In Melbourne as elsewhere, the November 24 election produced a pattern of strong swings in outer suburbs and weak ones nearer the city, which cut across the partisan divide. The swing against veteran Liberal moderate Petro Georgiou in blue-ribbon Kooyong was just 0.05 per cent, while Peter Costello faced a similarly mild 1.7 per cent shift in neighbouring Higgins. This pattern carried over to the conservative dead zone of Melbourne, which swung only 1.1 per cent in Labor-versus-Liberal terms. However, the real story here was Greens candidate Adam Bandt’s success in edging out the Liberal candidate to take second place. The Greens’ primary vote was up 3.8 per cent to 22.8 per cent, 0.7 per cent behind the Liberals. This gap was bridged after distribution of minor party preferences, with Bandt leading the Liberal candidate 21,996 (25.1 per cent) to 21,405 (24.4 per cent) at the second last exclusion. Liberal preferences then took Bandt to within 4.7 per cent of victory, producing the first ever “Labor versus Greens” two-party result in a federal seat at a general election. This is the first time Melbourne has met the AEC’s definition of a marginal seat (6 per cent or less) since 1904.
Beyond the swing-resistant inner core of Melbourne, Kooyong and Higgins lay a band of seats separating it from the volatile outer suburbs. Batman followed the broader pattern of mild swings of around 4 per cent in inner suburban Northcote, and heavier ones of 6 per cent to 7 per cent at Preston and Reservoir further to the north. The Greens’ vote was up 3.2 per cent to 17.2 per cent, a potentially bridgeable 3.4 per cent behind the Liberals. Jagajaga, Chisholm and Menzies produced near identical swings of 4.6 per cent to 4.7 per cent, respectively staying safe for Labor’s Jenny Macklin and Anna Burke and the Liberals’ Kevin Andrews. On the bayside, Melbourne Ports produced a relatively gentle 3.4 per cent swing which was nonetheless the biggest movement in the electorate since 1993, while its safe Liberal neighbour Goldstein swung 4.0 per cent.
The two biggest swings were in the Melbourne area were in the outer suburban suburbs of Calwell in the north and Holt in the south-east. Calwell topped the table at 11.1 per cent, with swings topping 15 per cent at Craigieburn on the outermost urban fringe. The 10.1 per cent swing in Holt was most pronounced in the south, peaking with a mighty 17.5 per cent swing at the electorate’s largest booth of Narre Warren South. Swings in the north were in the range of 5 per cent to 9 per cent. In what might be regarded as the defining booth result of the election, a 10.96 per cent swing to Labor was recorded at Kath and Kim’s home of Fountain Gate.
Labor added some fat to a number of margins in traditionally safe south-eastern seats that were cut uncomfortably fine in 2004. After previous member Ann Corcoran suffered an unexpectedly close shave in 2004, newcomer Mark Dreyfus boosted the Labor margin from 1.5 per cent to 7.7 per cent in Isaacs, which produced heavier swings in the inland suburbs of Keysborough and Carrum Downs than along the coast. Immediately to the north, Simon Crean increased his margin from 7.4 per cent to 13.0 per cent in Hotham, with particularly strong swings recorded in Springvale. In Bruce the swing to Labor was an evenly distributed 4.8 per cent, increasing Alan Griffin’s margin to 8.3 per cent.
Liberal seats in the eastern suburbs mostly followed the trend of their Labor-held neighbours. Only in the case of Deakin was the swing enough for a seat to change hands, Labor winning the seat for only the second time since its creation in 1937. Their candidate Mike Symon picked up 5.7 per cent on the primary vote and 6.4 per cent on two-party preferred to prevail with a margin of 1.4 per cent, ending the 11-year parliamentary career of Liberal member Phil Barresi. Labor achieved an identical swing further afield in McEwen, which was famously 12 votes short of what was needed to unseat Fran Bailey. The swing peaked at South Morang (10.6 per cent) and Wallan Wallan (9.1 per cent), but there was no clearly discernible pattern to its distribution. Labor’s other disappointment was a 5.3 per cent swing in La Trobe that fell 0.5 per cent short of delivering them the seat. The Dandenong Ranges formed a rough dividing line between suburbs on the city side where the swing was in the order of what Labor required, and the hill suburbs and surrounding small towns where it fell just short at around 4 per cent.
On safer ground for the Liberals, Bruce Billson’s seat of Dunkley returned to the marginal zone with a swing of 4.2 per cent that was felt more heavily in Frankston than Mornington and Mount Eliza. In outer suburban and semi-rural Casey, Tony Smith suffered a 5.4 per cent swing that was higher in suburban Croydon and Kilsyth than in the satellite towns of Monbulk and Woori Yallock. It is interesting to note a particularly sharp 8.1 per cent swing in Aston, which memorably gave the Liberals a bigger margin in 2004 than Kooyong. Any thoughts that this might have marked a long-term realignment can now be laid to rest, as the respective margins are now 5.0 per cent and 9.5 per cent.
Labor’s safe seats in the west and north of Melbourne produced remarkably consistent swings of between 5.5 per cent to 6.7 per cent, excepting the aforementioned Calwell. Wills followed the pattern of neighbouring Batman in producing smaller swings of around 4 per cent at Brunswick at the southern end nearer the city, increasing to around 7 per cent at Glenroy in the north. Bill Shorten’s candidacy appeared not to make much difference one way or the other in Maribyrnong, which swung to Labor by a locally typical 5.8 per cent which was evenly distributed through the electorate. There was similarly consistency in the swings in Gellibrand (6.5 per cent), Gorton (6.3 per cent) and Lalor (6.7 per cent).
739 Comments
interesting to see a particularly large swing in Springvale. Big Asian population around here.
with the great result in Bennelong added to this, i think it’s safe to assume K.Rudd is a hit with Asian Aussies.
The AEC now says that results are final, but where’s the 2PP count for the seat of Melbourne? I know it’s a minor detail, but it means that the AEC currently has 2PP counts for only 149 of the 150 HoR seats. As Melbourne is very strong Labor on a Labor vs Lib basis, they are currently under-estimating Labor’s national 2PP by about 0.15%, and, more significantly, Labor’s Vic 2PP by 0.5%. This also affects the 2PP distributions of minor parties, particularly the Greens.
William,
I think you will find that Wandin and Woori Yallock are separate townships.
Thanks GG, meant Woori Yallock.
The right wing nutters need to take note, KOOYONG, held by a real liberal, white in a sea of red.
I don’t know Charles – I’d suggest that the relatively affluent parts of Melbourne voted roughly in accordance with their class interests. To wit, those relatively less shafted by Workchoices were less likely to vote against the Libs.
The prevalence of major swings in already-safe ALP areas of a working class nature (think Calwell, for instance) also supports this hypothesis.
Interestingly, the race-baiting of Howard and Andrews, if it had any helpful effect for the Coalition at all, was certainly not helpful in any areas with a reasonable degree of ethnic diversity. Since most of Melbourne and Sydney fall into this category, this was a pretty dumb tactic.
The Happy Revolutionary @ #6 brings up an interesting point. For all the work that Andrews and Howard put into the racist vote, there is very little evidence of any positive dividend for them, and plenty of evidence for the negative. A quick trip around the blogosphere reveals that there is plenty of fertile ground to be ploughed by such grubs, which is of course part of the reason for the efforts of Andrews/Howard. Further recent revelations from Malcolm Fraser demonstrate that racism is a big part of Howards nature in any case.
Perhaps it takes a series of well known public events to stir the racism fires sufficiently to make it a vote changer. The previous election followed on the heels of a series of well published rapes, a related series of shootings, and general well publicised lawlessness on the part of a large group of mostly lebanese muslim thugs. The usual suspects were able to transfer the responsibility for these crimes to the general Muslim population, and ultimately provide an atmosphere where any mention of Islam or Lebanon/Middle Eastern sent voters scurrying for shelter.
Or was it that with the sword of work choices hanging over their necks, the voters susceptible to the racist dog whistle were not hearing anything without any particular event of bad behaviour that could be sheeted home to the islamic community.
This is excellent analysis again, very helpful for a newbie like myself
I’m very interested in guessing how much of the swing in Victoria (and therefore Kooyong) was simply a re-balancing of the swing to L-NP that was driven by the bi-polar Latham experiment in 2004.
My guess has been 1.0 – 1.5 % of the swing to the ALP in Victoria was a simple re-adjustment from 2004.
Factor this out of the ALP swing and maybe Petro would have had a positive swing
Mike @ 6.
The circumstances in 2001 were considerably different. People were genuinely frightened about the threat of Islamofascists and their terrorism. In those situations people will react badly because they see their way of life under direct threat.
It is true that Howard et al took political advantage of the situation and exacerbated and amplified the concerns of the public. However, they misunderstood fear about a particular time and place as being a generalised racist sentiment.
Terrorism still exists but people are more attuned to dealing with it. With the heat out of the issue, people focus on other more pressing threats e.g. Work Choices and interest rate rises.
It was not a particularly edifying time in Australian History, but we have to forgive ourselves and move on.
Mike,GG
Following on from your excellent comments-maybe the reason Petro’s swing was so mininal was that he distinguished himself by not following the conga line of rascism and being seen (along with a couple of others) as a “real liberal” and not the myopic and insular “howardism” that was imposed on Oz for the last 11 years.
What’s the ethnic makeup of Kooyong? Many Asians there? If so, maybe Petro’s small-l liberalism did help him weather the storm that blew away many of his less enthusiastically multicultural colleagues. On the other hand, if the seat is uniformly white and wealthy, they were probably just ticking the “Liberal Party” box on the ballot paper, not the “Petro” box.
Greensborough Growler,
Good post. Hopefully the Libs can learn that the Australian public are NOT intrinsically racist in outlook and put their racism strategies in the dustbin of history.
So far in their post election analyses, they haven’t demonstrated any willingness to honestly review their past performance to any degree that they can learn from this defeat and restructure and revamp their ideology to more represent the aspirations and needs of the 21st century Australia.
Unless there is a willingness to confront their sordid and wasteful period in Government under Howard, then they are destined to a substantial period in the wilderness.
Rudd and Labor are not going to waste the opportunity handed to them by the Australian electorate and although they will make some mistakes during this term, they will more than gain the confidence of the people who took the risk in electing what they feel are a competent, principled Government.
Craig, the affluence of Kooyong is not much of a factor in producing the negligible swing recorded in that seat in the recent election. Goldstein, Melbourne Ports, Higgins, and Melbourne are all affluent seats on average and, yet, recorded larger swings.
Petro survived the anti-Coalition swing simply because the people of Kooyong believe that he is a good member, and much of that comes down to his small-l Liberal ethos. He comes across as a decent, fair, and reasonable human being who actually displays some level of concern about the social impact of various policies of the Liberal Party.
I know of a couple of rusted-on Labor voters in Kooyong who have a lot of respect and liking for Petro. It indicates that Petro himself stands somewhere near the centre of politics even though the rest of his party are FAR to the right.
The continued infiltration of extreme right-wingers into the Liberal Party will be its ultimate undoing. People don’t want their brand of politics and Petro has shown that VERY clearly.
Noocat,spot on!
Re Craig at 11 and Noorcat at 13, I agree with Noocat. I used to be a Kooyong person but moved to Melbourne. Altough never voting for Petro I respected him a great deal and wrote to congratulate him on his stand. He certainly was high up on my preferences. Re the character of the electorate I suspect there is a change in the electorate in the North Balwyn area as people buy to be in the Balwyn High School zone. But to me the big factor is that if you are a professional working in Melbourne (and Kooyong is full of professionals) you will be working with professionals of all ethnic backgrounds. You will have respect of these people and the wedging is just seen as a low political tactic. Even if you are not living in the same street as non-Angloceltic, non-mediterannean, non-northern European, you will know plenty of people who come from Asia and the Middle East and you will be very comfortable with and welcoming of these migrants.
Petro and only three other Libs that spoke out against the appalling sitution re refugee detention are the only Libs i have any respect for. They stood up against the big party machine and placed basic humanity above the Libs determination to use race and fear for political gain. Hence the small swing.
An important factor in Petro’s continuing popularity is precisely because he has come out many times in support of migrant groups and against Howard’s racist agendas. Yes, he represents the electorate well, but he has also been a vocal opponent of mandatory detention, the citizenship test (more recently) and has sponsored two Private Member’s Bills aiming at giving a wider range of human rights to refugees. Like Noocat I think that many Labor and other non-Liberal supporters would support him for his convictions and actions. And of course it doesn’t hurt (in this electorate) that he’s the prime example of the successful migrant. After all, many of the people in his electorate come from migrant backgrounds.
Islam and Pakistan….and US involvement.
http://www.fpif.org/fpiftxt/4845
Remember once hearing an English-born American saying that the English discuss issues for yonks,but rarely act, whereas the US act first and then maybe discuss later,if they haven’t already moved on to something else.
Re Hotham – It should be noted that the Liberal HTV coverage in Springvale was very poor. At the last election they covered the area properly for once. This time back to a few people in the morning. Makes a big difference if there is no one handing out or no posters for a candidate.
I’d like to think that Noocat is right that Petro G. has had a personal vote because of his principled stand on what might loosely be termed the “race” issue. There is some support for the proposition, as the other Victorian to do significantly better than the Liberals’ average was Russell Broadbent in McMillan, who also was in a Liberal party room minority on refugee issues. There were some other factors involved in that seat, but his performance is at least suggestive evidence.
However, Kooyong went the other way in 2004, so there is also some evidence for the contrary hypothesis that it was merely reverting to the mean. Mr. Squiggle has made this suggestion as applying to Victoria more generally. I haven’t done the figures but my recollection is that Holt and Calwell swung heavily (at the top of anti-Labor swing table in 2004?) against Labor last time, and they’ve swung back more than proportionately this time. A comparison of 2001 and 2007 figures would be enlightening. (In terms of the idea, I’m obviously plagiarising Peter Brent’s instructive comparisons of NSW seats over the years of Howard rule.)
I’d also wish that the optimistic view of the electorate’s response to the race issue was right. However, I think it can be argued that Howard (& Andrews and the other strident voices in the Government) have already mined that seam. I think the research design for testing the proposition would need to compare either 1998 votes with 2007 (before Tampa) or even 1993 (pre-Howard).
Btw, when Kath and Kim was in its early stages of production, I understand that the writers didn’t know of Fountain Gate’s existence, and in truth Fountain Gate is nothing like its fictional version (filming actually occurs at Southland in the affluent bayside suburbs). This was a case of art mimicking life as well as a demonstration of the gulf in consciousness between inner urban Melbourne and its outer suburbs.
//Hopefully the Libs can learn that the Australian public are NOT intrinsically racist in outlook and put their racism strategies in the dustbin of history//
Scorpio, I’m not hopeful of that at all. One particularly odious individual who specialises in the dog whistle electoral trick seems to have a higher profile than ever now – Andrew Robb. They’re hooked on the tactic, because they get encouraged to do it. I went to a Liberal Party branch meeting once a few years ago (purely in a “know your enemy” sense of course) and it was absolutely dominated by some really nasty racist neocon types who i suspect knew full well the power of the dog whistle to what they see as their base supporter groups.
Did we see P Giorgio coming into the shadow ministry? The prosecution rests m’lord…
Is anbody around who could answers this dumb question for me please.
How, in the shortest possible way can I explain the american presidential voting system to my esl(very very esl) motherinlaw.
I will pay
Like T@M at 21 above, I am a bit sceptical about claims that racism is not a significant part of the Aust make up. I am mindfull of the apparent ease that Fred Nile, the very unchristian cleric of Sydney was recently able to summon up a crowd of frothing lunatics over the issue of a Muslim school in Camden on Sydneys southwestern outskirts.
As a child, I was brought up in a western NSW town, where casual racism and violence, especially sexual violence, were commonly practised against the reasonably large Aboriginal community. When I go back there I see that the attitudes have not changed at all, only resentment at the vigour with which many Aboriginals now react to racism. Many openly long for and reminisce about the good old days.
I now live in Canberra, in a relatively affluent part of supposedly the best educated State/Territory of Aust. Just last week I saw at our local Mall a couple walking in the evening cool, doing absolutely no harm to anyone, except that they were both dressed in long robe style clothing, and she was wearing a headscarf. This was sufficient for two separate carloads of bogans to throw fast food rubbish and insults at them, one of the cars returning for a second go.
I was shocked but not surprised. My first mental reaction was to blame the past Govt and their dog whistles, but when I thought about it I realised that the event was just a replay of the behaviour I saw all too often in my childhood. The coalition did not invent Aussie racism, they did not make Aussie racism any more prevalent. They were just prepared to make it acceptable to openly practise racism and racial thuggery as a political tactic. The dog whistle did not have to be very loud to bring a crowd of racists out of cover.
I wish it were otherwise.
Racism is essentially fear of the “other”. You have to be taught it. Little kids playing together ignore it. One of my Anglo neighbours kids became fluent in Cantonese because he was always playing with his next door neighbours – they were Cantonese speakers.
Once you are comfortable in your own skin, you realise that it’s OK if others are different form you – whether culturally, intellectually, racially or sexually. The last government was ruled by a man writ little. He has a fear of the other because he was taught how to hate and does not have the intellectual depth or curiosity to explore the reasons for his bigotry. Indeed, in public, he has always said “I am not a racist” yet his many actions… (I leave you to fill in the blanks).
In order for the Greens to now win in Melbourne they need preferences from that “minor party” the Liberals. This is not a given for two reasons:
1) The Liberals have in the past run a scare campaign about the greens which might be more effective if there are some concessions forced out by the Senate. They could try a “leave them last” move like the ALP did with the One Nation party which the Coalition struggled to cope with at times (QLD 98 in particular). This is likely to happen if the Greens do get some major concession in the senate.
2) Some Liberal voters don’t follow the HTV cards. Although they do seem to follow them more closely than other voters (something about following orders I guess), many would be disgusted if their vote elected one of those “Commie Greens”.
Another point is that the Liberal vote is likely to have hit rock bottom in the seat as it is likely the seat has more potentional “wets” who now without Howard might to come back to fold. I mean the seat is getting richer and not all the new comers are going to be “doctor’s wives”.
I’ll never forget back in ‘77 as an 11 year old boy walking past the local kindergarten on my way to school & saw the local toddlers out playing & I waved to one as I passed. The infant ran up to the fence & started yelling at me the most vile,racist insults towards me (I am Australian born to Greek-Cypriot parents) whilst this was going on the rest of the kiddies swarmed up to the fence & joined in with equal vigor. I was shook to the core even at that age that out of the mouths of babes that such evil could spew forth. Even my school mate who was with me couldn’t believe it!
Now back in the ’70s I was use to racism & bullying in numbers at school from the school age kids but coming from babies is something totally WRONG. Australian racism from my direct experience I learned from that day can only mean that it is learned at home from mum & dad and how sad I was when I realised it.
Now I thank God that times have moved on from that era & we are a more tolerable society then what we where then. I am not saying that racism is dead & I acknowledge that Howard & co used it as a favored wedge wherever possible (Dr Haneef comes to mind) but I believe that Australia is still evolving & for the better. I’ll point out the Hanson phenomenon from 10 years ago with her anti- Asian stirrings from QLD to another Quenslander who speaks Mandarin & just became our PM.
Things can only get better.
PS – I grew up on the south side of Brisbane.
BS that’s BS
A large factor keeping the Greens out of inner city Melbourne and Sydney are residual migrant populations most of whom are elderly and Labor orientated, when many of these post war greeks and italians go to “meet their Marx” so to speak the Labor vote will be impacted.
Hi ESJ…HNY you old smoothy you!!
ESJ that’s ESJ (extremely stupid judgement).
Offer some facts rather than your haughty opinions from on high. The Greens rise is because all the Libs have gone to Ming.
Happy New Year. Nice yo see you back.
Yeah, Glenn really got lonely.LOL!!!
Looks like the new Lib leader “half Nelson” is intent on continuing on with Howard & Costello’s comparison of the economy to a finely tuned sports car.
{”Whilst it’s important that everyday Australians actually get a fair go, the one thing we can’t afford is union bosses taking the finely tuned economy … out to do burn outs and run the risk of engine blow-ups.”}
And it is apparent that “Unions boo” still has a bit of mileage in it yet also. Either that or they just have absolutely nothing left to offer their jaded and dispirited supporters.
{”I’m not confident that Mr Rudd and Julia Gillard will be able to stand up to the unions, because let’s remember that in the end the unions actually own the Labor party.”}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23001600-2702,00.html
Any evidence that anyone is actually listening to Nelson anymore than they were Howard towards the end?
Yawn……………………
Another dispirited ex Liberal leader heading for the lifeboats.
{FORMER West Australian opposition leader Matt Birney will retire from politics because he does not want to become a “political tragic”.}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23002027-2702,00.html
The confidence expressed here by a number of Liberal supporters a few days ago after the WA poll results that the Libs would be in with a good chance of toppling Carpenter’s Labor Government at the next election, doesn’t appear to be shared by the ones that count.
Megan ,
See the link in my post @ 31.
The GG is still listening, but I don’t think Nelson has anything to say that would interest any one else in particular.
More problems at the cricket. “Howard relegated to 12th man”.
{Former PM Bob Hawke was watching the match from the cosy surrounds of the SCG Trust box.}
{When Mr Howard, new PM Kevin Rudd, Federal Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson, NSW Premier Morris Iemma, Governor-General Michael Jeffery and Australia’s former defence head Peter Cosgrove all accept invitations to the cricket on the same day, the protocol system hits meltdown.
Because all seating allocations have to be done without bruising egos or downplaying anyone’s importance.
So the premier position was taken by Mr Rudd.}
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22999574-5001021,00.html
The easiet way to avoid bruising egos and down playing anyones importance is to ask them to but their own ticket.
No, it’s only the “peasants” and “working families” that have to buy their own tickets.
This is quite funny, though!
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/opinion/cartoons/
I wonder what’s in the water at the GG.
Peter Brent from Mumble has got a column in todays issue.
I like the article too. Looks like Bill Kelty agrees with me.
{NINE days after last year’s federal election, The Age ran an opinion piece by former ACTU secretary Bill Kelty. In it he laid out what he believed were the reasons for the Liberal Party’s November 24 loss, and what they should do to regain relevance.
The party, he wrote, had “grown old, intolerant and less open to ideas” and so had “lost touch with a generation”. They now must move back to the centre and embrace diversity and multiculturalism. And stop bashing unions, of course.
Welcome to Opposition, Brendan Nelson and team. It must be galling to be so lectured by someone intimately associated with the other side of politics, but they had better get used to it. }
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,22998699-7583,00.html
And, attuned, I awake.
Not to the Iowa primaries, or any such. The sound of my neighbour’s pump, drawing water again from the bore, to water his grass and the road. The road looks very fine and wet. Not that it has grown.
So, I did my thing, went in, patted Rebel, turned off the water.
Message, South Aussies, to Maywald, Rann, if you would enjoin, please.
SlartyB @22., try this
http://www.enchantedlearning.com/vote/presidential_elections.shtml
Might help.
Re Mr Birney
his seat is marginal and he has a personal vote in excess of 5%
this is a good chance of a labor win
I nominate the state seats of Balmain and Marrickville as examples.
In the former the best Labor vote comes from the Haberfield (ie Italian population) and Marrickville (in the centre where the Greek population) is located. It is no accident that the Labor candidates both elected in the last 2 years focused heavily on these groups.
No doubt there are Liberals who wont vote for Greens element but I imagine its not beyond even the Liberal party imagination to run dead (ie run a 19 year old uni student) like Labor does in many country seats in the hope of independents getting up.
Secondly the inner city is the home of the proverbial disaffected leftie who may have been in the ALP but is now in the Greens. Look to the underlying factors – on the Leichardt Council where the greens are a plurality but not a majority the Labor councillors vote with the Liberals to keep the Greens out.
It is not beyond the realms of possibility that the local councils in the inner city will be greener in this years local government elections (given the unpopularity of the State Labor Government in NSW).
Hi Bludgers
Had a great time on Fraser Island.
Will be back on Sunday to annoy you lot…LOL.
My experience (in seats that aren’t Labor/Green marginals) is that around 20% of Liberal voters ignore the HTVs and preference Labor ahead of the Greens – usually well down the ticket, but there’s a surprising number of major party voters (on both sides) who put the other major party second ahead of all minors.
At the Kath and Kim booth of Fountain Gate I see the Greens recieved 3.75% for the senate and 3.63% in the house of reps. While there was an overall increse in the Greens vote across the state it did not occur in the mortgage belt, their vote decreased.
Di Natale was very unfortunate not to win a senate seat with a considerable 10.08%. It shows the Greens strength in the inner city and the huge improvements in the bush.
But can the Greens continue to carry the disinterest from a massive part of the electorate? The mothers and fathers of Jaxon and Tyfanee think the Greens are on the nose. And it’s not noice.
Obama is getting very short in the odds at Betfair.
Down to 1.29 to win Iowa.
ESJ,
Have no idea about Council elections in Sydney. However, my experience here in the beautiful never ending sunshine of Melbourne is that Council elections are mostly about roads, rubbish, rates and making sure “doggy do” is collected from local parks. There is not much ideological about these items, so the notions of “doctor’s wives”, “disaffected lefties” and “secret immigrant enclaves” is just a giggle.
Development/redevelopment and neighbourhood character issues can be controversial. But what you find is division is rarely ideological along the traditional Labor/Liberal divide. Neither Labor nor Liberal endorse candidates in Council elections. This is in direct response to voters wishes that party politics be kept out of Council. Of course many Councillors are members of political partys. However, I find it unremarkable that Liberal and Labor Councillors work together on Councils.
Why they would group to exclude the Greens, see my first paragraph. The Greens don’t seem to understand the simplicity of the task!
Whether the voters punish Labor at the next Council elections in your State is open to speculation. But, I do point out that those same voters just endorsed Rudd and his Ruddernauts in rather convincing fashion.
In Marrickville The Greens 2PP seems to have plateaued at around 40%. From memory, they received about 600 more votes at the 2007 State election than they had in the previous one, which I though pretty disappointing given the way Iemma and Costa were campaigning hard for anyone but Labor.
In the aftermath the impression I got was that enough people just didn’t take the Greens seriously. There also seemed general hostility, based on the Telegraph’s usual malarkey as well as other predictables like the EB talking about a gay smack agenda that would be forced on the good people.
Perhaps if we see a re-centring of political ideas generally, post Howard, and the Greens can get some more positive press with their greater power in the Senate, they will be seen as more viable generally. This may translate into greater appeal at the State level in seats like Marrickville and Balmain. On the other hand, if Rudd makes Federal Labor (and the ALP brand) more attractive to leftist supporters, and Watkins takes over in NSW and can begin bailing the water out of the sinking ship, I find it hard to see The Greens increasing their vote beyond where it has sat for the past 4 years in these areas.
Looks like more trouble within the WA Libs.
Paul Omodei doesn’t seem to be able to hold them together either. The State Libs seem to have a death wish and apparently like to make Labor’s job of holding the reins of power in Government, just that little bit easier even when conditions on the ground seem to be going their way.
{A SERIOUS challenge to the West Australian Liberal Party’s unpopular leader Paul Omodei is firming after one of two MPs with supported ambitions for the top job announced he would quit at the next election.
Kalgoorlie MP Matt Birney’s resignation, almost two years after losing the leadership to Mr Omodei in a bitter poll, clears the way for Mr Birney’s rival, Troy Buswell, to challenge.}
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23003682-5013945,00.html
There maybe a double whammy for the Libs in this chart when you overlay enrollments with a view to the forthcoming redistribution.
If you look at where the high and low population growth seats are located regions and project out until 2014 using the average growth rate in enrollments for Vic (okay … I don’t have a life) then the following trends are apparent:
Firstly, the swing against the Libs was broadly weakest in the two areas of slowest population growth:
Rural – below trend growth: (Indi/Murray/Mallee/Wannon/Gippsland/McMillan) (i calculate net 0.5 quota)
Middle urban below trend growth. (Kooyong/Hotham/Higgins/Bruce/Menzies /Aston/Chisholm/Casey/Deakin/Maribyrnong/Jaga Jaga) will all collectively surrender about 1.3 of a quota.
The fastest population growth seats were unsurprisingly at the perimeter of Melbourne (Gorton/McEwen/Lalor/Corangamite/Melbourne/Calwell/Scullin/Holt/LaTrobe) all will need at least 1.0 extra quota in Vic (mostly likely to be followed by a second seat on current trends mid next decade) and all swung strongly (except Melbourne) to the ALP.
Growth rates appear slower now in the South East of the city than the North West and it was a big surprise to me that McMillan had one of the slowest projected population growth rates.
Melbourne’s south (Melbourne Ports/Isaacs/Goldstein/Dunkley/Flinders) and Victoria’s regional seats (Bendigo/Ballarat) I expect to be the least impacted.
I expect over time (first next year then following in say 8/10 years) one eastern urban and one rural seat (either Liberal or marginal ALP) will be abolished and shifted first to the northwest and then subsequently one to the west as Melbourne’s fastest population growth is now to the North and west of the city, areas this chart which showed the strongest swings to the ALP.
This thus just underscores the Liberal’s need to broaden their voter base.
Iowa numbers coming in here: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/primaries/states/ia/d/
Anyone know of a better place?
LD, thanks for the population growth information — very interesting. Those areas with fast population growth are also some of the ones with a high proportion of single-parent families, much affected by the Howard govt’s welfare policies. This surely means that if Labor does a reasonable job at supporting these ‘working families’ it will take a while for the libs to make any inroads. It’s a shame about Indi, I’d love to see a sudden population explosion in Sophie’s seat.
http://www.iowacaucusresults.com/ this has the democrats but can’t find republicans…
Glen: Which candidate are you supporting?
WTF??!! rudy guiliani on youtube…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2iFhGtKO-Q&eurl=
Dems a 3 horse race. Anyway to the expected outcome? Are these expected strong Obama areas of Iowa?
Weird ad cobber – pretty confusing, with only a couple of seconds at the end acknowledging Rudy. Although I suppose it is just one of many ads he’d be using.
It does make the Libs ad campaigns seem like childs play though.
Daryll, my understanding is that Iowa and New Hampshire are where Edwards has put most of his resources hoping for a good start and some momentum. Clinton has raised as much money as the other two combined in Iowa according to the Washington Post link above.
McCain and Rudy with poor showings so far according to: http://projects.washingtonpost.com/2008-presidential-candidates/primaries/states/ia/r/
pancho yr probably right one of many adds, i’d like to see his pitch for the gay vote?
Wow, LD thank you for your contribution.
apres, the outer north western suburbs would also house many people affected by increased interest rates, negative equity and the deleterious effects of Work Choices.
LD is right the Libs need to desperately broaden their base if they are to remain relevant and viable. Of course, what we get is more Union Bashing.
http://www.theage.com.au/news/national/labor-to-take-hard-line-on-illegal-strikes-gillard/2008/01/03/1198949988102.html
This is interesting. Glen, have you got any money on Huckabee?
{Former Governor Mike Huckabee has won the Iowa Republican caucus, surging past better-known rivals to triumph in the first nominating contest of the 2008 US presidential election, US media reported. Mitt Romney has come second.
The Iowa victory gave Huckabee, a former Arkansas governor and ordained Baptist minister, momentum and national credibility for his shoestring campaign as he headed toward the January 8 primary vote in New Hampshire, where polls showed him running a distant third.}
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/huckabee-wins-in-iowa/2008/01/04/1198950042900.html
Looks like Barack is home – polling 36% to the others at about 30, with the margin increasing as the late precincts (presumably the bigger ones?) are reporting. Could end up with towards 40 as opposed to two under 30s. Second place will be interesting. You’d think that Clinton would be very unhappy with a third placing if that was how it ended.
Go Barack go. I would love to see the Iowa result take all the wind out of the Clinton campaign.
Democrats Iowa results
1st…Obama 37%
2nd…Edwards 30%
3rd…Clinton 30%
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21229206
SlartyB @22., try this
http://media.news.com.au/multimedia/mediaplayer/skins/black/index.html?id=699
I think the Republicans have real problems. Romney evidently lost today because the evangelical Republicans didn’t want to vote for a Mormon, despite him being the hard right’s favoured candidate along with Thompson (who the electorate views as too dim to beat any of the very intelligent Democrat 3). The neocons hate Guiliani and McCain, and know their days of unfettered influence will be numbered under them. It looks like the Republican party will tear itself apart so comprehensively that the Libs in Australia will look like a well-oiled cohesive machine in comparison.
