Long live the king

Best of luck to Barack Obama as well. However, the truly momentous and inspirational aspect of yesterday’s result was my almost perfect prediction of it, as published in Crikey last Friday. Obama has carried the erstwhile red states of Iowa, New Mexico, Colorado, Virginia, Ohio, Nevada, Florida and Indiana, with two states coming down to the wire: Missouri, where McCain leads by 5868 votes (0.2 per cent), and North Carolina, where Obama leads by 14,053 (0.4 per cent). I tipped Obama to gain all of these states and no more. I gather late counting of declaration votes is unlikely to change any leads, so it appears those 0.2 per cent of voters in Missouri have stood between me and my moment of destiny. Better luck next time, I guess. To those who tipped McCain victories or record-breaking Obama blowouts and find themselves wondering what my secret is, one simple piece of advice: believe the polls (or Intrade if you prefer – it will usually tell much the same story). They may not be perfect, but they will outperform your own “informed conjecture” well over 50 per cent of the time, no matter how clever you think you are.

If the last two states play out as expected, the final result will be 364 electoral votes for Obama against 174 for McCain, pending one complication: Nebraska, which along with solidly Democratic Maine divides its college votes by congressional district. Two of the three districts have stayed Republican, but in a third Obama trails by just 569 votes, and thus stands a chance to make it 365-173. In any event, the joint winners of the informal Poll Bludger tipping contest (thanks to Juliem for conducting this) will be David Walsh and Ron, who I gather will win a tie-breaker ahead of fellow 364 Club members Grog and Peter Fuller.

Finally, our good friends at UMR Research have published qualitative polling on Australians’ attitudes to the President-elect. Those who harbour an unfashionable element of cynicism about the great man might want to keep a sick bag handy.

Author: William Bowe

William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.

780 comments on “Long live the king”

Comments Page 14 of 16
1 … 13 14 15 16

  1. Ronster

    There’s hope for me yet. Bill Clinton’s morally ambiguous deals with sleazy foreign companies might be too embarrassing to Hillary for her to take the job. The term “conflict of interest” would be used a lot. GO BILL!! There’s a long list in the article but I’ll give an example:

    [During her own White House campaign, the New York senator criticized China for its crackdown on protesters in Tibet and urged President George W. Bush to skip the Olympics in Beijing. Her campaign was embarrassed by reports that her husband’s foundation had raised money from a Chinese Internet company that posted an online government “Most Wanted” notice seeking information on Tibetan human-rights activists that may have been involved in the demonstrations.]

    Bill’s Foreign Deals May Pose Issue For Clinton As Secretary Of State
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/15/husbands-foreign-deals-ma_n_144066.html

  2. Juliem or anyone very familiar with the US system, does SOS have much influence over US domestic politics? Noting Dio’s concerns if Hillary got the job and it is mainly foreign affairs, won’t that get her”out of the way” for domestic politics?

    For the record, I hope Hillary does got SOS. The US has a lot of fences to mend internationally and like them or not the Clintons were good at international politics. Plus, while I was dissappointed in Hillary when she “went negative” in the campaign, she did swallow her pride and campaign for Obama in the election, so that deserves some recognition IMO.

  4. ltep

    I didn’t mind her criticising Obi. But when she said that she and McCain were ready to be Commander-in-Chief and that Obama wasn’t, she just became a pain in the arse. Her inability to accept reality became a big problem.

  6. Socrates @ 652,

    Ability to influence domestic policy – a big fat ZERO. Ability to influence foreign policy – depends upon the relative strength of the personalities involved.

    Think about some of the names over the last few decades. James Baker? Colin Powell? Condoleeza Rice? Madeline Albright?

    If the SOS is paired with a strong (speaking force of personality and ideas here, not in regards to any specific party affliation) President, the opinions of the POTUS will carry the day in foreign policy and a lot can get done. Reagan being a good example and his various summits with Gorbachev and other Soviet leaders over the 8 years of his presidency.

    If the SOS is not strong in and of him or herself and is paired with a weak (again, see definition above) President, not a lot will get done of any substance on any front. Can’t think of a particularly good example at the moment.

