Could Gord get away with abolishing PMQs?
February 6th, 2008
Would he take a short-term hit for a long-term benefit?
Another Wednesday and another PMQs for Gordon Brown to have to endure. He clearly doesn’t like them and being open every seven days to the fierce blasts that Cameron is able to master cannot be very pleasant.
Ever since a piece appeared in the Indy a couple of weeks ago about Brown’s views of the weekly ritual I’ve been pondering over whether we are being softened up for a proposal to change the structure.
Maybe they could find a way of blaming Cameron for the need for change because of the way the Tory leader handles the event
The Indy suggested Gordon Brown is telling friends that the public is being increasingly repelled by the event and that the Commons exchanges are now of little use in discussing the issues of the day.
It was emphasised, however, that there were no plans for change. Maybe I am being very suspicious but for Downing street to suggest this makes me wonder whether, indeed plans are being drawn up.
Of course there would be a huge row in the commons and in the media and the Tories would claim that he’s “scared” and “chicken”. But that would eventually blow over and Brown would have taken away the weekly nightmare.
Clearly there would have to be something in it place but, no doubt, something could be devised that sounded fair and reasonable but took away the Opposition Leader’s six questions.
It’s just a thought.
MessageSpace Advertising
Great mischief making Mike!
Most people aren’t watching telly at midday on wednesday. I doubt it’s continuous presence or absence would have much effect outside of the politics pages and westminster.
I would prefer to abolish Gordon.
Abolition of PMQs because Mr Bean cannot cope, what a portrait of courage!
Latest from CNN (results)
Hillary Clinton
Pledged: 590 Superdelegates: 193 Total: 783
Barack Obama
Pledged: 603 Superdelegates: 106 Total: 709
Hehe, he’d never get away with it and he’d have to be a blithering idiot to try it.
Then again, he did try to divert attention from signing the EU Constitreaty by turning up late… and subsequently got even more attention.
He could, however, get away with format changes (going back to two 15 minute sessions for example). But I doubt he’ll want to try tinkering, and anything perceived as lessening the Opposition’s questioning power would make him look cowardly.
PMQs is one of the greatest traditions of British democracy. I know many Americans who watch it on C-SPAN amazed at it and wishing for anything similar over there.
Any PM of any party who abolished PMQs would bring shame to his office and would not deserve it. The media would rightly take against him for it too until he’s humiliated out of office.
If Brown is genuinely right in thinking that the public is turned off from PMQs then he has no reason to be concerned by it anyway.
OT: could someone please tell me exactly what superdelegates are? I think I heard that they can shift from one person to another, unlike ordinary delegates.
The British Constitution is a flexible, and dynamic thing, but a major change like this would need to be done from a position of authority and dominance. Blair could have got away with it, i dont think Brown could. It reinforces the McCavity impression, it eats away at his reputation for accountability.
It would be a terrible decision for Brown. PMQs are the centrepoint (from the public point of view) of Parliament.
Of course he could revise it, and maybe remove Camerons six questions, by maybe, increasing the libdems and giving the Scot Nationalists a designated question. But since Brown despises both of them, i doubt he would even do that.
Brown just has to learn to get better at it. He has put on a few good performances, there is no reason why he cant improve. Someone needs to tell him to stop asking questions of the opposition members.
Some of his Labour MPs whoop at him doing so, assuming it puts Cameron on the edge (who doesnt take the bite, at all it seems), but they know its bad form. It has to stop.
I can understand (but not excuse it) the Speaker not wanting to attack the PM in public, but its not good enough. He needs to have a strong quiet word with the PM and tell him that in future he will rule it out of order and instruct the PM to answer the questions.
5. Why Hillary probably won’t win…
http://themoderatevoice.com/at-tmv/newsweek-blogitics/17608/obama-in-command-of-the-race/
I think the problem is that it probably wouldn’t be a short term hit but would feed into the growing theme. The world and his aunt would have fun with his book on ‘courage’, the Conservatives would go ballistic. This site would be unbearable! I also think the Conservatives could quite easily lay a trap of trying to get him to agree to a televised election debate into the bargain. It would look like the petulant child losing at Monopoly who throws the board up in the air and flounces off. It would be a total and utter disaster.
8. It seems to me superdelegates are there purely to “beef up” the ultimate winner’s perceived margin of victory, not to decide the victor themselves. The above article linked at 10 explains succintly why superdelegates won’t help Hillary….
To contradict my earlier post, it would feed into a media narrative and allow the conservatives to howl with derision.
One of the things that has struck me about it is that there is no “questions for the leader of the opposition.” Gordon could work that in, giving himself a slight respite and DC a bit of a hard time.
He may want to abolish it, but I doubt if the Press would allow it! It gives them some easy coverage of an ersatz conflict, which they can peddle as an interesting and relevant news story. It isn’t, of course - it’s just a charade, and far removed from the original purpose of giving the Legislature a chance to hold the Executive to account.
But when all’s said and done, PMQs has only existed since the early 1960s, so it’s not a particularly hallowed part of the Constitution. One thing is for certain, though - if Brown did abolish PMQs, none of his successors would reinstate it.
Obama (apparently backed by some networks’ calculations) claims he gained more delegates than Clinton yesterday
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8358.html
13, I don’t think that would work. Would Cameron only be questioned, or Clegg as well? What about the Irish party leaders, and the SNP and Plaid Cymru?
You can’t hold the Opposition to account because they don’t govern the country.
Finally, it won’t happen because Cameron would then have even more opportunities to slap Brown around.
he might launch a review into PMQs……….. then appoint an advisory committee….. then an implementation group…but make a decision to abolish them? Not a chance.
Why worry about them anyway, he only has 18months-2yrs left to endure them.
Rod Crosby @ 10.
That is an excellent and succinct analysis and represents why Obama is very good value in the markets.
It’s noticable how very badly Hillary has done in all caucus contests and this has blunted her edge in the larger states.
16. Biggest oppostion party, and although they don’t govern the country, they want to and are involved at most levels with it’s governance.
14. I disagree. If Brown abolished it, as part of the attack, it would be absolutely necessary for Cameron to commit to reintroduce it.
It reminds the PM that he is of Parliament, and accountable to it. We would in essence have a President without a popular vote, he would not need to turn up for parliament, except maybe for grand events.
A strong Prime Minister might be able to abolish Prime Minister’s Questions (Tony Blair dramatically reduced its impact by reducing the number of sessions from two to one a week, although he doubled its length). Gordon Brown is not a strong Prime Minister.
Moreover, it is not in Gordon Brown’s interests to do so. It gives him a strong reason for keeping a tight rein over everything happening in his Government on a weekly basis. Without that excuse, he would find it harder to pry into the detail of each department.
Brown wouldn’t dare, the papers would have a field day, as would the opposition, and although Brown’s little clique claim it turns off voters, the public would be angry too. He’d be castigated as a coward in the press and battered in the commons by Cameron, who would rightly see it as a victory. Brown and his team have so far shwon themselves to be inept at any political manouverings, this would be handled just as badly.
21, a strong Prime Minister wouldn’t want to, or need to. Blair smashed IDS about, and had the better of it against Howard. Brown, on the other hand, ranges from awful to adequate at best.
An unelected PM abolishes the only real time he can be called to account ?
Cons would have a field day.
Repost from last thread:
Ok, well I’ve tuned in here and am shocked at how everyone’s calling it for Clinton. MSNBC this morning was reporting how it was pretty even, but looking ahead Obama has the edge. All the newspaper headlines on the train were about how last night as a tie, or that the battle could go on into the Spring. As the outsider, Super Tuesday was always going to be Barack’s biggest obstacle. He won most states and most delegates. With the primaries coming up, not only are they favourable territory to him, but he can spend more time in each state getting his recognition up to Clinton’s. The spread of them also means that every positive result will stay in the news for longer. Obama is less than 75 delegates behind Clinton and may well be ahead by Sunday morning. If you’re gambler, my advice is put a lot on Barack at these favourable odds.
Roger, were you reading the same site as the rest of us? Other than candidate cheerleading, all the informed analysis on this site was that nothing would be decided and the fight would go on. I’ve been saying for a long time this would be the case. I’ve also predicted the collapse of Romney for a long time and said that evangelicals wouldn’t abandon Huckabee and he’d do better than expected.
donpaskini, I was thinking this yesterday. A sealed up Republican contest, especially one with base conservatives sniping at McCain, means the GOP are not getting favourable coverage, while the media will stay focused on the Democrats making speeches in front of supporters. Also, whoever wins the Democratic nomination will, by the time of the general, have been thought of a winner more recently in the public’s minds. McCain would also have problems directing his fire: Clinton and Obama are so unalike that any attack on one risks making the other look better. Meanwhile there are twice as many people getting media coverage having a go at McCain.I think the conventional wisdom that a prolonged Democratic race could harm them might be very flawed indeed.
‘Gordon Brown is telling friends that the public is being increasingly repelled by the event’
So either he has been reading the BBC comments (posted by his own spotty juniors) and is thus completely self-deluded, or he is being dishonest and thinks his colleagues are incredibly stupid.
Abolishing PMQs would be both disgraceful and hideously counterproductive. He would look “frit”. And sly. And cowardly. Disastrous politics.
People may not “like” PMQs for its yah-boo aspects but they like the idea the prime minister is vigorously challenged in the House of Commons once a week.
I think Brown would get not only the derision of all the opposition parties (indeed he might find it hard to force through the Commons, if some MPs rebel - and surely they would?) - he would find the entire media world enraged and contemptuous.
Not possible. And I don’t think Blair could have done it either. Even Thatcher couldn’t have done it in her pomp.
Re the US delegates issue. I’ve been trying to explain, gently, to Nick Palmer that Obama either got pretty much a score draw in delegates - or he actually won. Nick seems to be labouring under some delusion that 300 Californian delegates are gonna suddenly drop on Hillz.
FWIW I also think adding superdelegates to the scores is a little dubious. They can switch. And they do, for various reasons, some of them quite moral - i.e. their home county or state voted for a different candidate.
Without the supers, Obama is ahead.
OT. Next Italian Prime Minister market at PP
Applies to next permanent President of Italy AFTER the Election. Does not include caretaker President.
Silvio Berlusconi 1 - 4
Walter Veltroni 5 - 2
Giovanni Trapattoni 100 - 1
Any value in Veltroni?
“Polls give Berlusconi and his rightwing allies a lead of between 10 and 15 percentage points. But they also show that by running alone, without support from the radical left, Veltroni and the Democratic party could whittle the gap to less than three”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/italy/story/0,,2253087,00.html
23 - I don’t disagree about the “need to”, but why do you think Blair made those changes to Prime Minister’s Questions? It always seemed to me that he had done so to reduce the number of days a week when he could slip on a banana skin.
I don’t doubt that Brown would love to abolish, what is for him, a growing weekly trauma that seems to be gradually grinding him down. He will do it if he thinks he can get away with it.
From the last thread. The FT’s view on Brown’s “chaotic” reign:
“Mess, prime minister: From the shadows of his bunker emerges a battered Brown
By George Parker and Alex Barker
Last updated: February 5 2008 19:28
Supporters of Gordon Brown speak of “chaos” – and that is one of the gentler words used to describe the past few months at 10 Downing Street under Britain’s prime minister.
His officials have sometimes been seen in nearby pubs red-eyed with fatigue and – occasionally – with the sting of tears. Their complaints are of a prime minister shouting at the typists, taking out his frustration on his closest aides and unable to take decisions. For them, Mr Brown has been at the helm of the GST: the “Good Ship Titanic”. Even loyal ministers admit that things inside a dysfunctional Downing Street were becoming “ridiculous”…..”
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a441af4e-d405-11dc-a8c6-0000779fd2ac.html?nclick_check=1
30. That certainly deserved a repost. Our PM it seems shows rather little ‘courage’, instead indulging in childish tantrums much of the time.
Another interesting analysis of the Democrat race, and the possibilities for Obama going forwrd…
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/080206nj1.htm
Obama cleaning up amongst smart, wealthy people, who are also I guess the “opinion formers”…
25. Hey! I’m not calling it for Clinton. I’ve been battling the massed armies of ignorance, camped out on the darkling plains of pb.com, for hours. But the Hillary-loving Orcs won’t listen.
A frigging mollusc with dyslexia can interpret what happened yesterday: A Whacking Big Draw. A tie. Neck and Neck. Even stevens. All to play for. Game on.
And a draw, of course, favours Obama, as the next few weeks should get better for him - in terms of money, momentum, and amenable primaries.
28- “But they also show that by running alone, without support from the radical left, Veltroni and the Democratic party could whittle the gap to less than three”
I really can’t see it.
The 10-15% gap is over the whole centre-left, not over PD alone.
PD can gain votes during a campaign running alone (and so without having to worry by a communist popping up every week disagreeing with something) but they can’t really pass the whole CR coalition alone. They can go from high 20s to 30s IMO, but not much more.
