Best of luck to Barack Obama as well. However, the truly momentous and inspirational aspect of yesterday’s result was my almost perfect prediction of it, as published in Crikey last Friday. Obama has carried the erstwhile red states of Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, Nevada, Florida and Indiana, with two states coming down to the wire: Missouri, where McCain leads by 5868 votes (0.2 per cent), and North Carolina, where Obama leads by 14,053 (0.4 per cent). I tipped Obama to gain all of these states and no more. I gather late counting of declaration votes is unlikely to change any leads, so it appears those 0.2 per cent of voters in Missouri have stood between me and my moment of destiny. Better luck next time, I guess. To those who tipped McCain victories or record-breaking Obama blowouts and find themselves wondering what my secret is, one simple piece of advice: believe the polls (or Intrade if you prefer – it will usually tell much the same story). They may not be perfect, but they will outperform your own “informed conjecture” well over 50 per cent of the time, no matter how clever you think you are.
If the last two states play out as expected, the final result will be 364 electoral votes for Obama against 174 for McCain, pending one complication: Nebraska, which along with solidly Democratic Maine divides its college votes by congressional district. Two of the three districts have stayed Republican, but in a third Obama trails by just 569 votes, and thus stands a chance to make it 365-173. In any event, the joint winners of the informal Poll Bludger tipping contest (thanks to Juliem for conducting this) will be David Walsh and Ron, who I gather will win a tie-breaker ahead of fellow 364 Club members Grog and Peter Fuller.
Finally, our good friends at UMR Research have published qualitative polling on Australians’ attitudes to the President-elect. Those who harbour an unfashionable element of cynicism about the great man might want to keep a sick bag handy.
780 Comments
“However, the truly momentous and inspirational aspect of yesterday’s result was my almost perfect prediction of it, as published in Crikey last Friday.”
Oh the modesty Mr Bowe.
Well done William on both your prediction and your very informative coverage of the whole long saga.
Continuing a theme jsut started at the end of the previous thread, I made the comment that the republicans didn’t just need to refocus themselves, but needed to stop pandering to their middle america base. Despite its history, this base is essentially the poorest and least progressive part of the USA, and the most needing to change. The problem is moral as well as economic: denial is not a virtue. The mid-west and south are America’s weakness, not its strength.
It was therefore sobering to see the reaction at republican blogs like Red State. never mind social analysis of the causes, sure enough there was denial of the result itself. This piece was typical of the attitude:
http://www.redstate.com/diaries/redstate/2008/nov/05/obamas-2008-victory-in-perspective/
There is a need for profound change in the world if its current structures are to survive. These peopel do not seem capable of accepting that.
Can you change that to “baseless optimish” for my sake?
aargh “optimism”
William
Before you get too pleased with yourself, remember that Ron was absolutely perfect (unless juliem wins because of the last Nebraska EV). We all have to defer to Ron from now on.
Note that I said the following:
It sounds like I missed Julie tipping 365?
Dio
Nooooooooo
Damn Missouri… I, like Granpa Simpson, no longer recognise you!
Come on Nebraska!!!
Interesting to see that electoral-vote.com was absolutely right on the money as well… except for Montana, which he chose to label a tie instead of taking a stab at who would win.
This is what happens to fence-sitters kids, you lose your bragging rights. I myself lost money on this election (I remember being quite pleased with the ‘good odds’ I got on McCain much earlier in the year at $2.80. Oops.) You live you learn and, like Mr Mumble, I was a happy goose.
Election Projection has a roundup of the pundits’ accuracy here. Maybe you should make them aware of your prowess Master William?
It has been an exhausting two years since Kevin Rudd took over the labr leadership and Barack Obama declared his candidacy. Top job Poll Bludger!
Pew were pretty close to the money with their last prediction on the popular vote.
Good job William, we all know Missouri doesn’t really count
Oops. juliem chose to add 1 EV to William’s total, not Ron’s. That means that Ron looks like winning.
The living shall envy the dead.
“The horror, the horror.”
No William, I ended up saying 376, which was your and my pick originally (I picked it first several weeks ago) but at the 11th hour and 59th minute, I thought, ooopps, what about that one vote?
But even if I get that one vote, Missouri isn’t coming back
…….. so, I’m (like you, BH and Yo ho ho) over the mark ….. you said 375, BH and I 376 and Yo ho ho said 394. Did you pull those numbers, Yo ho ho, out of your backside? 
…..
Another bit of news today in the post election fallout but hardly surprising … the US Ambassador in Canberra (McCallum) is resigning. He didn’t indicate a date but said it would happen. Turns out McCallum is a political appointee and not a career foreign servant so he’s doing the “politically correct thing”.
In terms of predicative abilities, i feel it should also (as it was on the previous post) be pointed out that our colleague Kirribilli Removals prediced not only an Obama victory but also the financial collapse…
opps, #15 should read ‘376 “instead of 375, which was your and my pick originally” in the first paragraph, but I corrected it in the second
….. ….
news about McCallum is from today’s print edition of the Canberra Times … I picked up both Melbourne papers and the CT so have several to save for posterity …
Julie, it’s convention for ambassadors to resign their commission when a new administration comes in.
For the record and to clarify what I mis typed at least once above in case it isn’t clear to all this is what we had in the end ….
**Grog O 364 Y MO FL
David Walsh O 364 Y MO CA
**Peter Fuller O 364 Y MO CO
Ron O 364 Y MO CA
??William O 375 Y MO
??Julie O 376 Y MO CO
??BH O 376 Y MO FL
**Yo ho ho O 394 Y MO FL
** are definetely out. As it stands at present Ron and David are in on the “money”. William is in if Missouri turns around, Ron and David out. If Missouri AND Omaha turn, BH and I are in, others out.
Yo ho ho, you go have another glass of grog
…. (pardon the pun, Grog)
so close…
Bugger.
Yup, that’s correct, they all resign
Thanks, Max, I expected as much but wasn’t quite sure ….. Seems that this convention doesn’t extend to other countries though as Vanstone is still in Rome as I recall …..
No, it’s just a US thing I think
I think the difference is that Rome, like most democracies, uses a parliamentarian system of government. This sort of governance is considered continuous and never-ending, even when different parties take control – hence in Australia Rudd didn’t overturn all appointees. The US is pretty unique in that they have an administration, it lasts for exactly four years and then they install a new administration (even if the President is re-elected it’s still considered new.)
Interestingly, if a President wins a second term in office in the US, all members of the original Cabinet hand in letters of resignation at the conclusion of term one so that they can either be re-appointed or not. Saves everyone the political and personal embarrassment of the President firing a member of his own Cabinet if he wants fresh blood.
I suspect the philosophy is the same here, saves Mr Obama from firing an ambassadors arse if he doesn’t like them which would create all kinds of international tension.
I stand by my baseless optimism.
I was 13 when Keating lost, 17 when Gore lost and 8 the last time the Hawks had won the flag. I’ve been used to losing.
November 24 and a certain AFL game this year have sent me over the top with optimism. I’m very much of the belief that anything is possible now.
I take it all four members of Club 364 got Missouri wrong, and thus arrived at 364 by tipping Indiana wrong as well? Can’t I (or Julie and BH depending on Nebraska) argue that I made one mistake rather than two, so I’m the king of the castle?
I have heaps of enthusiasm now
….. I was so down and out between 2000 and 2007/08 as having my feet legally in both countries; I had to endure one setback after another between both countries …..
K07 almost made up for Howard’s misadventures and Howard losing his seat was the icing on the cake. Australian half of my equation fixed up quick smart. Now, not only do we have Dems in Washington BUT they’ve broken down so many barriers by choosing this particular one. Now the US side of the equation is fixed up too
.
Btw, my AFL affliliation is blue and white; we had our last dip in 1999, I could use another one, but it isn’t going to happen anytime soon I don’t think
All 4 got Missouri wrong, correct. However, Ron and Dave said California or some variation thereof (the West Coast swing) which is what put Obama over the top.
Don’t know about the rest of you but my guess of 376 came about this way – the RCP notossupstates map + Missouri + Indiana + North Carolina + (at the very last minute, Omaha). I bloody forgot about Omaha until it was almost too late to change it.
26 correct with me William. My methodology was the intrade figure at the time plus either MO or IN… juliem asked me about MO, and, like a fool, I thought, yeah why not.
William,
If I recall, you were also pretty accurate at tipping the Oz election last year.
So my rule for tipping the next election is: follow WB – he seems to get a lot closer than all of the other mugs (Mumble included!!!)
P.S. If my previous post doesn’t make sense, I apologise – I am slightly drunk atm (carry over from last night in Chicago…)
Pretty much the entire upper ranks of the US public service resign with the change of a President. Ambassadors, along with secretaries, undersecretaries, etc, are almost entirely partisan appointments. Some from the opposing party get through, but they tend to achieve that in spite of their party due to a particular talent.
Coleman has declared victory in MN with a lead of 460 votes out of 2.5 million. He’s trying to bluff Franken out of demanding a recount.
There must have been something seriously wrong with Franken’s campaign not to win in a liberal state like MN, which Obama carried in a stroll.
SL, Mumble tipped the last two federal elections nine months out, which is a higher order of achievement.
You wouldn’t say there was something wrong with Franken?
31 SL, what did you end up going with? As my warnings about cold weather didn’t materialize?
WB,
That’s true. However, his confidence in Obama losing from several months out must count against him. You picked the Oz election to within 1 seat (84 as opposed to 83 in reality) and the US election to within 1 state.
As for Franken, it’s Minnesota. If they can elect a former pro-wrestler as Governor, they can easily elect a comedian. Also, Coleman managed to beat a former vice-president in 2002 (Mondale) to win a seat from the Democrats in his first election.
Mumble was dismal in his prognostications.
William
You could certainly make that argument, just as Sarah Palin can make the argument that Africa is a country rather than a continent. We make our own reality.
Possibly running a comedian wasn’t a good idea.
Rumor mill of who is or is not being considered for various posts. Two names jumped straight out at me as IF those guesses come off, there will be 2 Kennedy connected folks in an Obama cabinet …..
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/03/rumor-mill-what-could-an_n_140777.html
“They laughed when I said I was going to be a comedian. Well, they’re not laughing now!” – Bob Monkhouse
juliem,
It’s 74 F (or about 22 C) here in Chicago – so it’s not cold at all. Add to that the sheer number of people around Grant Park last night and it was actually quite warm. I ended up walking around in a light jacket and had a couple of vodkas as a night cap last night.
I have to admit, though – it’s been a once-in-a-lifetime experience to be here. I didn’t realise the importance of this election to the American psyche. All of the analysis here in the US has been about how this is a page turned in American history and how African-Americans can now tell their children that they too can become President one day. There was a queue here earlier today for the Chicago Tribune – just to get the front page saying Obama is present. It’s nothing like Australia last year – think about Labor’s jubilation last year and multiply it by 10 to get some idea of the joy amongst Chicagoans today…
*”just to get the front page saying Obama is president”
I bet Jesse Jackson is regretting dissing Obama during the campaign now. No nice embassy for him!
Franken perhaps wasn’t the ideal candidate, but Coleman (former Mayor of St Paul) is quite popular in Minnesota. He used to be a Democrat.
Even liberal states can elect Republican senators. Susan Collins was easily re-elected in Maine, which Obama also carried in a stroll. Her GOP stablemate Olympia Snowe, also from Maine, was re-elected 2 years ago in a landslide, despite the Republicans being seriously on the nose back then too. Both Maine senators are “moderates” (by Republican standards). Gordon Smith (GOP) looks like he might hang on in Oregon, which also went over to Obama in a big way. On the other side, some rusted-on Republican states that McCain won easily continue to re-elect Democratic senators, eg. Rockefeller (W.Virginia), Baucus (Montana), Johnson (S.Dakota). A lot of ticket-splitting goes on in US elections.
Don’t think so, he is down by 4,000 votes now
43, no worries, I knew exactly what you meant
…. My brother in Michigan sent me an article with heaps of pictures in it of various newspapers front pages from both around the country and around the world. It was good to see. I can well imagine, having lived there in Michigan for 43 years.
There was a map posted from a link on the thread just prior to this one that had the county by county breakdown of Rep. and Dem. votes. I loaded that and spent some time looking at it earlier. You want to talk about this being necessary to the psyche of the country? It was also necessary to the psyche of Ohio. That map shows Obama won only the various metro areas (Toledo, Columbus, etc.) around the state and the border counties with PA excepting the lower 2 or 3 where they border with WV. I’ve been in Ohio hundreds of times over the years. The black population in Ohio doesn’t live in the farms in the countryside. They live in the cities. It was the black population rising up and THEY delivered Ohio to Obama. No ifs ands or buts about it.
And in another postscript to that county map nationwide for the results? Guess which county had the biggest winning margin in the country [not percentage, but raw numbers winning margin]? Cook county
…..
Wish I had half your luck mate
{but I saw Clinton in 1992 so that isn’t a bad consolation prize}
Dario, on that one I’m glad to be wrong.
Another Dem pick-up. How’s Alaska looking?
kakuru @ 45, I saw on HP about 30 minutes ago (don’t know when it was first posted so don’t know if its new news or old news) that Oregon has been declared for the Democrat. They aren’t done counting YET but the counties where there are still outstanding votes are heavily Democratic counties.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/05/jeff-merkley-declared-win_n_141667.html
Stevens in front by 4,000 but there are still quite a few votes to count supposedly, and the Dem was even saying that his own vote hadn’t been counted yet so only time will tell.
“Possibly running a comedian wasn’t a good idea.”
Neither was running a black guy for President. But if you always ran the least risky candidate, where would you be? The ALP.
“I bet Jesse Jackson is regretting dissing Obama during the campaign now. No nice embassy for him!”
Yeah, but there’s a cozy Senate seat for his son.
It doesn’t look like Stevens can lose on the current figures. So if his conviction is upheld the Dems will have to expel him from the Senate and then there will be a special election which Palin can contest and probably win. It’ll be a cross between Mr Smith Goes to Washington and The Beverly Hillbillies.
#53
I thought if Stevens is expelled the governor appoints a replacement until a special election in 2010. Let me check who the governor of Alaska is…. Oh.
Well, of course in US elections the party doesn’t actually “decide” to run anyone. Anyone can run in the primary and if they win they’re the candidate. All very democratic, but the problem with letting your activist base choose your candidate is that they may well choose candidates that the swinging voters won’t vote for.
Yes the governor appoints a replacement, but apparently under AK law the special election is straight away, not in 2010 as I previously thought.
There are 40,000 absentee ballots to be counted and his lead is 4,000. I’m not sure which way absentee trends normally go in the US, but yes it would take a big swing to unseat him from here.
“but the problem with letting your activist base choose your candidate is that they may well choose candidates that the swinging voters won’t vote for.”
I still think a drovers dog could have won in 2007.
#56
Yes, it’s news to me too Adam. The 17th Amendment of the US constitution doesn’t specify *when* the special election has to be held in the event of the resignation (or expulsion) of a sitting senator. In most states the governor appoints a temporary senator, and the special election is held at the time of the next election – as in the Mississippi senate seat this year which Wicker won. But I gather Alaska does things differently. Might be a sticky legal issue…
It used to be the procedure in Alaska that the Governor appointed a new Senator when a vacancy takes place. However, when Senator Frank Murkowski was elected Governor in 2002, he appointed his daughter Lisa to the vacancy, and triggered a referendum in 2004 which changed the law. The Senate seat would now remain vacant until a special election could be held (like an Australian by-election).
Juliem
Here is that 3D map reference again:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/interactives/campaign08/election/uscounties.html
I made the comment after seing this one that the republicans really have become a rural party and the dems an urban one. Its quite stark when you look at this map. But I later added that many of these rural areas are the ones that most need to change in terms of socail and economic structure to survive. For the republicans to “reinvent themselves” as credible to urban voters, they have to be willing to show ledership and challenge thsi group, not just pander to its prejudices. The days when the USA gained its strength from its rural economy are even longer gone than Australia’s nostalgic harking back to “riding on the sheeps back”. Both myths are false.
It’s a great map Socrates. Thanks for the link (spent a bit of time at work looking at it today!)
Regarding Stevens relection in Alaska – they’re clearly not too worried about that code of ethics nonsense up there. The other republican senator Frank Murkowski nominated his daughter to replace him in the senate when he became governor (before Palin). The law was subsequently changed to require special elections.
Sorry Ben I just saw your post. Doh! The amazing bit (to me) is that Murkowski was still elected! Alaska is sounding like a very safe cosy seat for a republican.
Socrates
Alaskan politics looks like a cesspit of slime and corruption. Palin, Stevens, Murkowsi and Young. Something is rotten in the state of Alaska.
Funnily enough, lots of neocons are advising Palin to stay in Alaska rather than go to the Senate so she can remain a “Washington outsider”. Sounds like BS to me.
“Alaska is sounding like a very safe cosy seat for a republican.”
Well they *did* elect Sarah Palin as their governor after all. I suspect a reasonable number of them also enjoy slamming their fingers in car doors.
Expelling a member of Congress requires a 2/3 majority in their house
.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Constitution_of_the_United_States_of_America#Article_I_Section_5
On Planet Janet, the election win by Obama was not due to record low approval ratings for her friend George, widespread disgust at the direction the US was headed, a cynical VP airhead choice or a repudiation of her neocon ideals. It was because racist America voted FOR a black guy. Evidently, she met a white US taxidriver who wanted Obama to win, saying it would be a good thing if they had a black President. QED
Is America a racist nation after all?
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/is_america_a_racist_nation_after_all/
Quote, William:
I take it all four members of Club 364 got Missouri wrong, and thus arrived at 364 by tipping Indiana wrong as well?
I’ll out myself, as that was precisely my mistake. However, I must also confess to a mathematical error, as I predicted the extra vote from Nebraska, and somehow tallied that to 364 not 365 as it should have been. So I’m not merely a loser, but a dunce as well. Oops!
Reply to:
On Planet Janet, the election win by Obama was not due to record low approval ratings for her friend George, widespread disgust at the direction the US was headed, a cynical VP airhead choice or a repudiation of her neocon ideals. It was because racist America voted FOR a black guy. Evidently, she met a white US taxidriver who wanted Obama to win, saying it would be a good thing if they had a black President. QED
Is America a racist nation after all?
http://blogs.theaustralian.news.com.au/janetalbrechtsen/index.php/theaustralian/comments/is_america_a_racist_nation_after_all/
–
And then you get other crap from her like
Obama will Democratise the judiciary – http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24603244-7583,00.html
She’s a one-eyed right-wing female (I can’t bring myself to call her a woman) who has no credibility. She makes Palin look like the next Obama.
The 17th Amendment says that the state executive may appoint a temporary replacement Senator only with the authority of the Legislature so if the legislature of Alaska took no separate action to disauthorise the executive then Palin/Deputy Palin could theoretically still appoint a temporary replacement (I read something somewhere saying a proposal to attempt to get the Maine-Nebraska method adopted in California by initiative plebiscite by the Republicans would fail for the same reason).
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Additional_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution#Amendment_XVII
68 that was the most pathetic article I think I’ve ever read. Amazingly bitter. You’d think for one day you could acknowledge how big a thing BO’s win is. But no. She’s truly entered the Ann Coulter sphere.
I was quite surprised to read that Obama is pro choice on abortion
also supports funding for alternative energy sources
supports 80% reduction on emissions
will relax restrictions on stem cell research and
is for civil unions for gays and will let states decide re marriage.
Upfront on his views and secured a a sweeping victory.
The abortion, stem cell and gay stand would not go down well with the religous right, maybe their influence is overestimated, the noisy minority?
Democrat registered voters now outnumber Republicans by nearly 10%, so yes
Dio @ 68,
BOY oh boy, I’m glad I didn’t waste my change on the Australian today …. I was in the newsagents to buy a couple of news issues for keepings sake. I ended up with both Melbourne papers and the Canberra Times but I considered The Australian at one point ….
Has Janet always been thus? (a few kangaroos short) I checked in on some of her stuff last year during the federal election but thought maybe her attitude would die off afterwards. I guess not
Depends how you look at it castle. “Letting states decide” could be seen as a cop-out as he hasn’t said he’s actually for/against them, and whilst previously for gun-control he now supports a decision in the opposite direction.
Depending on where you sit he’s either a constitutionalist or a conformist.
“Democrat” and “religious right” are not necessarily mutually exclusive.
http://democratsforlife.org/ Sort of like the opposite of Emily’s List.
And for gay marriage, look at California. Overwhelmingly Democratic but passed a proposition banning gay marriage.
Indeed, Arizona rejected a similar amendment.
The Republicans are not some ghetto for religious extremists and the Democrats are definitely no left-wing progressive haven.
WILLIAM & JULIEM
Thank you Juliem for conducting th competition and for enormous work you put in
William said “long live th King …. was my almost perfect prediction of it, as published in Crikey last Friday.. “
With respect your honour th King who still sits in th throne , th race was clearly how many e/v’s won and th State that tipped Obama over 270
Now th skill of th 364 Club , th gang of 4 , after years analysis did assess that 364 e/v’s correctly in th race handicap …and only David & th O’Ronly Factor then selected th tipping point State (CA) in th weight for age event AS former King your throne remains using despotic power of being “almost perfect” right
It should be said for us final Gang of 2 also , that I’m sure David privateley went through a specific list doing asessment However I lead with my chin abit as usual and publicly specificaly listed individual States “in play” , and then specifically listed those “in play” that thought were reely absolutely unwinnable (MT , AR , GA , WV ND ) and furthermore then slecificaly listed th 4 close ones (FL , NC, IN and MO) with odds ,listed NC at 54% and then listed IN as a clifhanger at 52/48% chanse & MO reeely a tie at 50.5%/49.5% chanse Given th ultimate closeness of both final votes , th fact they flipped in reverse actually justifies th gang of 4 ‘s final 364 e/v predictions (as more likely 2 cliffhangers will be split than go both one way)
Again Juliem , well done If its any consolation , to show how easy it is to be wrong predicting close contests fact that IN had been “red” since before 1948 years (except LBJ) always pushed me towards MO rather than IN in rating these 2 close cliffhangers (and now Obama joins LBJ in winning it) Suppose Juliem I get th Crown of Thorns , and David gets th covated Crown of Roses
I think that there are more people who fear gays and lesbians and are afraid to admit it than there are people who are racists on skin colour and afraid to admit it {to interviewer – “Oh, that Obama, he’s got a funny sounding name, isn’t he muslim? etc. etc.}
…..
Yes, Oz, you’re right.
Has anyone done a study of the percentage Obama got of the vote in CA and the percentage that voted No, do NOT adopt Proposition 8?
While you must assume logically that there were some Republicans that voted in the negative on Prop 8, I think it is safe to assume that the overwhelming numbers in the difference between those two figures I’m wondering about were Democratic voters. I know gays and lesbians who live in CA, FL and MI and if I were in their shoes, it would really give me the creeps to wonder if my Democratic friends were secretly phobic about sexuality like that.
OZ
I saw that California bit, but I wouldn’t see it as a cop out, wise in letting the states decide, ie baby steps, and it is a big step to take in declaring support for gays. He would have lost votes in seeking to override states.
Is it Cheneys daughter whose gay? and yet he opposes civil unions for gays?
The stem cell is a big step forward as is commitment to emission reduction.
Ron, I don’t know that I expected to get all 3 of them right. I hoped so, but wasn’t sure to be honest (MO, IN, NC). As I was taking a leap of faith on them vs the RCP notossup states map.
Honestly, though, I thought that IF I was going to miss one of those, that it would be guessing wrong on Indiana. My confidence in them was in this order – most on NC, middle on MO and least on IN. Got the middle one wrong …..
castle, yes and yes …….
Palin didn’t know Africa is a continent!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/05/palin-didnt-know-africa-i_n_141653.html
Read this in a digest of stats on the election …
Huh? Who wants to take a stab at explaining that one? I would have thought, intuitively, that an African-American would not increase votes upon those from the previous nominee ….. guess you have to counter-intuitive on that one, but even thinking that way, I still can’t sort it out.
Yes.
Other Republicans are able to show more compassion than that:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PrGNhczw9U
Well the reason Obama won is because he got more whites and hispanics to vote for him than Kerry or Gore.
Juliem there are some exit polls here of a vague nature.
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/results/individual/#CAI01
yes, ShowsOn, I know that much
…. what I am pondering is why Catholics in particular, voted in higher numbers for Obama than Kerry …….
With the Proposition 8 vote in California, I heard that the white vote actually supported gay marriage, and the difference was made up for by a significant anti-gay-marriage vote amongst the black and hispanic community, whose turnout was boosted by Obama. So ironically a much less inspiring Democrat running for President would have saved gay marriage. But it’s only a matter of time. In 2010 the left will fight back and will be much more focused on the goal. Many lefties in California went and campaigned in Nevada, New Mexico and Colorado.
78 My thanks as well to you juliem – excellent contest.
If the overall Democratic vote went from 48.3 per cent to 52.4 per cent, I don’t think we should be that surprised that the Catholic vote went from 47 to 53 (subject to margin of error). We know he did well among Hispanics, and presumably they’re a big share of the RC vote.
The majority of American Catholics are either Hispanic (increasingly heavily Democrat, except the Cubans), or working class Irish-American or Italian-American (swung heavilt Democrat this time – they were the US equivalent of the Howard battlers).
Agreed William – I don’t think the RC votes as much of a block anymore.
Those CNN exit poll figures on proposition 8 show 61-39 opposition among the 18-29s, which is reversed for 65+. Combine that with likely lower turnout among blacks and Hispanics in 2010, and I can easily see it being overturned.
Even in CA, Anglo liberals are not 50% of the population. In fact Anglo liberals are probably a declining minority, as the state fills up with Hispanics and Asians. The Democrat coalition doesn’t hold up on this issue, because the Black evangelical churches as well as the Catholics oppose it (also the Orthodox Jews).
It’s also worth remembering that it isn’t as simple in comparing Kerry and Obama. Their race wasn’t their only differences. Obama was much more charismatic, Kerry was much more the stereotypical Liberal, and most importantly, Bush was much less popular in 2008 and the Democrats had built up their party structure and had successes at the 2006 mid-term elections. You could argue, as some people did when Obama was pulling ahead towards the end, that a “vanilla” (ie. straight white guy) Democrat would’ve been 20 points ahead of McCain. Maybe, but who would that have been? Behind Obama you had a woman, who would have had many problems too, then Edwards, who has since been thrown into scandal, then a hispanic politician. So where was the white guy? Truth be told Obama, for most of the campaign, demonstrated that his political skills more than compensated for any negative consequences of his race, and if anything the race of the candidate made Democrats more enthusiastic to succeed.
Yes, it’s only a matter of time before gay marriage is accepted. Until then the religious nutters will try their hardest to block it, only to eventually be disappointed as they are each time abortion is legalised. I was pleased to see a few loony abortion propositions be defeated.