Obama making his speech now
mms://msnbc.wm.llnwd.net/msnbc_2_live_8825
New York Times-Obama and Huckabee win in Iowa vote.
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/B010308Z.shtml
Tassieannie @ 40
Thanks, I was having a hard time explaining my very very limited understanding of the process overthere. Not helped at all by vast quantities of her despicable home made wine that she proudlky gave me as a Chrissy present. (I was obliged to drink it but … well let’s just say it’s an aquired taste)
Damn, still had the old (m-inlaw is coming) cookie from the other day in my laptop,
Thanks also to you Scorpio@66, after a powerful hangover and a nice long surf this morning I think I will now go and learn about the American system
Thank you
apres -
I’ve tried my best for indi -(3 kids, and haven’t eaten any of them yet).
I’m pretty happy with how things went in Indi – Sophie got almost 9% swing against her, and this is such a conservative seat, even though the labor candidate was unremarkable.
greens did ok – about 1.3% increase taking us from 2.7% pre- 2004 to 8% now.
We polled almost 30% in some booths and many were between 15 – 20%.
Should do as the FF’s do, and try and breed ourselves into power, but what with global warming and all…
re US elections -
th republicans deserve to be completely wiped off the face of the earth at this election.
If Obama wins, neo-conservatism will go the same way as Stalinism, Nazism etc…history.
And with it will go the influence of the fundamentalist christians who are as bizarre and dangerous as their islamic counterparts IMHO. Clinton supported the invasion of Iraq and helped to feed the hatred of the West that the Hydra-like absurd “war on terror” so as much as i would like to see a woman president- not her.
read – that the ..”war on terror” has created.
As I posted on the old thread: Huckster and Obama, Ann Coulter will be frothing at the mouth.
Good to see Iowa nominate the weirdest Republican simply because he spruiks god and isn’t a Mormon.
Obama’s made history, firstly taking out a whitebread state, and secondly, beating Clinton by a good margin.
Republicans are sure they can beat Clinton nationally, since she’s got so much baggage and they’ve had years to dump shite all over her, but Obama is truly a cleanskin in comparison, and they don’t have a way to deal with pure charisma and smarts.
It’s going to be a very interesting race.
jen
The hardnut big money republicans are already ripping into Huckster, so it’s truly happening already, the hard right is trying to eat the religious nutters, and all Karl Rove’s wonderous ‘good works’ to make a fusion of them forever amen is dust in their mouths.
Hallejuah!
KR-
joy indeed.
If the REpublicans go down after Howard’s drubbing then perhaps it is a sign that some sanity will rturn to the west.
Not sure what to do about the extremist hatred of the West, btu it’s a s clear as day that the current approach has only worsened the situation. Whoever wins will be holding a poisoned chalice, but it’s a start.
Latest results for Iowa:
Barack Obama 936 38%
John Edwards 742 30%
Hillary Clinton 734 29%
I’d suggest something closer to the Marshall Plan than the Enola Gay would be a great place to start.
jen, it could not possibly be any worse than the current lot have made it! I agree it’s going to be an uphill bumpy road to restore some sanity into US foreign policy, although I’ve been a bit impressed that Condi Rice has at least muzzled the extreme loony Dick Cheney and made some small progress towards a saner response.
Huckster is just not credible on the big stage, but I think Obama has the style to roll Clinton. (I’ve got a good bet on McCain and long odds, to draw in the serious Republicans, but there’s no point ‘misunderestimating’ Republicans, is there?)
The more I read about the debacle in Iraq, the colossal mess in Pakistan, and realise this just did not have to be this way, the more desperately I hope that we get sane Democrat leadership. We don’t deserve these nutters wrecking the world , shooting with their neoconservative blinkers on.
Kr
hear hear.
And people say the Greens are extreme…. go figure.
Huge turnout for Democratic Party today, no wonder Glen was following the results at the Democratic Party website.
“Turnout among Democrats topped 220,000, smashing the previous record of 124,000 in 2004 — testament to the high enthusiasm among Democrats heading into November’s election.”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080104/pl_nm/usa_politics_dc
BTW -
I was given a day calender of Bushisms – trulu bloody incredible that this fool was/is the leadr of the free world.
My 8 year old is far more coherent. So, for that matter is my dog.
(They can both type better thn me though)
jen, here’s a bit of Obama’s victory speech, (just try and imagine anything like it coming from the mouth of GWB!)
If elected, Obama vowed, “I’ll be a president that ends this war in Iraq and finally brings our troops home, who restores our moral standing, who understands that 9-11 is not a way a way to scare up votes but a challenge that should unite America and the world against the common threats of the 21st Century.”
“Hope is the bedrock of this nation, the belief that our destiny will not be written for us but by us, by all those men and women who are not content to settle for the world as it is but who have the courage to remake the world as it should be,” he said. “That is what we started here in Iowa and that is the message we can now carry to New Hampshire and beyond.”
I hope he wins, KR.
A leader who shows vision is a rare commodity indeed in these sorry times.
Apparently it was a corker of a speech, shades of JFK and Martin Luther King. (ooh, that’s not a good historical outcome, is it??)
The man has got the rhetorical muse and the wit to go the whole way, and if he can outdo Clinton in Iowa then he’s got to be in with a very good chance.
All Democrat precincts reported just now:
Barack Obama 940 37.6%
John Edwards 744 29.7%
Hillary Clinton 737 29.5%
And most of the Repulican:
Mike Huckabee 35,621 34.2%
W. Mitt Romney 26,524 25.5%
Fred Thompson 13,932 13.4%
John McCain 13,693 13.2%
(Note: Democrats don’t report the actual number of voters, but the State Caucus equivalents…go figure!)
BTW – here’s one for the record from GWB..
“The war on terror involves Saddam Hussein because of the nature of Saddam Hussein, the history of Saddam Hussein, and his willingness to terrorise himself”.
Glad we bombed the crap out of them then.
Diogenes
The best paragraph in that article, which borders on hagiography for Bhutto, comes from VS Naipaul:
In this sense, the war in Iraq was not only foolish but a moral crime because it diverted focus and resources from the real issue. Not focusing on Pakistan after 9/11, and instead contracting out to Musharraf, was a grave strategic error of the US. It paralleled two other mistakes in dealing with Islamist fundamentalists: first, the indiscriminate and unquestioning support (for) the Afghan resistance against the Soviets in Afghanistan in the 1980s, not distinguishing between the fundamentalist stem cells of al-Qa’ida (Gulbuddin Hekmatyar’s groups) and the democratic forces of young commander Massoud’s Northern Alliance; and then, America’s dangerous tolerance of Saudi Wahhabism in return for oil.
There’s more truth in that than the whole Bhutto was our great white hope to restore democracy to Pakistan! Firstly, democracy has hardly had much real influence in a country run by the military or fuedal families or bizarre arrangements between the two of them. Sure, there’s a big middle class that want to retain the British institutions, but it’s so overwhelmed by the corruption and violence of the two main protagonists.
Enter into this unholy mix the Taliban and their affiliates and you’ve got a stinking mess that’s been stirred and fortified with Bush’s bungling support for Musharraf.
when will we know the final result of the Democrats selection?
Whoever won that will be the next US President, I guess.
91
Democrat national convention is in August, then we’ll know.
Here is a take from David Nason about Obama’s foreign policy regarding the middle east esp re the Bhutto assassination. Things seem to be running his way and perhaps he is a true visionary.
“The impact on Obama is harder to measure. On one hand Rawalpindi highlights Obama’s inexperience in foreign policy and recalls Bill Clinton’s cruel barb that making Obama president would be “rolling the dice” with America’s future.
But on the other hand Obama’s much-criticised suggestion in August that US forces should strike at al-Qa’ida bases in Pakistan without worrying about getting permission from President Pervez Musharraf may now be judged as prophetically wise.
Obama responded yesterday with sensible caution, saying he had asked for briefings on the situation in Pakistan.
He also claimed that the war in Iraq had diverted troops and resources from the more important task of hunting al-Qa’ida terrorists operating between Afghanistan and Pakistan. “
I am a conservative and generally find myself more inline with Republicans than Democrats. The problem I have at this election is I dislike most of the candidates from both sides. The one that I don’t dislike however is Obama.
Ironic how Bush bangs on about democracy and freedom so much that it causes your ears to bleed and on the other hand supports unpaliatable regiemes like the House of Saud and that nutter Musharraf. I guess it is similar to how countries like North Korea put the word ‘democratic’ in their countries official name (Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea).
Here’s the Iowa victory speech from Obama.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080103/VIDEO05/80103084
The one common element about Howard and Bush is that they have both left the world a worse place. It is extremely hard to locate a policy by either leader with any merit or that has improved the world. In fact, most of their policies have actively made the world a worse place. I sincerely hope Obama becomes president, and neoconservatism dies a quick death.
Though I have my money on Obama, Edwards is the only one who has categorically stated he will have the troops home from Iraq in 12 months.
My money is on Obama and the future president will have to help clean up the mess that Bush created.
I don’t know how, but they can’t and won’t cut and run.
ESJ @ 27 – I think you miss the point I was trying to make. The Greens at the moment are not going to win on primaries. They are therefore they need the Liberals preferences in order to get over the top of the ALP. But the Liberals might have different plans.
You theory about their being an elderly population in Melbourne that is about to kick the bucket is false. Only about 8% of the population in the seat is over 65. It is in fact one of the younger seats given the large student population who are generally more Green than the general population. My point about the cost of housing increasing is that it is this group which might not be able to live there and those that replace them are not going to be as “Green” as a group.
scaper –
the chivas worked!
by “cut and run” do you mean they won’t/ can’t withdraw from Iraq?
Some commentators (can’t remember who, sorry) have made it clear that the US presence is inflaming the violence, even though it is said to be sectarian, and that in the event of a withdrawal there is greater chance of negotiation and settlement between the warring parties.
Not sure how correct this is, but staying there (and being there in the first place) has unleashed a complete bloodbath. At least a withdrawal would change the current dynamic.
Have just finished re-watching Michael Moore’s Farenheit 911 and Bowling for Columbine. He has to be one of the bravest individuals in the good old US of A. I guess I really don’t care who wins the Presidency, as long as they get rid of that evil cabal of neo-cons. Having said that, I feel that Obama has his job cut out, given the racist and lunatic fringe (or is that mainstream
) in the States.
What Obama said in his victory speech. Much more coherent that the edited highlights from the MSM.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7577.html
103 Steve.
thanks.
To see some passion and conviction enter the political debate after so much spin and lies is quite breathtaking.
makes Kevin seem pretty pallid in comparison.
54
Asanque -
If i was an American id support Rudy Giuliani because he’s not uber Christian conservative, he’s pro-choice, he’s strong on the GWOT and also wants to maintain tax cuts. He is by far the best choice of the Republican field when you have a 72 year old, a millionaire Mormon and a Baptist preacher. If the Republicans want a chance of beating Hillary or Obama they need Rudy IMHO.
Regardless of finishing 6th in Iowa who cares 16, 17 odd delegates Romney and Huckabee got big deal Rudy has his eyes fixed on the bigger primaries he’ll clean up in Florida, California and New York which will give him hundreds of delegates.
So says Glen
Glen there’s two other reasons for you to support Rudy too:
1. He is unlikely to win and your record of backing losers would remain intact.
2. It will give us eleven months of laughter as he wilts.
Steve as i recall i backed the winners out West in 07 in Cowan and Swan as well as Stirling so besides the national results my predictions werent too bad…i suspect you may have been one of the left wingers who said Rudd would win 100+ seats lol!
Steve your hubris precedes you but only a fool would almost entirely rule out one candidate by January 4th especially one who has consistently led the Republican field in the national polls…
Besides your attacks on Rudy are based on the fear that he is the only Republican capable of beating Hillary or Obama….nuff said
Having read Obama’s speech, I really hope he becomes President which would be the best thing that could happen for all of humanity. I would have loved to be able to vote for him in Australia. Given his comments about being the Democrat candidate most Republicans would vote for, I’d be interested to hear what Glen and ESJ would think of him being President.
Glen,
Guiliani will be rejected by the religious right-i.e.majority of Republicans- as he is too progressive,has some alleged romantic ‘blow-back’ which could prove problematic in the future and in the end the White House back-room boys /neocons will ochestrate a winner.
So says this cynic.
OK….maybe not a winner,but they will be having lots of strategy meetings as we speak.
110 Megan, it is the weird strategy that is a self imposed handicap with rudy. His idea seems to be to join the campaign late. There is much doubt about whether his strategy is sound. Some think not. Calls have been made for his advisors to be sacked, so worried are some republicans by his strange strategy.
The lunacy explained:
http://article.nationalreview.com/print/?q=ZjM5YzVmNmQwMGIzMmI2YjMxZjM5YzMyNjI0YTI5OTc=
Giuliani, or 9iu11iani as one wag called him, is not the next presidential candidate.
Just look at this:
Mike Huckabee 39,814 34.3%
W. Mitt Romney 29,405 25.3%
Fred Thompson 15,521 13.4%
John McCain 15,248 13.1%
Ron Paul 11,598 10.0%
Rudy Giuliani 4,013 3.5%
Duncan Hunter 515 0.4%
Tom Tancredo 5 0.0%
96% reporting | Updated 4:04 AM ET
Now, remember that Thompson entered the race very late, spent little time or money in Iowa and yet got almost four times as many votes as Rudy. A washed up actor beat Rudy by a longshot.
Even that dingbat loopyfruit Ron Paul got close to three times as many!
Now, tell me again that Rudy is going to clean up in Florida!
I think my pick of the Republicans would be Rudy, but that is picking from a very shallow selection. I cant see him winning as Republicans seem to be very censorious of others private lives.
I would like Obama to win over all, but will America vote for a black man?
Who is the Howard sprog working for among the Republicans? That might be an indication of who the neocons are backing.
This Rolling Stone article isn’t quite as positive – ‘Guiliani: worse than Bush’
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/060407O.shtml
101
jen
There’s two strongly competing forces in US policy: the imperial imperative to dominate a strategic Arab oil state, and the hard-nosed realistic appraisal that occupying that Arab country is never going to allow any kind of peaceful settlement.
The neocon’s had Israel and US hegemony as the central tenets, but despite a slight lull in US deaths recently, the reality is that the country is wound up tight like a spring and there’s a long way to go before those tensions can be released.
Obama realises that it was total lunacy to invade Iraq, that staying there cannot be justified, and all the baloney about al Qaeda ‘winning’ is pure Beltway pap. al Qaeda was not there before Saddam, is not a natural fit with the country’s Shiites or secular Sunnis, and will be dealt with easily.
What will not be dealt with easily is the inversion of the ‘natural’ order ie Sunnis are being totally removed from their middle class and ruling positions, there is massive sectarian ‘cleansing’ of Baghdad, and the internal Shiite forces are coming to the boil.
None of these things have a US military solution, and Obama pledges to pull out. He is, in my opinion, right, even if it will be a difficult thing to do. Clinton is more engaged with the military/industrial complex and is more equivocal about relinquishing US ‘control’. I think she’s wrong, they cannot get a better deal by just staying in the middle of a sectarian war.
But there you go…it’s complex.
Imagine if Howard had won the election and Obama wins the presidency? Now that would have been just great for our relations with the US wouldn’t it? The Australian people sure can get it right, not like the Americans!
They have had 4 years of George, 8 years of Bill, 8 years of Dubya and now they’re thinking of 4 years of Hillary. That’s 24 years of Bush/Clinton. Fair dinkum, you would think they were the only people in the US. It’s like watching a soapie? One minute Brooke, then Taylor, back to Brooke, and then Taylor again.
That’s the problem with the US, too many bloody soapies. So says Centre.
115
Megan
Rudy is monstrous, in just about every sense. He’s milked 9/11 so thoroughly that it almost became his only claim to become President, and outdo GWBush.
He’s run on fear, and almost nothing else. Oh yeah, he was mayor of New York and ran the place for his personal aggrandisement and with a ruthless political style that did not endear him to many who lived there.
Rudy is poison to the religious conservatives, (cross dressing, divorced a few times, pro-gay etc) and just cannot get the national numbers to win against any of the three major Democrat contenders.
After watching the dear folk of Iowa see right through him, I doubt he’ll last a day after Feb 5th.
113
Kirribilli Removals -
If you’d taken the chance to stay up to date with the national polls that have Rudy ahead by a substantial margin you’d also be aware that he hardly campaigned in Iowa and New Hampshire because he can’t win those races (christian conservatives). Instead he is focusing on Florida, California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York ect where he holds double digit leads…why you ask? Because these States have more delegates and are more centre-right so even if Huckabee won IW, NH and SC which he wont anyway but even if Rudy would win more delegates than him with taking Florida put together.
He’s a smart campaigner and despite the religious conservatives how many New Yorkers or Californians will vote for a Baptist preacher (Huckabee) over Giuliani???
The democratic field is a joke IMHO, Clinton who is as divisive as they come as 50% of Americans wouldn’t vote for her, you have Obama and Edwards both campaigning on raising taxes and surrender Iraq to al-Qaeda just as we’re winning and the only viable candidate Biden has bowed out.
Keep in mind, in a lot of the states with primaries, it is not a winner take all either. Huckabee might not win the majority of the vote in New York or California but he is likely to win the Christan right of the Republican vote which in those states is still a big percentage of the overall vote; just maybe not as high as in Iowa. So he might still get delegates for many of the more secular states.
119 Glen, here’s a reality pill.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/03/giuliani-camps-out-in-new_n_79621.html
Au contraire, Glen, you’ve not been paying attention to the movement, and that is down for Rudy nationally, and up for McCain.
As for that neocon codswallop about ’surrender to al Qaeda’, that’s as credible as Saddam’s WMD.
If you stop repeating Whitehouse talking points on Iraq, (which have been totally and utterly wrong for almost four years!), you may have time to really inform yourself about the history and the geopolitical facts of the place.
Sorry, but I never bothered to answer your innanities during our own elections, but I’ll try not to bother doing it again. I’ll let others get the fun instead.
121
steve
What’s that Steve? Some hard facts for Glen to chew on? How Rudy is not the messiah, just a very confused guy in a wig who keeps saying 9/11 a lot?
What a crack-up, now poor Glen is backing the next bigtime loser!
He’s got a magic touch for picking ‘em!
Fairman that is true about California but for New York my understanding is it is winner take all as are a few others which are pro-Rudy as including New York, New Jersey, Connecticut, Delaware and Missouri award delegates this way.
“Moreover, the Republican presidential primary has different rules. “It is winner-take-all by Congressional District,” Hoffenblum said. “There are 53 Congressional Districts. Whoever gets the most votes in a district gets three delegates.” That’s three delegates per district, whether the district has 200,000 registered Republicans like the 48th Congressional District in Orange County or 33,000 registered Republicans like the 9th Congressional District in the San Francisco Bay Area.”
There are alot of democrat districts who will vote for Rudy aswell as Republican ones too, still you’d have to favour Rudy against a baptist preacher in California.
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/04/30/schneider.california/index.html
122
Kirribilli Removals – he has maintained his lead in almost all national polls, and his average national lead is strong anyway his loses have largely been due to McCain but once he’s out Rudy will be in like Flynn.
(Was waiting for your response ,KR!)
Ahhhh, Glen, you know how to stir the possum!
I’m no expert but the following is:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juan_Cole
Most frightening prospect is Guiliani floating idea of Cheney as Vice-President.
124 glen it is now 2008, I know conservatives try to live in the past but the polls have moved on a little from your link tells us you are at. You are way back in time where Rudy was before his support fell away. Don’t happen to have a link to a recent poll with Rudy doing well do you? No, you have not, have you?
Megan, it’s not credible that Darth Vader can be kept cyrogenically alive for another stint as Veep, is it?
What a damn godawful bunch of crazies Bush and Co. have been, and of course the turnout in the Democrat caucuses in Iowa just shows how fired up Americans are to get their country back from them!
Repblicans are washed up, fractured, and despondently awaiting the removal of life-support from GWB’s presidency. Bush is the Terri Shiavo of the Whitehouse. Pity they didn’t pull his cord as well. (ooh, sorry, that’s a bit tacky. But hey, those loony tunes wanted to overturn the courts to keep that person’s body alive because hey, like, they are soooo ‘pro life’! Tell that to the poor families of Haditha!)
Steve of course i have, big whoop 2% behind to McCain who won’t win the primaries and anyway that’s from one poll and its within MOE.
The polls might be tight atm but that’s just because Rudy hasn’t been on the news because its been Huck and Romney battling it out in IW and because Rudy’s been campaigning in Florida and California most of the time and not the traditional Iowa or New Hampshire.
But now that Romney is a goner and McCain looks like taking New Hampshire that’s Romney out the back door then Rudy only has to beat Huckleberry that shouldn’t be too hard lol!
So i take it you’re an Edwards or Obama fan you seem to have a radical streak lol??
Truly incredible,KR.
Depends on who’s life,doesn’t it?
I simply cannot reisist:
No New York mayor, since the modern city was created in 1898, has ever been elected to another political office.
This one first came into play back in 1972 when Republican-turned-Democrat John Lindsay ran (badly) for president, and the rule proved its staying power in 1982 when Ed Koch lost a gubernatorial primary to Mario Cuomo. A few months ago, Rudy Giuliani seemed to many (but not to Roadies) to be the ex-mayor likely to burst the curse when he was riding high in the polls. But now that “America’s Mayor” has all but conceded Iowa and New Hampshire — and three marriages plus Bernie Kerik are taking their toll on his national poll numbers — there is a growing sense in the John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee camps that, yes, you can fight City Hall.
…gotta love Salon.com, ’tis full of interesting titbits.
129
Kirribilli Removals – not all Republicans are like that not the moderate Republicans anyway if you hate them so bad do you feel the same way about Arnie??
Ah, that’s the beauty of it Megan, you can stand in a shaft of pure white light and make noble utterances about the sanctity of life, while at the same time you can have your forces of darkness kidnap people off the streets in foreign lands, have them transported to hell holes, have unutterable cruelties done to them for months or years, and then finally release them when it’s all just found to be a big mistake. Meanwhile, you can bomb Fallujah to dust, incarcerate tens of thousands without trial, employ thugs to kill people with impunity, and all the while, you can stand in the beam of pure white light and proclaim, with no hint of embarrasment, that you are ‘pro life’.
It takes some hide, but hey, draped in the Stars and Stripes, it’s so easy.
Glen,
First Howie.
Now Rudy?
Edwards,Obama radical?
So well said,KR.
Makes me cringe in embarrassment and seethe in fury.
132
Kirribilli Removals -
I can’t simply resist….
No person has ever become Prime Minister of Australia with less than 1 years experience as a political leader of a Party or any other leadership experience outside in Business or Trade Unions since Kevin Rudd.
No Opposition has been elected to government when the economy was doing so well since Kevin Rudd.
The moral of the story is KR that there is a first time for everything…
KR he never really contested Iowa and NH he’s been focusing on New York, California and Florida which is a smart tactic that will bar a disaster will work a treat. Iowa and NH only count for ‘Mo’ but Rudy is the only candidate with 4% in Iowa who has not chucked in the towel because he’s stronger in the bigger States.
McCain finished fourth behind Fred Thompson yeah right he’s going to win the nomination the only State he’ll get is NH and thats it. Morman Romney will be lucky to get Utah possibly MA and Vermont but he’s finished being pumped by Huckleberry who spent 20-1 less than him and still won.
KR admit it you’re afraid the Democrats could be beaten in a Giuliani v Clinton, Giuliani v Obama election that’s why you’re going out of your way to attack him you lefties just can’t see how effective he’d be in the general election.
I feel a certain pity for the ‘moderate’ Republicans, the ones who let a troop of baboons take over the Whitehouse, trash their constitution, rape and pillage a few countries with mindless abandon, while all the while giving tax relief to the stinking rich and watching the middle class and poor barely keep wages level with inflation, as the country borrowed more and more billions a day to fund its mindless binging on the world’s savings, while more and more of them could not even afford health insurance.
On second thoughts, nah, they deserve nothing but disdain for their stupidity and vile pre-occupation with Bill Clinton’s sexual peccadillos and their own sense of ‘moral’ superiority.
Just look, just look where it got them!
Nup, I don’t give a toss about Rudy, he’s toast, and the rump of Republicans who’d even bother to turn out to vote for him would be holding their noses.
You are a truly sad character Glen if you can get a frisson of excitement out of a ghoul like Rudy! Ha!
KR i feel sorry for Rockerfeller i mean he had a big shot at 1964 but nooooo Goldwater had to take over the Party with the Christian Right…
If you call liberating a country whose dictator would have people raped and tortured and gassed pillaging and raping that’s very obtuse of you IMHO.
KR if you think a drovers dog could win it for Democrats you’ll be sorry come November….
KR you automatically lose an argument when you resort to childish name calling, score 1 for Rudy….
137 [No Opposition has been elected to government when the economy was doing so well since Kevin Rudd.]
Does the good economy left by $weetie explain the interest rate rises the National Bank announced today the first time that an interest rate rise has not been decided by the Reserve Bank?
Does the $1.50 tipped for a litre of petrol represent the inheritance of a good economy, too?
Does the high chance of an interest rate rise in February form a part of $weetie’s good economic management legacy?
http://www.asx.com.au/sfe/targetratetracker.htm
Glen
Guiliani is simply John Howard but without the ability to dog whistle the bogan (ie, your) vote. He is going nowhere. However, that said, I can’t wait to see the dribbling Fox reporting of the female/lesbian vote vs the black democratic vote.
I, for one, do not want to be cleaning the Hannity underpants when America is confronted with one of “those” for president. But, one way or the other, it will probably happen. Your dreams aren’t going to be any sweeter, big guy….
Glen, can you stop saying KR, because I keep thinking you mean (Saint) Kevin Rudd and it makes (more) nonsense of your messages. For instance, when you say ‘KR he never really contested Iowa’ I’m thinking hang on, what election does Glen think Kevin07 is running in?
Megan says “Most frightening prospect is Guiliani floating idea of Cheney as Vice-President.” is that fair dinkum? When I first read that I thought it was a joke!
Guiliani is a knob all he ever seems to talk about is 911 and 911 related subjects. No substance in what he says about stopping terrorism just hairy chested sound bytes. I suspect many Republicans would rather vote for Obama than Rudy.
Hillary is just as bad as Rudy IMHO.
Steve last time i checked the Prime Minister of Australia doesn’t set Petrol prices and since Ruddy boy said he’d make them lower he’s off to a bad start wouldnt you say?
Ah Steveo look at the IR’s we had under Keating that we were left and not just that but the 1million unemployed oh and the recession which we had to fix up oh and the budget in the red by 96billion thanks to your mob Rudd and Swan have got it so good mate and you know it…
Iraq is not ‘liberated’, you silly person.
Sorry, but you sound like an autobot that cuts and pastes a few phrases from Neocon central and thinks it’s original and clever insight.
It’s stupidity like that which allowed this horrendous mess to happen. Just accept the lies and propaganda from Cheney’s B Team and it’ll all turn out on the night.
You sure as hell know how to pick losers. See a pattern there?
More personal insults from the left i assumed as much how sad it is when right and left cannot argue based on the facts rather than childish name calling!
KR last time i checked the Sunnis were backing the Americans and look at Al Anbar why dont we hear anything negative on the news about Iraq because its getting better and the left wing progressive media types would have to recant all their deceptive and negative comments on Iraq!!!
KR Rudy hasn’t lost the nomination check in here in a few months and one of us will be eating humble pie and i doubt it will be me!
nuff said ya’ll
146 Glen – you know you’re talking BS. Rudd at no time said he would make petrol cheaper. In fact on those areas he said there was no magic bullet but he did say he would take steps that may help to keep increases low. You know this – so stop the sh.t stirring.
I suppose dying with violence in a ‘libarated’ Iraq is better than dying with violence under Saddam? The whole Iraq thing is a big screw up, most Aussies think so, most Americans think so too. The fight against Islamofanatics was never in Iraq but in places like Afghanistan and Pakistan. All the invasion of Iraq did was create more enemies against our way of life. Bush, Howard, Blair and the other airheads have done us all a great disservice.
It is good to see a new generation of pollies like Kev and Obama comming up through the ranks, at least they give us a glimpse of hope in this twisted world.
Sinowestie,
See 121 -Steve’s link…..bottom of page.
Just realised I’m going to be passing through South Carolina (work trip) on primary day. Could be fun.
[If you call liberating a country whose dictator would have people raped and tortured and gassed pillaging and raping that’s very obtuse of you IMHO.],
hmmm, and Colonel Gaddafi is just wonderful isn’t he? He’s just been rehabilitated…
why couldn’t they have done that with Saddam? Oil maybe?
148
Oh, you read the MSM, and you’ve got a quote to prove it! Yes, the two biggest clans in al Anbar decided that they’d better let the US arm them to remove al Qaeda, and yet your silly mantra is that al Qaeda would take over the entire country if we left!
Think about it, even for a few seconds.
Like so much that happens in Iraq, the real story is far more complex and loaded with ambiguity than the simple Whitehouse press releases. Surprising, huh?
So let’s get this straight, a country of nominally 20 million, (take away a few displaced millions that have fled to adjoining countires, they are truly ‘liberated’ huh?), and a very conservative 20 odd thousand of them got killed in 2007. Multiple that number by about 15, to give you the number of dead Americans if the same level of ‘liberation’ was occurring in the USA.
In those terms, there’d be 300,000 dead Americans in one year, and that’s “Mission Accomplished”? That’s thirty thousand 9/11’s per year.
Those Iraqis should be grateful for their ‘liberation’ shouldn’t they?
152 Blair just sidestep the Rudy campaign. He isn’t polling well there.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/sc/south_carolina_republican_primary-233.html
I knew there was a moment when Rudy just turned to mush, and it was the recent National Intelligence Estimate that basically cut the legs from under him. Rudy was all hairy chested about Iran and then, wham, the NIE lobbed it into the Whitehouse fantasy that nup, they in fact did not have any, actual, you know, weapons of mass destructions or programmes running to make any.
From that moment, Rudy was deflated, and his main theme was a popped balloon.
Here’s a good piece on that very thing:
http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2007/12/11/iran_08/index.html
…another of Juan Cole’s excellent insights into the murky mind of the neocons.
Crikey, what a shocking bit of math!
That’s one hundred 911’s every year!
Just read that again, one hundred 911’s every year. And you’d think you were really liberated!
OK, Glen, just so even you can understand what ‘liberated’ means:
Two 911’s every week!
Whoopeee, that’s liberation!
The US had one! One event where about 3,000 people got murdered and they still haven’t really come to terms with it.
Iraq has the equivalent of two such events every week and you think they are ‘liberated’.
You sir, are seriously mistaken.
Kirribilli
“Sorry, but you sound like an autobot that cuts and pastes a few phrases from Neocon central and thinks it’s original and clever insight.”
A poster called Bushfire did an excellent post on Glens cut and paste technique, maybe someone saved it?
Since when does liberating an oppressed people work by killing them?
It would be the same as saying that the Jews were liberated from the death camps if they were bombed to death by the allies.
This is what has happened in Iraq, in the order of tens of thousands of dead innocents, including children
.
And we are complicit by electing the governments that have allowed this to happen.
So it is imperative that we end it now.
That is why we need Obama to win, and the small fry (like Rudd) to support the withdrawal of firepower, and the instigation of United Nation-sanctioned rebuilding and peacekeeping.
Anything less is condoning the ongoing bloodbath , for what? (surely not oil…)
What a beautiful set of numbers!
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/general_election_giuliani_vs_obama-228.html
Glen’s interventions remind me of a discussion before the Ruddslide, when he was having conniptions about pollbludgers’ indignation over the tragic sinking of SIEV-X — well, he said, it didn’t sink in Australian waters so we didn’t have any responsibility for the loss of those 353 lives. There is no point in engaging with the Glens. At times they may seem quite jocular and even engage in (seemingly) good-humoured repartee of a rather heavy kind, but they just don’t understand that no human lives are more important than others.