I think I know where the 10-15% gap reduced to 3% thing came from…if it’s what I think they refer to, it would be the gap over the whole opposition..but if PD runs alone with the current electoral law, it would be worthless in terms of a win.
For ex (making up numbers)…CR get 52%, PD 33%, Radical Left 12%, other CL 3%…it would be an easy majority for CR in terms of seats (bonus at the House and regional bonus in the majority of regions at the Senate)
33. Yes, I was going to say that in the last two threads you had moved from romanticist orator to the lone astute analyst!
Friends, Brown has ‘friends’, I thought he only had ‘visions’.
It was a shame that he wasn’t stoppped from asking questions to both Cameron and Clegg. He failed to address Clegg’s concerns about fingerprinting schoolchildern; instead he waffles on about protecting Liberties.
If Brown can’t cope with PMQs he should give up, or show some courage and face up to the questions. Gordon Brown: Portrait of courage, my @r5e.
33 - Like you say all to play for but there is a couple of things that could really throw Obama. For instance, what if Edwards endorses Hillary? What if she starts a creeping barrage of Endorsents that she has kept back?
34- Indeed, the polls with a reduced gap of three points are for the total CR against the total CL.
Il Cavaliere va a vincere ancora, povera Italia…
I said before the election that never happened that Gordon would not do well on the campaign - unlike Tony he does not like being in situations where he has to think on his feet - he is much more comfortable with pre scripted monologues and prepared answers - if he had his way he would get rid of not only PMQs but also any events where he has to face an interogation because he tends to lose and he is painfully aware of this weakness- it was one of the reasons i believe why he only wielded the knife against TB when he was sure that there would be not contest for the leadership . Essentially he is not cut out to be prime minister but he really wants to hold onto the position. If abolishing PMQs will help him do that he will go for it
35. Yes, I’m just sharper than everybody else. That’s my problem. A prophet without honour.
Ahem.
I notice that Clinton’s price has drifted somewhat on betfair, while Obama has tightened a tad. Heading towards evens, which is probably what it should be. No one knows who is gonna win this race, not us, not the bookies, not Wogerdamus, not the candidates themselves.
But right now I’d probably rather be Obama than Hillz, though it’s a very close call.
Now I’m going to watch Rambo IV.
36. Dubcek used to talk about ’socialism with a human face’.
Brown is giving us authoritarian socialism with a saturnine countenance. The first feel-bad PM.
34. Thanks Andrea for the insight. Is it likely that something may happen in the 2 months to 13 April that could mix things up, such as a change to the electoral law to stop such unstable coalitions in future?
37. Clinton wanted this race to be sewn up before it began. That’s why she got all her endorsements out public beforehand to give her the air of inevitability. She’s unlikely to have any more forthcoming as she wasn’t expecting a fight.
What if that doesn’t happen? What if, instead, Barack sacrifices a live sheep on the Letterman show? What if Hillary’s bra explodes, revealing a small training camp for Al Qaeda concealed in her cleavage?
What if? What if? What if?
What if you stop coming up with ludicrous ideas that have no basis in reality and spring only from yr alleged “brain”? What are these secret endorsements? Where are they? Who is it? Who’s going to endorse her? The Krankies? Robert Mugabe? Bob Holness from Countdown?
I wondered if anyone can tell me when McCain, if he is the Republican nominee, would have to select his VP by?
It seems to me that this decision would be very much shaped by the Democrat opponent. If it is Hillary, I think McCain can consider sidelining the requirement for the socially conservative wing of the party to have a VP candidate. He has shown to be popular amongst independents and Hillary is the perfect person to force up Republican loyalties. This does not solve any problems McCain could have in the South though.
But if Obama wins the Democratic nomination, McCain would be in a contest with the only other person to consistently win independent support, perhaps making the support of social conservatives more critical to chances of success?
[US thread 265] - James Burdett said “It remains to be seen whether Obama wins more delegates. From my admittedly untrained eye, Clinton seems to be doing marginally better in Obama states than Obama is in Clinton states.”
Maybe it is my rose-tinted specs, but.. Lets take their home states:
Illinois for Obama by 65-33 (%) 62-31 (delegates, 60 to allocate)
New York for Clinton by 57-40 (%) 127-87 (delegates, 18 to allocate)
To my untrained eye it look as though both sides won some states easily, Obama won some tight states (Missouri, New Mexico) and Clinton won the biggest states (California, New York/Jersey), whilst Obama won the biggest of the rest (Georgia, Colorado, Minnesota).
Like seant says, it’s a draw.
I hope PMQs is abolished and replaced with something like the Liaison Committee grillings on a more regular basis. PMQs is a complete waste of time. Even a self-confessed political junkie like me finds it terminally dull these days.
Is the main problem with PMQs not the most useless speaker ever ?
48 - that doesn’t help. Maybe we just have a very bad combination of all the different bits that make up PMQs at the moment.
Might Gordon be more comfortable if PMQs was a bit shorter? Say two 15 minute sessions, once on Tuesday and once on Thursday…?
47 - Liaison Committee “grilling” ?
“It is right that we review our democratic accountability and I have made clear that courageous, long term decisions are required to ensure we are fully transparent in our policies and accountable to the British people. We need a root and branch overhaul of the outdated and ineffective PMQs and its replacement with a modernised, robust system for the long term. It is the right and courageous choice to make this important and long term change now, not in the next Parliament, and to fully involve the British people, the hard working families who need answers to their difficult questions.
The party opposite, wedded as it is to yesterdays solutions. interested only in short term headline grabbing, well rehearsed soundbites doesn’t have the courage to take the long term view, to make the difficult long term decisions needed for better direct accountability.
It is right therefore that I, following the example set by my father when he introduced coffee mornings to take his congregations questions and give them long term direction, introduce Prime Ministers Blog. This 21st Century innovation, will in the long term enable the British people to directly question their PM and enable me to directly respond, not in short, quick fix answers but to give them robustly thought through and long term directions on how I am bettering their lives and delivering the change and vision this country needs,”
The Rt Hon Gordon Brown, Prime Minister, Webmaster and First Lord of the Treasury,
52. You should send that to no 10 - you’d get a job offer..
PMQs isn’t that much of a tradition: it could be abolished or radically altered. I’d be interested in a format which excluded PMQs in their current form to backbenchers, while allowing the Leader to put a meatier q on something like the Urgent Question format, in order to develop something but a mini-debate. But Brown could not afford to make changes, any more than Major could when he was in trouble and privately wanted to change the format.
52. That’s not gordon, he didn’t mention black wednesday
Oops, missed new thread…
re 283 from last: A sealed GOP nomination, which imo will be today/tomorrow as the full impact of Romney’s California wipeout is absorbed (after CDs are allocated McCain should be 750 to Romney’s 300), will definitely leave the Dems more in the spotlight. However, is that necessary positive for them? McCain will be given a free pass for a couple of months, with the Dems attacking each other rather than him. More importantly, do Clinton and Obama actually damage each other in their desperation?
38. Chris, I left a message for you in the previous thread about Carla Bruni
42. Caveman, I think Veltroni and PD can potentially run a good campaign alone without the Radical Left. As I said they can raise from high 20s to low 30s IMO.
But it would still very very far from running the whole CR close.
A new party has been created last week (centrist)..don’t have a clue yet on how they can perform though.
As for the electoral law, the referendum about it is going to be delayed to next year because of the new elections. So it will be this law.
The exact composition of alliances and parties standing will be probably confirmed soon.
Communist Refondation, Italian Communists, Greens and Democratic Left are expected to run together in a sort of Rainbow List.
AN, Lega and UDC asked FI not to bring in again all various little CR parties and run just the 4 of them in PD run alone.
28,
‘ next permanent President of Italy AFTER the Election. Does not include caretaker President.’
The President of Italy is Giorgio Napolitano, and a very fine man too.
Are you talking about who might be elected prime minister of Italy after the April elections? (It’s reassuring that those elections will be conducted under the eye of Giuliano Amato, the current Minister of the Interior, who was called for a talk with President Napolitano before the technical mandate to rejig the electoral procedures was returned to the President.)
46. Indeed. Just to emphasise what a draw it was, here is one tally of the raw vote:
Clinton: 7,186,853 (48.78%)
Obama: 7,142,354 (48.48%)
Edwards: (2.74%)
Numbers via The Field
Incredibly close. And with some votes still to come that might favour Obama, it could end up even closer. Basically that’s as close a draw as you are gonna get with 15 million voters.
If you had asked Obama a year ago, a month ago, a week ago, can you take a draw in votes on Super Tuesday, when you win the most states, and possibly the most delegates - he would have said Yes I Can!
Meanwhile if you’d offered Clinton a draw in votes, a deficit in states, and a possible deficit in delegates, on Super Tuesday, she’d have hit you with her copy of The Female Eunuch.
52. You forgot tractor production.
Classic post.
Obama is now the slight favorite for the nomination. It looks like he will have a lead in pledged delegates, the february terrain is favorable and he has ongoing fundraising advantages. At the end of 2007 Obama had $14m on hand for the primary and Clinton had $18m while Obama outraised her $32m to $13.5m. I think he has spent more as well (he had TV ads in more ST states), but probably has a $5-10m cash on hand advantage.
NOTE - Clinton’s figures are inflated because she has collected money for the General Election that she cannot use until after the primaries.
The more time and attention Obama spends on a state the better he does. However it is not all over for Clinton. She can claim to have at least blunted Obama’s momentum, and has an opportunity to reset the narrative of the campaign and probe Obama’s weaknesses further. It’s interesting that her campaign are pushing heavily for lots more debates. Obama has run a remarkable campaign but as it goes on there is a risk he makes a major gaffe. Plus, Clinton is unlikely to want for money. Obama may outspend her but it won’t be by a huge amount.
As for the General things continue to look promising for the Democrats. The exit polls show the vast majority of Dems are happy with either Obama or Clinton. And Dem turnout again massively eclipsd that for the GOP, even in some red states. Examples - Oklahoma, Georgia anmd Misouri where the Dems beat the GOP turnout by 24, 9 and 40% respectively. In many blue states Dem turnout was more than twice as high.
Despite the apparent hatred of Clinton she got more votes than any of the Republicans in Oklahoma a pretty red state. McCain is likely to be the nominee, but will rely heavily on independents to win. He has struggled to break 40% in most red states, on a depressed turnout. Especially if Obama is the nominee several red states could be in play.
Also if it is Obama v McCain it has echoes of Santos v Vinnick in the West Wing which seemed very fanciful at the time.
59 You’re right. As of today Obama has the mo. They’re neck and neck today, but Obama has come from nowhere so is doing better.
57- Andrea
French media are no better… It becomes unbearable to read a newspaper, the presidential couple is the only subject! (i’ve given up on tv news several years ago).
61 - A very good comparison actually.
59 SeanT “Numbers via The Field”
Even the country set must be following this US election then. Suppose it passes the time now hunting is banned
63 - That’s nothing to what will happen when you move to the US if Hillary wins.
Come to Britain - you know you want to.
63. Chris from Paris, I can understand it..they’re moved from “are they together?” to “are they married?” to “is she pregnant?” …it was too much!
I was almost willing to force myself to watch a French tv series (without being harsh towards French television, but I’m not sure which is worse between Cordier, Soeur Therese or Julie Lescaut) in exchange not to see them again!
65. Yes, the beagling correspondent is unusually well-informed on Democrat psephology.
Jonathon (from the last thread) It would be difficult to attack Cameron in that way when he’s popular and as Bob Sykes points out showing Brown’s abjectness at PMQ’s could be a risk.
However Labour has little that’s positive to ’sell’ at the moment and it wouldn’t be believed if it tried. So finding a chink in David Cameron could be the best option.
Having looked at the hard sell ads of the US elections-which will have been researched to death-it’s obvious that inconsistency from your opponent is their weapon of choice. Usually a syrupy voice saying ‘he said this in October and changed his mind by November….’
With Cameron it could be much more potent. Cameron sitting with Andrew Marr in his shirt sleeves saying in that sincere voice of his ‘I want to get rid of Punch and Judy politics’ subtly intercut with some well edited footage from today with a tiny scratch on his voice. Then a positive tag line about Labour!
67 - Oi, you…stick to Midsomer Murders!
66- Well at least Bill doesn’t pose naked for lad magazines… (as our distinguished first lady recently did)
Re New Mexico
With 180 of 184 of precincts reporting statewide, Clinton held the narrowest of leads — 65,845 votes, or 43 percent, to Obama’s 65,728 votes, or 42.9 percent, Democratic party officials said Tuesday night.
Brian Col¢n, chairman of the state’s Democratic party, said early today that results from four precincts were being delayed — three in Rio Arriba County and one in Sandoval County — because the county chairmen could not be reached.