I said this last night, didn’t know when it would happen or what the ultimate disposition of the case might be. But even I didn’t expect it to happen so damm fast
….
thanks, William (91) … that was the piece of the puzzle I was missing; the ethnic makeup of the Roman Catholic voters these days …..
I’d like to throw in a’left’ field thought on th increased RC vote for Obama over Kerry …Sarah Palin
Whilst th natural answer is proportionaly Romon Catholics increased there support for Obama similar to overal Democrat vote increase vs 2004 , its also so that Romon Catholics ( not just RC hispanics) overwhelmingly supported Hillary over Obama so th vote “thought” to chose within a politcal brand , and suggest many Romon Catholics having ‘decided’ they wished to suport Obama may hav seen Sarah Palin’s religion as an additional reason
Ron, her right to life sentiments bordered on the extreme and were in the same ballpark as Catholic dogma if not practice …..
100 agreed – many RC and other “traditonal” churchgoers – Anglican etc are not exactly all that favourable to the fundo side of the religion. However of course the bible belt is a pretty broad church (so to speak)…
juliem,
I know it is popular in some circles to advocate the killing of unborn children. However, there are a large number of humans who believe this practice is barbaric.
You may choose to have a different opinion.
if we’re going to have a pro-choice /pro-life debate, I think I’m going to have to bring up taxation so as to get GP to come in and create a diversion!
The great majority of Catholics don’t vote on the basis of candidate views on abortion. It’s evangelical Protestants who see abortion as a dominant issue.
Is this a core or non-core left field thought?
Most Catholics are creationists, but at least they accept the Earth is billions of years old.
You’re assuming that all people consider a blastocyst ior a zygote morally akin to a born person. There will never be a consensus view on that question, so the best we can do is provide sex education, contraception, and government financial support to reduce the number of women who have to contemplate having an abortion.
This is a moral issue that has been partly resolved by a curious moral compromise, because there will never be universal agreement on the principle that a clump of cells has the same moral worth as a person.
The Money donated by Mormons to back ads for the Prop 8 ban was significant.
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=pe2023SzWXxE8wYX5qWeoIw
He’s assuming “a large number of humans” consider that, which is certainly true. But most of them don’t base their votes on that belief.
The view is particularly stupid because it pretends that making it “illegal” somehow makes it disappear.
My point was simply believing it doesn’t make it true. So it is a silly rationale for opposing abortion.
There was a nice old McCain/Palin split on what were nation issues and state issues too.
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/10/21/america/Palin-Gay-Marriage.php
It’s the principal rationale for opposing abortion. Whether it’s “true” or not is a matter of opinion. It’s not a view I share, but it’s certainly a defensible view, and one held by many highly intelligent people.
That splits been going on both in America and internally in both parties since the formation of the union.
But the political test is not showing how obvious your differences are, so McCain/Palin failed. Well we knew that anyway.
Well it certainly isn’t a view followed through logically. Since stress can induce a ‘natural’ abortion, should we then ban sexually active women from working stressful jobs?
Believing that a few cells are morally akin to a person is absurd on a biological level, and flat out dangerous on a moral level.
Your first paragraph is too stupid to comment on.
Christians don’t believe that “a few cells are morally akin to a person”. They believe that a fertilised cell IS a person, since it has a soul. Since that’s a theological belief, it’s not susceptible to your kind of scientistic dismissal.
It’s a matter of opinion that some people feel strongly about. No amount of arguing convinces people on matters like that.
Oz, I think the war might be carried on in the media for a while just to keep Palin’s profile high.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/us/politics/06mccain.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1&hp
By the way European sharemarkets are down about 4.5% tonight.
amigo ronnie, congrat 4 slayin those obama suppts who hv swellin head at the moment. Meanwhile back in the ranch the russian bear is growling like gg. Salute frm santiago… Will perf 4 pb in machu piccu
LOL!
If it is stupid, surely you will be able to demonstrate that, rather than just being so dismissive!
Well this is really stupid! Why do we call them different things if they are exactly the same? Why do a few cells look so different from a fully formed human? Why do fully formed humans have capabilities that a blastocyst and zygotes don’t have if they are identical? Why do zygotes have features blastocyst don’t have if they are all the same? This just raises more questions than it answers.
This is a scientific hypothesis commonly called “the ghost in the machine”. Cognitive science and evolutionary biology provide a great deal of evidence that it is a completely flawed theory of the mind.
You are just dismissing this as a theological question by fiat, instead of actually engaging with mountains of scientific literature that says the truth is something else.
But I am not surprised, the ghost in the machine, the blank slate, and the noble savage are the three most common explanations used to define what it means to be human. They all happen to be wrong.
GG @ 103,
Actually, I was just commenting upon her values as the campaign over the last few months presented them. I didn’t specifiy my own. But since you have confused them, I will add my own just to clear the picture.
I happen to believe that life starts at conception BUT I am extremely strongly Pro – Choice. So while I might cringe and cry internally if my 19yo daughter or my 22yo’s GF came upon a situation where she felt an abortion was her only option, I would support her with all of my love. My own internal views are mine and mine alone. I wouldn’t force them upon someone else.
Palin’s positions on abortion have been widely reported in the media. That makes them fair game for public comment and discourse.
ShowsOn, you’re arguing with people who jailed people for saying the Earth was round and revolved around the sun and killed women for having red hair.
Enough said.
ShowsOn you’re being terribly intolerant of other peoples’ legitimate opinions.
No amount of “scientific literature” can prove or disprove religious belief. The soul is not a “scientific hypothesis”, it’s a religious belief. You don’t believe in the soul, and nor do I, but it’s both arrogant and stupid to assert that it is something that can be scientifically refuted.
ShowsOn is typical of half-educated fools who think that “science” can be deployed to answer all questions and refute all beliefs. No real scientist believes that.
Play nice, Adam.
Oh of course.
But the real problem now is people asserting with no evidence whatsoever that some questions are purely theological, or based around faith, when they are actually scientific hypotheses.
The belief that humans have souls is perhaps the most common example of a scientific hypothesis that is claimed to be either a self evident fact, or even worse, an article of faith.
What is a soul ShowsOn?
This is all terribly off topic…
OK, ShowsOn, let’s hear your scientific refutation of the existence of the human soul. I’m all ears.
shows
i have a soul,but then counting my feet it comes to 3 or is it four in total.
btw
“But I am not surprised, the ghost in the machine, the blank slate, and the noble savage are the three most common explanations used to define what it means to be human. They all happen to be wrong.”
what then is the truth?
Check out the Democrat from Idaho, Walt Minnick, who won a house seat.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/06/us/politics/06cong.html
Who knows, but it’s out there…
Yes, I am watching The X-Files.
You’re being intolerant of facts.
Asserting that people have souls that magically appear around the point of conception is a scientific hypothesis that has been disproved. Sorry, but things are more complicated than that.
Incorrect, this just demonstrates your ignorance of science. Again, you are just trying to quarantine this question as if it can’t be investigated scientifically. It has been, and the results show that humans are biological organisms similar to others, but with important differences that give us unique characteristics. There is no evidence that we have souls.
It can be. You are just ignoring several fields of science that try to answer this precise question. You are ignoring a mixture of genetics and cognitive and evolutionary psychology. Again, I simply suggest that you inform yourself more before making such outlandish statements that some questions about HUMAN NATURE are not the domain of science. The whole concept of human nature is a scientific one in the first place!
LOL!
I love the scare quotes around science!
This is absolute rubbish, I never wrote anything remotely proposing this. I simply pointed out that what you think is a question of faith – the proposition that people have souls – is in fact a scientific hypothesis that is unsupported by evidence.
Of course people can believe if they want to! But there is no ghost in the machine, human nature is a lot more complicated than that.
If you cared to read a book on human nature, you’d find that the actual explanation for what makes us human is both more fascinating, and a lot more complicated than that.
Anyone else sick of Thomas Friedman.
He’s a journalist who pretends to be an expert on economics, sociology, history, theology, neuroscience…
And he jumps on whatever bandwagon happens to be popular at the time. You can see that with his views on terrorism, Iraq and the environment.
Rant over.
I’m waiting for your scientific evidence for the non-existence of the soul, as postulated by Christian belief.
Democrats win in Oregon.
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/06/2412685.htm?section=justin
I was always under the impression that something had to be proved before it was taken as existing.
I postulate that there’s 14 invisible monkeys doing a conga line on the desk of the Oval Office.
Find me scientific evidence to disprove that!
I am not being ‘intolerant of facts’. What an utterly ridiculous assertion.
Oz
It has been proven that when the soul is fozen you get an ice soul!
think about it
Oz, exactly. ShowsOn maintains he can prove a negative proposition, and I’m waiting to see him do it. Christians don’t regard themselves as obligated to “prove” the existence of the soul, they take it as a matter of faith. That’s the difference between a religious belief and a scientific belief, which ShowsOn refuses to acknowledge.
Oz, nothing can be ‘proved’; just supported by differing degrees of scientific material. That’s neither here nor there. Religious loons believe God trumps science so basing an argument against their beliefs in science is silly. The best you can do is agree to disagree.
I speak on behalf of the entire global population when I say that that is the worst “joke” I’ve ever heard.
Of course religion is based on “faith”, that’s the whole idea of God and religion. But surely some things that were considered a point of “faith” like the sun revolving around the earth have been scientifically shown to be incorrect?
Are you sure?
That the Earth is round cannot be proved? Even though it’s sphere-like shape can be clearly observed as well as tested mathematically?
Nope. Science never proves anything, it can only refute or verify. Relativity was taken as existing on a theoretical basis but took years before it was “proven”.
ShowsOn
There is no scientific evidence for the non-existence of the soul. There is also no evidence for the existence of the soul. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.
*takes bow*
Oz
no-one got the humphrey b bear- funny othello “joke” last night btw
ShowsOn,
Your blogs by in large are good so please stick to the politics & leave the science & “God complex” alone.
Thanks.
I don’t think relativity has been proven, it remains a scientific “theory”.
Pretty sure I can “prove” I’m sitting on a couch. Unless you want to get into some really absurd areas of “what is couch?” “what is sitting?” “what is real?”.
Of course geocentric cosmology could be disproved, and was, as soon as scientific instruments existed to do it with. But since Christians don’t claim that the soul is a material object which can be seen or measured, how exactly does ShowsOn intend to prove its non-existence? I’m agog with anticipation…
I hear Obama has bought a pitbull puppy for the kids…….called it “Revlon”
Gusface, “what is truth”?
Two possible answers:
- a set of facts consistent with a sound and complete set of truth conditions. Now what about those truth conditions?
- the opposite of whatever John Howard said
I prefer the second definition.
I won’t even try to get into arguments about souls, but I will make one observation. I think one of the next big collisions between religeon and science (after Darwin versus creation is eventually conceded like the earth orbitting the sun) will be over cognitive science, and the possibility for consciousness to survive outside the body. The more we learn about physicalist theories of mind and the relationship between parts of the brain and the mind, the less room there seems to be for immortal souls to be possible. Just my opinion.
I must have missed it, but what does the “B” stand for?
Wikipedia has this gem on Humphrey:
“Typical complaints about the Humphrey character include the character failing to wear pants”.
I hope you’re taking notes, Gusface.
I think I speak for all here when I say please God may we never have another religious debate on this blog that is meant to be about pseph stuff…
I’m sure there’s lots of blogs out in the www to debate over souls.
I pray this doesn’t become one of them.
Oz
Relativity has been proven, in that there is abundant evidence for it, but it took ages to find it (it was light bending during an eclipse if you must know).
And you can provide compelling evidence that you are sitting on a couch but you cannot prove it. How do you know you aren’t dreaming all of this?
oz
The context was regarding sarah palins “communication skills”- which i compared to humphrey b bear
the tag line for humphrey b bear ( a kids show with a mute bear) was – a funny old fellow
(you had to grow up watching the show to get it.sigh)
whats with the pants thing-its not like he was fraser in memphis
According to his website, the “B” stands for Bear
And I have posted this pic before, but to make it on topic for Pollbludger, though not this friend, but one of those pictured was GWB’s Bestest Buddy
http://www.humphreybear.com/images/hbb_gall12.gif
ShowsOn, I’m not sitting up all night waiting for you to demonstrate scientifically the non-existence of the soul. Either defaecate or get off the pot.
#155
Poor old Humph never spoke again from that day on
The latest on the economy of Iceland does not look encouraging.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/11/06/2079779-iceland-keeps-interest-steady-at-18-pct
Douglas Adams worked this stuff out ages ago.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcncPpQ8loA
SNIP: Overheated comment deleted – The Management.
There is no evidence for it. How humans behave is a complex interaction between our environment (including culture), our senses, and our brains. Our brains evolved to make sense of the world, and our senses evolved to feed accurate information about the world to our brains. There is no magical agent that controls our entire bodies, rather our perception and sense of consciousness is an extraordinarily complicated interplay of these functions that run across 100 billion or so neurons (the possible permutations of brain connections is more than all the atoms in the universe).
If there was a soul driving these processes there would be evidence of it in the brains of living people that isn’t in dead people. But again, there is no evidence of a SINGLE thing in there controlling the ENTIRE body. I understand that intuitively the idea that there is a central agent seems to make sense, but there is just no evidence for it. Some people suffer strokes in some parts of the brain and only have slightly impaired brain function, whereas others have strokes in other parts that leave them completely paralysed. If there is central agent, why would there be these varied outcomes from incapacitation? Or if the soul is driving things – and not our brains – why do we need a brain at all?
People cling to the idea that we have souls because they want to believe there is an agent in us that makes us behave in a positive moral way. They seem to feel that without a soul or spirit there can’t be a positive moral force driving us to do good. But I think this ignores the fact there are also evolutionary reasons for why we are generally kind to others (so they don’t threaten to kill us), and that we have devised cultural processes to encourage good behavior, and discourage bad behavior (nation states, politics, laws).
We could remain blissfully ignorant of these facts, but doing so implies an ignorance of our biological foundations, and the fact humans are the products of millions of years of evolution. I accept this doesn’t count as a complete proof, but I simply propose there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary. We should believe the explanation of human nature supported by evidence, rather than one based purely on speculation.
Abortion was a sleeper in th election given Obama’s overpowerful views on it , tougher even than th NRAL , perhaps I’ll post his views one day Of course neither Party politcaly wanted to make it too big an issue
Be that as may , Obama does needs to be careful his minority Abortion views that he’s been prepared to vote publicly for issue in past , don’t flare th whole Aborton debatee in US as there’s big chunks of Democrat demographics who do not support especialy within blackk church community base , th hispanics , jews and suspect strong increasing Asian groups
Th passion against abortion is driven mainly by passion in beliefs in religion and that may weaken politcal party affiliation suport for some if it blew right up
For mine left fields I hav no problem therefore at all in people opposing abortion believing a human is already created & tink its intollerant to dismiss such views I also undrerstand those who suport abortion for a woamns health , mentel situations and children especialy rape etc However what seems to occur is like politcal sprectrum diferense its so polorised one vs other , one 100% right and th other 100% wrong , and sometimes a Government reacts to politcal pressure groups wih a decision on this moral value jugement issue withot balance I tink
Here’s ShowsOn pretending he doesn’t understand the argument.
I believe all that but still allow other people to have their own beliefs.
Firstly, that is just a set of assertions, not a presentation of evidence. Do I need to give you a lecture on the scientific method?
Secondly, you obviously have no idea what Christians actually say about the soul. They don’t say it’s a “controlling agent” or something that can be materially measured. This shows a level of ignorance of Christian doctrine which is just laughable.
I said earlier you were a half-educated fool, and you have just proved it, as I fully expected you would. Now I can go to bed.
SNIP: Unconstructive comment deleted – The Management.
I’m waiting for their evidence their is one, when there is so much evidence to the contrary!
Oh dear! How is saying a soul EXISTS a negative proposition!? You are saying “prove that something that can’t be proven exists exists”! That is just plain stupid.
There is a very good alternative explanation for human behavior which is just a lot more likely.
What you have written is effectively the same as “because no one has ever been able to observe evolution in action, that means creationism must be equally likely”.
We see the EFFECTS of evolution, but not the processes itself actually occurring.
Why thank you for your kind words.
Science only produces theories! Relatively has been supported over numerous experiments, most recently by sending radio signals back and forth between Mars.
This is just idiocy that completely demonstrates your ignorance of science. Just because some dogmatic believers SAY something as certain properties doesn’t make that true. If something exists there should be evidence of it in some sort. If an alternate explanation is supported by more evidence, that is more likely to be true.
Classy stuff. Well done.
I believe other people can have their own beliefs too. It just doesn’t make them true, or even remotely likely to be true.
No thank you, you’ve demonstrated you have no idea what the scientific method is.
They suggest it is a ghost in the machine. The fact you don’t realise that demonstrates you don’t actually know the ramifications of what they are proposing.
The fact you simply reverted to this attack demonstrates you have absolutely no idea of the significance of what I wrote.
There’s no such thing as souls. There’s no evidence to support that they exist.
Meanwhile it looks like the currency markets have taken a turn for the worse again and the next move is a large cut in rates by the Bank of England. I thought all the central banks were going to take combined action against the strength of the Yen a couple of weeks ago, what are they waiting for?
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/euro-down-pound-gains-ahead/story.aspx?guid={7943B2A9-8A7A-41AB-9D35-069ED9C8277B}&dist=msr_1
Can we please avoid going into the religion/science/souls/abortion etc debate? That’s the point when I stop reading comments on here, and I’m sure others do too.
To get the abortion debate back onto psephological issue, I would argue that most Catholics (we’re not talking about churchgoing Catholics here, who may have a different political breakdown) are pro-choice or very weak pro-lifers who don’t vote on that basis. It’s not the issue that decides the election. After all, every election you have some Catholic bishop say awful things about the Democrat and they still get half the Catholic vote. John Kerry was threatened by some bishops with excommunication and still got 47% of the vote.
Ever since Paul VI banned the use of contraceptives, the Church lost control over the sex lives of a significant majority of Catholics, at least in the Western world. And the two countries where the Church has lost the most control of Catholics are Australia and the US.
Shows
just luv you’re work
+1000
#169
was there a pun in your words there
you’re=your
Ben
Did religion really factor in this election?
As Castle ,i think,said earlier they are the noisy minority-personally I call them the nosey minority
Yes it’s obvious the souls debate is a waste of time and space.
SNIP: Suspect comment deleted – The Management.
What did I say about absurdism?
Currency market is stuff. Time for a currency pegged to the inverse value of coal. How’s that for a market based incentive to stop climate change.
Breaking news – Bank of England cuts rates 1.5%.
The Bank of England has just cut its key rate to 3% from 4.5%.
Frank, http://www.humphreybear.com/images/hbb_gall12.gif is my new desktop.
Btw I must have misheard Lateline, no rate cut.
steve,
It seems like all the Central Banks have had an outbreak of “limbo fever”.
How low can you go?
Oh there was a rate cut.
170
My #162 suggested psephological angles on Abortion for Abama in this own Democrat vote blocks
Same applies to gay marriage , VP Biden who oposes it but would vote against a State ballot on it These issues ar fraught with politcal pot holes aside from actual issue debate itself
VP Biden who publicly oposes it but would vote against a State ballot to ban it
The US might have a bit of trouble brewing in Taiwan to where a hundred thousand demonstrators are upset over talks with a delegation from the Chinese mainland.
http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5gzWno1YGe_7I85ZJJqSW7gIz_zmA
Oz
I jus got your 151
lipstick . pitbull
har de har
ps do you know the helena rubenstein one?
China says if Taiwan ever officially declares independence they’ll invade. The US says if China invades they’ll retaliate.
Neither China nor the US are going to war over Tawain.
??
max factor
1.5%, holy crap
I don’t get it.
Dario it was looking like the economy in England was going to contract 1% in the next year as against the US .5% contraction. It has turned the European sharemarkets around by at least two percent in the past half hour or so and they may well finish up in positive territory. The banks over there have threatened not to pass on the full cut but I think they might get lent on very heavily.
#184
there is nothing inconsisyent with th 3 sentences positions Its called a mexican standoff reverse checkmate
By Gordon Brown? Does he have that much authority left?
Sure, but the US is not going to invade China over Tibet.
Ron
That is quite an imperialistic statement “mexican standoff”
rates up there with french letter and dutch treat as an example of both superiority and propaganda in one neat package.
When in fact the mehicanos kicked the french’s arse
alamo anyone?
frenchs arse being of course maximillian
Check out the turnaround in the European sharemarkets since the interest rate cut announcement.
http://markets.on.nytimes.com/research/markets/usmarkets/usmarkets.asp
Sure , but Tibet is an insignificant economic etc power Some Obama suporters may find Bush was a mumbler and Obama a brilliant orator but some World reality situations may not change just how its described that nothing is going to change , & with Tibet vs Tailwan reletivities
This is correct.
Sorry I meant Taiwan.
Regardless of it’s economy, the two biggest powers on the planet aren’t going to war over it.
“Ron That is quite an imperialistic statement “mexican standoff”
but you left out my last 2 words “Its called a mexican standoff reverse checkmate”
So I spread th flavour of chess playing cultures in with our Mexican alamo friends
The European Central Bank cut its benchmark interest rate by half a percentage point, to 2.75 percent from 3.25 percent.
And what ar th “but if when maybe” brigade of econamists going to do if there objectives ar not met with rate decreases and interest rates get to 0% , whats there trick then (but from amigo FINNS “ploy”: th Banks pay you to borrow from then
Ron, that actually happened in Japan in November 1998.
http://money.cnn.com/1998/11/06/economy/japan_bank/
Steve tanks for that , although after reading it it seems it was overseas Banks to Japenese Banks for holding Yen etc , but wondering th step after (if) rates got to 0% itself in a country and if th amigo FINNS trick cpomes into play ..th curent presumption todate is at “some” point before 0% an effect will occur as per history but even inter Bank confidense is low (’oz’ banks hold 6 trillion of these CDO & CDS deritives off balanse sheet)
and am not sure if rudds guarantee covers that , suspect not
Adam, please less running a psephological thread into the ditch with some irrelevant dinner-party controversy-creating standbys. And more eating of humble pie regarding your prognostications about the election, which now must read like the ramblings of some bastard child of Karl Rove and Malcolm McKerras at his silliest.
Apologies if you already have and I missed it.
SimonH
th guy Adam is not live to defend himself & he certainly wouldn’t want a literary rogue like me defending him , however you ar shooting th messenger instead of th untollerant provateur (”S” whose bandwidth on it is proof)
Anyway humble pie applies to winners doing so also and you’ve in underlying spirit of your blog hav exceeded that pie eating , seeing th guy acknowledged prediction many times , and its quite diengenuous to make th attack and then say Oh appologies if I missed it
You’d be better off taking me on , i’ve congratulated your man without qualification on winning but hav ‘left’ policy reaons & others for having reservations about outcomes vs perseptions
Adam isn’t live to defend himself? My deepest sympathy to his family and loved ones.
While your contributions are frequently experimental Ron, the fact remains that you either won the sweep or at least went much closer than me. I was way too far on the Obama-pessimistic side (311). As I hope is the case with most Australians, I’ll always respect a good punter.
th culture of my lingos was lost in translation heres , SimonH I NEVER made a reference or inferense to predictons , i was simply saying I’m live I’m not a supporter of Obama although I ve congratulated him witout reservation …AND THEREFORE i’m live here to attack should you wish…those in nigh nighland attack dems when they ar lives
As for good punting , no , Bauer centimters short and all on th nose , no each ways for th greedy punter here
FINNS
Posted Thursday, November 6, 2008 at 9:45 pm | Permalink
#118
“amigo ronnie, congrat 4 slayin those obama suppts who hv swellin head at the moment…Salute frm santiago… in machu piccu”
Amigo , missed your post earlier , your post was in middle of a big religous parlay vou & I was tinking th memory of Obama’s win got forgot somehow …so you in Santiago over nited there , and spreading th Amigo gospels to th South America’s as official Ambassadors…so you drawing Abama like crowds
Ron @ 181,
That is because he is pro choice and wants to preserve the right of others to chose for themselves. If a state or national government were to mandate laws in that area, it would remove the right of women to chose for themselves what they want to do.
Back to the election ….. this link shows maps of the vote and also shows population cartograms which skew the red/blue markings to reflect the population centers. That allows a truer picture of how much red/blue division in fact actually existed.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~mejn/election/2008/?map
If no one has found this I just had to share this –
http://obama2008.s3.amazonaws.com/headlines.html
E N J O Y !!!
The transition team is starting to be mustered. One thing I hadn’t thought of is that the new administration has to be careful that the new team does not look like a third term Clinton administration.
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/us/series/the_new_team/index.html
Oz
The argument that “reality” is a dream is solipsism, not absurdism. Absurdism is the philosophy that life has no meaning and that human attempts to find one will fail.
Obama will win the second congressional district of Nebraska:
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2835&u_sid=10480262
So 365 looks like the result.
Looks liek Sarah Palin was even dumber than we thought (!!!) even according to Fox News!
http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/insiders-spill-the-beans-on-sarah-palin/2008/11/07/1225561084675.html
Good to see that Fox were able to keep the news quiet till after the election and didn’t allow the “duty” of reporting news to override their loyalty to right wing politics.
Possum, a question.
Does the 57 Dems tally count in the senate include the two independent democratic leaning senators? Or are they a different kettle of fish?
Rasmussen – Obama approval ratting +8 (40 / 32) LOL!
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll
The official webpage of the President-elect:
http://change.gov/
How can people already strongly disapprove?
Steve – both Bernie Sanders and that Lieberman creature caucus with the Democrats, so they’re both counted in the 57 tally.
Lieberman is expected to be given a shit sandwich to eat by the democrat leadership later today I think. No more committee chairs and other boondoggles for him.
Obama’s final vote in all ten swing states was more than the final RCP average. No evidence of Bradley, pro-Dem pollster bias, Diebold or a last minute tightening. The polls were pretty good except they consistently underestimated Obama’s vote and they were miles out in NM and NV (7.6% and 6.0%).
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/05/polls/index.html
LANDSLIDE!
No idea, that’s what makes the poll funny.
I think that is fair. I mean it is one thing him campaigning for McCain, but his absurd speech at the Republican convention is something else.
Dio went:
Cell phone effect
Probably. But do they have an inordinate number of cell phones in NM and NV? It might be more complicated.
How can we tell that there WASN’T a Bradley effect, that just happened to be canceled out by a big cell phone effect?
Oh, and in what states was the Sara Palin effect most important? Iowa, Indiana, Ohio?
Possum
The average underestimate of Obama’s vote was 2.5% in those 10 swing states. If it’s due to the cell phone effect, how does that translate to Australia, where we increasingly have younger (Green/Labor) voters with no land-line? Do the polls here take this into consideration?
Dammit ……. that means bloody Missouri cost me …….. otherwise, I would have been right on the mark ……
Ron and Dave are still in as the winner was nearest to but not over
BH, what was your methodology behind your 376 pick? Cheers
The cellphone effect is going to take a bit to get to the bottom of properly because of ecological fallacy issues. State data on cellphone only households needs to be broken down into smaller regions, then age characteristics accounted for.
