PSO Glasgow poll had no “certainty to vote” question
July 22nd, 2008
Is this why Labour was so far ahead?
After my moan this morning about Progressive Scottish Opinion, the pollster that carried out last week’s Scottish Daily Mail Glasgow East poll, the information has been released to me within the past hour and two things stand out:-
Although respondents were asked how they voted at the general election this does not appear to have been used to weight the sample. The stated weightings were that it should be “be representative of the Scottish population by age, gender, social grade and regions.”
No certainty to vote question was asked - something that is standard practice amongst many pollsters who weight the response so that the views of those saying 10 out of 10 are regarded as being more important than those who don’t.
This element can be critical especially as declared Labour supporters in other surveys are much less certain to vote than other parties. Ipsos-Mori, it will be recalled, only include in their headline numbers those who are 100% certain and this has the affect in almost every survey of reducing Labour shares by a considerable amount.
So from the PSO figures we read that the number saying they will vote Labour on Thursday is a staggering 68% of the number who declared that they had voted for the party in May 2005. I don’t find that plausible.
By-election betting - live latest prices
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
Last time I saw Dobson he was campaigning at Crewe, trying to defend the labour toff attacks.
Re-post from end of previous thread..
Can anyone confirm?
Rumours (in the Scottish Sun I’ve been told, but it’s not online) that not only was David Marshall’s front room his constituency office staffed by wife/daughter (delete as applicable) but it was also where his daughter conducted two property businesses.
If true it shows a sound grasp of the need to reduce business overheads in these trying economic times. Worth an Enterprise Award?
Leaving aside the possibility that people are answering how they voted in 2007 not 2005 , recent ICM , Comres and Populus national polls also give a similar 60% or so of 2005 Labour voters saying they will vote Labour now
Is there anywhere in the data that they have provided anything that either proves or disproves the story that some of the polling they did was in the wrong constituency?
2. b
Very good. Just makes the matter of the half million in expenses that harder to explain.
http://adamsmithwasasocialist.blogspot.com/2008/07/maggies-out.html
has that the picture of Gordon Brown with Margaret Thatcher is now on the streets of Glasgow East. Should improve the Tory vote.
Mike- good spot. Well that poll was about as useful a a chocolate teapot then.
Maybe labour are and should be the favourites but people backing them at 1/3 on are a bit silly.
Nearly as stupid as those real chumps who put a 100 squidlies on the SNP at evens. Doh!
4 The strange thing is if that rumour was true ( which I doubt ) , the polling in the wrong constituency would in fact have boosted the SNP figure and reduced the Labour figure .
just watching brown give his statement in the house. has he ever told the truth about anything? The man is a liar of the first order, he NEVER tells the truth about anything and will be voted out as a result.
Well Mikes thread certainly stirred a quick frenzy of activity on Betfair , I managed a couple of quich consecutive lays on Labour and the SNP and both increased my green figure on Labour and reduced my red figure on SNP .
Time calls the election the way they see it:
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1825337,00.html
9. Hmm - Labour still 1.34 though - so not a seismic shift.
Is Yougov due for a Glasgow east poll?
Whilst we are on the subject of amateur or misleading polling, did anyone else see this in yesterday’s METRO newspaper?
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=226840&in_page_id=34
It is their ‘award-winning’ Urban Life poll, which works as a panel of 4-5,000 18-44 year old readers of METRO.
It reported that the Convservatives were on 37%, LibDems 16% and Labour in third place on 13%.
Maybe there is some logic to restricting a poll to readers of a free newspaper, only in cities, within a fixed age range.
Personally, I think it undermines serious opinion polling to have these rogue or amateur polls published in newspapers. Given Sunday Times’ use of MRUK (who are ‘joining’ the BPC), this useless Scottish poll, the continued use of BPIX by the Mail on Sunday, and now METRO making up its own in-house numbers, I’m not sure that publishable political opinion polling shouldn’t be licensed.
11 No it is drifting back to the pre thread position .
re 14. I rate it as about evens for for both the SNP and Labour and have just bet nearly £300.
12: Not likely, you do the math. There’s about a quarter of a million people on the YouGov panel and 650 or so constituencies.
I cannot think who in their right mind would put money on Labour at 1/3. I think they’ll just hold on, but if it’s a majority of over 2000, that would be a great result.
There is value in the SNP price for sure, and even if you are a Labour supporter, this will be something of a lottery.
Anyone got any insight as to why people are backing Labour at 1/3?
13 That poll would leave “others” on 34% - just 3% behind the Tories! WTF??
Still - Labour on 13% Huh-huh-huh - but don’t tell Gabble. He’s been all bouyant and bouncy the last few days. Bless.
18 - Exactly, it’s junk polling, but there will be a lot of people who have never heard of the British Polling Council (I hadn’t until I started coming to pb.com) who will not realise that this poll is completely invalid.
If something is not done to force newpapers to only publish political polls that meet the BPC standard, I worry that this will become the norm, and we will see deliberate manipulation of the public mood through malevolent distortion of polling. If that becomes prevalent and lucrative, it could undermine good polling in the longer term
17 Who in their right mind would put money in Labour at 1/3 - those who have knowledge of the postal votes ?????
18 I would guess that part of that 34% are Don’t Knows or Would Not Votes .
@19:
Morus, it’s not like “malevolent distortion of polling” is something constrained to non-BPC polls, or free rags.
Hey betters,
Corruption scandal hits Glasgow East
http://tinyurl.com/6xxt34
Watching Brown deny an inquiry into Iraq is a shameless sight. When will Labour mugs understand that nobody is going into the voting booth and put their X next to this clown?
17…greed and fear drives markets!
22 - e.g. the government’s attempts at “representing” public opinion re 42 days detention
Ladbrokes have just shifted their turnout odds - not sure whether they’ve changed all of them, but 20-24.99% is now 12/1, in from 20/1; I think a few of the others have also become a bit less gung-ho. Must all be down to my £4 bet at 20/1 last night (converted a free £2 on Ladbrokes Games section into £4 with a lucky spin on the wheel, and decided I might as well chance my hand…).
Last prices matched on Betfair - Lab 1.41
SNP 3.05
Always look at the last trade - not that which is on offer,
23. It is the story referred to at 2. No mention of the half million in expenses though, so still quite kind to him.
20 In the comments page in the the Herald yesterday a poster said the SNP were ahead in the postal votes by 57, If its that close Labour are in trouble
23. From what I have seen, the reasons for picking Margaret Curran - the 4th or 5th choice - still have not made the MSM. (the story being that the other choices are all up before the standards commission on corruption).
It certainly looks too close too call, which suggests SNP are the value currently. I’ve laid Labour on Betfair at 2/5. 9/4 available to back SNP with William Hill and Sky Bet
22 - No, but BPC membership and the expectations of that (releasing data in full etc) is a good minimum standard from which to start.
It’s been good as a voluntary thing up until now, but I wonder if the time has come to insist upon it.
29
Yeh, the idea of it being a retirement on ‘health grounds’ has kept the lid on that - it would be bad form to capitalise on conjecture in connection with a man with health problems. Although The Herald (Labour’s pals) has tried to play this down as just another bit of by-election rough-house I suspect this new development will mean open season for the next 48 hours. The lid is off.
- “be representative of the Scottish population by age, gender, social grade and regions”
Errr…. should it not be weighted to be representative of the Glasgow East demographics, not the whole of Scotland!!! (There is a massive difference.)
And that word “regions” looks a tad odd in the context of a single-constituency poll, to say the least!
What a bunch of total amateurs. Are the Market Research Society reading this?
What are the formal rules, if any, allowing the second placed candidate to demand a recount in a Parliamentary election? Any such recount, either way, could give rise to some real betting excitement on the night.
Any credible poll released before Thursday showing a still useful Labour lead of say 6%-7% or more would be unlikely, IMO, to move the Glasgow East betting odds to any significant extent at this late stage.
27 HG, obviously Ladbrokes have been reading my pieces on PB
Every TV report on Glasgow East now commenting on the place being deserted. Any PBers canvassing today?
37 Maybe, Easterross, although their betting odds don’t seem to reflect your views.
36 - Any candidate may demand a recount. It’s up to the Returning Officer to decide whether to grant it or not.
Have been in Glasgow East this morning, the SNP are on the doors and in the streets and have been given a massive lift with the story about David Marshall and his daughter and the infamous front room finally hitting the streets in Scotland’s biggest selling newspaper!
I think this combined with the Welfare reforms make the SNP look highly attractive at whatever odds.
39 Thanks, archroy, I do recall recounts being requested by candidates securing just below 5% of the vote, in an attempt to save their deposit.
BBC: “Light showers” for Glasgow on Thursday.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/weather/5day.shtml?id=1946
23. Well, that explains why Labour didn’t take the same approach as in C&N, where they had the MP’s daughter as the candidate.
Off-topic but almost on-site, does anyone have any views on the best places to bet on the Mercury Music Prize? Do Betfair or any such markets feature it?