Beth Adams, the party’s caucus director, said this morning that those four outstanding precincts remain the party’s top priority.
“We’re going to have to get up there (to Rio Arriba County) within the next couple of hours and get them and focus on getting a complete count on those,” she said.
But the real wild cards were about 16,800 provisional ballots waiting to be counted.
Provisional ballots are given to voters who show up at the wrong site, whose names are not on registered voter lists provided by the state or those who requested an absentee ballot, but signed an affidavit saying they did not return it, Col¢n said.
Those provisional ballots will be counted beginning at noon at a Northeast Heights accounting firm. That will happen simultaneously with a certification of all ballots cast Tuesday, Adams said.
“It’s going to be a thorough process,” Col¢n said. “It’s going to take some time.”
Statewide, provisional ballots accounted for 10 to 12 percent of all votes cast, Col¢n said.
Party officials today said the high number is at least partly the result of their plan to encourage voters to cast ballots anywhere they could.
“We really wanted to make sure that people who weren’t able to get an absentee ballot, who were working in Santa Fe, like legislators, could get a provisional ballot,” Adams said.
69 - Roger “Then a positive tag line about Labour!”
Got it! ‘Not Flash, just Gordon’. Watch those poll numbers soar.
67- All French TV series are incredibly bad. But I’m proud to say I’ve never seen a single episode of the ones you mentioned!
French Tv is as bas as Italian TV but with less football and less veline…
If Brown abolished PMQs I would put £1000 on the Tories to win the next election and start waving goodbye to all the Labour MPs about to lose their seats.
But he won’t: Brown loses at PMQs = the Westminster bubble has something to talk about over lunch. Brown loses PMQs = the national press derides him for cowardice and the usurption of democracy.
Socrates (from the last thread) I agree this site was excellent last night. My point was that most people who hadn’t watched the results would be surprised this morning to discover Hillary was still in the race. Someone asked me yesterdaty who was going to win and I said that from reading this site it’s going to be Obama. It’s possible I read it wrongly or that the polls were misleading but that seemed to be yesterday afternoon’s consensus.
68 it’s because she hunts them and so knows all their devious ways
74. Chris, I’ve still to recover from France-Italy coproduction on Les Rois Maudits
Brown is really becoming a slightly tragic figure of fun, isn’t he?
How sad.
Looking at the calendar Washington State, Oregon, Mississippi, Louisiana, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Vermont, and Hawaii are all likely to go to Obama.
The big question is what will happen in Texas and Ohio. I think HIllary take Texas and Obama will take Ohio.
76. Next time, Rog, just email me and I’ll tell you who is in front. OK? Me and Peter the P have been calling it quite accurately since New Hampshire.
The question is what do Hillary and Obama do now? A measure of Hillary’s neediness is that she is askign for more debates (always a sign of weakness). He should refuse. He’s debated her three times. He hasn’t shirked. But he should now concentrate on his strengths: speeches, ralies, TV appearances.
She is better at debates. Let her debate with Larry King.
US pundit now on BBC saying Barack has the clear momentum. I think the media story has changed since last night.
I must admit as a Hillary supporter I was impressed that Obama won the states he did - but when I made my prediction I said I let my heart rule my head - did I really think Hillary would have won AL,DE,MO, not really - not to downplay how well he did - in terms of delegates it is a tie - but he has the next 7 to play for where he should win them with only Virginia and Louisiana being a possible for Hillary - I would call the next ones for Obama
but here goes, Obama -
Nebraska, Washington, Maine, D.C. Maryland,Hawaii, Wisconsin,Wyoming,Mississippi, (9)
Toss ups - Louisiana, Virginia,(2)
Hillary, RI, VT,OH, TX, PA, OH(6)
In terms of delegates I think she will hold him pretty close with those predictions - maybe pulling ahead with TX,OH,PA
Can’t predict ahead anymore and really I have no idea bout VT or RI but felt Hillary needed a little moral support
82 - so much so you gave her Ohio twice
Obama news conference say he won “more delegates” yesterday…
CNN has California as 52/42 Clinton after 96% of the votes counted.
Obama confident campaign is “gaining momentum by the day…”
82 - I know you favour Hillary, but even she can’t win Ohio twice…
Barack doing a live press conference now. He just is very impressive on TV. I think it’s the Luther King voice. Even when he talks bollocks it sounds resonant.
His speech last night was tired, overlong, repetitive and a bit dull - but the voice carried it. And saved him.
Now on TV he is calm, lucid, persuasive, likeable, eloquent and obviously smartand thouthful.
America has the chance to elect a very fine president. And change the perception of their country.
83, 87 - Too late… sigh
81 Some of us were calling it accurately before and during New Hampshire as well!
So much easier than UK politics where the heart gets in the way.
That said, today Brown was pants. Pure and Simple. At present the Tories look like winning by default. Sigh.
88. I much preferred SeanT the mighty invective thrower to this new, gushingly idealistic incarnation.
88 - Obama has less experience than Bush, that turned out great.
Brown’s obvious get-out is to require questions in advance. He then reads out a reply, allowing the questioner a single supplementary.
In theory that is what PMQs was meant to be when it was first started. It still is when there is a ‘listed’ (if that’s the right term) question.
91. lol.
Then I refer you back to my post of 44 on this thread. Nasty Sean hasn’t got anyway, he’s just sharing space with hitherto concealed Nice Sean, who has been coaxed into the light by the rhetoric if Barack Obama - like a watervole peeping from his burrow in the first rays of Spring sunshine.
91. Wait till he’s home in cold, wet, miserable Blighty! That’ll get him back to normal.
…She’s holding on right now, but you would anticipate he would win Virginia, Maryland and D.C.,” said Sara M. Taylor, the former Bush White House political director. “She is going to be behind next Tuesday, which is remarkable.”…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/06/AR2008020601782_2.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008020601923
88 - “Now on TV he is calm, lucid, persuasive, likeable, eloquent and obviously smartand thouthful.
America has the chance to elect a very fine president. And change the perception of their country. ”
SeanT is Andrew Sullivan and I claim my free “Hillary 08 t-shirt”
If Brown tried to abolish PMQ’s it’d be a compete disaster, and would seal his fate once and for all, as Britains most cowardly PM ever.
However, that doesn’t mean Brown won’t try and scrap it. I think it would be in keeping with the gutless one, to try and get out of his weekly thrashing.
78- I didn’t manage to reach the half of the first episode. The books were quite good though(if you like history novels)
One of the few recent good decisions of Sarko was to annnounce the end of advertisement on public channels: they might begin to concentrate again on delivering good quality TV…
94. Perhaps we can have a sally against Brown, for old times’ sake?
Morning After Super Tuesday
What a wild ride though the USA from coast to coast and beyond, from the frozen tundra of Point Barrow to the palm fringed beaches of American Samoa.
Like all of the previous parts of this presidential nomination process, my paramount feeling is one of pride for my country and its people.
God bless every American who voted yesterday, in all states, for all candidates, and for our common future as citizens of the United States and Planet Earth.
And God bless the Boss and all eager PBers, what an outstanding bunch of girls & boys!
101. ugh..the sickly sentiment is just getting too much now…worse than the Oscars.
Jon Craig calls PMQs a score draw.
back on topic
Think Blair was smart to consolidate two 15 minute PMQs into one half hour weekly session.
Brown is just going to have to like it or lump it. Even voters who dislike or disparage PMQs would think less of Gord if he funked.
And he’d lose his credibility with US public opinion, at least the educated public that enjoys watching PMQs (via C-SPan on cable TV) and seriously envies the UK for having such a wonderful institution.
Which speaks to role that PMQs play in building and maintaining good will and respect for UK around the globe, most esp. (but certainly not entirely) in English-speaking countries.
102 - Agreed, much worse!
99. When I read the abolishing TV ads on public channels proposal, I thought “Oh God, now they can do all their historical TV movies* without caring about if no-one watch them. Or even worse: they may do more co-productions with Italy”
* historical TV series are actually a good thing on public channels IMO, but France2 has this strange habit to let direct Joseé Dayan them with Jeanne Moreau starring….
100. I know what you mean, but I find it hard to get THAT worked up about Brown, because he is so obviously a secondrate leader. He is just dismally mediocre. A weaselly coward. A stoat of a man.
He claims to care about “Britain” but he is happy to betray Britain and the British people on the most fundamental national question of all: by not giving us the promised referendum on the EU Constitution. The referendum HE promised.
Shove yer f***ing “moral compass” up yer arse you swithering Scottish gimp.
But anyway. Who cares. He’s just a slug. The Labour party in general are just slugs. Horrible and mucilaginous blobs, inept and inverterbate liars. We all know that. They admit it. They happily confess they are liars and cheats and scum. But you don’t go into the garden and shout at slugs slugs, do you?
You just pour salt over them and go back to work.
One day in the future we will have an honest and credible government, until then I prefer to avert my face from the cup of cold vomit that is my country’s government.
Nick Robinson picking up on Cameron’s nastiness:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/
There is some excellent analysis on http://www.electoral-vote.com of the outcomes of Super Tuesday, particularly on Huckabee’s postion, both now and as a future VP nomination, and on how Obama is doing in white states
107. That’ll do very nicely thanks
:)
107 - So when is nasty Sean going to reappear?
Sorry to go Blue Harpy but how does Gordon know “the public” being “increasingly repelled” - how often does he actually hear any member of the public? does he mean Balls, Alexander, Miliband and Mrs Brown or perhaps his dinner or weekend guests, or is it what the columnists say as he eagerly reads the first editions before calling up editors to complain?
No-one’s likely to say “you are a useless wally at PMQs Gordon old boy” if he asked, they would fidget a bit, glance down and mumble that PMQs aren’t what they were, haven’t watched them for ages, turn off nowdays, don’t know why he bothers.
110. Yes, I feel refreshed. Nasty Sean is now heading for the minibar.
Nice Sean is going to sing Kumbaya. It’s good to be schizo!
OOPs - two Ohio’s to Hillary she really does need moral support but not that much ….
I must give a big American HUG to Hillary and Barack they both did really well and may the best person win the nomination - you make me proud to vote for either of you - God Bless you both … and my heart and soul do out to those 48 souls who died in the Tornado’s …
All I pray for is that NO Republican wins in November - after hearing all 3 of them speak - it will mean disaster for America - only Hillary and Barack can save America …
113 European Union
(waves red rag to bull)
88- “And change the perception of their country.”
For about 5min.
And another interesting article on McCain and his funding problems on http://www.dailykos.com/.
With the caveat that Daily Kos is a very liberal Democratic site, this does point up the possibility of the McCain campaign running into some big trouble not too far down the road.
Looking ahead to the upcoming primaries and the media narrative that will form:
Feb 9th
Lousiana: 30% black, big Obama win
Nebraska: More Republican, Midwestern and few urban women, Obama win.
Washington: Pacific liberalism, wealthy and educated, Obama win
Virgin Islands: 76% black, more international, huge Obama win
Narrative: Obama winning big in the first battle since the tie on ST. Lasts one day.
Feb 10th:
Maine: New England, lots of professional women, strong Clinton win
Narrative: Clinton managed to claw something back after her big defeats yesterday. Last two days.
Feb 12th:
DC: 60% urban black, extremely huge Obama win.
Maryland: affluent, educated voters but in New England with a lot of professional women. Tight battle.
Virginia: affluent, educated voters but also urban women. Edge with Obama
Narrative: Clinton managing to keep battling but Obama is moving clear of her. Last 7 days.
Feb 19th
Hawaii: Obama’s home state. Big Obama win.
Wisconsin: Midwestern, big links with Illinois. Big Obama win.
Narrative: Obama is running away with this. Is this a procession now? Lasts 13 days.
This could mean Clinton would have to make a heck of a stand on March 4th in Ohio, Texas and Rhode Island.
first time I’ve been seeing a Holyrood debate…Swinney shouting at a LD a few minutes ago
SeanT - not sure about weasels courage but stoats are as brave as, as brave as…, something that is very, very brave!
Leave stoats alone.
119. Uplifting stuff, no doubt
104- “Which speaks to role that PMQs play in building and maintaining good will and respect for UK around the globe, most esp. (but certainly not entirely) in English-speaking countries.”
Ha! Any good will and respect for the UK died when we invaded Iraq. It will take years and years to repair the dammage Blair did to our country.
I see that Hillary’s proice has eased to 0.9/1 on Betfair. Barack is now at 1.08/1
I think the reports of discussions were probably a deliberate attempt to test the temperature, rather than a firm plan.
Bit like letting Myra Hindley out for the day.
A strong incoming PM could abolish PMQ. the political class would explode but after 6 months joe public wouldn’t care. If he’d announced it after winning snap november election then we’d have forgotten about it by now.
But he isn’t a strong PM. It would just pour 10 tonnes of rocket fuel on the existing narrative. ie He’s lost it.