I’m very pleased to see some passion returning to Pollbludger!! The Dionysian impulses cannot be forever suppressed by the Apollonian, but I do think Glen’s long awaited return has contributed. Yesterday we talked about myths and delusions vis a vis those poor lemmings being Children Overboarded by Walt Disney. I’d like to add refute two popular myths and delusions that have promulgated in this blog recently.
1. Al Qaeda doesn’t exist in anything like the form it is given credit for. A couple of cashed up militants in a cave in Northern Pakistan do NOT run a criminal global network of terror. The term “Al Qaeda” was first used by an American caught in a nefarious clandestine arms deal as and was used by him to improve his plea bargain.
2. While the 9/11 tragedy was an appalling incident, a comparable number of Americans have died each and every day since due to alcohol and smoking. The Americans are paranoid and obsessed about 9/11 due to the power of fear. The enormous resources used to fight the War Of Terror should have been better spent.
Arbie 159
did you mean this one?
Glen’s been in his room all day, moving little squares of paper he cut out of his Spiderman colouring-in book around on his desk.
They have names on them: “KRudd”, “Howard” “Costello”, “Newspoll”, “Swan”, “Burke”, “Campbell”, “Prosser” and many more.
Round and round they go. He tries butting them together in every possible combination, corner to corner, side to side top to bottom.
Doesn’t eat. Doesn’t sleep. Must work this out. Every now and again he thinks he’s onto something.
See, if KRudd talked to Burke BOURKE and Costello sacked Campbell… no that wouldn’t work. What about if Howard sacked Campbell and BOurke walked into room with Prosser… no… So there’s these three politicians… nope… [NT/Slf: this no joke… mst CONCENTRATE].
OK, he’s got it!
Costello wedge KRudd/ends up getting Howard to sack Campbell/Swan comes along/ruins all by being caught with Burke in bed with altar boy. But altar boy Anglican sooooo…. KRudd MUST have something going there too. Maybe likes legless altar boys??? [N.T.Slf… “legless a.boys? POSSIBLE?”]?
Meanwhile Nwspol 57/43: Labor ahead/landslide/000’s letter writers/bloggers say either don’t care abt. Burke or so angry/changing vote.
Ah ha! It’s all a leftist plot!
Cdnal Pell… [Pell —> Catholic —> McKewSOW —> KRudd??? XXX lk. into this…XXX… where does a.boy fit in???”] Pell chimes in with brill. abortion wdge. Abbott talks up Devil [Dvl wrshp??? Mst chk w. Op.Dei.].
At last! All the pieces fit together.
Writes post at Oz Politics. Gets told he’s crazy by leftie throng. Bk to drwing board.
well said apres -
what’s a few thousand (or hundreds of) dead Iraqi’s in comparison to 3000 dead Americans?
The fact is though, that while we are cushioned from the horror of what happens in Iraq (thanks no doubt to Rupert and all who sail in him), most of us feel horrified by what goes on in the name of the Coalition of the Willing.
Especially when it becomes more obvious by the minute that it was all about getting themselves re elected.
What a disgrace this past decade has been.
yer right Diogenes, there’s nothing so invigorating as rebutting a nong that’s had everything wrong from day one!
Bring back Tabitha, her/its couplets were pure genius in comparison to the droll stuff that’s being put up as reasonable argument. Then he’s got the hide to cry foul, ooh, ah, I called him names, and runs off to sulk.
Purlease, rule number one: be a grown up, and expect a slap when you talk crap.
Diogenes. Hillary will be President. It is just a matter of whom the Republican sacrificial lamb will be.
Americans will not vote for Barack Hussein Obama. Remember Colin Powell did not run in 2000 because his wife was worried he would be slotted by a right wing Southern loon. That impulse has not gone away.
North Korea is a despot haven & they the people of this “democratic republic”need liberating too. The problem is they ain’t got oil. Oil for liberation…what crap. Go’s to show how screwed up this world is when you got a an ‘oil man’ for president.
Aussieguru –
are you suggesting…?
I thought it was about liberating the repressed (albeit alive).
i meant Oppressed (how embarrassment..)
167 [Americans will not vote for Barack Hussein Obama]
ESJ was it the Australians in Iowa that voted for him you reckon?
70,000 caucus voters in Iowa does not a President make. The turnout in Iowa in the 2004 presidential was 2million.
ESJ-Don’t forget its not Americans in general who decide who is the Democrat candidate (and therefore next President), it’s other Democrats. And they seem pretty keen on Obama at the moment. Not holding my breath though but I am keeping a little candle of hope burning. How do you feel about Clinton vs Obama “”leading the free world”?
ESJ
are you seriously saying that americans won’t vote for a black candidate in the 21st century?
try and join it.
Yup Jen, I’s saying not enough will for one to get elected.
Lets see how New Hampshire goes before you start popping the champagne corks. Its a truism about the Democrats pick the democrat candidate but its the establishment democrats do the picking. They do not support Obama.
Happy New Year
Obama for pres, that is who i want. Either Obama or Edwards.
Clinton is an establishment person. Wouldn’t it be good to have someone who is not a millionaire.
And people here are suggesting that Obama is unelectable, rubbish. I think Obama can win because he has charisma and is a very clever and intelligent speaker. Hillary will be another nothing like Rudd. Run by the democrat machine.
Obamas’ main danger maybe the media and some loony racist geek who may wish to murder him. Other than that i think he can win. Edwards also is a chance but may be a little shallow in regards to his speaking qualities.
Guilani is to old and hated by key conservatives in the Republican party and this will divide them.
ESJ, Obama won because of the record turnout especially among young voters. Your 70,000 figure is a nice guess but nowhere near the true figures.
steve correction its 90,000 ie 37.6% of 240,000 voters. You also have to allow for the second preferencing of votes. Nice win but not conclusive.
If Obama can win ‘whitebread’ Iowa, then he can become president, it’s that simple.
Remember, voting is not compulsory, so a charismatic candidate who inspires the independents and the apathetic to roll up and vote will easily overcome the racist Republicans who will have to vote for McCain (most likely) or Huckster if he can keep his mojo going. Rudy is a non-entity that will not got the nomination, but he’d lose to Obama even if he did.
Clinton is too damaged, carries too much baggage as they say, and even if she is a truly good candidate, will never insprire the kind of fervour that Obama generates.
Remember Obama’s line when Howard was speaking about Iraq last year, what a beauty, muted Howard completely. Pity the Labor Party in Australia doesn’t have people of this calibre within its ranks. This man is what the world needs a fresh, smart man- perhaps another Robert Kennedy.
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz american caucuses
No offence but we are 10 months out.
Its a bit like english soccer, just cut the bollocks and give it to the biggest wallet.
180
Yeah, it was a corker, delivered with deadly accuracy, and put little Johnny right in his place.
Now that the tide is turning against the madness of Bush, there’s going to be a truly incredible push to get a Democrat in the WHitehouse, and it’s not going to be one that has an ex-President standing beside her. Obama has hit the right note, they want change, big change, and so far he has inspired enough Democrats to think he can deliver it.
It’s going to be a very interesting year.
Love your cynicism Deano, but no one gets to be POTUS without getting nominated first.
Diogenes @ 173
‘Don’t forget its not Americans in general who decide who is the Democrat candidate … it’s other Democrats.’
I’m not quite sure what group you mean by ‘Democrats’ here. In most states the people who vote for the delegates are a (self-selecting) subset of voters who have registered as Democrats. And in some states it is not confined to registered democrats. The motivations and ultimate allegiances of these voters is one of the murkier aspects of US politics.
ESJ has a point at 172.
I do not think that the actual numbers in Iowa mean a lot. At this stage it is the theatre and spin associated with them that are significant. (Witness the posts here.)
Regardless of calibre of Democratic candidate, paperless touch-screens a concern,especially since Diebold has such strong Republican connections. Irregularities in last two elections.
Not tamper-proof.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/1006-03.htm
Still tra la.
Pre emptive strike, as they say.
Conducted on the water waste.
Well done,CW.
Synchronises with a couple of local cats that choose this hour to have their fisticuffs under my window. Not wishing to use a hose,has me chasing them like a banshee.
Safely out of range,am sure I can hear quiet feline chuckles.
Can’t find my usual source at the moment but this link has ‘Patterns of voting machine fraud’.
http://www.flcv.com/fraudpat.html
What a surprise. HRC is now chasing the young voters. While Obama has adopted McCains favorite line about straight tlk and not spin.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080104/ap_on_el_pr/democrats_analysis_8;_ylt=AuCBt2ZB7hIcSJ9Qy8IT4B_BF4l4
Diogenes @ 163 -
Perhaps an even more startling statistic: American’s love affair with guns results in the deaths of around 2,700-3,700 its kids and teens annually.
You’d think they’d be appalled and do something about it but apparently they believe its a price worth paying for their right to play with their toys.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/00news/finaldeath98.htm
http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/children_and_firearms
http://www.childrensdefense.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=8491
Did I read that Rudy may choose Dick Cheney as VP running mate, oh goody, perhaps they will go skeet shooting together, solve a few problems then
Obama has had a great start.
1) 95% of Iowa is white
2) He has attracted a lot of new voters (youth, independents)
3) He has defeated the well oiled Clinton juggernaut.
These indicate that he is seen as more than a “black candidate”. His appeal lies in delivering hope to an electorate which yearns for change. A convincing win in NH will give him the big “mo” that will carry him to the White House.
Edward Street John you are wrong about Hillary becoming POTUS. She carries too much baggage (Whitewater, Iraq) and alot of Americans strongly dislike her. So much so that some analyists are saying a significant number would vote Republican just to keep her out.
Yes, good the see Obama get an early boost.
I also saw the summary of US polls to which someone above gave a link, showing Obama to be ahead of Giuliani at the moment.
But the assumption reflected in some comments that the Democrats will automatically nominate their candidate on merit – the most intelligent, sensible and capable (ie Obama) – is a nice warm one, and easy from this distance, but may be a little wishful.
In the Democrats as in the Republicans there would be the usual hard nuts, of the type with which we are not unfamiliar here, who will coldly assess who the ’safest’ candidate is in the end and control the party voting accordingly in the states that really count. All the Democrats internal polling will be about whether or not Obama (and the other candidates for that matter) is sufficiently pre-digested to be placed on the menu before the amorphous mass of McDonald’s eating voters.
I do hope though that the internal polling as the processes grind on say the risks of Obama are acceptable – the best hope among them for a better world from what I’ve read of him.
184 Artie B- Thanks for correcting me. I didn’t know that. I had assumed that only members of the Democrat party could vote to choose their candidate. Still, I think the thrust of my argument is true, which was that left-leaning Americans will choose the Democrat candidate.
And before everyone rejoices about Obama becoming next POTUS as Americans will agree with us and see what a great President he would make, don’t forget they voted the village idiot in twice.
Liberal is the party of the future.
Labor is for losers.
ps. bring Huckabee over here to lead the Coaltion. He’s so hot right now.
But to be fair Diogenes, we voted the Howardistas in 4 times. Plus Bush only just sneaked in both times, wereas 3 of Howard’s 4 wins were by good margins.
In today’s NY Times, David Brooks (deep conservative, by the way, in case anyone doesn’t know!), has a piece about the ‘two earthquakes’ that rumbled across the US political landscape yesterday.
Epicentre: Iowa.
If anyone doubts that what happened yesterday was not a significant, landscape changing event, then I suggest you read Brooks’ article, because two things happened: a black newbie rolled the Clinton machine decisively, and a Southern Baptist outgunned the big moneyed republican machine man. There’s a lot of paradgim shift going on here, and the well accepted truths have just been tested to well beyond stress point and found unsound.
But, I’d argue that there was a third earthquake in the US, and it rolled over the economic landscape on the following day. On Friday the jobs data was released, and what some have suspected for a while was there to see in numbers which scream the ‘R’ word: recession. It’s been like a runaway train, gathering momentum on a long downhill run, and it was always going to be anything but a ’soft landing’, and now it’s gone right through the first crash barrier. The next bit is going to be very, very ugly.
Along with a shift in perception about the political verities, there’s going to be a truly siesmic shift in America’s perception of itself as the great economic behemoth, the onetime engine of the world’s growth. A lot of that shift will be turned on the doofus in the Whitehouse of course, and a lot will be turned against the Washington/Wall Street cabal that has run amok with its financial system and loaded the world with toxic debt, paralysed it’s credit markets, and put the wrecking ball through the US housing industry.
Ladies and gentlemen, that low rumbling you can hear is a tsunami of debt in US dollars about to crash from coast to coast, laying waste to the lives of millions.
Anyone who can sell hope, can lift people above those crashing waves, will take the Whitehouse, and America will begin the long road back to sanity.
John Edwards would bolt in.
Diogenes and Mayo-
the stupidity of the electorate is boundless as proven by Howard’s re-elections and that fact that Anybody could ever vote for Bush, much less twice.
However in spite of ourselves, we here in Oz have managed to reject the incumbents at last, so I feel great hope that even Ameericans can see the light – after all they did eventually abolish slavery.
If not, the other scenario is too awful to contemplate – another right wing neo-con president beholden to the insane religious right.
KR-
scary prophecy, although I suspect you are all too right.
What do you think will happen here as a result?
Jen
It’s been hard to follow all the arguments, and I ain’t no practitioner of the dismal science (economics), but there’s a fair concensus that the world is what they call ‘de-coupling’ from the US economy. (You could make a few unsavoury comments about who was doing what to whom, but let’s not go there,ok?)
Under this model, the US, although responsible for some 20% of world growth in GDP, is steadily decreasing in this role, and some of the slack is being taken up by China and India gradually increasing their own domestic demands. But it’s a long way off for them to replace the US.
In a nutshell, we’ll all take a hit, but Australia is still going to be supplying the raw materials for the massive growth of China and to some extent India, so it’s not all gloom and doom.
As we’ve seen, the inflation genie (you know, the one Costello ’slayed’, not!), is awakening, and interest rates are on the march. We cannot but get some slowing of growth, take some hits in the housing market, and see some purging due to excess credit growth in recent years. It won’t be all that good, but I suspect we’ll do a lot better than the US, which if the worst happens, particularily with foriegn holders of US debt clambering to sell, then all bets are off, as they say.
Just as well you are above the electorate, Jen
Obama is a good demonstration of how politics can change when somebody provides a light for the electorate to move towards.
TWorm@ 203- Obama may be popular in Boston and on some campuses, but what about Utah and Florida? (we can jump to conclusions about Texas and Mississipi). We have to remember – Americans are not Australians. In some aspects the majority are weird – 70% believe in creation. When a large majority like that can wallow in fundamental ignorance and superstition, assumptions about the electorate following a voice of reason – and a black one at that – cannot be made, not this early anyway.
Turningworm -
just further evidence for you that Greens are elitist.
You may be right Jaundiced one, I hope not.
However even the Republican candidates seem to have rejected the old Bush/Clinton New World Order Tennis tournament, where you bomb our aspirin factories in Sudan, we bomb your trade centre in New York, you invade our countries, we assassinate your stooges. etc. etc.
Ruddy said …
Glen Said …
OK – Glen – I have to say … it’s an interesting position.
tabitha Says:
January 5th, 2008 at 10:12 am
Hi tabitha
The losers win.
And the winners lose.
Nationally Clinton has a 20% lead over Obama – or at least did before the Iowa primary, a lot to pick up.
209
JV
Here’s the latest Rasmussen report:
Friday, January 04, 2008
The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Friday shows Hillary Clinton slipping back below the 40% level of support nationally.
In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s Clinton 38%, Barack Obama 26% and John Edwards 18%. No other candidate tops 2% nationally (see recent daily numbers). For Clinton, that’s a three-point decline from yesterday. Both Obama and Edwards gained slightly.
…so yes, so far she’s been leading, but her movement has been declining of late.
The Iowa result will have substantial repercusions, Obama will get the ‘big mo’ and Clinton will have to start changing tack. (Did you see Bill and Madeleine Albright standing behind her the other night? They really looked like something out of a late night horror show! I mean, Obama radiates F-R-E-S-H in comparison)
Tabitha … I’ve missed you! but isn’t is odd that you and Glen share the same holiday season?
211
Tabby is really an automated bit of software that generates couplets, while ‘Glen’ is its alter ego, and craves the company of people who despise bots who try to fake consciousness. Clearly there’s a strong streak of masochism and self-loathing attached to being the alter ego of a limited word processing autobot, but at least ‘Glen’ knows he can come here for the thrashing he so desperately craves.
Thanks Removals @210 – The momentum (if that what is meant by “‘big mo’”) is good at least for Obama now if the sample is reliable – only 12 points now.
By the way, before becoming a horror show extra, wasn’t M Albright ‘romantically linked’ (substitute own choice of words there) some years ago to one of our ex-politicians over there on a junket?
Ha, JV I think your memory serves you well on that one!
hey, if you haven’t seen Obama’s speech in Iowa yesterday, then watch this and ask yourself when you last saw a politician fire the blood and rouse the spirits like this man does:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cNZaq-YKCnE&e
…truly, he’s got it, and no amount of TV advertising and tirades from the MSM can lay a glove on it.
Oh, JV, I think the term ‘Big Mo’ was from Bush Snr when he blitzed it in Iowa in the 1980 caucus, but lost it to Reagan in new Hampshire and the rest is, as they, history.
So there’s a touch of irony in the term, coz the guy who termed it, actually went on to lose.
The bloody Liberals couldn’t care less about the slaughtering of whales. They’re only out to make political capital out of it. Hell, they weren’t in favour of Labor sending the ship out in the first place, now they want us to believe they’re concerned it isn’t going out. Give us a break.
213 J v
as my 8 year old would say : eeyeoow, gross.
who was it??
Gary didn’t the Liberals send a ship out as well, and did i get this right the Liberals wanted to make political capital out of it, I agree but isn’t the Labor Party doing the same.
In regards to the environment the Labor Party picks the Whales as an issue because like the Liberals it is easy.
What about the Pulp Mill Gary? What about old growth forests Gary? What about Channel Deepening, a desalination plant Gary. Sorry but give me a break. A labor man who does not see anything outside the square.
Jen, we have no idea.
http://www.australianpolitics.com/news/1999/99-11-18.shtml
KRemovals – yes some good lines in Obama’s speech – particularly liked the ‘choice of hope over fear’ , and also the shot about taking politics back from the Washington lobbyists, which projects an aura of freshness in itself.
Jen – I thought I had erased that unnecessary knowledge from my memory banks (rather, bank singular these days), but Steve has rudely brought back some intrusive imagery with his link.
Re tabitha’s poem
“Liberal is the party of the future.
Labor is for losers.”
Technically, she is correct (or most physicists believe she is). One of the prevailing theories of reality is that ALL EVENTUALITIES HAPPEN when there is a possible decision. This is the “Many-Worlds Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics” or more popularly the parallel universe theory. It was proposed by Hugh Everett III, who amazingly was Mark Oliver Everett’s father (E being the lead singer of Eels, my favourite band, and perhaps the greatest living human being IMHO).
Tabitha’s problem is that these universes are non-communicating and so she can’t go to the one where the Liberals are the party of the future.
Tabitha puts so much thought into her ideas.
K Remov @ 212 “but at least ‘Glen’ knows he can come here for the thrashing he so desperately craves.”
Aha, so that’s why Glen is so infatuated with Julie Bishop
223
Basil Fawlty
Thanks Baz, I’d forgotten the weird infatuation the Glenbot has for JB. Oh well, whatever turns him on! He comes here for a thrashing and fantasizes about Jules at the same time.
‘Kinky’ just doesn’t quite define it, does it?
ANZ to put up rates now.
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/second-bank-to-lift-loan-rates/2008/01/05/1198950110012.html
KR 198 and 202
Very good points. Economic statistics tell you you things after the fact. I think the US is probably already in recession. If the US is like Australian voters, they tend to vote on domestic isues far more than international. A US recession would really cook the Republican goose in 2008. Hence if Obama wins the nomination he will be president IMO, regardless of who the GOP put up to run. Whether the looser is Guiliani or Huckleberry is academic, although if its Mike that would send a bad message to the rest of the world IMO.
As for Obama, I would be happy to see him win. It would do a lot for tolerance and liberal thinking in the world to finaly see the US elect a black president. Plus they certainly need a fresh approach to recover their world standing. They certainly can’t fall back on the super-power status any more. I think they will be overtaken by China economicaly within ten years. It will take a lot of work to turn their economy around. Their internal investment priorities under Bush have been even more stuffed than ours were under Howard. Future? Who cares.
When you had one bank in government ownership it provided a situation of market caps, hence it stops the excesses of private banks from being to greedy.
Unfortunately a particular party privatised the bank for short term gain and as a result the banks and interest rate levels may wreck Labor electorally in three years time if the economy goes backwards. It may serve Labor right.
The economists are not predicting a recession, just like 1989 all over again, watch them stuff it up. They never get it correct.
209 jaundiced view “Nationally Clinton has a 20% lead over Obama – or at least did before the Iowa primary, a lot to pick up”
Chris says Still does, here is a lot of great information, This site has a good track record with its results.
http://www.electoral-vote.com
Thanks Chris – but mustn’t that national poll have been taken before the Iowa result? Otherwise it was remarkably fast.
Portrait of Rudy.
http://worldwide-sawdust.com/showDiary.do?diaryId=1857
226
I posted a quote from Bill Gross (head of huge US bond fund, PIMCO) a few weeks ago, where he said that he suspected December numbers would show that the US was already in recession. The job figures were shocking, and there’s no way this is going to get pretty anytime soon. There’s a cascade effect to come with it, and that’s the final capitulation of the US consumer, something that’s been sustained through cheap credit and asset inflation (mostly housing, but also the stock market).
The rotten structured financial schemes that Wall Street has hatched for its own engorgement are coming apart at the seams, and as usual, they are waiting for more Greenspan medicine from his successor, ie cheaper money. But it’s now toxic, and more cheap money can’t fix the problem, and not while the inflationary pressures are growing by the week.
Bush was on Lehrer’s New Hour, stumbling around the words ‘economy’ and ‘challenges’ and he looked and sounded like a man that’s just had his own grizzly death graphically foretold. He looked and sounded awful.
His day of reckoning is going to be a slow tortuous ride into the unforgiving pages of history.
Bring it on!
It’s unusual to see Shields and Brooks (on Lehrer) being so much in agreement that this primary process has a different flavour, and it’s actually something that is personified in both Obama and Huckabee. Brooks said it most succinctly, and that is that the conventional campaign machines do not have the right message, and they cannot deliver it. They’re pumping numbers and policy and the electors want hope and inspiration.
Gotta say it, but haven’t we just seen something similar here, in our own small way?
Hearing Clinton in New Hampshire it struck me how shrill she sounds, pleading with the listeners to look at her record, and it reminded me of a certain JWH in his dying days. It sounds desperate.
Obama sounds anything but desperate.
Even Huckabee sounds, should I say it? Relaxed and comfortable. At ease in his own skin, and exuding a kind of natural sureness that Romney or McCain could only dream of.
Whatever else happened in Iowa yesterday, it was not business as usual. It was a real groundswell of ennervated people, and they voted with their hearts.
JV
ah,of course. how could I not have guessed -our own little casanova diplomat.
KR
I totally agree with your analysis of the need for hope in the US, following right in the footsteps of little old us.
I think people the world over are sick to death of the executive financial approach to government and are looking for vision and leadership. And Obamah has what it takes unlike Hillary, no matter how much surgery she has to look young and fresh.
whoops – no h on the end of Obama.
I so need a PA to blog for me. Might try the kiddies.
You guys must still have the hang-over from the silly season if you think Obama will become the Prez of the US of A. The US lunatic rights will never allow a black man to become the US Prez. Not for a long long long time anyway.
Finns-
explain the Iowa vote then.
231
Thanks for that link Steve, Glen Geenwald is one of my favourite writers on the mad neocons and the vacillating Democrat Congress. His portrait of Rudy is pretty scary:
Giuliani, when he was merely in charge of New York’s garbage collection, zoning rules, and a municipal police force, developed a reputation as a power-hungry, dissent-intolerant authoritarian, obsessed with secrecy and expanding his own power. It takes little imagination to apprehend the grave dangers from vesting in such a person virtually unlimited power to control the world’s most powerful military as well as a sprawling, federal bureaucracy.
http://www.amconmag.com/2008/2008_01_14/article1.html
He also does a great job in Salon.com of debunking the Beltway pundits who assume they speak for some mythical majority!
236
The Finnigans
Is Obama black?
Oh, yes, I see what you mean!
Look, if another 100,000 Iowans rocked up the other night (as compared to 4 years ago), and gave Obama the ‘big Mo’, then it’s going to be a pretty interesting year to watch. He not only got out Democrats, but pulled a majority of Independents and even some Republicans.
I know what you are saying, but listen carefully to the buzz, and it’s not coming from the campaign machines, it’s in the crowds. Obama connects with the voters unlike anything they’ve had since the Kennedys, and it sure as hell makes the other candidates sound tired and scripted.
If the Democraiic Party end up with an Obama/Edwards ticket they will be very hard to stop.
and just for fun – another Bushism…
“for every fatal shooting, there were roughly three nonfatal shootings. And, folks, this is unacceptable in America. This is just unacceptable. And we’re going to do something about it”.
And they do.
God Bless the NRA.
Rudy says “FREEDOM IS ABOUT AUTHORITY”; Knob!
I hope Mike Huckabee wins the Republican nomination if anything he has a cute name
and has a more down to earth religiosity than many of the evangelicals do. I am not sure about Mc Cain tho, I applaud him on denouncing the torture that the current administration uses but I am not sure if he would be much better than Bush.
On the Democrats side Of course I like Obama, a breath of fresh air to say the least. I also like Dodd and Biden who have left the race due to their poor showing in Iowa. Edwards is so so but Clinton sucks big time, a typical oppertunistic pollie.
230 jaundiced view. There is always a huge amount of polls in the US. They are all trending the same way. Most of them predicted Iowa, they also think New Hampshire will be hard for Hillary. Then a piece of cake after that.
i’ll stop soon, but there’s this one…
“Reading is the basics of all learning”.
shame he can’t run just one more time.
#
236
The Finnigans Says:
January 5th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
The mad right won’t be able to stop him becoming prez; it’s what they do after that will probable shock us all.
Hi jen
You are so right about the lack of vision and leadership in politics these days.
They are keeping themselves on the gravy train by promoting division while Rome burns.
What’s needed here and the USA is some hard-nosed guys that will make the tough decisions with no regard for their political future, only for the future of their nations.
Maybe it’s time for new political forces to rattle their senses of electoral security.
Just a thought.
236 The Finnigans So you think the lunatic right will allow a female president?
If Hillary President and Obama VP, will they bump off Hillary to leave Obama in charge? I saw a TV show the other day where they were interviewing female African Americans in South Carolina. They were saying they wouldn’t vote for Obama because they didn’t want to see such a nice man bumped off.
and this..
“the majority of Iraqis want to live in a peaceful, free world. And we will find these people and bring them to justice.”
OK. I’ll stop now.
Hi scaper,
did the storm hit Fraser Island?
Did the chivas help?
jen
Keep ‘em rolling, we just lurv our Bushisms!
243
CB, because the Iowa caucus process is so arcane for the Democrats, it was very hard to poll, and just prior to the day they were considered to be neck and neck, bunched in tightly together.
Well, that ain’t quite what happened, was it? And you can put that down to the extraordinary turnout, and a lot of that for Obama. He’s got the big Mo, and he’s got his mojo workin’!
Dont stop jen.
Ah, 218 marky marky, the pretend Labor man.
250 Kirribilli Removals Yes it was, hopefully one of the first things Hillary does is to bring in national electoral laws.
OK -I can’t resist…
“You know , when I campaigned here in 2000, I said, ‘I want to be a war president.’
No one wants to be a war president, but I am one.”
and…
“The only things that I can tell you is that every case I have received I have been comfortable with the innocence or guilt of the person that I’ve looked at. I do not believe that we have ever put a guilty…I mean innocent person to death in the state of Texas.”
jen
There were no storms there at all and the resort was sheltered from the wind.
They kicked all the campers off the island for no reason that I could see.
When we went out driving, we would not see another vehicle for hours!
We had Lake Mackenzie completely to ourselves and we were not impressed with the litter and cigarette buts there.
The chivas did more than the job required and I’ll have to take another week off to recover from the holiday…oh well.
253
Chris B
I don’t think Clinton can beat the Clinton fatigue or the Obama surge, but I’ve been wrong about US politics before now!
One thing is for sure, Obama will now have a lot of black Democrats wondering if it’s possible, and a very largely disaffiliated group may swing back into voting for him. But hey, just remember, it was Iowa! A black man won in Iowa! It says that something extraordinary is happening here.
### The people might want Obama. The people might support Obama. I want to see it happens too. But that is not the point because the US lunatic rights will never allow it. Go and watch a movie called “The Parallax View”.
ok, so I’m as much an Obama fan as anyone here, but I wish he didn’t say that ‘only in American’ could someone of his background (the son of a Kenyan father and an American mother) get to be a candidate for Democratic nomination. I realise that this probably goes down fine with his US audience, who after all are the voters, but it still reeks to me of American arrogance about their pre-eminence in the world and their status as the saviour of democracy. And I know also that he has delivered more thoughtful and less jingoistic speeches, but I wish he showed more evidence of an edit function when it comes to the mythology of ‘America’.
KR-
or anyone,
what’s the history of Iowa in perevious elections? Is it really unusual for such an unlikely candidate (ie Black; not from an obscenely wealthy family with ties to the top end; not a Bush, Clinton or Kennedy) to make the grade at this stage?
Is it a bell weather electorate like our Eden Monaro?
you get the picture…
#247 “The Finnigans So you think the lunatic right will allow a female president?”
- I asked myself the same question. But I do think they will tolerate a white female prez.
251 – sinowestie
Ther’s an obvious response to that, but I’m too much of a lady.
apres, most Americans even very progressive (lefties) have a similar view that America is the only working democracy in the world and is a beacon for the whole world. It grates with me too but I tend to cut them slack in that respect because their pre-eminant view of America is a product of their culture (and insular education system). I rarely hear Australians ‘bang on’ about our democracy so to hear Americans go on about it all the time is a bit tiring.
260 jen-In 2004 Kerry won closely followed by Edwards. Bush was doing such a good job as President that he was unopposed. Bush won easily in 2000 but lost to McCain in New Hampshire.
The Finnigans @ 258 There’s truth in what you say, unfortunately. That’s why I conjectured earlier that the Democrat’s men in grey suits would dictate that Obama not be the candidate – on the grounds of perceived risk, regardless of merit.
Have just done a quick Google trawl of some US news and other blogs, and it gives an idea of the sort of dirt that Obama will have to cope with if he gets the nomination. This includes slurs about his schooling in Indonesia peddled by Fox & Co (supposedly radical Muslim – but actually secular), supposed pro-choice leanings, his late arrival to an organised Christian church – all things the right cannot abide and will be revisited over and over again to influence the middle ground (i.e. the 70% of voters who are creationists).
The betting market was very accurate in Australia for the last two elections. In the US, they have weight of money on Obama and Clinton 48% to 50%. The Republicans are McCain/Guiliani/Romney/Huck as 32/27/16/15%.
“I wish you’d have given me this written question ahead of time so I could plan for it…I’m sure something will pop into my head here in the midst of this press conference, with all the pressure of trying to come up with answer, but it hadn’t yet….I don’t want to sound like I have made no mistakes. I’m confident I have. I just haven’t — you just put me under the spot here, and maybe I’m not as quick on my feet as I should be in coming up with one.” —President George W. Bush, after being asked to name the biggest mistake he had made, Washington, D.C., April 3, 2004
Oh really George! I would never have guessed
Apostrophe man nearly had me – I felt the cold hand of correction hovering nearby. Not “Democrat’s”, but “Democrats’ “. That was a narrow squeak.
Diogs-
which direction is the Obama/Clinton wager heading?
Only guessing, but was the gap wider before Iowa?
Jen – Try this for a range of bookies’ odds, but no historical graph. We’ll need someone like our esteemed host for that. But it stands to reason there would be a slight shortening of Obama after Iowa and commensurate lengthening of the others. Note Clinton still odds on.
Is this the site you referred to Diogenes?
http://www.oddschecker.com/specials/politics-and-election/us-presidential-election/democrat-candidate
Intrade has Clinton losing ground to Obama but still in front:
Clinton was viewed as the likely Democratic nominee, with a 64.7% chance, versus Obama at 26.1%.