Dio – we’ve never seen the cell phone effect in Oz yet.
How do we also know the young people in ‘cell phone’ only households break significantly differently across party lines than young people sampled in the normal way?
Onion site – http://www.theonion.com/content/index
“Dio – we’ve never seen the cell phone effect in Oz yet.”
Possum, I thought it might have been part of the problem with the Morgan face to face.
Face to face being effected by mobile only households? I don’t get it.
Possum
The two huge outliers were NV and NM, both out west. Maybe part of the underestimation is due to McCain voters not turning up after PA and OH were called.
Actually, I saw some data showing that in the 06 elections there was also a 2-3% underestimation of the Dem vote. There is clearly a systematic (unintentional) bias in US polling against the Dems. The cellphone effect might be the it. But why isn’t it here as well?
If pollsters in Oz are actually factoring the effect cell phones into their polls with their age weightings, then perhaps Morgan face to face does not remove this effect from their weightings and thus has an extra skew?
Perhaps our pollsters factor it in already
ltep – because nearly every US pollster that has looked at it finds the same thing, Pew and Gallup particularly.
There’s a few reasons that are often argued to be behind it – one being technology utilisation. People that live in cell phone only households are more likely to use the net and use it more often, are less likely to be evangelical and less likely to be ideologically conservative.
It’s an interesting hypothesis, but if they know it exists why haven’t the figured out a way to factor it into their weighting?
Perhaps evangelicals think mobiles are tools of the devil. Perhaps there’s a telegram only effect.
Maybe there’s no political difference in Oz between cell phone only households and the wider population? Morgans face to face polls have bigger problems than any hypothetical cell phone effect in Oz anyway.
Dio – lots of little reasons will be measured and analysed and aggregated to explain polling/election result differentials over the next little while. There’s never any given single thing that ends up explaining Problem X with elections, but a given few things collectively usually end up explaining, statistically at least, large parts of Problem X.
“Morgans face to face polls have bigger problems than any hypothetical cell phone effect in Oz anyway.”
I’ve always thought of it as the more mobile people are then the less likely they are to be home when Morgan visits.
Ltep – the telegram only effect would explain Utah
Some things are really hard to weight for. It sounds easy in theory – just up the weighting of 18-34 year olds. But if cellphone only households act significantly differently than their landline peers, then weighting wont solve the problem. The pollster has to either:
(a) dampen or expand the actual results (like add some number to the polled results for the Dems and subtract another from Republicans). But Pollsters hate doing that because it means they’re no longer really being pollsters.
(b) Actually set up a process where that cellphone only cohort can actually be polled (or use screening questions to find that subdemographic in the field and weight from there, but that adds large uncertainty to the end result)
“Kobe Bryant Scores 25 In Holy Shit We Elected A Black President”
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/kobe_bryant_scores_25_in_holy_shit
Oh Dear, the repugs are frantically trying to organise a boycott against Fox News for their treatment of Palin but are finding it hard to find anyone who admits to watching Fox News.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2127130/posts
I thought Fox News viewership was their base?
Kim Beazley’s take on the US election results
Those Free Republic folk are mindboggling.
Speaking of Fox
http://www.ajc.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/11/05/jogger_rabid_fox.html?imw=Y
Jogger runs a mile with rabid fox biting her arm
If they turn off Fox, where else will they get their right wing TV news?
Drudge?
the amigos will hold obama to account, dont u worry abt that. I did say gg was growling.
The seafood in santiago is sensational
OK so lets get all Australians onto mobiles and the net, now.
btw a traveller tip. Make sure u travel with a mobile that can access wireless internet. Free wireless is everywhere. I am bloggin on my mobile in the hotel lobby
Using an iPhone?
One of my friends lives out in the country here in Australia and has recently purchased an emu for their property. She emails me today and tells me that they are going to rename the emu “Dubya” as the emu is the closest thing that they have to a turkey
Obama’s cabinet appointment notes:
http://www.236.com/blog/w/lee_camp/barack_obamas_notes_on_his_pot_10107.php
Juilem, way back at 210, thanks heaps for the maps link, v informative visuals, they make the claim about the GOP potentially becoming a rural rump a bit more credible (although, I reckon that GOP machine will get it self back on track and into urban USA by 2016)
It will only do it with a moderate candidate who is pro choice on abortion, and doesn’t constantly crap on about gay marriage and gun ownership. Obama winning was a rejection of cultural issues as wedge topics, it showed that at the end of the day, economic security trumps all those issues.
Juliem 228 – I am a bit embarrassed to tell you. I am absolutely psephologically illiterate except when it comes to waiting for the polls and being pleased that my mob are in front.
I trawled around the Austar channels – CNN, BBC World, CNBC & Bloomberg and, yes, -the dreadful Fox for the comedic value. We don’t get free to air here – lots of tall trees and huge hills in the way.
Saw that you had 375 and as I had followed your knowledgeable comments plus William’s figures each day I thought ‘I’ll have a go at this – I reckon BO will bolt it in so I’ll go one more than Juliem because she knows what she is talking about.” Also thought Obama would get Florida, Ohio and Missouri – missed the last one.
Not very scientific as you can see but like last year here I just had the feeling that nothing was going to stop BO – even if the GFC had not happened. There seemed to be a desperation for a change in the US.
Now ask me about the 2010 here and I’ll tell you that Kev & Co will bolt it in too. I had better be right!!
Unfortunately I can’t spend a lot of time being logged on here as I take phone calls for a community group. I just check in every day to read comments and log on when I can. I say again as I have before, thank goodness for all of you who contribute to this site no matter which side you bat for and for William, Possum and Shrike.
Obama got 78% of the Jewish vote, up from 75% that Kerry, but not as high as the 82% that Gore-Lieberman got in 2000. Jewish voters were uneasy about Obama, but the selection of Palin tipped them back again.
That free republic site is totally insane. You just have to read it to believe it. Fox News is a creature of the liberal left, was pro-Obama, pro-gay (because it’s full of gay reporters) and anti-God.
It looks like there was a “Bradley” effect after all in Alaska. Pollsters grossly underestimated Stevens vote, probably as not many voters would admit to a pollster that they were voting for a convicted felon.
http://www.fivethirtyeight.com/2008/11/what-in-hell-happened-in-alaska.html
Diogenes and poor old Guy Fawkes was pretty much neglected this year. It has been claimed that he was the first man to enter parliament with honourable intentions.
If he wins, surely the Republican senate leadership will work with Democrats to make him resign from the Senate. That would be the first move that the GOP could make to show they understand the meaning of the election.
The absurdity of the death penalty:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24615004-38196,00.html
ShowsOn @ 264,
I know that that was what Reid said BEFORE. But I read a piece last night that (can’t remember where it was) that intimated that if the removal of Stevens via expulsion meant having Sarah Palin in the Senate; well that Senators would see things a totally different way and try to find some way around this can of worms. The other 99 Senators don’t want to have to share that chamber with “her” ……
“It looks like there was a “Bradley” effect after all in Alaska. Pollsters grossly underestimated Stevens vote, probably as not many voters would admit to a pollster that they were voting for a convicted felon.”
Diogenes, we have a full blown conspiracy theory being developed over this one. Something smells very fishy in Alaska, I tell ya.
http://www.bradblog.com/?p=6644
But that would be funny! Seeing a whole group of people who actually know things shun her.
Maybe Democrats just stopped voting because Obama had won before the polls in Alaska closed? So that helped Stevens.
Check out this graph, it compares this year’s vote to 2004:
http://www.princeton.edu/~pkrugman/drshift.jpg
My big question is, why would Louisiana and Arkansas swing so heavily Republican?
I would’ve thought Katrina would make Louisiana lean democratic.
A reader of the Melbourne Age said in a letter today that he feels much safer with the Obama, Rudd and Brown Coalition of the Willing.
I’ll drink to that.
Oh, and how did Obama manage such huge swings in Indiana?
ShowsOn, perhaps enough of the pre Katrina black population didn’t return to NO?
Darn LOL how misguided can you be.
Who would terrorists rather face?
Obama, Brown, and Rudd
or
Bush, Blair and Howard
Anyway we’ll see how safe we are soon enough.
Brown will be gone in a couple of years anyway.
Gordon Brown finally wins one.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601102&sid=aF.3bbd18vrs&refer=uk
I heard about this terrorist attack that occurred in the U.S. 7 years ago. Bush was the President then, so to answer your question, it seems terrorists enjoyed Bush as President.
Well, it shares a border with Illinois, and has overlapping TV markets in several areas
If their intention is to start WW3 then probably Bush as he seemed quite happy to start a war when given the opportunity
Probably should have seen this one coming
….
Yeah, pretty amazing though, even Clinton couldn’t win there.
#274: Wow, big surprise there – margin 19,946 votes to 13,209. From what I was reading, Labour was expected to lose.
Is she refusing to donate them to charity?
Maybe she wants to give some as a gift to President Sarkozy’s wife when they go hunting?
I heard a story on the BBC last night saying Brown’s approval ratings have taken off since the financial crisis, and that this made the seat winnable.
They send a lawyer to pick up clothes? wtf?
Shows, not sure what she intended on doing but whatever it was, it isn’t going to happen the way that she planned
……
I’ve seen the Palin crowd in more than one place uttered in the same breath with the word “hillbilly” and I’m believing it more and more
….. It is funnier too when you can remember some of the scenes from the old Beverly Hillbillies show { but I probably shouldn’t say that as that dates me 
}
Glen 273
I wasn’t actually referring to terrorism. The chances of any of us bing killed in a terrorist attack are about the same as winning tattslotto.
I had in mind the really big threats to us all like global warming, the need to embrace renewable enery sources and wean ourselves off oil, finding a better way to run the world financial system, other than leaving it the hands of greedy free marketeers who almost wrecked the whole thing, etc.
I don’t think there is much doubt that messrs Bush, Howard and Blair would have been next to useless in solving those kinds of issues. .
ShowsOn 269
Juliem is right – New Orleans population is still only about 60% of what it was before Hurricane Katrina. In fact the rate or resettlement has actually slowed. Some areas may never be rebuilt. See
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2008-08-04-neworleans_N.htm
Several hundred thousand people no longer live there. It isn’t just poor blacks – a lot of former college students no longer study there, and that would hurt the democrat vote too.
She doesn’t own them remember! They belong to the RNC.
If the Republicans really think she is the answer to their woes in 2012, then they’re obviously asking a pretty stupid question.
Here’s an interesting discussion on what the Republicans may do:
http://www.slate.com/id/2203800/entry/2203801/
Some say talk less about economics, the others say talk more about abortion and gay marriage.l
Ah OK, so comparing to 2004 isn’t really a meaningful comparison.
I realise that, but why a lawyer?
If Sarah Palin does run in 2012 she will have one fan – Tina Fey!
Although no longer a regular on Saturday Night Live, I’m sure that, if the need arises, Tina will be prepared to offer herself in service of her network. She will probably demand a contract with a larger wardrobe allowance though.
They are going to struggle to get anything heard for the next years other than the economy, the way things are headed over there
My feeling is that the world will change so much in 4 years.
Whatever we think is important now – economics and terrorism – may be secondary issues by then.
I mean, at the start of the campaign, I thought McCain was just going to hammer Obama day and night over national security, paint him as being weak and unpatriotic. While they did that a bit, economics just swamped everything else.
The next campaign will just be something different again.
My early prediction is that Obama will win Arizona
1. Prime Minister Rudd of Australia
2. Prime Minister Harper of Canada
3. President Sarkozy of France
4. Chancellor Merkel of Germany
5. Prime Minister Olmert of Israel
6. Prime Minister Aso of Japan
7. President Calderon of Mexico
8. President Lee of South Korea
9. Prime Minister Brown of the United Kingdom
I thought the (acting) P.M. of Israel was Tzipi Livni?
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1108/Calls_returned.html?showall
No, she gave up trying to form a coalition government so there will be new elections next year. Olmert is the transitional government PM.
Wikipedia says that since Livni couldn’t form a new coalition government, Olmert remains as acting P.M.
That’s nuts! Hasn’t he been charged with fraud, which is why he had to resign!?
Interesting that Berlusconi missed the list of callers.
I don’t think he’s been charged yet, just implicated
Not really surprising after his comments yesterday
But isn’t that what lead him to resign, which is why Livni was elected head of Kadima in the first place?
Given those circumstances, I don’t understand why their political system let’s that same person stay in the job!
So on January 19th, will there be an official hand over ceremony of world’s biggest political douche bag, from Bush to Berlusconi?
I think he said he would resign as PM following the election, so as no new PM has been appointed by that election (and there will be new elections) he is staying on. A bit odd I’ll grant you, but it sort of makes sense.
Nah, I reckon Mugabe still has that honour
I should’ve added the proviso that is is for democracies.
Politico44 is a new page that is going to blog Obama’s activities by the hour!
http://www.politico.com/politico44/
When too much blogging is barely enough!
That being the case I think you would probably be correct
FINNS
#251
“The seafood in santiago is sensational’
Probably shark finns Amigo Let us know about th crowds your message is reaching
ShowsOn
“Whatever we think is important now – economics and terrorism – may be secondary issues by then.”
I’d lay a book they will not be secodnary issues then
Juliem , you commented on my #181 (was part of #180) about biden pro choise and giving women a choise Actualy was referring to Gay marriage where Biden publicly opposes it but won’t support CA ballot to ban it so was highliting by example how dificult politcaly some of these moral judgement issues ar for policans as his stanse probabley upsets both sides He’s copied Evatt’s principal & evatt got crucified both ways on it
I see Cell phones only get sold to democrats & demographics , Cellgate , like to see Cellgate explained by ‘oz’ pollsters given our cell penetrations
One of my numerous lead with chin predictons wass that th likely voters were being under estimated by at least 2% by US pollstars generally , but cell phones not in my thoughts , these pollstars do breakups by age and demographics etc post Its partly there samples and likely voter calcs that ar part of problem , linking past turnouts later Party registrations , Affilations split rates & my area , then to intention to vote & likely voter turnouts Of course some pollstars ar “hired” by a side and some no good anyway no matter what
305,
how neat is that?
…… thanks much 
I think in 4 years from now the world economy will be growing again, that was my point.
econamy is always in th trifecta
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/stevecoll/2008/11/we-are-the-worl.html
Oh yeah, as in Obama will be able to use his economic record to bash the Republican candidate in submission.
“We can’t go back to how things were before I was elected…”
ShowsOn
you said which i corrected you on
“Whatever we think is important now – economics and terrorism – may be secondary issues by then.”
So no more back pedalling …th econamy is always a primary issue …what state its then in or how politcans address it politcaly then is a seporate issue to what you said that i queried
SNIP: Unconstructive comment deleted – The Management.
also coreection typo error , I predicted likely voters by pollstars would be under estimated by at least 1% not 2%
Obama win newspaper front pages (WARNING THERE ARE A LOT)
http://obama2008.s3.amazonaws.com/headlines.html
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24616383-601,00.html
Paul Kelly should be fined whenever he uses the word “folly”.
He should go back to saying that everything is a “paradigm shift”, that was slightly more interesting.
It’s getting really nasty in the fight for the Repugs dark and twisted soul. It doesn’t get a lot worse than this. Beck really will fit in well at Fox.
Beck: Conservatives voted for McCain hoping he’d die in office so Palin could take over.
http://thinkprogress.org/2008/11/06/beck-mccain-die/
Is the final make-up of the Senate any closer? What is the most likely result?
Apparently there will be a recount in Minnesota if the margin is closer than 0.5%
There will be a runoff in Georgia if Chambliss doesn’t get to 50%.
There are still lots of votes left to be counted in Alaska, and a great deal of confusion because attendance seems to be down 10% (which is confusing given that Palin was a candidate). There is some speculation that not all pre-poll / absentee votes have been included.
So if Democrats manage to win those, I think they will get to 58 including Lieberman and Sanders.
Lieberman has been offered a sub-committee chair by the Democrat majority leader. They want him to relinquish his chair of the Home Land Security department.
Lieberman is just weird. Sometimes he appears quite the Democrat, other times he appears quite the Republican.
ShowsOn and bob
The Dems have 57 ATM (including Lieberman and Sanders). There are three to be decided so they could still get to 60. Lieberman is hoping they get there so they need him, otherwise they can cut him loose.
MN has an automatic recount.
Alaska looks very weird. There’s something fishy. Could do anything.
GA looks like a recount but Chambliss would probably win there because I think Bob Barr’s rep look away some votes from Chambliss which he should get back.
Yeah, which I guess is why he is an independent.
I think the huge mistake he made was giving a speech at the Republican convention, particular one that had such a condescending tone. His main argument essentially amounted to, “McCain is old, that makes him suitable for this job, Obama is young, that makes him unsuitable.”
I think he is regretting that particular speech about now.
Hopefully Bob Barr runs for the Senate!
But I see what you mean, the turn out for a run off will probably be much lower, because there won’t be the Presidential election to motivate many voters.
“McCain is old, that makes him suitable for this job, Obama is young, that makes him unsuitable.”
Exactly. I still can’t quite comprehend that he caucuses with the Democrats, but supported the Republican nominee for President.
Not to mention the Democrat nominee received a landslide on polling day. Interesting to note that Obama and Clinton’s wins were landslides (in comparison to both of Bush’s anyway).
No President has been as unlucky as President George W. Bush…months after taking office 9/11, then Hurricane Katrina and now the global financial crisis.
All 3 of these would have made any President look bad.
I think the big difference was $$$$, McCain has 80m Obama had hundreds of millions of dollars…how can you compete with that?
No Glen. Bush was just incompetent.
Typical left wing thing to say, you dont look past your bias or try to anyway.
If those things had happened to Obama and he was struggling in the polls you’d say he was unlucky too not incompetent.
The Democrats have just as much to blame for the problems America is in today and you can’t hack it.
Oh come on! What about Lincoln and FDR? Or Truman and Nixon who had to end wars?
All Presidents eventually face dire circumstances, it is how they RESPOND that determines whether they are remembered as good or bad leaders.
At the end of the day, Bush simply wasn’t cut out for the job. Governor was the highest political office that he was suited for.
Glen
That’s absolute rubbish.
9/11 made Bush popular and gave him, and America, huge goodwill. He used that for his own perverted agendas and pissed the goodwill up against the wall by torturing, spying on his countrymen, waging a stupid and unnecessary war, and trampling on the Constitution.
Hurricane Katrina was bad luck but very poorly handled. You can’t go 8 years without some natural disaster. If he had’ve managed it well, it would have helped him.
The GFC was all of the neocon chickens coming home to roost. The greed and stupidity of financial people never fails to amaze me.
No Glen, I pride myself in not being a partisan. I’ve yet to make a judgement on Obama because he hasn’t done anything yet. I find it hard to believe he can be any worse than that disaster though.
I’ll note that Bush has the lowest approval ratings (10-20%) in US polling history.
Oh yes, let’s just stick to the right-wing bias and believe it was due to other things besides himself! Or the fact he only just scraped through in both elections.
Ahhh righties. They crack me up.
Lincoln came close to losing the Civil War ShowsOn…it was really hard for him but in the end they militarily prevailed.
Diogenes…Bush didnt start the so called War on Terror…he had it thrown on his lap, it would have been hard for any president and for Gore too had he won.
Katrina was poorly handled by local authorities…Mayor Gray Nagin was incompetent as they come…
GFC is just to blame for the Democrats too, they passed laws under Clinton to offer loans to people who couldnt afford them in the 90s and started this whole stupid direction into dodgy sub-prime markets…the Republicans didnt change this and neither did the Democrats when they came to power in 2006, both parties are to blame.
’so-called war on terror’ Glenn? How PC.
I thought Bush was back up to 23% now? I read a Cheney approval rating poll that had him on 17%!
One of the biggest issues for me is how the hell can Obama de-politicise 1) the electoral process 2) The justice department.
Those two things need to occur to secure U.S. democracy.
Glen,
You getting geared up for tomorrow?
…. if is is any consolation to you to hear it from a “leftie” I think your horse is home tomorrow 
……
This is rubbish. The North was an economic powerhouse compared to the South, and ultimately stronger economies win wars. Read Shelby Foote’s Civil War history, which was written from a Southern perspective. He freely concedes that the South never had a chance of winning the war because the North had more men, money and machines.
Wrong…the British and French came awfully close to recognising the South. Had they done so the Union could well have lost.
Lincoln also came close to defeat in the 1864 election against McClelland but thankfully Grant took Atlanta or burned it to be precise and this gave Lincoln the boost he needed to prevail.
Had the South won Gettysburg they most probably would have gone on to force a settlement.
Glen
Bush did start the War on Terror. That’s what he called it. Obviously he had to respond to 9/11 but he totally stuffed the response. Al Qaeda committed 9/11, not the people of Iraq or Afghanistan. And he didn’t even go after OBL, he left that to the locals who failed not surprisingly.
FEMA totally screwed up Katrina, and Bush appointed “Brownie” who was doing “a heck of a great job”, until everyone worked out that the people affected would have been better off in a third world country where the aid would have come quicker. Obviously the locals stuffed up as well.
I agree on the GFC, but having a dumb, unquestioning, blind faith kind of President meant that he just trusted what he was told.
Lincoln also suspended the writ of habius corpus…something akin to Guantanamo Bay (althought not torture)…but nevertheless he was praised for doing so keeping Maryland free of Southern loyalties…
Let me be absolutely clear, Bush did make mistakes all Presidents do Clinton did and Obama will too. I just think it is too simplistic to blame George for everything, now i know he must accept responsibility (as he is President) but somethings were out of his control.
This just proves how weak the confederacy was! They were hoping other countries could come to their rescue! The south NEVER HAD A CHANCE.
I think I’ll trust the opinions of Civil War historians rather than your loose collection of anecdotes.
Of course, and the best Presidents respond well to unexpected events.
Bush reacted hopelessly to unexpected events. And didn’t act proactively enough to events he should’ve seen coming, like the global financial crisis.
Dio @ 339,
Speaking of FEMA screwing up Katrina, have you read Naomi Klein’s “The Shock Doctrine”? On page 410 she says “Within weeks, the Gulf Coast became a domestic laboratory for the same kind of government-run-by-contractors that had been pioneered in Iraq. The companies that snatched up the biggest contracts (to “fix” things) were the familiar Baghdad gang: Halliburton’s KBR unit had a $60 million gig to recon struct military bases along the coast. Parsons, famous for its sloppy Iraq work, was brought in for a major bridge construction project in the Mississippi. Fluor, Shaw, Bechtel, CH2M Hill – all top contractors in Iraq – were hired by the government to provide mobile homes to evacuees just ten days after the levees brokes. Their contracts ended up totaling $3.4 billion, no open bidding required.”
If you haven’t read that book, I highly recommend it. It is a brutal eye opener for the rubbish that Cheney and company have been pedaling for years now. It talks about “the rise of disaster capitalism” all over the world over the last 40 to 50 years or so. Starts by laying the start of the problem on the doorstep of the economist Milton Friedman (whose mantra these clowns have followed) and takes it on from there ….
FEMA wasn’t even trying as their “bosses” saw “other opportunities” in New Orleans …..
juliem
I’ve got it but haven’t read it yet (I’ve got 40 books in that category). Now that the horror of the Bush years is almost over, I’m thinking of reading a few more positive books. There don’t seem to be too many on my “unread” bookshelf. They’re almost all depressing. These Howard/ Bush years have affected me worse than I realised.
But what can be learnt from them? I worry about the NEXT wacko Liberal and / or Republican who will probably win in 8 – 12 years time.
Glen some of your points hav validity and others I difer on
“GFC is just to blame for the Democrats too, …the Republicans didnt change this and neither did the Democrats when they came to power in 2006, both parties are to blame.”
Agree , how this became a ‘TRepublicon” only brand blame reflects on th Liberal Media , and clever Democrat & inept Republicon politcal handling of th issue Spin won
Th CDO’s etc mainly started from 2001 so Republicons had longer control of Congress but Democrats had th sharp enfd when red alert warning were there High degree of shared blame is due
Katrina , well FEMA st.ffed up ….again some blame everywhere ..Bush gets blame for Browns appointment , managers under gotta take some blame as does Mayor Nagin who almost got off scott free but had alot of power Plus huge natural disaster responses often mean people ar not experiensed compared to 2nd time one occurs responses Main blame goes to FEMA managers right down What my critic of Bush lwas his no urgency of Leadership & prioritising & that is a big blame criticism
Iraq , thats Bush’s blame baby all alone Shift of empfasis from Aghganistan is also primary Bush , although would luv to know how much Intell Agencys hav some responsibility for info given re risks
Once one goes into bush’s record in Gitto , ‘torture’ sanctioning , renditions , jurispurdense , given iraq , then his record reely deteriorates I do agree however that no 9/11 we will never know if he’d been average POTUS but he was less than that
What about the Illiberal media? You never mention them.
So Iraq wasn’t core ‘left’? Just checking…
Obama and young voters.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/11/07/2084188-young-voters-not-essential-to-obama-win
Postscript to the election from North Carolina
….
I have this theory; people don’t like to be told what they are.
Great little article about a longserving Whitehouse butler.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603948.html
Oh no, Mugabe hasn’t paid his phone bill again – he had to congratulate Obama via the state run newspaper:
http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,24618301-23109,00.html
Here’s one that is difficult to get the head around. Something about an extremist evangelical church picketing the funeral of the President elect’s grandmother, but a bit much for the average non believer I’d say. This is the outfit that the Chaser and Michael Moore have lampooned.
http://digg.com/world_news/Westboro_Church_to_Picket_Obama_s_Grandmother_s_Funeral
I’ve been unable to post for a couple of days, but felt my concession speech for Juliem’s contest could be delayed no longer.
Firstly, my wholehearted and unreserved congratulations to our dual winners, David and Ron, and I wish them well in the days ahead (what say they about NZ?). I now offer them my full support.
All the same, I believe that my campaign deserves some small measure of recognition for the fact that, despite being slightly below the EV number in picking 312, I correctly called Obama losing MO and winning NE2, and CA as the over 270 state and, most sagaciously of all, Obama’s % of the vote.
Nevertheless, due to the fact that my miniscule miscalculation in the EV total is akin to McCain’s miscalculation of selecting Palin for his Veep running mate, I graciously, humbly and abjectly offer my unqualified concession to the contest victors.
Seriously, many thanks again to Juliem for all the time she put forth to provide us with so much amusement. Better than my Melbourne Cup sweep.
showson, no iphone 4 me. Am using nokia n82 vgood mobile, tough n versatile. Am vsurprise to discover how available the wless is. Yes even in remote patagonia
i did post on the day that palin was picked that obama has won
Not sure if anyone else has pointed this out in response to the query early in this thread about the Roman Catholic voters. Joe Biden is RC.
‘Onya Finnigans!
#354: Read their critique of Australia here.