Re US. I agree that obama has the mo. I’m a hillary fan but the fact he has the pledged delegate lead gives him moral authority.
Its inconceivable they’d let some one get the nomination on super delegates alone. It would be like an internal florida
My feeling is if she hadn’t won california so hansomely they’d be calls for her to drop out now.
119- Isnt AS resigning today if the Scottish Budget isnt passed? Anyone have news on what is going on ‘over the border’?
118 Hillary will take it all the way to Pennsylvania, in April, if she thinks she has a chance. If Obama can build enough support that he takes Texas outright, you can call it for him right there; otherwise Hillary will suddenly discover a deep abiding love of the Amish.
122. What damage? A few fanatics who hated us before hate us a bit more. So what?
Scottish budget carried. Lib/Lab abstain, SNP and Tories support it, one ‘no’ vote.
123. Toldya. The bookies are only now catching up with the wisdom of pb.com.
Yesterday was a GOOD day for Obama, only obscured by the hype over California and Mass. The fact is he was 20-30 points behind in those states a week back, and narrowed it to tens and teens. Otherwise he did very very well - won 13 states, maybe 14. Big news. He got a solid 40 in New York - Hillary’s home state!
And now the topography of the campaign alters in his favour, financially and psephologically.
126. Budget carried. 66 in favour, 1 against, the rest abstained..or something of that sort
127 In such circumstances the Democratic candidates will have to consider.
Which is most important…
A) That they win the Democratic nomination
B) That the Democrats win the White House.
The nomination could well be a clasic Pyrrhic victory.
127. Oh, I’m sure she will. But with a month of postive Obama coverage won’t voters simply feel her time has come and gone, even if she wins? Her name recognition would not be an advantage by that point, and people would have been exposed to Obama’s “movement” and oratory much more.
Lots of voters have turned from Clinton to Obama. While Clinton has hung on to a lot, the question at this point is “does she ever win some back”? If the answer is no, then Obama’s steady progress will see him through.
128- I was thninking more of the damage to our reputaion around the world, not some Islamic terrorist nutters. We have bascialy confirmed to the rest of the world that we are nothing more than an extension of America. “Hey Britain, invade Iraq with us.” “Yes sir Mr America sir”
129. StephenB, who is the one who voted against? Any idea?
133. Even if she wins March 4th I mean.
126 - Ah, you must have been the other person watching http://www.holyrood.tv!
Andrea, I’m not sure who it was - Margo perhaps?
137. I was watching Salmond’s moves of his head whilst laughing
California results more or less confirmed:
http://vote.ss.ca.gov/Returns/rcd/all.htm
Romney wins districts 21 (by 0.4%), 52 (by 2.8%).
Tossups:
42 (McCain +0.3% with 86% counted)
49 (McCain +0.1% with 87% counted)
McCain has won the rest - most are 100% counted, or he’s miles ahead in and can’t be caught.
Being kind to poor dead Mitt and splitting the two tossups, that gives McCain 50/53 congressional districts and thus 150/159 delegates from those, and the bonus 14 for statewide winner.
End result: McCain 164, Romney 9.
Road Ahead Tough For Clinton…
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/02/road_ahead_tough_for_clinton.html
140- So its going to be VP Huckabee then?
120. I actually have nothing against stoats. I’ve seen a stoat once, in a Sussex wood. A furtive but delightful woodland mammal.
I have also seen a weasel, a mink and a polecat. And an otter (but that was in America).
The quote “he’s a stoat of a man” is actually a direct steal from one of my favourite films - Rob Roy. A masterpiece of British cinema which we were discussing on pb.com just the other day.
You see, it all ties together. In my mind, anyway.
134. so what? that’s hardly news, is it?
144- You mean like the time we sent loads of troops to Vietnam?
88. Obama’s speaking style is easy to like when he’s making empty statements during a campaign but imagine how grating it would be if he were in power and doing something with which you violently disagreed. You’d probably hold him in the same regard as you do Tony Blair.
145. Talk about ancient history! And do you really think people around the world back then were going round saying ‘what a wonderful country Britain is, not joining the US in Vietnam’? They weren’t! And even if they had been, so what?
What do we think the chances of an attempt by the clinton camp to reinstate the delegates in Michigan and Florida? With those votes Hillary would be very handily placed. If neither candidate has a majority at the end of the primaries, which must be a real possibility, those two delegatons could make all the difference.
IIRC the ides of the “6 questions” for the leader of the official opposition is new in any case - as I remember introduced when Blair telescoped the 2 sessions a week into one. I would have thought he could declare its effect tested and found wanting - depriving others, and especially the Lib Dem leader - of fair treatment. It is also unduly gladiatorial - and he could again mention that dave’s declared aim is to remove yah boo politics. Yes, the right wing press would love to have a go, but if his reasoning is good enough he can make them look a load of yah boo artists.
141. Interesting that article put Maine in Obama’s box. I think the key states coming up are Maine, Virgina and Maryland. Clinton really needs to win two of these, certainly one. Otherwise she’s done for.
146. You mean you would rather him speak like Gordon Brown over the EU constitution? Then people wouldn’t hate him…
Five live reporting that Gordon has decided to refuse the license for the supercasino. So that will upset those in Manchester as well as those in Blackpool who think they should have got it in the first place. But the 14 smaller ones will go ahead - so it’s all right to gamble as long as too many people don’t do it in the same place.
147- Because not sending troops to Vietnam was the right decision. What has we gained that France hasnt by sending troops to Iraq? Please tell me, I would love someone to explain how having our foreign (and in some cases domestic) policy decided by Washington for the past 30+ years has had any positive effect on us? We are sidelined in Europe, are ignored in Africa/Asia, and made fun of in America for being a poodle.
148. As has been mentioned before, if it really came to that then Howard Dean would have a lot of influence. And he MUST be an Obama fan.
Still, it’s unlikely to get to the convention. I think that by May there will be a clear front runner and the Dems will want to wrap it up, especially with McCain already chosen for the GOP. The rest of the states, Edward’s delegates and the superdelegates will take someone over the required amount.
145/134 In Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and much of mid-East and Africa the population don’t see UK as a follower of the US because the UK has been interfering in their internal politics without much of a break for well over a century. So it wasn’t Blair the poodle but Blair, yet another British imperialist. As many probably blame the British as the prime mover as blame the US.
After all it was Thatcher that pushed for a response against Saddam in GW1 when George H Bush dithered and Major who pushed for the Kurdish no fly zone and sanctions so they have cause to see UK as an equal partner in blame.
151- The Daily Mail will be happy
148. As the article @10 makes the case, that will only happen if Clinton is ahead at the end of it all. In other words, they cannot be decisive.
Can you really imagine the following scenario at the convention?
Obama pledged 2100
Clinton pledged 2000
Tearful Hillary “But if we seat Florida and Michigan and count the superdelegates, I’ve won…”
Can’t happen. Won’t happen.
151. There is not much in the win column for Gordon - he remembers it played well with the Mail in the heady days of last August when he was cobra-ing the floods.
152. Americans don’t make fun of us for being a poodle. We are the most well liked we’ve been in the US for a long time. By both liberals and conservatives.
Are you seriously suggesting France or Germany or Japan has more influence than we do?
Don’t get me wrong. The Iraq war was disastrous, but our close alliance with the United States is very much in our interests.
150. Yes, I thought the same. My intuitive hunch is to lump Maine with New Hampshire and Massachusetts - a Clinton win.
If she loses in Maine, as well Virginia and Maryland, she is creme brule. I think she might get Maryland and Maine. But I think Obama could get the rest of the other upcoming primaries.
I see someone upthread wants to get the delegates reinstated from Michigan and Florida. Surely impossible. That would cause civil war in the Democrat party.
I think if a desperate Clinton camp tried to do that, because they were staring defeat in the face, the party establishment would unite against them and boot them out of the saloon.
149. The leader of the Lib Dems got a boost in the 1997 changes - he went up from one to two questions a week. If there is an argument to be made it’s that the changes disadvantaged backbenchers, though that’s only just the case.
As others have said, the solution for Brown is that he has to get better at PMQs. Changing the format, especially if Labour is seen to derive partisan benefit from it, will do long-term damage. It won’t be the short term hit of the issue - that might be forgotten quickly - it will be the reinforcing of the narrative that is building around Brown’s failure to take a decision (or at least to take one without dithering first), to avoid answering awkward questions and to hide away when the going’s tough.
150 Virginia is 20% black, 6.1% Latino, 5.2% Asian. Obama wins. Maryland is 30% black, 5-6% Latino. Obama wins. Maine is one of the whitest states in the union, and the only one where I think the outcome is in any doubt.
I’m starting to think an Edwards endorsement for Obama is quite likely in the next few days. He suspended his campaign to ‘get out of the way of history’, and if he’s reading the tea leaves the way I am, he’s going to think Obama is more likely to get it, and want to wrap the nomination up in his favour.
158- “Americans don’t make fun of us for being a poodle.” Yes they do. We are talked about among the American political class with phrases such as “Our European Bitch”. Our views on how to handle Iraq were ignored.
France and Germany have more influence in Europe. France has more influence in Africa/Middle East.
Japan has a far bigger economy anyway.
“but our close alliance with the United States is very much in our interests.”
Why?
Some weeks when Cameron is a bit softer, people complain that Cameron didn’t go for the kill. Other weeks when he does go for the kill, those same people complain that Cameron is nasty. If you can’t stand the heat…
With the SNP-Green-Tory alliance, why did Lib/Lab need to abstain? The budget would pass anyway.
How much are MSPs paid to have this so inspiring debate on traditional music?
Clegg is a disaster. Completely off the radar.
All the analysis so far has put Maine and Maryland firmly in the Obama camp and Virginia as a tight battle - so she would do well to win 1 of those 3 states and if she wins 2 it will be a major triumph …
151 so he had a review into a deeply unpopular and frankly bizarre labour policy and the result is that the casinos can go ahead all over the country but not the high profile ones. manchester and blackpool will have to watch lots of casinos open but not theirs making it even harder to stomach than a blanket reversal of policy.
instead of making a decision he comes to a pathetic compromise that appeals to nobody. good work.
156 There is a scenario where it could make a difference. Suppose Obama leads on elected delegates, but Hillary on total delegates. There would be pressure for the superdelegates to support the front runner in the popular vote, but Hillary could engineer a vote to seat Florida and Michigan and lock the nomination up.
with regards to Michigan and Florida - more so in Florida’s case I think the delegates will be seated - Florida is a need in November so you can not alienate those voters with disenfranchisement in the primaries … and all candidates stood in Florida so that one is easier to seat - with Michigan I have no idea how they seat the delegates - but there was a strong no preference vote which could be allocated to Obama .. so maybe Michigan too could be seated - you can’t alienate two big states for November .
164- Now you know why more English want Scotland to be independent than Scots
162. A close alliance with the US is in our interests, but not a one-sided one. Thatcher was prepared to say ‘No’ - for example when she authorised the Falklands expidition while the US was still pushing for a negotiated settlement. Major also had arguments over Bosnian policy to give an obvious example. You get the impression that Blair was not prepared to play his hand properly, and so was not able to make good the benefits of the alliance.
Good afternoon all. We’ve rejigged our US prices at Ladbrokes and taken a slightly different view to the rest of the market
Dems: 8/11 Clinton, Evs Obama
General: 11/8 McCain, 15/8 Clinton, 9/4 Obama.
The changes have just gone through. I’ll be interested to see what the market makes of it.
152 We gained valuable US assistance during the Falklands War. We gain access to high quality weapons techonology, and intelligence. There are times when I think the current government should reject US requests (the extradition treaty for example) but the US alliance is in our interest.
You overlook recent occasions when we have gone against US foreign policy (eg over Bosnia, wrongly IMO).
164. It sounds as a family reunion. MSPs even call themself by first name now
152. hang on! now you are asking ‘how do we benefit’, when previously you were taking of the ‘damage done’…a quick shift of ground there. Please can you stick to your original script and tell us what this ‘damage’ is?
For my part, Iraq has been a messy and unsuccessful foreign policy enterprise, but I can see no real ‘damage’. There has been some money spent, but the combat experience our forces gain by taking part in these missions is priceless - and unless we did subcontract them to the US from time to time they wouldn’t get it.
In a dangerous world I would rather have an army that really knows about fighting than the sort of pathetic ‘run for the hills’ rabbles that other European countries have.
It’s 50/50 on Intrade but 11/10 10/11 on betfair
In the light of 171, I should clarify that while the US government was pushing for a negotiated settlement, the US military was providing us with considerable assistance. At one stage, they even offered us the use of a carrier.
Maybe half the delegates could be seated, i.e. in line with the Republicans and default DNC policy. But that will only occur if it doesn’t change the result. Even if Obama could be certain that not seating the delegates would lose him those two states, he would have a tough choice, because he would definitely lose the presidency if he did seat them, and only probably lose it if he didn’t!