The projections were a shift from late October, when Giuliani was seen as the likely Republican winner and Clinton a virtual shoo-in with a 70% shot at victory.
Traders on Intrade were predicting Clinton would win the New Hampshire primary on January 8, giving her a 60% chance versus 42.4% for Obama and 2.1% for Edwards.
McCain led the Republican field in New Hampshire, with traders giving him a 59.9% chance of victory, versus 36.9% for Romney and 2% for Huckabee.
…but that’s only one market, and it’s probably all in flux now. That was dated Jan.2, so I’ll check it now.
OMG, seems like rodents are going to dominate the Republican Party campaign as they did in Australia.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/04/does-romneys-ad-against-_n_79905.html
OK, here’s the page:
http://www.intrade.com/
it has Clinton as 51.4% and Obama as 48% chance of getting the nomination.
Big turn around from two days ago, huh?
The huge Irish site paddypower has this after the Iowa caucus. They also predict that based on the betting for Iowa that the US Presidential Election will be the biggest non-sporting event betting spree in history.
“European bookmaking firm paddypower.com have slashed the odds on Obama to become Next President from 3/1 to 2/1 while Hillary Clinton has eased in the betting from odds-on 10/11 to odds-against 11/8.”
Good stuff – Oddschecker.com also shows Obama odds on to win New Hampshire and South Carolina, but not Florida, which it has Clinton winning.
yay.
Momentum is on .
Yep, anyone who thinks it’s all media hype just doesn’t get it; Obama has that mystic political sex appeal, and it’s been let out of the box and its on the rampage.
Lucky I put my dough on him a while back, (and yes on Huck too, but I win much more if McCain gets up, and it looks like Huck is helping him on that!).
But apart from my financial interest, I’m amazed that more people didn’t see him coming, and kept belieiving the old shibboleths about the Clinton machine being unstoppable. Well it sure as hell got bogged to the axles in the snowdrifts of Iowa!
KR – Just had a look at the Intrade site – thanks for that. Just look at those graphs – I had no idea this was available. Look at the Clinton graph showing a drop from 70% to just over 50% in a couple of days – or one day?
This market would I imagine be much bigger than any of our betting agencies – Centrebet etc. and therefore more reliable a reflection of realpolitic.
Greetings chattoids
I see we all getting excited about Barack Obama polling 38% of 220,000 voters in a small rural state. Let me remind one and all that this was a poll of committed Democrat activists, overwhelmingly white middle-class or professional and liberal. Furthermore, it wasn’t a secret ballot, they had to declare themselves in front of all the other white liberals in the room. Of course they voted for the Black guy, they’d've been ashamed not to. This is NOT how regular voters behave in the privacy of the ballot booth. Do remember Harold Ford, the Black Democrat Senate candidate in Tennessee in 2006, who polled well below what the polls said he would poll. This is called the Bradley Effect, after Tom Bradley, the Black LA Mayor who twice ran for Governor of California and twice lost, despite polls saying he would win. The Dems would be mad to nominate Obama: not only would the Repubs eat him alive for his total lack of experience, but white voters in the crucial states wouldn’t vote for him, regardless of what they tell the polls. My prediction: Obama will be the Howard Dean of 2008 – a transient bubble that will pop when the real stuff starts in a few weeks. The Dems are well-placed to beat a badly weakened, divided and discredited Repub party, but they must have a credible candidate. Clinton is by far the best they have, despite her many negatives.
Nice of you to pop in Adam, and add an ounce of wisdom, but have you checked the betting markets for the Clinton/Obama odds?
Clinton is too divisive. I would rather vote for Huckerbee or Mc Cain than Clinton and Im a leftie.
Adam, I don’t think Obama can say “I have a scream…” unless of course he’s cracking a joke!
Yes, all this has been recognised Adam, if you read through above , but one must have a dream … that is until the party heavies pull down the shutters on the chap who should be able to win, but is too big a risk to put before an ignorant electorate of bible-bashers.
Here’s an interesting take on the recent Federal election by Tim Colebatch.
{It felt like a Labor landslide. Yet John Howard and his Coalition government came within 1.5% of holding on to power at the recent federal election, final figures show.
The Australian Electoral Commission says the Coalition ended up with 47.44% of the two-party vote after strongly outpolling Labor in the record 2.5 million postal, pre-poll and absentee votes counted after election night.
The final count shows the election was closer than it appeared on election night.
Not only did the Coalition haul back Labor’s lead in overall votes, but the election outcome was decided in an extraordinary number of close seats that could have gone either way.
In the end, Labor won 83 of the 150 seats in the House of Representatives, the Coalition 65 and independents two. But nine of Labor’s 83 seats were won by margins of less than 1.5%.
Had the Coalition won them, the seats would have been split 74-all, with two conservative independents holding the balance of power – and most likely using it to give John Howard a fifth term in office.}
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/howard-only-15-from-being-pm-again/2008/01/04/1198950112914.html
{With just 320 more votes in the right places, the Coalition could have cut Labor’s majority to just 10 seats, a less than commanding tally. With fewer than 6000 more votes in the right seats, it could have held onto government.
But there was even more luck on the Coalition’s side. It won 13 of its 65 seats by less than 2%, five of them by less than 0.22%.}
An interesting way at looking at what mosy pundits would consider a fairly comfortable win for Labor.
“mosy”, I mean most!
Adam -
good to see you’re back to spread the plague of hopelessness.
Well, I hope you are wrong. Hillary is a conservative, and strong supporter of the Iraq invasion. It might not have had much of an impact in our election, but it might be different in the US. After all , there are more of their dead soldiers than victims of 9/11. (Not to mention Iraqi’s, but they are not westerners after all). That covers the liberals.
Add on a collapse of the mortgage market which hits the battlers, and another cyclone or two, and why wouldn’t they consider a cleanskin with great oratory skills- a particular relief after Gumbi Bush.
I will bow to your greater wisdom if you prove to be right, but i think there is something bigger going on now that we have not seen the likes of before. It is to do with a need for change, vision, and sense of humanity.
Hillary just won’t cut it, no matter how rich and well connected she is. The underclass is growing in America, and they might just vote this time.
281 sw
wash you mouth out with soap.
just add an r.
287 jen, sorry but I have a bad feeling about HRC, the same feeling I had about Bush.
What feeling is that Sino? -
do you need therapy, or are you making a prediction?
Its a gut feeling, Clinton appears to me to be power hungry and ‘vague’.
‘vague’ meaning too hard to get to?
or get at maybe.
Vague meaning what exactly is it she stands for.
herself i reckon.
Adam, I’d have believed your theory a while ago but the truth is that the Clinton campaign is not going well. It is clashing seriously with the media and they are set to go more negative on Obama tomorrow. This looks like it might also backfire on them. While Obama is presently winning voters the Clinton campaign seems about as convincing as the Federal Liberal campaign in the recent Federal elections.
My tip? Hillary for Prez and Obama as her VP.
I reckon a US election has to be viewed from here with a light sprinkle of humour. Although we all (I hope) want the neocon bastards swept away in the US, and a proper foreign policy and a safer world (and a proper US health system), there isn’t much point in investing too much emotional energy in an election so far away. They are quite different, and even Obama will have to succumb to the essentially VERY conservative majority of the American people should he win – even before then. Nothing is going to change radically or quickly, despite the nice early rhetoric. Yes, Obama is the best, but all of them have to be captives of the old Salem, Massachusetts mentality. Just read up on the groundwork Obama has had to put in to get sufficient religious traction for his attempt.
JV just check out how the Clinton Campaign is traveling. Looks more like a train wreck than anything else. Winners are grinners and the Clinton team aren’t smiling.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Bills_reason_to_go_negative_media_bias.html
I also don’t think that anyone on PB has factored in as yet the ultimate weapon that Obama has to swing the McMasses.
Opreh.
Yep, you’re right JV, it’s a long way from here in one sense, but it’s right in our face in another, and yes, we all want to see the vile fruit of Rove’s loins whither and die.
Just notice how hardly anyone even mentions Bush’s name anymore! Republicans might have been a well-oiled machine after 911 gave Bush his “tampa moment”, but they’ve well and truly squandered it and corrupted so much in the process that I really doubt they’ll get a credible candidate for November.
Could Romney,Giuliani, McCain or Huckster beat Obama? I very seriously doubt it, and the more that comes to be realised, the more Clinton is scuttled. She’s just not got the zing that Bill had, nor the zing of Obama, and for all her political experience, she’s also a very divisive figure.
Steve – That shows us how much rollicking good fun it’s going to be.
In the interests of keeping it light:
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/poll_bullshit_is_most_important
299
Wow, just check the spray that Bill and Hilary get from the bloggers! Eeeek, and they’re mostly Democrats!
From what I have seen of Obama is that he is a man of considerable talent. I would like to think that Adam is wrong in that white voters in crucial states wouldn’t vote for him, but I have my doubts. I reckon the safest option could be Edwards 1. Obama 2.
I doubt there has ever been a politician in it for themselves more than that radical right wing dingbat Hillary. She would be a nothing if her name was not Clinton. But you are dealing with people here who would vote for Jerry Springer in a landslide.
KR
Latest average of 8 bookies’ odds on final Pres. vote is 1/2 Democrats, 6/4 Republicans, but I wouldn’t be taking it yet, because of the – what did our Kevin call it – the long hard climb up Mount Everest? in front of Obama, and it won’t be snowballs being thrown at him on the way to the nomination either.
Well I’m going to raise and look you guys this far out. If Hillary or Obama is the Democratic candidate, I reckon a Republican will win it. (I hope I’m wrong).
Obama made the key point in his victory speech that Republicans would prefer to vote for him than Hilary. Judging by the vitriol on some of the political blogs in the US, Hilary really is hated (and therefore divisive, a word we are going to hear a lot). Machiavelli, the greatest political mind ever IMHO, said that a leader could be loved or feared, but could not be hated. And please don’t write back giving names of all the hated leaders in history!
marky marky said:
Can you recall one instance when this actually happened?
I suggest the political consequences from the collapse of the SA State Bank may have had more than a little to do with Labor selling off the Commonwealth. Probably not a good reason given that at least two of the majors also lost a lot of money at the time, for the same reasons, and we all ended up paying for it, many times over, with the huge slugs in bank fees that followed.
But the Commonwealth may either end up doing the job you suggest anyway, or disprove your theory. It sources most of its funds domestically so is unlikely to increase its rates because of the US problems. However, the NAB and ANZ know this and it hasn’t stopped them from jacking up theirs.
306
Centre, that’s an odd call, because you’re saying McCain or Romney or Giuliani or Huckerbee could beat Clinton or Obama?
Sorry, I just can’t see it. In fact any of the Democrat contenders could win over that lot, even Dodd or Biden, who’ve now left the race.
It’s surely about a break from Bush, a break from mad neocons running around pretending that their entire country is under imminent threat from some mad jihadis, that the executive can just ride roughshod over the Constitution and go start illegal wars…and so much that’s just been anathema to the majority of Americans.
Sorry, anyone related to that cannot get elected as the next US president, and that puts all the Republicans out of the picture. The kitchen table issues are even worse for Republicans, and the impending recession is going to focus their minds on how profligate and monumentally dishonest this Republican government has been.
Centre – Are you running a book on it? You may get some interest. What odds are you offering? I’d back both Obama and/or Clinton against any Republican, because I can’t see the Republicans winning, regardless of the Dem nominee. If Obama gets the nomination, it will be because the backroom operators know there has been a change in the electorate, risks are gone, and he can win.
Diogenes- Hilary – Divisive? According to The Onion a voter they interviewed said this:
303
JV, excellent satire, and oh, so true!
More happy news,
http://www.theage.com.au/news/entertainment/garden-show-back-to-its-roots/2008/01/03/1198949988124.html
Maresi.
If Conroy is as obsessed with putting good content on our digital TV as he is with keeping bad content off our internet he’ll give 31 a digital licence, post haste.
And again JV, Hilarious!
The fact that Hilary gets such stuff really points to a big problem with her and the Clinton machine.
Maybe they should get Monica Lewinksy to do some ads for her? Just think of the possibilities!
Before attempting to predict how Americans might vote, or more commonly decide to not bother to vote, I recommend some reading. Deer Hunting With Jesus, dispatches from America’s class war, by Joe Bageant and published by Scribe Publications. His is a liberal (left) view coming from a “redneck” background in a western Virginia semi rural town. I heard him interviewed on local ABC before Christmas and was given the book as a present.
Read it and consider whether these people are ready to vote for Obama.
Here’s Obama and Clinton in the New Hampshire Democrat dinner with about 3,000 people attending:
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/oh-bam-a-fires-it-up/
It’s sounding like he can keep the big Mo going.
Kirribilli, unfortunately the Americans may see it as a break from Bush if they listen to the rhetoric that those Republicans can dish out. 6/4 are by no means outside odds.
But don’t get me wrong, I would love to see Obama win. But he needs to overcome the redneck vote which will not be easy. And Clinton is not liked.
I listened to Obama’s victory speech and as usual had trouble getting to the end of it because I find him a little preachy and boring. It is because of the flaw in his campaign that would leave an opening for Clinton to come back, he gives no sense that there is a Republican machine to overcome in November. Clinton does.
Will the Democrats choose someone more electable over someone who makes them feel good? My guess is that they will, because lets face it, the only thing that really makes Obama appear more radical than Clinton is that having a black President would be less likely than a female one. I think there is barely any policy difference between them. By the by, I don’t get the feeling a Republican loss is as likely as the Liberal’s one was last year.
KR (232) I wouldn’t worry that Bill Gross thinks a recession is coming, he called it wrong last year and his funds had a very average performance.
314
Mike Cusack
I think Bageant would (vote for Obama). Some of his rels might not vote at all by the sound of it.
(He was on Philip Adams last year too. He’s a fantastic commentator on a part of America that doesn’t get much air time, but I haven’t read his book yet)
317
The Piping Shrike
Gross pulled out of mortgage backed paper a good six months before it all went pear-shaped, so I think he redeemed himself ultimately, eh? (Getting out early is always a risk of missing the last bit, but it’s a prudent move if you know it’s going to dive. He did the right thing by that criteria)
Yeah, I know the old line that someone has called ten of the last three recessions, but watch the US financial system get some monster whacks as the toxic debt parcels get unwrapped. You know it’s gone wobbly when Chinese and Arab money is biting off large preference shares of their major banks and walking off with about 10% returns.
My prices: For the presidency -
Clinton 5/4
Obama 3/1
McCain 5/1
Edwards 10/1
Giuliani 10/1
Huckabee 12/1
Romney 33/1
Market around 115%
33/1 for Romney? It’s a shame you’re not running a book.
313 KR – Monica could perhaps do something to remove the spreading stain on Hilary’s cloak of invincibility.
321 TPS, I’ll think you find he actually does.
322
JV, I’ll pay that! LOL
317
The Piping Shrike
I’m curious TPS as to what you might expect from a victory speech, in front of a whooped up crowd, after what is surely an historic event for a black man in Iowa?
Personally, I thought it was a ripper of a speech, uplifting in cadence and positive in message, but I guess I was more attuned to the mood rather than anxious to hear his tax plan!
It rather made Rudd’s victory speech sound a bit wooden though, didn’t it?
KR, timing is everything in Gross’s game. Maybe a recession is coming but it just doesn’t feel like one. Rates are coming down in the US and Europe and the central banks are pumping liquidity into the economy like buggery. I agree there may be some more shocks to the financial system but that by no means a recession.
By the way it is funny how the Liberals’ ‘tsunami’ that was so derided just a few months ago as a desperate last minute ploy to scare voters (which it was) is now becoming orthodoxy.
Thanks steve.
Here’s another ordinary voter’s view on H Clinton – again from The Onion:
TSP, have you read any of Satyajit Das? He’s got some some great takes on why this is the real thing, and although it’s hard stuff to wade through, it paints a scary picture of a financail system that is seriously off the rails.
(He’s also very funny, try:
http://www.wilmott.com/blogs/satyajitdas/index.cfm/2006/5/24/Fear-and-Loathing–WMD-or-What-are-Derivatives
and just wonder at the pomposity of Greenspan’s mumblings!)
The Iraq War effect:
The Deciders:
Amuuuurikka : Bush and the Neocon nuts
The C.O.W.
Britain : Blair- dispatched in disgrace
Spain : Aznar – dispatched in disgrace
Italy : Berlusconi – dispatched in disgrace
Australia : Howard – dispatched in disgrace
Poland : dispatched in disgrace
Bush is the last one standing (although technically the writing was put on the wall in the 06 congressional election).
Bush will be dispatched in disgrace. The Republican Party will be dispatched. Hillary Clinton will be dispatched.
Anybody who has non-stop, bald facedly lied to the people about the Iraq War is poison.
Obama will be the next President.
In November, when the economy is getting tighter and they are positively sick of the Iraq disaster and the people are sick to death of the unmatched amount of pure Goebblian lies they have been told by EVERYONE in Washington,people will crave 1 thing:
Hope
Hope of change
KR that was a fun read. Mind you, what he is saying about derivatives they used to say about shares. People always want to blame the financial system, but I always see recessions as usually happening because the ‘real’ economy is unprofitable, the financial system just can’t prop it up anymore.
TSP
I think a dose of this will help:
http://www.prudentbear.com/index.php/FeaturedCommentaryHome
You commented on the unprecedented flood of money from central banks, well Das puts it like this:
These moves have attracted remarkably little scrutiny or comment. Central banks are effectively underwriting the credit risk and the liquidity of the financial system with public money but without any transparent political debate. Socialism for Wall Street prevails, once again.
…because they are allowing dodgey ‘assets’ as collateral. This is pass the parcel on a scale that’s simply never been seen before and is essentially a ticking time bomb. (Think Enron’s dodgey off balance sheet loans to itself multiplied by many orders of magnitude.)
Here’s a turn up. Contrary to what Adam was saying earlier about the Bradley effect, it appears Obama will be OK after all – due to the “Reverse Bradley Effect”:
http://www.slate.com/id/2181118/fr/rss/
332
“Reverse Bradley Effect”:
Is that when a very large tank reverses over your car?
Hopefully you aren’t in it at the time!
Maybe that’s how Hilary feels at the moment?
I agree with KR and others that Obama’s speech was excellent. Good luck to him.
As for comments on recession, just to clarify, I think the US is already in recession (and that helps the Dems), but that does not automaticaly mean that we will be. Of course things are not as rosy as Howard wanted to pretend, but the fact is that the US is not even our biggest trading partner; China is, and they are not slowing. Things will be tougher for mortgage holders, but even they are only 40% of Aussie households, so struggle for one group, does not make a recession for all. Please note that this does not mean the situation is equitable nor do I like it (I have a mortgage!), but I just don’t think it is rational to assume a recession here always follows one in USA.
334
Yeah, the employment numbers rattled a few people:
“This is unambiguously negative,” said Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody’s Economy.com. “The economy is on the edge of recession, if we’re not already engulfed in one.”
So it’s definitely spooking the number crunchers.
i haven’t followed the US election seriously but i do want the insane shrub soundly beaten – i did, however, read a speech by obama – it sounded Presidential – it had the cadence of a JFK speech.
This poll taken just before xmas shows the problem that Hillary Clinton has in winning against republicans.
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/12/poll_obama_more_electable_than_hillary_and_edwards.php
Adam, the campaign of early 2004 favourite Howard Dean fell apart after he placed third in Iowa. If there’s a 2008 parallel there, it is not with Barack Obama.
As for the 2006 Tennessee Senate race, it offers scant evidence of the so-called Bradley effect. Published polling showed a close race, with the Republican candidate generally leading by a narrow margin, particularly in the polls taken close to election day. In other words, the polls were an accurate reflection of the eventual outcome.
David I didn’t of course suggest an EXACT parallel between Dean and Obama, just that they would prove similiarly transient. I expect Huckabee will be as well.
My view is that only Repubs with a ghost of a chance of winning in November are McCain and Giuliani (or possibly Thompson, but he’s not going well so far). If they nominate Huckabee or Romney they will lose whoever the Dems nominate. But if they can swallow their prejudices and nominate McCain and Giuliani, they could win, despite Bush, Iraq et al. It’s then a question of who has the status, the credibility and the money to win for the Dems. I still think Clinton starts a long way ahead on all three. It’s true that she has large negatives, but that has NOT prevented previous candidates winning. Roosevelt, Johnson, Nixon and indeed Bill Clinton were widely detested but still won. You only need 50% after all (not even that sometimes!).
Obama does a nice line in inspirational rhetoric, but he has zero substance – five years ago he was in the Illinois state legislature and no-one had ever heard of him. Now of course that doesn’t mean he CAN’T win – in January 1976 no-one had ever heard of Jimmy Carter either. But he’s a much less safe bet than Clinton, and I still think when it comes to the crunch white voters in the redneck states won’t vote for him, and that the Dem primary voters know that. Don’t forget that Iowa is very untypical: in the big states which vote on Super Tuesday the organised Dem base network, the big city machines and the unions come into play, and they will go with the candidate who has the track record, and the money, and that is still Clinton. I agree that if she bombs badly in New Hampshire that may change.
Adam
The democrats have ignored the primaries once and lost, if the primaries are won by Obama I’m betting he will be endorsed at the National Convention.
I don’t think you realize just how fed up they are with the Iraq thing and when it comes to that issue Hillary isn’t in a different party.
Funny thing really, politically congress has to keep the thing going while looking like it is doing it’s best to stop it.
We have just had a political outsider, a man who is drawn as tin tan, elected as our prime minister, I would have thought it would be s small step to consider the same as possible in the USA.
I think the reasons are the same, the voters are not impressed with what the political class has done. It only takes a small percentage to change the political landscape, and in the USA it only takes getting a small percentage to get off their bums. The turnout speak more than the result.
No, I put my bet on Hillary, but I think I am going to lose.
From the discussions I’ve had with ordinary Americans I wouldn’t be writing the Republicans off based on Iraq, the economy, etc. They may blame Bush for the fiascos but I don’t get the sense that their anger towards him and his administration is being extended towards the party generally.
Which is a concern because it makes it less likely the party will see the need to reform itself. The fruitloops will stick around waiting for better times, just as they did the last time a Democrat was elected President.
Nor do I detect the level of anger against the war that applies here. Americans are mostly angry about the incompetent way its been handled, not so much that it was started in the first place.
Quite a few seem to believe that following the ‘Surge’ they are now getting back to a winning position. It is all BS of course, the main reason for the reduction in violence is that effectively the Sunnis militants are being paid off by the Americans in both cash and weapons to supposedly fight Al Queda. That may work in the short run, but eventually the cash and weapons will be turned against the Shias and Allah help them both when that blows up because the Yanks won’t be able to.
Kirribilli @ 313
Maybe they should get Monica Lewinksy to do some ads for her? Just think of the possibilities!
Does Hillary smoke Cuban cigars Kirribilli ????
I think HRC is an intelligent woman who has run a dumb campaign and it looks like it is too late to turn it around. There are major debates on tonight clashing with major football matches and the Obama’s support is surging while the Clinton campaign is shrinking markedly each day. Hard to see how HRC can possibly win New Hampshire. The shorter timeframe between Iowa and New Hampshire this year makes it much tougher than previous elections. Looks like Hillary’s campaign is ‘all but’ to use an old cardplaying saying.
http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/new_hampshire/election_2008_new_hampshire_democratic_primary
Reuters is also reporting bad news for both Clinton and McCain.
http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN0427445620080105
MayoFeral Says:
January 6th, 2008 at 8:27 am
Yaa. Take a look at the congress and senate vote.
From the discussion I’ve had with a Americans ( I spent 7 months of last year there, it really is a shit of a place) what strikes me is their absolute ignorance of world affairs. Not hard to find one that believes that Suddam bombed the world trade center, or one that believes the earth popped out of the either 5000 years ago. It’s a country ran on fairy tales. As a friend of mine said, if you want to understand why a person with an average IQ is what it is, go to the USA, that is where the standard is set.
Politics in America is driven by apathy; I absolutely and totally support compulsory voting.
I will give you that the congress and senate vote wasn’t just Iraq, the presidents religious advisers boy friend outing him a week before the vote certainly sent the religious nutters into a spin, creating apathy in that important sector of the republican support base (boy it was fun watching the right wing religious nutters coming unglued) .
What I think is important here is Obama is talking about uniting the country again, I think it is fair to say there is a small percentage of Americans that know they are in trouble, it only takes a small percentage to change the political landscape. How does Hillary deal with a message of hope, mud slinging just reinforces Obama’s message.
And how does the party machines react, they only know how to do mud slinging and division. Some of the republican supporters are really nasty people ( the worst of the Australian reporters are not in a class of their own), the nasties just won’t be able to handle it, they will just get nastier.
I agree that Obama’s speech was great as a political speech- moving, emotive, eloquent, if a bit short on detail. I think he has overplayed the Iowa victory though. I know he is trying to create momentum but he came off as cocky and over confident and risks showing his inexperience
Morning all-
and in the immortal; words of GWB
“If the terriers and bariffs are torn down, this economy will grow,”
Maybe I shoud send Obama a copy: might be all it takes.
Transferring polling day from a Tuesday to a Saturday would help, too.
BB
are you serious – polling day is a Tuesday?
What happens to workers, students etc?
Are they given time off to vote (given the wait can be hours), or is this designed to discourage voters.?
Goooooooooood mornin’ Poll Bludgers! Oh, how I love the smell of hope in the morning!
I got this off a NY Times blog:
The Rasmussen Poll for New Hampshire out this afternoon is the first post-Iowa poll in its entirety. Results: Obama 37%, Clinton 27%, and Edwards 19%
…so it ain’t looking hot for HRC.
Apparently Obama is getting big fired up crowds and the Clintons are whinging that the media is giving them a bad time! That’s funny really, because the Clintons are still the nearest thing to royalty they’ve got, and there’s no shortage of coverage of their every word. This may be a bad thing in itself, I suspect it is.
Some great posts on PB today, and some really good discusssions about the whole Republican/Iraq issue. It’s still polling as one of the top issues, and it sure as hell fires the Democrats, just look at Obama’s support and listen to his message about Iraq. I think Clinton is way too compromised on it have that kind of authority.
349
Jen, you obviously need to learn that the great font of democracy in the world is anything but!
Also, in 22 States of the Union, if you’ve previously been convicted of a felony and done time (even as a kid, for car stealing, forty years ago), you are NOT eligible to vote!
This wondeful stunt was pulled by the South when they lost the civil war and had to begrudingly accept the blacks as not only human, but gawd forbid, citizens! So, they figured they could get most of them in jail at some point in their lives, so hey, that stripped them of voting rights for their entire lives.
Worse, Jeb Bush had a company ‘check’ the voting roles in Florida to purge it of any felons who didn’t have voting rights, and if Joe Smith of Dade County came up, well, all Joe Smith’s just got wiped off. There were black voters, who’d voted all their lives, being turned away from the polling booths and threatened with arrest when they protested that they should have been on the roles.
Welcome to Democracy, American style!
Hi KR
good huh?
I meant what I said about the Opreh factor – who better to mobilise the non-voting middle/working class to get out and vote.
Not to mention the fact that she has managed to get the approval as a black woman from the most uneducated and potentially bigotted of Americans. Her endorsement is gold for Obama.
KR
that post was sent before I read your next one.
I am concerned about the veracity of the vote, particularly after the Florida debacle last timme.
Perhaps the United Nations should be despatched to ensure a free and fair vote in the Gretest Democracy on Earth.
Suspect Clinton lost her credibity re Iraq when she refused to acknowledge she had made a mistake in supporting the war(if I can trust my memory). There has also been a sense of entitlement about her,as though she was the heir-apparent, and a certain lack of humility…a touch of the ‘know-it-all’.Her desperation was evident in her voice…shrill and forced.
Obama won me over a long time ago, not just his grace of movement(that helped!) but his calm conviction of a better way and his confident oratory. (Put my money on him at the time of our KR election win.)
However, am waiting for his weaknesses to become headlines from now on.
And ofcourse,events of 1968 always haunt when there is such a charismatic candidate.
Clinton will stomp on the Republicans if she gets the nomination. If Obama gets the nomination, then it becomes a slugging match between two unknowns.
I think Clinton will be a great president, much better than Obama.
Go Clinton 2008!
Happy New Year all.
I suspect there are still electable Republicans and I agree with Adam that McCain and Guiliani are two of them. Huckabee looks to me to have a glass jaw and Romney, as a Mormon, will really struggle.
What a tragedy that McCain didn’t get the Republican nomination in 2000, when he was the early leader.
Oh lordy I’m becoming an election tragic, watching Sky for the US Presidential debates while Mrs Removals and the little Removal boyz are out of town for the weekend!
HEEEEEEEELP!
Dyno
Giuliani has some horrid history and is seen as a fascist, even by a lot of conservatives!
McCain is a bit brittle, much too old, but probably their best choice, while Romney is simply unelectable if all the polling about Mormonism is credible.
dembo @ 355,
I basically agree with you about Clinton v Obama, although Obama is the one candidate from either side who could get a lot of votes from people who don’t normally vote, so that is an unknown factor in his favour.
A point to ponder is that on current projections the US economy could be much worse by November (when the election is) than in February (effectively when the nomination is likely to be decided). I am not so sure how Obama will come across in what could be a developing recession during 2008, whereas Clinton would be seen by many (including many of those who don’t actually like her) as a fairly safe pair of hands.
KR,
Most of them have some horrid history, including Clinton in the eyes of many Americans. Obama has hardly any history at all.
McCain is “brittle”???! He survived a long time (5 years I think) as a North Vietnamese POW, and came out of it all with very little residual rancour. Hardly brittle I suspect. But yes, quite possibly too old.
McCain appeared the least hawkish of the Republicans,though some recent statements are to the contrary. Hard to tell what thye REALLY stand for ….and not just saying what they think others want to hear.
I always felt Colin Powell was very much caught between being a good soldier,i.e.subservient to the Commander-in-Chief , and his own private convictions which I think were much more dove-ish.
And you are right about the voter disenfranchisemnt in the US,KR……….absolutely appalling, and I feel there have been subtle attempts at cutting the democratic cloth here too.
Dyno, Clinton has apparently modifed her rally format in New Hampshire, and is taking questions more and engaging in more dialogue rather than her usual shopping list of ‘achievements’.
One such line from her was that she is going to set up a ‘rescue’ package for failing mortgage holders!
That’s as credible (not) as what Bush has proposed on the same issue ie it simply is not possible for the US government to engage in the moral hazard of bailing out individuals or the lenders, in what was essentially a total failure of regulation in the first place.
But hey, it smacks of popularism of the first order, and Hilary is desperate!
As an aside, I find it hugely ironic that the ‘free enterprise’ mantra is invoked to keep prudent financial regulations away from Wall Street cowboys so they can indulge in flagrant abuses of the financial system, but the moment it all turns pear-shaped, the first thing they propose is that Federal government should come and hand out colossal quantities of taxpayers funds!
As they like to say…’go figure’!
Dyno, apparently McCain is pretty much mistrusted as a ‘maverick’ by the establishment GOP, and maybe ‘brittle’ was not quite the aposite word, but check his history, and you’ll see he’s often done his own thing and upset the power brokers.
Don’t get me wrong, I still think he is far and away their best shot.
Adam, I agree with much of that, particularly your assessment of the Republican candidates. But gosh, you’d be hard pressed to find many political commentators who agree with your view that electability is Clinton’s great asset. Yes a successful candidate only needs 50%; but it’s hardly a great selling point if the best she can hope for is to eek out a narrow electoral college victory (a la Dubya).
Obama’s shown over the course of 2007 that he can match Clinton for fundraising ability. Status? Certainly Hillary Clinton is a household name, but that isn’t necessarily a positive in her case. Credibility? I think the political achievements of both candidates is so far pretty modest: both having entered the US Senate fairly recently, both in liberal states.
By “white voters in redneck states” are you referring to the deep south? Forget the south, it’s a lost cause for the Democrats (with the exception of Florida) whoever the candidate is. Obama won’t win there. Clinton won’t win there. Even Edwards – a white southern male – would struggle to win there.
This particular page compares head to head the various possible nominations from each party in a general election. Interesting to see how much better Obama polls against McCain than Clinton. At the same time it’s a worry that even Obama is currently not a clear winner against McCain.