@41:
That happened in one of the London Assembly seats, didn’t it? Bloody annoying.
39 You are correct and generally there are 2 scenarios when a Returning Officer will always agree.
Firstly when the difference between the winning candidate and runner up is either less than 1000 votes or smaller than the number of spoiled ballots.
Secondly where a candidate has achieved more than roughly 4.5% and wants a check to see if he/she has in fact held the deposit.
It is quite bizarre because although the 1987 election was not remotely close, the major issue in Glasgow East, both Shettleston and Provan, was the announcement just before the election by Margaret Thatcher’s Social Security Secretary that the then form of social security was to be abolished and replaced by Income Support.
I well remember a “lonely” evening in the Church hall of the main Roman Catholic church in the constituency for a hustings where 200+ constituents were baying for my blood because of the impending change. Every single question from the floor was directed firstly at me. I seem to remember ending the evening by joining David Marshall in doing “Billy Connelly impressions”.
Unless the good citizens of Glasgow East have changed much, James Parnell’s announcement yesterday could cost Labour very precious votes.
Mike are we going to have a late night thread on Thursday while waiting for the result?
re 46. We always have a thread as we wait for the result.
The best of all was Dunfermline which I reproduced in my book - The Political Punter
37 - having a break, we are out in force again today and reception on the doorsteps from those who might vote encouraging.
47 Easterross - you have invested in a copy of Mike’s book I take it?
Mike do you know whether you folks in England are going to see the by-election programme we are getting on BBC Scotland?
Marcia, roughly what % of doors are remaining unanswered/sign of people away on holiday
Grrr Mike, you spooked the market
People not keen to lay me 3.5 anymore, and only nibbles at 3.45…..
37 Marcia
Encouraging for who?
48 Canvasspeak:
“encouaging” - disappointing
“very encouraging” - as expected
“ecstatic” - encouraging
@50:
You can get BBC Scotland via the Intertubes, and Sky. So anyone outside your blessed homeland can tune in if they wish.
@54:
“Being worshipped as a God amongst men” = Broxtowe
Latest Rasmussen Tracker :
McCain 46% .. Obama 46%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
56 Very good!
51 - quite a lot - only a third in at any time
53 - same party as you
54 - use a dictionary
“I think this combined with the Welfare reforms make the SNP look highly attractive at whatever odds.”
God, how depressing. In other words, “Don’t vote for Labour because their policies have historically failed you but vote for us instead because we’ll continue their policies.”
Why are the SNP building up their prospects in Glasgow East rather than downplaying expectations?
56. Oh shut up.
By the way, my tip for the Mercury music prize is Elbow. You can get 6/1 with Hills, I don’t expect that to last long.
now going out again - will report back tonight
61 Socrates - Coming from such a long way back, I think the SNP are still in the business of convincing voters they are in with a real chance. The downplaying strategy comes into effect if/when they actually do have a real chance.
61 Socrates, they have been doing exactly the opposite for several days. suggesting they will do well, it will be close etc but not saying theya re definitely going to win only that they hope to win.
they want to encourage their waiverers to vote and Labour’s to stay at home, that is of course if they are not in Blackpool.
64. Interesting, thanks. Seeing that the election mainly depends on Labour people staying home, you’d think they would want to not scare the horses.
Incidentally, a preview of what Evan Bayh could be like as VP, for those who don’t know him:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fk-m6uJt5cI
65 Where were you getting for your Wales seat numbers from?
60. Or to put it another way, don’t vote for a party who will treat you as criminals in need of punishment for having been out of work for more than a year.
People in Middle England are famous for voting in their own individual self-interest, why shouldn’t people in the lower social classes in Scotland do the same? The irony is that many of the people who remain slavishly loyal to Labour in places like Glasgow East are still labouring under the antiquated delusion that the party still stands for people like them. I think all the SNP would need to do is persuade people to actually read through the last three Labour manifestos, and ask them if that’s the same party they thought they were voting for.
66. It shouldn’t be too difficult to persuade Labour supporters to stay at home at the present time.
67 Punter, from the numerous nay endless debates on here for most of the past 3 months about each seat in Wales.
66 He’s certainly impressive at reading an autocue and at 5.6-1 on Betfair, he’s joint second favourite to be Obama’s VP pick.
His having been virtually unheard of as a Veep candidate until the last few days, this just shows what a crazy market this is to “invest” in.
We’ve just released our Mercury Music Prize book at ladbrokes. One of my favourite betting events of the year. They will be up on site very shortly.
I think the hype is only on the blogs and forums. This is responding to news articles and not really anything to do with the leadership. Although, if the SNP sense a swing and that they are winning then ramping it up only intensifies that trend. I think it takes a fever-pitch atmosphere to turn around a seat like this. Voters will want to jump on the bandwagon.. If the SNP narrowly lose then they can always talk about how close it was and how if Labour hadn’t held this during the holidays they would have won etc.
I think it would really make more sense for Labour to manage expectations; Brown badly needs to spin this to minimise damage and maximise positives..
30: Hmm, highly sceptical about that precision. For those who’ve not been to a PV opening, the way it works in Broxtowe is that the staff rapidly open and check the ballot papers, placing the actual votes face down. Party representatives do their best to gauge trends from glimpses. Unless the procedure in Glasgow is very different, it’s implausible to say you’ve counted them and the lead is 57.
40: At whatever odds, eh? OK, the Broxtowe cats are interested. Let’s make the SNP 100-1 on. How much would you like to bet?
70 Wondered if you had inside information you wished to share. It’s a little strong possibly to call 5 Tory gains a certainty. Better to say good chance while 3 are nailed on. I do wonder though whether Labour HQ would class Newport West as a Labour loss or gain rather like Wilson once said about a Labour MP.
62. We’re going out 8/1 Elbow.
@76:
And 1/4 on for ARSE.
71. Well he’s been on my list I’ve been announcing for a while. I posted a couple threads today that Obama will be making his choice public in about ten days, so get your trading in order by the time he comes back from Europe.
FYI - oil off $4.5 now - lots of stops being triggered - good news for the front end of STG rates curve too potentially….
78. Yes, we’ve made him 4/1 fav at ladbrokes. He was on one of the talk shows at the weekend and pretty much confirmed he was being vetted and would accept. A safe pair of hands from the right part of the country.
80. He would anger the activist base though, with his connections to the DLC and his FISA vote. I have a few other thoughts, but maybe I’ll mention them when shadsy’s not here
@81:
I would have thought his FISA vote would be moot, since The Chosen One also voted for it.
79- There is something very wrong when I look at the oil price and think “Wow, its below $130!”, when I should be thinking “JESUS TAPDANCING CHRIST OIL IS CLOSE TO $130!”
Shadsy, apologies if this is ‘taking liberties’, but could you drop me an e-mail when the Mercury stuff is up on your site? I’m in the midst of work and can’t really afford to keep checking (partially as I’m so easily distracted). Many thanks if so and never mind if not possible: julian – at – orangebyname.co.uk
Government leads in India confidence vote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/7519860.stm
82. No, the problem with Obama was that he voted for the whole bill despite it having the telecom amnesty in it. Obama voted for an amendment to strip the telecom amnesty from the bill, although he didn’t carry out his promise to filibuster if the amendment failed.
Bayh however actually voted against the amendment, and thus for the amnesty. It’s widely assumed those who did this are because they are beholden to teleco lobbyists (or frightened of them). There’s no other reason to do it.
@86:
He’s a USian politician. If he’s not beholden to Big Telco, it’d be Big Oil, or Big Pharma, or Big Content or BigSoft…
You don’t get to be a politician in the corporate republic unless you accept their special brand of massive corruption as a normal, legitimate part of the democratic process.
76. Great odds, I might open an account just for this.
8/1 is very good odds for Elbow. I’d also recommend getting on Laura Marling at 10/1 at Blue Square again, while you can.
What was Martin Day on about yesterday?
83. A falling oil price is not good news for the SNP, is it?
O/T Mike I think I have a post blocked in the spam trap and I don’t know why…
90 - Think the question can be shortened to “What was Martin Day on?”
90. Absolutely anything except the ICM poll which, on a Baxter calculation, showed Sheffield Hallam as a Lib Dem hold
@93:
We can do better than that. How about:
“Martin Day: What?”
or maybe just:
“?”
“83. A falling oil price is not good news for the SNP, is it?
by Alan J July 22nd, 2008 at 3:49 pm ”
Eh, the calculations that Scotland will give more than 20B pounds from oil this year to the treasury were based on an oil price of 120GBP per barrel. At least I think that was the price - certainly less than the current price.
Poor Martin. It’s nice that people laid off him rather than laid into him.
Why would Karadic want to disguise himself as Rowan Williams?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7519039.stm
93. I think that it is pretty clear that Martin Day was having a very public nervous breakdown yesterday. I sincerely hope that Mike Smithson has had the common sense to block his ip adress after that stream of foul-mouthed ethnic denigrations.