175 some combat experience has not been that good for some of the troops!
159. Yep, what’s the point of having a complex, expensive, drawn-out, nationwide democratic process if a bunch of unelected party-nobs can nullify the result at the end? The Dems would implode if it happened…
The superdelegates are there to swing behind the victor. A winner’s bonus, if you like.
179. Since when could you have combat without casualties? And if you could, how worthwhile would it be?
177. That may well be true, but the point is that Thatcher took the decision to engage in an armed recovery of the islands independent of what Washington wanted. It did Britain’s status no harm worldwide, or indeed in the US - the ability of a country to do that makes even allies treat you more seriously.
161 - Voting next tuesday - Maryland, Virginia and DC. Obama has to be a strong favourite in both Maryland and DC. Think Hillary will focus on Virginia. She won the Asian vote in California convincingly 3-1, and more Asians than Blacks voted. So she would probably need to win the white vote 60-40, which though a stretch is not inconceivable.
158- ‘“Americans don’t make fun of us for being a poodle.” Yes they do. We are talked about among the American political class with phrases such as “Our European Bitch”.’
Who in the political class? Civil servants? The administration? Congressmen? Republicans or Democrats?
‘France and Germany have more influence in Europe.’
France has historically had a lot of influence and Germany has historically gone along with whatever France wants. Now things are changing, as many of the Eastern European countries look over to Britain’s support for their plight during the Cold War.
‘France has more influence in Africa/Middle East.’
Yes, they clearly reigned in Syria’s influence from Lebanon. Or stopped the genocide in Rwanda. France has some degree of leverage, but not much, in her ex-colonies. We have the same thing in ours.
‘Japan has a far bigger economy anyway.’
It’s got twice as big an economy, because its got twice as many people.
‘“but our close alliance with the United States is very much in our interests.”
Why?’
Because they are the world’s only super power and are far more democratic than the emerging big players in the world. The sheer practical realities means we can not deal with international crises on our own, so a close relationship with the US means we have a valuable channel to influence events. Just because Blair was slavish in the relationship doesn’t mean it has to be. Just ask Maggie “Now’s not the time to go wobbly” Thatcher.
175- “There has been some money spent, but the combat experience our forces gain by taking part in these missions is priceless ”
Is that a f***ing joke? COMBAT EXPERIENCE?!!! Please stop, I’m dying from laughter.
177- There was no way they could have lent us a carrier, the Royal Navy personel needed to run it would have taken months to learn how to. It wasnt a serious proposal (if in fact it ever happened, most think it didnt, or if it did it was said as a joke, not a serious proposal)
184. France’s ‘influence’ is limited to the ability to periodically bully a few sparsely populated irrelevant ex-colonies in Africa. Otherwise their main activity in foreign policy is to help the sales of weapons to the nastiest regimes possible.
175. Surely the hundreds of thousands of fatalities and the millions who have their lives wrecked counts as “real damage”? Or how about our weakened position from not having the threat of deploying our troops elsewhere? Or the spread of sympathy for Islamic militantism throughout the Muslim world?
172 - the “market” will conclude there’s no arbs to be had at present but will keep an eye on Obama’s betfair price. As they say on betfair, hope this helps.
Obama ahead by 71 votes in New Mexico with 2% left to count. Strange comment about them having to contact certain precincts, not sure what’s going on. Still, that might push my prediction back into 19 out of 22 right.
186. Seeing that we sell weapons to Saudi Arabia I don’t think we have much grounds to single out France.
186- “Otherwise their main activity in foreign policy is to help the sales of weapons to the nastiest regimes possible.”
Have you ever heard that Britain also exports quite a lot of weapons?
Anyway I don’t see how someone from a country whose last 2 foreign secretaries are named Beckett and Miliband can pretend that its neighbour countries have less influence in international affairs…
173- America only supported their ‘closest’ ally, a democracy, over a dictatorship, after weeks of sitting on the fence. They then sat back and watched the IRA collect vast sums of money and weapons from the US, while refusing to extradidte IRA members who had killed British soldiers, because in their words “The killings were politicaly motivated” (Well thats ok then!)
Meanwhile they gave us tons grief over Boby Sands while today they dump *their* terrorist suspects in a cuban hellhole.
How embarrassing I had $5000 fantasy money on CNN to play the markets with and lost a lot on Obama winning most states on ST - and now it is down to Hillary if she keeps between 5-10% in CA I win that part of my prediction - the shares were bought at $13.90 so a win on that would bring my dollars back …. heres hoping
rej4sl. Oh come on. Hillary can’t suddenly demand that Florida and Michigan be counted, just cause she is losing.
Imagine how it would look in the general election. The lady that had to bend the rules, having lost the legitimate vote, to get the nomination. It would be disastrous.
Sturdy, honest John McCain would look saintly in comparison. If they’re not careful Democrats could lose the presidency by squabbling over the nomination.
Plus such a sinister maneuver would sow years of bitterness in Democrat circles.
I imagine if the Clintons reach the Convention notably behind in pledged delegates, they will come under irresistible pressure to step down.
172. Good move, Shadsy*. That looks more sensible to me. Clinton very slight favourite due to her higher delegate/superdelegate count, but Obama moving in to evens thanks to his performance yesterday and the favourable terrain ahead.
*Please note that I know absolutely bugger all about betting, and treat my remarks accordingly.
184- “so a close relationship with the US means we have a valuable channel to influence events. Just because Blair was slavish in the relationship doesn’t mean it has to be. Just ask Maggie “Now’s not the time to go wobbly” Thatcher.”
But thats the point. We have *no* influence. Stories of Thatcher infulencing Reagan IMHO are pure spin.
186- Anyway I don’t really know why those foreign policies on here regularly ends with comparisons of France and Britain, as if they were total opposites.
We have substantial differences in our respective foreign policies, but, as far as I know, we have been members of the same alliances since 1905 (and for most of the secondf part of the 19th century as well).
189. UK Paul. I heard last night that there were parts of New Mexico that were snowed in (go figure) and/or they couldn’t get hold of the local dem officials.
That might be the cause……
192. I disagree with many American policies, especially those of the current administration, and we should not be afraid to criticise and hold things back from them if we are treated unfairly. That doesn’t mean we should scrap the whole alliance. An alliance between all modern, free democracies in critical for the improvement of the world, and as the USA is the most powerful free democracy it has to be central to that. We should equally keep strong alliances with France and Germany, but again, we should not be slavish to them. Those who seek to break apart Europe and America are very foolish indeed.
I note that with 98% reporting in New Mexico Obama leads Clinton by 71 votes!
196. France has been a bit spiteful to us at times, such as not letting us in the EEC first time round.
165 - “Clegg is a disaster. Completely off the radar.” Are you a spoof poster?
184 Agree with you on France’s lack of leverage with Syria but Jack Straw failed equally to exploit Syria’s good view of the UK as its liberator from French colonialism.
As for Rwanda - France supported the francophone Hutu government against the anglophone Tutsi insurgents and initially (as in Yugoslavia) delayed an international response. Result for France - English is now a national language, Rwanda has applied for Commonwealth membership and cricket (!) is being pushed as the new sport. France’s hands are certainly very bloody regarding its involvement in Francophone Africa.
Interesting to read Nick Robinson’s corn log, sorry, news log. Some do think Cameron’s overly aggressive, but the point of PMQs is to get answers. Robinson woefully omits any mention of Brown not only refusing to answer, but actually firing off questions to Cameron and Clegg.
Robinson’s a pretty poor political editor. I recall some weeks ago, when they did the Daily Politics outside, that he said Cameron should go low key. Cameron then did that, and Robinson criticised him for it!
And ukpaul noted it first!
195. Well “your opinion” is contrary to most informed analyses and scholarly papers I’ve ever read in my time studying US-UK politics in my degree. What are you basing it on? Your visceral anti-Americanism?
192. Don’t forget all those lovely incidents of friendly fire.
“such as not letting us in the EEC first time round. ”
If only we’d taken no for an answer.
206. The reason why we get so much friendly fire from the Americans is because our units don’t have air support of their own (so no opportunity for British on British friendly fire) and because our troops don’t have enough funding for precise and integrated GPS tracking of their position for pilots, which all American units have. This issue has been massively exacerbated by anti-Americanism in both the left-wing and the “old right” British press.
205. Simon9999 is insanely anti-American. He only ever posts on that issue. It’s like arguing with a belligerent tramp about the price of cider.
I’d give up if I were you.
142. I wouldnt bet against it right now.
208. It’s not the friendly fire itself, things like that happen in war.
It’s the refusal of the american administration to investigate the cases that really rankles, or do anything that could be construed as punishment.
Before we get into any debate about America, i am not anti-american, i am very much pro-american. I am anti-bush/neocons, but pro-american.
205- Yes, I’m anti-american because I think we shouldnt blindly follow America. I’m anti-american because I remember the harm they did to us in Northern Ireland. I’m anti-american because I remember how our views on Iraq were ignored and made fun of. I’m anti-american because I remember them being prepared to destory our economy over Suez after saying they wouldnt interfere (ok I don’t ‘remember’ that, it was before my time).
(PS I’m not anti-american, there are many things I love about it, its constitution, the soldiers who died in WW2, I just take notice of the bad as well as the good)
211. I have very similar views. You’re right that the US army suffers greatly from a lack of willingness to punish its soldiers, as has been shown from the absence of prison time for the Abu Ghraib scandal. It’s a hot bed of Republicanism unfortunately, and when there’s no Democratic administration to pressure it, abuses go unpunished.
However, that doesn’t take away from the fact that the Americans often get a lot of stick for friendly fire incidents that occur because we don’t fund our troops properly.
209- Yeah SeanT, in the same way you are insanley anti-european. Its people like you I despise, who always ignore it when America screws us, but magnify any small dispute we have with Europe.
Real Clear Politics is now showing McCain 134 and Romney 3 delegates for California.
Delegate totals:
McCain 682, Romney 244, Huckabee 187.
McCain should go well over 700 once all the numbers are in.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/republican_delegate_count.html
Seant - you have persuaded me to bet on Obama, your insightful analysis and Roger’s support for HiLLary are all the reason I needed
- if I don’t win I will try and think of a really really cutting insult and launch it in your direction; no doubt causing you massive amounts of personal trauma.
If I win I probably won’t ever say thanks or anything I’ll just the collect the cash and congratulate myself on being very clever.
212. Holding the actions of a few members of a community against the whole nation is the essence of prejudice. The United States had done far, far more good than harm for the UK, and certainly more for us than we’ve done for them in the last century.
I’m still waiting for you to say who precisely in the US made fun of us and called us their poodles?
SeanT. Did I read you correctly that Rob Roy is one of your favourite films? how strange.
Sorry to go on about this but on this site yesterday Obama was a strong favourite for California. What’s more it was said that if Obama wins california Hillary’s finished. In the event she won by 10%. Therefore it’s either the biggest comeback since Lazarus or I’m confused.
73. JohnO. It’s good but It gives me a deja vue feeling. How about ‘Dave-No more Mr Nice Guy!’?
216 - The 5/4 at Coral for the Dem nomination won’t last long
214. Sean hates the EU, not Europe. I’m sure he’d be equally het up if we were seeking political union with the United States.
217. I love how the right hate europe, while the left hate america. Same attitudes just different targets.
212 Stop being a whining Pom - the UK wasn’t forced into involvement in Iraq or inveigled by bribery or blindly follow the US or whatever. Stop trying to transfer any guilt you feel to the US.
The UK is a grown up country - it has been one of the great powers for centuries and has had and still has an independent foreign policy. Iraq was a decision made by the Government of the UK, the Parliament of the United Kingdom voted by a large margin to support a war in Iraq, which at the time had a majority of support in the country in the polls. In 2005 only 23% of the public voted for parties opposed to that war and the Prime Minister who actively worked to enable it was re-confirmed in office. If the UK has guilt to bear over Iraq its not transferrable to the USA, it was a democratic decision of the UK and it’s the UK’s fault.
As for Northern Ireland, the UK acted in the same way in the 80’s & 90’s as regards fundraising for Islamist extremists, Kashmiri separatists and Tamil Tigers. Indeed very recently a Labour MP attended a Tamil event at which Tiger propaganda was openly displayed and Tamil terrorists videos shown. The French, Sri Lankan, India and Russian governments have all complained to the Foreign Office over the UK’s inability to police terror organisations operating out of the UK.
220. Quite a few of Sean’s posts have been borderline, a while ago i remember him going on about WW2 and the “krauts”. But i think it was more to wind lefties up than exposing any of his own prejudice.
