Adding the latest YouGov poll to the previous polls only changes the picture slightly in terms of the popular vote. The predicted shares are Conservatives 41.06 Labour 35.01 Lib Dems 13.04. This produces a prediction of 296 seats for Labour (+15), 311 for the Conservatives (-10), ) and 14 for the Lib Dems (-5). The combined Conservative and Lib Democrat share of the vote is down to 54.1, suggest that it may be reverting to its ‘normal’ range of 50-53%. Overall, this is better news for Labour, especially since the tone of press coverage has been broadly negative, however they still need to take another 2% from the Conservatives to make the contest more competitive again. Brown really needs to seize the agenda, possibly by unequivocally stating that Northern Rock will be charged the full rate of interest on the emergency loan that the Bank of England made. Brown should also recognise that many of the short term gestures that he made in his appointments were not a success and that he should sack Mark Malloch Brown. Although this is better than the previous poll, Labour will need to improve things if a 2008 election is to be possible (although it still remains a value bet).
Archive for November, 2007
Can we use the ’swingometer’ to predict US Elections?
November 17, 2007
Some surprising results
The conventional wisdom is that using national voting figures in US Elections, especially in terms of voting swings, is a futile device. This is because individual US states are so different in terms of ethnicity, demographics and individual issues that you cannot simply assume that all 50 states will move in the same way. Instead, the conventional wisdom is that you must treat each state as an individual election. However, while this is practical for someone with the time and energy to study US statewider polling trends in depth, it is impactical both for the average punter and for someone with a PhD to finish and a job to find. It is also a dirty little secret that the British method of applying uniform national swing (simply assuming that a national swing will be repeated at every level) works pretty well, if there isn’t a factor which massively distorts the picture (such a third party with regional strength).
Indeed, although the average overall state swing to Bush in 2004 was lower than the national swing, applying either of those two swings would have called 46 out of 50 states correctly and predicted that Bush would remain in the White House. Indeed, the use of a swingometer would have slightly overestimated Bush’s lead as Wisconsin, Oregon and Minnesota would all have become ‘red’ states, while New Hampshire would have stayed in the Republican column. This crude device performs as well as the worst of the projections made by this sites competitors. For instance, Scott Thomas of ‘The Blogging Caesar’ got only 44 states correct (his formula only miscalled 2 state – showing the limitations of ‘gut feel’) while the main algorithm of Andrew “Electoral-vote.com” Tanenbaum got 46 right (although other algorithms actually worked better). Of course they didn’t have the actual national vote tallies but it does show that the Swingometer isn’t as crude as many people make it out to be.
Is now the time to bet against Mitt in Iowa?
November 16, 2007Good news for Huckabee (and McCain)
.
There have been a spate of polls in the last twenty-four hourse. However, after putting them through Samplemiser, there is only one conclusion that you can draw: the race is getting tighter. Despite the millions that Romney has poured into Iowa, he is only leading Huckabee by just over five points. Now might be a good time to bet against ‘Slick Willard’ as contracts on him winning Iowa are trading at an overly optimistic 54.2-56.8. The polls also show McCain narrowing the gap with Giuliani, strongly suggesting that it would be worth his while to put some more effort into the Hawkeye state, and Thompson, who will need to decided whether he actually wants to be President or not. The full results are: Romney 26.77 Huckabee 21.14 Giuliani 13.1 Thompson 10.7 McCain 8.22 and Paul 3.82.
Should McCain stay or should he go?
November 15, 2007
The Senator from Arizona faces some tough decisions about Iowa.
Putting the all the Iowa polls since September 27th through Samplemiser produces the following projections: Romney 28.77 Huckabee 19.69 Giuliani 13.26 Thompson 10.11 McCain 5.71 and Ron Paul 4.55. Apart from showing that Huckabee is a serious challenger to Romney, and that Thompson needs to pull his socks up, it shows that McCain is facing a meltdown in Iowa. This presents him with a dilemma as his campaign is not making any headway in the Hawkeye state. On the one hand this would suggest that he should simply abandon any pretence of trying to compete there and concentrate on New Hampshire and South Carolina. However, McCain needs to put in a credible performance in Iowa to gain some momentum and to prevent Giuliani from performing so well that he becomes the default candidate of the centrist bloc, or even the inevitable winner. He also cannot afford the humiliation of being beaten by the crank candidate, Ron Paul. His problems are also compounded by severe financial problems, the decision to abandon his crusade to drive Republican economic policy to the centre and the large amount of time that he is wasting campaigning in the later primary states. Indeed, his campaign reminds one of that carried out by his fellow centrist and colleague, Joe Lieberman four years ago. In that campaign Lieberman adopted a strategy of running on his electoral appeal, focusing on the later states and trying to emphasise his liberal credentials.