@99:
Lulz. I missed all this! Which thread was he on. I want to go and see the incomprehensible one implode before my eyes.
Today haas been an unedifying Brownie midday.
The man himself muttered about a ‘changed’ mission and possible withdrawal of troops from Iraq by 2009. He did not mention his earlier promise during the last Tory conference, nor did he tell us directly that all troops coming out of Iraq will all hot foot it to Afghanistan.
Then his protege Balls talked to his name by claiming the SATS fiasco is nothing to do with him, despite him being the minister in charge. Its all the fault of the quango for qualifications and the company doing the work.
What was he going to do about it? Well nothing when you boil it down, because it is all so sensitive he daren’t interfere.
Are you lucky in Scotland, that you don’t have Balls served up to you like this. A better argument for England having charge of its own affairs is difficult to find. Balls will be kept in place by the government majority, most of whom have no electoral connection to the parents of the kids effected.
re Martin Day - poor guy. He’s out of work and yesterday someone broke into his car and stole his Satnav. That must really get to you and perhaps explains some of his invective.
Just got 9-4 on the SNP with Hills. Good price.
Martin,
It was two threads before this one. Do a search on his name and you’ll see all his posts. I’m wondering if the thread might end up as evidence in a trial or something..
101. Brown is obviously hedging his bets on Iraq. He is trying to maintain the pretence of an ‘independent’ foreign policy but his policy in Iraq will be determined by the result of the US election in November.
“re Martin Day - poor guy. He’s out of work and yesterday someone broke into his car and stole his Satnav. That must really get to you and perhaps explains some of his invective.
by Mike Smithson July 22nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm”
Now you know why people in poor areas like Glasgow East are under tremedous stress, have mental health problems and problems with alcohal…
99: sorry I missed it now
Free the Sat Nav 1 - unban Martin Day !
86- Whatever Bayh’s percieved weaknesses may be, whether on the FISA bill or anything else you may point to, he would be a solid choice for Obama when viewed from a larger perspective. Obama would be wise to choose him if only for the fact that he is perhaps the most calm, composed, reasonable Democrat among the credible contenders for the VP spot. It would be very difficult for Republicans to make much headway attempting to negatively characterise him. Whenever I’ve seen Bayh speak, I must admit it is hard not to warm to him simply because he has such a decent and pleasant demeanor and presentation. My guess is that, if he is the choice, the Republicans will basically ignore him and attempt to train their all of their fire on Obama instead. Bayh simply does not present a good target, which makes him a perfect VP choice.
Here is an interesting Vanity Fair article by former Bill Clinton Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers explaining how one-sided the media has been, and presumably will continue to be, in the presidential election:
http://www.vanityfair.com/online/politics/2008/07/is-the-media-trying-to-elect-obama.html
For those of you who are still hesitating to place your hard-earned betting dollars (or pounds) on Obama, keep in mind what the combined effect will be of a 3 to 1 Obama spending advantage and an overwhelmingly pro-Obama press corps. It would take the political equivalent of a miracle for McCain to win in spite of all of the hurdles and obstacles he faces in this contest. Poor Senator McCain will be a broken (and broke) man by November.
“Poor Senator McCain will be a broken (and broke) man by November.”
You say that as if it were a bad thing…
103, Mike S Have you seen my post in the spam trap?
103. Mike
Jeepers, that 9/4 at Hills looks bloomin tempting. I am almost tempted to bung that 50 quid bet on now after all. Decisions, decisions…..
109. The media has had more airtime tilted towards Obama because he’s a more charismatic person to cover. It was precisely the same in 2000 with Bush charming them and Gore being the boring policy-wonk. But it’s not all positive traffic. The media went through the ridiculous madrassa story, always mention the spurious connection to William Ayers, went wall to wall on Reverend Wright, and even covered Pfelzer (who Obama didn’t even know!) in large amounts. McCain hasn’t had as much good coverage, but he hasn’t had much bad stuff either. Terrorist fist-jab anyone?
And I don’t think the anger-the-base stuff will matter much for the election, and I think Bayh is a likely candidate. He just seems a bit, well, boring.
FFS!
Neue-Arbeiter have arrested Christian Bale!!! [Sky News]
What is wrong with our [sic] government? Obviously we [English] must carry the cloud that is Socialism to protect the One-eyed Jonah and his sponsor Radovan Karadzic.
I’ll leave it to Guido’s folks to administer justice…!
re 109 FISA bill? Have I stumbled into my rowing forum by mistake?
metcheck.com (thanks Chris A!) are more optimistic about the Thursday weather in Glasgow. Should have stopped raining by time polling stations open:
http://www.metcheck.com/V40/UK/FREE/today.asp?zipcode=Glasgow
@104:
OMFG.
Martin Day: PBC’s own borderline-unhinged caped crusader. I can only assume he was high on booze/adrenaline/crack at the time.
If he wrote that sober, then frankly… I’m scared.
116. I think the weather thing is overplayed - surely effects both sides +/- 1% ?
85 The excitement in India last week in the press was over whether the 6 MP’s convicted of murder and violence would support the Government. They had been freed to take part in the vote.
We talk of Conway and his son, the Winterton/Keen/Balls housing allowances - in India they have for example:
Mohammed Shahabuddin serving a life term for murdering a political opponent and facing 40 other cases of murder, abduction and extortion.
Rajesh Ranjan given a life term for murdering a trade unionist.
Between them, both men face close to 100 criminal charges but the Government was actively seeking their support.
In addition one MP has got Lucknow airport re-named after his father and a host of other deals have been made.
Though even the Indian Government might have blanched at £2.7bn tax rebate to try to win a by-election.
@118:
Because Labour are evil, their voters catch fire when they get wet. Like the wicked witch of the west.
113- You’re right that Obama has nothing to fear from his base in choosing Bayh, and there is much to be gained from choosing someone so “boring” in a pleasant way as Bayh is (kind of like soft, pleasing background music in a movie… does what it’s supposed to do by not getting in the way).
The terrorist fist jab business is both hilarious and fascinating; it is a case of a pro-Obama cover artist at a pro-Obama magazine fighting with pro-Obama activists over whether the magazine cover could be perceived as being something other than pro-Obama. Are we living in Stalin’s Soviet Union here, where am artist’s attempt to produce a pro-regime propaganda is seen as so insufficiently pro-regime that he is suspected of treachery and merits denunciation? There can be no clearer proof of Obama’s effective domination of the media than the widespread outrage provoked among Obama supporters by an attempt to produce PRO-Obama propaganda.
118 Because SNP voters are Gremlins, who multiply when they get wet…..
New Rasmussen poll for Ohio :
McCain 52% .. Obama 42%
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/ohio/election_2008_ohio_presidential_election
120,121 : Surely for some of the Celtic/Labour supporters the rain will provide their first wash in months ?
@121:
But are harmed by bright light. I assume that’s not a problem so far North?
121- I see that my comment is awaiting moderation. Apparently my inappropriate PB commentary over the past several months is finally catching up with me. The chickens are indeed coming home to roost…
I find Accuweather to be really good -
Glasgow, United Kingdom (Glasgow City, Scotland)Forecast Details Tuesday, July 22, 2008 [ English | Metric ] Details for Thursday Jul, 24
Intervals of clouds and sunshine with spotty showers
High 23°C
RealFeel®: 22°C
Winds: ESE at 20km/h
Wind Gusts: 41 km/h
Max UV Index: Moderate (3)
Thunderstorm
Probability: 29%
Amount of Precipitation: 2.5mm
Amount of Rain: 2.5mm
Amount of Snow: 0.00cm
Hours of Precipitation: 3 Hrs
Hours of Rain: 3 Hrs
Hours of Daylight: 15.9 Hrs
Thursday Night
Periods of rain in the evening; otherwise, clouds breaking
Low: 14°C
RealFeel®: 12°C
Winds: ESE at 16km/h
Wind Gusts: 37 km/h
Min UV Index: N/A
Thunderstorm
Probability: 23%
Amount of
Precipitation: 0.3mm
Amount of Rain: 0.3mm
Amount Snow: 0.00cm
Hours of Precipitation: 3 Hrs
Hours of Rain: 3 Hrs
Hours of Dark 8.1 Hrs
Watching the Sky
Sunrise: 5:08 AM
Sunset: 9:38 PM
Moonrise: 11:00 PM
Moonset: 12:57 PM
124 Explains why the SNP does so badly on the south coast of England.
120 - you are confusing this site with politicalinvective.com.
122. These latest Ohio polls are all over the place.
104- maybe an imaginary trial Alex in planet fantasy where on occasion Martin Day occasionally drifts into.
Martin is one of my favourite posters on pbCOM who occasionally shows great insight and intelligence. He is just a trifle unhinged like many others here.
128. He could be catering to the no values voter:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/no_values_voters_looking_to
96 Surely, a price of US$120?
@132:
Surely “no-values” just makes you amoral, not evil. Somebody who believes nothing, has no ideology, no ideas, nothing he wants to achieve.