217- The British intelligence servies stoped sharing their information on the IRA with america because the information was “somehow” finding its way to the IRA. I wonder why? Support for the IRA and their cause was widely supported in America because they thought it was “freedom fighting” against those nasty imperialistic Brits.
Not only could Gordon abolish PMQs but he should do it. See here for my five reasons why, written in verse!
214. Listen to yourself, you embarrassing halfwit.
I’m not anti European. I am anti the EU. I do not want my country, the ancient democracy I love, to simply hand over it sovereignty to an unelected executive in a foreign country - WITHOUT THE EXPLICIT PERMISSION OF THE PEOPLE.
I love Europe, I just don’t want to be governed by “Europe”. As a very wise Frenchman said: Paris is my city; Europe is my civilisation; France is my country.
I feel quite European, in terms of culture. Politically and emotionally I am firmly British. And I want to stay that way, thanks very much.
Unlike many anti-Americans I have travelled in America, a lot. I know the country well, with all its blemishes. And they have many. What the hell are funnel cakes? Why do all the girls have such big butts? Why are all their sports so rubbish?
More importantly, I can see deep flaws in their politics and their culture.
But I also see the many virtues, which wholly outweigh the flaws, to my mind. America is the guardian of democracy, it is the city on the hill. America is England unfurled.
Take just one example. In America the next president might well be a man who says the Iraq war was a disastrous error. He thought that from the start. He is countered by a man, on the right, who firmly believes it was the right thing to do.
BUT AT LEAST IN AMERICA THEY ARE HAVING THAT DEBATE. OPENLY. IN PUBLIC VIEW.
What have we got? We have a wretched lying government, spineless, venal, odious and redundant, a government which lectures us for hours on the evils of plastic bags and how patio heaters are terrible, yet which won’t even give us an inquiry into their disastrous, obscene and illegal war which killed half a million f***ing people.
Compare and contrast.
218. Roger, you just had to read into it. A few on here including myself though Hillary would hold that state.
I cant deny though I’m finding it difficult to take the things worth evaluating from the many posts regarding Obama on here and have taken to ignoring large swathes of it because it is easy to get sucked in and have it affect a view, which in my case is solely betting related. I have no financial stake in him winning and none in Hillary winning the nomination.
California had significance. If he’d have won it have no doubt it would have be promoted by some as the death of Clinton, and frankly it may have a knock down if not knock out blow.
I can see reasons why Obama can win this but I can also see why Hillary can.
A little thought though when it comes to analysing the results. Come November what states are genuinely in play and could swing either way, red or blue? Then consider who is winning such states. It may be useful in helping to consider who has the whip hand in a tight delegate race.
218. Yes, I LOVE Rob Roy. Don’t tell me you directed it or something, cause then I might have to admire you, which would be too confusing at 1am on a Thursday morning.
Did you??!
223- He posted that he would attack anti-french and anti-german feeling just as much as anti-americanism. Then he posted that he “Didnt trust the french”. I guess if I posted that i didnt trust americans, sean would be enraged to post something about it
And anyway, I’m not a leftie, I’m a rightie, and I also dont think america has unfairly taken the UKs role as worlds policeman from us, I think the UK should accept that it is a medium sized power and act like one, not yearn for some pre-WW1 glory years.
218. It was because Obama was so unlikely to win California that if he did win it she was finished! I said multiple times that the Hispanic vote in California meant she should win.
224. You’re referring to a claim by a Bush appointee to discredit Clinton. I think it should be taken with a grain of salt rather than your “American bastards! I knew they were screwing us!”
229. The United States century of being the world’s only superpower has been a damn lot more ethical than our century of the same was.
Interesting thought. Major didn’t dare go down from twice to once a week. Brown would certainly take a short-term hit - a big one too. It just might still be useful ammunition at election time. It’s always said that it makes no difference at all to the voters. So the main benefit would be in shoring up Brown’s parliamentary support. It would be an extremely defensive manoeuvre (sp?)
231, a somewhat daft comparison. You can’t make moral comparisons between empires that exist in different eras, it’s like berating the Romans for crucifixion. Applying modern morality to ancient nations just doesn’t work.
222- You called me a pom so I’m guessing your an aussie. If so, then stop whining. What is it with you aussies, you complaing that we whine, then proceed to whine and whine and whine
If you aint an aussie, then, stop whining anyway.
You are right however, the UK is a grown up country. I hate Blair, Brown, and new Labour far more than I hate the US over Iraq. Meanwhile France gets to spend the money they didnt waste in Iraq on some nice public projects.
PS. Bill Clinton invites Gerry Adams and treats him like a hero. When has Gordon Brown/Tony Blair done that to the head of a terrorist organization?
I find it really odd that there is this obsessive belief that Obama will win. I have no strong preference between the candidates, but contributors here - and punters too - seem to be guided by sentiment rather than fact.
Anyway - here’s a thought. Will the next US President but one be a) the second female president or b) the second black president? (or neither).
Should Condy run and win in 2012 - or 2016, she may be the first female and the second black president - or the first black and second female president.
215: jeez, at last. Most of those CDs were settled yesterday, yet they (and everyone else) couldn’t bring themselves to give the 100+ extra delegates to McCain. As a result, most of today’s press on the subject was misleading.
Now at +438, we’re way beyond my guess at a good McCain outcome. That had McCain on more delegates, 775 or so, but Romney on 400 (+375, which assumed McCain wins in Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee).
Romney’s campaign last night makes Giuliani look like a master strategist.
@Stephen B
The 1 vote against is Cathie Craigie, Labour MSP for Cumbernauld and Kilsyth
“What have we got? We have a wretched lying government, spineless, venal, odious and redundant, a government which lectures us for hours on the evils of plastic bags and how patio heaters are terrible, yet which won’t even give us an inquiry into their disastrous, obscene and illegal war which killed half a million f***ing people.
Compare and contrast.”
That would be the war which you initialy supported on the basis that “The left were against it, so it must be the right thing to do”
You do have a point however, the problem is in the old days the Tories would have supported the war and Labour would have been against. If only it was the tories who won the 01′ election and Labour reverted to old Labour. Then we would have left Iraq shortly after the 05′ election. Unfortunatly Labour have been infected with pro-americanism, so we have no choice.
By the way Sean, you still havent make any remarks about the USAs support for the IRA. I guess you like to pretend it didnt happen.
235. Wouldn’t it be interesting if for the next 200 years of democracy women and blacks dominated, what a contrast.
235. Where is this obsessive belief that Obama will win? There isn’t. But the stats show that he might. Look at this:
http://iemweb.biz.uiowa.edu/graphs/graph_DConv08.cfm
Follow the Obama trend line. From a low point in October he has been trending quite mathematically and regularly upwards. Hillary, meanwhile, has been in a very gentle and stately decline from the same time.
If this wasn’t politics you’d say it was inevitable that the two lines would cross, irreversibly, in the next week or two. But it is politics so we can’t be at all sure.
However there is lots of evidence, like this, to support an argument that Obama is now a very good bet.
All that said - and please note kingbongo!! - I still think Clinton is just - just - the favourite, cause of her lead in delegates, super and otherwise. But Obama is now very very close behind - following last night’s results, and taking into account what is upcoming.
IMHO.
235. It isn’t obsessive. I spelt out my reasons above due to demographics factors, the run of primaries and a history of each candidates strengths in different areas. I put it at 65% Obama winning it.
234 Proudly British and definitely NOT an aussie (my ancestor in the First Fleet jumped ship and swam through great white infested waters rather than face the horrors of Botany Bay, should have said a whining Rooinek but the UK Brits don’t get that)
As for terrorists Tony Blair & Gordon Brown have done more to assist Gerry Adams than Clinton ever did, helping destory the SDLP through their policies. UK happily gave Ceauşescu and Mugabe honorary knighthoods (the latter in 1994 well after the genocidal attacks on the Ndebele were publicised).
Point is that UK Government is as amoral as US and the choices the government has made are our choices, our responsibility. Don’t blame the US for our bad choices.
We chose not to make a fuss about the IRA funding and Major could have made much more of a point on Clinton’s invite to Adams. The three thousand deaths in Northern Ireland are individually as painful to families but the millions who have died in Zimbabwe as result of famine & Aids are no less painful and Robert Mugabe is still a Knight Commander of the Order of the Bath and still holds honorary degrees (though the great University of Edinburgh stripped him of one at least).
218. I’m confused too. Despite my limited Norwegian, I’m pretty sure on Norwegian teletext when I went to bed last night, the headline was “Obama wins in California” and when I got up this morning it was “Clinton wins in California”.
Rumours in a few places say Romney to drop out tomorrow.
235. I think some people just don’t like Obama 1 Kinobe. Horses for courses…
Roger!!! What is your connection with Rob Roy?? I’m intrigued. If you did the art direction or something I will be totally flummmoxed and will never be able to insult you with quite such vehemence again. I love that film with a serious passion.
“he’s a stoat of a man! a stoat of a man!”
Ach, du.
How many delegates is edwards holding onto?
CH4: Obama went ahead in Super Tuesday delegates in the past hour…
247. Must be total delegates, ex superdelegates. CH4 says Obama leads 838:834…
246. About 20 I think…
246- 26
240 duly noted
- I figure that at evens he is worth a tenner because, of the remaining States, he has the potential to build some momentum and I’m not convinced la Clinton does.
Whatever way you cut it though - the US Primary system has proved very exciting this time round.
240 - whilst YOU are always measured and calm and unswayed by emotion and rhetoric, there are those who get carried away on this site. And just look at much the odds have varied - even last night.
Of course Obama may win. But these wildly fluctuating odds I find very confusing. Obama has undoubtedly come a huge distance in recent months, but Obamania does seem to cloud judgement.
For the record I think that Clinton and Obama would both be good presidents. It’s quite something that the Democrats, who have had only one credible Presidential candidate in the 38 years 1968-2004 (Bill Clinton) can suddenly have two at once. If I had a vote in the Democrat primaries, I don’t know who I’d back.
(I don’t count Carter as credible; he would have lost to any half-good incumbent Republican. He has however been a credible ex-President.)
249. not enough to influence things then
O/T: anyone know what the market is for next Labour party leader?
242 - “helping destory the SDLP through their policies”
I think that the SDLP did a pretty good job at destroying themselves. The spin, polish and sharp suits that SF adopted in the last ten years has kicked the analogue and grey SDLP out of the limelight.
Can anybody remember anything John Hume or Mark Durkan have ever said? From what I have heard, from a good source, the SDLP organisation is shambolic nepotism.
252. I think the wildly fluctuating odds are perfectly understandable. And its not necessarily a question of clouded judgement.
This is a bizarre and unique race: between a black man and a woman. Nothing like it in US history. Its emotional and charged in all sorts of ways.
Polling for all these emotional, racial and gender variables is a nightmare. Plus Obama has come in on the inside track, as a rank outsider, and that is always confusing.
No wonder the poor bookies are having a hard time getting it right. They know little more than us. And judging by the poor odds they were giving Obama this morning, they know even less than us, sometimes.
Drudge is reporting that the Clintons may now be using their personal wealth to support her campaign.
OK, 2am. Time for bed. Sawadee KAP. Another day over, in the life of Ivan Peebeesovich.
OT
Georgia Dems, 1,043,203
Reps, 952,651
Tennessee Dems, 612,791
Reps, 548,783
Missouri Dems, 820,453
Reps, 584,618
Oklahoma Dems, 401,230
Reps, 329,483
Overall Democrats who voted nationally, 14.7 million
Overall Repubs who voted nationally, 8.9 million
And a black guy wins for the Democrats in Alabama? Alabama?
George W Bush was the big loser. And McCain, or whoever, is going to have big problems in November.
Malcolm
255. Isn’t there talk of the SDLP and Fianna Fáil merging?
260 - yes, there is. I know I just ran down the SDLP, but I think they are far nicer than SF. But I just don’t see them as professional politicians. In terms of polish, they are a bit like the Liberals in a bygone age.
259 - “And a black guy wins for the Democrats in Alabama? Alabama?” Why the surprise? What proportion of registered Democrats in Alabama are black?
Final words: looks like Clinton might actually edge it in New Mexico, by a couple of hundred votes. So the state count is, I think, 13-9 to Obama from yesterday.
However the main US news agencies are now stripping the superdelegates out of their totals, and giving us the basic delegate count (which is the only proper way of doing it, as supers are not pledged).
Obama is ahead in delegates according to MSNBC - by 838 to 834. And he has won the most states, too.
Make of all that what you will. Zzz.
I’m starting to think that Edwards really could be a reasonable VP choice for Obama. The two parts of the Democratic coalition he is failing to win over are women, who should support him over McCain, and white collar urban whites, who think very favourably of Edwards.
Maybe he could choose someone to do well among Hispanics, who McCain should do well with, but the only name to match McCain in this regard is Ted Kennedy, who clearly violates the do no harm principle. He could maybe go with a Hispanic candidate, but an all minority ticket might cause discomfort with whites who have only just gotten used to the idea of a black president.