What do you think? If you agree or disagree with me please leave a comment below.
Betting Journal: Daschale
November 14, 2007I have just bought 10 contracts on Tom Daschale (at a price of 0.1) becoming the Democratic Vice Presidential nominee. This is not particularly likely, but he was one of the first to endorse Barack Obama, so it seems a possible value bet.
Where is the value in the Vice-Presidential Betting?
November 14, 2007
Why I have bet on Webb and Warner.
Having bet on Jim Webb and Mark Warner (and also on Kerrey, Nunn and the ‘field’ option) I am now going to explain why I think that the following have a good shot at being on the bottom of the ticket.
Jim Webb – Jim Webb is from Virginia, a state that Democrats should be looking to win.. As a former member of the Reagan administration who gradually became a populist he has clear appeal to blue-collar ‘Reagan Democrats’ whose election day allegiances often swing close contests. Although he is anti-war, and consequently beloved by the ‘netroots’ he has impeccable national security credentials as a Vietnam War Hero, a former Secretary of the Navy and as a father of a Marine fighting in Iraq. Although his controversial views on the Civil War and suitability of woman in combat, as well as a political philosophy which appeals to those who think that the trouble with Ross Perot was that he was not Scots-Irish enough, would raise some eyebrows this factor should not be overestimated. Indeed, it might be thought that his presence on the ticket might mollify any chauvinists or racists wary of voting for the Democrat frontrunners.
Mark Warner – As I said before, Warner’s is moderate, experienced and his home state of Virginia is marginal enough to make putting him on the ticket good from an Electoral College point of view. The only problem is that he might be too moderate for the ‘netroots’ and he is currently committed to running for the Senate (and a possible 2012 bid). However, I believe that the benefits of having him on the ticket are such that he might be asked to ‘take one for the team’ and abandon his run in favour of second place on the ticket. Indeed, if Hillary is forced to move to the left during the primaries having a moderate Southerner on the ticket will be imperative.
Other possible candidates who could be on the bottom half of the ticket include (with the exception of Nunn and Kerrey they are covered by the ‘field’ option):
Ken Salazar: Latino and from a swing state (Colorado). Moderate in his views and a successful state attorney-general before he was elected to the Senate in 2004.
Sanford Bishop: Experienced congressman and a respected leader of the conservative ‘blue dog’ wing of the Democrats.
Sherrod Brown: Senator for the swing state of Ohio. Populist rhetoric would pacify the left and allow Clinton to run a more restrained campaign.
Harold Ford Jr: Experienced and charismatic former congressman who was controversially defeated for the Senate in 2006. Currently chairman of the centrist DLC.
Sam Nunn. Experienced former Senator from Georgia. National security and defense expertise adds credibility on foreign affairs to the ticket.
Bill Nelson. Well respected and experienced senator from Florida.
Janet Napolitano: Popular governor of Arizona, and would mollify female voters if Hillary went down in flames.
Bob Kerrey. Vietnam war hero (although some controversy over an incident during his service). Well respected and popular centrist.
Betting Journal: Democrat Veepstakes
November 14, 2007I bought 10 contracts on Kerrey, Nunn or another candidate being nominated as the Democratic vice-presidential candidate. I currently have $15.34 left in cash.
Betting Journal: Liquidate Gore
November 13, 2007I liquidated all my positions on the former Vice-President a few minutes ago at 5.1, taking a loss. According to DailyKos Gore’s office have now catagorically told people not to put Gore’s name on the ballot or organise a write-in campaign. One of the ‘Draft Gore’ organisation has stated that, ‘We have received a communication from a member of Al Gore’s staff discouraging our efforts to put Al Gore’s name on any primary ballots. This includes California, New York, Massachusetts, and the write-in effort in New Hampshire, as well as any other states that are working to get him on the ballot. Accordingly, effective immediately, we are recommending that all groups cease their signature collection and related fund-raising activities’. Even though I can still a scenario where Clinton goes down in flames, I believe that this decision effectively stops any late entry by Gore.