Wait! That’s just like…
No, it’s too easy.
@131:
I’ll have you know that *I* am thoroughly hinged. But I am low on WD40.
122 - PPP had Obama ahead by 8 in OH yesterday, it all seems a little counterintuitive, if McCain is ahead by 10 in OH then he’s doing better there than in MS, SC, ND, SD or MT which i find hard to believe… looking at the Ramusen poll that McCain is beating Obama by such a massive margin amongst independents also strikes me as odd.
Then again it’s summer and frankly all the polls in the states have seemed a little off (lots of good state by state polls for Obama but some much closer national and tracking polls) perhaps it’s a quirk of summer polling.
130 Socrates. Indeed. Although Rasmussen is the only pollster to show a McCain lead. SUSA, PPP and Quinnipiac have Obama leading in Ohio.
One trend from Rasmussen polls is leaners are invariably boosting McCains’s numbers.
Sorry Marquee,
You are correct. If Britain started selling oil in pounds it might end up in the famous ‘Axis of ….
130- State polls are generally too unreliable to place one’s faith in under any circumstances, not just when there seem to be wide variations from one poll to another. Would you be more assured if you had the results of two poorly conducted but similar polls in front of you? You likely wouldn’t know that they were poorly performed, but you would be much more likely to believe them if their numbers matched. This is a perennial problem with state polls; they are conducted by all manner of polling organizations with all manner of methodologies and ultimately don’t face the scrutiny, or methodological rigor, that national polls face (since a polling organization’s entire reputation could be riding on the accuracy of its national polls). My suggestion, as always, is to not pay too much attention to state-by-state polls and instead look to the national polls for guidance (from which you can fairly reliably extrapolate state-by-state outcomes).
138. Yes look what happened when Saddam wanted to switch to Euros…
126 - Released.
Evan Bayh. Please let it not be true.
He’s one of those candidates who is always going to be on the shortlist, but you’d never pick out for the job. I think he would play the part well in the election - no slip ups, doesn’t overshadow the top of the ticket, doesn’t offend anyone - but after that?
You’re not creating a VP who is then presumed for the nomination in 8 years - if Bayh is VP, then others will give it a shot - Richardson, Warner, Schweitzer, Ford Jr, because I can’t see them giving Bayh as easy a ride to the nomination as Gore got. If Obama is looking for a successor, Bayh is simply not unambigiously POTUS material.
I think his NLC roots piss off a lot of Kossacks and Netrooters more than is necessary when Obama has so many options, I think Indiana is still a huge stretch with Bayh on the ticket, and I don’t agree with options that undermine the possibility for a fillibuster-proof Senate. Bayh’s Senate seat would go to the Republicans, no question, because even if the Governor loses, he will put a Republican in as a temp who will almost certainly win a special election.
I will be really quite disappointed if it is Bayh.
123- jeepers JackW- beginning to look like Ohio and Florida are both drifting away from Obama.
BTW- looking at McCain yesterday, does he by chance use Michael Jackson’s plastic surgeon? Very badly pulled, and his missus looks quite grotesque too. I know images shouldn’t matter, but….
136- Your argument relies on one accepting as gospel truth the results of the mentioned polls in MS, SC, ND, SD and MT, and discounting any possibility of a general opinion shift since those polls were conducted in the mentioned states.
141 - Strike that last sentence - interim Senate appointment made by Governor-elect (I reckon Jill Long Thompson) so would be Democrat. Reckon Republican would win Special Election anyway though.
Stars & Stripes and Jack W - would be interested to get your thoughts on this:
http://politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2008/07/12/gubernatorial-races-in-november/
141 Looking at that list why should Obama look to lock it up for a VP before then. Look how they benefited from this years contest. Any candidate emerging from that field would be a great pick because of the strength. Plus if Obama has done 8 years it may just give that freshness and excitement factor someone who has done 8 years as VP would surely not have no matter how strong now.
142: he’s had skin cancer a few times, so I think he can be excused looking a little odd.
142 tyson. See 137.
We’ve also had very little recent polling from Florida, so your observation is premature.
143 - it would have to be a pretty hefty shift against Obama and towards McCain and one with no apparent cause(?)
Obama has been performing consistently strongly (for a Democrat) in the northern plains states (Montana and the Dakotas) while at the same time wracking up some pretty impressive margins in the upper Midwest (Minnesota, Wisconsin and Iowa) and I cant see what could have happened to change that.
That said, Ohio is a different proposition and its perfectly possible that Obama could still being doing well out West (where, to be fair, the GOP could comfortably absorb some hefty negative swings) but trailing by a wide margin in OH – but I just don’t see why, in contrast to everything we’ve seen so far, that would be the case. I’d like to see some more polls out of OH before I’d consider this one as kosher, but then again it’s summer and that traditionally throws up strange polls (and that probably goes double for state by state polls).
Here’s who Brown invited to Chequers.
Ed Balls, Hilary Benn, Hazel Blears, Andy Burnham, Yvette Cooper, Alistair Darling, Lord Darzi, John Denham, John Hutton, Alan Johnson, Lord Jones, Ruth Kelly, Lord and Lady Kinnock, James Purnell, Geoffrey Robertson, Jacqui Smith, Angela Smith, Jack Straw, Lord West, Michael Wills, Baroness Young, Stephen Carter
Missing politicians?
The Deputy Labour Leader Harriet Harman
Geoff Hoon
Any Trade Union leaders
http://tinyurl.com/676ayc
142,
Michael Jackson is the Tory candidate in Glasgow East..
141- Thanks Morus, and you have some compelling arguments for why Bayh should not be chosen. I do disagree with you though. Although I am a Republican, I don’t boost for Bayh out of a belief that he is a conservative, or even a moderate. I believe he is ideologically pretty standard Democratic fare (some divergences from the left-wing script, but not many).
Your argument that he isn’t POTUS material in eight years presumes that that should be Obama’s concern in choosing a VP. I just don’t agree with the premise. Did it serve the Democrats’ interests to have Gore imposed on them in 2000? Would it have been better for the Republicans if Bush had a VP who was now the Republicans’ candidate for the presidency? VP’s rarely are successful in using their vice presidency as a springboard to claim the White House upon their boss’s departure. All other things being equal, it seems empirically that a party is probably better off not having a vestige of the previous presidency imposed on it as a presidential candidate and instead making its own choice free of the control of the outgoing presidency.
Bayh is hugely popular and well-established in Indiana and, I believe, could allow Obama to carry the state in November (although not a certainty). Further, the far-left of the Democratic Party, just like the rest of the electorate, will have their eyes trained on Obama and McCain in November and will not vote for or against Obama because of Bayh. Only VP errors will make the VP relevant to the outcome (other than in the VP’s home state), and Bayh is unlikely to make those sorts of errors.
138 I couldn’t believe that official figures might have implied £1 = $1 - some collapse of Sterling that would be!!
144 Morus. Much will depend on turnout. If Obama pulls the numbers and his coat-tails are long then many surprises are on the cards especially in states with a heavy AA demographic. You get the sense of the near panic in some GOP circles in this article about Republican Senate chances - Save yourselves !!
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0708/11923.html
Glasgow East related betting scandal
http://www.racingpost.co.uk/news/new…ory_uid=985005
SPORTING INDEX’S legal action aimed at obtaining more than £700,000 in alleged gambling debts from racehorse owner and billionaire Dermot Desmond, set to begin at the high court in London on Tuesday, has been adjourned.
Proceedings are now expected to be rescheduled for the end of next month, but no date has been fixed and as disputes of this nature are frequently settled out of court, nobody can be certain the case will be heard until the parties appear in front of a judge.
The adjournment is understood to have been agreed in order to give Sporting Index’s lawyers time to study an affidavit provided by Desmond, Ireland’s wealthiest man according to the Sunday Times Rich List 2008, and boss of betting exchange Betdaq.
According to court papers, Desmond owes Sporting Index £727,578.85. The figure is made up of gambling losses of nearly £680,000 up to August 14, 2007, plus associated interest.
While Desmond’s friend Padraig Harrington won him €160,000 when winning last year’s Open Championship, an unsuccessful ‘finishing position’ bet on Harrington is said to have cost Desmond €452,000.
Desmond is also claimed to have lost €178,500 and €164,500 backing Ernie Els and Jim Furyk.
145 - It’s been great for the party, but if you’re finishing off two-terms in office, you want your VP to be the nominee - party as a validation of your own achievements, and partly because it is a complete waste to throw away the benefit of incumbancy.
142 - Pretty much all the polling out of FL has shown it’s probably out of reach for the Dems (it’s worth pointing out that Clinton didn’t carry the state in ‘96 ) but with Ohio the polling has consistently shown either a close race or a clear Obama lead.
McCain suddenly achieving a landslide lead just seems a little odd, having said that, the polls back in March/April did give him a 7-8 point lead but that was back when Clinton and Obama were knocking ten bells out of each other with Hillary being perceived as the ‘blue collar Bodica’ while the RevWright story flared up and those polls soon tightened again.