They’re an association of racists and homophobes who picket funerals simply as a way of generating publicity.
The U.S. Congress had to pass an act last year to stop them picketing at military funerals. Apparently now it is illegal in the U.S. to protest within 250 metres of a military funeral; a law devised essentially to stop that bunch of lunatics from plying their trade.
Seems like there is going to be an attempt to change some of the electoral system as a result of this election:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/us/politics/07voting.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1
I want an iPhone, but I hate long term contracts.
Having said that, if wifi is everywhere as you suggest, then maybe a prepaid one would be OK.
I imagine Obama would veto any law that seeks to make it HARDER for people to vote.
Apparently a Republican is going to move to have Ted Stevens expelled from the Senate if he is re-elected:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15392.html
Slightly off topic – well, totally actually – but just finished watching a documentary on Johnny O’keefe. At the very end of the credits was the following acknowledgement:
“Special thanks to Ed St John”
It seems our ESJ is a man of many talents.
This ESJ is the head honcho of Warner Music Australia.
http://www.aria.com.au/pages/more-information.htm
includes a happy snap of the ARIA EStJ
http://www.aria.com.au/pages/images/bio_ed_st_john.jpg
He was also a pop singer of no great distinction in the 1970s.
Are you sure you’re not confusing him with Jeff St John ?
And is he the son of the late former Liberal MP of the same name?
Or Olivia Newton St John?
You are quite correct, Frank. Dude in the wheelchair, right?
Correct, he has Spina Bifida like me
Jeff now lives in Perth and performs standards as Jeffery St John & The Embers.
http://www.jeffreystjohnandtheembers.iinet.net.au/
If I couldn’t remember his name correctly, I suppose it’s possible I was also mistaken about his mediocrity. Mind you, I was watching old TMG clips on YouTube earlier today, and even those titans of the age were not all that I remembered them to be.
Wash thy mouth out – you need a musical Edumacation
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=mXJUAMTTf2c
If you thought those were daggy, check out his first solo hit
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=k1fvYjSfsis
The US economy Lost 240,000 Jobs in October, Pushing Unemployment Up to 6.5 Percent, which is about what had been anticipated.
JJulian1009
#355 Concession Speech on Juliems e/v competion to th winners
Very moving JJulian 1009 concession speech gesture to David and I , and your comment “I believe that my (JJuklian1009) campaign deserves some small measure of recognition..” is quite justified & indeed it is JJulian1009
You ran a hard fought campaign & without using swift boating & ‘chad’ challenges like some “right” leaning contestants And selection of NE2 is especially comended for th campaign time spent I might add I quite frankley did looked briefly at NE2 ,
thought there was some reel chanse but unlikely on past history & militaries but anyway required too great campaign time using my over detailed methodologies for th one e/v , but not you you chased every single vote fighting to th end , a worthy campaign strategy
FINNS
#356
“even in remote Patagonia” Tirelessly roaming all parts of south America in true Amigo style….th Amigos continue to ride…everywhere
Note ESJ’s 15 minutes of fame & glory relating to a a JOK doc only lasted from #366 at 11.32 PM but got extinguished at 11.47 PM #367
ONE OF MOST MOVING ARTICALES of US election was posted by Steve about th black 34 years serving White House butler Whilst its long , its emotave in meaning and saves its most special message for th last lines , and well worth reading , perhaps (hope) he will get an invitation on Inaugauration Day So Ilm reposting in case it was missed
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/11/06/AR2008110603948.html
Washington Post hav just archived it in th last 1/2 hour ! Cheeky , Still woth joining as a free archive member to read it
JJ, glad you see you back again. Good thing we didn’t need my sister’s vote in Missouri
……
To all that have a weekend & want the behind the sceene story on Obamas victory now that election is done read here -
http://www.newsweek.com/id/167582
“Its called how he did it”. From little things big things grow!
Plouffe is denying it but where there is smoke, there is usually fire
….
Does anyone know what they are waiting on before they officially declare Missouri? I’ve tried several sites but haven’t been able to glean any useful information …..
From Daily Kos site, a quick but simple chart showing Dems gains this election:
The +4 for Republicans in Louisana reflects the exodus of the black population post Katrina
Juliem it appears you forgot to read the Boonville Daily News.
http://www.boonvilledailynews.com/news/x635432565/McCain-Obama-race-tests-Mo-bellwether-status
Well you’d assume Obama couldn’t catch up from those numbers.
Obama won NE-02, taking his tally to 365.
http://www.omaha.com/index.php?u_page=2835&u_sid=10481441
Oh my, a President who can INTENTIONALLY make jokes, including some about himself!
http://www.slate.com/id/2204042/
Bush makes accidental jokes, that’s different.
Ok, William
(and Ron/David) …. IF Obama gets 5854 of those 7100 votes, I’m in ….. fat chance I think though 
…. (would mean he’s getting 82% of the provisional votes and they’ve more or less split the state 50/50 at this point)
Thanks, Steve, for that word. I knew it was somethinng of that sort but couldn’t find a news reference to say exactly ……
Juliem, must admit it was my first reading of the Boonville Daily news too. I was most impressed with their scary electoral map.
Julie, great to see you’re still doing the good hard yakka to help make this blog as reality-based as possible. Extra congrats on your call that a significant % of Floridian Cuban Hispanics would vote for Obama, which largely accounts for the swing back to the Dems from 2004 after Gore won FL in 2000.
My Repub brother in Colorado is sulking and “scared”, but I take immense satisfaction that my vote in CA is 1/10,000,000 responsible for putting Obama over the 270 EV’s. :>)
As for your Sis in Missouri, Steve’s post #384 is most pertinent and interesting. Thanks, Steve. I’ve lived among the Boonvillians and thus my call for No on Mo in your EV contest.
Re: the national presidential ballot total and final %. It’s still too early to be certain, but I hope you’re correct that this will be the highest % since the mid sixties when we baby boomers first came on board.
Also, there is a major controversy brewing whether or not Obama is a baby boomer ( 4 Aug. 1961). My take is that he is the arch between the two generations. Notice I didn’t say “the bridge between” in order to obviate any verbal association with Sarah Palin’s bridge (and sentences) to nowhere!
Gore didn’t win Florida in 2000 though.
Ron at #377
I deeply appreciate your generous and statesmanlike response to my concession speech, which displays the same perspicacity with which you (and Ralph, of course) won Juliem’s EV contest.
Did you notice how desperately Juliem is still clinging to dreams of vindication via the remaining MO provisional votes! lol :>)
Sorry, that was meant to be David in line 2.
One of the major problems for the US economy is that as official interest rates have been cut, mortgage rates have hardly moved down at all. At least the latest massive cut in the UK looks as though it is going to be passed on to customers.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7716086.stm
I hope Tim Blair is on Insiders tomorrow. I want him to be asked what drugs he was smoking when he said “don’t count McCain out yet”. He only lost in a landslide.
Itep @ 391
That was meant to be a jocular post. Nevertheless, I apologise for making that historically incorrect statement about Florida. The 8% swing in Florida is one of the most amazing (along with the 17%+ in Utah), and I didn’t pick Obama to win Florida in Juliem’s EV contest.
For anyone else who might not know how Bush won Florida in 2000, the Democratic-appointed majority of the Florida Supreme Court ruled the recount should continue, but the Republican-appointed majority of US Supreme Court voted 5-4 to stop the recount, thus debunking the myth of the apolitical stature of both US state and federal supreme courts. The only small consolation for Dems is that they never had to endure sanctimonious Lieberman as Veep and then his likely winning of the Dem presidential nomination this year (and I thought that in 2000).
jjulian1009, that is just too funny.
But weren’t people in Utah voting for Obama because they thought it would bring on the third coming of Christ?
You know, like how some conservatives have now admitted the only reason they voted for McCain was because they hoped he would die, thus leaving Suitcase Palin in charge.
jj, this is what she told me (and one of the reasons I’ve commented this week that the Repubs are walking aroudn like zombies)
Of course she is whinging about the Chief of Staff appointment. She also doesn’t seem to understand that the economic problems preceeded this election. They haven’t suddenly appeared this week in the last 72 to 96 hours. Obama will make it better. If she is hurting now in the short run, she ought to be blaming that on the Repubs and then have voted Dem. this year as many registered Repubs did who were primarily concerned about their pocketbooks. Also fails to recognize the impact of the foreign misadventures of GB too.
jj, I’ve posted something about my sister’s comments to me several days ago but it got caught up in William’s spam filter as the filter didn’t like at least one word that she used
……. catch up later with post #399 (I believe) when it gets off of the moderation queue …..
jjulian1009, after the Supreme Court ruled the media recount study found that under the system of limited recounts in selected counties as was requested by the Gore campaign, the only way that Gore would have won was by using counting methods that were never requested by any party, including “overvotes” — ballots containing more than one vote for an office.
All other types of recounts had Bush winning.
The event you’re spinning is just not correct.
ShowOn,
Good call. lol
My take on Utah is that it’s pure Romney territory, and they were browned off that Mitt was spurned for Veep candidate by McCain. I was living in trepidation that McCain would pick Romney because his genuine executive experience as a successful businessman and governor of a large Democratic state (Mass.) would have provided strong support in a difficult economic environment without looking as connected to the Bush administration failures as McCain with his 90% voting record.
My assumption for the reason that Arkansas still went +5 for McCain despite their Gov. Huckabee being spurned by McCain for Veep nomination is that it was trumped by Hillary PUMA voters (Party Unity My Ass) when she was spurned by Obama for Veep as well as the hits that their good ole’ boy Bill Clinton took for his allegedly racist comments during primaries.
“AT LEAST two of Australia’s largest corporate bookmakers are refusing to pay out on tens of thousands of bets laid on Barack Obama’s victory – on the grounds that he may be killed before he is inaugurated.”
http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/bet-his-life-on-it-bookies-hold-obama-payout/2008/11/07/1225561136611.html
A completely ridiculous scenario.
Re 392,
I am really in much the same boat as William, so so very close yet so far
…. I do take pride though in getting close 
…..
Re. Missouri though – compare the Missouri map to the Ohio one. In Ohio, Obama won only the metropolitan areas around the cities (Columbus, Dayton, Cinncinnati, etc.) and the northern swatch of border counties with Pennsylvania. The southern ones voted with West Virginia
. African Americans are not farmers near as I can tell {although to fair, there might be an isolated one or two or three if we’re lucky out there} and live in concentrated areas in and around the cities. IF NOT for the abundance of cities in Ohio, they would have turned out just like Missouri. ALL of their rural counties voted for McCain.
What Missouri needs are some more major population centers and not just country towns …..
and in spite of this, Missouri swung too to Obama compared to 2004 by +7 so even the country hacks were moving, just not fast enough ….. if Obama’s first term is a good one, Missouri should move Dem. next presidential election ….
The result in Florida was SO CLOSE, that if EVERY vote in the ENTIRE state had been recounted, Gore could’ve won.
That is what the supreme court should’ve insisted happen for the sake of democracy.
ltep @ 403, betcha that those agencies are run by Lib sympathetic folks …..
jj – again, the spam filter has complained about a word I used in post #404, I was comparing Missouri to Ohio and why Ohio went democratic this time and missouri did not, check back in for #404 once William is up and running
What a nonsense that story is ltep. Bookmakers don’t pay out on any election until the person is sworn in. The same will happen with my bet on Labour in NZ tonight. I will win and be paid if Labour get sworn in and lose if a mob of shepherds are sworn in.
If you read the rest of the article it’s pretty explicitly pointed out that the bet was always going to paid out on the inauguration regardless of who won.
Obama’s secret service motorcade has already had one run in with a wayward driver:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/06/obamas-motorcade-interrup_n_141966.html
ShowsOn Gore just needed to win his home state…he couldnt so he lost.
I did read the rest of the article. It was a completely ridiculous scenario for the ’senior Sportsbet bookie’ to have raised.
Glen it’s a moot point to make. If Gore was legitimately elected in Florida the result in his own state would’ve been irrelevant.
I still hold that Bush’s election was legitimate and for people to still be claiming that he lost the election or that Gore won Florida is incorrect.
Glen, I was talking about FLORIDA.
Tennessee has 11 EV….if Gore had carried his home State he would have been on 277 and Bush on 260 EV…
Gore should have won his home state and if he had the dodgy result in Florida wouldnt have mattered squat!
A completely irrelevant point to make Glen.
Actually no it isnt Itep.
It is entirely relevant because if you were a Senator of a State and you couldnt even win it or try to win it in your bid for the Presidency you really need to have a hard look at yourself.
Gore would have been President had he just won his home State. So all this complaining about Florida is pointless, if your man had just won tennessee then he’d have won.
Snap.
But if he had lawfully won Florida the result in Tennessee would not have mattered, whether he ’should’ have won it or not.
The question is whether the Supreme Court erred in its decision, and I can’t see a legal reason that it did. The legal logic behind the decision was sound.
Itep, I respect your viewpoint that Bush would have won Florida even if the recount had been allowed to continue by the US Supreme Court, and I have already apologised to you for my making a joke about it.
Everything I said in my post about the Federal and Florida supreme courts is strictly factual. All the justices on both courts voted in line with the party which had appointed them, which is what debunks the myth of the US having genuine separation of powers with apolitical supreme courts. This is completely irrelevant to which candidate would have actually won the 2000 presidential ballot recount.
If you want to carry this discussion further, it will have to be with someone else, as I have to take my family to lunch now. Cheers!
Whether they voted on the lines of which party appointed them is neither here no there. What matters is whether their legal reasoning is sound. If you can point to an adequate flaw in their legal reasoning then that’d be different.
Well at least some of the other judges thought there was a flaw in their legal reasoning which is why they voted the other way.
So it’s pretty obvious it’s not a strict interpretation of the law because then everyone would vote the same, no? Opinions and biases clearly come into play.
Yes, but you could argue that no matter which way a court decides. The system is, the majority decision of a court is the one which is legally valid. The majority reached a decision that is legally sound, it is the final court in the jurisdiction so that ends it. He was legitimately elected.
Ok, the Dems are in now for sure in GA
…
Another bank in Texas has failed.
http://money.cnn.com/2008/11/07/news/companies/bank_failure/?postversion=2008110719
I said as soon as she was picked that Palin would be the gift that keeps on giving. And it looks like she will keep on giving for another four years and ensure Obama is a two term POTUS. Keep drinking the Kool Aid, Repugs.
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_2012/69_of_gop_voters_say_palin_helped_mccain
Diogenes, this one is good too.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/11/07/palin-on-the-leakers-those-guys-are-jerks/
Diogenes, it looks like someone wants to be a doctor but doesn’t know it yet!
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/07/-a-scapular-art-dres.html
It’s good news for the Democrats that they’ll be getting a run-off in GA, but I think the Republicans will win.
At the risk of sounding like a sore loser, I’d like to quote my post from “Presidential Election minus 5 days” Sunday 2 November:
“Julie,
I’d like to submit a prediction:
Obama 364 – Kerry States + Virginia, North Carolina, Florida, Ohio, Missouri, Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico, Nevada. My quirky guess is 1 vote from Nebraska.
As for the decider on count night, I’m thinking Colorado”.
As I’ve previously acknowledged, I’d calculated incorrectly, thinking that added up to 364, when it’s in fact 365. The errorin the States is that I expected Missouri to come across, and Indiana to stay Republican.
story about the efforts to get the Dems votes in North Carolina
Sarah Palin… thinks N.A.F.T.A. means “Need Another Fifty Thousand for Accessories”. – David Letterman
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/07/lettermans-top-10-sarah-p_n_142082.html
Juliem
#388 “Ok, William …IF Obama gets 5854 of those 7100 (provisional) votes (in MO) , I’m in ….. fat chance I think though…”
I’m terribly disappointed to let you know ca;cs below on th 7100 provisional votes , especially as everytime I log onto this thread th despotic former King leaves th following up:
“Long live th King…..the truly momentous and inspirational aspect of yesterday’s result was my ALMOST perfect prediction of it, as published in Crikey last Friday.”
Seing th simple rules were to tell you a single e/v figure …no matter how calculated (probably presently 365) and th tipping State (ultimately CA) , th former King’s 375 (with 2 States wrong) indeed was almost right , your 376 was almost right , Grog & Peter made blues , and all th guys at 353 were also almost right , but th (present) predicted 364 e/v figure with CA is presently th right predicted figure ………Which leads to your 7100 provisional votes….you said you hope Obama gets 5854 out of th 7100 but sorry to disappoint but th remaining 1246 votes also hav to go to either Obama or McCain Actualy th McCain lead is 5859 and for Obama to win he’d need 91.3% of those 7100 provisional votes (if all were accepted) Also I’d assume 50% probably will be rulked inaligible anyway on registration reasons , prior voting etc as that’s usually why they ar treated initially as provisional
Your hoped for 82% of them would need 9100 rather than 7100 provisional votes and even at 82% I suspect that’s too high a % , and am posting now rather than you hoping till 18th November final count As for th King I was probabley in such existing disfavour of th Royal Court that redemption was never likely anyway
I’ve updated the USA maps section at my website, including presidential and Senate maps back to 1789. I will add new detailed House maps when the results are finalised.
http://psephos.adam-carr.net/countries/u/usa/usamapindex.shtml
“Exit poll survey confirms partisan shift”
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jL8ihdCofjv-TbxC4kp1JNJbeTVAD94ALFPO0
‘Democrats made up 39 percent of the electorate and Republicans 32 percent in a national exit poll’
ps adam you latest map shows 363-shouldnt it be 365,great effort BTW
from same article
“What if it had been Hillary?
There’s no way to be sure, but she might have won by even more than Obama did.”
lol
The Associated Press has caught pollbludger disease
Adam
Your 2008 presently shows Obama 363 to Mccain 174 (with NE 5 red)
Tink 2008 should show Obama 364 to McCain 173 (with NE 4 , 1 undecided)
(you may hav worked off some US media also showing same)
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/bustech/story.html?id=28357389-5afa-49ad-bb68-3e82b8562795
just received this link as well-”The good, the bad & the very expensive: Marketing lessons from the U.S. campaign”
“When you have a candidate who actually outspends McDonald’s on marketing (Obama bought $77 million U.S. of advertising in the first two weeks of October, about what the giant burger chain invests in a typical month), it’s hard not to see politics as largely a marketing and messaging exercise”
21st century politics
the medium is the messenger
Hmmmm
someone said Israel will not llom large or that jews would not warm to obi
“In strikingly racist remarks, the father of Rahm Emanuel has said Israel will benefit from Obama’s choice of White House chief of staff.
“Obviously he will influence the president to be pro-Israel. Why wouldn’t he be? What is he, an Arab? He’s not going to clean the floors of the White House,” Benjamin Emanuel, father of Rahm Emanuel, told the Israeli Ma’ariv daily. ”
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=74697§ionid=351020206
Gusface
#433/434 ““What if it had been Hillary?
The Associated Press has caught pollbludger disease”
What part of AAP polling (quite demmographicaly detailed) of Hillary vs Mcain on electon day did you not like
Th fact AAP hav removed th Republicons LAST lame excuse they would not ALSO been easily defeated by th alternative Democrat Primary candidate Hillary irrespective of Obama’s $ donations kitty
(or that on those stats Hillary probabley , not certainly , hav won by more in % terms)
AAP POLL
Exit Poll (18,000)
Sampling error plus or minus 1%
4/11/08
“What if it had been Hillary?
There’s no way to be sure, but she might have won by even more than Obama did.
Voters in the Obama-McCain race said they would have preferred Hillary Rodham Clinton over McCain by 51 percent to 41 percent, a larger margin than Obama’s 53-46 win.”
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jL8ihdCofjv-TbxC4kp1JNJbeTVAD94ALFPO0
Nothing changes who is POTUS , but AAP’s poll on hillary was legitimate ….for Republicons ears to hav to wear historically with zero ezcuses (and for Hillary to put up with)
Thanks for that correction. The correct ECV figures are 365 to 173. No-one in the US seems to think the Nebraska vote is in doubt.
woah their ron
I actually supported hill until she went a bit “redneck”
from then on she was toast and obi was da man.
It was quite extensive (thats why i posted it) but I dont care for what ifs -only cold hard facts.
I just find it ironic that AP would use the term we used here on pollbludger
{ she might have won by even more than Obama did}
Adam
does typing the names gusface and ron a problem? just asking
(you havent caught GP disease have you btw)
g u s f a c e
r o n
why thank you kindly sir
As I said earlier great effort on the maps.
excuse ignorance time-But when did the 2 term law come in.
Why?
1951, via the 22nd amendment.
It was thought to be because the founders wanted to stop a monarchical situation from occurring.
And of course, the thought that having a President serve too long may arise in a dictatorial environment and upset the separation of powers.
It was the Republican Party’s posthumous revenge on Roosevelt.
ta Lteap
“It was thought to be because the founders wanted to stop a monarchical situation from occurring.”
why didnt THEY(the founding fathers) put it in the original constitution?
Sorry meant ltep
ta Adam
“It was the Republican Party’s posthumous revenge on Roosevelt.”
cos he was a 4 termer ?
or to stop another FDR arising?
I’m not sure gusface… I think some old fuddy duds thought that because there was purportedly a convention that no one would seek a third presidential term that that had been the intention of the founders.
Ha, found this choice quote from Mr Bush
President George W. Bush when, after winning his second term, told the media “I’m going to come out strong after my swearing-in. We have to move quickly, because after that I’ll be quacking like a duck.”
Adam
“No-one in the US seems to think the Nebraska vote is in doubt.”
I don’t think so either but given 5,000 provisionals and that they “found” 12,000 early votes this week thaty were uncounted , I wasn’t preuming your sites methadologies so left one as doubtful
(see3ms Obama leads by 1260 , 5000 provisionals , McCain needs only 62.6% of those but problem is they ar in Douglas County (and likely 50% get ineligible anyway making it maths impossible same as MO in reverse assumng only 7100 provisionals only ar there )
Washington retired after two terms, which given his immense prestige was considered very remarkable at the time – many wanted to make him president for life. Thereafter it became the convention – if it was good enough for Washington, it was good enough for everyone else. I’m not sure how many presidents actually could have won a third term, but at any rate no-one tried until FDR in 1940, which he justified on the grounds that there was a world war on and he was indispensible. The Republicans of course were very angry about this because they thought they could win if FDR retired.
Ron
did you go in the crikey comp?
the amercian studies one?
Adam
so although not written in the original constitution, the R’s decided to ‘channel’ the founding fathers and rely on a “convention” to enact a law.
why wasnt it challenged /can it ever be overturned?
Neocons of the world, start squirming.
The Obama Agenda
By PAUL KRUGMAN
Bear in mind, also, that this year’s presidential election was a clear referendum on political philosophies — and the progressive philosophy won.
So a serious progressive agenda — call it a new New Deal — isn’t just economically possible, it’s exactly what the economy needs.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/opinion/07krugman.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin
Yes Gusface by another amendment. Chances of that? Slim to none. It’s probably good in a way, rids politics of the incumbent factor and forces parties to refresh at least once every 8 years.
I wish we’d only had Howard for 2 terms.
Gusface
“It was quite extensive (thats why i posted it) but I dont care for what ifs -only cold hard facts
just find it ironic that AP would use the term we used here on pollbludger”
I tink what you ar saying is you’re not interested in what may hav been as its academic My view is th “cold hard facts” hav pretty well noew been laid out …by AAP and th benefit i saw as I said was more that Republicon comment i’ve seen has complained 1/ as an excuse of Obama’s war chest 450 million to McCain’s 84 million and 2/ as an excuse Hillary just lost and had she not th Republicons would hav beaten her
Well th AAP Poll of 18,000 with sample error of of only 1% shows Hillary would hav won probably not certainly more easily and statisicaly destroys both Republicon excuses ….Republicons ar left to blame themselves , and that was my interest in AAP questions
ron
faced with the truth most neocons deserve the line from some film i never saw
“you cant handle the truth”
granted with hill it would have produced a different result but the “vibe” would have been different imho- so it really ends up as acadaemic
a ‘vibe’ person you ar , thought you liked ‘and they played waltz sing matilda” …..well Republicons and there Fox fiends ” cant handle the truth” that a black guy won and won easily as it was against all there theories , all AAP did has left there alternative excuses in a rubble also …so guess theyll argue Mccain was not consevative enough 9which 100% in reverse of what they should be tinking)
and th band played waltz sing matilda
ron
dont understand the picture you are trying to paint oldson?
Maybe the Repubs and the Liberal Party can sit down and discuss that they are not conservative enough. And go to the next election being even more neocon than usual.
Howard was able to bask in the neocon glow of the Bush administration, the George’s little Sheriff. Well how much more will Obamas progressive light shine on Kev.
Wonder how the Liberals are going to try and undermine Obama if he sets ‘bad’ examples for Kev or does stuff that supports what Kev might do, like running up a deficit maybe.
Kev could not do worse than associating with Obama, wonder if he has a ranch to visit?
Fox are going to start campaigning to make the Republicans shift further right, you know think they can win by talking about abortion and gay marriage.
Apparently the Western White House is going to be in Hawaii rather than Chicago.
That’s actually more convenient than the U.S. mainland for an Oz P.M.
vibes will pass …sooner or later , what will come after that hopefully is concrete outcomes and its up to Democrats to do so Th song that a poster shared my high view of and i thought mistaeknly was you , had many diferent messages that th Republicons with Iraq still do not understand nor understand there ultra consevative values ar not why they won in past or why McCain’s lack of them lost th Republicons th electon this time
That is what people had suggested would happen, denial. Just as Abbott couldn’t believe Australia tossed out a ‘good’ government, the people just didn’t understand. The Republicans in denial can make the excuse that McCain wasn’t a genuine Republican and thus didn’t represent the ideology in its purest form.
This is of course madness. Not only did Americans vote for a Democrat it was a black Democrat. Bigotry and racism are the foundations of neocon electioneering, the appeal to the base fears and prejudices of people, who happily comply. Do the Republicans think that they were so un-Republican that Republican voters decided to vote for a black person? The message is of course the opposite. Voters were so fed up with Bush and Republican brand that they did something they may have not have done otherwise, vote against their prejudices.
Ron
Congratulations on your excellent prediction in the comp
I should say too that while I didn’t want to debate it further in previous threads, I also agree Hillary would have been very competitive in this election. With her as the democrat candidate the republicans wouldn’t have even gotten their Palin bounce. I hope Obama uses her in government in some capacity, because she is still a smart and capable politician, and they need a few people to fix multiple problems.
Ronster, who will be further to the left; Obama, the Senate, or the House of Representatives?
Supplementary question, who will be more core ‘left’? Obama, the Senate, or the House of Representatives?
Ron
no
I still have my idealism just my pragmatism triumphs most times
“Th song that a poster shared my high view of and i thought mistaeknly was you ‘
ron if you remember I posted it.and ps none us hold the high ground on ‘views’
Probably the economy only needs to be somewhat better or in some sort of sustained recovery in 4 years time for Obama to get reelected. You would think that the USA economy would indeed be in recovery by then.