261. I actually made a few quid buying the SDLP seat spread at the 2005 GE. (Unfortunately my sell of Respect wiped the gain out).
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8363.html
Clinton considering campaign shakeup
245. Sean. Relax! It was directed by the very unlovely Michael Caton Jones! I was shooting in Scotland at the time and my (then) girlfriend was on the film so I went to the wrap party. It’s an odd film to love and it was a very difficult shoot but M C-J would be thrilled to know that someone thought it their favourite film!
If I were in the US, and a registered Democratic, I’d be leaning towards a Clinton-Obama ticket, paradoxically because Obama has had the better campaign. Both are strong candidates, capable of enthusing different parts of the Dem base and attract, in different ways, independent; combining their strengths gives the Dems the best chance of success. But Hilary is very unlikely to serve as No. 2, and no Dem candidate is likely to want her as VP (Bill Clinton is troubling enough as “First Gentleman”; a disgruntled “Second Gentleman” in Number One Observatory Circle could be a bad joke that undermines a Dem Presidency). Clinton is very unlikely to run again if she’s defeated now; this is the last chance for the Dems to trade on positive memories of Clinton. Obama would still be credible in the future, especially if he stands as VP. Besides, Obama, fundamentally, hasn’t been tested under fire, and is potentially vulnerable on policy. Clinton’s likely to be more surefooted during the national campaign.
If I were in the US, and a registered Democratic, I’d be leaning towards a Clinton-Obama ticket, paradoxically because Obama has had the better campaign. Both are strong candidates, capable of enthusing different parts of the Dem base and attract, in different ways, independent; combining their strengths gives the Dems the best chance of success. But Hilary is very unlikely to serve as No. 2, and no Dem candidate is likely to want her as VP (Bill Clinton is troubling enough as “First Gentleman”; a disgruntled “Second Gentleman” in Number One Observatory Circle could be a bad joke that undermines a Dem Presidency). Clinton is very unlikely to run again if she’s defeated now; this is the last chance for the Dems to trade on positive memories of Clinton. Obama would still be credible in the future, especially if he stands as VP. Besides, Obama, fundamentally, hasn’t been tested under fire, and is potentially vulnerable on policy. Clinton’s likely to be more surefooted during the national campaign.
I have watched PMQ’s, he’s reverted to asking questions, which makes him look daft. He’s also trying to insert pre-rehearsed lines and soundbites into every answer, which always look forced and sound terrible. Brown is still very poor at PMQ’s, and the nasty tag trying to be attached to Cameron is yet another forced insult (toff, chameleon) that labour have come up with to try and stop him.
Good Evening
QUOTE
LONDON (Thomson Financial) - The government has paid 2 bln stg to buy the debt of failed Tube maintenance firm Metronet and to continue funding the public/private partnership (PPP) upgrade of sections of London’s underground train system, Transport Secretary Ruth Kelly said.
In a written statement, Kelly said the government was buying the debt under a put option agreement in the PPP contract that left the taxpayer liable if the firm became insolvent
Spend, spend, spend
put option
269. I think the ‘nasty’ tag will eventually cause Cameron some damage because it’s true and relevant.
271 - The problem is though that there are a lot of tags that are already crippling Mr Brown so saying that something might harm Cameron in the future is rather like saying the deckchairs are unsinkable as the Titanic disappears beneath the waves!
Maggie was never ‘nice’.
271 Could equally say that Cameron can’t help looking nasty because he’s faced by a cringing, angry and impotent Brown who is unable to deal with questioning. What’s he meant to do, help the useless man? (A Blue Harpy writes)
Can just see the Lobby conversation a week or so back after yet another Brown defeat, Michael White or similar “Don’t you think Cameron is a bit of a bully?” and the Lobby think “Oh there’s a new angle” bored as they are with reporting how poorly Brown does. It’s spin and will be replaced at the next turn by “Isn’t Cameron masterful at PMQs”.
Brown has adopted a coping strategy and is protected by the Speaker and it does make him look a bit vulnerable, and as Snowflake once posted, that vulnerability makes Cameron look a bit cruel, kicking a man when he’s down but it also re-inforces Brown as a weakling behind a tough front and that is IMHO more damaging to Brown than Cameron’s manner is to Dave.
Mike,
I’m not sure I agree with your basic proposition.
I don’t think PMQs actually registers that much with the general public, on a week to week basis. It’s more important for party morale in the house, and a general tone emanates out to the country. For reference, Hague bested Blair most weeks, but it didn’t shift the electorate.
However, I do not think that Brown would be able to shake off the epithet of having run scared, and gerry-mandered the system because he wasn’t up to the job.
That tag will hang round his neck like a millstone until he is driven from office, heaped with the opprobrium he richly deserves.
I’m not sure his own side would let him do it either - they will want the opportunity when they are back in opposition to question DC; and I still retain some confidence that there are enough genuine parliamentarians in the House (of all parties) that believe in holding the Executive to account.
269 To label Cameron ‘chameleon’ has a large grain of truth to it-he cannot get far enough quick enough from the very right-wing,spiteful,made-me-want-to puke 2005 manifesto-Labour will be well placed at the next election to portray him as a flip-flopper changing his mind,saying anything to get elected-in 1992 the Tories used this campaign tactic against Neil Kinnock,and even as a Labourite I caoncede Neil Kinnock did move so far from his hard-left beliefs in 1983 he was an open goal to kick at
What a Happy Bunny I am CNN screwed up - on my market portfolio on the fantasy game - they asked who will win the most primaries on Tuesday - and they had to pay out on Hillary as Obama won Caucuses not the most primaries …!!!!!! I love badly worded questions … poor folks who bet on Obama will be livid though
It may provide temporary respite - but like paper over cracks, the underlying problem remains.
Here is Hilary Clinton using fake cough to dodge a Bill question…
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=557_1202234303
One point to be borne in mind: Brown is unlikely to simply abolish PMQs (and this is all hypothetical). He’s likely to propose an alternative, which sounds attractive for the Opposition - don’t think there is one. Besides, the Speaker could well object.
276. He clearly wrote the manifesto under instruction from Howard, seeing as it included ID cards, which Cameron is against - despite public support for it.
208 The reason why we get so much friendly fire from the Americans is because our units don’t have air support of their own
I’m sure British troops prefer US Air Support to no Air support at all.
When we get a Conservative Government, our troops can get the financial, logistic & political support they deserve.
269, 271, 272, 274 etc
I do enjoy reading the partisan critiques of PMQs and the regular follow-on attacks (Brown is hopeless/defensive/weak - Cameron is arrogant/substance free/over rehearsed). It would be interesting to have an intelligent debate about it but alas…
As I said in an earlier post today, they have two completely different styles designed to shore up their base. Brown goes for the “Will the leader of the opposition state whether or not he supports policies that are best for the UK” whereas Cameron’s line is more of a personal attack designed to paint a picture of Brown in the swing voters mind.
Brown’s tactic is working in the sense that, polling wise, it looks like the leaking holes of support have been plugged and their position is steadying. Cameron’s approach is working in the sense that he’s keeping the factions of the conservative party together as their poll ratings remain a steady 4-5pts above Labour.
Cameron can come off as arrogant (not nasty) and is clearly a divisive figure to many outside of this site, and Brown is clearly seen as dull/dour and the ’safe pair of hands’ idea is being seriously questioned.
I do think the two men clearly despise each other, making them react in ways they would perhaps would not normally do, mannerisms that don’t seem to manifest themselves outside of PMQs. But the media do seem to be bored with Brown bashing now and are turning their sites on Cameron (though I haven’t heard the ‘nasty’ tag mentioned by many political commentators.)
Interestingly, Adam Boulton’s blog mentions the Ashcroft question in light of Dave’s new belief in transparency so there is a desire to turn the heat up.
“Max Bialystock: The two cardinal rules of producing. One: Never put your own money in the show.
Leo Bloom: And two?
Max Bialystock: [yelling] NEVER PUT YOUR OWN MONEY IN THE SHOW!”
(The Producers - Mel Brooks)
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0208/Clinton_loaned_her_campaign_5_million.html
I agree with Robin at 275. People don’t care about PMQs on a day-to-day basis, but Brown would look to be a coward who was shifting the system to his favour.
If he was ahead in the polls he might be able to get away with it. But as Labour is behind (and by a fair bit) it would be another nail in the coffin, as he’d be giving Cameron some long-term ammunition - especially if Brown refused leader-to-leader debates at the election.
275 “opprobrium” - Don’t agree with your sentiment but great use of the word.
IMO opinion PMQ’s brings out the worst in the pair of them- Brown, humourless, dour, leaden footed, unlikeable, and Cameron smarmy, arrogant, bullying, ungentlemeny, overly rehersed and driven by PR looking for the soundbite.
It is difficult to say who comes off in the public eye. I doubt any of them
280 “He clearly wrote the manifesto under instruction from Howard, seeing as it included ID cards, which Cameron is against - despite public support for it.”
Some wags could wave their flip-flops around at that one.
Isnt Colin Powell a good potential VP for McCain? It would certainly neutralise Obama…
288- or Condi to counter Hillary. Interesting take
288 Colin Powell is a similar age to McCain I believe so would probably not be a great idea.
194 - I find the situation Michigan and Florida find themselves in vis-a-vis the Democratic nomination, somewhat amusing. They’ve been disbarred, due to moving their primaries further forward than the hierarchy wanted them to, in the one year when the contest continues into the later states.
Would they be allowed to re-run their primaries?
288 Do you think he’d want to get back into frontline politics after the drubbing he received in the Bush administration. He does seem to be enjoying himself critiquing from the sidelines now - though the thougth of he and McCain sticking it to the Republican elders could prove an opportunity to good for him to miss.
Maybe then we could see some more fantastic powerpoint slides???
290 - Indeed. In addition, Powell appeals to the kind of voters that McCain does, and is just as disliked by the GOP arch-conservativves as McCain is, so is unlikely to bring anything extra to the Republicans, apart from a slightly enhanced African-American vote.
This might well be an additional complication for the McCain team: over and above the basic electoral considerations, they need a candidate who can offer a good balance, and must, above all, look like a credible President if the worst happen. Huckabee might bolster the GOP in the South and bring over christian conservatives; but would Americans really want to risk waking up one morning and seeing Huckabee in mourning, being sworn in?
286. I agree, shames both of them. But it’s the performances not the format.
Wondered if anyone had seen New Scientist, had a report on whether or not political affiliation is decided by genetics or not? It was quite interesting.
Certain personality traits are closely correlated with opinions on issues, lefties were more open minded and extrovert, while righties tended to be more conformist, so tended to be more polite, honest and law abiding. Something good for everyone, though i assume it excludes politicians who are all nasty, dishonest and corrupt, (probably). Apparently some of these traits are decided by our genes, so we cannot change our minds on issues.
Couldn’t a black or female VP actually depress the racist/sexist vote rather than increase the female and black vote, causing damage to electoral chances?
VP nomination for McCain is a minefield. Needs someone who appeals to conservatives but doesn’t put off moderates, for example.
UKPaul. Did you get to see Juno?
296 - Yep, saw it a few weeks ago. What did you think?
I thought it was very funny. The sort of film Americans have always done well. Good script I thought if original and nominated it could be in with a chance and a good performance by Ellen Page though not special enough for a prize. What about you?
Before McBean made it to the top job I predicted he would find some way to ‘reform’ PMQs. But that was before he made such a car crash of his weekly performance. Now he would never live down the shame of scrapping them. It wouldn’t be forgotten. PMQs are one of the great traditions of Britain. In their own unique way they define a version of Britishness (Gordo must love that). Now everyone knows he’s crap at PMQs his window of opportunity to ‘reform’ them is past. Also - when Cameron gets returned to office he could make a huge symbolic deal out of reinstating them and come across as a brave hero of parliamentary democracy. McBean as usual has screwed himself.
When can betfair be expected to settle the party candidate markets- when said candidate passes the majority point for delegates or actually when the conventions take place.
If the latter when are the respective party’s conventions?
Just wondering on the basis that if Mcain is a certainty then leaving money on him at 1.07 for a few weeks/months is better than leaving it in the bank and there is plenty of money on offer.
294- G- there was a great feature on Radio 4 about the evolution of “disgust”- man’s very natural reaction to things like rotten food, faeces, vomit- i.e stops the spread of disease, and how this links to political affilaitions. He was saying that right wingers are far more likely to project “disgust” to non conformists, gays and immigrants. In short they cannot help it.
On this site certainly many on the right side of things show much more vitriol. Well they just cannot help it. In their DNA poor dears.
295 - I think moderates will be happy with a conservative-leaning VP as long as McCain doesn’t appear too hamstrung by them. I’d go for a governor; Rick Perry looks like being a good counterbalance to McCain, and I’m tempted to put money on him.