149…. and Nick Palmer!
@155:
How does one explain Cheney then? There was never any reasonable chance of his being a nominee, what with being MAD, EVIL and one mild shock away from total existence failure at any time.
148- I have been pretty suspicious of some of those Great Plains polls that have received tremendous attention here, such as those in the Dakotas. The populations there are historically rarely polled in presidential contests and, also based on observations from many previous presidential contests, seem quite suspect to me. Maybe I’m wrong and there’s been a historic sea change in the Great Plains, but I doubt it.
I expect Obama to win the presidency by a solid margin, mind you, but I still don’t believe what some of those Great Plains polls seem to have been saying.
153 - Jack W - I agree with the coattails premise for Senate elections in November, but a special election could be February or March, and some of the novelty might have worn off by then.
How about the Gubernatorials link at 144? I can’t see Obama v McCain having a big impact on many of those races.
S&S - VP’s have done surprisingly well when incumbant and running from a 2-term Presidency.
Truman won after 4 FDR terms, when he was not popular at the time
Nixon came very close, maybe even won the PV, following Eisenhower
Ford did well to get close to Carter, given Nixon’s 2 terms
Bush won after Reagan’s 2 terms
Gore won the popular vote after Clinton’s 2 terms
2 winners, maybe another 2 popular vote winners, and a close run after only a couple of months in the job following a double resignation under criminal charges. Incumbant VPs are safe choices, who don’t miss the mark by much. I wouldn’t surrender that advantage (of personal VP incumbancy) for an exciting primary fight - that’s the job of opposition.
155. I’m really not convinced incumbency works for the VP the same way as the President. He’s known unexciting without being the main man already. Look back over the last fifty years only George Bush Senior has gone directly that route. The others Truman and LBJ were already President thanks to their predecessors dying in office. It could appeal to Obama’s ego but I think he won’t be too bothered really, he’ll have made enough history if he wins two terms.
158 - A number of theories:
(a) Hell for leather - Bush/Cheney didn’t give a damn about a third term, they planned to get everything they wanted done in two terms, by having Cheney be completely bloody-minded and not have to think about being electable
(b) Bush would have loved to be followed by a VP, but Cheney is really the one in charge and insisted on keeping his job (variants on this theme include that Cheney knows secrets and is unsackable)
(c) No-one in the Administration really thought that far ahead…
160- Morus, Truman was effectively running as an incumbent one-term President, not a VP attempting to claim his boss’s job. FDR died almost immediately after the beginning of his fourth term in office, leaving Truman nearly four years to impose his mark on the nation as President. If you include Truman, you should certainly also include LBJ. I don’t think this is a fair inclusion, though, since we are talking about who could claim the White House after eight years of President Obama.
161 - I wondered if he would chose an old hand to stabilise his youth and get him elected, then bring a younger ‘next POTUS’ candidate onto the ticket for re-election if he won.
So Wes Clarke in 2008, then Mark Warner/Bayh/Ford Jr in 2012.
What do you think?
161- As Punter says, only George H. W. Bush successfully made the move directly from VP to President in the post-war era. Also, I would think Obama should, and is, thinking ONLY about who can help him get elected, not about whom he can help to elect in eight years.
@160:
That’s a pretty sorry list you have there, Morus. You seem to think it’s making your point. It looks to me like quite the opposite.
Even if they do win, they tend to go on to become mediocre, forgettable, one-term nonentities.
If you want a VP to go on to become an excellent and memorable president, you need to have a POTUS die in office, it seems.
Which is probably a good reason for not making Hills veep.
160 Morus. As for the Gubers differential AA turnout in North Carolina and Indiana might swing tight races. Also if under 30 turnout spikes then GOP contenders will suffer down the ticket.
158. You think Bush chose Cheney? Cheney appointed himself after he was tasked with the job of finding a VP!
159. I do think there is something going on in the Great Plains. They’ve not become particularly Democrat, but they’ve stopped being particularly Republican either. Generally the mentality out there is very libertarian, isolationist, fiscal conservative one. They don’t like the way the GOP has shifted to become so religiously orientated, they don’t like the huge deficits run up by Bush, and they really don’t like the neoconservatives and the war in Iraq. I share your belief that they won’t go Democratic this year, and a Democrat in office won’t suit them either. But the GOP should ignore the Western wing of the party at its peril.
166. Truman was a very good President. Bush Snr was the best Republican one in a long time.
163 - So actually the stats are pretty useless!
Excluding Johnson and Truman, even though maybe 75% of incumbant VPs win the popular vote (GHW Bush, Nixon 1960, Gore 2000, Ford didn’t), only one of the last four has managed to win the White House.
Incumbant VPs are useless. Strike what I said!!
164. Personally, I think Bloomberg looks like excellent value. Great on the economy, rams home the theme of change, appeals to independent and his fundraiser for Mary Landrieu’s Senate run shows where his sympathies lie. And he would take it in a shot.
165-166 - I have retracted my point in light of the evidence!
167 - I still reckon NC Gubernatorial will buck the trend, but accept your point on AA vote otherwise. Indiana would be a big win - first woman to hold that office.
169 - Truman *was* a good President, but had a poor reputation until he died in 1972 - many people considered him one of the worst in history until that point.
GHW Bush was a good President? Really? I never saw it. Maybe the Gulf War and stuff. I usually forget him.
My pal in the BBC news room tells me they have had a sweepstake on the democratic vp. Tremendous. Sadly, she’s picked Bob Kerrey.
171 - There is a danger in the idea that a man can *buy* the Vice Presidency, but otherwise I agree. Some senior Dems might be a little annoyed to be passed over for a Republican-of-sorts too.
He would, of course, have to pacify the party by donating (say) $500m to the DNC…
mike S 114 seems to be another one of ‘them’.
174 - Someone was touting him on here back in the New Year. I can’t see it, but maybe a Cabinet post if Clinton had been the nominee.
144- Morus, I hadn’t read your previous column and enjoyed reading it just now. I largely agree with your assessments, with the following elaboration:
I think that, of the Republican-defended seats, the most likely to flip is Missouri (I’ll say a 70% chance), followed by Indiana (60% chance). I only place MO ahead of IN since for the Democrats mainly because there is no Republican incumbent running there and Indiana historically votes strongly Republican in presidential contests, giving a potential boost to the Republican governor there (although a Bayh VP candidacy would change the dynamics there to some extent).
North Carolina seems as if it will be extremely close. The gradually Democratic-trending nature of the state and its affinity for Democrats at the state level make me think the Democrat has a very slight advantage there come November, particularly in a strong Democratic year, so I would say its something like 52:48 in the Democrat’s favor.
Washington is likely to stay Democratic given the fact that the Democratic candidate is running as an incumbent, the state leans Democratic at both state and national levels, and this is obviously a good year for Democrats in general.
Delaware is one state you didn’t put on your final list of possible flips, but I would give the Republicans a shot there. After many years of Democratic incumbency in Dover, the Republican there just might do it. I’d say the Republican has about a 35% chance.
159 – Perhaps, I must admit when the SUSA (IIRC) poll put Obama ahead in both NE2 and ND back in April I didnt really buy it, but since then the polls have consistently shown a much closer race in those states than has traditionally been the case.
There is certainly a growing base for Democrats in the northern plains states and they have been making a significant amount of progress there… Having said that, I don’t think its likely to translate into any victories for Obama this year, but I’d be surprised if he didn’t register a big improvement on Kerry and Gore’s performances in those states and compel the GOP to spend time defending them.
The most likely impact of a big improvement for the Democrats in the northern plains states (with which I’d include Alaska) could be the Senate race in AK which has been tilting in Begich’s favour recently.
While the national polls show a very small, if relatively consistent, lead for Obama and the state polls are just as volatile as positive volatile, I cannot get my head around to believing this truly is an open race.
The fundamentals are overwhelmingly in favour of the Dems, but on paper you could of course argue that McCain is a well-loved maverick, and that Obama has problems uniting his party and convincing people he’s no danger to their suburban lifestyle. I always believed McCain would give Obama a run for his money, despite his whole Kennedy-esque appeal.
But McCain is crap. Instead of restoring his maverick image after winning the Republican nomination, he is associating himself ever closer with Bush. Either he has come to like being part of the club for once, or he sees that his party is not afraid enough of Dem overall control to take the bitter pill of a very moderate GOP president. Either way, how is strategy supposed to work in a Dem year?
Now, even if his strategy was more flexible, he doesn’t seem to run a very efficient campaign. The amazing thing about Obama is, in my opinion, that his whole Bambi-JFK-MLK crossover appeal is backed by a mercilessly efficient organization (as a German, I’m bound to be impressed). It reminds me much of Disney’s cold approach to making cute movies during the ’90s. McCain’s campaign, by contrast, has a feel of garage sale. Remember the hideous green background McCain had when he tried to get some of Obama’s spotlight before Clinton’s quasi-concession? I bet the McCain campaign just didn’t think that would matter so much. They are the naive ones in this race.