Early prediction, McCain will vote with the Democrats more often than the Republicans in the new Senate.
Now that he doesn’t have the RNC and Sarah Suitcase to lug around, he can go back to being a real MAVERICK, with Joe Liberman as GOOSE.
This is one of the best side effects of the entire election. If people keep voting against their prejudices long enough, we won’t be able to meaningfully say they have prejudices anymore.
Of course it is crazy for the republicans to try to move even further to the right. But they are still in the denial stage. I expect next they will move on to anger (at the media?) and then depression.
I think so too. But he needs a big domestic win, like his tax plan by say mid next year, and health care operational with 12 months to go.
If he is going to have a plan to create manufacturing jobs, please let it be in renewable energy tech.
They seemed to spend most of the campaign attacking the media. Which to me is a stupid thing for a political party to do, that is how you get your message out!
I think there is a connection here between shifting the party to the right, and trying to set Palin up as the defacto leader of the party. She is supposedly a moderate in Alaska, but she kept that side of herself completely hidden during this campaign.
Gusface
you misunderstood what i meant , i meant only a poster shared my high view of th song itself as a song and what it says so well As for ideals and pragmatism I agree thats always a clash for believers on balance , and this electon i took former over later and was very popular
Any Democrat win is a victory for the USA and the world and a chance to clean out the Whitehouse and start again. Clinton would have done a good job of course, especially with Bill there to be a sounding board and give the benefit of experience.
However their system put forward Obama and as it may turn out he will be an even better option than Clinton if only that his election is a potent symbolic shift in thinking and attitude for the nation and for the world’s view of the USA. Obama is the literal blank black-board and he may more than anyone else have the authority to write what he wants on it, and have it accepted. He will given much more room to move by the people you would think since he may to many represent more than just another change in leadership. He has a big ‘good will ‘ ticket to spend, hope he is smart enough to spend it wisely.
The proof will be in the eating of the pudding. But given the example of his life so far and the way he has been able to make it through these campaigns and keep it all together so well, you wouldn’t think he would stuff up for lack of intelligence and ability.
The Republicans in their denial may even enhance Obama’s work by fighting a dead and forgotten paradigm whilst Obama moves on with the world.
Don’t know if any of you caught up with Mark Knight’s very funny cartoon in the Melbourne Herald Sun today, but for those who didn’t it went as follows::
First picture – Rudd sitting at his office desk and a voice bubble from stage right saying ” Mr Rudd it’s the President on the phone.
Second picture – Rudd picking up phone and saying ” Hello Mr Obama.and congratulations on your win. It’s so good to talk to someone intelligent. That George Bush, what a dope. He didn’t even know what the G20 was…
Third picture – Voice bubble from the phone – This IS George Bush. I’m still the President until January.
Ron
ATBPWM- by eric bogle
still makes me cry every time.
u and i are onthe same path just different tracks
thanks Socrates I tink Hillary will stay in th senate and I feel only a few cabinet posts would hav used her abilities to maximun In th Senate Obama will need alot pf of pull from senior Democrats (and Hillary now has advanced status in th Party) to get some Agneda items through because there is so much cross th floor voting there and th 57 Democrat seats ar not all given on all Bills so she could be quite helpful there (although not apparently publicly but in reality effective helping th Administration in smooth transition of dificvcult Bills with Harry Reid , Pelosi etc )
What a system it is! Of course it is terribly expensive, but on the plus side it is highly participatory, because the party machines don’t determine the candidates. But also, it is a grueling process, that to get to be a viable candidate, let alone President means only those politically and personally fittest survive.
First they need to figure out all the things that Bush did wrong, write a long list, and see what makes them similar.
My feeling to the latter question is this; Bush based a lot of his most important decisions on hunches influenced by how he WANTED the world to be, not how it actually is.
Call this the reality deficit syndrome. I don’t think 1) Obama won’t suffer from this 2) I don’t think the Republicans have many members that DON’T view the world in this way.
What a genius system Ron!
Politicians actually voting based on what they think!
We should have that here.
Jim Cramer’s integration of immigration and housing and economic policies:
http://www.thebigmoney.com/articles/judgments/2008/11/06/hey-barack-hire-me
TP@475
“Clinton would have done a good job of course, especially with Bill there to be a sounding board and give the benefit of experience”
this from obi’s transition team
-As a former Chief of Staff to Bill Clinton, John Podesta has plenty of White House experience to offer Mr Obama, as he helps lead the president-elect’s transition team.-
Nice.
This is the huge bonus of Obama winning, you get him in the big chair at the big desk, but you get a whole new administration, that won’t politicise things like the justice and defence departments.
and this bit is for ron,adam ,gg,finns etc
-Mr Podesta, who remained close to the Clintons during the Bush years, backed Hillary Clinton in the Democratic primaries. -
Ron
True about Hillary in the Senate. With their stupid arcane fillibuster system Obama will need to negotiate a few moderate republican senators on side to pass bills, like courting Fielding and Xenephone here.
It looks like Obama’s transition team is quite inclusive of different sections of the democrat party, so that is a good sign I think.
They seem to be checking everything, Clinton faction, Kennedy establishment, Obama’s backers, maybe even Kerry for Secretary of State.
Agree re inclusiveness accross Party Socrates , and th move appointing ex Billy man John Podesta who apparently has been working on transition for a few weeks shows good long term planning by th Leadership and use of an expereinced guy who does know pitfalls from th last transition & tink they will learn from that last time and make it quicker and more effective operationally earlier
shows
the scuttlebutt from the email i recieved pointed to the UN/supernumerary
though whether as a superambassador/ supernumerary
or not?
would suit bill as he luvs and is luvved by most of the 3rd world
lets wait and see
Bill Clinton as U.S. ambassador to the U.N.! That would be interesting.
But really he could be the President of the U.N. Ban Ki Moon is no Bill Clinton.
Well I hope the U.S. gets in there and REFORMS to U.N. If they could do that it would be a more credible forum that would be more influential in world affairs. If it keeps going a long as a body for kinds like Mugabe and Amdinejahd to make speeches in, then it will become irrelevant.
Just to underscore how silly the republicans desire to shift further to the right is, apparently Turnbull made a statement defending abortion here today. That would have been unthinkable under Howard just a year ago:
http://news.theage.com.au/national/turnbull-defends-abortion-20081108-5ki8.html
Personally I agree with Turnbull on this one. Besides, I do not think it appropriate for the State to legislate against something which is clearly still a divisive moral issue.
shows
the us would be able to now ,via stachmo bill ,reclaim the respect taht it so sorely needs.
where bush said ‘ya eva agin us or aginst us’
obama is saying ‘who dont i represent huh?’
The astonishing thing is, the debate here was done and dusted by about 1970.
In the U.S. it goes on and on and on. Could you imagine abortion being talked about for 10 minutes in a P.M. V Opposition Leader debate? Well that is what happened in the 3rd Presidential debate this year.
That’s a huge difference. Obama has moral authority around the world because of his life story.
I still believe it, the only thing that exceeds the stupidity of the U.S. is their genius. Their country has an astonishing ability to renew itself no matter how big the failure of catastrophe it encounters.
They’ll recover from Bush, he’ll be a forgotten man in 20 years time.
“I do not think it appropriate for the State to legislate against something which is clearly still a divisive moral issue.”
Problam i see with abortion , and indeed fertilization and gay marriage etc is th vocal minority often sensationalised with publicity by a hungry Media from both sides , seem hog limelight , inflence debate & politcans , to cloud what i suspect is a more balanced in middle view of many morally devisave issues of th silent majority
Whenever conscience votes are debated in parliaments around the country, the progressive position usually passes by a 2:1 ratio.
The only exception is issues related to homosexuals, like should they get access to IVF. Those votes are much closer. But stem cell research and abortion related issues usually pass 2:1, most labor MPs, and the left wing Liberal MPs support it.
Does this mean Australia should be considered a default centre-left country?
I agree that in Australia the majority of both the population (based on opinion polls) and politicians (based on conscience votes) usually vote for the “progressive” position on these issues. But still, the pollies rarely voice their positions publicly. Hence Turnbull’s statement is a change of tack. Of course, its awelcome one because , as you say, this debate is only sustained by a group of zealots who are not representative of mainstream views. If recent events have dented the credibility of these lobby groups, that is a very good thing.
I feel ‘oz’ has always been basicaly a centre left Country since Whitlam , with swingers prepared to vote ‘right’ when they tink Labor has run its course/st.ffed up and then ‘right’ usualy relies on wedgies , tax cut offers and National security to over ride populations natural centre left feelings to retain powers On other hand believe US is basicaly a centre right Country including big chunks of th democrat Party
ShowsOn
If a clear majority support a view, and have done for several decades, then perhaps its not so much the case that you are progressive if you support it, as those who oppose it are being quite reactionary.
I think this was one of the biggest spins (lies) told by the right in the Bush/Howard/Fox News era: they presented aggressive attacks on previously agreed social norms and human rights as being “conservative” rather than radical attempts at social counter-revolutions. Its high time they got called on it.
Ron
Despite my comments at 498 I agree with you on the US – it is more conservative than Oz and has been for a long time. The greater influence of religeon in the US is an obvious reason why.
Good point. I was going to write “liberal”, but I thought that may be confused as “Liberal Party”, which of course is the party that features most of the members opposed to such policies.
But it is interesting that for the first 70 years or so of the 20th Century, Democrats mainly held power. So it was like they had a slightly left party to balance the centre right structure of the government.
Well Obama is clearly getting good advice and understands it. He mentioned this in his first press conference.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/08/stupid-fiscal-tricks/
Adam @ 451,
FDR wasn’t the first to try for a third term. Though I think he was the first to try for a third consecutive term.
Theodore Roosevelt, after retiring at the end of his second term, came back four years later and unsuccessfully battled President Taft for the 1912 Republican nomination. He then ran as a third party candidate in the general election.
Ulysses Grant, also after a term on the sidelines, unsuccesfully sought the Republican nomination in 1880.
ltep @ 455,
Mate, try Z E R O terms, that would have been better
……
I wanted more of Keating
tp @ 461,
I think that is the way that they are headed, initially anyways. Saw a poll yesterday that said 64% of Repubs want Palin in 2012. Don’t think that those 64% realize that she is clueless so what does that say about them?
Mister 538 is famous!
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=caple/081107
501 TP, I think that Arnie has become a classic symbol for the problems you explained.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/07/us/07marriage.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
Higher taxes? This guys a Republican how?
Cos he likes to kick ass and take names.
Chuck and Sly are Repugs as well aren’t they?
Sarah Palin and Alaska have a few budgetary problems looming due to recent oil price falls too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/us/politics/09palin.html?partner=rssnyt&emc=rss
David, yes you are right about TR and Grant. Wilson also *wanted* a third term, even though he was partly paralysed by his stroke. What I meant was that no-one before FDR was actually nominated for a third consecutive term by their party.
TR decided not to run for another term in 1908, after having served nearly all of the 1901-05 term following McKinley’s assassination, then the 1905-09 term in his own right, partly because that would have been seen as breaking the “no third term” convention. He then tried for the GOP nomination in 1912, but was beaten by Taft, before running as an independent and thus handing the election to Wilson. If anything TR’s behaviour reinforced the “no third term” convictions of conservatives.
It seems that Obama has picked that extra ECV in Nebraska.
http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/07/make_that_365_obama_on_track_t.html?hpid=topnews
Hypothetical
Would Bill C have won a third term against George W?
Ronster
I read that Bill is likely to be sent to Kashmir as a super-ambassador (temporarily) to stabilise the region which Obama thinks is crucial (something about it impacting on the Paki-Afghani power balance).
Also Franken is catching up in the late counting in MN, now only 221 votes behind Coleman. The manual recount hasn’t started yet. This race will probably end up in court.
amigo ronnie, didnt realise u r an old rocker.
I want the obama’s narrative not just fighting bush fire.
Diog, yr day in the sun tomorrow. Lima peru is a real surprise not a hick town at all
Diogenes, yes I think he would have done. Despite being impeached (though not of course convicted), he still had very high approvals at the end of his term.
Also, I now see the AL Senate race is drifting towards the Dem.
http://donklephant.com/2008/11/08/fivethirtyeight-thinks-alaska-senate-could-go-blue/
Sorry, that should be AK, not AL.
Adam
I suspect you are right. Bill’s approval rating was 65% at the end of his second term, which was the highest of any POTUS leaving office. I saw somewhere that anything over 50% approval rating for any incumbent basically guaranteed re-election. This graphic shows that his approval rating just kept increasing the longer he was in office. It’s pretty much the opposite of his successors.
PS I couldn’t find a graph of Howard’s approval rating through his terms. He was 43% in October 2007 which fits the 50% rule.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Clinton_approval_rating.png
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:George_W_Bush_approval_ratings.svg
There is an interesting story here about ‘the Farmer in Chief’ which translates to what is Obama going to do about rising food prices in the US?
http://www.boingboing.net/2008/11/08/the-new-presidents-p.html
An interesting prospect in Alaska, but I think Stevens will, unfortunately, still manage to be elected. The eventual election for that spot will be interesting, but I suspect the Republicans will still manage to get a senator elected.
Apparently one of the most conservative Senators Jim De Mint is going to move to have Stevens expelled from the Senate in January if the Republican leadership doesn’t do so in December. They need 67 votes for an expulsion, so that means they’d need all the Dems, De Mint, and another 8 or 9 Republicans.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15392.html
Actually that article says that he wants to attempt to have the vote before the old Senate runs out in which case if all the Democrats voted for the expulsion then 16 republicans would be required to vote for it (with full attendance).
A followon from several earlier posts since the election where I’ve noted that the blacks really turned out Ohio to vote for Obama
….
Tickets to Bush’s departure ceremony sound like fun.
http://inaugural.senate.gov/
Landslide.
But thankfully the two term rule stopped it (oh that PM’s could only be PM for 2 terms…)
While the rule is good because of the inherent advantage of incumbency, I guess it cuts both ways – it would have been interesting to see if the Rebups would’ve eeven nominated GWB this year had he been able to stand…
I strongly doubt it, a 27% approval rating won’t win many elections.
Palin no longer thinks Stevens should resign:
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin/1108/Palin_walks_back_call_on_Stevens_to_resign.html
I loved this bit.
http://inaugural.senate.gov/history/daysevents/departure.cfm
Would’ve been pressured to do an LBJ I suspect…
Grog
I expected everyone to say Bill Clinton would have won a third term but it does beg the question of why Gore couldn’t win. His policies were almost identical and he didn’t have the sleaze problems Clinton had. In effect, a popular Administration was thrown out for no good reason I can see. It’s hardly as if Bush was a great candidate. I can see how Bush won his second term but not his first.
http://inaugural.senate.gov/history/daysevents/inauguraladdress.cfm
I think it was because Gore ran a poor campaign. He ran on an “us v them” platform that made his policies sound like they were far to the left of Clinton’s. He made himself sound like a risky change candidate, instead of continuing the Clinton years.
It was almost as if he didn’t want to win by riding on Clinton’s coat tails, hence he didn’t talk to Clinton at all during the campaign, and didn’t want him campaigning on his behalf.
That’s nothing compared to Strom Thurmond. More than 24 hours!!
Apparently part of the speech was a verbatim read out of the U.S. and South Carolinian constitutions.
Remember, he had to remain standing for that entire period. If he sat down, that would be considered the end of his speech!
Another bizarre speech was made by a representative in the Canadian parliament. Apparently Canadian Hansard records everything in French and English, with a translation created between the languages. The legislator had written a book in English, that he wanted translated to French for free, so he preceded to read out his entire book into Hansard so it could be automatically translated to French!
Thus, the very good rule in Australian parliaments that members/senators should not read speeches. It’s rarely applied but would be swiftly done if someone tried to pull something like that.
We have time limits for speeches thank fully!
IMO most speeches in our parliaments are generally boring and repetitive. Party discipline really stops our MPs from thinking for themselves about various issues.
What a clever idea.
In the Senate a few weeks ago Coonan took a point of order during QT that Conroy was reading his answer off his laptop, contrary to standing orders. The President ruled that Conroy was in order, because there is a gentleperson’s agreement that this standing order will not be enforced. That evening Coonan came in and spoke on some bill or other, reading every word verbatim. Some Labor members heckled, but no-one took a point of order. If the standing order against reading were enforced, Parliament would get through its business a lot quicker, because half the Members and Senators would never speak at all!
ShowsOn,
In regards to “speeches” per se, isn’t that what you are supposed to do out of QT when they ask leave to make a “ministerial statement” or “personal explanation”?
Yes Adam… it’s rarely applied but would be applied for something such as irrelevant reading from large slabs of books, newspaper articles etc.
Generally the way it’s gotten around is to say the senator/member is just referring to ‘copious notes’ which would obviously not apply to extensive quoting from a book, such as happened in the Canadian parliament.
Obama roasts his new Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel (from 2005).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdphzxz64BY
I don’t understand why if a member has say 20 minutes for a speech why they go on and on and on even if they are just repeating themselves. Why don’t they just shut up and sit down after they have made their points?
Is it because they have promised to keep talking so the next speaker doesn’t need to be in the chamber until a specified time? If people only spoke for as long as necessary, rather than as long as they are entitled to speak, then that would force more MPs to actually attend the chamber, because they wouldn’t know when the person was going to stop talking.
Sometimes they don’t want to get through legislation early because they’re not ready to move onto the next item of business. Other times they want to filibuster. Also, if one side has 3 members speaking for 20 minutes then the other side will feel obliged to have the same amount for ‘balance’.
If they wanted to they could all just seak leave to incorporate speeches in Hansard and then things would really whip past quickly.
There is a standing order on relevance, and also one on tedious repetition, which are in part intended to stop filibustering, but of course time limits are the most effective way of doing that. But we can still see “filibustering by relay”, as the Coalition did in the Senate with the luxury car tax. I think every Coalition Senator spoke at least once, and since the government doesn’t have the numbers they couldn’t be stopped. This wasted a whole week of the Senate’s time.
The US Senate has no time limits, and cloture (the gag) can only be invoked by a vote of 60 Senators. So filibustering is alive and well there, though not as rampant as it used to be.
So did Labor Senators speak as well? Or did they just let Coalition Senators go one after each other?
Um, they’re politicians? They like the sound of their own voice.
I prefer the U.S. tendency where they just make the points they want them hand over to the next person.
Except of course if they are deliberately trying to waste time.
Some Labor senators spoke, but after a while the Coalition was just left to talk to itself.
To be fair, not many members “go on and on and on even if they are just repeating themselves.” Both sides have a system of distributing speaking notes to their members for each piece of legislation, so most of them can do a fairly coherent 20 minutes on a bill. The point of making speeches which no-one listens to is (a) to distribute in your electorate and put on your website to show that you’re doing your job, (b) to impress the whips in the hope of getting yourself promoted, (c) send out to revelant interest grous (unions, business, farmers, whatever), to show that you’re working for their causes, so they will help you get re-pre-selected and re-elected.
Technically a minister can close debate on a bill at any time by rising and speaking, then moving the reading of whatever stage the bills is at. In practice, however, that’s discouraged.
Also technically, the Government in the Senate can still close debate if they get the agreement of a majority of the chamber. If it’s obvious that senators are just seeking to waste the chambers’ time and senators want to go home on time that week it’s quite possible that can happen.
Just came across this fascinating piece in Salon.com which puts forth the thesis that there have been three American Republics, approximately 72 years apart, and it commenced a Fourth Republic between 2004 and now. The first half of each Republic is a period of “Hamiltonian” expansion, and the second half is a period of “Jeffersonian” contraction.
1st: Washington to Buchanan
2nd: Lincoln to Hoover
3rd: F.D.R. to G .W. Bush
4th: Obama
Highly Recommended: http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/11/07/fourth_republic/index1.html
Ahh, this is what they mean! I kept reading articles where people were saying Obama marks the start of the 4th Republic, because of his ability to attract a broad voting coalition. I just didn’t know exactly what they meant.
I guess it is part of the “transformative election” thesis, that describes a dramatic realignment of voting tendencies.
But if that is the case, shouldn’t 1968 count as the end of one era? Because that election was the first big fracturing of the New Deal coalition?
Not if the Opposition have decided to waste the Senate’s time as a deliberate tactic, as they clearly did in this instance. This is a very angry and bitter opposition. They hold Labor in absolute contempt and believe very strongly in their own right to rule. The Senate is their last redoubt and they intend using it to undermine the government in any way they can.
I’m aware of that but wonder whether the government thought of running the idea of a closure (or actually did run the idea) past the Greens, Xenophon and Fielding on that occasion. It was an obvious abuse of the Senate’s time and I have a feeling the Greens or Xenophon would’ve felt similarly.
I suppose the problem with that is twofold, firstly the Greens or Xenophon might object to doing that in principal (it curbing senators’ rights to speak on a bill). Secondly, Fielding is a dope.
Obviously the government can shut down the Coalition if the Greens + FF + X will support them. In this case (IIRC) both FF and X supported the Coalition on the issue, and were happy to let the debate run. (FF later changed his mind.) I don’t think they will consistently take that line however. It will depend on the issue and the atmospherics of the time.
They always expect better treatment than what they provided when in Government.
I don’t think they can really care less about the history and traditions of the Senate.
Wow Bill Kristol is a real neocon in all respects. Creepy.
http://blogs.crikey.com.au/trevorcook/2008/11/09/kristol-palin-and-the-nyt/
More feet of clay … King Neocon is dead, long live the king!
I’m not sure if I’m the first person to ask this on this site, but since the Australian, US, Canadian and NZ elections are now over, what’s the next major election to look forward to?
I gather there’s probably some state elections coming up next year, but the next big one I can think of is in the UK in 2010. Is that right? (and what happens to Pollbludger until then)???
16 November: Guinea-Bissau legislative election
28 November: Romania legislative election
30 November: Cote d’Ivoire presidential election
7 December: Ukraine legislative election
18 December: Bangladesh legislative election
18 January 2009: El Salvador legislative election
15 March 2009: El Salvador presidential election
9 April 2009: Indonesia legislative election
3 May 2009: Panama presidential and legislative elections
19 May 2009: Malawi presidential and legislative elections
12 June 2009: Iran presidential election
14 June 2009: Bulgaria legislative election
14 June 2009: Luxembourg presidential election
14 June 2009: Luxembourg legislative election
5 July 2009: Mexico legislative election
14 September 2009: Norway legislative election
27 September 2009: Germany legislative election
14 June 2009: Luxembourg presidential election
should read
14 June 2009: Lithuania presidential election
Also Israel in February but I don’t think a date has been set yet
Israel should be interesting. Does anyone know how they are going with that “negative income tax” thingie they trialled about six months ago. ESJ was rabbiting on about the benefits of “negative income tax” a while ago.
http://www.worldwide-tax.com/israel/isr_econonews.asp
Hmm… I can see a very active thread on the Malawi presidential and legislative elections next year…
That said, the German and Israeli elections next year should be interesting. As should the Ukrainian election (although they seem to have one every year or so nowadays…)
Perhaps we should have an open thread for non-Oz elections? The occasional US election, like the GA run-off, British by-elections and general dross that shouldn’t go on the Oz/State threads could go there. A bit of a dumping ground for “non-core” business.
Bill Kristol was Dan Quayle’s Cheif of Staff.
Enough said…
Was that spelling intentional, or just Dan Quayle induced?
LOL! Must’ve been.
Quayle ran for President in 2000 remember. Would’ve he been worse than Bush?
MUST READ: TV SoundOff with Justin Linkins. A summary of the Sunday politics talk shows:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/09/tv-soundoff-sunday-talkin_n_142426.html
TBH it’s not something I’d really like to think about…
A good article from “The New Yorker” -
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/11/17/081117fa_fact_lizza?printable=true
Under the literal wording of Article II, Section I of the American Constitution, the President “shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment.” So unless 5 Supreme Court justices somehow find a hidden exception in the above, yes Bush could pardon himself.
Congress would almost certainly try to amend the Constitution to prevent self-pardons in future but IMHO Bush could and would get away with it.
Whilst th Missouri Government stats do not show this , I understand there ar reports of an ERROR in MO counts in St Lois favouring Obama by 699 that would cut McCain’s lead from 5859 to 5160 (before alleged 7100 provions ar couunted)
Not offical but seems a total of 3156 extra votes added tcollectively to Obama/McCain with Obama getting 61% of them …..firstly some of there tally boards were not aadded up properly (gives me great confidenses in maths ) and also some military ballots were not even counted (do not know how that happens)
Assuming these figures ar right then margin is 5160…then assuming no other County made ‘tallying errors’ or missed out counting …and then assuming alleged 7100 provions ar actual number..then Obama needs now 86.3% of thiose 7100 to win (although expect about 50% would be inaligible anyway)
Tink I would be asking for a better electoral officials performanse in future if I was da Chief in MO
Pardon himself for what? Being a moron?
I was just answering an earlier question about possible last minute pardons – i was making fun of the far left in a pseudo-Swiftian way
He could kill Obama, get convicted and then pardon himself.
I presume he could give himself the same sort of pardon that Ford gave Nixon, a pardon for any or all offences committed while President.
The pardon is not prospective so he can’t be pardoned for things he hasn’t been charged with.
So he could blow up the Whitehouse and then pardon himself?
A tale of two states Kansas & next door Missouri on a colored 2008 electoral map just looks like KS strong red McCain 57/41 to MO pale red cliffhanger And yet under th map I tink is a story of 2 America’s when you look at Counties and there voting and thiose big state only figures hav a diferent shade & meanings
Blow th 2 states up by County side by side and all of KS is red by County except a small border section with MO inside east KS Then you see all of MO is also red by County except a small border section with KS inside west MO plus at other extrematitiy of MO where a small border section with IL inside east MO (apart from little Boone county in middle)
So both States which ar sort of rectangls hav reely only blue bits on there very extreme borders and its more than just Meidia steroatypes of rural Obama won about 3 out 90 counties ins maler KS 1.2 million In much largewr MO Obama only won 9 of 114 Counties
Obama’s close loss in MO is diue to his pull in 2 great cities , Kansas City MO in th extreme west bordar thats literaly accross th road from KS and ST Louis in th extreme east border thats literaly accross th road from IL These 2 cities & St Louis County total 858,104 for th 2 candidates and Obama won almost 70% of this vote Yet in rest of MO has a quite large population of 2,021,383 for th 2 candidates so thats alot of towns of size and McCain won 58%/42% (although repeating KS flow but with much bigger towns & peoples) Yet many problams of th big 2 MO cities and th rest ar similar in some ways and also MO is not a big geographical State so th dissimilarities , and religions and histories hav created a gulf of almost 2 States inside MO and wonder whether th tale under th coloured electoral maps red & blue maps by State is of interest to Media or if image of US as simply red and blue is easier to expalin of
Could I ask a favour regarding the election coverage? I was looking for footage and facts on the crowd in Grant Park, Chicago. Xanthippe said the scene of Grant Park when Obama’s victory was announced on CNN was a huge celebration from the 100,000+ crod. Cursed with being a mortgage-bound wage slave I missed it. Does anyone have a link to where it might be stored in cyber space? I suspect it will be an iconic image in years to come.