(The rest of this site is good too):
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html
Man the liferafts!
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/0,8599,1700705,00.html
I don’t know how the post-match Melbourne report transwhatevered into US primaries, but Mitt Romney has won eight delegates in Wyoming; Fred Thompson, two; and Duncan Hunter, one. One is still to be chosen to make up the 12.
Huge plunge on Obama to win Democrat nomination. In the futures market he is now 53% to Clintons 40%. Adam et al should have some money on Hilary if they really believe she is going to beat Obama. Thet must have plenty left over after the Oz elections.
Watching the Republican debate on Sky, a couple of thoughts:
Iraq
If the al Anbar Sunni hadn’t been attacked by the Salafi/al Qaeda for not being ‘Muslim enough’, and their rabble hadn’t kidnapped and killed a couple of important tribal leaders or their family members, Iraq would be a VERY different story at this point.
Ironically, the jihadis have handed the Republicans the cover story that Iraq is some kind of ’success’ because it’s only getting the population equivalent of two 911 attacks per week!
So McCain and all the others except Ron Paul are claiming their love of the Bush doctrine and are being all hairy chested about American hegemony in Arab lands. Ron Paul is the only one who has actually read Ossama bin Laden’s demands by the sound of it! In other words, bin Laden’s movement is openly saying that they’ll attack America so long as it exists as an occupier and supporter of repressive Arab states. (Mind you, it’s a teensy bit more complex, but essentially Ron Paul is telling them the truth, but they just don’t want to hear it).
Ironically, Romney is quoting Sayyib Qutb (so Diogenes, we were discussing his seminal role just two days ago! It’s obvioulsy our reading of the zietgiest!) but fails to note that Qutb’s movement has been well and truly hijacked (no pun intended) by the anti-US radical movement of bin Laden and al Zawarihiri because they keep giving them excellent recruitment opportunities.
Six months ago this conversation would have been entirely different, and as it is, it is being conducted under the smokescreen of a ‘victory’ in Iraq which is entirely chimerical.
As Harold MacMillan responded to the question about the greatest challenge to a statesman: “Events my dear boy, events”, this could all unravel in an instant. Rather like the report yesterday of an Iraqi soldier killing a couple of US soldiers and an interpreter. If the reality of Iraq, rather than the spin, intrudes, it’s going to be very interesting to watch the back-pedalling from today’s declaration of devotion to the “Bush Doctrine”.
368
Big swing in a day, Diogenes!
Looks like the Obama magic is firing up the new Hampshire landscape too.
This is getting fascinating. Now, back to the debate, with Republican’s swearing undying love for GWBush! Oh my god, it’s surreal!
Clinton or Obama would be too divisive. To be sure of winning the Dems need Edwards or, better still, Gore.
Gotta love Rudy “we have the best health care in the world’! As long as you’re not on median income or less trying to support a family!
The audacity is breathtaking! These guys can call night day with a straight face.
I know I’ve called Ron Paul a fruitloop, (some of his policy idea are literally mad), but his analysis of what’s wrong with America is more on the money than any of the cardboard cut-out answers of the rest of them combined.
Talk about living in complete denial!
What happened to Gore?
Could he still make a late bid, or is it too late now?
Actually, KR, I doubt if Rudy is as bad a candidate as you say, as far as the general public are concerned. His biggest issue is that he’s unlikely to be acceptable to the Republican power brokers. His approach of spurning Iowa and New Hampshire (and other pre-Florida primaries) is probably going to cost him, as well.
what news outlet are you following Kirrabilli?
Gore is a poor candidate and they’d be crazy to pick him.
He made a passably good documentary about climate change. So what?
Anyone know anything the candidates’ attitudes to gun control? Or are they all in favour of business as usual?
Gore can still win. There is a theory that Clinton might decide to cut and run (if things get worse) and transfer her support to Gore with her as VP. He needs to get in by Super Tuesday though.
BTW Bush has an estimated IQ of 125 based on his SAT scores and a few other things. That’s still the second lowest of 20th Century Presidents but he’s not a complete moron at all. Who would have thunk it! Bill Clinton’s was 145 and the highest was John Adams at 170 (which is easily genius).
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article634182.ece
Dyno,
I can’t imagine that any candidate would be brave enough to stand against American’s inalienable Right to Bear Arms (and murder each other at a staggering rate).
Diogenes,
I beg to differ.
Regardless of his IQ score, Bush is a complete moron.
I’m also curious as to whether Opreh (who by the way, I cannot stand) has a following in the Deep South, or whether they have they worked out that she is black.
This may sound trite, but let’s not forget who we are dealing with here, and endorsement by a celebrity would carry more weight with some Americans than any other form of political debate / commentary etc.
jen- I’m sorry to say it but the term “moron” is actually defined by IQ (round about 70 from memory).
And KR, I just did a test to look at which candidate best fits my beliefs. Obama won not surprisingly, but I was actually closer to Ron Paul than Hilary.
http://www.selectsmart.com/president/2008.html
Jen, I’m watching the debate on Sky, a bit delayed now as I do other things, so I’m behind realtime by a bit now.
As for Bush’s IQ, it’s not really the point. The point is he is the reformed alcoholic coke snorting failure of a politcal dynastic family who was elevated beyond his capabilities by the money machine of the GOP and the Machiavellan dirty tricks of Karl ROve. He found god, and they found him!
He became the glove puppet of some ugly neoconservative forces that conspired with Cheney and Rumsfeld and the rest is history, as he will soon be. Thank the lord!
Remember, it was Kenny Boy Lay who flew young George around the country in his private jet because they knew he’d do for them nationally what he did for them in Texas. And oh boy, when Enron was finally exposed as a massive fraud, it was GW Bush who came out and said “Ken Lay, who?”
Bush is a travesty of history, and most Americans have finally figured it out.
Diogenes -
alright then – he’s a complete idiot.
382
Diogenes
Interesting, I’ll take a look at that later.
As for Ron Paul, yep, he has the great advantage that he’s not a real contender, so he speaks something that’s close to the truth. It just shows the unadulterated hypocracy of the Republican party insiders that they’ll go to their defeat without acknowledging that they’ve done over their country with mad policies and profligate borrowing to support it.
KR
I hope the Americans punish the republicans like our departed last leader.
They will play the race card on Obama and hopefully this will backfire.
377 Dyno-They split pretty much on party lines with the Reps going with the NRA and the Dems endorsing the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence.
There is a chance of a three-sided contest. Michael Bloomberg might run as an Independent. In particular, if the race is between Clinton or Obama vs Huckabee or Romney, there might be some pressure for someone in the middle. Ballot Access might be an issue but getting on the ballot in 30 or so states might be enough to win or at least force the Electoral College into a three corner contest itself resulting in Congress deciding (which has happened twice in 1800 and 1824).
Diogenes, thanks for that link.
Seems that Dennis Kucinich meets my criteria the best. Useful link for policy snapshots of individual candidates.
Wonder why there are no avowed atheists standing in the US? They didn’t ask about gun-totin’ trigger-happy NRA member-candidates apparently.
Gallup Poll – Diversity (December 07)
US voters asked whether they would vote for candidates of their party generally well-qualified but tagged as follows – with ‘yes’ response percentage:
Catholic – 93%
Black – 93%
Jewish – 91%
a woman – 86%
Hispanic – 86%
a Mormon – 80%
married 3 times – 67%
72 years old – 57%
a homosexual – 56%
an atheist – 46%
It’s worth having a look at the site to check out the trends in these figures. An interesting one is the trend for a woman – it has dropped 3% since March/April 2007. The Hilary factor?
The approval for a black candidate has come a long way since 1958 (38%) and 1967 (53%)!
http://www.pollingreport.com/politics.htm
Thanks Diogenes for the link. Mine came out Obama also, followed by Edwards and then Al Gore. Must confess I like Edwards, think he may be a dark horse here. Wonder if Gore is just sniffing the wind at this stage, still not too late and bear in mind he won the real vote in 2000, the year of the Great Pretender and his bast**d brother in Florida.
Ron Paul just cracks me up, as he’s said that US$ inflation is the source of their problems, and broadly, he’s dead right. The others just sit there and pretend he didn’t just fart in their faces.
It’s the funniest thing I’ve seen a group of Republicans doing for a while!
Paul said that the price of oil has been flat against gold but up 350% against the US$ over the last few decades and only 200% against the Euro. And was only $27 a barrel before they went ‘over there’ to save ‘their oil’.
OK, but what’s the solution? yep, just keep borrowing, drive down interest rates further when your financial system tanks from years of debauched regulation (and believe me, they let it happen!) and watch the USD tank even further!
But then they all just continue to act like Republican policy has been fiscal rectitude writ large! It just cracks me up!
Snap Megan .
(Mind you, never heard of him).
Obama was a close second so he’d still get my vote.
Looks as though Faux News (fair and balanced) have let their resident lunatic O’Reilly out of his cage. This is from AP
No one ever accused Bill O’Reilly of being a wilting flower.
So when the Fox News Channel commentator and interviewer appeared midway through a Barack Obama rally at a Nashua high school Saturday, his presence was evident. Tall, with camera crew in tow, O’Reilly marched forward to get a good look.
Journalists have been known to seek the best angle.
But it was after Obama’s speech that O’Reilly threw some elbows. And not so figuratively either.
Obama staffer Marvin Nicholson, a personal aide always at Obama’s side during rope line handshakes, said O’Reilly yelled at him to get out of the way of his cameraman’s shot. Nicholson said O’Reilly came around the waist-high barricade separating Obama from well-wishers.
“Then he grabbed me with both of his arms and tried to push me out of the way,” Nicholson said after the campaign agreed to make him available to reporters.
O’Reilly, interviewed afterward by phone on Fox News, said he tried “to gently remove” Nicholson because he was standing in front of Fox’s camera.
Now it’s the Dems turn, and they get the biggest strawman question: What to do about a nuclear attack on the US by terra-wrists!
My god, they are eating themselves with paraniod crazy stuff!
maybe this question should have gone to the republicans who let GWBush go galloping off to attack a clapped out Arab state that didn’t even have an operating airforce!
Jesuuuuuuuuuz they are a stoopid bunch of whackers! And they let the media attack dog just ask it like it’s the most sensible question in the universe!
Gobsmacking lunacy!
I know Obama does seem like abit of a gamble and that he can not win the South. Until reacently i thought giving the nomination to Obama would be nieve. However Gore is from the South and hardly one any Southern states including his own(nearly as sus as Florida in my opinion). Niether did Kerry. If they play their cards right Obama would only need to win New Mexico, Ohio, Iowa and West Virginia.(without loosing any obviously)
I Dont think any Democrat can win Florida or any deep South States. If Huckabee wins the Republican nomination, then Arkansasis off limmits anyway. I think Obama is able to win the Southern states that stayed in the union if performs well enough. With the level of unpopularity of the previous republican govt in Kentucky, it like the other 4 states i’ve mention have almost reached “Drovers Dog Status”. As for the other union southern state the the Dop hold Missouri it is supposedly a Bellweather and more like Iowa than its Southern nieghbours. Edwards might be able to win North Carolina and maybe Virginia that Obama can’t.
Kirribilli
are you suggesting that the GOP (does it really stand for Grand Old Party???)
is made up of people who are driven by a mad ideology that mirrors that of the very enemy they seek to destroy?
As well as a burning need to rid the world of pooftas and lezzo’s? Or at least keep them well and truly locked in the closet.
sounds strangely familiar….
come on William – unlock me. It’s irony, even if tasteless.
GOP not Dop sorry*
I agree with 314. Read “Deer Hunting with Jesus” and you’ll quickly see that Obama can at best only hope for a narrow electoral victory (ie winning Ohio or Florida and the Kerry 2004 states).
While I agree that Hillary has big negatives, I would suggest that it is because she’s been around for so long. Any politician who hangs around a long time will get them, especially if they have a big name. I would also suggest these negatives are “capped” now – all Americans have an opinion on her now. Those who hate her already do – it’s unlikely this can increase any further now. On the other hand, Obama has something of a Pandora’s Box of negatives waiting to be opened by the raging right.
Remember Kerry after 2004 ended with big negatives that weren’t present beforehand his entry into the campaign – this is largely due to him becoming ‘known’ (and ‘Swift-boated’) to America.
So Hillary can win this year, but again I think it would at best be as I’ve described Obama above – the Kerry/Gore states plus Ohio or Florida to win.
If you read “Deer Hunting with Jesus” and also “Freakanomics” (which looks at, of all things, the Weakest Link TV Game show on the differences between publicly voting for minorities), you’ll quickly realise that only John Edwards would be able to lead the Democrats to a landslide in 2008.
jen, yes, that’s what the GOP stands for as it is currently encumbered (sic), but there’s a lot of real conservatives that are horrified about what the neocons and the loopy christian zionists have concocted: a witches brew of fear and hate.
(By the way, they’ll keep in the family questions about lezzos to Mr Cheney’s new grand daughter a private matter, as will they keep known rampant gays in their own ranks until they cross the divider in airport ‘rest rooms’, but essentially, it’s pure hypocracy for the bretheren.)
400
Ryan
I know what you’re saying about the deep fried south, but can I make one important observation about Obama: he’s not black!
At least not in the important sense of being the descendent of those people their people (ie Southern whites) once owned.
He may as well be of Korean or German (or Austrian) descent for that matter, and he’s able to appear, not as a ‘black’ (read ‘nigga’, for the Confederates), but as an American.
There’s something happening with this guy that is different, just look at his appeal in Iowa, of all places!
KR, yes he’s a “real” African-American in that his mother was American and his father African. But this doesn’t matter in America, it’s what you look like that decides whether you’re “black” or not – nothing to do with your parentage…
Just look at Tiger Woods, despite his protestations, Americans (including and especially African-Americans) consider him “black”.
As a black American, when a taxi drives past you or when a white night-club is ‘members only’, you are not asked whether or not your parents are descendants of slaves.
And it’s far from just southerners who are racist. Their racism may still be the most overt, but there’s black suburbs and white “suburbs” in America’s large cities even in the so-called Blue states.
Black and white America still are reluctant to socialise together. Take a look at a high school cafeteria – if it’s a rare non-segregated school, the tables will still usually be in race groups.
There are two Americas (in many senses) and only Edwards seems to articulate and recognise this.
KR, and BTW I don’t doubt that Obama is exceptional and he’s certainly no Jesse Jackson seeking the nomination. He’s bringing new people into the process so far, and if he carried this through it would be an advantage in a general election.
The question is: is it sustainable and could his candidacy generate negatives that would invigorate the Republican base to offset those Obama brought in?
John Ryan -
clearly the US has a large population of God-loving, nigga-hating gun-toting rednecks who would no sooner vote for a black man than fly.
However they are not the only people who reside there (someone made the Sopranos and Six Feet Under after all), and so while I totally agree that there are parts of the US where there is no chance for Obama, is it not possible that the educated and liberal-thinkers might outflank the bigots?
Or am I just being naively hopeful?
naievely hopeful Jen? No you are just ignorant. More work and study and less application of prejudice required.
Good points John Ryan, and we are all pretty aware of America’s history and it’s racist fault lines, but we are in somewhat unchartered waters here, as there’s never really been a candidate like Obama. (And yes, Afro-American in the literal sense, but not ‘black American’ in the historically defining sense).
There does come, once or twice in a generation, a figure that transends the norms, that creates a new paradigm and does what nobody saw as possible until that moment.
Is Obama the great (non)white hope? I’m not sure, but he’s the closest thing to it I’ve ever seen in the American political scene.
We shall see, and if he wins NH, we’ll have a pretty good indicator early on in this most remarkable election year.
ESJ
my ignorance is about what – HBO, or are you suggesting that my perhaps unkind anaysis of certain aspects of American culture is inaccurate?
In which case I will humbly submit that I am in fact, sadly though, right.
Diogenes
I came out for Kucinich a tad in front of Obama, so not an unexpected result really.
Clinton’s a good debater, got all the answers, is smart, has a long track record, but she let Edwards press her buttons in the NH debate and she let fly with a hissy spray that really sounded shrill.
Obama just smoothly flowed right on through and didn’t get stuck. Edwards was firing up his engines and taking shots at Clinton that really struck me as a bit desperate.
jen
Don’t take crap from mr smarmyjohn, he’s a molester from way back, and is still licking his wounds from the monumental rout his howard mob copped. So he’s only here to take swipes at those he thinks he can damage.
My result was Obama on top 91% followed Chis Dodd (who withdrew) 86%. Hillary was 70% (which suprised me) and Mr. 9/11 28% (which didn’t suprise me)
In a US Presidential election EVERYTHING revolves around the ELECTORAL COLLEGE. Essentially every state gets a certain number of votes equivalent to the size of its congregation in the House of Representatives. There are 538 votes so you need 270 to win.
I believe California has 54 votes and the South has 138 votes combined. Only Clinton and Carter in recent history have won in the South.
Essentially there is a large swathe of the country in which any Democrat cannot win. A Dem has to win OHIO and in the West in states like Colorado, Nevada and Arizona. The Western states which have previously been reliably Republican are trending Democrat however.
The problem is that whilst voters in Massachusets and NY may be fine with Obama you have to win over the conservative middle in states like OHIO. It is a well acknowledged fact that polls overstate the support of black candidates – as Adam correctly identified with Harold Ford (who is not unlike Barack Hussein Obama). Secondly at some point the US media will switch to discussing the electability of BHO which will result in a different narrative emerging, if you have followed a few of these it is a standard narrative for primaries campaigns.
Finally the democrat establishment is not that dumb to allow a nomination win to someone who is unelectable in a democrat year. Essentially BHO would lose to John McCain who is looking like the probable Republican nomineee.
ESJ
Yes, but do not despair yet. There is some hope – Obama is polling a lot better nationally than Clinton head to head against McCain, who seems the most likely Republican candidate to be left standing – I mean right standing. It’s neck and neck between Obama & McCain at present. [No Misssissipi Burning pun intended]
I can remember when Dukakis led Bush Senior in polls and look how that turned out.
What would the results be here if we were to follow the college system the americans follow. I believe it would be only WA to the Libs, thus making it 135 to 15 in Labours favour!
JV
I doubt that ESj would be despairing – I would guess he is hoping for a resurgence for the republicabs, as he was an ardent supporter of the former Australian Gocvernment.
ESJ
I freely admit my ignorance of the US electoral sytem and demographic. That is why I ask so many questions, and appreciate the answers i receive that enlighten me. Including yours on the odd occasion.
that would be republicaNs
Jen – ‘Rebublicabs’ ? – You must have been thinking of the right-wing taxi drivers with talkback rednecks on the radio one encounters from time to time. You’ve just coined a collective noun for their taxis.
glad i could contribute JV
Oh I don’t know, Jen, I kind of liked republicabs, lemming-like processions of conservatives swept out to sea with the force of the Barack (Hussein for your benefit ESJ) Obama tidal wave.
Excellent apres -
we’ll use it.
There’s now a 14% lead to Obama over Clinton on Intrade. It’s moved a lot in just a few days. It does not appear that her performance at the debate has done lifted her appeal, in fact the opposite. (She’s just so kneejerky on defending herself after all these years that she goes into shrill mode way too easily. It’s her Achilles heel.)
ESJ has shown his amazing inability to predict election results at the last election. So anything he says has to be taken with a grain of salt.
Whilst I think Hillary is still favourite for the Democrat candidacy, Obama is catching up fast.
Compared to any of the Republicans, they will romp it in.
Just look at the betting odds.
Rasmussen has the lates NH poll with Obama in front of Clinton 37% to 27%
McCain beats Romney 31% to 26%
So, the Obama-rama show rolls on to the granite state and looks rock solid!
It’s not usually my style to cut and paste a longish quote, but Frank Rich of the NY Times on Obama and Huckabee:
The two men are the youngest candidates in the entire field, the least angry and the least inclined to seek votes by saturation-bombing us with the post-9/11 arsenal of fear. They both radiate the kind of wit and joy (and, yes, hope) that can come only with self-confidence and a comfort in their own skins. They don’t run from Americans who are not in their club. Mr. Obama had no problem winning over a conclave of white Christian conservatives at Rick Warren’s megachurch in Orange County, Calif., even though he insisted on the necessity of condoms in fighting AIDS. Unlike the top-tier candidates in the G.O.P. presidential race, or the “compassionate conservative” president who refused for years to meet with the N.A.A.C.P., Mr. Huckabee showed up last fall for the PBS debate at the historically black Morgan State University and aced it.
The “they” who did not see the cultural power of these men, of course, includes not just the insular establishments of both their parties but the equally cloistered echo chamber of our political journalism’s status quo. It would take a whole column to list all the much-repeated Beltway story lines that collapsed on Thursday night.
…he can’t resist of course, and goes on to name a few shibboleths that got trashed, and you can read it here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/06/opinion/06rich.html?hp
…suffice to say, we are going to hear lots of reasons why Obama and Huckabee can’t get nominated, so sit back and enjoy the show.
Jen etc
NPR (National Public Radio) is an internationally acclaimed producer and distributor of noncommercial news etc
http://www.npr.org
basically USA’s equivalent of the ABC here-very good for unbiased reporting of the primaries
Yes KR, it’s a full marathon. And I’m not even sure the starter’s gun has gone off yet. The slings, arrows and mud buckets are lined up ready along the route.
The voting /delegate process is rather opaque to the uninitiated I must say, and the methods in the primaries differ:
[New Hampshire and a few other states hold "semi-open" primaries that allow independents to get involved on the side of their choice.
Independents comprise some 44 percent of the approximately 850,000 voters in the state and can have a decisive role. Some candidates shape their message to appeal to this crucial bloc.] -Fairfax
KIrribilli -
just want to sat thanks for the fantastic blogging from you : would take me hours to source and pick thruogh all the sites and opinions you condense.
And it’s all looking good for those of us who want to see the death of fundamentalism and neoconservatism in the democratic nations.
The ultimate will be the United States electing a black left-thinking president.
The way the names of Presidential hopefuls run off the tongue is interesting:
President Huckabee ?
President Obama,a totally different image.
President Edwards…
Interesting times indeed.
As I recall asanque you were one of the naive crowd who bought the 100 seats for Kevin 07 based on pseudo statistics from Possum?
Me my final prediction was a modest 80 seats down from an intial 85.
You should all take a chill-pill, it will be over by 5th february though.
And I second that,Jen.
And entertaining to boot!
I thought the name Edward St John sounded familiar…
Here’s a description of Edward St John (the politician and member of Warringah in the 70s) by Justic Kirby of the High Court:
“Edward St John was a restless spirit. He attracted calumny and praise in equal measure. His admirers saw him as a modern Pilgrim. At various times he was dubbed a “McCarthyist”, a “communist”, a “tool of communists”, a “neo-Nazi”, a “pornographer” and a “puritanical wowser”…”
427
JV, yeah, it’s a mish mash of historical proportions! (Ta boom!) I guess I was pretty cynical about Iowa until I watched it on CNN, a real live high school caucus in Des Moines, and it was actually a quite civilised, if a bit hectic, affair. I was then convinced it was truly wholesome when I read Christopher Hitchens piling odious quantities of manure on it! But in a strange way, they ‘got it right’, and I suspect it’s going to be seen as prescient, down the track.
428
jen, I’ve had way too much free time this weekend, no Mrs Removals, no raging kids, and it’s been blogging heaven! I actually saw all of the debates on Sky and did not once have to shoo the kids away.
Bliss!
(Oh, by the way, I like to write out my thoughts, as I can touch type pretty quickly and it’s my peculiar way of logging my ideas. I’m glad you get something out of my ramblings, it’s my ‘therapy’, if you know what I mean!)
You can read on at http://www.lawfoundation.net.au/ljf/app/&id=300A215A27F05D2DCA2571A90008EE77
Sounds like an interesting fellow!
Like clockwork (orange??), the Bush admin is now talking about beefing up CIA and Special Ops in the Pakistani border areas, ‘coz you know, al Qaeda and the Taliban are threatening to destabilize the country.
They pushed Musharraf to give Bhutto amnesty (she did not deserve it in my opinion), and then when the forces of darkness topped her they suddenly have an excuse to get all hairy chested and talk about going in to solve a problem they’ve largely created in the first place.
Expect this issue to not go away any time soon.
ESJ @ 430- Alright, I’ll ask – what will be all over by 5 February? I see that’s the date for the primaries in Delaware. Is that it?
Or is it just that you are going to do something dramatic to celebrate the anniversary of 5 February 1859, when Wallachia and Moldavia were united under Alexander John Cuza as the United Principalities?
It scares me to think that a man that could actually advocate political interference with the judiciary – as Huckabee has suggested he will do in appointing conservative justices to the Supreme Court in an attempt to change abortion laws – could actually be elected to President.
And to run on such devisive stances as anti-gay and anti-abortion in a democratic country, it just shocks me… and scares me! to think that the people would elect him to President.
By the way JV, that’s true about the independents in NH, but apparently that’s why Obama is so hot, he’s pulling a lot of them across, plus disaffected Republicans.
One thing everyone forgets to mention when they say that a Dem can’t win Ohio or wherever, and that is, that was BEFORE eight years of the most goddam awful Republican stumblebum in the Whitehouse!
Let’s not forget just how popular GWBush is not! His presidency is almost off the dial for unpopularity and he’s got some history to compete with on that score!
ESJ: Nope you are incorrect yet again.
I predicted 84 seats. And that was just one shy of the eventual 83.
If you did your research you can check on Possum’s site and this site.
Putting forward opinions without facts is something you are great at though.
436 JV, that’s the date for the big rollout of primaries across the country, the date Giuliani has lipsticked in for his big victory and the one which Clinton was expected to take easily.
All bets are now off on both of these ’strategies’ since the Obama-rama show rolled right through Iowa and surprised the hell out of the pundocracy. Likewise with Huckabee.
437 Sean, it’s some irony that he scares the bejeesuz out of the GOP machine men too! It’s like Frankenstein’s creation come alive. Here were the Republicans luring the Christian right with god/gays and guns, and lo and behold, when Bush fails to burn every gay at the stake, along comes Huckabee to take their votes.
I mean, what a shock! Who’d ever have thunk it?
JV, roll your mouse over this map (choose the Democrat page of course):
http://www.electoral-vote.com/
437
Sean sweetie-
you are forgetting the two-time election of the most absurd, and dangerous, president in written history.
And he’s still there.
Huckleberry appears almost moderate in comparison.
Oh Asanque we both know the truth, a little post election revisionism hey? (like Possum too).
Jaundiced View – 5th feb is this years super tuesday a whole heap of states vote – therefore the nomination will be decided on that date.
OK-
perhaps not more moderate, but no worse .
ESJ: Yes we both do, and its not coming from your posts.
There is no post election revisionism and I challenge you to find any such post from me from either site.
Given your failed wager on newspoll during the election, I’m happy to wage you another $50 towards pollbludger if you are able to find any such post.
There are lies, damn lies and complete bullshit. And I think we all know which camp you belong to.
Yes, it surprises me constantly what America can produce…
In a sense, it doesn’t matter who will become President, for nothing much will change that!
KR @ 438 – Well, if things get on a roll – when the ‘Big Mo’ happens, as you quoted so aptly, it could be very difficult to stop in the modern media age. If Obama can appear to embody what the average American wants politically after the six years of the US being a pariah in the world because of GWB, then the mud that will be flung at him won’t stick. But this has to be believed by the elite party heavies in their bunker, not just shallow emotional idealists like us, or independent primary voters. The heavies have to believe that the best chance of beating McCain (or whoever) will be Obama in November, after all the conservatives’ best dirt has been tipped on him. If they think the mud will slide off Clinton faster, then she will be nominated. I suppose that’s why Obama needs a big kahuna wave to start in the media now, with the Oprahs as Jen mentioned, and a million other elements behind him, so he can seem to be above conventional politics. This might sway the Democrat insiders to back him
ESJ – Of course, thanks. I was rather hoping you were a fan of Cuza’s though.
Please Asanque,
A little more analysis and a little less personal abuse. I am not inclined to expend the energy on insult and counter insult.
ESJ
ahem.
I think insulting fellow bloggers is one of your main games,my friend
J view – anyman who retires to exile with his wife and mistress would be interesting.
Jen where is the photo you promised us , it never went up on the Greens web-site?
Lets make a deal. You stop telling lies about me, and I’ll stop telling the truth about you.
As such, I won’t rehash your past falsities (of which there are many), and I will restrict my comments in the future to your analysis of US politics.
Obama and Clinton neck to neck in NH
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/05/nh.poll/index.html
Its hard to see which republican can make a credible case against either Edwards, Clinton or Obama. First, they need to deal with the bad smell that comes from a Bush government. Second, they need to come up with some credible centrist policies. This is a new world, and people are sick to death of the right wing agenda.
Only if you properly attribute quotes. After all Adlai E Stevenson deserves the recognition for the witty line you are ripping off Asanque?
ESJ – I know, he’s very interesting. I was thinking you would approve of him expropriating land from the church for the benefit of the people, and freeing the peasants from their servitude, as well as introducing universal manhood suffrage (women no doubt were to be next). What a guy, eh?
ESJ-
Firstly, my photo did go on the Greens website
and secondly-
WTF does what I look like have to do with anything discussed on this site?
454 That’s Cuza, not Stevenson!
J view,
Well the great womanisers in history have tended to also be supporters of equal rights (ironically).
452
asanque
Considering that Clinton was in the lead all year, the Big Mo is obviously not on her side, and if Obama nudges past her in a couple of days, it could seriously rip the wheels off her caboose.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080106/ap_on_el_pr/obama_bradley
Bill Bradley to endorse Obama.
KR
are the polls trending in Obama’s favour to beat Hillary at NH, or have they plateaued at a dead heat (which surely has to be in his favour anyway after the unexpected and therefore I assume not- predicted outcome in Iowa.)
BTW -did any polling predict that he would win in Iowa?
And if not, how could they get it so wrong?
That’s enough questions for now I’m sure..
I’ve never said Obama is unelectable, just that he could end up with big negatives a la Hillary.
They both could still win by winning Ohio or Florida plus the Kerry states. Either of those states they could win.
I just don’t think he or Hillary are capable of fully capitalising the anti-Bush feeling to give a 52%+ landslide to the Dems that could be waiting for them with the safer bet of Edwards.
As for the Republicans, I don’t think McCain actually has a hope of winning if he’s the nominee. Firstly, too many base Republicans don’t like him (eg. his Immigration stance). Independents are now wary of him because of his steadfast support for the Iraq misadventure. He’s 72 – and looks every bit of it – unlike Reagan did. And lastly, he’s a Vietnam vet – he can ask himself [2000] and “Presidents” Kerrey [1992] or Kerry [2004] whether being a Vietnam vet helps you electorally.
On Huckabee, I think http://www.electoral-vote.com sums it up best:
“The bashing of Mike Huckabee–from the Republicans–has begun. Not a peep from the Democrats. They like Huckabee. They think he’s in over his head and will be easy prey in November, in the unlikely event he gets that far. It’s the Republican establishment that hates Huckabee. The reason is clear but the media are scared to talk about it. The truth is what the current administration really cares about is tax cuts, especially big ones for the rich. What was the first thing George Bush after Jan. 20, 2001? Tax cuts, including lowering the top marginal rate from 39.6% to 35%. If you are making $10 million a year, that’s $460,000 extra in your pocket. After Bush’s 2004 victory, he said that the election gave him political capital and he intended to spend it. So what did he do? He spent two months traveling around the country trying to sell a plan to privatize (read: phase out) social security. He didn’t spend two months trying to get a constitutional amendment banning abortions or forbidding same-sex marriages. He could have, but didn’t want to spend his political capital that way. Even when pleasing the Base was cheap he didn’t do it. Remember that his long-time friend, Harriet Miers, was his first Supreme Court nominee, and he asked her to withdraw only after the Base protested loudly. The Republican party’s dirty little secret is that upper management really doesn’t care much about the social issues; they care about taxes. They trot out the social issues just before each election to whip the Base up into a frenzy and conveniently forget about them after winning. Huckabee is a real threat because he sincerely believes in the Bible. He’s not just making it up to get votes. He’s become their Frankenstein monster and must be eliminated.”