    If the SOS is strong and the President is weak (see above) or not particularly interested in foreign affairs, while lots gets done it will go the way of the SOS’s ideals and the President is “along for the ride”. I would argue Kissinger and Nixon fit this mold and that detente with Communist China under Mao was all Kissinger’s doing. I don’t think had Nixon had another SOS that this would have panned out as it did in the 70’s.

  7. Socrates, if you check the current US thread, I’ve noted there, after some personal reflection, that I think putting HC into the SOS position would be the perfect place to put her to get her out of the way as far as potential and future threats go. It was earlier in this last week.

  9. This is a very interesting map:
    http://elections.nytimes.com/2008/results/president/map.html
    It shows swings to Obama or McCain as compared with 2004, by county.
    We can see that the whole country outside the South swung to Obama, except for Arizona and Alaska, which produced weak home-state swings to McCain/Palin. In the South, however, there were strong swings against Obama in those counties where whites heavily outnumber blacks – most of Tennessee, eastern Kentucky, Arkansas, Oklahoma, East Texas, northern Alabama, south-western Louisiana, parts of the Florida panhandle. In the Black Belt, the string of black-majority counties which runs from the coast of Virginia down through the Carolinas and Georgia, and across central Alabama and Mississippi to northern Louisiana, there were strong swings to Obama, clearly caused by increased Black turnout. This was big enough to mask the anti-Obama swings among whites in these areas. The map shows the continuing alienation of white Southerners from the rest of the country, and also that these areas are now the Republican Party’s only really reliable base apart from a few cowboy states like Utah, Idaho and Alaska.

  10. It’s even more striking if you slide the pointer to 2000, which gives you a comparison of how Obama polled compared with Al Gore. It shows that Gore did vastly better across most of the South than Obama did, even though Gore carried no Southern state and Obama carried NC and VA. In fact one things these maps show is that these two states seem to have seceded from the South. Only a few hillbilly counties at the western edges of these states swung to McCain. The coastal and piedmont zones of VA and NC, while not necessarily voting Democrat, showed no swing away from Obama, as did most of the rest of the white South.

    Note also on the 2008 v 2004 map the block of counties in south-west Pennsylvania and eastern Ohio that swung, weakly, to McCain. If you zoom in you can see that they are the most depressed of the white working-class counties of these rust-belt areas. This was the much-ridiculed Clinton-voter-backlash against Obama. It wasn’t strong enough to offset the Obama sweep elsewhere, but it did happen.

  11. ltep

    Posted Sunday, November 16, 2008 at 11:02 am | Permalink
    “Some people just seem bitter that Hillary Clinton dared criticise Obama.”

    Very true.. I hav all of Obama’s dirty tricks on file that HE useed against Hillary in th Primarys , no lillywhite knight is Obama in a politcal contest and people hav short memories Fact is both engaged in that fierce Primary contest and both Obama & Hillary used negativ tricks against th other…its politcs

    Obama for example , spent millions on TV adds falsely claiming Hillary still supported th Iraq invasion (false) , falsely said if he was in th Senate he would hav voted No to Iraq invasion (false I’ve got his quotes as Senator in 2004 & 2005 saying he would not know what his decsion would hav been given same intell as Democrat Senators) , falsely distributed millions of leaflets claimin his healthcare policy & Hillarys were th same (false) , falsely claimed Hillary was financed by Washington lobbyists and he was not (false check SEC declarations) , falsely claimed Hillary made key decsions in Billys admin and Billys admin was unsuccessful , falsely claimed his tax policy was better than Hillarys for th poor (false) , falsely claimed he and Hillary had identical policy on Kyoto (false)

    And when th campaign got to th working class States (typical Labor terrotory) like Ohio , Pennsalvania , Michigan , Texas , Indiana then of course Hillary criticised Obama’s poor working class policys compared to hers (like tax & universal heathcare) , which is why she won all those working class States

    And don’t tink for one moment that McCain & Obama did not tell fibs about each other in th main campaign either (and norwould Hillary hav hesitated to had she been opposed to McCain) Its US politcs , 15 second grab TV perseptions imagery , and Obama is no cleaner politicing than any other US politcan its th reel world

    Sometimes I wonder whether th bitterness is because Hillary went with 2% of winning despite 50% of th campaign funds and having a woeful (Mark Penn) campaigin Manager
    Better to realize obama won th race and then defeated McCain to be POTUS , that th now

  13. Hi Ron,

    Good to see you as feisty as ever.