Also, does anyone have details of that crowd? I recognised it was big when I saw Obama’s speech on video, but I had no idea just how big till I looked at Grant Park on Google Earth today. That is one big park! That crowd must have been at least 100,000.
Socrates
It was estimated at 240,000.
Here are the photos.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-081104-obama-rally-grant-park-photogallery,0,647742.photogallery
Wanting to say, Bye Bye Bye, to the three dead heads, so supposedly smart and in control, that they thought, just because they were re-elected, that they were getting away with it.
How fantastic and delightful that not one of these guys was able to avoid the judgment and rejection, well overdue to them, from we, the voters.
Thank you, Australia, England, America!
Socrates, don’t know but this one might do?
……. I got into Google search under Images and put in the search terms “Grant Park Obama victory celebration” and came back with a heap of options, of course, one or another of them weren’t always the right ones but this one seems good ….
http://weblogs.cltv.com/entertainment/tv/metromix/lolla%20crowd.jpg
juliem 578
It is interesting isn’t it? My son was treated to the same ‘discrimination’ at school here in WA during the recent election. He was standing up during class activities and issuing little bits of advice to his class mates on how everyone should vote for labour and how the liberals were bad. A seriously intelligent boy some might say.
This was a little confronting for us, as from his point of view he was being picked on for supporting labour which would be a serious issue. From the teachers point of view of course she was disciplining him for disrupting the class!
I think the lesson is there is ALWAYS two sides to every story and if you wish to beleive everything reported in the American press as gospel… well you need to remember where Rupert Murdoch lives I guess.
Not saying it DIDNT happen you understand…….. just that circumstances sometimes dictate an activity is appropriate one time and not appropriate at another.
Ron I suspect your posts are quite interesting but until you learn to spell I simply cannot read them.
Well, Israel looks as interesting as always on the electoral front, and recent polls look close…
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/livni-takes-poll-lead-as-israel-heads-for-election-975486.html
Hah, forming government with 29 seats out of 120.
Ron @ 579
You are spot on about MO. I lived in the exurbs of Kansas City, and that’s why I voted No on MO in Juliem’s contest.
By contrast, each of the last three years I have visited my brother in a solidly Repub. House of Reps district 100Km south of Denver. The difference between MO and CO is that Hispanics have doubled their % of CO’s Registered Voters since 2004 and had a strong GOTV ground game to give Obama the pickup margin of 8.6%. MO’s demographics would have changed negligibly since 2004, I’d surmise.
To further support your point, Obama’s homestate of Illinois, on MO’s eastern border, has similar hybrid blue/red demographics to MO, but the difference here is that Chicago’s Dem population overwhelms the Repubs even though their Red Congressional districts cover at around 80% of the area of Illinois.
Krugman
Note also the right trying to misrepresent history.
Franklin Delano Obama?
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/opinion/10krugman.html?hp
OMG …….. she is way more than a few kanagaroos short …….
jjulian1009
#589
Thanks for that info on Chicago following my #579 re MO Prevoiusly i’ve ignored IL as its been an easy blue State for last 4 elections (although not before)
So therefore until your coment I had not realized how much Chicago does dominate IL Actual 2008 results bear your view out strikingly …Cook county 2,060,000 Obama/McCain voters (won 76/23 by Obama) with a margin of 1,105, 935 Yet IL is not a small State , with obama /McCain total voters of 5,269,141 yet th rest of counties only contributed a further 211.604 Obama margin
Only dissimalarity I noticed to MO was IL has quite a spread of smaller blue counties , whereas as mentiond MO only has its 2 border cities (at extrematies of State plus Boone in middle)
Having lived in west MO (Kansas City) , jjulian1009 do you know why Crawford (KS) on th KS west border with MO was won by Obama narrowly , yet all th other Counties around it on both th KS and MO side ar very strong Republicon Its even more surprising as apart from Wyandotte & Douglas in KS accross th road from Kansas City , Crawford County KS was th only oither of th 90 odd KS Countes to vote for Obama and yet geographicaly in KS its all out on its own)
“Obama Wants Lieberman To Remain In Democratic Caucus”
Can understand why , each vote may be critical but frankley Lieberman to me has been not just a problem to Obama but to Democrats beforehand and I would not put too much faith in his loyalty Chris Dodd who has spoken for him probably fot poitcal numbers reasons is th reverse , and principalled even standing up to Pelosi , obama etc in pushing to stop illegal telcos getting immunity from Bush’s corrupt wiretapping , also pushed on own re for closing Gittmo at one stage , hav reel alot of time fot Chris Dodd
Ron, good call on IL. Sorry, I don’t know anything about Kansas except Dorothy went back home there after visiting the Land of OZ, and it is reputed that some Americans, when euphoric, sing “I’m as corny as Kansas in August”!
As for Lieberman staying in Dem Caucus, now that Dems have at least 55 Senators, whether Lieberman is in Caucus is irrelevant because plenty of Blue-Dog conservative, most Southern, Dem Senators will vote against Dem party majority on big cloture bills, particularly military funding. What Lieberman’s blubbering about is that Reid wants to strip him of his Chair of the Homeland Security Comm., which was the prestigious post that he held in last Congress as his price so that the Dems could have majority “control” of the Senate. If they let Lieberman keep that Chair, it will be astounding.
As for Dodd, that’s just Connecticut (my birth state) politics for his fellow home state Senator. By the way, Conn. Republican House Representative, Schays, lost the last New England Republican seat in the House!
Liebermann should be kept within the caucus, lest he defect to the GOP and give them a safe senate seat in New England.
I agree with jjulian’s point that the question of whether the Dems get to 60 or not is fairly irrelevant at this point, because of blue-dog Dems (as well as DLC Dems). There are currently 2 Democratic senators in MT, ND, AR, VA and CO. There are also Democratic senators in LA, SD, NE, MO, IN and NC. All of these Senators are not going to vote for liberal bills just because Obama (or Pelosi) introduces them. Regardless of whether Martin wins in GA or Begich wins in AK, none of them will vote for liberal legislation unless there is a generous slice of pork accompanying it.
What makes it worse for the Dems is that there are hardly any moderate Republicans left in the US senate that would cross the floor to vote with them on liberal legislation. There are 2 Senators in ME, Specter in PA and Voinovich in OH. The rest are tried and true conservatives…
jjulian 1009 : “strip him (lieberman) his Chair of the Homeland Security Comm”
yes agree astounded if he kept it , especialy on its high standing but maybe even also this role is part of security framework and I feel Obama needs not just someone skilled but his own man he knows is delivering for th Party/Country (without other Agenda’s)for which obama has key responsibility so reckon he will definitively lose it but unfortunately get a ‘bone’ (undeserved) Also could Lieberman reely be better than 50% as a GOP candidate in New England against a reasonable Dems candidate
Actualy I spoke in favour of Glen here pushing his Republicon candidates because re th Senate makeup th loss of moderate Republicons is not necessarily a good thing long term It moves Senate Republicon wise more ‘right’ and can strengthen dog blue Democrat Senators on other hand I feel Senate is now quite a mixed bag once you move away from absolute key legislation & even there as with Bailout diferent voting views within Dems Party so wonder where th general “majority” tipping point will be (probaley not allowing most tax cuts to expire in 2010 but perhaps delayed , big monies into R E enegry replacement , certailnly more financials regulation and some healthcare reform (but may be reel contentous in detail) and ……but social justise issues (except Bush torture ones etc) may be a problam as may military expenditure/prioritis , th deficit & “protectionism”
general “majority” tipping point unfortunately is then affected by ‘pork barrelling” , which is always a factor in reality in alot of individual Congress voting decsions
So it might be god’s will that Palin run for president? Hmm, that would confirm me as an atheist. Its a cunning line too; very hard to contradict god after all. Blessed are the spin doctors?
Regarding Lieberman, pesonally I hope they kick him out of the committee, and even caucus if he doesn’t behave. He shouldn’t be dealth with on principle. He campaigned with the republicans, hence he for all practical purposes he has changed sides. Caucusing with him just makes the democrats look weak, and probably gives him a chance to leak tactics and embarrass them any time he disagrees with something.
“Caucusing with him just makes the democrats look weak”
no I tink it makes th Democrats politcally savvy , believing his vote on a future key issue (given Senators do cross floor alot) could be crucial , and more important than “repaying” Lieberman for his flirting with Republicons
As i said in #594 i do not hav much faith in his loyalty and tink he should be given an unambigous warning that he gets a lesser post to buy that loyalty , and if he breaks it then penalty follows i just feel greater good of a Democrat POTUS with a chnse of some reel legislative change from a Democtat Congress is (reluctantly) worth th pregmetism …but with a principal guillotine known to him hanging over his head
plus am not sure whether other guys ar saying he’s better than 50/50 taking New England next time should he change to GOP , I wouldn’t thought so but done no reel data work
Your points on the senate voting for Lieberman may be right Ron, but I’m not so sure about the senate seat. Admittedly this link is from Daily Kos, which is pretty strongly pro-democrat, but still, it shows his polls have tanked since he supproted McCain.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/7/03724/55127/779/491459
Agree Socrates , thanks for that poll , even discounting Research 2000 leanings th drop in both Democrat & Independent suport for Lieberman is big from 2006 figures , so wouldn’t rate him 50/50 on that single poll (april in middle of Primary race) Unfortunately being elected in 2006 , his term has a way to go
Chris Matthews might run against Arlen Specter in the PA 2010 Senate Election. At present, prelimiary polling suggests Matthews at 27% to Specter’s 40% but it is early days and Matthews isn’t even an official candidate anyways. People don’t really know him and aren’t thinking of him in this way.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/12/specter-v-matthews-potent_n_143259.html
Connecticut did not vote Republican even having Lieberman running hard for them. He will be voted out of office whether he remains in the Dems caucus or leaves at the next opportunity. Here are some of his greatest hits from the campaign: http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=8DJ-zGC1-wE&eurl=
He has not apologised or pleaded his case to the Dems, but rather said he would bolt to the Republicans if he was stripped of the Homeland Security Chair. The old megalomaniac does not hold any cards, and should be given a slap. If you have a look at the clinical way that Obama has dealt with those that have crossed him over the past couple of years (notably Hillary), I reckon you can bet that old Joe won’t be getting off scot free.
He’ll get some sort of dressing down, and it will be left to him whether he wants to remain or leave. Also, if he begins blocking Obama, he will have even less chance of re-election than he already does.
And for Ron: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/12/washington/12health.html?_r=1&oref=slogin. Some of those long sought mandate seem implied here.
Dems pulling ahead in the Alaska Senate now 814 up. Every seat counts but I wold be cautiously optimistic that the moderate Republicans will be open to reason.
So much for the Palin-to-Washington scenario. If Begich does win, and if Franken also pulls ahead in MN as the late votes are counted and the “undercounts” are scrutinised (as seems likely), then the Dems can still get to 59 seats. They could get to 60 if they win the GA runoff, but this seems very unlikely because black turnout will fall without The One on the ballot. The 59 includes Lieberman. Obama has said he doesn’t want Lieberman expelled from the Dem Caucus, so he won’t be.
th Panche
good to see you , have you been away or imprisioned on Gilligans We shall now see th opportunitiy for your broad macro type changes to be become operational , because as i recall th micro policy area you didn’t se as important
Regarding healthcare link you gave As you ar aware from my long healthcare campaign querying Obama , his plan for adults mainly was around private insurance boltered in affordability by tax credits & subsidies which fits his econamic philosophy & which i criticised compared to Edwards universal healthcare plan (Obama’s exception was kids)
Th link you provided of Dems Senator Max Baucus, the chairman of the Finance Committee is more encouraging and is a challenge to Obama’s in that it goes much further which i welcome Suppose there will be alot of these ‘ambit’ claims made by Dems
I would like to highlight part of that NYT link which is positive:
“Max Baucus, the chairman of the Finance Committee, will unveil a detailed blueprint on Wednesday to guarantee health insurance for all Americans by facilitating sales of private insurance, expanding Medicaid and Medicare, and requiring most employers to provide or pay for health benefits.
But Mr. Baucus’s 35,000-word plan would go FURTHER than Mr. Obama’s in one respect, eventually requiring ALL people (Adults) — not just children — to have coverage.”
A massive difference including all Adults , which is th first desired leg i’m on Baucus’s side , his problam will be convincing enough Dems in Senate then Obama to change significantly some philosophy but hopeful he has a key chair role
Of course th 2nd desired leg (fixing & limiting th individual cost) is also still to achieved …..to get US weaned off having almost all healthcare via privatre insurance supported by tax credits & rebates Thats a US psche issue with free enterprise vs Govt involvement , but th H and Edwards alternative financing of healthcare method (fixing & limiting th individual cost) is a step to dismantle that way , guaranteing a fixed max % of income for healthcare insurance Wonder whether th ‘centre right’ of Democrat Party will think that as a step too far into socialism areas
So th panche , your link provides some encouragement I feel , although must say any Dems healthcare plan will be an improvment on currewnt 45 million underinsured & 30 million underinsured Assume you did not tink universal healthcare matter would die with electon , and presume as you ar delighted with th large marin of th win
with th large e/v margin of th win
Geoff
#606
do you hav a link for your 814 lead by Begich (D) over Stevens (R)
Sites i’ve got show count incl CNN show 3 vote lead , 125,019 to 125,016 , with approx 90,000 absentee ballots to count that may take a few days Hopeful signs for Dems is Stevens was leading by 3257 votes before absentee votes commenced to be counted suggesting a high Dems ratio so far in absentee votes
Seeing MN seems too close to call on recount , a Dems 60 in th Senate requires alot of luck in both MN and AK and reliance on Lieberman , but those blue dog southern Dems make alot pof those 60 benefits reely academic , and I also wonder how often th 60 need would hav arisen anyway
.
yes lieberman got in falsely with 70% Republicon votes , splitting dems vote 1/3 and getting over 1/2 of imndependents so he won’t get relected on polls , but he is there now , and reluctantly i’d re suggest from 2 nites ago that better him in caucus than a consevative Republicon to negotiate with …sometime th devils vote may be handy on a key Bill
omitted GA in th 60 , thats 3 lucky wins plus Lieberman to get to 60 , I’d lay long odds on that quadrella
It is in effect a supermajority anyway. US politics is loose enough that you won’t get every single Republican voting with the party line.
Gore doesn’t want back into government on any level ….
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/13/gore-rejects-climate-czar_n_143543.html
Ron – G’day. Just tied up with work.
I have always seen policy outcomes as important ends, I guess I just read the campaigning signs differently to you. And the ends still remain a way away, but it’s rare historically that the overt signals given in a campaign are the whole picture in the United States. As previously stated, I have found Obama’s ideological behaviour encouraging over a longer period, as evinced in his writings, work etc. I grant that he still may be a dud, but, as you say, an encouraging start.
Adam – I don’t think kicking Lieberman out has been raised by anyone outside of the netroots and Lieberman himself. It seems a false issue pushed by the bloke. No one is going to kick him out, but many are wondering why a fellow who was so anti-Obama (particularly for Security reasons) should be given subpoena power over him as Chair of a powerful committee. It has also been pointed out that while Waxman was investigating Bush constantly over the past 2 years as Liberman’s opposite in the House, Lieberman did not hold one hearing. Doesn’t seem like he’s too good at the job really…
Anyway, my point is that Joe will get some sort of punishment. He must, that’s politics. And he’ll give himself a better chance of holding his Chairmanship if he shows some contrition. But in the end, whether or not he caucuses with the Dems is his choice – they won’t kick him out – and will determine how much he fancies re-election.
For those for when one electoral vote map is not enough!
http://kottke.org/plus/2008-election-maps/
Map heaven.
Yesterday in Daily Kos I found this excellent piece on the issue of dissent from Barack Obama written in November 2005 which I think is related to this current Lieberman issue (and I’m taking into account that Joe’s no longer a Democrat, but only a member of their Caucus in last Congress). The piece has now been removed from DK and can’t provide a link, so just luckily I’d copied it to WORD and can provide this excerpt:
“How can we ask Republican senators to resist pressure from their right wing and vote against flawed appointees like John Bolton, if we engage in similar rhetoric against Democrats who dissent from our own party line? How can we expect Republican moderates who are concerned about the nation’s fiscal meltdown to ignore Grover Norquist’s threats if we make similar threats to those who buck our party orthodoxy?
To the degree that we brook no dissent within the Democratic Party, and demand fealty to the one, “true” progressive vision for the country, we risk the very thoughtfulness and openness to new ideas that are required to move this country forward. When we lash out at those who share our fundamental values because they have not met the criteria of every single item on our progressive “checklist,” then we are essentially preventing them from thinking in new ways about problems. We are tying them up in a straightjacket and forcing them into a conversation only with the converted.
Beyond that, by applying such tests, we are hamstringing our ability to build a majority. We won’t be able to transform the country with such a polarized electorate. Because the truth of the matter is this: Most of the issues this country faces are hard. They require tough choices, and they require sacrifice. The Bush Administration and the Republican Congress may have made the problems worse, but they won’t go away after President Bush is gone. Unless we are open to new ideas, and not just new packaging, we won’t change enough hearts and minds to initiate a serious energy or fiscal policy that calls for serious sacrifice. We won’t have the popular support to craft a foreign policy that meets the challenges of globalization or terrorism while avoiding isolationism and protecting civil liberties. We certainly won’t have a mandate to overhaul a health care policy that overcomes all the entrenched interests that are the legacy of a jerry-rigged health care system. And we won’t have the broad political support, or the effective strategies, required to lift large numbers of our fellow citizens out of numbing poverty.”
Hey Hey ……. Palin isn’t coming to Washington after all, will wonders never cease?
Ron, the link for Alaska is here.
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/states/alaska.html
Good news, sense wins over stupidity after all.
Thank god for that
hot damn!
Well Alaska ALMOST elected a convicted felon
PHEW
This result:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/states/minnesota.html
has excited the Murdoch Press here:
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122644940271419147.html
Ahh, election fraud hurting the Republicans… you have to smile
while some are getting their heads around the election result, not all have
Quite an interesting exchange re prop 8 in california
The article is quite funny esp the reply
“Woo! It has been quite a roller coaster over the last week. Of course, the Best Church of God only found out today that the Presidential Election went for Senator Obama, because we have spent the last month in an airless, lightless, medialess, rapture-ready bunker in northern Idaho.”
http://scottfree.typepad.com/yourcivicdoody/
I have not suffered the last 12 months to put up with this!!!! I have bravely beaten my way through all of these attacks, smears, frights and beat-ups. To name a few;
Wright, Ayers, ACORN, Michigan recount, Florida recount, the SDs voting en masse for Hillary against the PDs, Mythematics, Bittergate, Muslim smears, socialist smears, Hillary winning the popular vote, the Bradley effect, Lipstick on a Pig, the 3am phone call and the surge.
God knows how much I have suffered and I DID NOT DO IT TO END UP WITH HILLARY AS SECRETARY OF STATE.
Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/13/hillary-clinton-secretary_n_143735.html
Dio, please for the love of God, NO ……………………………………
Secretary of Health and Human Services, not Secretary of State. We voted Obama in in the primaries because we didn’t want Hillary close to any power triggers ….. Secretary of State in the US is a much more powerful position than the Foriegn Minister is here in Australia.
Please make it not so ……. I’m with you, Dio, in case you can’t tell
juliem
It would be a Pyrrhic victory. If he couldn’t stomach her as VP, how could be even consider her as SOS? It’s not happening, except over my dead body.
Dio, he has to give it to Kerry ……… what in the world has Kerry EVER done to him to merit taking away the SOS position? I can think of heaps more that Hillary has done to screw him over.
Shheeeesssshhhh …… I mean, you vote for these guys and then always something happens …… I understand a politician doesn’t always do everything you like but I didn’t think one of Obama’s no-nos might loom so soon.
Now before others out there on the other side say I told you so, I will always vote Democrat/Labor. That doesn’t mean I won’t be unhappy with the odd decision here or there.
I am quite upset with K07’s short to medium term reluctance (now) to handle the republic issue, but that doesn’t mean I won’t vote for them the next time. Frankly, I think it would really put the cat amongst the pigeons if Malcolm would come out publically for this again and I would secretly be quite happy if he did
Dario,
I was thinking while I got breakfast ready. Biden who is now the VP has been in and around foreign affairs for 30+ years. It has been said he will be “in” on all major decisions (at least). Presumably, if this comes off, that means Biden will also have signed off on it. I trust Bidens judgement without question. If Biden gives HC his seal of approval in THIS position, I would reluctantly accept it emotionally. I would still want someone to explain to me though WHY she is better at SOS than Kerry.
Hopefully, we will not need to cross this bridge ……
What’s wrong with Bill Richardson?
One more official electoral vote making 365\162.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/11/14/politics/main4604957.shtml
Is this the result of a pre-election deal?
Might help explain why the Clintons became so committed to the cause late in the campaign.
Diogenes, Richardson is still in with a big chance.
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/nov/14/obama-weighs-clinton-richardson-as-sec-of-state-1/
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/14/clinton-met-with-obama-ab_n_143810.html
Dio, see my #630. While I’m extremely disappointed, I can accept this now. Totally understand though if you can’t. Don’t know the roots for your unhappieness with this though, maybe it might help if you can itemize them?
My complaints with Hillary are multiple and extend back her time as FLOTUS. I know she is quite capable and intelligent. However, her overriding personality flaws of being too ambitious and her haughty attitude are more than enough to override the good points. Bottom line #1; her cons are more than her pros so the bottom line is don’t bet on this horse. I first began to dislike her when it “arose” during the Monica L. scandal that he was a serial philanderer and she had always taken him back. You don’t keep on putting yourself through that kind of behaviour from your spouse if you have any shred of self respect. Once, yes, probably you end up doing the decent thing and forgive the spouse and stay, but than when it happens subsequent times and you keep on staying …. any self respect you have left gets cut in half from whatever is remaining each time. Bottom line #2; her ambition is so powerful that she is willing to hang with him only for her own self interest in spite of how he treated her. They are both disfunctional and the relationship is disfunctional. We did NOT need that kind of ambition and/or personality problems in the White House whether the Oval Office or the private residence. That is the basis of my dislike of her candidacy for POTUS. New York can have her for all I care, Bill too for that matter.
Look on the bright side. If she ends up SOS, then that job is so time consuming that she can’t possibly both have it and run for President at the same time. Looking at Condoleeza Rice this time as an example, she wouldn’t have had the time to campaign for either the top spot or the veep spot on the Republican ticket. No one will challenge Obama in 2012 and if she doesn’t consider herself too old in 2016, she will have to give up the SOS job { admit, it does demand all of you attention
} in order to be able to do it. This job will keep her busy and out of a direct line of attack upon Obama 
This is a funny story about a Mayor who picked up his bat and ball and went home.
http://www.denverpost.com/watercooler/ci_10985498
Bloomberg, the mayor of NYC has decided the Californian and News South Wales tax hike solution is the path to take.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/15/nyregion/15bloomberg.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Get over it, you two. Joe Biden has obviously told O’Bambi that he needs the Woman of Steel, backed up by the World’s Greatest Ex-President, to help him deal with Putin, China, the Ayrabs, Ahmadinloony, Kim Jong-Loony and other threats to peace and good order.
Adam
Margaret Thatcher is going to be SOS, with George W riding shotgun
This just gets worse.
Anyone interested in a DVD of CNN’s election night coverage? It starts an hour before the first polls closed and finishes a bit after Obama’s speech.
Obama names the person to drive the Federal Communications Commission.
http://www.techpresident.com/blog/entry/33153/obama_puts_well_known_internet_advocate_in_charge_of_fcc_review
What the hell does “pro-internet” mean.
Here’s an interesting grilling about the GFC.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hpyf-hS_WgY
Oz, I think it’d be along the lines of “not anti-internet”.
Diogenes
“God knows how much I have suffered and I DID NOT DO IT TO END UP WITH HILLARY AS SECRETARY OF STATE”
What , ar you concerned that foe next 4 years th Amigos may mention in passing how well Hillary is doing as SOS
This fine lady energises you evrytime her name appears , imagine tour SA Newspapers religously recoding her exploits for th next 4 years
Fact is Hillary was emminentley qualified to be POTUS , is clever , has wonderful ‘left’ policys in universal heaklthcare & suport of Kyoto ratification , has ticker and can negotiate , and would be an asset to th US as SOS She was by far th most viable candidate as VP in politcal circumstanses at THAT time , but suspect SOS is in relaity a mor powerful & independent position
You will be pleased to know Diogenes that according to multiple Obama sourses , th job is hers if she wants it She has not applied for it , its been offered , and as sensibly it should hav been Surprisingly I tink Hillarys decision will be based on 3 factors alone and none of them reagarding her ability to perform or ambition…firstly will be her perseption of th reality & efectiveness of th working chemistry between her and Obama …secondly will be Billy and his “World” job being a cross over/distracton …and thirdly of course valuable advice from her faithful fighting Amigos
Steve ,
Thanks for that link Latest again tonite seems Begich (D) is now 1022 ahead of Stevens (138,959 to 137, 937) in AK
GA is reverse , Chambliss (R) has a 9,748 lead making that a likely Red win
As was suggested th 90,000 absentee ballots may favour Beglich , and they ar approx 30% through them , with Beglich so far getting 53.9% to Stevens 46.1% making Beglich likely
Didn’t tink Dems could bet th quadrella of AK , GA , MN and Lieberman to get 60 …probably based on th above trends looks like Dems 57 , plus Lieberman VS Republicons 41 …with MN pot luck cliffhanger That is a great result realisticaly
th Panche
yes am delighted to see you back , tied up with work ? capitalist thou art
“guess I just read the campaigning signs differently to you.” Yes , both in micro policy and my centre right perseption of th candidate as to what I tink he was saying vs what a few may believe ‘change’ meant
“And the ends still remain a way away, but it’s rare historically that the overt signals given in a campaign are the whole picture in the United States.”
Yes absolutely Most Obama suporters couldn’t see th future island thoughts I was on through th lingos & there idea of current US politcs status I always believed any Democrat in Nov 2008 automaticaly became Non bush and wiped th slate for renewal I always believed any Democrat in 2009 would hav eurfphoria in Liberal Press that things were different well they will be ..no Bush and a different broad FA/domestic approach With Obama being black and deemed “new” & progresive that Media glow I expected in 2009 and into 2010 will be even greater Th start is promising and broad improvments & perseptions world wide will occur because its not a Republicon admin
My islands hav always been centred on later…later still when ‘admiration’ subsides and FA and domestic decisions hav been made or ar needed Palestinians Georgia , Ukraine Iran, afghanistan Iraq Pakistan , sickly porkbarrelling/lobbyists , under priviledged poor , unemployment , healthcare , Kyoto…and wonder whether th wrong comparison is made …of Obama to Bush …rather than Obama to Obama , I hope objectively th latter and with reel positive outcomes to come but on history am cautous
one can add exactly an extra 100,000 to Chambliss (R) lead in GA
Ron, I have noticed a protocol shift in the past few days.