The polls show that Clinton have not all gone berzerk, and that whites don’t hate Obama. The economy is going downhill while Iraq is remaining stable. Foreign policy will thus be less salient.
Of course it’s very much conventional wisdom that Obama will win (which makes the prediction boring), and Events, Dear Boy, Events can turn any race on its head. Still, even this far out, this campaign reminds me much of the primaries where we were told for about a month that Hillary Clinton still had a realistic chance while she was in fact dead and buried.
172. He worked across the aisle to stop the huge deficit brough about by Reagan running away, he expanded civil rights for the disabled, beefed up an environmental policy that had been watered down by lobbyists, managed to make sure the democrat won in Panama, united a multilateral alliance to rescue Kuwait but pragmatically resisted the neocon calls to enter Iraq, expanded free trade in North America, successfully managed the end of the Cold War and negotiated Russia into the democratic world.
177 - I’d agree on MO and IN certainly.
Christine Gregoire’s weakness in WA confuses me - I can’t see how her approval ratings and poll ratings are so low unless it is personal. You’re probably right, and she’s hold on by party, but there’s something not quite right in that campaign - she shouldn’t be making such hard work of it this year.
North Carolina could well go Democrat, but I wonder if this is a local thing. Charlotte is fast beocming one of the best cities in the US, and I wonder if the credit for that might help the Mayor. Certainly more plausible than Guiliani winning Gov NY in 2010. This is the one race I can see bucking the trend, because I think Obama could win NC, and I think Elizabeth Dole might lose her Senate seat as well. The Gubernatorial is the best hope they have a good result against the new demographics you mention.
Delaware - I hadn’t considered it! I’ll take a closer look…
179 - Well when you put it like that, fairy nuff! I’ll add him to the list of good Presidents then…!
178 - Begich leading Stevens by 9% (Rasmussen, released today)
178- Alaska is a tough state to evaluate for a lot of reasons, and the Republicans will probably do better there than currently seems to be the case. That said, I wouldn’t be surprised if the Democrats managed to pick up either the House or Senate seat there, or both.
179 - Actually, not sure that not going into Iraq in Gulf War I was a good thing - understandable, but they perhaps should have done it to allow Shia uprisings to overthrow Saddam then - they would have a much better rep in the Middle East if they had done it, and it would have saved the Kurds. Pragmatic, but on reflection, we’re living with it now…
“A meeting of the NI power-sharing Executive, set for Thursday, has been called off at short notice.
Other parties are claiming that a stand off between the DUP and Sinn Féin is causing deadlock in the Executive.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/northern_ireland/7519408.stm
I’m off out - see you later all.
“A new heritage minister has been appointed following the resignation of Rhodri Glyn Thomas last week.
First Minister Rhodri Morgan announced Plaid Cymru assembly member Alun Ffred Jones was taking on the cabinet role.”
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/wales/7520023.stm
171- Socrates, I would be shocked if Obama chose Bloomberg. Who exactly would be happy with his choice of a Jewish billionaire from New York City who changes his party with the seasons? Also, as a resident of the New York City metropolitan area, I can tell you that his accomplishments are vastly overrated and his flaws are many.
Latest Gallup Tracker :
McCain 42% .. Obama 45%
http://www.gallup.com/poll/109006/Gallup-Daily-Presidential-Contest-Remains-Close.aspx
183. Going into Iraq would have meant breaking up the Grand Coalition organised against Iraq (which it should be remembered included most Arab states).
Changing the object of the war from protecting the sovereign rights of states to regime change would have sent all the wrong messages that went out in the 2003 war and turned world opinion in no small way. That would have been especially true in the Arab world (that goodwill has been blown now anyway, but that’s besides the point). It’s unlikely that the 1993 peace accords would have happened and slow though it has been, that was one of the better side-effects of the Gulf War.
As with all deputies, the best ones are the ones that want the job, not the ones that want their boss’ job.
Cheney has only been a rubbish VP because he has been a very good VP. He has worked as a team with Bush and while he sometimes appears to go beyond where Bush is (which is itself sometimes the job of a deputy - scouting the ground), he has not undermined the president in the way that can happen if the VP is after the Oval Office and the popularity that is necessary to get there. Not having those ambitions means that he was able to focus on the job of getting on with Bush’s agenda - and that was the failure.
As an aside, presidents wanting ‘continuity’ after leaving office don’t have to go with their VP; cabinet members have also been options in the past. Teddy Roosevelt backed Taft (in an error of judgement), who went on to win, and Hoover succeeded Coolidge. Neither were tremendous successes. These days, that kind of endorsement does require both a VP who isn’t interested or is discredited, and a cabinet member with a high enough profile, but is not completely out of the question if the right person exists.
Just looking at the RCP Obama vs McCain graph, it looks a little like Obama got no post-nomination bounce after all (he’s been 46-48% for a while now). However, McCain has lost 3-4% to Barr+undecideds in that same time.
181. In fact Truman and Bush both didn’t get the credit they deserved because their main feat - putting large parts of the world into a liberal democratic order - is beyond most people’s understanding and is taken for granted from a Whiggish perspective afterwards.
187. Its the fact that it would be a heck of a news story and cement the framing of Obama as the “new kind of politics” ticket. Like you, everybody would be so shocked at the choice and therein lies its genius. It would blow the GOP attack that Obama is a partisan liberal out the water, the unaffiliated would be impressed, Obama’s economic/business credentials would be boosted, and it would bring the waivering Jewish vote - particularly useful in Florida - right back into the Democratic column. Even the netroots would be impressed at the sheer audacity of it. There are others that are more likely, but I certainly think his chances are greater than the 33/1 odds currently being offered. Worth a few bucks.
The General Trading Company and flooring retailer Floors-2-go both have gone into administration today.
Both ends of the market are suffering.
test
190. Evan Bayh certainly does have the ambitions to go into the Oval Office. He attempted this cycle but the attention on Obama put him off. I certainly think he’s a schemer in the Clinton mould, which is one reason I’d rather he wasn’t chosen. You’re right that you want someone who doesn’t want the top job, or one that’s going to be loyal to the wider cause until their time comes. I think the latter would be Mark Warner.
“Terence Blacker: Reasons to be cheerful about the credit crunch”
“…what is happening is more than an overdue economic adjustment. It has the potential to bring in a saner way of life which will have benefits for us and the world around us. It might even make us happier.”
http://tinyurl.com/5fqwm6
evening all, Reporting Scotland has concentrated on the absence of voters in Glasgow East in tonight’s by-election review. John Curtice thinks the poll wont be far down from 2005 so almost certainly it will be around 25%.
192-Now if Obama really wants to shock me with bipartisan “new politics,” maybe he could choose Chuck Hagel! But seriously, if Obama chose Bloomberg, I think Bloomberg’s first order of business would be to announce whether he intends to remain an independent or whether he will come full circle and rejoin the party he left eight years ago in order to finesse his way into the New York mayor’s office.
O/T But Mr Smithson has been dubbed a genius by the Spectator Blog.
148 - Rasmussen have been having a problem with polling rustbelt states, they are well off in many cases to other pollsters. Not sure why but I’m sure delving into the details would give some reason.
I am concerned about US polling full stop, for such a large and diverse country the national polls use ridiculously small sample sizes. The tracking polls just multiply that problem.
Also, looks like McCain’s tactic of goading Obama into going to Iraq has gone really well, allowing Obama to look presidential and making sure that everyone knows that his understanding of foreign policy is strong and ideas supported by those in the region.
197 Excuse the ignorance but why is there this fuss over David Healy making a flute gesture to Celtic fans.
177 re North Carolina
The fact that Democrats get elected at state and local level doesn’t necessarilly translate to national candidates though. Its more that the Democrats have finally got smart and selected pro life pro gun etc candidates who can win outside minority districts- e.g. Heath Shuler. Would think McCain would still carry that district comfortably
201: Just the usual tedious, infantile, bigoted Ulster politics (ie the norm).
201 - because unlike people who live in Northern Ireland, Celtic fans still live in the 17th century. (Whigs gain everywhere!)
197. Easterross
30.01 - 40.0 Percent is still favourite on the Betfair Glasgow East turnout market.
However, over at Ladbrokes there are now two joint favourites:
25-29.99%
30-34.99%´
This morning 35-39.99% was favourite at Ladbrokes, so that is a significant downward movement on punters’ expectation for turnout. Doesn’t seem to be much reflected in the winners markets though.
200- The sample sizes need not be increased, statistically speaking, merely because the country is larger than, say, the UK, but the sample does have to be representative of those who will actually vote, which is where I see the problem with a lot of polling. This problem is magnified in state polls, where polling methodologies should be taking account of the voting peculiarities of the populations of the individual states but often do not because of the pollsters’ lack of knowledge and/or motivation. Simply put, pollsters don’t need to be talking to more people (which is relatively easy), but rather need to be talking to the right people (which is relatively difficult).