    Agree that we should all move on and ruminate more on the coming Presidency than focus on the campaign past.

  16. Centre

    Read third paragraph , first line…word is “still”…ie in 2008 (Hillary PUBLICLY recanted her vote in October 2005 …when th Senate inquiry found 2002 Iraq invasion supporting intell info was falsely corrupted by Bush/Cheney…hence th Obama lie)

    A month later incidently Edwards (another victim of Bush’s corrupt 2002 Irawq intell did same thing …when they found via snate investigation info was false

    NOW deal with Obama AS a Senator in 2004 and 2005 ..BEFORE these Bush corrupted disclosiures , saying he would not know what his decsion would hav been ifgiven same intell as Democrat Senators in 2002….again making his campaign claim of opposing th invasion as false (and only true IF HE DID NOT see th same Intell)…deal with Obama as a lier just like all politicans

  20. G’day Amigo GG

    #663

    hav just done a 9 months course on unfeistiness (awaiting exan results as we speak) …thought I was making progress….progressiveLike

    where hav you beem , earning a dolloar or asisting Blues boys recruiting for a shot at th 8

  22. Well GG Amigo , th last mystery we had here was Billbowe and th Marsupial going down th aisle with Crikey , always wondered why you were not asked at same time

    Incidently , if you missed at time , th Juddster won th first tan time trial quite easily , so he will be like “coming back from a spell” so to speak next year , but better

  23. Steve

    “George W. Bush Outed CIA Agent Valerie Plame says Scott McClellan, Bush’s former Press Secretary.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K3kSMvVRnk0”

    Yes he does unambigously when listening to full youtube tape I suppose most ‘left’ would hav believed that anyway

    Whilst I would not be a defender of Bush , this guy Scott McClellan is hardly a “cleanskin” witness one would be normaly taking any notise of whatsoever His whole tape was devoted to reprtrsospectively clensing himself and furthermore almost claiming well he knew nothing about Iraq war decsions etc , i “trusted” Bush , I’ a “moral” person….very self serving innocent says he .Scott McClellan ..hell th guy McClellan was Deputy Press Secretary to Bush at Iraq invasion ands later th man his Press Secretary…lying away to th Media with a straight face

    Now we know Scooter Libby was found guilty of obstruction over th Plame affair , he was Chief of Staff to Cheny and assit to VP CRITICALY on National Security Affairs for 5 years..so clearly Cheny seems to be Libby’s authorisation to leak We also know Cheny had enormous power in th White House & far more than a normal VP …queston is did Cheny ask Bush ( as Scott McClellan claims) , possibly ( th inclination to tink so of course) but not certainly seeing McCleeellan is not a great sourse and Cheny was a power mongul

    I hav no doubt of Cheney’s complete complicity

  24. “It shows that Gore did vastly better across most of the South than Obama did, even though Gore carried no Southern state and Obama carried NC and VA”

    Suppose secession of NC and VA from confederency may include demographics and econamic improvements apart from black turnout

    Queston of why Obama did not do nearly as well as Gore in 2000 may hav many conflicting answers Perhaps Gore whilst avoiding where possible including Billy Clinton in his campaign still may hav benefited from th enormous popularity of Billy Clinton in th South anyway plus Gore was a Tennessee Senator Secondly , whilsyt obama suporters do not like me saying this I feel Obama as a N E Liberal was a negative in th ‘socially consevative’ South which is why I always thought even Texas and SC were totally beyong him winning even those Southern States Thirdly I suspect alot of even th non fundalmentalist religous ‘white’ voters who were still religous regard those values as important and may hav seen th Pastor as th antithist of that Fourthly I suspect Obama’s blackness may hav been least important of these 4 factors

    Map shows “its time’ factor and ‘Wall Street collapse bailout’ totaly imfluenced th rest of Country but not in South….there’s a politcal message for both Democrats and Republicons there…I mean alot of those white poor should be voting Democrat & were pre LBJ