Stevens (R) (convicted felon) AK
Ronster
There’s hope for me yet. Bill Clinton’s morally ambiguous deals with sleazy foreign companies might be too embarrassing to Hillary for her to take the job. The term “conflict of interest” would be used a lot. GO BILL!! There’s a long list in the article but I’ll give an example:
Bill’s Foreign Deals May Pose Issue For Clinton As Secretary Of State
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/15/husbands-foreign-deals-ma_n_144066.html
Juliem or anyone very familiar with the US system, does SOS have much influence over US domestic politics? Noting Dio’s concerns if Hillary got the job and it is mainly foreign affairs, won’t that get her”out of the way” for domestic politics?
For the record, I hope Hillary does got SOS. The US has a lot of fences to mend internationally and like them or not the Clintons were good at international politics. Plus, while I was dissappointed in Hillary when she “went negative” in the campaign, she did swallow her pride and campaign for Obama in the election, so that deserves some recognition IMO.
Some people just seem bitter that Hillary Clinton dared criticise Obama.
ltep
I didn’t mind her criticising Obi. But when she said that she and McCain were ready to be Commander-in-Chief and that Obama wasn’t, she just became a pain in the arse. Her inability to accept reality became a big problem.
Dio @ 654,
Agreed on the inability to accept reality , albeit in my case for different reasons
Socrates @ 652,
Ability to influence domestic policy – a big fat ZERO. Ability to influence foreign policy – depends upon the relative strength of the personalities involved.
Think about some of the names over the last few decades. James Baker? Colin Powell? Condoleeza Rice? Madeline Albright?
If the SOS is paired with a strong (speaking force of personality and ideas here, not in regards to any specific party affliation) President, the opinions of the POTUS will carry the day in foreign policy and a lot can get done. Reagan being a good example and his various summits with Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders over the 8 years of his presidency.
If the SOS is not strong in and of him or herself and is paired with a weak (again, see definition above) President, not a lot will get done of any substance on any front. Can’t think of a particularly good example at the moment.
If the SOS is strong and the President is weak (see above) or not particularly interested in foreign affairs, while lots gets done it will go the way of the SOS’s ideals and the President is “along for the ride”. I would argue Kissinger and Nixon fit this mold and that detente with Communist China under Mao was all Kissinger’s doing. I don’t think had Nixon had another SOS that this would have panned out as it did in the 70’s.
Socrates, if you check the current US thread, I’ve noted there, after some personal reflection, that I think putting HC into the SOS position would be the perfect place to put her to get her out of the way as far as potential and future threats go. It was earlier in this last week.
Thanks Juliem – that confirms my thoughts. In that case I think giving Hillary SOS is a good outcome.
This is a very interesting map:
http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
It shows swings to Obama or McCain as compared with 2004, by county.
We can see that the whole country outside the South swung to Obama, except for Arizona and Alaska, which produced weak home-state swings to McCain/Palin. In the South, however, there were strong swings against Obama in those counties where whites heavily outnumber blacks – most of Tennessee, eastern Kentucky, Arkansas, Oklahoma, East Texas, northern Alabama, south-western Louisiana, parts of the Florida panhandle. In the Black Belt, the string of black-majority counties which runs from the coast of Virginia down through the Carolinas and Georgia, and across central Alabama and Mississippi to northern Louisiana, there were strong swings to Obama, clearly caused by increased Black turnout. This was big enough to mask the anti-Obama swings among whites in these areas. The map shows the continuing alienation of white Southerners from the rest of the country, and also that these areas are now the Republican Party’s only really reliable base apart from a few cowboy states like Utah, Idaho and Alaska.
It’s even more striking if you slide the pointer to 2000, which gives you a comparison of how Obama polled compared with Al Gore. It shows that Gore did vastly better across most of the South than Obama did, even though Gore carried no Southern state and Obama carried NC and VA. In fact one things these maps show is that these two states seem to have seceded from the South. Only a few hillbilly counties at the western edges of these states swung to McCain. The coastal and piedmont zones of VA and NC, while not necessarily voting Democrat, showed no swing away from Obama, as did most of the rest of the white South.
Note also on the 2008 v 2004 map the block of counties in south-west Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio that swung, weakly, to McCain. If you zoom in you can see that they are the most depressed of the white working-class counties of these rust-belt areas. This was the much-ridiculed Clinton-voter-backlash against Obama. It wasn’t strong enough to offset the Obama sweep elsewhere, but it did happen.
ltep
Posted Sunday, November 16, 2008 at 11:02 am | Permalink
“Some people just seem bitter that Hillary Clinton dared criticise Obama.”
Very true.. I hav all of Obama’s dirty tricks on file that HE useed against Hillary in th Primarys , no lillywhite knight is Obama in a politcal contest and people hav short memories Fact is both engaged in that fierce Primary contest and both Obama & Hillary used negativ tricks against th other…its politcs
Obama for example , spent millions on TV adds falsely claiming Hillary still supported th Iraq invasion (false) , falsely said if he was in th Senate he would hav voted No to Iraq invasion (false I’ve got his quotes as Senator in 2004 & 2005 saying he would not know what his decsion would hav been given same intell as Democrat Senators) , falsely distributed millions of leaflets claimin his healthcare policy & Hillarys were th same (false) , falsely claimed Hillary was financed by Washington lobbyists and he was not (false check SEC declarations) , falsely claimed Hillary made key decsions in Billys admin and Billys admin was unsuccessful , falsely claimed his tax policy was better than Hillarys for th poor (false) , falsely claimed he and Hillary had identical policy on Kyoto (false)
And when th campaign got to th working class States (typical Labor terrotory) like Ohio , Pennsalvania , Michigan , Texas , Indiana then of course Hillary criticised Obama’s poor working class policys compared to hers (like tax & universal heathcare) , which is why she won all those working class States
And don’t tink for one moment that McCain & Obama did not tell fibs about each other in th main campaign either (and norwould Hillary hav hesitated to had she been opposed to McCain) Its US politcs , 15 second grab TV perseptions imagery , and Obama is no cleaner politicing than any other US politcan its th reel world
Sometimes I wonder whether th bitterness is because Hillary went with 2% of winning despite 50% of th campaign funds and having a woeful (Mark Penn) campaigin Manager
Better to realize obama won th race and then defeated McCain to be POTUS , that th now
The problem for the repugs in Iowa is not in deciding whether to move right or back to the centre.
http://www.siouxcityjournal.com/articles/2008/11/16/news/local/bdd941141365c3968625750100708326.txt
Hi Ron,
Good to see you as feisty as ever.
Agree that we should all move on and ruminate more on the coming Presidency than focus on the campaign past.
Ron, I know Hillary supported the Iraq invasion. I heard her say it with my own ears!
George W. Bush Outed CIA Agent Valerie Plame says Scott McClellan, Bush’s former Press Secretary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3kSMvVRnk0
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plame
Centre
Read third paragraph , first line…word is “still”…ie in 2008 (Hillary PUBLICLY recanted her vote in October 2005 …when th Senate inquiry found 2002 Iraq invasion supporting intell info was falsely corrupted by Bush/Cheney…hence th Obama lie)
A month later incidently Edwards (another victim of Bush’s corrupt 2002 Irawq intell did same thing …when they found via snate investigation info was false
NOW deal with Obama AS a Senator in 2004 and 2005 ..BEFORE these Bush corrupted disclosiures , saying he would not know what his decsion would hav been ifgiven same intell as Democrat Senators in 2002….again making his campaign claim of opposing th invasion as false (and only true IF HE DID NOT see th same Intell)…deal with Obama as a lier just like all politicans
Fair enough Ron.
B
Centre
is that B a hug
haha, Ron I don’t know how that got there. I must have hit it when I posted.
G’day Amigo GG
#663
hav just done a 9 months course on unfeistiness (awaiting exan results as we speak) …thought I was making progress….progressiveLike
where hav you beem , earning a dolloar or asisting Blues boys recruiting for a shot at th 8
Ron,
My activities include all the above, plus looking after a brood and a mystery project to be revealed.
Well GG Amigo , th last mystery we had here was Billbowe and th Marsupial going down th aisle with Crikey , always wondered why you were not asked at same time
Incidently , if you missed at time , th Juddster won th first tan time trial quite easily , so he will be like “coming back from a spell” so to speak next year , but better
Steve
“George W. Bush Outed CIA Agent Valerie Plame says Scott McClellan, Bush’s former Press Secretary.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3kSMvVRnk0”
Yes he does unambigously when listening to full youtube tape I suppose most ‘left’ would hav believed that anyway
Whilst I would not be a defender of Bush , this guy Scott McClellan is hardly a “cleanskin” witness one would be normaly taking any notise of whatsoever His whole tape was devoted to reprtrsospectively clensing himself and furthermore almost claiming well he knew nothing about Iraq war decsions etc , i “trusted” Bush , I’ a “moral” person….very self serving innocent says he .Scott McClellan ..hell th guy McClellan was Deputy Press Secretary to Bush at Iraq invasion ands later th man his Press Secretary…lying away to th Media with a straight face
Now we know Scooter Libby was found guilty of obstruction over th Plame affair , he was Chief of Staff to Cheny and assit to VP CRITICALY on National Security Affairs for 5 years..so clearly Cheny seems to be Libby’s authorisation to leak We also know Cheny had enormous power in th White House & far more than a normal VP …queston is did Cheny ask Bush ( as Scott McClellan claims) , possibly ( th inclination to tink so of course) but not certainly seeing McCleeellan is not a great sourse and Cheny was a power mongul
I hav no doubt of Cheney’s complete complicity
“It shows that Gore did vastly better across most of the South than Obama did, even though Gore carried no Southern state and Obama carried NC and VA”
Suppose secession of NC and VA from confederency may include demographics and econamic improvements apart from black turnout
Queston of why Obama did not do nearly as well as Gore in 2000 may hav many conflicting answers Perhaps Gore whilst avoiding where possible including Billy Clinton in his campaign still may hav benefited from th enormous popularity of Billy Clinton in th South anyway plus Gore was a Tennessee Senator Secondly , whilsyt obama suporters do not like me saying this I feel Obama as a N E Liberal was a negative in th ’socially consevative’ South which is why I always thought even Texas and SC were totally beyong him winning even those Southern States Thirdly I suspect alot of even th non fundalmentalist religous ‘white’ voters who were still religous regard those values as important and may hav seen th Pastor as th antithist of that Fourthly I suspect Obama’s blackness may hav been least important of these 4 factors
Map shows “its time’ factor and ‘Wall Street collapse bailout’ totaly imfluenced th rest of Country but not in South….there’s a politcal message for both Democrats and Republicons there…I mean alot of those white poor should be voting Democrat & were pre LBJ
and th ‘black’ turnout for a ‘black’ candidate only emphasises these 5 factors , rather than any Obama swings implying diferently
Ron
I agree with your scepticism of McClellan. While I don’t like Bush, he is so unpopular that I think there is a danger he will become a scapegoat of all that was done badly udner his presidency. In reality many people deserve some blame both for the second order immoral decisions, and how nastily some of Bush’s decisions were implemented. I have said before that I will be very interested to see who he pardons upon departure. To cover everything the list would have to be very long because I suspect that between the justice department sackings, Valerie Plame, Gitmo, torture and renditions, many people have committed serious crimes. Not all were ordered by Bush either, I suspect.
Here is a story that I think underlines the thinking behind Adams link 659:
http://www.smh.com.au/news/us-election/palin-poised-to-make-ton-of-money/2008/11/17/1226770297276.html
The republicans want more of Palin!! She makes Bush look smart. If Bush is the idiot’s thinking man, Palin is the idiot’s idiot.
It’s interesting to see how poorly Obama did in rural white areas (in both the Mid-West and South) compared to Clinton in both 1992 and 1996, yet he still managed to pick up a win that was similar in magnitude to Clinton in 1992.
It just shows that there are multiple routes for Democrats to get to the White House – it just depends on how effectively you target them…
The problem is that she has already burnt many bridges with Independents and Dem voters, illustrated by her approve/dissaprove numbers. To put that many people offside as a VP nominee is quite something. The Republican base won’t be enough to win.
Will it be enough to win the primaries is the interesting question. I doubt people will still be talking about Palin in 3 years time.
I like Obama more and more each day. 31 of 41 staffers appointed by Obama so far has been Clintonites:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15617.html
and with Hillary:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/14/clinton-met-with-obama-ab_n_143810.html
Obama is showing very good judgement. The kid got potential.
Who knows. Black voter turnout, and even general Democrat turnout, is unlikely to be what it was this election.
The Palin of 2008 didn’t have the skills to build the bridges she needed too. The Palin of 2012 might. Combined with a restive Republican Party and a lax Democratic Party who knows what could happen.
That’s certainly possible, but it is going to take quite a turnaround
“It’s interesting to see how poorly Obama did in rural white areas (in both the Mid-West and South) compared to Clinton in both 1992 and 1996,..”
Well i’ve advansed psephologicals in #674 suggesting Obama was never going to match Billy particularly in th South
“It just shows that there are multiple routes for Democrats to get to the White House”
Perhaps not if one was an non rusted on Obama strategist planning forward …did run a tight & clever ‘change’ campaign but those voters got th whole straight six draw this time , and all my way…George , Palin , Iraq War disatisfacton , US disrespected , McCain not running as a maverick independent , “its time” and …th game breaker .. Bailout Now this is not all going to happen next time , but in 2012 there is massive incumbancy advantage plus/minus Obama record vs hopefully “a Palin” running
So I do not tink all th e/v’s road won this time necessarily is future , although Latino etc demographics ar helping and problems arise more so should Republicons choose to go centre right with a Pawlenty , or worse a Latino centre right , and th nitemare a black Colin Powell Actual plus for Democrats is th Republicons have never reely gone that way & Democrats hold POTUS incumbancy
Senate seats up in 2010
http://www.cqpolitics.com/cq-assets/cqmultimedia/pdfs/NM-guide-2010-map.pdf
A site where you can “make your own” cabinet for Obama ….
http://innovation.cq.com/cabinet_maker?ver=dem
It’s next to impossible to predict what is going to happen in a US Presidential Election in 2012 this far out. For example:
1. In Nov 1996, most people had started to refer to Al Gore as the “next President of the United States”.
2. In Jan 2001 (delayed for obvious reasons), people were still referring to Al Gore as the “next President of the United States”.
3. In Nov 2004, no one was predicting that the next Democratic candidate would be a newly elected black Senator who would carry both Indiana and North Carolina in the 2008 election. Although, people were then talking about McCain/Giuliani v Clinton – so they almost got it right…
Ronster
I’ve got your exam results. Possum is going through them to do a Hotelling’s T-square multivariate analysis. He’s got a few hypotheses to test.
Senate seats up in 2010 – it’s hard to see many Senators at risk. Gregg of NH definitely, Burr of NC possibly, Dorgan of ND possibly, Lincoln of AR possibly, Voinovich of OH possibly. Specter of PA will probably retire (he has cancer) and the seat would definitely be at risk. Grassley of IA will be 77 in 2010. If he retires the seat will be at risk. The others all look safe. So even if Obama’s popularity has declined, it’s very hard to see the GOP regaining control. But then I would have said the same in 1992…
Also add Martinez in FL. And Inouye in HI will almost certainly retire at the end of the term.
The open seats in DE and IL could also be of concern if the GOP can find decent opponents for the soon-to-be-appointed “incumbents”.
Obama and McCain meet tonight.
http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2008/11/17/2119498-obama-to-meet-with-mccain-at-transition-office
Do not how Democrats would lose Senate control in 2010
Likeley makeup now is 57 Dems (feel AK to Dems) 41 Republicons (feel GA to Repub)
Assume worst on remaining 2 Senate seats , (cliffhanger MN goes to Repugs) and Liebernman rats to Republicons makes Dems 57 to 43
Dems would need to lose 7 seats in 2010 out of there 16 up for re electon (almost 1/2) and whilst some ar not givens its very unlikely Dems could lose control even if Obama st.ffs up a bot (and in 2012 they at least pick up CT from Lieberman I feel
Ron, here’s one for you on the vetting of Bill.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/us/politics/17memo.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
Dio
#688
“I’ve got your exam results. Possum is going through them to do a Hotelling’s T-square multivariate analysis. He’s got a few hypotheses to test”
Amigo FINNS has returned from Macchu Piccu , Peru with video (below) of th fabulous Macchu Piccu , and video not only shows an Amigo monument & a complementary picture of you , but also our famed “knowledge trees” ….and you mention Enemy Marsupial’s graphs in th same breath
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=MG1TvZgf3hI
Thanks Steve
very well sourced article there Steve It confirms my earlier sense th job is hers if she wants it …subject to her perseption of there dual working ‘chemistry’ AND as I said at time Billy’s “World” job cross overs
I tink it reflects well on Obama , not that he sees her a th most qualified SOS for this job as she clearly is (I mean Biden would be a dud) , but that he is prepared to build a coalition , as that has consensus future domestic & FA signs as well
Howevr interesting that Billy Clinton’s ‘empire’ seems main focus of checks for conflivcts of interest against FA etc , seeing he has talked & liased with everyone in th World irrespective of there politcs I recall when he made his ‘oz’ speaking trip , with tink Gorby as a speaking partner , & his fees were astronomical to attend…but business still rocked up
See my #636 this same thread. Serves her right for staying with him for only ambitious reasons if he ends up denying her the cabinet position.
What business is it of yours why someone chooses to stay in a marriage or not?
Finns/Ron @ 694,
Love the Macchu Piccu travelogue. I never understood how wise the Peruvian locals were. It is like we three wisemen are the prophets pointing the way in that timeless land.
Those guinea pigs reminded me of the Gilligan’s Island crew. Kept in a safe, warm and dark environment to be fattened up and then cooked an eaten as an exquisite delicacy at our pleasure.
The cost of the US financial bailout so far this year $ trillion 4.28.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/27719011
Amigos
Don’t you realise that you have defiled one of the most sacred places in the world with that “Diog, you were wrong” sign? There are some Inca gods who are most displeased. Apo is their God of the mountains and he is not to be trifled with.
Steve 699
I don’t know if that cost link is entirely fair. Some of that money may yet be recovered. Still, if thats right, it equates to $14000 US per head for every US citizen, or $82000 US for every moron who voted Bush into office in the first place.
I can’t help thinking this is going to start to lead to some (well deserved) anger in theyounger generation. They will eventually realise that they are going to be paying for the excesses of their elders through the tax system for a good decade.
Yes Inouye will retire but the seat is safe for the Dems. I doubt either the IL or the DE seats will be at risk. I suppose Martinez might be at risk but I doubt it.
Socrates
That’d make a great T-shirt.
Here’s an interesting comparative map on the Obama vote in the south.
http://strangemaps.wordpress.com/2008/11/15/330-from-pickin-cotton-to-pickin-presidents/
Adam
The correlation is pretty amazing except for a hot spot on the Alabama-Tennesee border.
BTW, before any repugnants try that line again that it was the CRA that caused the crisis and it wasn’t their fault, Paul Krugman as a link to a great analysis that proves the point. Essentially, the whoole US housing bubble really took off after these dervative backed loans became commonplace. The share of the US housing market made up of Fannie/Freddie backed loans was actually declining after 2003.
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/fannie-freddie-data/
So the voters got it right -it was the free-marketeers fault for letting it happen.
The Hawaii Senate Seat may be competitive if Linda Lingle, the GOP (and popular) governor of Hawaii stands for the seat. That said, she would almost certainly face one of the Democratic congressman for Hawaii who always get re-elected, so it would be an interesting race.
Martinez barely won in 2004 in a GOP year. It’s a swing state and if the Dems pick a decent candidate (more easily said than done), he could be in trouble. Open seats are almost always interesting, particularly if there is controversy over one of the candidates – which may well be the case if Beau Biden is the candidate in DE.
Other potential incumbents who could be in trouble are Murkowski in AK (although the Dems would have to find another good candidate to run, now that it looks like Begich will win) and Brownback (who is retiring) in KS if Sebelius decides to run.
That said, Gregg in NH seems (at this very early stage) to be the GOP incumbent most at risk purely because of the likelihood of the highly popular Gov. Lynch running against him in 2010…
ltep @ 697,
If someone’s ambition is so overriding that it spills over into and affects decisions in other areas of their life, that is someone I don’t want anywhere near the seat of power. If I were Russian (which I’m not), I would feel equally as passionate about Putin staying OUT of power [ as I hear that they are working on changing the laws, influenced by him, so he can get back INTO power ]. Someone who is that ambitious, irregardless of sex, is dangerous.
And as for the aspect of “knowing when it is time to get out of a marraige”, I’ve been there myself. I had a failed first one. I know what it feels like when your self respect is at rock bottom. Been there, done that and that is why I can make an informed statement about whether or not HC should have left him in the middle of the ML scandal.
GG
#698
“Finns/Ron @ 694,Love the Macchu Piccu travelogue. I never understood how wise the Peruvian locals were. It is like we three wisemen are the prophets pointing the way in that timeless land.
Those guinea pigs reminded me of the Gilligan’s Island crew”
.
Yes GG Amigo , a task delegated by Macchu Piccu dynasties to only th select as prophets , yes of th famed “knowledge trees” , of Apo King of all Peruvian mountains blessings , of Dio sacrifices and of Inca’s ultimate culture disdains… for th liberal elitists …and still they could not see ‘th way’ , and yet nor could th Gilligans , to there fates do they
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=MG1TvZgf3hI
The Guardian reckons Hillary Clinton is going to accept the Secretary of State job.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/nov/17/hillary-clinton-secretary-of-state
Here’s something different on the foreclosures front.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ufexZnViDiU
Here’s one on how the individual states are fairing economically.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/17/us/17fiscal.html?ref=economy
Steve
That NYT article was dated 17/11 , you posted it 18/11 , and i’ve tried to access it just into th 19/11 but itsd archived , they’ve done that to me before too , must be a 48 hour window I presume
Do you recall which States hardest hit ? Maybe in th South and heavy industrialised like MI , PA, IN etc ?
I also recall alot of foreclosures ar in thnic and black poor areas , suckedinto dream of home ownershiip by parachute interest & repayment deals , and now just walking away
US has reel problems , recsssion but both massive public debt and also massive trading defict and no incentive to agree to Doha deal on trade
Ron, archived? It was a great piece of writing and is archived here.
Here’s some astounding news that will set the cat among the pigeons. Just when the US congress is split about whether to bail out the major car manufacturers, China might leap up and buy two of the big ones.
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/breaking-news-chinese-may-buy-gm-and-chrysler/
Amigo GG & Ronnie, yes, the Native Peruvians were indeed very wise people. Contrary to popular myth, Maccu Picchhu was not a summer palace for the Inka Royalty nor a refuge to run away from the Spanish Conquistadors. MP was a built by the people, for the people and of the people. It was a working farm and more importantly it was the original “fridge” where the people can store their corns and other produce long term because of its chosen location and suitable climate.
The Spanish Conquistadors in fact knew of its existence but decided not to bother about it because there was no gold at MP. They went after the gold of the Inka Royalty. The place was abandoned by the locals because the the Spanish Conquistadors were getting too close and they were killing and raping.
I also think that i should put Diog out of his misery for my MP statement that “Diog, you were wrong”. If you recall, there was a mysterious meeting during the Primary between Obama and Hillary at the home of Sen. Senator Feinstein. Nobody was able to figure out what the meeting was about. Well, a deep-throat told me that it was during this meeting that Obama confessed his love for Hillary and that he is a Clintonite.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/13/hillary-clinton-secretary_n_143735.html
There you are Amigos, we might have lost the battle, but we have won the war and Diog, you were wrong, again.
Another Clintonite hits the Obama road.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/30/eric-holder-obamas-attorn_n_137696.html
[Been there, done that and that is why I can make an informed statement about whether or not HC should have left him in the middle of the ML scandal.}
Its absolutely none of your business how an individual chooses to handle their marriage. How can you possibly know what Hillary's relationship with Bill is based on? Why is it your business?
Plenty of people stay in marriages for political reasons, men and women. Men have been using their wives and children as photo opportunities for a long time with very little comment. Yet its only women who deserve scorn?
The whole 'ambition' line is thrown into the faces of women time and again, for instance claiming they are selfish and not fit to lead if they put their job over their children or having children. As far as I see it there's absolutely nothing wrong with being ambitious and it's sort of a prerequisite for having top jobs.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/11/18/texas-grand-jury-indicts-cheney-gonzales/
You’ve left out the operative word “too” in regards to ambitious.
Stevens loses Alaska Senate race
Tuesday’s tally of just over 24,000 absentee and other ballots gave Begich 150,728, or 47.76 percent, to 147,004, or 46.58 percent, for Stevens.
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gZXmpL3-GlWbhbGKemFmCm_bPPmQD94HP1VG0
Thanks Dio, you have neatly compiled all the happy US news today
Looks like Washington will stay Palin-free for another 2 years+. To paraphrase David Lange, she could move from Wasilla to Washington and lower the average IQ of both towns.
I must admit though, regardless of our disagreements on CLinton for SOS, I have greater misgivings about sticking with Leiberman as committee chair. A question to those who know the US system – are committee chair appointments for fixed terms, or can they be kicked out if their performance is unsatisfactory? They have to hold something over red-Joe’s head, or he will continue to mis-behave.
Mitt Romney says the auto industry can go jump into the Great Lakes ….. very brave statement coming from a politician with a Michigan background AND with future presidential ambitions as well …
Amigo FINNS
#716 “I also think that i should put Diog out of his misery for my Macchu Piccu statement that “Diog, you were wrong”. That mysterious meeting during the Primary between Obama and Hillary at the home of Sen. Senator Feinstein. Nobody was able to figure out what the meeting was about. Well, a deep-throat told me that it was during this meeting that Obama confessed his love for Hillary and that he is a Clintonite.”
“Macchu Piccu statement ” Litle does Diog realize that whilst put out of his “HRC love” misery on one hand , those signs “Diog, you were wrong” still adorn th Peruvuan mountains around
Macchu Piccu , at th Mionumetn incentre town and at ht gates of th “knowledge trees” …meaning visitors & tourists year in year out will wonder how this Diog could hav got it so wrong …and wonder whether he is a fallen ancient elitist God that Apo th Peruvian God of gods had despatched for eternal infamy
Ronster
The Incan God of Knowledge, Truth and Light (Diobama) has been invoked to and he’s going to pay a visit to those “Knowledge Trees” and sort out those sacrilegious signs.
The Truth Will Out!