BTW, EStJ needs to check his electoral maths. Firstly California has 55 electoral votes. Secondly, a state receives as many electoral votes as their *total* congressional delegation (ie. their House members *and* their two Senators). This why small states with only one House member still have 3 votes (eg. Wyoming) and are thus over disproportionately represented in the 538 member electoral college. The only exception is DC who have no voting congressional delegation, but have 3 electoral votes nonetheless.
asanque-
Opreh AND a Hall of Fame basketball star: reckon he’s in.
jen: The more recent polls had Obama ahead in Iowa. He was also ahead in the betting markets a few days beforehand.
The polls are trending towards Obama in NH.
I still believe it will be very tough for him to win there, but if he does, he is a great shot for the Democratic candidacy.
I am of no political correspondence to ESJ but I have known of him from this bludge site for some months now & I do believe that he is trying to be a more objective & less insulting blogger. He may come across as a “chainsaw” but he has made statements that he is trying to rehabilitate his style. Please cut him some slack as he is a “work in progress”. Even if we don’t like his politics!
ESJ @ 457 – I am somehow attracted to that concept.
So the corollary is that the typical elite born-to-rule type is a cloistered monogamist?
Pretty amazing that Obama is hot favourite to win NH now.
I remember a few days ago, it was Clinton as clear favourite.
Obama is also now favourite to win as Democrat candidate.
Especially as he was over $3 prior to Iowa.
Fair enough Aussieguru,
I will try to be less reactive,
but the photo thing again…honestly!
I think William put it best once when he referred to ESJ as very naughty.
Sorry. What photo thing Jen?
I found it!
See what I mean?
Water off a ducks back m’dear.
fair enough, I just don’t see any of the male bloggers on here being asked for thier photo.
IMHO, Obama will walk away with the democratic nomination, mostly because he has the ability to draw support from independents and disillusioned republicans, and because he has the ability to draw the politically inactive/alienated (running to about 35% of the electorate) into the politcal process. This gives him and his co-democrats in Congressional and State races the opportunity to absolutely thrash the republicans.
Hilary, sad to say, looks and sounds like she is past her best. This just shows how important the primary selection process really is and how much power it places in the hands of ordinary voters.
Enough of that.
I would still like to know why people think the polls did not pick up on such a large swing to Obama in Iowa. (Quite happy to hear ESJ’s view on this as well.)
Jen, here’s the latest from Rasmussen looking at the market:
As of 6:30 a.m. on Sunday morning, data from the markets implies that Obama has a 56% chance of representing his party on the ballot in November. At the same time, Hillary Clinton is seen as having a 40.5% chance of being nominated (current market prices: Obama 58.0 %, Clinton 40.5 %).
This reflects a fundamental change since the Iowa caucuses. The closing prices on the day before Iowa showed that Clinton had a 65% chance of winning while Obama was a distant second at 29%.
On the Republican side, there remains no clear frontrunner. At 6:30 a.m.Sunday morning, John McCain was seen to have a 33% chance of winning while the markets showed Rudy Giuliani with a 31% chance (current numbers: McCain 34.0 % Giuliani 31.0 %).
The markets also point to Barack Obama and John McCain as the likely winners in New Hampshire. Current prices show that Obama has a 80.0 % chance of winning the Democratic Primary in the Granite State while McCain has a 81.8 % chance on the Republican side.
jaundiced view- I know it’s a bit picky but did you know that your name is a myth. People with jaundice have abnormally high levels of a pigment called bilirubin, normally from liver failure. The first sign of jaundice is yellow discolouration of the eyes and later the skin. The bilirubin is only deposited in the sclera, the white part of the eye, and is not in the lens or retina. So the term “jaundiced view” is incorrect as they see the world exactly the same colour as everyone, except those of us with rose-coloured glasses.
John Ryan and others
http://www.npr.org/templates/topics/topic.php?topicId=1102
the real maps not some strung together shite
ps california has 370 delegates at stake (dems)
173 republicans
please check your sources
Jen, If you seen photos of Adam & William…thats enough LOL!
AG -OK I’ll check (but I didn’t ask, OK?)
Kirribilli: that sounds like a pretty enormous swing. Still want to know why the US polls were so inaccurate. Maybe our own GG pollsters are working for them in their holidays.
476: KR
This doesn’t appear correct.
I got Obama as favourite (1.87) one day before Iowa. And just before the caucus, Obama had dropped to 1.30. This is on betfair.
jen: the polls were not inaccurate a week before the caucus in Iowa.
It was shown as a tight 3 way tussle with Obama rapidly closing and with a slight lead over the other 2 candidates.
The polls simply understated Obama’s vote by a few %.
Otherwise they were fairly accurate.
Diogenes @ 477
What a coincidence, because since the recent festive season I have noticed just those symptoms you describe, and have sworn off the booze for 3 months to give the old bastard liver a chance to re-chrome his walking frame.
I know they say “The liver is evil and must be punished!” but when the bilirubin started flooding the sclera it was time to act.
I’ve lost half my friends already.
Thanks asanque-
I had the impression that Obama’s win was out of left field and that it was thought that Hillary was a shoe-in.
It’s good to know that the polls give some idea of what is going on. Therefore looks good for Obama for New Hampshire if the trend continues, I guess. And hope.
Diogenes-
what about gout?
Jen – Gout? That should be crystal clear.
jen:
Try this site.
I still prefer Pollbluger, Possum’s and the like, however this is the next best thing for the US
Pollbludger
and link here:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_democratic_primary-194.html
asanque -
just had a quick browse and excellent information.
Thanks.
JV
at least your sclera are not a dead give away, even if you can hardly walk.
jen-gout is due to deposits of a crystal of uric acid, and usually affects the first joint of the great toe initially and is VERY painful. It has many causes (diet, genetic, trauma). The frequency of attacks can be reduced using allopurinol, and flareups are normally well treated with Nurofen etc. It should be investigated with blood tests to see how high the uric acid levels are and to see if there is an underlying cause (occasionally blood cancers cause it).
JV- I hope you’ve got a good gastroenterologist. The liver is about the only human organ which can regenerate but alcohol is a definite no-no.
Thanks Diogenes -
I can cross that one off then.
(JV, I meant at least your Toes are not a dead give away, unlike your sclera…)
I’m going to bed.
Night all, and thanks for the mostly informative commentary.
Thanks Diogenes @ 492 – I may have been exaggerating slightly, but a break off the grog won’t hurt.
Are you sure the brain can’t regenerate too? Just the frontal lobe will do – Please?
Asanque – That site – realclearpolitics – you mention I found last night as well, and it seems to be very up-to-date, and should lead I hope to some lucrative wagers. My punters’ club wants me to get into it after the successes betting in our election, but the territory is a bit distant and unfamiliar as yet.
jv-there is a lot of evidence that the brain has more plasticity than previously thought. It DOES regenerate a bit, particularly with stimulation.
Just looking at the site again – Intrade has Obama at heavy odds-on to win New Hampshire, and at 59/41 to win the nomination overall, which is about an 8 point increase on last night.
Diog @ 496 – Let there be stimulation then – I’d better take up euchre. I’ll be a member of Mensa before the 3 months is up and I’m back on the turps.
I’ve actually hedged my bets at this stage on Hillary and NH.
I am not familiar enough with US politics to take chances.
However, most of the value from Obama is now gone.
I can’t see any other Democratic or Republican getting close for presidency.
However its still a long time away
For no logical reason I still see Obama as a good wager (I got on at 5.1 for presidency and 3 as the Democratic candidate). However, my cynicism says Hillary who is still leading in the majority of the US national polls.
There will be good arbitrage betting in the future for those with foresight.
What’s your punter’s club mainly involved in?
Asanque @ 499 – It’s usually the sport of Kings, but I made a big impression with bets on Maxine and other seats and also on Horatio at huge odds on Betfair.
I think it will be McCain for the republicans b the look of things at present, but really, who knows?
Betting on Maxine was the easiest money of the election
Great for the informed punter.
I hope McCain wins, as he appears to be one of the more moderate republicans. He is 72 though.
That’s why the Republicans really don’t have much ammunition this election.
Ah, the memories. I’ll never forget the punt of the century – getting $3 on Maxine on Betfair after the exit poll at around 5:55 pm on the 24th. It almost seemed unfair, although I successfully dismissed that thought !
Yes, the tide is out on the Republicans, but the differences between the parties seem even less than it is here. When you look at what H Clinton has supported all the way through – where’s the difference in policy from GW? They all have to be religious zealots, gun supporters, and gung-ho nationalists before they start. It’s a weird place.
I agree, take care with betting in that surreal environment.
‘night all and sundry
Frfucsakes. I have kept up my reading, dear bludgers.
Great work all those who provide such terrific references and updates on the goings on. Keeps me so endlessly engrossed I am fair worn out with reading.
It’s all over the place. Darting from Obama to Hillareyous to Bull’nBush.
My view.
The Republicans are over. Dead. As in everywhere. Under whatever shade or name.
The only question is which of the Democrats will win.
I can hardly pretend to understand the Greatest Democracy, or its weird ways. Or perhaps I do understand, it is merely the process which is confusing.
Apart from everything else I have looked at, I did go again to the Obama site.
It is amazing to see how Kev07 it is. It is amazing to see how Obama08 so represents the same mood. Not only from the site, but the idea of it. So JFK.
The deal is change. The Clinton camp represents the old. We see the same deriding stuff against Obama as happened here. ‘Roll of the dice.’ Inexperience.’
Worse, no doubt, is yet to come, for Obama.
Well, too bad, it is over. He will survive verbal attacks. Not at all sure about the other.
No American willing or permitted to vote will accept that the weirdest democracy may carry on as it has done under GWB. Nor will they trust the Clintons to alter the status quo.
I do not bet or gamble.
But am prepared to risk this, Obama is the go. Not sure that even a remarkable new candidate could do it.
I am sure.
An enjoyable read about US populists in the Presidential campaigns.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/populist_campaigns_based_on_de.html
“And as for the testimony from Lynn Cheney that her husband and Obama were eighth-cousins, the Democratic frontrunner professed to being “kind of disappointing. When they are doing these genealogical surveys you kind of hope you are related to somebody cool… Dick Cheney?”
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/06/voters-offer-tweaks-to-ne_n_80041.html
A follow up.
And watching Foxtel elsewhere last night and before I returned and read the pollbludgers, a piece on Henry Parkes.
It was themed on the development of the Australian Constitution, but what struck me was the film footage of the strikers of 1890. Not the action. The determination on their faces. There comes a moment and it was visible in their stance.
Heads up, not cocked to the right or left, straight on, expression, immoveable.
You would recognise the exact same bearing and manner, as in ourselves, in unalterable decision about what we intended, regarding the Federal Election.
I was asked some ten months before, whether Labor would win. My answer was yes, then challenged on the supposedly unattainable sixteen seats, I said, it is about a quiet determination.
I recall my direct face, stubborn lip, firm nod, as I said this, not that I was in a looking glass. I know that is the way I must have looked, intended, certainly felt. And know it was a look not to be challenged. And a look which must have convinced any waverer.
Now, how can I say this? We here experienced soaring highs and tremendous lows. But we never wavered in our belief and hope. Sheer agony, and more so for the not quite decided, outside this site, battered by the tides of uncertainty visited upon them by those who could not envisage the idea of change.
The Americans are about to go through this, big time. I have every expectation they will make it. Just as we did. The narrowing may occur, but it will be all right on the night.
It will take every look, every chin, every bit of support we can offer, too.
Let’s do whatever we can.
(Steve 505. Thank you. Not least of the linkers. I actually blogged to one of the sites you pointed to, the Courier, not that it was printed, maybe too late for the blog. Will try again. In the light of what I have said).
jaundiced view @ 495 asked:
Sorry, neurogenesis only occurs in the hippocampi which play a role in memory storage, mood regulation and spatial navigation, but have little effect on thinking/intelligence.
As for the liver, try milk thistle supplements.
The Australian has an article today comparing Obama to the Reagan effect, appealing to a broad spectrum including many disaffected Republicans, interesting theory:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23013962-7583,00.html
Quote “The analogy that worries Republicans the most is a more recent one. Could Obama be a potential liberal version of Ronald Reagan? Could he do for the Democrats what Reagan did for the Republicans a quarter century ago? It’s increasingly possible. Reagan was the cutting edge of the previous realignment in US politics. With a good-natured civil appeal to Democrats who felt abandoned by their party under Jimmy Carter, Reagan revolutionised the reach of his party.”
Basil Fawlty
It’s the RR, formerly GG affect (Republicans Rule).
They just can’t help it. Undermining hope is their specialty. Trust them to choose the gloomy road.
Did they publish anything optimistic?
507 CW The bit I love is that the Democratic Party will be relatively stable with Obama and Clinton while the real sniping and dogfight will be the Republican Party tearing into each other until September trying to sort out a veritable dog’s breakfast of candidates trying to be top dog.
CW, that was not how I interpreted the article, it is in fact saying that Obama could do for the liberal cause what Ronnie did for the republicans, ie positive, or did I miss something. The scary bit was further on about Huckleberry and his plans to claim America for Christ and quarantine AIDS sufferers, jeez what planet are these people from?
Yes, Steve 511. Interestingly, Obama/Clinton could end up being a ticket.
Which would be an incredible scenario.
The Republicans have been devouring each other for years, so it will be a pleasure to watch the last of the dogs at each other’s throats, as you say.
I must go now, so catch up this arvo.
Oh, sorry Basil Fawlty. Maybe you are correct. I only read your excerpt. Will have another look. Mind you, I am a wee bit suss about the Australian. Diogenes could probably help me with my condition.
See you later.
Morning all -
today’s pearl from GWB (and Diogenes, this one’s for you)…
“Too many good docs are getting out of the business. Too many OB/GYN’s aren’t able to practice their love with women all across the country.”
Oh Dear
Romney tries to get tough but shoots himself in the foot.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/06/romney-i-want-bin-laden-_n_80072.html
I can diagnose that for you CW, it is a condition known as ‘paranoid suspicion of media owned by Murdoch’, well known and widespread, I suffer it myself
Steve
yet another complete tosser running for POUSA.
The democrats look unbeatable . I agree wholeheartedly with you Crikey, the desire for change is far bigger than populist politics or even particular issues.
I think is has a deeper, psychological basis that people feel let down by the leaders they wanted to trust, and anyone who offers a credible and new alternative is worth a shot.
That’s why I really don’t think Hillary can cut it – too much assosciation with the old regimes regardless of party .
And just as we gave neophyte Kevin a go based on the need for change, I am sensing the same thing can happen there.
In fact, it just did- in Iowa.
I agree Jen, another complete tosser. Why do we have to endure this ‘conga line’ of politicians all spouting their vile hate-inducing Christian rhetoric. It is amazing to me that they only seem to select the barbaric bits from the teachings of the Bible. Whatever happened to the love your neighbour as yourself, turn the other cheek bits. Religion is the curse of mankind, let’s start by locking all the lunatic fundamentalists from both sides on an island and let them go at each other.
Now for a little rewriting of history.
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Back_to_Iraq.html
508 MayoFeral- Sorry, you are are wrong there. New neurons have been shown to form in the cortex as well, at least in adult monkeys. The evidence is pretty overwhelming that neurons can regenerate in human adult brains. It is one of the few areas I know something about coz I have a PhD in neurophysiology (its a long story why a plastic surgeon has one of those!).
Obama on Iraq.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1304437063076200479&q=obama+2002+speeches&total
Obama clear favourite in NH. Hillary has drifted to 3.90.
Obama is firming as favourite for the democrat candidacy.
Pretty amazing stuff given how far behind he is in the national polls.
@ 508 & 521 MayoFeral & Diogenes (The Practice)
I want Diogenes to be correct on this as I have a vested interest due to my lifestyle. I used to drink at a pub with a bloke 20 years ago who got on it fairly heavily for 6 months each year, and then had the next 6 months completely on the wagon. I can see there was instinctive method in his behaviour – giving time for the liver and brain to regenerate. Although I suspect 6 months is more then really necessary. My current 3 months is much more civilised.
Has everyone seen the jump in Obama’s Intrade support for Dem nomination (referred to it very late last night)? 59/41 in his favour over Clinton it was – 8 points up on a couple of days ago.
I think j view the more relevant question is how many standard drinks a day do you consume? And do you allow yourself any alcohol free days?
years or decades?
Intreresting article in The Age today that confirms that Richard di Natale missed winning Victoria’s final seat by fewer than 9000 votes.
In an extraordinarily close three-way contest, Liberal candidate Scott Ryan also edged out Dr di Natale by just over 0.7% of the vote — the narrowest win of any of the 18 seats the Coalition won in the Senate election.
The result will give the Coalition 37 of the 76 seats when the new Senate takes effect from July 1, a loss of just two seats from the 39 it holds now.
Labor won 18 seats, a gain of four, taking its tally to 32. The Greens won three seats, edging their Senate numbers up from four to five. The other seat went to South Australian independent Nick Xenophon.
The election wiped out the Democrats, who will disappear from Parliament after June 30.
The result means the Coalition will be able to block any Labor legislation it opposes if it has the support of Mr Xenophon or Family First senator Steve Fielding.
Although Labor narrowly outpolled the Coalition in first preferences — winning 40.3% to the Coalition’s 39.9% — that lead was reversed after preferences.
ESJ – Too many and too few, respectively. but I have a good GP who says 10 drinks a day is fine – as long as they are sipped and not guzzled. I’m sticking with him.
528 Sounds like that doctor is a proponent of ‘the illusion of control’ theory.
Guido @ 527
Reflecting on the relatively strong coalition vote in the senate, it seems that the efforts of Getup and the Greens to get people to approach the senate vote differently might have backfired with some voters, who balanced a vote for Labor in the reps with a vote for the coalition in the senate, because they expected Labor to win overall but couldn’t bring themselves to vote Green.
Steve- 10 days off the grog so far – now that’s real control. I haven’t consulted my GP about it though, he might have discouraged my efforts!
Did you hear about the group Richard Harris started? It was called ‘Alcoholics Unanimous’. If you didn’t feel like a drink you phoned a friend who talked you into it.
Great effort JV just keep doing what you are doing and you will soon have twenty years up without even worrying about control. If you are not drinking there is no need for control. Only drinkers have to control their drinking, To nondrinkers the theory is superceded.
Dont you worry about those Republican candidates! Jesus will save them all and lead them on to glory! LOL.
RE Richard’s missing out ion the senate (sob).
Wonder if the chances of a DD are higher than previously thought with the coalition still pretty close to control.
Fielding is likely to side with them.
I have to admit it is more fun watching the US now though. What a watershed for global change this could really be if Obama wins.
Obama Magic Draws Record Crowds
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/obama-magic-draws-crowds/2008/01/06/1199554485481.html
That lamp I carry around may have found what I’ve been looking for!
Diogenes – does that lamp contain the Light on the Hill?
Jen – It would be for sure be best if Obama won, but one must keep reminding oneself that there is so little room to move for a US President, within the constraints of the the military, the industrial establishment, Congress, the Churches, the organised lobbies.
Obama will essentially have to read from the script he is given (that’s no doubt why actors do so well in politics over there!)
It is too easy now with all the early rhetoric to set ourselves up for disappointment on a wave of hope that will suddenly fill up into nothing once it rolls over the election reef.
JV-What if he really is a true leader though, who makes decisions that are not only to please`the power brokers that rule behind the scenes?
ie -the type of leader many of us have never seen in our lifetimes.
I think its abit soon for people to count Romney out. Think about it carefully. If Huckabee comes first in Iowa/South Carolina, McCain in New Hampshire, Giuliani in Florida/nervada and he come second in all of them. That puts him in a strong position.
Anyway i want Romney to win. overall he is the least popular in the electorate
Giuliani V Obama would be the worst case scenario for the Democrats. As Giuliani would do well in the northern states while lossing minimal ground in the south. McCain would also have alot of negatives for Obama. This is according to the polls I’ve read so far.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_by_state_for_the_United_States_presidential_election%2C_2008 offers a good summary
Steve @ 522
Great link. The more I see, hear and read about Obama the more I hope he gets up.
The win in Iowa caused people to listen just that bit more and it appears they like what they hear.
… and of course who can forget the way in which Obama demolished Howard in a single breath.
Jen @ 538 – [ie -the type of leader many of us have never seen in our lifetimes.]
Wow, is obama really that impressive? I know KirribilliR seems to think so and now Diogenes is holding a lamp for him. He does seem a bit different to the usual candidates, but I will leave my pompoms in the cupboard until the blowtorch has been fired up.
JV-
I know it sounds a bit extreme, (although,being a Green and all..), however the time has come for not just a change of leadership, but a change in style of leadership.
We face unprecedented danger with global warming, and the threat of fundamentalism( Islamic, Christian and Jewish) influencing politics across the globe leading to who knows what.
That is why I am sitting glued to the sites to watch the unlikely unfold. A person of vision and integrity appears to be on the ascend. And he won’t be perfect, but it looks like he’ll be a damn site better than what we’ve had in the 47 years I’ve been on this earth.
jv- The legend about Diogenes was that he lit a lamp in broad daylight. When asked why, he replied that he was looking for a human.
Re Obama- I have Dawkinsian antipathy towards religion and I could therefore never fully support him, but he’s the best of the bunch for me (actually I quite like McCain and Edwards).
JV,
perhaps we are all just expressing the deep seated hope that change is possible.
That there could be a leader of vision and integrity in politics, rather than the cynical, self-interested people we’ve had for so long now (both sides of politics included here) that is seems ads if that is all taht can ever be.
Global warming is an unprecedented threat to the entire globe, as is the rise of fundamentalism (Islamic, Christian and Jewish), and we have a right to demand true leadership from our politicians.
Obama may not make the grade but he’s the closest I’ve seen to it my lifetime.
I keep getting moderated – I think it is because I mentioned the Abrahamic religions of the J type in my response.
Diogenes –
he’s not religious is he?
As in really, or just to appease the masses who Love the Lord.
542 Diogenes – Well my seasonal festive lights are on, glowing away in the middle of the day here in empathy with that mythical lamp. No humans in sight here either – just a teenage son.
Good to find another rational atheist – try Sam Harris’ “The End of Faith”as well.
Indeed, how can one get emotionally attached to any of these US politicians, who wallow in such wilfull ignorance? Why do Americans require their leaders to believe in Medieval superstition? They wouldn’t go to a doctor who practised Medieval medicine … or would they …?
Latest NH poll
USA Today/Gallup (January 4-6)
Obama 41
Clinton 28
Edwards 19
Richardson 6
McCain 34
Romney 30
Huckabee 13
Paul 8
Giuliani 8
Thompson <3
Hunter <3
The surveys of 776 New Hampshire residents who are “likely” to vote in the Republican primary and 778 New Hampshire residents who are “likely” to vote in the Democratic primary were all completed after the news from Thursday’s Iowa caucuses had been reported.
Each figure has a margin of error of +/- 4 percentage points. So Obama’s lead is “outside” that range, while McCain’s is not.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/06/see-the-latest-nh-polls-_n_79985.html
I posted a “post match report” on Lindsay. Needless to say it was nowhere near as good as this. Perhaps I should have used a map as well lol (actually that’s not a bad idea, I might look into it)
http://australiavotes2007.blogspot.com/2008/01/random-seat-report-lindsay.html
Romney has won the Republican only Wyoming caucuses with 67 percent of the vote. 8 more delogates for the mormon. Thomson came second with 25 percent and 3 delogates. Democrats for that state isn’t till march 8.
Jen-I understand he is a bit of a late bloomer in his Christian faith. His father was a Muslim and the religious right are a bit wary his faith is just political expediency. I doubt we will ever know the truth.
jv- I am reminded of the Gallup poll in the US asking whether they would vote for a candidate who was otherwise well-qualified if the candidate was
1. a woman (95% would)
2. Roman Catholic (94% would)
3. Jewi#h (92% would)
4. black (92% would)
5. Mormon (79% would, incidentally not a good sign for Romney)
6. homosexu#l (79% would)
7. atheist (49% would)
They really hate us over there!!
Diogenes -
it is your poll that makes me wonder: if you only had a 49% chance of winning then you’d be praising the lord and speaking in tongues if need be (with fingers crossed behind your back).
Jen – I’d say: atheist = no chance of winning any elected office. I doubt if a non-believer would even be allowed to win the lucky door prize at a dance over there.
Jen- I agree completely. I’m sure Kirribilli Removals has better info on this than me. You could argue that a true Dawkinsian atheist should commit political suicide and say he was an atheist.
BTW a bit of trivia, the novel I’m reading (Turkish Gambit by Akunin) says that Wyoming, which just had its primary, was the first place in the world to give women the vote and from a quick look on the internet it seems to be true.
The other half of Obama.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20080106/news_mz1e6caldwel.html
Jen, are you suggesting Obama is a hypocrite?
Diogenes, what is a ‘Dawkinsian’ atheist? (I know who Dawkins is. I have always just considered myself as an atheist. I didn’t know there are sects.)
Steve@553. The San Diego Tribune may not be a Murdoch paper, but it is at least as conservative. There is little doubt they will support a Republican and it is unsurprising that they are sounding the warning bells re Obama. Having said that, Obama’s great weakness is going to be his lack of experience. Expect to hear that theme loudly trumpeted by his Dem and Rep opponents for the next few months. He is an impressive character, though, and one I believe the world needs right now if lasting change is to be achieved.
I am still uncertain about how the nomination process will play out, but I’m encouraged by the trend for Obama who seems a very impressive candidate. I’m slightly persuaded by John Ryan’s thinking that there will be real resistance to the notion of black President, yet there does seem something in the air this year. That drives my other fear that the previous Presidential campaign in which there was a palpable sense of change was 1968 (alluded to by Megan). I’m not expecting any candidate to be murdered, but I am reminded that the eventual contest then was between Hubert Humphrey (a politician with a fine record, but utterly discredited by his association with the failed policy in Vietnam) and Richard Nixon. We can only hope that this election does not conform to that precedent.
May I recommend Obama’s “The Audacity if Hope”, which sets out his views on a range of issues. He writes impressively and persuasively, if a little platitudinously. The suggestion about the book was particularly prompted by the questions/concerns expressed on this thread about his religious views. He describes growing up in a largely secular household. He formalised his Christian faith as an adult, and saw it deriving from his social service/ charitable activity. His arguments in his chapter “Faith” seem close to those of Rudd – that political progressives should not leave the field open to religious conservatives. He is pro-choice and for civil unions though opposed to gay marriage. In rejecting a literal application of Biblical teaching, he says ” As a general rule, I am more prone to listen to those who are as outraged by the indecency of homelessness as they are by the indecency of music videos.”
The audacity of Hope is a remarkably frank book from some-one embarking on a Presidential campaign
556 Artie B- The term “Dawkinsian” atheist has several connotations. They (we) view religion not just as a misguided harmless or even beneficial social phenomenon but as “the root of all evil” or something close to that. Rather than being bemused by religious beliefs and not commenting on them, Dawkinsians would actively try to argue against religious belief. They value science very highly and rational thought above all. They can be described as “neo-Darwinian” and believe evolution is progressive (as opposed to Gouldians who believe it is not).
GG
India c Benson b Bucknor
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s8n6GI54y00
with apologies to Indian Express; will Kev or Julia be on the box tonight?
Speaking of the Nixon era:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/01/04/AR2008010404308.html
Here is a whole lot of poll material to digest for the US election, presented with an easy to understand map. Just roll over the state for the latest polls.
http://www.electoral-vote.com
Artie B-
I am suggesting that aa a politician he would also be a pragmatist. (I accept he is not the Messiah).
I think we can safely predict that Edwards, who is from the South, will be Obama’s running mate if he wins.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23015320-601,00.html
Aha, true leadership…let’s just see what comes to pass.
I believe that progression has been hampered by the division created by the political process.
For progress to be accelerated for the future needs, all parties must sit at the table and reach a consensus.
Oh well…
556 & 559 Diogenes and Artie
Yes, and rather than ‘moderate’ religion being benign, it is seen by many atheists as being the medium from which extremism grows. All the slightly more zealous have to do is just read the book (Bible or Koran) and take up on the clear and absolute intolerance towards those of another faith. If it wasn’t for the moderates, who tend to pretend the exhortations to kill in the books don’t exist, there would be less of a springboard for the extremists, who are just being ‘holier than thou’. The moderates tut-tut and distance themselves from violent acts, all the while being the unwitting generators of the nutters.
For all you American-philes who give a damm
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/the_iowa_curse.html
For those interested in the power of religion in US politics – Just came across a timely example from today’s SMH as to the extent of the influence of christian religion in popular culture in the US – and in this case the world. This is the sort of power Obama and co are up against before they start. This is quite frightening … shudder …
“Christian critic sways studios”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/christian-critic-sways-studios/2008/01/06/1199554485388.html
Perhaps Americans just don’t know what the word “atheist” means?
Jen, PLEASE remember that the Messiah only votes Republican and ofcourse Family First!!!!!
JV and Diogenes -
I just gave The God Delusion to a cousin of mine who has recently left the monastry, thinking that the best way to deal witha crisis of faith is not to have any.
I’ll let you know his views, as he is totally disillusioned with the CatholicChurch but still of the opinion that religion as a’ benign force’ is a source of good.
JV if Obama is a Christian then whats the problem with that bloke in the article?
Is he a right wing nut?
Thank you Brenton,
I stand corrected.
Reminds me of the woman handing out Family First how-to-vote cards at my polling booth who claimed that God had placed a message in her heart that guided her to the polling booth. Beats GPS!
McCain and Obama will win NH, Huckleberry will get SC and Rudy will pick up Florida which will make Feb 5 interesting.
Might i also point out that Obama is not an ‘African American’ his father was from Kenya, that is why some have said Obama will struggle with the African American voters who may still back Hillary…
I still expect Rudy Giuliani to have more delegates after Feb 5 by a large margin being the only moderate Republican he’ll do well in the Big States like California, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York.
Scotty Romney only won Wyoming because nobody else could be bothered to waste their money on a handful delegates, that’s why Rudy is holding back his millions of campaign dollars for the Big States which are more moderate and have more delegates.
sean-
that’s fantastic. I’m going to ditch my Melways for the Bible.
Yes, but she didn’t understand what compulsory voting was and had never heard of WorkChoices (even though she was handing out how-to-vote cards). So, I think God may have extracted her brain in the process.
Note to self. Give up on irony.
Glen: That’s a fair assessment of the goings on in the US.
Who are you backing for the White House?
sean-
the sad reality that the man that represents such unthinking ignorance perpetuated by the evangelical churches – Stephen Fielding – almost holds the balance of power in the Australian Senate.
Artie -
i got it.
It will be interesting to see how that plays out considering the Age today reported that Nick Minchin had meetings with Nick Xenephon just recently to discuss matters.
Aussieguru @ 572 – Looks like he is. Here’s your answer from the article:
What appears to be right-wing nuttery from here though probably doesn’t look like it to those who live there within the American political scene.
I always assume that the more intelligent a person seems, the less likely they are to embrace superstition. So I’d like to think with Obama that he has done the minimum christian distance to qualify, and lurking beneath the religious claptrap he must utter is a rational thinker on all issues. We’ll see.
Jen – Give your journeyman relation Sam Harris’ book ‘The End of Faith” too, if he can take it, on top of Dawkins.
The “root of all evil” Diogenes is, in its original context, greed (or specifically ‘the love of money’). It’s ironic that Jesus’ words should be used to condemn religion. Somehow I think he would enjoy the irony. Equally dangerous to greed however, is intolerance. For atheists or anyone else to encourage intolerance towards those who practice even a moderate faith is as potentially evil as the fundamentalists’ blind hatred of any who differ from them. Our democracy has always insisted that freedom of religion is as essential to liberty as is freedom of speech, thought or political persuasion. These are freedoms we should guard with every fibre of our being. Regulars here will know that I have a background as an ordained minister. My journey out of religion was driven by personal convictions and observations and came at considerable personal cost. I probably have more reason to distrust religion than most and have battled fundamentalists at close quarters for decades. While these days I may happily engage in theological debate with ‘believers’ of any stripe, I remain committed to their right to practice their faith without fear of persecution holding firmly to the view that tolerance is a mark of a mature democracy.
Well im backing Giuliani i he’s a moderate Republican when it comes to social issues like gun control, abortion which i support him on and he’s more inline with my opinions of the ‘war on terror’ so im backing Rudy.
