intrade. Down to 38% now.
Huck now leading 41-38.
420 - I’d agree with that. However that doesn’t mean that Texas and Ohio aren’t much more favourable terrain for her than Washington and Louisiana.
Obama 53 to 37 with over 10% counted now.
425 - She has been in the 40-44 range for much of today.
I’m sorry but this is spinpiffle. She can’t keep losing state after state by double-digit margins and claim its “not bad”. She’s losing in Nebraska and Washington by 30%!
She has lost three states today quite comprehensively - it seems. In her heart of hearts I’m sure she hoped to take at least one of these three, or at least run Obama very very close in WA or LA.
She hasn’t. It’s bad.
426. Where?
425 So the results tonight were already priced in on Betfair, but not Intrade? Curious.
427. But if she doesn’t win BIG there she’s toast. Ekeing out single-digit wins insn’t enough.
Presumably you also caught the Cleveland Plain Dealer endorsement of Obama earlier….
obama 17% ahead in LA
430. No one expected her to win any of todays states, now put away your pom poms.
431 Huck leading 44-38 cnn.com
New thread - “Significant Saturday” - the thread continues
Are there any more Medium-Sized-Toozdays or Saddrrdays or Thrrzdays or whatever? Or are the remaining primaries all in little dribs and drabs?
is this Obamatron Spin Network on here tonight Hillary was not expected to win any of WA LA NE ME or HI MD VA DC or WI
435. Go read the Hilldroid blogs. They were bigging up her chances in WA.
She campaigned there for two days. Big big rallies (by her standards). She had the two WA senatosr endorsing her. She must have hoped she would - at least - come within striking distance of Obama, and mop up some delegates to boot.
In Washington she is losing by… 67% to 32%. It’s a walloping. It’s bad.
Just found Louisiana county populations, here are all >100k:
.Orleans Parish 454,863
.Jefferson Parish 452,824
.East Baton Rouge Parish 411,417
.Caddo Parish 251,309
.St. Tammany Parish 220,295
.Lafayette Parish 197,390
.Calcasieu Parish 185,419
.Ouachita Parish 148,237
.Rapides Parish 128,462
.Livingston Parish 109,206
.Terrebonne Parish 107,491
.Tangipahoa Parish 106,502
.Bossier Parish 105,541
That lot total just under 2/3 of the 2005 pop. Yes, that is pre-hurricane, but at least it gives some vague idea.
438.
12/02 MD, VA, DC; 168 delegates…
19/02 HI, WI; 94 delegates…
4/3 OH, RI, TX, VT; 380 delegates…
6/5 IN, NC; 157 delegates…
20/5 OR, KY; 95 delegates…
3/6 MT, SD; 29 delegates…
441 andrew
The most recent estimates for Orleans parish are 223,000. Shows the impact of Katrina….
Please use new thread