Err not so good for Mike
From Coffee Shop at 5.16 pm “Mike Smithson, the genius behind Political Betting, says that he’ll be staying out of the betting market until the polling stations have opened.”
But actually:
“I rate it as about evens for for both the SNP and Labour and have just bet nearly £300.”
by Mike Smithson July 22nd, 2008 at 1:16 pm
198. But Chuck Hagel is really is not a Democrat on domestic issues. There would just be too many disagreements. Plus, Obama will want to leave moderate Republicans in the Senate to work with. Getting legislation to 60 votes there is going to be his biggest sticking point to his plans, and once a couple of Republicans start joining in, everyone gets scared of being the noncompromiser (look at the Democrats over the last five years!). So Hagel would be a very useful ally there.
Bloomberg could announce his coming back to the party on the same day as he is declared VP choice. Give a big speech about how they have impressed him with being a tolerant and diverse big tent, unlike the GOP etc.
202. Entirely right. Although there is a genuinely liberal element in NC around the research triangle.
test
Why doest test answer?
208 Isn’t Hagel retiring.
202- I generally agree with your assessment, although I was only talking about gubernatorial races and not commenting on how the presidential candidates will do in those states. The Democrats’ increasing success in electing candidates to national offices in the South can also be attributed to a general feeling that Republicans have not delivered on the issues for which southern voters elected them and the fact that whatever it was they didn’t like about Democrats running Washington has become something of a distant memory. The next few years should go a long way to reminding them about that.
208- I was really kidding about Hagel, although if shock were the motivation, he would do the trick. Sadly for Obama, Hagel will be long gone when he is sworn in come January.
210 Never does - been wondering myself why such rudeness.
212. I agree that the South will return to being much more strongly Republican in the next few years, although Virginia is fast becoming detached from Dixie. This should apply to the Great Plains too. However, I think more moderate places like the Midwest could become quite blue if Obama does a decent job. The recent memory will be off a competent Democratic administrations either side of a really terrible Republican one.
It would be different if McCain wins, as then the scale of Bush’s awfulness will be subscribed just to his administration, but if the next govt is Democratic, then the only image of the national GOP will be the last eight years. Not good.
Combined with the Southwest (NM, AZ, NV, CO) becoming more solidly Democratic through Hispanic immigration, the GOP would need to win the rustbelt comprehensively to get the Presidency. If an Obama administration delivers universal healthcare, a minimum wage raise and better security net, that’s going to be very tough.
My personal view is that the Republican party is going to need a completely thorough reinvention to comeback, and looking at the current state of the party they’re in no mood to do that. Problems will be compounded if they blame McCain’s loss on him being a moderate as it’ll take them four years before the regeneration process begins.
211. Apparently so. Maybe some FP role in an Obama administration then.
Going out on a limb… “A test of strength between his government and mine.”
He must be feeling confident to come out with that.
http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jptKb492i04rXFRolLbtkDtatE1A
216 My money would on Secretary of Defence assuming Obama does not pull a real rabbit and try and keep Gates who has done amazing work given what his predecessor left him.
217.
Interesting. Nice catch b!
‘Glasgow East byelection is a test of strength between two governments, says Salmond’
“Speaking as he campaigned at a shopping centre near Easterhouse with the SNP candidate John Mason, Salmond said: “It is a test of strength between two governments … This is a tale of two governments and people are passing judgment on the Labour government and the SNP government in Scotland … that’s what people are entitled to do.”
Salmond has banked heavily on his own popularity by spending 12 days campaigning in Glasgow East since the sitting MP David Marshall stood down last month.”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jul/22/glasgoweast.labour
215- That sounds like the Democrats’ dream scenario, leaving little reason to hope for Republicans for at least a generation. And who knows, it may turn out to be an accurate prediction. But I’m not quite as pessimistic as that for the GOP. The American political scene historically (at least in modern, post-war history) generally has a way of balancing out pretty quickly. As soon as one party manages to grab all the marbles, they quickly start to roll back to the other party and balance is restored. Unlike in British politics, there are many ways to balance power in the American system, so voters aren’t left with the British choice of either these guys or those guys (nationally speaking). Here, we can have some levers of power in one party’s hands and the other levers in the other party’s hands. That is where I would look for a coming shift that should benefit the Republicans.
To return to your description, if the Democrats lock down Virginia, the Southwest, the Rust Belt, and become competitive in the Great Plains, the Republicans are screwed as far as the eye can see. But looked at another way, if the traditional balance in American politics is restored, it is interesting to consider which states will start to tilt Republican to compensate for those states that have tiled to the Democrats. Will the Democratic drifters, such as Virginia, Colorado and New Hampshire, start to drift back? Will the drift instead be in the Midwest? Any other possibilities? This will be interesting to see and should start to materialize (in my view) in the next year to two years.
As for whether the Republicans need to reinvent themselves to come back, we will see. But many people were saying that about the Democrats only a few years ago. There has been no reinvention, but the Democrats came back. A reinvention was unnecessary because it was the Republicans’ screw ups rather than the Democrats’ strategic brilliance that created the Democratic comeback. The same thing could, and probably will, happen again, but in the other direction. It is only a question of how it will happen.
215- I would add that we’ve been through this before, and not so long ago. Back in 1992, Democrats were dancing in the streets crowing about the final utter defeat of Reaganism and the Republican Party, seeing nothing but blue skies on the horizon. But a funny thing happened on the road to perpetual absolute power. By the end of 1994, it has been reported that Hillary had to tell Bill that he needed to stop “counting the dead Democrats” that had fallen that November and move on.
New ARG polls for Florida and New Hampshire :
Florida
McCain 47% .. Obama 45%
New Hampshire
McCain 45% .. Obama 47%
http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/
201 - Because it’s the instrument most commonly associated with Orange order parades.
I’m surprised the Celtic fans were quite so sensitive given some of their supporters liking for belting out songs about terrorist muderers and pointing imaginery rifles at opposing supporters.
221. I wasn’t expecting stuff like lockdown’s in Virginia and the Rustbelt or being competitive in the Great Plains. I think more likely is lockdowns in Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada from Hispanic increases; and New Hampshire, Minnesota and Wisconsin from the Midwest and New England just growing apart in culture from the heartlands.
If you give them that, the Republicans would need a virtual clean sweep through everywhere else. If the Democrats just took Michigan and Pennsylvania they’d be returned to the White House, even if the GOP won FL, CO, IA, MO, OH, VA. I suspect we would get a polarised 55-45 country again, but this time with the Democrats havnig the edge.
215. McCain is the beginning of that process apparently. Some guy, used to work for the Clinton adminstration…Sidney Blumenthal thats him….reckons that George W style republicanism is dead and the GOP will have to go through change. Although there is the danger of McCain being nailed for defeat Blumenthal reckons, ironically, McCain is the future.
Sidney is no GOP man so his comments are certainly worth noting. The GOP would be crackpot to blame McCain, the man the GOP voters put in this position because they had the wit to get that he is the only one with a chance.
If the GOP looks it’ll find the last Congressional beating saw a lot of middle and liberal republicans (which at heart McCain is pretty centerist for his party) ousted. That layer of such people being removed is due warning that they need to keep the centre, which lest we forget, Bush got enough of twice to win.
Left right though doesnt explain why people are miffed with the GOp right now, its Iraq and the economy.
201, Because people are whingers. They spotted Sir David in his lucky Northern Ireland boots (which are motifed with suitable NI football symbols) and gave him some stick about where he was on the 12th of July so David took the rip back. He probably shouldnt have bothered admittedly but its being whipped up.
No doubt those who decry the very existence of Northern Ireland will claim that they can never support its football team. As if they were ever going to back it anyway.
Campaigner ‘Sticks himself to PM’
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7520401.stm
226- Your last sentence gets to the heart of the matter. This fact poses the greatest immediate danger to the triumphant Democrats; if they read too much into their coming victories (which is almost inevitable), they are at great risk of going well beyond what the majority of the population wants them to do and causing a backlash that would likely be seen in 2010, or at least by 2012. That is, if they convince themselves (as I believe they already have) that the people have rejected everything the Republicans stand for and embraced everything the Democrats stand for, they will predictably go too far and will only see the error when their support has evaporated and they are forced to attempt a comeback (as Clinton did between 1994 and 1996).
229 Bear in mind though as far as Congress goes the last time the Democrats took forty years to go too far. In addition the scale of the likely win in Congress means it is extremely unlikely the Republicans could reverse it in one go which means a sharp scare could surely moderate any Democratic misbehaviour. Bottom line the Republicans will surely take the White House before Congress again. Ronald Reagan remember of 49 States fame had to do a double act with Tip O’Neill.