I still can’t say who can win the nomination on both sides, personally i dont think Huckleberry can do well in some of the Big States i mentioned purely because he has next to no cash on hand and neither can i see Republican Party whose strongest base the CC’s will ever back a Morman for President so that’s Romney out therefore essentially it will come down to Rudy, McCain and Huckleberry.
It’s going to be tight between Hillary and Obama IMHO Asanque purely because Clinton has a better operational structure and infrastructure more so than Obama’s and that will count more in the bigger States. But i suspect Obama to carry NC and SC but Hillary is happy playing the same game as Giuliani sit tight weather the storm and wait till the bigger Primaries and swamp your opponent by winning vast numbers of delegates by taking the Big States.
Giuliani was helped immeasurable by Romney losing Iowa, Romney was always Giuliani’s biggest competitor and if he doesnt take NH he’s all but done IMHO. It will also hurt McCain with him refusing to commit to more than 1 term due to his age and that will count IMHO.
Giuliani and Clinton are playing a risky game essentially waiting for Feb 5 but it could well pay off for both in the end, plus because of the way the Democratic Nomination is organized Hillary has the support of all but 1 US HoR Member in New York thats 39 votes to 1 already in her favour.
I liked Biden for the Democrats if i had to pick one but he’s gone, but if the Republicans don’t nominate Rudy Giuliani they have about as much chance of winning as John Howard does of becoming Prime Minister again in 2010, bugger all!
Ferny Grover, sorry, dont bore us here with the poor old suffering of those of a religious nature! I belong to one of the most abused and discriminated groups ever in the history of mankind. Please allow me the right to despise, people who indulge in the worship of thin air and all it’s devastating consequences to millions of innocent victims!
Hi Ferny – no need to get personally affronted. You are clearly harmless
The context is the US and the extent to which religion and politics are intertwined, with the result that ludicrous morality and beliefs such as the creation is shoved down everyone else’s metaphorical throat, nationally and in many states. That is hardly moderate. And the other point is how every national candidate has to drip with that stuff to have a chance of election.
Brenton, I doubt that ‘despising’ will help anyone and is, indeed, at the heart of the problem.
Ferny- I think there is a big difference between atheists views towards religion and their views towards religious people. I know, love and respect many religious people, I even married one! But religion as an idea can be challenged rationally without there being any intolerance. I’m more than happy for people to believe in a God or whatever takes their fancy and I certainly don’t believe that religion is the root of all evil (I actually don’t think even Dawkins does). Philosophically, I don’t actually believe in “evil”.
I do not know enough about the US prsidential hopefuls to make a detailed assessment. Of the Republicans, John McCain seems to have integrity, while the others seem to change according to when and to whom they are speaking. Barack Obama may be all that he is hoped to be by posters here, but he seems full of Amway rhetoric to me. I haven’t got a clue what actual policies he would implement for the USA. This may be a result of the US presidential system, under which different parties can control the Comgress and the presidency or, when the same party controls both Congress and the presidency, the party system is so loose that the president cannnot get his program legislated; e.g., Bill Clinton and health insurance. The Liberals said Kevin ‘07 had no policies, but they were very detailed for anyone who looked. I do not see the equivalent in the US.
Sorry Ferny Grover, religious people DENY other groups of people their rights! That is where the ‘despise” comes in! And dont lecture me at all about ‘despising’ , just look at the history of the Christian Church??????????????????? NOt a pretty picture at all !!!!!!!!
Hi JV – I’m not personally affronted – far from it. I enjoy the (usually) well considered views on this forum. I could point out a few fundamentalists who would definitely NOT see me as harmless
. The US is a strange place and its odd mix of religion and politics (or religion and pop music, sport and anything else) is bizarre to most of us in Oz. I know from personal experience the power of the conservative christian forces in America. They carry a lot of votes and no politician has yet taken them on and survived.
Glen at 585: Good post.
Sums it up quite well from both sides.
Who do you prefer out of the remaining candidates? Edwards, Obama or Clinton?
Out of the republicans, I probably prefer McCain over Giuliani, but have queries about his age.
I can’t see Huckerbee or Romney being viable for the Repubs.
I see the Republican race as too close to call until later this year.
Although I can’t see any of the Repubs coming close to the Democrats.
Obama will take NH, and is now favourite to take the Democratic candidacy.
Edwards is no shot, and will likely play kingmaker/queenmaker. I suspect he will choose Obama and become VP.
I’m not counting out Clinton who still has a remarkable 20 point lead over Obama, yet is behind in the betting markets.
I prefer Obama because of his stance on the ‘war of terror’.
I still can’t reconcile US foreign policy to be anything but a miserable failure in the last 8 years.
590
Chris Curtis – that’s why Presidential candidates have ‘policy positions’ lol!
Tabitha moment for the Catholic church:
Liberal boys go to heaven, kneeling and praying eveyday.
Labor boys go to hell, chasing all the hot girls away.
Anyway, if Obama can keep rising above the slung mud such as the article Steve linked above and lead through the primaries, the election processes will be infinitely more engaging for the next 11 months than if its Hillary vs McCain or any of the others. And it will breathe more life into this blog too.
593
Asanque – out of the three as you can imagine neither is rather appealing to a tory but i hate myself for saying it but id probably back Clinton over Obama and based purely on experience.
Clearly Obama will have the ‘Mo’ going into Feb 5 after victories in NH and SC in my belief but with the Republican field so divided Feb 5 will sort the men from the boys i suspect Romney, Fred Thompson and Duncan Hunter as well as Ron Paul to drop out soon after Feb 5 leaving it to Giuliani, McCain and Huckleberry aka ‘Jesus Loves Me’.
I must admit i like McCain too his experience, his leadership in the Senate, him not being beholden to the CC’s who dominate large portions of the Republican Party and his moderate political positions. My only ? is his age perhaps as a VP to Giuliani would be far better than Huckles even though if Giuliani manages to pull it off in the end he’s going to have to ask Huckles probably before McCain. I think the national security is about the only thing that can unite Republicans thus Rudy is my pick though he is no shoe in i wonder what the betting markets have to say.
I suspect you are correct he needs someone from the South he needs a Johnson like Kennedy needed to hold fray down there but i think Edwards is more of a radical than Obama infact Edwards makes Obama look great in comparison. Obama could go for Biden since Biden ruled out being VP under Hillary. But the trouble is Obama will want Edward’s delegates and he’ll have a few by the end of it.
I really hope McCain wins NH because Romney is only in it because of his personal fortune and he’s a Morman and he’s pandered to the Christian Right and recanted all his moderate political positions.
I must say the US is in deep brown stuff with regards to their Health System i mean say what you will about trashing Whitlam for his economic management but Medicare really does help out paying the bills.
Glen: Mccain is slight favourite over Giuliani.
And just ahead of Arnie on 1000-1
Glen: What do you think of Rudd’s performance so far as PM?
Has his lack of experience hurt him?
Have union officals taken over yet?
All I know is that the global economy is crashing and it must be the ALP’s fault.
Just kidding
Switched on Fox News during a late lunch today. Caught the debate between the Republican candidates. From left to right you had Giuliani, Thomson, Huckabee, Romney and McCain.
What a pack of deadbeats.
You’re not being terribly constructive, Brenton.
Diogenes @ 521
Cortical neurogenesis in adult monkeys may not be as clear cut as whatever research you’re quoting may suggest, and it almost certainly doesn’t create new neurons in the cortex of humans, at least not cells that survive for any useful length of time.
Probably the most authoritative study into this is by Jonas Frisen of the Karolinska Institute and colleagues. He used Carbon-14 levels in neurons to calculate their age. Dividing cells take in C-14 only during division and in quantities proportionate to the amount in the organism’s surroundings. C-14 levels spiked after each of the Cold-War atmospheric nuclear bomb tests so these can be used as markers to determine when the cell was created. Frisen et al found a clear correlation between the amount of C-14 in the tested cortical neurons and atmospheric C-14 levels at the time the individuals were born, pretty much proving that cell division rarely if ever occurs afterwards.
Frisen et al did make two qualifications: 1) The resolution limits of their equipment meant that they might have missed a few cells (<1%), however, they calculate this limits the amount of new cells that could be generated to a max of 0.007% in a 5 year period, and 2) earlier research on monkeys (Gould E et al, 2001) found that while new cells may sometimes be generated these are short-lived. If this also occurs in humans Frisen calculates the neurons would have a life span of <4.2 months. This probably addresses one of the points you raise.
David Fink, one of ANSTO’s principle scientists was a collaborator on this research and can provide you with more information – email: david.fink-AT-ansto.gov.au (replace -AT- with @).
The paper is available online: http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/103/33/12564
Neurogenesis has so far only been shown to naturally occur in the dentate gyrus region of the human hippocampus, and possibly, the olfactory bulb. However, the heat generated by proponents for and against the latter make the Oz/Indian cricket teams spat appear almost genteel.
Glen,
I gather that the standard presidential hopeful’s policy position is something like: “We are united and will win back this great country of ours and go onwards to victory and decency and do so without fear or favour or malice. We will put aside the old ways, the establishment ways and govern for all Americans. Join with me in this great campaign to rebuild and renew America, the greatest country on Earth, to make it a place that all its citizens can be proud of.”
It intrigues me that so many Americans become president after being governors, rather than after being senators. And now, being a mayor is enough?
Asanque
Rudd well he hasn’t really done anything as PM other than go to the First Days of the Melbourne and Sydney Test Matches and see the fireworks at Kirribilli so not much to comment about his performance but he sure is enjoying the high life atm lol. We’ll soon see the measure of Rudd in a few months because he’ll have a hostile Senate throughout his first term and alot of ‘green’ Ministers.
His lack of leadership experience will hurt him but we’re yet to see him in action and anyway the best time to judge such a thing would be 2010 when either Nelson, Bishop or Turnbull is running the Party lol!.
Alls i know is my petrol prices are going higher and Mr Rudd’s petrol commissioner isn’t lowering them lol
BTW i wonder how long it is before we see Rudd v Nelson in Parliament oh and also BTW i don’t like Family First either just so you know.
603
Chris Curtis – lol true but i suppose it’s because Governors have executive experience whereas Senators have none, even Giuliani has been a leader all be it of a city but Edwards, Obama and Clinton have not ever been a leader before.
Glen,
Given that the US is the world’s most powerful nation, I can see an advantage in a president who has had some experience of the rest of the world, something that governors and mayors do not really have. Neither the terrorist attack on New York nor having the UN in the city qualifies the mayor, no matter what executive power he has exercised.
Glen: I think he did a reasonable job at the Bali conference.
Many said that even if we ratified the Kyoto treaty, the US would still go their own way.
However, it seems being isolated resulted in the US actually compromising slightly at the Bali conference.
I think we’ve all seen the results of 8+ years of Bush and Howard.
I’m looking forward to 8+ years of Rudd and Obama
I know you don’t like Family First, and you are an agnostic/atheist?
This surprises me that you support the republicans, given the right wing republicans are so predominantly religious nut jobs
However, I guess your right leaning tendences override small speed bumps
Not that the Democrats are much better.
You think Nelson will last until the next election? I’m expecting a Turnbull challenge.
Keep up the updates on the US election, its good reading.
Hey Glen… old chap,
What would you reckon if Mr T. broke away and formed another political force?
Would you support this???
There is 43% of the population that has been disfranchised…what the hell are you guys going to do about it?….Whinge…?
I apologise William! I have a thing about ‘religious people’. It’s best if I dont comment about them. The influence that they have in political circles and the effects that they have over peoples lives is enormous. I have fought my whole life to overcome particular forms of discrimination , William, so I become very passionate and PROBABLY not very constructive. But, I do note that just because someone says that they belong to a Religion , then they become a protected species. I wish I have been afforded that luxury during my life!
MayoFeral- Frankly, I’m very perturbed to get my neurophysiology PhD (it was 1995) trumped on neurogenesis on a political blog!!!
My reference is Neurogenesis in the neocortex of adult primates. Science. 2000 May 5;288(5467):771. by Gould et al. It has been questioned though but then again, what hasn’t!
MFeral @602
No, it suits my circumstances to insist my specialist was right (Diogenes), when he said that the frontal lobe neurons can regenerate. Still it’s good to know from your above excerpt that I’ll be able to remember what I smell with my regenerated bulb.
Scraper we’ve seen what happens when a strong political Party splits and it aint something you do unless you feel like being in Opposition for more than 20 years.
Mr. T won’t because Mr. T wants to be Prime Minister how could he form a Party that would win 76 seats????
Well Scraper i suppose you’ve heard the old joke about the difference between a bleeding heart left winger and a puppy…a puppy stops whining after it grows up. LOL but we tories will be looking forward to the day when we win back NSW or WA in future and then we’ll see…but until then we tories can only yell at the TV about Rudd this and Rudd that that’s all we got now.
It appears the Lib/Nat merger has dropped off the airwaves maybe it’s dead and buried?
I suppose it depends on how well Nelson goes, Rudd doesn’t have the same empitus to govern well for there is no one to take over from him just yet, but Nelson has Turnbull, J. Bishop and Tony Abbott potentially all wanting a go. All i ask of Nelson is not to go back any further and pick up a couple of gains in 2010 i don’t expect us to win unless there is a recession and it’s have to be one we had to have to have an impact.
Dear bludgers,
before this site turns into a God V God haters/atheist debate and we troll over history with general brushes to make a “valid point” lets put something into prospective. Human beings when in power if on a religious or atheist platform can abuse their office to suit their own ends contrary to the basic belief structure that is to help your fellow human.
Two cases in point -
* the inquisition was brought about by “mother church” to persecute, kill & rob those who wanted to be free of her so she could hold her power. Quite on the contrary to the teaching of “love your enemies & pray for those who use you” – How many millions where lost?
* when communism ruled USSR, China, Kampuchea & North Korea tell me how many millions died under Stalin, Mao tse-tung, Pol Pot & Kim Il sung? Isn’t this ideology suppose to distribute to to their own needs? Now these are atheist.
Is does not matter what the label is, Bad men are BAD men. There are good people who believe in God as well as good people who believe in nothing as well as good people who believe in anything.
Why paint every one with the same brush & do a dump job on them or is that humans are just generally rotten?
Omg. How can people criticise Rudd already?
News Flash!!!!!!!!!!!!! (Yes Glen i mean u)
“PARLIAMENT” has not sat yet. It would be extremley unreasnable and biased to judge a governments performance before it has sat yet geeeeez. Have you forgot it is the holidays.
Hey Brenton
We are all religious in some way because that is the life-force that drives us.
To me religion is about morals and beliefs.
God does not come into the equation for many of us.
It is best to live and let live…it can be achieved I reckon mate.
I’ll tell you guys something…my business name is scapers, hence the three dots for the people who know Morse.
What I have noticed over the many years…is being called scraper!!!
I have come to the conclusion that the letters confuse people…and I’m also talking about the so-called intelligent clients.
Just Google scaper…
scaper, after your delightful comments and a needed glass of wine , I have returned to a renewed spiritual plane! I will leave the conversations to the very ’serious’ regular Poll Bludgers and will read with interest their comments, especially about the looming American situation in New Hampshire!
William I think you should also be doing a comparison of the previous swing in 2004 in order to gain a better perspective of the oscillation direction and frequency of the swing. It is also worth comparing the outcome with the 2006 State seat. I know the old wisdom is that voters vote different on state as to federal but the more I look at the past results the more I begin to question this wisdom. A comparison between the two can and will show the core part support base which needs to be taken into consideration if your dosing a high/low comparison. The 2004 Election is a good comparison as it shows more or less beyond doubt that Labor lost that election on its choice of leader. Where in 2007 Labor’s leadership team was much more appealing to the electorate. That couples with the fact that John failed to initiate a hand over and every one felt his time had come to an end. (Even Bennelong was of that view)
Analysis of the green vote needs to also reflect on the reduction of support for minor parties. The Greens picked up primarily from the decline in minor party support but overall they did not do as well as they did in 2004. Where as Family first held their position coming fourth in the Senate count.
Put your hard hats on – it will be trench warfare after New Hampshire.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/06/shaken-clinton-camp-prepa_n_80125.html
538
Jen @ 538 Says:
The nearest recent example would be John F. Kennedy and we know how that turned out
It seems The School Prefect (Bishop) has been outvoted
http://www.news.com.au/perthnow/story/0,21598,23018008-5005361,00.html
Brenton,
We had some ’strongly felt ‘ discussions re Christian Fundamentalism on this site not too long ago, and like you, I found it difficult to write in a non-inflammatory way because of personal experience.
From memory,there are others who share your view(and passion),though can understand William needing to keep a lid on things.
Another interesting statistic to look at is where did each of the Minor Party votes split in terms of Labor/Liberal. It makes a mockery of the Greens and Democrats split ticket. the 50/50 Split clearly does not reflect their support base intentions.
Glen @ 604 says:
“Rudd well he hasn’t really done anything as PM other than go to the First Days of the Melbourne and Sydney Test Matches and see the fireworks at Kirribilli so not much to comment about his performance but he sure is enjoying the high life atm lol.”
Is that really the best your lot can offer? It is no wonder that they were treated with the contempt they deserved. Get over it Glen, we finally have a leader who has captured the imagination in a way your tired and cliched mob never could. If you want to talk petrol prices, look no further than your hero who is presently the incumbent in the White House (pro tem). Every time a Bush has been president, the price of oil has gone through the roof. The fact that this hideous family has its roots in the ‘bidness’ is, of course, incidental!
Megan 622 , Thanks for your comments! Amazingly, Senate Watch has brought me ‘down to earth’ and also my sense of humour has returned!
602
MayoFeral Says:
Neurogenesis has so far only been shown to naturally occur in the dentate gyrus region of the human hippocampus, and possibly, the olfactory bulb. However, the heat generated by proponents for and against the latter make the Oz/Indian cricket teams spat appear almost genteel.
Hah! Neurogenesis is a polite Sunday afternoon tea party for timid academics compared to the brutal turf wars going on over the so called ‘functional somatic syndromes’ (aka psychosomatosis, hysterical conversion, MUPS, etc, whatever term they are using this week).
You better be wearing the best armour modern science can provide, and have your affairs in order and your life insurance paid up, if you are going to venture into that area of medicine. Trust me, I have the scars to prove it, and I am about to dive back in for another round, noble truth-seeking masochist that I am.
At least the neurogenesis debates are mostly confined to the research setting, and the patients are usually left out of it.
Ah Senate Watch – back again?
On about split tickets again – I’m thinking you’re talking about Senate GVT’s coz we all know that HTV’s for the HoR’s is just a recommendation. Now I don’t recall a Greens split GVT – do you?
On falling minor party vote – yes, the trend of the last 30 years has reversed of late, mostly down to the collapse of the Democrats, but also the fragmentation of the right vote (PHON notwithstanding – but PHON masked the falling Democrat vote to some extent in overall minor party votes). But to suggest the Greens didn’t do as well as in 2004 – I am perplexed! I can only assume you mean that they didn’t increase their HoR’s vote as significantly as in 2004 – but they did increase it in a very polarised election. In the Senate the vote was up 1.37% according to the AEC – that’s not bad when starting from 7.67%. But again, I assume you are suggesting that the magnitude of the rise is not as large as in 2004?
And Family First? Their national votes did not increase, but fell (even if marginally). 1.62% in the Senate is not an what I’d call a world beater, especailly when you consider the CDP vote also fell. My strongest impression was of a patchy election for them. A good rise in Vic (handy having a sitting Senator, eh!) was offset by a crunching fall in SA & QLD (over 1% in both cases).
Diogenes @ 610 –
After I retired I did some work with veterans with mental illnesses which blossomed into maintaining an anxiety & depression news blog. The, admittedly little, I know of neurogenesis was initially sparked by the fact that it probably is how antidepressants work, and then getting my fingers spanked by several leading experts in the field after I misrepresented their research in an article. They then kindly took time to educate me on the finer points.
Liz Gould also coauthored the later study referenced by Fisen which found that neurons produced by neurogenesis only have a “transient existence” The PubMed extract is at: http://tinyurl.com/2nay4r
jaundiced view @ 611 – There is nothing in science that should be considered as being worthy of chiseling into stone. It’s possible new research will disprove everything I’ve written, though I wouldn’t count on it.
However, you may be able to limit the damage by taking antioxidants before and after hitting the turps, plus keeping fluid (water) levels up. And Milk Thistle extract really can help the liver repair itself. N-Acetyl-Cysteine supplements may also help, especially if you take paracetamol (acetaminophen) to ease hangovers. It’s used to treat overdoses which kill by slowly, inexorably ‘frying’ the liver.
**Note to anyone who might get unfortunate ideas from the above – paracetamol OD is a really, really horrible way to exit life!
Frank
“We’ve already announced that we won’t be trying to stop Labor from changing Work Choices or the unfair dismissal laws in the Senate,” Mr Pyne told ABC radio. ”
Smart move by the libs, Work Choices cost them in the state elections in Vic, Qld and NSW as well of course federally.
We had the state lib oppositions and at times Costello saying that they would protect workers from Work Choices whilst the federal libs were saying how great it was. Pu Goward said it was worth at least 5% and cost them gaining seats in NSW.
If the libs did not kill Work Choices dead it would continue to hurt and haunt them in 08, 09 and probably 10.
Letting all of labors changes through places all of any problems with the changes in labors camp.
It will not be a smooth implementation as businesses have to negotiate CAs on a fair basis and offer employees fair terms as well as treat their employees like human beings instead of disposable inputs.
very interesting story on large demographic change in one of the most northern Southern States: Virginia. With its juicy 13 electoral college votes.
http://www.ncec.org/electioninsider/election_10_11_07.html
The pretty graphs pretty much sum it up. If they win it, then they would only need one more medium sized state to win. Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri or Indiana would be enough to seal the deal no matter which democrat won. Or two of the winnable smaller states with more than 4 electoral votes
That is as long as they don’t do something stupid like loose wisconsin
Hmm, a discussion of simian neurophysiology at Pollbludger. This breaks new ground in “off topic.” Is William, like me, having a holiday? Anyway, I think I will conceal my vast erudition on this subject so as not to arouse further jealousy among the Bludger community.
Politics: It seems the Hon Christopher Maurice Pyne is finding his true vocation in opposition, making the transition from towel-boy to statesman in one balletic leap. Do I descry a Turnbull-Pyne ticket in the offing, a marriage of the Australian Club and the Adelaide Club? That’ll put the class back in the class war, what?
628
MayoFeral Says:
However, you may be able to limit the damage by taking antioxidants before and after hitting the turps, plus keeping fluid (water) levels up. And Milk Thistle extract really can help the liver repair itself. N-Acetyl-Cysteine supplements may also help, especially if you take paracetamol (acetaminophen) to ease hangovers. It’s used to treat overdoses which kill by slowly, inexorably ‘frying’ the liver.
If we are talking avoiding hangovers (from commercial, mass-produced booze), there is one very easy and effective way, only drink vodka or gin. Seriously. A hangover is almost entirely caused by other components in booze, not the ethanol (though enough ethanol on its own will still leave its mark the next day).
Adam- Turnbull and Pyne are both “wets” and would be unlikely to get up without a major meltdown from the Right. There are many rumours of Pyne transferring to State politics given his drubbing in the deputy note.
Adam
Pyne is very vulnerable, only needs 800 people to change their vote or preference, less than 1% and he is gone.
He is obviously thinking ahead to 10 or 11, not so much as winning government as saving his seat.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/test
Apologies if this site has already come up, but I find it fascinating. The premise of the test is that left / right is no longer a meaningful dichotomy and that it is more useful to see where people site on a quadrant. The site owners have profiles major world leaders including Howard but not Rudd.
All those “tests” are grossly biased and meaningless. I generally find less than half the questions answerable, since the correct answer usually is “it depends on the circumstances” or “it depends on how you define the terms.” Take question one of the test CL refers to: “If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.” The question assumes that there is a dichotomy between “humanity” and “the interests of trans-national corporations.” Obviously most conservatives would reject that assumption, so they can’t answer the question.
If economic globalisation is inevitable, it should primarily serve humanity rather than the interests of trans-national corporations.”
Milo would have the answer.
Just Me-
in my younger days working in Alcohol and Drug rehab programs a number of (now dead) clients found metho to be a good way of avoiding additives. Could have been the passiona of course.
well, I must say what with neuorphysiology, United States elections. religion and the inevitable bleatings of Senatewatch, Pollbludgers is becoming a veritable chocolate box of treats – (the senatewatch bits: that’s like the turkish delight.)
Back for a moment to Obama – not having had the ime or inclination this evening to trawl the sites an I ask for an update on NH?
and I really can’t resist -
GWB at New Hampshire Jan 27,2000
“I know how hard it is for you to put food on your family.”
638
thatbwould be Time and Can.
sheesh.
with no ‘b ‘between that and would.
Fks sake.
Constant Lurker
Good to see you here.
No form, no spurn…I’m sure it will eventuate.
Adam @ 631 – How many years would I get for bribing 801 Lib voters to switch their vote in 2010/11? It would be almost worth doing a year or two in one of Her Majesty’s establishments to see off the second most annoying little @#$% in Fed politics. And a couple of decades to do the same to the most annoying, Milord Downer of Mayo.
I predict Hillary will win NH. Why? Because on the debate yesterday, John Edward “ganged up” with Obama to have a go at Hillary. I am quite sure that Obama wasn’t too pleased about it, judging from his expression.
I predict Hillary won’t win NH.
She is $5 at the bookies compared to $1.10 for Obama.
All polls are pointing to Obama.
Why wouldn’t Obama be pleased at Edwards backing him up?
Please explain.
Although Edwards is ideologically closer to Obama than Hillary, they are all playing tactics at this stage. The fact that Edwards locked in with Obama, and even Republicans like Huck are saying they admire him (not to mention McCain today claiming that he could beat him) shows just how successful Obama’s tactics and presentation are. He is way in front. All bookies have him firming incredibly. The Gallup poll of today has him 41-28 in front of Hillary in NH. She has no chance in NH and will need to go away for a regroup and tactical readjustment before Feb5 if she wants to remain in the race.
Maybe she’ll need to get Bill involved more? I’m sure she’d hate to do that though.
Some one told me this afternoon that if Obama is going to be attacked for a perceived lack of experience then perhaps he could form an alliance with Al Gore and be able to borrow his former vice President credentials while Al does his save the world from Global Warming thing.
The Finnigans-
not sure that I understand. You appear to be saying (correct me if I’m wrong) that Hillary will win because her rivals are strongly opposing her?
ie: she would lose if they supported her?
I’m pretty sure that Al wouldn’t want to play straight man to another charismatic leader. I think that if he chooses to throw his hat in the ring now it will only be because he thinks he can win. And that seems pretty remote with such a strong field. Had it shaped up like 2004 he’d have been in in no time. But it is more likely that he’ll wait for President Obama to make him some sort of Secretary for the environment now.
If in doubt blame the pollsters.
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/5/16506/74059/1002/431233
Edward did not “back” Obama. He was simply trying to hop on the “change train”.
If I were to advise Hillary, I would suggest that she could kill the “change train” stone dead with one statement: “You want change? I am offering the biggest change in the US history. The first US female President. How many female US Prez has there ever been? These gentlemen are the status quo, not me”. That’s the risk she has to take. It might not work, but it will kill the “change train” stone dead.
Against a black guy who can talk like Obama? I don’t reckon that one would fly.
What I thought was interesting in the debate is that Obama was not treated like the front-runner, Clinton was. If Obama really was the front runner, Edwards would have ben trying to take him down. I think what Edwards wants is Obama to be the one left to make him easier to take on than Clinton.
Obama’s answer on the Pakistan scenario was more hawkish than anyone’s elses and was in line with what Bush did in Iraq (as the moderator pointed out). But people don’t care about that, if he is black he must be radical. This euphoria about Obama is unfathomable.
Pat was told the winner… by God.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/06/god-said-ha-pat-roberts_n_80083.html
Jen, where on earth did you get that Bush stuff you are quoting?
Is it real? Sorry, question answered, both yes and no.
Too tragi comedic.
Stewart J @ 627
Yes I think if you look at the Victorian State you will notice a Green split ticket. (Part of the Greens sweet heart deal with the Liberals for supporting them in the Victorian Upper house) Now you were saying. I know the Greens are beyond such things.
I note with concern that the Australian Electoral commission has not published copies of the “below the line” preference data files.
Crikey Whitey -
they are from the revered tome of “the 2008 desk calender of George W Bushisms”
And yes, sadly they are all accurate quotes.
(you can see heaps more via Slate Magazine on line).
And just to start the day -
“I think anybody who doesn’t think I’m smart enough to handle the job is underestimating.”
Obama up to 13% ahead of Hillary according to USAToday/gallup poll.
an additional concern is the way in which the EC has presented their summary count sheet. The count sheet does not show the number of ballot papers involved in each transfer but the aggregated value of the formula they are required to use is based on the number of ballot papers not on the aggregated value. What the AEC is showing is the aggregated transfer value expressed as a vote. For example in the Victorian Count the AEC show in the second count a transfer of -870,104 as being Votes transferred. In reality this is 1,324,729 ballot papers (Votes) each with a transfer value of 0.6568. The question is what is a vote is it the ballot paper or the value of the ballot paper. The rules for calculating a transfer value require the AEC to calculate the surplus value of votes and then divide that by the number of ballot papers. To those who are not familiar with the counting procedures the use of the terminology “Votes” in this case can and is misleading. If you assume one ballot paper is one vote then what is actually being transferred is the value of the vote not the number of votes/ballot papers. This inappropriate use of terminology masks the inbuilt distortion in the way the AEC calculates teh transfer value and the distribution of the votes as any one can tell you that if you have 900.000 ballot papers worth 0.001 plus and 1000 ballot papers at full value (1.00) to transfer each ballot paper at an equal value seriously distorts the full value votes and inflates the lower value votes this losing its proportionality. The way in which the AEC presents its summary count sheet hides this disproportional value. If the AEC publish the BTL Data files then it would be possible to more accurately present the method used by the AEC in calculating the result.
This is not saying that the results as published are incorrect, they are just misleading in the way they have been presented (as a result of the adopted format and inappropriate use of terminology) as they do not show in sufficient detail the method of calculations.
Phillip Adams is saying what I have been trying to point out this blog: “BARACK Obama is crazy brave. His victory in Iowa puts him in the crosshairs of many a gun-toting racist for whom the thought of a black president is an abomination”. Maybe, I should not try to be too subtle about it.
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/phillipadams/index.php/theaustralian/comments/obama_must_be_wary_of_the_assassins_gun
655 Steve, I had a look at the Rev Pat Robertson link, to think that people like him have influence over the world of US politics is nothing short of terrifying.
The F’s
the same awful thought has occurred to me.
SenateWatch -
“I think if you look at the Victorian State you will notice a Green split ticket. (Part of the Greens sweet heart deal with the Liberals for supporting them in the Victorian Upper house) Now you were saying. I know the Greens are beyond such things.”
There was no split ticket in the Victorian Senate. Just as there is no “deal” between the Greens and the Liberals in the Victorian Upper House. Honestly, you spout such nonsense!
Regarding the US and Obama’s chances, I hope this isn’t the kiss of death (no pun intended Jen) but the Oz quotes some well respected polls that he will win in New Hampshire today:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23020740-601,00.html
As for the forces of dumbness, Huckabee may not quite be their kind of idiot after all. This is a link to a good artiicle pointing out that Huckabee did poorly amoung the Catholic voters in Iowa, which will hurt him in other Republican states, including southern ones with a large Latino population:
http://polysigh.blogspot.com/2008/01/huckabee-and-catholics.html
Check out this graph. The Clinton campaign continues to sink like a stone.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html
Fox News had an interesting debate last night with the Republican candidates answering questions in front of a panel of NH party members. It struck me that if one of the group got elected as preznit over the Democratic candidate we would be in safer hands than those of the incumbent. A small mercy indeed. The audience liked Romney best and Fred Thompson least.
The New Yorker has an interesting colour piece on the Iowa caucuses at http://www.newyorker.com/talk/2008/01/14/080114ta_talk_lizza
Senate Watch @ 657
Actually, you should check the VEC site with respect to GVT’s (http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/grvotingtickets.html) – the Vic Greens did not run any ALP/Lib split GVT’s, although the Democrats did in 3 regions. In every UH region the Greens preferenced the ALP ahead of the Libs. That would seem to fit with the Greens voter base don’t you think?