Betting Journal: Webb and Warner for VP
November 12, 2007I have purchased 10 contracts of Mark Warner and James Webb (for the Democrat VP) at 1.8 and 4.5 respectively. Although Warner is currently running for the Senate and Webb has some controversial views, they would both make good running mates for either Hillary or (if I turned out to be completely wrong about the top half of the ticket) Barack Obama. A longer article will follow tomorrow.
Filtered Polling Data: HUNG PARLIAMENT
November 12, 2007Inputting the latest ICM poll and putting the updated data through Samplemiser gives the following predicted voting shares: Conservatives 42.52 Labour 35.13 Lib Dems 15.04. Specifically, Baxter’s new model predicts 281 seats for Labour, 321 for the Conservatives and 19 for the Lib Dems (putting the previous figures into Baxter’s site gave Labour 340 seats, Conservatives 245 and Lib Dems 35). The Conservative party would be technically 5 short of a majority, although they would undoubtedly be able to form a government with the assistance of the various Ulster Unionist parties, or even function as a minority administration for a few months.
Why only an almightly scandal will stop Hillary
November 12, 2007Ignore the controversy over planted question and focus on the allternatives.
Hot on the heels of the ’scandal’ involving a fundraiser and the criticism of her performance in the recent debate, there has been speculation that her opponents may have finally found her Achilles heel. However, I disagree with this analysis. Hillary is still above 40% in the Rasmussen tracking poll and she enjoys substantial leads across the board, she has the money and the best organisation that such funds can buy. She clearly understands the importance of the early states and has been campaigning hard in Iowa and New Hampshire. I also believe that the continuous Republican barrage against her over the past few years has inoculated her against any blowback from such common and minor misdemeanours as planting questions. Finally, Hillary has the biggest asset that any candidate has, her husband Bill Clinton.
In addition to all these assets, there is one ‘inconvenient truth’ that Democrats have to acknowledge, namely that the alternatives to Hillary are pretty mediocre. As his comments over Pakistan demonstrated, Barack Obama is both inexperienced and immature, which is clearly what is not needed in these turbulent time. According to Kerry’s campaign manager Bob Shrum, Bill Richardson was forced to withdraw his name from consideration as Kerry’s running mate because of rumours about his private life. John Edwards might be a serious contender if he was the centrist, mildly populist, Edwards of 2004 rather than the person who is trying to out-scream Howard Dean. I don’t think a draft Gore campaign would work (although I am still going to hold onto my Gore contracts just in case) and Biden and Dodd would have been credible candidates 20 years ago. Of course, if you want to be absolutely sure I would consider betting on a Clinton withdrawal before the end of the year (though in-between the spread on Intrade), since the only thing that would stop her would be a scandal that is so big that it completely destroys her, and given that my name is not Paul Staines, I don’t believe that will happen.
Betting Jounnal: Buy Hillary, sell the Democrats
November 12, 2007I’ve decided to partially unwind my ‘arbitrage’ by selling my 14 contracts on the Democrats winning the White House. I’ve decided to buy instead 12 contracts on Hillary Clinton winning the Democrat nomination. I’m going to explain it in a longer article but, short of one almighty scandal (and I don’t mean some piddling little controversy about planted questions) I just don’t see any alternative to Hillary winning the nomination.
Ranking the Republican candidates
November 10, 2007
Giuliani starts to pull away from the pack. There is still value in Thompson and McCain (and a punt on Huckabee might be a good idea).
The race is still as murky as ever. Giuliani has a clear lead nationally, but there is considerable value in Fred Thompson and still some value left in John McCain. It should also be noted that I have decided to update these rankings fortnightly from now on.