O/T
Another boost for Boris
Deloitte ‘aren’t the best people to make a value judgment about what is good art,’ London mayor Ken Livingstone has said, fighting allegations about the accounting problems at the London Development Agency.
A review by the Big Four firm has raised doubts about the controls in place over £18.5m of grants handed out to arts projects, The Evening Standard reported.
But the LDA has dismissed the problems, saying: ‘The majority of the concerns that were originally raised have now been answered. The projects have been successful and have had a positive impact.’
Discussing the matter at a City Hall press conference yesterday, Livingstone battled off the allegations, saying: ‘Accountants aren’t the best people to make a value judgment about what is good art.’
Deloitte had found the LDA’s processes were ’seriously flawed’. There were no audits carried out on the spending of the money, and the LDA relied on assurances from the projects that money had been well spent.
Lib-Dem Dee Doocey, chairman of the Assembly’s economic development committee, said: ‘Deloitte’s second - and completely independent - report vindicates the committee’s serious concerns about the processes used by the LDA to manage and monitor cultural projects it funds It is very clear that the LDA has mismanaged public funds.
re Juno - Enjoyed it very much, Ellen Page made the film I thought and, though not an Oscar winning performance in most years, she might stand a chance (although Christie or Cotillard are probably in a better position). Apparently it was trumpeted by the the US pro-life lobby as their sort of film. Hmmmm.
I’m thinking could there be time for a Granita style deal in the Democratic race as the GOP side is likely settled on McCain.
In fact, Rick Perry’s endorsement of Guiliani, and his very quick switch to McCain, shous just how badly he wants No. 2 spot. But keeping a Texan on the ticket, when neither Obama or Clinton are realistically going to compete there in November, is a drawback.
Political affiliation & voting
Heredity does play a large role in political decision making.
Am not talking about the genetic angle (which indeed sounds very interesting) but rather environmental, in that people absorb many of their political views, beliefs and perspectives from their parents and other close relations.
Personally came from a split home: dad was Republican, mom a Democrat. I took after my mom politicially, but always think about how my father would have looked upon things and how he would vote.
For example, am guessing he would be for John McCain, due to shared experience as combat vets AND as socially moderate, econonomically conservative.
Think my mother would be torn between Hillary & Obama. Would respond positively to the best in each. And she might not vote for McCain, judging him (correctly) as too conservative and hawkish, but am sure she’d have great respect for his military service, independendence and persona.
Out of curiosity, how many PBer have been or are still influenced by the politics of your parents and other close relatives?
307 - I’m not at all influenced by my relatives. My Dad was almost far-right, my mums a Liberal (in the UK sense). I’m a moderate Conservative. Interestingly one of my sisters is a communist and the other is totally apathetic. I think my family is weird though.
308 - are you sure your middle name is not Mitford?
Holy good god, Ive just watched the desecent of Northern Ireland football into the on field reflection moribund personality of the manager.
Please someone in the league, offer Worthington a job, I’ll subsidise it.
307. Hundreds of years of history helps make my preferences. Live in Northern Ireland, firmly British.
309 -
303 - Does indeed seem Red Ken’s pooh-poohing the bad audit report like a good issue for Boris. A small but telling outrage, and with the artsy-fartsy angle to rub the voters the wrong (or from opposition perspective, the right) way.
Assuming of course that Boris doesn’t allow his natural showmanship to step on his own message, as per usual.
300. Probably not better than the bank when you factor in fall under a bus factors.
307, 308. I’ve heard political beliefs are also largely affected by where you are in the sibling order, with younger siblings more likely to believe governments should step in to regulate fairness, and older siblings more likely to believe people are best left to get on with it. Seeing as I’ve been in both situations it could explain why I’m a moderate.
309 - No, but the Sunday lunch discussions were excellent!
I’m not sure it means that much, though. None of the sleaze or financial governance issues are likely to damage Livingstone among his core vote. Most people blame their borough, rather than the GLA, for their CT bills. There isn’t yet much sense from BJ, too, of an alternative way of doing things. Livingstone will only really be seriously in trouble when an issue cuts him off from his core.
307- sea shanty- dad was a commie, and mum a tory hating socialist. Don’t think it managed to influence my politics mind!
Father was a socialist, mother a liberal/libertarian, i ended up a social democrat, more pragmatic and less idealist than my parents. Both worked in public services though, and i have been left with a slight distrust of the private sector, I fail to see it as a proper career.
318. Most people I know who have worked in both would suggest the opposite.
319. You’re probably right, but both would baulk at the idea of a job which had no benefit other than money. Both worked far under their proper pay. Interestingly my mother went to the public school Bedales, while my father came from a yorkshire mining family, both Labour until Blair took over.
307/308/314
I am 3rd of 4 children (the worst spot to be in IMHO), and everyone IMHO hase been conditioned by how we were brought up.. In my case it was theDaily Telegrah every day, public school(no jokes pls) etc. There was never ever any question of socialism in our family,it was stand on your own two feet and get on with it,. We always had an election at school at election time…..and It was always a Tory landslide.
310 Personal genepool includes significant Ulster contributions both Catholic & Protestant. Has been way to long since I last visted Belfast, Antrim & Donegal.
Irish Catholicism definetely inclined that side of family tree to Democrats. Likewise the Protestantism (Scots Irish & German) inclined that side to Republicanism.
Sorry about the football.
Up Down!
321- you never stood a chance comrade with that background.
My father was a Labour Party member and a trade union activist, yet my mother was a Liberal whose father was a Liberal councillor. Mum often voted Labour but was very moderate and hated Tony Benn.
I was a Labour Party member who was a local councillor and activist, and now, having left the party, after 39 years, over New Labour’s anti-democratic instincts and behaviour, I vote Liberal Democrat when I vote, occasionally Green.
Malcolm Gamekeeper turned Poacher
well, well, you couldn’t make it up and get away with it. When I checked a few minutes ago Betfair odds on Dem nomination were right on evens! Drifting to Obama, which is probably right as he is going to clean up in the next week in terms of wins. BUT not so many delegates. Clinton gets chance of a ’second comeback’ with Texas and Ohio. Then what? They could well be arguing about Florida (maybe Michigan) long into a long night at the Convention.
Sensible option now would be for both candidates to say “it’s so close, let the people decide. Most primary+caucus votes - as opposed to delegates - gets it.” No argument. But it ain’t gonna get sensible.
MPs on all sides would be against it, as would the press. And even though the general public don’t watch it, the media would make it an issue of Brown’s cowardice that would ingrain itself on to the voter’s psyche.
It would also be a PR coup for Cameron. Can you image the final one before it was abolished?
Cameron: “The House will know that this is the last PMQs, well the last one until I become Prime Minister and bring it back!”
324- I am a Labour man through and through who since reaching the voting age (1987) has never voted Labour in any election, LD’s, greens, and not voting. Could not vote for Brown, and could never (hell freezes over) vote Tory.
307. “Out of curiosity, how many PBer have been or are still influenced by the politics of your parents and other close relatives? ”
do you mean like when my mother told me that if I would have voted for the right, she would have thrown me out of the house?
In US elections, you can see “fossil remains” of old ethnic patterns and ideological struggles on the map of local, county-by-county, town-by-town, precinct-by-precinct results.
This is especially true for rural areas, where the pace of change is less, and which are more likely than cities to get left behind in their own local time warp by the general March of Progress.
For example, in parts of the Midwest that are just north of the Ohio River, if a rural county is a GOP stronghold today, chances are that it voted for Abraham Lincoln in 1860. Conversely, if a neighboring county with similar demographics has a Democratic tradition, odds are it voted against Lincoln in that election.
There are a multitude of similar examples packed into the pages of Kevin Phillips’ first book, a true masterpiece “The Emerging Republican Majority” (1969, Arlington House).
328 Andrea- your mum was a good woman.
Please, please let not us see the return of old Berlurs
325 - The problem being that caucus vote totals are not available. It has to be delegate totals if they want a tiebreaker.
Thanks to those posting figures on Dem vs Rep total votes cast. Some astonishing differences. Missouri stands out, as the bellweather state. 4 votes in the Dem primary for every 3 in Rep.
And what about Colorado? OK, not too much should be inferred from low turnout caucuses. But in a state with more registered Reps than Dems, the ratio of total votes yesterday was 2:1 Dem. Wow!
Parents (and entire extended family) were Liverpool-Irish Labour. All Tories were perceived as anti-Catholic, anti-Irish bigots. (This was true, historically, in Liverpool…) On social issues, of course, parents were on the extreme right… Dad had travelled the world for 20 years as a marine engineer, amongst other things spending 3 years on the Amazon. Always thought England was the finest country in the world, apart from Canada…
My father was a Christian socialist, a member of Sir Richard Acland’s commonwealth party.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Acland
My family had been serfs on his estate for generations. My mother Welsh working class Labour, and that was it. Me sort of left, although pretty tongue in cheek.
I would like to see the end of the Labour Party and its replacement, with a broad centre left party, free of its trade union links perhaps eventually merging with the Liberal Democrats.
327. I sympathise, having ideological and historical links to labour, but being unable to vote for them. It’s like being the politically homeless.
328 - Do you think she’d have done it? Or did you find out the hard way?!
330 - Aye to both yer propositions.
Doubt most Americans give a fig who the PM of Italy, certainly don’t have any feelings either way for Berlusconi. But for myself, must say I have an extreme, visceral dislike which I believe stems from the fact he reminds me strongly of Mussolini.
Which is not a positive image for Americans, to put it mildly.
Right now though, my main thought re: bella Italia are:
1. Hope that left can win; and
2. Hope the twerp & his party that crashed the govt get own heads handed to them.
This debate reminds me of a politics lesson back when I was in the 6th form about 17 years ago.
Teacher: Everyone is influenced by the politics of their parents.
Pupil: I’m not.
Teacher: Exactly!
329 - You have a few similar patterns in the UK too, such as the Liberal recovery based on their traditional Nonconformist rural strongholds in the West Country and rural Scotland and Wales. In and around Lancashire, you can find relics of the old working-class Tory vote based on Orange Protestanism, as well as the effect of Catholic Irish immigration. Past socio-economic composition can be an important factor: many larger urban cities, for instance, have areas which were originally built for the wealthy and well-off professionals, who have decamped to the suburbs and other high-income reserves. But their successors tend to be middle-class, but of the left-leaning, gentrifying variety - and so the Conservatives left a parting gift for the modern LDs.
Has anyone posted the number of Dem delegates needed if FLorida and Michigan do stay out? AOL are showing Hillary up to the 1000 mark - much less on CNN / BBC ’cause they haven’t allocated California’s 400+
In my mother’s family, Irish Catholic heritage did not translate into fervid Irish nationalism or anti-British feeling. Largely due to fact that family lived in rural, mostly German-Scot Irish community. Catholic Church was center of their ethnicity, such as it was, not Ireland.
Very proud of the Irish in ‘em, of course, and Democrats largely by inheritance. But woman in particular were strong admirers of the British, with little consciousness or interest in traditional Irish grivances. For example, one of my mother’s favorite movies “Mrs Minniver”. And she and my aunts and my grandmother were all huge fans of the Royal Family. Can still remember watching investiture of Charles as Prince of Wales with my mother, who adored the entire spectacle.
New thread - Are the big donors deserting the Hillary campaign?
Tyson (301) - a recent survey showed left wing bloggers are 17 times more likely to be abusive than posters on the right. That is certainly my (anecdotal) experience.
340 - Ironically, the author of the original “Mrs. Miniver” columns, Jan Struther, moved to the US in 1940 as part of Britain’s war publicity effort, and ended up living there for the rest of her life (her great-nephew, Iain Maxtone-Graham, is one of the main writers for The Simpsons).
339 - A figure of over 1000 for any Dem delegate is incorrect at this stage. It must be a typo (or they haven’t got a clue, quite probable with aol). NBC or CNN are a better guide, California is split anyway so makes only about 30 delegates difference.
NBC says Obama 838, Clinton 834. Without superdelegates Obama is ahead.
The winning post remains the same, even without the two states apparently (unless they change it but they haven’t so far). As such it is very unlikely that anyone will have a majority until the convention thrashes things out.
This was covered earlier today if you have time to check through the threads.
BTW the California split is 202, Obama 163 so she did slightly better than expected with a 39 delegate lead there.
Just checking. I think they’ve added on what they imagine from superdelegates. These are not fixed pledges and will change depending on how the state delegates are going so just confuse the matter.
The prime minister is one of the Queen’s ministers, answerable to the Queen in Parliament just like any other minister.
The ‘first among equals’ could not possibly abolish PMQs; it would turn him into a President.
It would also massively damage him with Labour backbenchers.
In any case, even if he was thinking of it, he’ll dither for ages and then decide not to make a decision.