184. Been brewing for months….
225- I presume that your “55:45 country” refers to presidential elections, but if so, that likely means that Republicans will regain control of Congress. While many have the impression that Republicans have dominated the U.S. for most of the last 50 years, this is true only if you limit your view to presidential elections. The country has experienced a sort of rough balance since World War II in which, while Republicans have dominated the presidency, the Democrats have dominated Congress. Neither fact indicates that this is either a Democratic or a Republican country, but both facts demonstrate that balance is preferred over imbalance. The exceptions are there to be seen, but so is the restoration of balance soon after. So if you are correct that Democrats will become the dominant party in presidential elections for a generation or so, I would predict that Republicans will do well in congressional elections over a similar period.
142: Tyson - good point. McCain, if he wins, must be one of the most likely POTUS to die in office of recent times. So (to my surprise) I am interested in reading the VP musings on here, as there’s very little in the MSM.
BTW - do you still think i’m xenophobic for being Euroscpetic? Or didn’t you read that one
I have forgiven your cr@p post due to the fact I got a big fat bonus at work today.
222. But this is completely different. In 1992 people had had enough of the Republicans, but they weren’t disgusted with them and they had very fond memories of Reagan. If Obama gets two terms, people under 35 will have Bush as the only Republican president they know as they vote in 2016. I suspect the 2012 candidate will be a hardliner too.
I don’t expect for the Democrats to hold both chambers of congress past 2012, certainly not by 2014, but having the Oval Office until 2020 will mean they will control the agenda for a very long time. That length of time in power will mean the GOP will have to accept some chunks of a new consensus to fight back other parts.
230- Punter, I’m not convinced that the GOP will regain the presidency before it regains either the House or Senate. This is far from clear from where we stand today and will depend on how things play out over the next few years. You could be right that the Democrats will merely receive a scare in 2010 and will take the lesson to heart in time to maintain total control through 2012, but I don’t rule out a complete Democratic collapse in 2010 similar to the 1994 Democratic fiasco. Balance is the golden rule, though, so that is what guides me in my predictions.
You are correct that Democrats kept Congress (or, more properly, at least the House) for 40 years, but the Republicans did have a period of Senate control during that era. There were also reasons along the way that allowed Democrats maintain control for such an extended period; it was not impossible for Republicans to retake the House and/or Senate, but various events prevented it from happening. The main such reason was general Republican success in presidential elections, which had the effect to bolstering Democratic fortunes in congressional elections.
Mike or anyone,
“So from the PSO figures we read that the number saying they will vote Labour on Thursday is a staggering 68% of the number who declared that they had voted for the party in May 2005. I don’t find that plausible.”
Can someone explain this to me? I don’t know where the 68% figure comes from and I don’t understand why the conclusion is not ‘plausible’.
“My overall conclusion is that if the certainty question had been put and the sample had been past vote weighed then Labour’s lead, if any, would have been nothing like the published 17%.”
If votes were weighted according to past voting then Labour’s vote would go up, no? I don’t undersand?
226. I agree, a younger, more charismatic McCain of 2000 would be the future. But the Republicans didn’t select him for those reasons, they selected him because he was the last one standing in a crap field. And he WILL get the blame, mark my words.
229. I think the netroots and many Democrats have fallen into that trap, but I don’t think Obama has, and I don’t think he will. I don’t even think people like Pelosi have, hence their choosing of DINOs for many congressional races. This large amount of moderate (and even conservative) Democrats in congress will also prevent to large a swing to the left. Unlike the GOP right now, whose congressional and activist base has been narrowed down to the real ideologues.
232. I’d agree with all that. Four, at the very most six years is the best the Dems can hope to retain congress for. Plus the Senate is biased towards Republican states, so that helps the GOP, although the increased profile of Senators will help incumbents.
234- Socrates, 2012 is an eternity away in political terms, and Americans (particularly those near the center) are notoriously fickle in their political allegiances. That wasn’t true of the FDR generation, and even less true of the sons and daughters of the Confederacy but it is true of the “what have you done for me lately” generation. Look at how quickly the Republican Party was forgiven after the Watergate meltdown of 1974. Even by 1976, Ford came within 2% of winning a term in the White House. By 2012, the issues of concern to voters will be different and political choices will be made on different terms involving different candidates. It is too soon to predict what these issues, terms and candidates will be, but I am quite sure that the zeitgeist will not be dominated by the image of George W. Bush.
235. I think you really are underestimating the desire for change. You’ve mentioned congressional approval ratings before, but I saw one recently for Democrats in congress and they get about 35% approval. I imagine there’s a good 15-20% of hardcore Dems who disapprove of them for not being hardline enough. (Republicans were at about 23% I think).
238. Perhaps I am too rooted in what happens in British politics, but I think the US is getting a more traditional party system where they are much more parties than the labels they used to be in the 70s and before. When you have more clearly-defined, coherent parties, people hold things against them longer.
237- If Obama and Pelosi are indeed wise and powerful stewards of the federal government, they may indeed achieve the unlikely and avoid any serious political backlash. However, one of the first interesting things to watch in an Obama presidency will be how well and how quickly he can organize and wield his presidential power. Congress would be only too happy to control the agenda if Obama allows it to do so and I believe many of the more powerful members of Congress are secretly hoping that the inexperienced Obama will be unable to dominate them or dictate the balance of power. That would give Committee Chairmen a free hand to become virtual dictators with respect to their respective spheres of influence, and Obama will have to work immediately to prevent that if he wants to be an effective president.
239- I think the desire for change is great, but that is a very tricky and dangerous sentiment when there isn’t clarity about what that change should be. If Obama and Congress don’t quickly pull off big successes, the great hope behind that desire for change that is motivating so much excitement today will give way to disappointment and disillusionment. And as long as the “change” message remains vague (as lampooned in the Jib Jab cartoon), it is inevitable that vastly differing visions constitute that overall sentiment and it is very likely that huge chunks of the electorate will be displeased and/or disappointed when they discover next year exactly what that change is.
To put it differently, the Democrats will have to hope that the desire for political change ends on Wednesday, November 5 and does not return for many, many years to come. Congressional and presidential approval ratings can come and go quickly, particularly when one, and only one, party has absolute power. We shall see.
241, 242. Agreed. Much will depend on how successful Obama is in taking control of the agenda and getting an achievement in the first 18 months. I saw an interview with Warner recently where he was saying that “America needs a win”. The circumstances are precarious, but that first significant win would give a lot of breathing space. Part of the reason I want Warner on the ticket!
243- Warner would be a great choice and Obama would be foolish to let the issue of the Virginia Senate seat prevent him from choosing Warner. If he doesn’t want him for some other reason, so be it, but he shouldn’t pass him up for that reason. Wins or no wins, the first year of an Obama presidency would be fascinating, probably the most interesting political time we’ve seen in quite a while (both from a policy perspective and a pure political perspective).
244-SaS- I think within 2 months Obama will hold that post as if it has always been his.
We will all mostly grow to respect, admire, and some even love Obama over the next 8 years, so much so that it will be unthinkable to consider a world without him. Obama may even touch greatness.
243- As a side note, one of the issues Obama would have to deal with pretty quickly is one that we’ve heard nothing about in this campaign but was much talked about in 2000; the inheritance tax. As an attorney who has practiced in estate planning, this is a subject of particular interest to me. In 2010, there will be absolutely no inheritance tax, but by 2011, the exemption will go back to the low threshold of the 1990’s. What will Obama do with this hot potato? Nobody is talking about it, but the issue will require congressional action at least by next year (the complete exemption in 2010 is almost as big of a problem for the government as is the political issue of reversion to 1990’s rules to go into effect in 2011).
245- I hope Jesse Jackson isn’t reading your post… if he is, I’m pretty about sure what he would like to do.
247- pretty sure about…
245: Have you been drinking? He’s just a smooth talking politician. He is not “great”. He MAY be, but we have zero evidence except (indirectly) a myriad of disappointments in politicians the world over who have flattered to deceive.
He says little of substance.
Oh, lids coming off the Marshall sleaze story in Glasgow East:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/2446349/Labour-facing-humiliation-in-Glasgow-East-by-election.html
Labour calling the SNP ‘Nazis’ will backfire big time. Calling Alex Salmond the ‘Führer’ is surely very defamatory. Are Scottish Labour learning some bad unpleasant tricks from the UK Labour Party? For years English Nationalists have been branded racists and nazis, so now they say the Scots Nats are racists and fascists too.
I see many parts of Scotland are now experiencing mass immigration like England has been for years. I wonder what the betting will be for which Scottish city becomes the first ethnic majority city, Will it be Edinburgh or Glasgow? Mosques are being built there too so multiculturalism will soon creep onto the Scottish political scene. Will a right wing nationalist ‘ Scotland First Party’ form as the SNP don’t appear to have opinions on immigration (correct me if I am wrong)?
The SNP are an inclusive party and welcome support from all people who live in Scotland.
Many people who were born outside Scotland but who live here are members of the SNP including English,Welsh, Maltese,Poles,French, American etc to name but a few.
The SNP have also made clear, that every race living in Scotland st the time of Independence will be able to claim Scottish citizenship.