Actually I am still not convinced that McCain will win NH convincingly tomorrow on the Republican side of the ledger. If a big move is on by independents to kill off the Clinton campaign then McCain can not possibly do as well as expected. McCain’s polling has been well within the margin of error of the polls and I will watch with interest to see if the hype of McCain is matched by votes on the ground. There is something fishy about it all and a good Romney showing would not surprise.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/nh/new_hampshire_republican_primary-193.html
Good morning bludgers.
It looks like Hilary is following in Howard’s footsteps by adopting a pleading stance accompanied by tearing up. At least it shows she is human.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,23022030-601,00.html
And on Philip Adam’s column, I had the same horrible thought. And statistically, what is the most dangerous job in the world?
US presidents have a 5% chance of dying for each year they are in office (half are assassinated and half die of natural causes). Overall, 19% will not reach the end of their 4 year term.
Amongst more common professions, fishermen are about 20 times more likely to die than if they gave up their job, especially in Alaska!
sean @ 665
I have looked at the AEC web site and the Greens most defina;ly have tow tickets registered for the senate in Victoria. I suggest you look again.
Group U AUSTRALIAN GREENS Ticket 1 of 2
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Downloads/SenateGroupVotingTicketsDownload-13745.csv
You were saying…
Stewart J @ 669
Ditto..
looked at the AEC web site the Greens most definatly had two tickets registered for the Senate in Victoria. I suggest you look again.
Group U AUSTRALIAN GREENS Ticket 1 of 2
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/Downloads/SenateGroupVotingTicketsDownload-13745.csv
You also were saying…
Interesting. The chance of a US president dying is comparable to the danger of living in Iraq for its citizens (> 1 million dead in 20 million population = 5%).
Senate Watch (Melb City) @ 673/674
That link you point to takes you to a null file – there’s no information in it. But all the tickets are still up on the ABC website at
http://www.abc.net.au/elections/federal/2007/guide/groupvotingtickets.htm
And yes, there are two tickets
Ticket 1 preferences: ALP 30-33, Libs 38-40
Ticket 2 preferences: ALP 30-33, Libs 65-67
As with the Vic state election tickets, the Libs appear 100% AFTER the ALP. In what way does this support your erroneous assertion about the tickets being part of a sweetheart deal with the Libs?
Actually, count that a rhetorical question – because it just doesn’t.
I find your posts fascinating . . . there’s often some good stuff buried in them. It’s just frustrating to have to wade through the huge volume of hyperbole, repetition and error to find them.
675 socrates- Actually, the 1 million in Iraq (5% mortality) would be over a four year period, which equates to a 19% mortality in POUSA. George W is considered the fittest President ever so he’d be less. Which reminds me of the phenomenon of healthy and energetic political leaders recently (Bush, Howard, Blair, Sarkovy, Putin, Arnie…). Evidently the electorate rates this quite highly according to a survey I saw somewhere.
Well thank you. You falsely first claimed there was not a split ticket.
The link was that provided on the AEC website. I agree they do not maintain their web site all too well.
I am still having a struggle in obtaining copies of the below-the-line preference data. It should take them 10 mins to extract the data each file approximately 1 mb in size. If we do not receive a satisfactory response from the AEC by tomorrow we will have no alternative other then to submit an FOI application and commence legal proceedings to secure this data. The requirement to make an FOI application to obtain the detailed results is an abuse of process on behalf of the AEC and sadly an indictment against the AEC. This data should have been readily available as a down load. Thankfully the elections results were not close but had they been close the only way you can effective scrutinise an electronic count is if the data files are available for independent analysis. This was one of the problems identified with the Victorian Count and it tool the VEC three months before it reluctantly provided a copy of teh data file (But it failed to provide a copy of the preliminary count preference data Why? I can only guess they have something to hide) All members of the Senate have been contacted and all have express interest and support in having this information published. We shall see if the AEC is capible of self regulation and committed to maintaining an open and transparent electoral system.
666
Socrates – With Huckleberry not getting the Micks that’s good news for Rudy Giuliani who is classified as a Roman Catholic thus he’ll have a better shot in Florida and California with the latino republicans…
Glen-The latest polls have Giuliani only 2% ahead of Huck in Florida, which is the first really important vote numbers-wise. If Giuliani loses that one, his big lead in California might collapse. I think Florida might make or break him.
Giuliani has big leads in all the major States, California, New York, Pennsylvania which won’t just drop out of mid air and Giuliani has been campaigning strongly in Florida and has a good organisation down there to get the winner take all state.
I agree that should he not win Florida it will be far harder for him to win the nomination but so long as he maintains his leads in the big states and the North West with Oregon and Washington he’ll have a big lead in delegates soon. California for the Republicans as i understand is winner takes all and Rudy would then get a whopping 173 delegates in one go.
Still he’s not getting favourable press with his strategy and it should hurt him but really can the Republicans win the Election with a baptist minister, a morman or a senior citizen???? The only logical choice for them is Giuliani and if he’s not nominated the Republicans will have no shot whatsoever.
Unlike the Democrats the Republicans have far more winner takes all contests which favours Giuliani and Obama. This helps Giuliani as he should pick up the bigger States giving him more delegates and likewise it should give Obama sizable numbers of delegates from the big States even if Clinton wins them.
676 –
“As with the Vic state election tickets, the Libs appear 100% AFTER the ALP. In what way does this support your erroneous assertion about the tickets being part of a sweetheart deal with the Libs?
Actually, count that a rhetorical question – because it just doesn’t.”
Very well put!
I’ve opened a new thread for discussion of the New Hampshire primary, so can we please keep this one Australian-only from now on.
Senate Watch – maybe you didn’t read what I said
“Actually, you should check the VEC site with respect to GVT’s (http://www.vec.vic.gov.au/grvotingtickets.html) – the Vic Greens did not run any ALP/Lib split GVT’s, although the Democrats did in 3 regions. In every UH region the Greens preferenced the ALP ahead of the Libs. That would seem to fit with the Greens voter base don’t you think?”
And my previous post referred to your comment about a “sweetheart deal with the Liberals” – so there was no split ticket with respect to the ALP & Liberal Party.
Your twists and turns do you no credit – if you are trying to black the Greens over doing split tickets preferencing the ALP below the Libs through GVT’s (which I would suggest is your intention) then you should cite some actual evidence instead of these silly comments – and I am aware of the alternate tickets but they don’t refer to reversing an ALP-Lib preference (in Western Victoria it was between Whelan & de Pieri).
senate watch – it aint that hard. The Greens preferenced the ALP ahead of the Coalition in the senate at the 2007 federal election.
IT seems Senate Watch’s rantings are considered CONSTRUCTIVE, but it is obvious The Greens are fair game on here! I would have thought that considering that the ALP is in government everywhere, that there would be a lot more to be said about how they are going?
How many days has Gillard been Acting PM?
Brenton, the Labor Party has been in power for about 6 weeks and already Nicola Roxon has copped a spray on here for not bailing out the hospital in Phillip Island and making the old dears drive to Wonthaggi and get in the queue. More recently Stephen Conroy announced himself as the man most likely to fill Tony Abbott’s shoes in government which has also been discussed.
The Greens get a lot of air-time around here because there are a couple of regular posters who are Green supporters who won’t shut up about them.
“already Nicola Roxon has copped a spray on here for not bailing out the hospital in Phillip Island and making the old dears drive to Wonthaggi and get in the queue”
That’s quite a long drive if your seriously ill, TW.
I’m only talking about the Greens to clarify any misconceptions arising from SenateWatch/MelbCity’s lies.
Stewart J 684
The issue under discussion is the Australian Senate registered tickets and your previous statement express the view that the Greens did not issue a split ticket when in fact the Greens had issued a spit ticket. Why I fail to understand as it was fairly clear that the Greens would not be elected on primary votes and as was the case their preferences would not be distributed. Personally I consider split tickets deceiving and should not be allowed or if they are permitted then it should be possible for parties to nominate the percentage breakdown of each ticket.
Should you require further information on the Greens/Liberal alliance I refer you to comments available on http://www.greens-liberal-deal.com.au/
Thank you for your reference to that site, and in turn I refer you http://www.howtovote.com.au/greens-liberal-deal.html?gclid=CImYve-a5pACFQSOggodPF7CVw, which repudiates all of the claims on greens-liberal-deal.com.au (which I supposed is authorised by the ALP, yet they don’t clearly declare that. I wonder why…?)
Still, both of the “split tickets” you claim the Greens issued preference the ALP highly, so I really don’t see why you are complaining.
Here, in case you missed it:
“Upper House voting data shows that Greens have voted with Labor 32 times out of 37 divisions (86%)
Labor has voted with the Liberals 27 times out of 37 divisions (73%)
All three parties have voted in unison 27 times out of 37 divisions (73%)
In only 6 out of 37 divisions in the upper house (16%) did the Greens and the Liberals both vote against the Labor government.
…
On most occasions when the Greens and the Liberals voted together, the Labor party voted with the Liberals too.”
The hospital at Phillip Island is a Private Hospital and should not be funded with public money. If the people on the island want the hospital than they should put their hand in their pocket and save it, simple.
I applaud Labors’ stance.
However on the banks and the rise in rates, well it serves Labor right for privatising the Commonwealth in the 1990’s, by having a bank in public hands you could have at least stopped the excesses of these rapacious bankers from doing such. Wayne it is no use bleating about the banks you should instead be criticising your former colleagues for privatising a bank letting the deregulated market do as it wants.
“The hospital at Phillip Island is a Private Hospital and should not be funded with public money. If the people on the island want the hospital than they should put their hand in their pocket and save it”
Good grief, you sound like a Liberal!… And what if the people don’t have the money?
“Wayne it is no use bleating about the banks you should instead be criticising your former colleagues for privatising a bank letting the deregulated market do as it wants.”
I agree with you on that. Wayne looked just pathetic. If that’s the attitude he adopts (”Please, Mr Bank, stop raising your rates…”), will he really make a good treasurer?
That is not being a Liberal by stating that not using taxpayers money to pay for a privately owned bank. Public money should be used for public means and not to be provided for private businesses, unfortunately all governments are giving money to private enterprises these days and it should not occur.
Saw Wayne again on the news, sitting down with reserve bank- why? what is that going to achieve Wayne? He will be a nothing within a government led by a nothing with a bunch of nothings, so Wayne will not be alone. I look forward to next three years because very little will change in this country, and i am a Labor voter.
You still didn’t answer my question, Marky
marky marky @ 693 claimed
Again, can you cite a single instance when the CBA was used by a federal government to hold down interest rates, fees and charges, or anything else?
So far Commbank hasn’t adjusted its rates beyond the recent RBA increase, and given that it, unlike NAB and ANZ, sources most of its loan funds domestically it probably won’t. However, this, and the same non action by Westpac, hasn’t stopped the other two from doing so which suggests your basic premise is flawed.
I might add that as both a, very minor, shareholder and customer of one of these banks I don’t see why it should loose money or impose higher rates or charges elsewhere because of factors beyond its control. If you want to blame someone look no further than the US government.
#616
okkkkaayyy….googled “scaper” and got this
1380432, PAD INCONTINENCE TENA LADY SUPER 6X30 860ML, SCAPER-757730, C180.
Gearing up again for my night raid against water waste. Will sleep shortly, wake early.
The neighbour has adjusted his start time, which is good really, the later the better. Last night was 4.00 am start. I allowed a half hour of bore watering, by which time the road was sufficiently soaked. As was the footpath, the stobie pole.
Still no reply from Mike Rann, to my email on the topic of bore water wasteage.
Hey Turning Worm – if you want to get out and defend your home team be my guest. For my part I’ve seen little to complain about from the new Govt – at least in respect of what was promised and delivered. I may have issues with some decisions, but not like we didn’t know about them (think Tassie forests/Gunns) – overall I’ve been impressed by Rudd’s sincerity, Joel Fitzgibbon has been doing well in defence, Penny Wong has been a star, and (for the opposition) Nelson seems to have been overtaken by Minchin in reshaping the Kiberal Party, if the MSM is to be believed (IMHO thus illustrating why Nelson’s a lame-duck leader).
And I defend the Greens as it warrants it, and comment on other issues as I see fit (especially NSW & WA issues). To be clear, I think this blog is mostly ALP posters, some Greens, and the odd (in the nicest possible way!) Lib.
As to the hospital on Phillip Island – the issue surely is the provision of service where none other exists? While I would wholeheartedly agree that public money should not be used for propping up private business, unless the state is prepared to provide the service then private business is the next best option for operating it. An example I can provide is in regard to the provision of education services in remote (indigenous) communities. There are a number of Independent School operators (private) running schools there, funded with public money, because the state will not provide those services. We should of course provide them from the public purse, but that may be some time (and political will?) away, so paying a private provider seems appropriate. The obvious answer is then to build a public hospital, but is that a reasonable (and financially responsible) use of public money? Such is the conundrum of government.
Of course, we could look back 100 or so years ago and see that communities at times banded together to raise their own funds and build hospitals without state assistance – but that rather begs the questions of the role of the state.
Make that “Liberal Party” (and I thought I’d spell checked…)
Stewart J, I wasn’t thinking of you, in fact after reading my post again it was probably too harsh in it’s assessment of anyone posting on this site. Your defence of your party and your beliefs are admirable.
On the hospital issue which was done to death a while ago, surely the issue is equitable provision of service. The extra burden placed on the people of Phillip Island does not seem to be too onerous to me, when viewed in context over the whole country.
Admittedly, the current banks problem is not a result of a deregulated market and it is a result of the credit crunch in US but a deregulated market does not help the situation. By having a bank owned by government it at least provides some kind of competitive hold on banks to be overly greedy and that is my point. For Wayne Swan to cry wolf is just silly, instead of doing this he should do something meaningful. Trying to show crocodile tears means nothing and it is just hot air. Take your business elsewhere god forbid to those people to do so and then realise that the other bank is doing the same and raising rates.
The question about how do people raise the money… well if they can’t then they do not have a hospital. Put simply Phillip Island may not have a hospital because their isn’t the population for it or if they had one (government) the adequate trained personnel to be able to work within. Yes it is a question of governance and money and need, maybe in time Phillip Island should have a hospital but when is the answer regarding population and perhaps ensuring that more development does not occur on such a pristine part of Victoria.
Hey Scaper… Testing my Morse Code. Never typed it out before.
… -.- .- .–. . .-.
… -.-. .- .–. . .-.
… -.-. .- .–. .-.
ooo -o-o o- o–o o o-o
marky marky @ 703
But effectively CommBank and Westpac are doing what you believe a public CBA could have been used for and it hasn’t stopped the NAB and ANZ from increasing their rates.
Nor, AFAIK, did any government use the old CBA to do what you suggest.
Perhaps, but that’s politics. You have to pretend to do something even when there is nothing useful you can do.
Such as? Capping interest rates, perhaps? Well this was hardly a roaring success when Treasure Howard did it in the 1980s. In fact it was a disaster. Sure, those with a mortgage saved a few dollars, but everyone else got slugged with higher rates on personal and business loans and credit cards while those trying to get a mortgage had a better chance of winning the lottery than getting money from a bank.
The only way to limit bank greed is competition and in the mortgage market there is already plenty of that.
BTW-do you have super, marky marky? If so your fund almost certainly has a substantial investment in bank shares and derives a significant amount of its income from them.
Whilst it does not effect a great number of people relatively speaking, the AMP also put up their standard variable home loan rate by 0.12% yesterday. They are the first of the non-major mainstream (non-conforming lenders have been raising rates for some months now) banks/lenders to do so. Others will certainly follow suit. I dont think under the circumstances, there is any point in taking advantage of the “competition” in the mortgage market by going through the cost and hassle of refinancing to another lender (unless there is significant benefit) until the dust settles and we can see who has done what with their rates. Far better to go back to your current lender and advise your “intention” to refinance which will often lead to a renegotiation of your existing rate. (and I am a finance broker, so I am certainly doing myself no favours in suggesting this).
The more I look at the summary count sheet for teh Senate published by the AEC the more I hate it. I recall Antony Green stating previously that the way in which the AEC presents its count summary is not the best. This is an understatement and yes he was right.
The count sheet seriously lacks detail and provides misleading data. The value displayed as the number of “votes” being transferred is in fact the aggregated value of the votes that are transferred as a result of a candidates surplus or exclusion. The AEC’s count sheet does not show the number of ballot papers transferred or the value of each segment of votes involved in the transfer of votes allocated in distribution of a candidates exclusion from the count.
The AEC also appears to be trying to avoid publication of the detailed below the line preference data files. Now that the data-entry process has come to an end there is no reason or justification why copies of the below-the-line data files should not be made available and published on their web site.
Access to the detailed data files becomes more and more important as we begin to adopt electronic means of counting the ballot.
Overall I would have to say that the AEC has done a better job then the Victorian Electoral commission but I would have to admit that the summary count sheet provided by the VEC is better then that published by the AEC.
MayoFeral,
no doubt in my mind you are a economic rationalist. That is the difference between us. And yes i have super but i am not a fan of it. Why should we be privately funding peoples’ retirements and creating a divide between working people on the amounts of their retirements related to income levels. Absurd. Although at least super has given working people the chance to have money in retirement. I don’t doubt that. Best to have government owned pension funds providing support instead of cash cows for wealthy bankers and fund managers to look after. And financial advisors to take commissions from and in many instances take peoples’ saved earnings.
So competition curbs wealth in the banking sector, are you for real? Yep look at the profits the banks are earning, and the millions their executives are walking away with each year. These rises were not needed, when the banks are walking away each year with billion dollar profits, downright stealing.
If we didn’t stop the larger banks from taking each other over their would be no competition. Competition has done little to curb wealth they are all doing very well for themselves.
And for Wayne Swan, to me deregulation should be curbed and as a government we need to go back to having a governmentally run bank- simple. Will not do it public ownership is evil. Public ownership is the only thing that curbs excessive wealth and ensures that debt spending can be done on the cheap. But of course its best to continue to have a society of have nots and haves.
My school’s election to determine our school captain’s is ran better than the Victorian elections. This year we will invite the VEC to our school to watch our children count, resditribute and confirm elected positions. They may take notes.
Armed with new ideas I certainly hope they will improve by November’s local government elections. The VEC may need a crew of UN watchdogs!
Deano. No dispute from me on that one. Hoverer I must admit the VEC summary count sheet is superior to the AEC count sheet which really sucks (Big time). If you do a computer count I hope you will publish the data files
It took 3 months and an FOI application to get teh detailed results of the Victorian Election. I wonder how long it will take to secure a copy of the detailed preference data from the AEC. I am told that Senate count falls under the provisions of the Victorian Civil Appeals Tribunal in that it is a State initiated election.
Update:
The Australian Electoral Commission has just published a revised Distribution of Preferences summary report.
http://vtr.aec.gov.au/External/SenateDopDownload-13745.zip
However the Commission has to Date failed to publish the detailed preference data files recording each Below-the-line ballot paper’s preferences.
This file should be readily available and published on line. The Victorian Electoral Commission reluctantly provided this information 3 the after the election and only after teh requirement to submit an FOI application and a request for a review of their initial failure to provide a copy of the data files.
Somehow I get the impression that the Australian Electoral Commission is deliberately seeking to avoid publication of this information. Maybe they are not acting in good faith, maybe there is a misunderstanding as to what has been requested.
Sadly Senate Watch , everyone has deserted to the politics of the USA!
Bring on the ACT elections as soon as possible!
Brenton I understand this fact.
I have received another reply form the Australian Electoral Commission who appear to be deliberately seeking to avoid publication and disclosure of the detailed electronic below-the-line preference data file.
Correspondence by Mr Tim Glanville, Deputy State Manager, Victoria
Australian Electoral Commission has indicated that the AEC wanted to send a hard copy of the information requested. LOL . The size of the data file for the State of Victoria would be approximately two Mb in size less if compressed.
To print out a hard copy is absurd and irresponsible on behalf of the Australian Electoral Commission (How many tress would that take?)
I get the impression that the AEC is deliberately seeking avoidance and disclosure and the question must be asked why?
The data file should be published on the AEC web site and available to the public as a down load.
Anyone interested on seeking a copy of the electronic data file should write to the Australian Electoral Commission Direct email: SNIP: Sorry, I don’t allow email addresses here – PB.
Brenton, I have not deserted. Certainly I am interested in PollyMerica. But what can we do?
As William suggests, vain hope of keeping it together. And I am listening to, as I write, to What the Papers say. Lots of interesting goings on.
Guess the most William and bludgers can hope for is the resumption of Parliament.
Then we can get stuck in. Should Kev disappoint.
I was obliged in the last few days to read the Latham Diaries. A friend who gave this unwanted book to me required a response. It is most interesting. Putting aside Mark’s clear bitterness, the anecdotes are telling. But what is the truth?
Senate Watch, there are usually only three possible explanations for these things. They are (a) the CIA, (b) the Jews or (c) aliens. Let us know when you figure out which one is responsible in this case.
Or maybe they are just overworked?
Adam??? Your comment does not make any sense and appears to be alienist. sorry … It has nothing to do with them being overworked. The effort they spend avoiding the publication of data is far greater then the 5 mins it would take to publish it. Try another excuse. How about they are just technocrats and do not want information released. god forbid if the public become more aware of the flies in the system They might wake up to the fact that we are wasting 100’s of millions of dollars in maintaining multiple electoral commissions who see their Mai job as avoiding disclosure and release of details of the elections results. The City of Melbourne spent over $60,000 trying to avoid publication of the Council’s detailed election results. Find another excuse to justify the indefensible.
Adam if you read my above post you would have known that the SEC proposed printing out in hard copy the information I had requested. where is the efficiency in that? Let alone the cost of in terms of paper time and ink. So much for their concern about the environment. All it takes is 5 mins attach and email… The data is sitting there. Less work then posting to your web site. Certainly much less time then printing a hard copy. LOL LOL
It has taken them ten emails and a lot of effort in doing nothing other then avoidance. We will proceed with an FOI application which is IMHO an abuse of process on behalf of the election commission. The VEC took over 3 months to provide a copy of their data files (dated December 12, 2006). The printing of a hard copy as proposed by the AEC is ridiculous to say the least, and will consume more resources and time then emailing an electronic copy. OI can not hear the Greens complaining about the loss of tress and impact on the environment. I live in the 21st century email is my preferred means of communication. I guess the federal parliamentary electoral committee is more interested in junkets travelling overseas then addressing the problems of inefficiency and the conduct of elections.
“The printing of a hard copy as proposed by the AEC is ridiculous to say the least, and will consume more resources and time then emailing an electronic copy. OI can not hear the Greens complaining about the loss of tress and impact on the environment.”, says SenateWatch
Well, I don’t see any reason for them to provide this information at all. That should solve any problems.
“We will proceed with an FOI application”
Who is “we”? Or do you refer to yourself in plural these days?
And sean why do you think that?
I can asure you they will provide it. It is a public document and the AEC is ot a private club.
A number of Senators, Candidates and other have also requested copies of the preference data file. The Greens have not yet responded. So much to their commitment to open ad transparent elections. In 2000 David Risstrom, Then Melbourne City Councillor, gave evidence in support of the publication of the BTL data files. Now there is a regime change and it Seans that the Greens are no longer advocates for honest open and transparent elections and the full disclosure of election results. Obviously the Greens want to avoid closer independet analysis of the election results and the fact that the system delivered the Greens an addition 2,700 “bonus” votes disproportionally to their support. Fact is the system can work against them as much as it can work for them. It all depends where in the count the distribution takes place.
I have calculated the difference between House and Senate votes state by state and nationally. Below is the national table:
House Senate Difference
ALP 43.4 40.3 – 3.1
Coalition 42.2 39.9 – 2.3
Greens 7.8 9 +1.2
Family First 2 1.6 – .4
Others 4.6 9.2 +4.6
The ALP loss was from .8 in WA and NT to 10 in the ACT. The Coalition loss was from .8 in Tasmania to 7.7 in SA, and it gained from l.2 in WA to 1.0 in the ACT. The Greens gained from .4 in WA to 8.3 in the ACT, and they lost .5 in SA. Family First lost from 0.1 in Queensland to 1.2 in SA. Others gained from .5 in WA to 16.2 in SA, and they lost .8 in Tasmania. The overall loss by the two major parties in each jurisdiction was: NSW 3.2, Victoria 4.6, Queensland 8.8 (Pauline Hanson), WA 0.6, SA 15.3 (Nick Xenophon), Tasmania 3.5, ACT 9, NT 1.8, giving a total for Australia of 5.4. Tasmania was the only jurisdiction in which the major party House vote was less than 84 per cent, while the NT is the only jurisdiction in which the major party Senate exceeded 84 per cent.
As a general rule, a very small percentage of people votes differently in the two Houses, but a much higher percentage will do so with a high–profile Senate candidate, and even the small percentage that does so routinely is sufficient to change the results.
I have also calculated the number of double dissolution quotas based on the 2007 Senate figures, in the order ALP/Coalition/Greens/Other. I have made no attempt to allocate surpluses or preferences and the total s are thus less than 12 for each state.
NSW 5/5/1
Victoria 5/5/1
Queensland 5/5
WA 4/6/1
SA 4/4/0/2
Tasmania 5/4/2
Australia (including ACT and NT) 30/31/5/2, with 8 unknown but calculable by someone with a properly set Senate calculator.
726 -
“The Greens have not yet responded. So much to their commitment to open ad transparent elections. In 2000 David Risstrom, Then Melbourne City Councillor, gave evidence in support of the publication of the BTL data files. Now there is a regime change and it Seans that the Greens are no longer advocates for honest open and transparent elections and the full disclosure of election results. Obviously the Greens want to avoid closer independet analysis of the election results and the fact that the system delivered the Greens an addition 2,700 “bonus” votes disproportionally to their support.”
You and David must be really good friends! Seeing you gave him your preferences in the City Council election you lost and constantly criticise the Greens for not giving him #1 on the Senate ticket (even though di Natale actually got more votes than he did in ‘04).
And what is this “2,700 ‘bonus’ votes” that you talk of? Sounds ridiculous to me!
“…the Greens are no longer advocates for honest open and transparent elections”. They are, but there’s nothing to criticise in this election (except your need for the “publication of the BTL data files”), which mean very little to the ordinary citizen or politician or even pollbludger! And you don’t see the ALP – your party – doing anything about it. Yet you would never criticise them!
I agree it is rediclus. you obviously do not know what your talking about…
Your lying when you claim I do not do anything about policies my party has not addressed. Try again.
My criticism of the Greens is the BS contradictions in their policies.. I disagree with them. My support for Risstrom was the right one. David was an a honest and worthy candidate. I also supported Lyn Alison. She got my vote after the ALP for what it was worth. Never got to her though…
You still have not provided an answer to my question.. Why should the BTL preference data not be published? You do believe i open and transparent government and elections I trust? Risstrom understands the issue you obviously do not.
Try calculating the surplus transfer from the Liberal Party number three based on the ticket votes only. Tell us what you get. Then do a hypotheitical change one nation to preference the Liberal before the ALP and tell me the result. You can assume that BLT votes form minor patriotes flow either all to the Greens or the same as theticket vote of the group they came from.
The ALP is very much aware of this issue and hopefully they will address it. After all the reform to the Upperhouse did not come about because of the Greens. That I am 100% sure of.
lets see who well informed you are as to how the system works…
Above message was aimed at Sean. Chris you might like to also do the hypothetical calculation of the transfer value..
Senate Watch,
That would be a too time-consuming and complex for me.
Its not that difficult. I am still waiting to hear Sean’s rational for not publishing the BTL preference data. What does he want hidden and why would he/the Greens not support this data being made public. perhaps he would prefer that the Electoral Commission just announce the winning list of candidates and the Commission not be held accountable.
Cris It is simple really.. look at the last two counts. When Family First is distributed add to it the ticket vote from One Nation (This is the hypothetical I am using to demonstrate the seriousness of the flaw in the system that Sean does not understand or tries to avoid people knowing.)
The Hypothetical would result i Labor falling just below quota and would require the Liberal 3rd candidate Surplus to be distributed.
Under the rules adopted by the ARC the surplus is divided equally by the number of ballot papers allocated to the Liberal no 3 candidate. This is where the distortion 2700+ “Bonus votes” come from. The system adds value to the Liberal Ticket vote which has over 1.2 billion ballot papers worth a fraction of their original value. The votes that come from Family First are full value and represent over 26% of the Liberal Surplus. Under the SEC rules they are transferred at less then 10% of the surplus disproportionally to their original value.
This “bonus” votes flows on to the Greens and elected the Green candidate not on Merrit but on the inbuilt distortion in the system.
If you apply the same results based on the value of the voet (Not the number of ballot papres) the ALP rightly is elected on Family First Preference flow.
Litte wonder why the Greens want to avoid this issue… Now you know
I agree it is rediclus. you obviously do not know what your talking about…
Your lying when you claim I do not do anything about policies my party has not addressed. Try again.
“My criticism of the Greens is the BS contradictions in their policies..”
Give me one contradiction, with appropriate evidence (i.e. another source, not your own conspiracy theaory) to back it up.
“I disagree with them (the Greens)”
Really, I never would’ve guessed. What is your real problem with them? If it’s purely contradictory policies, then what is the Labor party?
“You still have not provided an answer to my question.. Why should the BTL preference data not be published? You do believe i open and transparent government and elections I trust? Risstrom understands the issue you obviously do not.”
Why would Joe Average care the least about BTL preference data? And where, pray tell, has David Risstrom spoken out about it (give me a source, not your own ramblings)
“The ALP is very much aware of this issue and hopefully they will address it.”
In other words: their yet to address it. Or, even more clearly: Labor are doing nothing about it. But forget that; criticise the Greens!
“After all the reform to the Upperhouse did not come about because of the Greens. That I am 100% sure of.”
You’re right. The Greens never campaigned for Upper House reform… BS!
“lets see who well informed you are as to how the system works…”
Well, I have a good enough idea of how you work: harrassing the AEC, lying about the Greens, championing Labor and your friend Risstrom.
I would have to write a book. The Greens were not around when the policy of reform was in Victoria was beig debated. I recall having meetings with HOOP and other conservations organisations BUT not the Greens.
I note and laugh that you still have not answered the substantive question Why you think the Below-the-line preference data should not be published?
Avoiding the question are you?
PS David Risstrom gave evidence in the Victorian Civil Appeals Tribunal So much as for your knowledge of this issue. Try again, or try asking him first before you sell him out.
“Why you think the Below-the-line preference data should not be published?”
Said this before a million times: Why would Joe Average care the least about BTL preference data?
“you sell him (Risstrom) out.”
I did not ’sell him out’, only pointed out the fact that he got a lower vote in ‘04 than di Natale got in ‘07. So, I would suggest, di Natale was a better candidate.
Sean I diassage with your assessment and your logic you presented as to Why the BTL preference data should not be published is stupid to say the least. if you apply that argument then you would provide no information on any topic. This most ceartainly is not a valid argument to refuse to publish the detailed elections results. If you do not want them that is your decision. Others do and are interested.
re The Green vote in Victoria I suggest you do more analysis of the vote try looking at the 4PP of both elections discounting the general percentage swing away from the liberals and you will see the Greens did no better. 2004 the swing was to against the Liberals in 2007 it was and the Greens still failed, thank god, to get elected. Your will need 5% more votes if you are to to rely to the corrupt Bonus Votes and preferences. Did you d the exercise in calculating the distortion in the vote. I suggest you learn more about how the system works, the maybe you can produce a more credible argument. Perhaps you should take a look at the BTL preference data as it will help you understand how the votes are distributed. LOL
Senate Watch , who gives a toss!
“The Green vote in Victoria I suggest you do more analysis of the vote try looking at the 4PP of both elections discounting the general percentage swing away from the liberals… Did you d the exercise in calculating the distortion in the vote. I suggest you learn more about how the system works, the maybe you can produce a more credible argument. Perhaps you should take a look at the BTL preference data as it will help you understand how the votes are distributed.”
In other words: if you twist the statistics enough you can make it look like the Greens lost votes in the ‘07 election. Well, that is false. They gained votes, and improved their position from the ‘04 election (when Risstrom was running).
“if you apply that argument then you would provide no information on any topic”
If you applied my lgic you would only provide information which was to the concern of the everyday citizen, not people bent on harrassing the AEC ever since the day they lost a council election.