Diog , as a South Australian you guys ar well behind th times and latest News , so sorry to let you breaking news …..but Apo king God of all Peruvian mountains chained Diobama to th gates of th “knowledge trees”……right next to th sign “Diog, you were wrong”
Actualy there ar so many of these “Diog, you were wrong” signs dotted around Macchu Piccu that kids ar erecting clones of them by th day Th originals of course carry th Amigo moniker……..and you can tank benevolence of GG for interceding in our ultimate plan to attach a photo of your beloved Hillary on each of them
Diog, please be careful, the location of those two “knowledge trees” was a well kept secret of the Inkas. In has been well protected by a local Inka secret society ala “the Templar Knights” of the Da Vinci Code. I have to pledge never to reveal their location upon the guinea pig blood before i was allowed to take the photo.
The Truth Will out indeed!
Ron,
Ah yes, I have always thought that Hillary would make the perfect “Big Brother” picture.
We have always been at War with Eurasia and all that.
Amigos, THIS is the REAL knowledge tree of Maccu Picchu:
http://home.people.net.au/~sspp/kt.jpg
Guarding over the terraces of life.
Ah yes , no doubt Obama will make pilgimage to th “knowledge tree” of Maccu Picchu , and pay due respectful homage…….and yet he also will wonder about that dio guy in th signs dotted around
Leiberman was elected as an “independent” having defeated an endorsed Democrat in 2006 , and since then has been anything but helpful And th Dems make ‘reward’ , a poor decison , and what message does that send to other Democrat Senators & Congressmens
As mentioned earlier , Dems will hav 57 in Senate (maybe 58 with MN) without Lievberman , and would hav to lose an unlikely 7 or 8 out of 16 up for electon in 2010 to lose Senate control after 2010 (and then almost certainly win back Libermans seat in 2012)
…this is consesus too many steps too far , sometimes you should make a stand I mean Chairman of this important committee which th Dems having th majority can decie by a Senate resolution to decide whoever they choose often this goes by seniorority , well Lieberman has no seniorority in th Democrat Party as he is not an elected member thereof
Daschle looks set to be in control of medicare.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081119/ap_on_go_pr_wh/obama_health_daschle;_ylt=As5JqiB.EDUJhQ_EzccpQQoGw_IE
Here are two stories that illustrate just how deep the recession the US is in might be. One is about imports piling up at US container ports because nobody want them.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/business/economy/19ports.html?em
The other points out just how many US jobs might be lost if GM, Ford and Chrysler go down. The number is 1.5 million to 2 million jobs lost:
http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=a4893b49-36df-4784-9859-2dfa3a3211bf
Despite this, the current government is ideologically opposed to bailing out auto manufacturers or mortgagees, despite already spending over $100 billion bailing out the trading banks that caused the problem in the first place:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/19/business/economy/19bailout.html?ref=business
The double standard is glaring. Given that the only counter-arguments require a knowledge of arcane economic theory that is being debated even by economists, I don’t understand why teh republicans don’t see this will cost them votes. In future elections, not only can the democrats point out that the mess happened under republican administration, but they blocked attempts to help those whow were harmed by it.
Of course, economically, the hole Obama is left with now is looking pretty deep.
Well I note its World Philosophy Day, whatever that means:
http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/11/20/2423869.htm
Happy world day to me! On the plus side, I saw a recent article by Kristof in NY Times that Obama has a “favourite philosopher”, which marks a change from his predecessor:
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/09/opinion/09kristof.html?partner=rss&emc=rss
Looks like stupid is no longer fashionable. On the down side, Neibuhr is not a philosopher – he was a theologian, and never formally studied philosophy, though he took a well educated and rational approach to religeon. It is an unfortunate fact that the number of people who actually understand what formal philosophy is, is very few.
FORD/GM and Lieberman …there is an unfortunate connection
42/13 Democrat caucus voted to let lieberman keep Homeland chair , yet this guy openly campaigned for McCain , criticised Obama during that campaign , even often flying with McCain on his campaign plane , even further actualy spoke for McCain at th GOP convention…an “independent” Senator , hardly ….poor decsion given Democrats hav 57 Senators (incl Sanders) without Lierberman and maybe MN ot add….if Dems had 51 Senators of th 100 , pragmetism reigns , but tis is cynicism and foolish I feel
Ford/GM cynicaly puting there hand out ffro monies clealy earmarket for th financial systems rescue….not other Industries hurt by downturn and/or poor management Plenty of non auto Industries need help at present but bailout is not for that purpose
IF one is looking at US wide industry assistance , including auto thats a seporate issue and without huge job losses as a blackmail Problem is Lieberman and his Congress cohorts who hav pork barrelled this Industry for decades with sweet hart deals meaning they could “survive” building petrol guzzlers against gravity…th gravity that consumers wanted smaller cars (so Japan , Korea etc who did so bnefited) , th gravity because they ar CC shockers , and th gravity because they continued US dependence on Arab Sheiks and there oil , and th gravity that this contributed to US trade deficits….ckickens ar home to roost…and US Govt is trillions in debt…and GM/Ford needed to transfer to CC friendley and smaller cars decade plus ago and now hav no money & neither does there Govt (th Chinese do , but thats a politcal dynamite investment)
Unfortunately , with a 10 trillion debt , 3 .3 trillion Obama tax cuts promised (although maybe will get defferred abit , a 5.1 trillion off budget 2 Fannies debt , increasing trade deficit debts on trade , and with recesion looming less revenues ….where is money to come from , and how will it get financed
I had a theory you run out of time before you run out of money , but US seemed to hav reversed that , will need to run reel quick now & be lucky as there is red inkk everywhere
and with blue dog Dems and moderate Republicon Senators and other mish mash of Senate voting anyway , lets see how many times Liebermans solitary vote (pro a Dems Bill) is th decider in next 4 years (till his 2012 re-electon) , suggest never
I notice that the Dear Leader is heading off to Lima, Peru for the Annual APEC Leader Conference. Curiously, the route he is taking is via Honolulu, Acapulco and Lima that would take 32 hours. If he is taking Sydney-Santiago-Lima, it would only take 18 hrs. But Honolulu and Acapulco do have their attractions.
The leaders of APEC could benefit form visiting the “Knowledge Tree” of Maccu Picchu that the Amigos have been advocating for the poor “you were wrong” Diog. Under the KT, they could reflect upon the achievements and wisdom of the ancient Peruvians that man, man made and nature can harmoniously co-exist together.
Ron
The Ford GM situation is even worse than that. GM in particualr have a huge unfunded liability to provide health care plans and retirment benefits to their large workforce. As a result they don’t have enough money tin invest in developing new models themselves. Terrible management as you say, for even more reasons than you list.
The trouble is that there is a good reason to want to keep them running (see some posts on Krugmans blog) because the govt really would spend more on unemployment payments than the cost of the aid. But they ought to insist on strict conditions. As a minimum these giants could break up, with profitible sidelines sold off.
This is obscene. They can have it.
http://www.smh.com.au/travel/crisis-what-crisis-dubai-hotel-to-throw-30-million-party-20081120-6c2t.html
A stupid insinuation which could only be written by someone who knows nothing at all about Kevin Rudd, who will undoubtedly spend the whole trip working, as will his staff.
The reason the Dem Senate Caucus have let Lieberman off is that Obama asked them to, so all you Obamanauts should vent your spleen at him. Obama is putting party unity and consensus-building ahead of pretty revenge, which is exactly what he said he would do, remember? Will he give McCain the Pentagon? I wouldn’t be at all surprised.
pretty = petty
“so all you Obamanauts should vent your spleen at him.”
As a consistent critic of Obama for months I don’t made th grade as an Obamanaut , however on this occasion I do not hold him “responsible” I was aware of Obama’s ’support’ for Lieberman staying in th Caucus made a week before th Caucus vote , and Harry Reids subsequent (after decison) comment it was in ‘respect’ for Obama’s wish for consensus etc
huilst Obama’s public preemptive comment made it politcaly hard for Dems 55 Caucus to go against th new POTUS theme , I tink they should hav seeing both now hav put judgement & standards on line for someone (Lieberman) who is essence of cynicism & disloyalty post 2005 , and for little/no voting value Th last Labor Senator “rat” taking Senate “chair” from howard would hardly hav been welcomed back into Labor fold
Dems and Obama will be lucky to see a tangible or intangible reel politcal “divdend”….and worse , if Lieberman jumps out of line in future th politcal costs I feel will hav more than exceeded perceived benefits But its done now
Yes Socrates agree , and unfortunately there is pre th Bailout an existing bi partisan 25 billion “retooling’ aid program on table , but Big 3 want more $$ , and do need it to ’survive’
Other concern is both th product size and/or its power sourse is not a 21st Century future , and nor is th past “Washington” channelling of unproductive monies or even blind eye to overstated mpg type regulation measures Unfortunately growth down sizing of an econamy multiplies th problem challenges , but I’d start with new managemnt at least as tax payers price of support
An odd figure that stuck in my mind from Bailout discussions was a report then of US govt unfunded pension etc liabilitys of 51 trillion , never checked it further as thought well even discounting by 50% exaggeration is mind boggling ….and economicaly unsustainable as it will hav to be paid sooner or later
PS/ FINNS , fatal attraction of Honolulu politcaly as you say will be Press cameramen taking just one shot at a breakfast of Rudd there , with a caption of where breakfast is (leaving innuendo foer reader to digest) , rather than reality
Check out the kick in High Yield Bonds over the past couple of days.
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/business/economy/index.html
Adam:
Just as the public whines about parliamentarians pensions and former PM’s benefits after leaving office – why they want government treated like an ordinary job i don’t know – they claim that overseas trips are just junkets – its no use telling them you’ll be stuck in long boring meetings
Consider Rudd’s schedule this last week: flew Canberra-Washingtion for the G20. Two very long days of meetings in Washington. Flew back to Canberra. A very long day of Cabinet then meeting 300 mayors all wanting money. Flies Canberra-Lima, just about the longest flight on the planet, more long days of meetings, flies Lima-Canberra, back in time for Cabinets and meet Parliament next week. You can accuse Rudd of sheer madness with this kind of schedule, but to accuse him of junketting is just stupid, and quite offensive. I’m talking to you, Finnegans.
I tink you’ve made th mistake of implying th politcal innuendo Finns was actualy highlighting th ‘oz’ Press may seize on
Taking an extra 14 hours to get to Peru and going via Honolulu and Acapulco is a fact as stated by Finns , and probably Rudd preparing for th APEC Leader Conference away from distractions of ‘oz’ But as Finns said “But Honolulu and Acapulco do have their attractions” is exactly how it can be “presented” in th Media , and difficult to rebut
Amigo Ronnie, i seem to remember that i used to have a parrot, devoid of sense of humuor, and demanded that i do certain thing. Deja vu.
WTF has been going on here while I’ve been gone? Ron and Finns have become Obamanauts. Adam is praising Obama. And the Amigos are getting scolded by a very sensitive Adam for pointing out that Rudd is visiting the Knowledge Trees in Peru via Acupulco and Hawaii. Has this thread become a parallel universe?
Geithner will be announced Treasury Sec.
Richardson is Commence Sec.
And Hillary will accept SOS according to the NYT. That’s a very impressive Cabinet.
Woodward says Obama has given the Clintons the world, so he can focus on the economy.
Ron 744
Agre 100% on the car makers.
Regarding tehe figure on unfunded pension liabilities, you have to remember that they can be paid for an average of 20 years these days, so multiplied by millions of workers you can soon rack up a vast sum. That being said, I don’t believe that figure for the US govt alone. I suspect that would be the total for all the US economy, private and public, including the unfunded auto industry pensions. Its another reason why the US debt is such a big problem – they will need to borrow more to pay pensions in coming years, or force people to work longer.
This story could be one of Obamas first big headaches: City Group might collapse. This is a big deal – City is the second largest bank in the US, and it is not a Wall Street deal maker but a real bank with real businesses and depositors with their savings in it. It would be comparable to NAB going down here.
http://www.reuters.com/article/newsOne/idUSTRE4AI91420081119
Diog, can i put it better than this? The natives on the G island must be spewing over their guinea pig stew.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/conason/2008/11/22/hillary/
Indeed indeed Amigo , yes humour comes fom th hart , is triple edged but th right edge is lost if not young at hart at th time I shall say what your more eloquent prose did charm….Rudd/strategists were dumb to so schedule Acapulco/Honololu bypass & open up a potential poltical innuendo unnecessarily (assumimg it was avoidable)……and if Ruddy took his big bertha surfboard to Honolulu as well , then well what a photo opportunity indeed
Amigo Ronnie,
Peru is stil a poor country. But the rich, like everywhere else, knows how to live. They live in a burb calls Miraflores. It has a beautiful shopping mall built inside the cliff top. The cliff top has been carved out and plonked into it the shopping mall. Yes, sipping coffee in siesta time over looking the Pacific Ocean is kinda of bourgeois and decadent. No wonder the Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso) is not happy.
Miraflores Shopping mall – http://home.people.net.au/~sspp/mira.jpg
Right infront of the shopping mall is the twin-tower Marriott Hotel, one of the best I have seen. I believe many of the APEC Leaders are staying at this Marriott Hotel.
Marriott Hotel, Miraflores – http://home.people.net.au/~sspp/marriot.jpg
Finns and Ron
I’m not so fussed about Billary being SOS. Lieberman retaining his position truly sucks though. Why he would keep that toerag apologist for Bush and all of his disgraceful abuses of power is beyond me. It doesn’t bother me so much that me backed McCain over Obama but Lieberman’s judgement has been appalling during the last eight years.
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/11/12/lieberman/
Finns
Are Shining Path still going? I thought they had been defeated in one of the few times terrorists have actually lost.
Diog “WTF has been going on here while I’ve been gone? ”
Well you’ve returned as you left ….in a universe of th what is not , with unchanged naughtinesss in premium
Big events hav occured & happly to to cheer you with these big News:
Firstly , Missouri officially has now fell to McCain leaving ‘long live th King’ not only constitutionaly dethroned with 2 wrong at 375 , but he still using 00 type ’spin’ headlines at this Threads Introduction , holding that throne undemocraticaly
Secondly politicaly Dems hav reel power now in Senate with 57 of 100 with Sanders , and thats without Lieberman or MN , so greater chanse of both sound & ‘fairness’ legislation than in last Senate
Thirdly Lieberman has proved th completely unnecessary undeserving cynicaly disloyal can sometimes be ‘rewarded’ in a unique ‘consensus ‘theme’ transition period as is th now
Fourthly Adam who said he never reads/understands my generation Z lingos appears to hav actualy had a go at doing so , but should not hav as seems to hav misunderstood my hit against th Harry Reid/Pelosi who should hav mildly dented Obama for an hour only to politcaly help/save him long and longer term on policy & standards issues…devils choises ar never easy , but for me this time pragmatism & consesus was not worth th exhorbitant price , and at such a price forever remembered now
And fiflthy , you will be cheered to know APEC will be held in Peru and no doubt th APEC Leaders will wander into Maccu Picchu….. to those “knowledge trees”….and they also will wonder at th origin of ‘a diog’ after seeing erected those hundreds of signs “diog you were wrong”
And finaly well , all of your Christmas’s hav come at once …Hillary may be SOS , and adorning , no Headlining your Newspaper reading every day for th next 4 years will be that Lady , an Amigo thought for you , and probably th G Island brigade as well Fortunately you can always count Amigos as friends
Diog, the remnants of the SP are still lurking among the cocoa trees of Peru as the Unions are still fairly strong in Peru. As they say one man’s terrorist is another’s freedom fighter. They were truly Maoist alright.
Anyway, how would you describe the regime of Fujimori who is currently in jailed (6 years) over the death squad, human rights abuses and corruption.
It was actually Fujimori who proved tough enough finally to smash the Shining Path. Sadly he was also a crook. Peruvians seem to be a forgiving lot. Alan Garcia bankrupted the country the first time he was president but now they have re-elected him.
Finns
I read a book saying that Shining Path was the most “successful” terrorist organisation ever in terms of numbers killed. And they are the only group ever to be destroyed by military tactics. The author also made the point that the tactics used by the Peruvian Government were not exactly conducive to good government, and nowhere (even in America!) could a democratic government use the same methods. Hence the futility of democratic governments trying to use military force to quash terrorism.
Ronster
I think we can call it a draw. Obi as POTUS running the US, and the Clintons as SOS running the rest of the world.
Diog,
[I think we can call it a draw] – agree.
The Dream Team is finally realised. yes. Obi can run the USA and Hillary will run the World. The “Knowledge Tree” of Maccu Picchu triumphs again. The natives on G Island are not amused.
Just wondering where the APEC Leaders will parade their silly dress session. A poncho by MP terrace?
Hmm – I wonder if Chelsea Clinton will run for her mother’s Senate seat in 2010 (assuming Hillary becomes SOS).
Chelsea would turn 30 in 2010, so she would be constitutionally eligible. It would smack of nepotism, but the Clintons are so popular in NY that she would still probably win…
Diog
“Ronster
I think we can call it a draw. Obi as POTUS running the US, and the Clintons as SOS running the rest of the world.”
Treaty of Versailes was at least conducted in a train , and all you offer is a few lines , and without documentations , nor even drinks Upfront must say there will be absolute generosities from Amigos re this draw bit to those brave escapees from G and deservedly so , but for G Islanders much Solomons thoughts to come
As for Hillary , has been well advised , now thats been publicised Obama can not withdraw …she holds th negotiating cards now and expect her as reported not to be trapped like Powell with a later wicked John Bolton type appointment , also she will appoint all her State people , she will hav direct access to POTUS & not via chief of staff or NSA guy etc , she will be immensely powerful in FA , good thing reely for Obama double wise …one she can handle FA easily and two Obama will now wish her to mostly because devasted US econamy will be a fulltime POTUS job and rightly Obama’s no 1 priority
(of course ’spin’ Media will say Obama is accross all facets including FA for “respectability” , but serious players know econamy is a massive generational challenge & be very time useage …and justified
No, it was the armistice that was conducted in a train. The Treaty of Versailles was conducted at Versailles.
Thanks William for correcting my error , thought there was a train somewhere there , in that city …..so now Diog we hav your offer of a “draw” , and I will now switch to an armistice that may be needed , docs duly notorized with ‘terms’ (genorous of course to thou ) and of course mandatory drinks
Socrates,
Hadn’t replied earlier as just saw your post on Citibank , th 2nd biggest US reel Bank & with significant concerns One wonders th extent of financial inter connection of Citigroup to other World Banks including ‘oz’ ones regarding supply of funds & debt What was reely a worry is Reuters quotes like :
“Citigroup’s market value is down from more than $270 billion just two years ago. It is also less than one-half the $75 billion of new capital that Citigroup has raised SINCE the credit crisis began, INCLUDING $25 billion through Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson’s financial industry rescue package.”
Th “agreement” to buy “on Wednesday of 17.4 billion of structured investment vehicle funds” Alot of these type of funds imploded at start of crisis and ar usualy toxic
“there share price down 78% this year”
“3.6% to insure Citiigroup Debt over 5 years against default”
One wonders how deep reely is th hole in US financial system and its potential for moere externol damage overseas to structure of those financial systems , and whether US Treasury ar still reactive rather than getting ahead of overall problam
Ronster
The terms of the Armistice are simple.
Obama takes credit or blame for everything that happens in the US. All aspects of domestic policy are his, including Gitmo, rendition, torture, homeland security.
All of the US’s foreign policy will be ascribed to Hillary and Bill. Obviously this is a little simplistic with Biden as VP, but we need to draw the line somewhere. Also, if there ever was a SOS who would be given carte blanche it would be the Clintons.
The US is at War with Iraq and Afghanistan and Gates appears likely to stay for a year or so as SOD. He seems more interested in the conduct of the War and less interfering in the internal politics than Rummy, but I’m reluctant to give Hillary full credit for the end of the Iraq War, just as I don’t think it will be fair to blame her for the ongoing debacle in Afghanistan.
Diog, it looks like Obama has just outsourced the salvation of the US economy to our Dear Leader.
In yesterday OZ, Paul Kelly wrote:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24687258-12250,00.html
As the DL has been telling the APEC Leaders that you got to spend spend spend your way out of the current crisis
Now the kid said he is also going to spend spend spend, sounds very familiar:
http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5hEx3tiPJhZQLVqjNmHR_oP6FZMuwD94K59GG0
Diog
#768 “Ronster The terms of the Armistice are simple” POTUS & SOS
Now you started suggesting a Draw , and its now become an Armistice , but you then say “its simple”
….but only because you wrote all th terms and probably with assistance from G Island
Let us see your list , now domesticaly yes you just happened to omit economy from Obama’s responsibilities , sort of almost leaving that uggly ducking to a shared POTUS/SOS responsibility Tink Obama can hav that Then we see Obama’s non Kyoto and what you wish to saddle SOS with that Obama albertross , another Obama Kyoto CC baby to keep
Then I noticed you snuck FA issues Gitmo, rendition, torture into th Obama POTUS tent rather than th SOS Probabley because you see some SOS FA success’s being achieved there for th SOS Well they ar in SOS FA tent with gloating to come
Of course within 4 years if Obama can produce an electric car to cut his domestic policy responsibility for economic oil dependence he can hav that success
Amigos will need to look more carefully at your armistice “oratory” , noting Iraq withdrawal could be another SOS FA success
Ronster
I didn’t include the economy as I thought that it went without saying that Obama takes full responsibility for that.
Kyoto wouldn’t normally be a SOS job would it. Smith didn’t go to Bali, but Wong/Garrett did. I don’t think Condi was there. Obi takes the rap on CC.
I’m open to negotiation on Gitmo, torture, rendition and unlawful detention as I think Obama has made the running on those issues but they are within Condi’s remit.
Diog
it always is of concern when you become reasonable in negotiations , sort of like i may hav missed something along line therein th oratory
Yes Condi as SOS has to take that stain on Gitmo, torture, rendition etc , its not Defense or NSA as she had to be not only in policy but worse in ‘very hard selling’ thu SOS diplomocy it abroad to alleged ‘allies’ so its Hillarys SOS to fix and fix properley (except current military tribunals , diferent jurisdiction)
You havn’t mentioned Doha trade deals and gun control Guess SOS having UN appointee under State Dept unlike last admin means SOS wears those rotten veto votes on Isreael returning to 1967 border withdrawals , but Palestinian resolution itself is grey demarcations
Ronster
Richardson has Trade. No SOS there.
Arms control in US = Obama. Arms, nukes in rest of world, including Pakistan and North Korea = Hillary. Good luck there!
Anything in the UN, including Israel and Palestine is Hillary. Tough hey.
Torture, Gitmo and tribunals really come under Defence or Justice so they’re Obama. But if there’s a rendition, I’m blaming Hillary.
Amigos, this is the official APEC Leaders photo, or in another word, the silly dress session.
http://www.apec2008.org.pe/apecsystem/gimagenes/imagen2497_det_real.jpg
They look cheap as per observed by the OZ:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24696859-16953,00.html
I heard the ponchos were made in the famous Peruvian Alpaca wool. The naughty alpacas.
http://home.hetnet.nl/~tyeslemore-voskuil/tyeslemore/alpacas/alpaca123.jpg
Now the question is whether these were pure alpaca wool that would cost a fair bit or they were the el-cheapo mixed with synthetic fibre. Even better, were they made with baby alpaca wool that would cost 10 times more than pure alpaca wool.
One alpaca wool shop in Cuzco told me to watch the Australians, he said in the next twenty years Australia will rival Peru in the production of the alpaca wool.
They look even cheaper by posing in front of a card board cut-out of the famed Maccu Picchu and NO knowledge tree.
Next year, APEC will be held in Singapore, the la la land. It will be interesting to see what silly dress the Singaporeans will come up with.
Amigo FINNS
“They look even cheaper by posing in front of a card board cut-out of the famed Maccu Picchu and NO knowledge tree.”
Yea , knew it was fake when there no diog signs in th background
http://www.apec2008.org.pe/apecsystem/gimagenes/imagen2497_det_real.jpg
“I heard the ponchos were made in the famous Peruvian Alpaca wool. The naughty alpacas”
Understand ponchos ar of pure alpaca wool , th most expensive potato sacks I’ve cast eyes upons
Now Amigo , hav been trying to follow diog’s literery Hillary’s SOS responsibilities offers , but they seem to change every time he gets codes from G Island , just look:
diog #771 I’m OPEN to negotiation on torture, Gitmo, rendition and unlawful detention …….they ARE within SOS CONDI’s remit.
So Amigo #772 agrees , yep thats SOS responsibility , so fine OK SOS Hillary should gets those responsobilities
diog #773 “Torture, Gitmo and tribunals really come under Defence or Justice so they’re Obama ”
Well Amigo ? , #771 and #773 posts ar diferent , but seemingly written by diog , what do th “knowledge trees” say
Ronster
I gave you rendition didn’t I? That was the negotiation. I’m a tough negotiator.
In fairness to me, I think Condi was frozen out of the torture briefs. Gitmo is technically US soil so the SOS isn’t involved.
They were areas of international concern, but I think Condi/SOS was more having to sell them to the world as an international spokesman for US domestic policy, rather than them being examples of US foreign policy.
You know how much I love pedantry.
Diog, next time when USA host APEC, is Hillary responsible for the silly dress or is it Obi? Especially if Obi insists they all dress like this:
http://www.smh.com.au/ffximage/2008/02/26/obama_270208_narrowweb__300×512,0.jpg
or a selection like this:
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/231/463506745_8ed842c2f0_o.jpg
Amigo , when you compare th two pictures of next APEC dress rehersal ,
Obarama shows nothing , no openness
Hillary shows it all , all open …although whats in right hand corner there
Diog , mention to G Island that there claim of Gitmo “is technically US soil ” , would makeo Abu Ghraib prison (Iraq) “technically US soil” , Subu base (Manila) also ….making them what , under “homeland security”….but there’s ywellow arch ‘Macca’s’ there thats th giveaway …so Gittmo & renditions ar SOS…..you’re just jealous your love Hillary will fix these problems quick & well
I know I probably go on about economics too much, but the latest bailout in the US (CityBank) is really an appalling deal for the US taxpayer, and strangely inconsistent with previous bailout deals, which were on much tougher terms for those bailed out. It costs the US taxpayer up to $306 B in the long term, with them taking 90% of the financial risk. In return they get 10% of the shares of the company (!) with no restrictions on executive payouts (!!). All of the fears of congress over teh bailout conditions are now being realised.
I guess the Bush administration figures that they have no chance of relection in 2012 anyway, so they might as well abuse the power while they have it. Here are some reactions to the deal:
http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2008/11/the-citigroup-b.html
Note that even the Wall Street Journal thinks this deal is dodgy.
Socrates
I agree with a couple of the commentators there. The deal is so ridiculously favourable to Citigroup that every failed group is going to put their hand out for the same deal. GM will be next, and they’ll use the argument, quite reasonably, that more employees would be affected by their demise than Citigroup and that the Government should support them in exactly the same way.
The worst possible aspect is that the deal is so inept that the markets might lose confidence in the soundness of economic decisions being made by the Government re the bailout, and spark another plummet in the markets.