  25. and th ‘black’ turnout for a ‘black’ candidate only emphasises these 5 factors , rather than any Obama swings implying diferently

  26. Ron

    I agree with your scepticism of McClellan. While I don’t like Bush, he is so unpopular that I think there is a danger he will become a scapegoat of all that was done badly udner his presidency. In reality many people deserve some blame both for the second order immoral decisions, and how nastily some of Bush’s decisions were implemented. I have said before that I will be very interested to see who he pardons upon departure. To cover everything the list would have to be very long because I suspect that between the justice department sackings, Valerie Plame, Gitmo, torture and renditions, many people have committed serious crimes. Not all were ordered by Bush either, I suspect.

  28. It’s interesting to see how poorly Obama did in rural white areas (in both the Mid-West and South) compared to Clinton in both 1992 and 1996, yet he still managed to pick up a win that was similar in magnitude to Clinton in 1992.

    It just shows that there are multiple routes for Democrats to get to the White House – it just depends on how effectively you target them…

  29. [The republicans want more of Palin!! She makes Bush look smart. If Bush is the idiot’s thinking man, Palin is the idiot’s idiot.]

    The problem is that she has already burnt many bridges with Independents and Dem voters, illustrated by her approve/dissaprove numbers. To put that many people offside as a VP nominee is quite something. The Republican base won’t be enough to win.

  30. Will it be enough to win the primaries is the interesting question. I doubt people will still be talking about Palin in 3 years time.

  31. I like Obama more and more each day. 31 of 41 staffers appointed by Obama so far has been Clintonites:

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15617.html

    and with Hillary:

    [President-elect Barack Obama offered Sen. Hillary Clinton the position of Secretary of State during their meeting Thursday in Chicago, according to two senior Democratic officials. She requested time to consider the offer, the officials said.]

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/11/14/clinton-met-with-obama-ab_n_143810.html

    Obama is showing very good judgement. The kid got potential.

  32. [The Republican base won’t be enough to win.]

    Who knows. Black voter turnout, and even general Democrat turnout, is unlikely to be what it was this election.

    The Palin of 2008 didn’t have the skills to build the bridges she needed too. The Palin of 2012 might. Combined with a restive Republican Party and a lax Democratic Party who knows what could happen.

  33. [Who knows. Black voter turnout, and even general Democrat turnout, is unlikely to be what it was this election.]

    That’s certainly possible, but it is going to take quite a turnaround

  34. “It’s interesting to see how poorly Obama did in rural white areas (in both the Mid-West and South) compared to Clinton in both 1992 and 1996,..”

    Well i’ve advansed psephologicals in #674 suggesting Obama was never going to match Billy particularly in th South

    “It just shows that there are multiple routes for Democrats to get to the White House”

    Perhaps not if one was an non rusted on Obama strategist planning forward …did run a tight & clever ‘change’ campaign but those voters got th whole straight six draw this time , and all my way…George , Palin , Iraq War disatisfacton , US disrespected , McCain not running as a maverick independent , “its time” and …th game breaker .. Bailout Now this is not all going to happen next time , but in 2012 there is massive incumbancy advantage plus/minus Obama record vs hopefully “a Palin” running

    So I do not tink all th e/v’s road won this time necessarily is future , although Latino etc demographics ar helping and problems arise more so should Republicons choose to go centre right with a Pawlenty , or worse a Latino centre right , and th nitemare a black Colin Powell Actual plus for Democrats is th Republicons have never reely gone that way & Democrats hold POTUS incumbancy

  37. [That’s certainly possible, but it is going to take quite a turnaround]

    It’s next to impossible to predict what is going to happen in a US Presidential Election in 2012 this far out. For example:

    1. In Nov 1996, most people had started to refer to Al Gore as the “next President of the United States”.

    2. In Jan 2001 (delayed for obvious reasons), people were still referring to Al Gore as the “next President of the United States”.