Rudolph Giuliani – Giuliani still leads in the national polls and has a strong position in both Iowa and New Hampshire. It’s impossible to describe the Robertson endorsement as anything other than a major boost and the crisis in Pakistan can only help a candidate whose perceived strong point is national security. It’s amazing to think that Giuliani could wrap up the nomination in January by getting into the top two in Iowa. The only cloud on the horizon is the Bernard Kerik scandal. Estimated chances of winning the nomination are around 45%. Price on Intrade.com 42-43. FAIRLY PRICED
Fred Thompson – His campaign continues to drift downward due to the perception that he less than fully committed to it. At the same time his reliance on free media, which was a necessity when he hadn’t announced, has ultimately prove unwise. Thompson needs to put in some time on the campaign trail in Iowa and New Hampshire. The fact that he is beginning to air some adverts on television will be reassuring for his supporters and he still remains second in the national Rasmussen poll. Chances of winning the nomination are about 20%. Price on Intrade.com 5.9-6. UNDERPRICED
John McCain – McCain may be doing better in the national polls, but as Joe Lieberman found out in 2004, being in a ‘three way tie for third’ is nowhere near enough. It is also imperative that he pulls ahead of Giuliani in Iowa. As I have been saying for the last three months, McCain needs to remind the centre why it supported him eight years ago. His opposition to the adverts run on his behalf by an advocacy group demonstrates his honourable character, though that could very quickly turn to cynicism unless he makes another gesture emphasising his opposition to the ads, even if that means returning donations and/or firing staff. Estimated chances of winning the nomination are around 15%. Price on Intrade.com 6.7-6.8 UNDERPRICED
Mitt Romney – Romney is still ahead in Iowa and New Hampshire so it would be silly to completely write him off. Romney also has a large amount of money, so he doesn’t have the financial worries that other candidates will have. However, Romney’s chances of winning the nomination are about 10% because I believe that a poor result in Iowa, will really reduce his momentum. Endorsements aside, I believe that Romney’s support in Iowa will start to decline once Thompson starts airing ads in Iowa and Huckabee gets Dobson’s endorsement. Estimated chances of winning the nomination are about 10% Chances of the Price on Intrade.com 29.4-29.9. OVERPRICED
5. Mike Huckabee – Like McCain in 2000, Huckabee is the classic demonstration that an effective grassroots campaign that relies on early state momentum and time spent on the stump works. I still believe that Huckbee’s stances on taxation and foreign policy are his Achilles heels and that it is difficult to see him doing well in New Hampshire. However, he has a decent shot a winning Iowa. Indeed, I could imagine Huckabee becoming the Howard Dean of 2008, which might make him a good bet if you can find a ‘greater fool’ to lay it off to when his price surges. His chances of winning the nomination are 10%. Price on Intrade.com 5.4-6.3. UNDERPRICED
6. Anyone else – I have put some money on Mark Sanford, Haley Barbour and New Gingrich as a hedge against one of the frontrunners being felled by a major scandal. However, the rumours of a sex scandal involving one of the major candidates have turned out to be just that – idle gossip. STILL AVOID.
Betting Journal: Fred Thompson (again)
November 9, 2007I have decided to buy 21 more contracts of Fred Thompson, leaving me with free cash of $26.68. At 6-2-6.5 Fred Thompson is simply too cheap, especially since he’s now started to run TV adverts, rather continue with his bizzare reliance on free media. I’m not going to hold these extra contracts for a long time, I’m going to (hopefully) take some quick and dirty profits when they get back to a more reasonable price.
How will the crisis in Pakistan effect the Republican and Democrat contests?
November 9, 2007
Will voters move to the more experienced candidates?
Although the crisis in Pakistan seems to eventually resolving itself, with Musharraf agreeing to hold elections, there is still are large amount of disorder with Bhutto now under house arrest and a state of civil emergency still in place. However, although this may seem rather cold blooded, the impact that these events will have of the Presidential election should be examined. Supporters of Barack Obama will presumably claim that his willingness to send US troops on anti-Al Quaeda operations within Pakistan, without Musharraf’s consent, has now been vindicated. However, I believe that this incident will undoubtedly move Democrats towards to the more experienced Hillary Clinton. The Republican side is a little more difficult because there are clearly two candidates who have strong national security credentials; John McCain and Rudy Giuliani. The fact that they are both on the centrist wing of the Republican party further complicates matters. My view is that, because of the recent endorsement of Robertson, conservative switchers will move to Giuliani and McCain in equal numbers, although I believe that Romney will be the biggest loser.
What do you think? Give your opinion in the comments section.