    3. In Nov 2004, no one was predicting that the next Democratic candidate would be a newly elected black Senator who would carry both Indiana and North Carolina in the 2008 election. Although, people were then talking about McCain/Giuliani v Clinton – so they almost got it right…

  38. Ronster

    [hav just done a 9 months course on unfeistiness (awaiting exan results as we speak) …thought I was making progress….progressiveLike]

    I’ve got your exam results. Possum is going through them to do a Hotelling’s T-square multivariate analysis. He’s got a few hypotheses to test. 😀

  39. Senate seats up in 2010 – it’s hard to see many Senators at risk. Gregg of NH definitely, Burr of NC possibly, Dorgan of ND possibly, Lincoln of AR possibly, Voinovich of OH possibly. Specter of PA will probably retire (he has cancer) and the seat would definitely be at risk. Grassley of IA will be 77 in 2010. If he retires the seat will be at risk. The others all look safe. So even if Obama’s popularity has declined, it’s very hard to see the GOP regaining control. But then I would have said the same in 1992…

  40. Also add Martinez in FL. And Inouye in HI will almost certainly retire at the end of the term.

    The open seats in DE and IL could also be of concern if the GOP can find decent opponents for the soon-to-be-appointed “incumbents”.

  42. Do not how Democrats would lose Senate control in 2010
    Likeley makeup now is 57 Dems (feel AK to Dems) 41 Republicons (feel GA to Repub)

    Assume worst on remaining 2 Senate seats , (cliffhanger MN goes to Repugs) and Liebernman rats to Republicons makes Dems 57 to 43

    Dems would need to lose 7 seats in 2010 out of there 16 up for re electon (almost 1/2) and whilst some ar not givens its very unlikely Dems could lose control even if Obama st.ffs up a bot (and in 2012 they at least pick up CT from Lieberman I feel

  44. Dio

    #688
    “I’ve got your exam results. Possum is going through them to do a Hotelling’s T-square multivariate analysis. He’s got a few hypotheses to test”

    Amigo FINNS has returned from Macchu Piccu , Peru with video (below) of th fabulous Macchu Piccu , and video not only shows an Amigo monument & a complementary picture of you , but also our famed “knowledge trees” ….and you mention Enemy Marsupial’s graphs in th same breath
    http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=MG1TvZgf3hI

  45. Thanks Steve

    very well sourced article there Steve It confirms my earlier sense th job is hers if she wants it …subject to her perseption of there dual working ‘chemistry’ AND as I said at time Billy’s “World” job cross overs

    I tink it reflects well on Obama , not that he sees her a th most qualified SOS for this job as she clearly is (I mean Biden would be a dud) , but that he is prepared to build a coalition , as that has consensus future domestic & FA signs as well

    Howevr interesting that Billy Clinton’s ’empire’ seems main focus of checks for conflivcts of interest against FA etc , seeing he has talked & liased with everyone in th World irrespective of there politcs I recall when he made his ‘oz’ speaking trip , with tink Gorby as a speaking partner , & his fees were astronomical to attend…but business still rocked up

  46. [
    Bill vetting could cost Hillary her Cabinet post
    By MIKE ALLEN & GLENN THRUSH | 11/17/08 8:23 AM EST

    Obama aides are becoming exasperated by the Clinton camp’s pokey response to demands for former President Bill Clinton’s finances.

    Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) is President-elect Barack Obama’s first choice for secretary of State but his aides are becoming exasperated by the Clinton camp’s pokey response to demands for extensive information about former President Bill Clinton’s finances, according to numerous Democrats involved in the process.

    “The sense among the no-drama Obama world is: This is well on its way to winning best Oscar for drama,” said one well-connected Democratic official.

    http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1108/15680.html
    ]

    See my #636 this same thread. Serves her right for staying with him for only ambitious reasons if he ends up denying her the cabinet position.

  48. Finns/Ron @ 694,

    Love the Macchu Piccu travelogue. I never understood how wise the Peruvian locals were. It is like we three wisemen are the prophets pointing the way in that timeless land.

    Those guinea pigs reminded me of the Gilligan’s Island crew. Kept in a safe, warm and dark environment to be fattened up and then cooked an eaten as an exquisite delicacy at our pleasure.

  50. Amigos

    Don’t you realise that you have defiled one of the most sacred places in the world with that “Diog, you were wrong” sign? There are some Inca gods who are most displeased. Apo is their God of the mountains and he is not to be trifled with.

Comments Page 14 of 16
1 … 13 14 15 16

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *