Sean's Site

Up until a few mornings ago, there was this idea floating around political chatrooms that "Iowa doesn't matter" for the Republican presidential hopefuls in 2012. Actually, it's an idea that floats around seemingly every year between presidential elections, and it's not so much based on fact as on fancy. What if, the thinking goes, there's a candidate who owns the independents? Or the evangelicals? They could just skip the Iowa caucuses altogether and wrap up the nomination with wins in New Hampshire or across the South.

And what do you know, in every election cycle there seems to be a candidate who fits one of those fancies, and the "Iowa doesn't matter" conversation rises anew. This year, Mitt Romney was the one declared Iowa-proof, the guy who could leave the cornfields to the freaks (Paul, Cain) and duds (Pawlenty) — but still win it, thanks to his relative normalcy — go on to dominate his "native" New Hampshire, and glide to the nomination on a cloud of anti-Obama rhetoric and Aqua Net.

Then Michele Bachmann surprised the field...

Source: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/romney-vs-bachmann-iowa-6013232?src=rss

political signs political ad political buttons political consulting firms political advertisements

Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/08/june-jobs-report-hiring-slows-unemployment-rises/

political websites Obama President Obama US Secretary US Politics

Source: http://www.capitaltonight.com/2011/07/the-un-weiner/

Obama President Obama US Secretary US Politics US Government

My post yesterday on the No campaign's focus on the man who wasn't there has provoked a sharp reaction from the former Lib Dem leader Lord Ashdown.

"The personalisation of the No campaign is disgusting politics", he tells me before going on to condemn what he calls a combination of "Conservative Party money and the dinosaurs of Labour who are attacking the man holding the coalition together".

This follows the Climate Change Secretary Chris Huhne's warning on Newsnight last night that "gutter politics" and "downright lies" are damaging the coalition. He went on to say that "I am frankly shocked that coalition partners can stoop to a level of campaign that we have not seen in this country before". He was referring not to coded and not so coded attacks on Nick Clegg but the No campaign's claim that voting under AV would cost millions and that it would promote extremism.

Both men will have seen the latest poll - ICM for the Guardian - showing a dramatic 16% lead for the No campaign. It is just a poll and just one poll and, more than in most elections, turnout is the key to this contest. However, the trend in all polls has been no-wards.

If that is the result it will be one more reason for some Lib Dems to ask 'What are we getting for staying in the coalition?'

PS One or two of you have complained that I am focussing on the horse race rather than the substance of the referendum. Point taken.

More on this to come but, for now, I've been studying Professor John Curtice's analysis for the Political Studies Association of whether AV would make much of a difference. Having projected general election results since 1983 under AV his cautious answer is that it would make hung parliaments "a little more likely" and give a "modest boost" to the Liberal Democrats.

At the last election, for example, Curtice estimates that the Lib Dems would have got 80 seats not 57, the Tories would have got 20 fewer seats and Labour three fewer. This would still have led David Cameron to conclude that a Tory/Lib Dem Coalition was the only stable option. However, the alternative Lab/Lib Dem Coalition would have had an overall majority - 335 seats against the 315 they did get - which might have convinced some that a "progressive alternative" could have worked.

The one recent election outcome which could have been dramatically different and could have changed the country's political history was 1997 when Tony Blair would have got - at least if these calculations are right - a bigger landslide and, more importantly, the Lib Dems would have replaced the Conservatives as the second biggest party - getting 115 seats as against the Tories 70.

Update 12:10: Thanks to those who pointed out my schoolboy error. Curtice's study suggests that the Tories would have got 20 fewer seats under AV, not 20 extra seats as I originally said.

Update 13:08: Lord Ashdown has just gone much further. Whilst campaigning for a Yes vote in Bristol he challenged David Cameron to disassociate himself from what he called a "deeply and appalling personalised campaign":

"There are three questions for Mr Cameron. Will he now disassociate himself from a deeply personalised campaign of the sort no British prime minister of whatever party should be associated with? Secondly will he explain to us why the Conservative Party is now funding a campaign whose primary theme is to attack his main coalition partner? And thirdly if he wants to take a high-profile lead in this campaign let him do so in favour of a campaign on the basis of honesty and decency. I'd like to hear him make a commitment on that."

And here's the response from a No 10 spokesman:

(1) Will he now disassociate himself from a deeply personalised campaign of the sort no British prime minister of whatever party should be associated with?

The PM yesterday said: "I don't run the No campaign, I run the Conservative No campaign... I certainly don't condone any personal attacks on anyone in this campaign."

(2) Will he explain to us why the Conservative Party is now funding a campaign whose primary theme is to attack his main coalition partner?

As the PM made clear yesterday the Conservative Party is running its own NO to AV Campaign. This is focused on highlighting how unfair and unpopular the AV system is and why people should vote No; it is a system that is obscure, unfair and expensive and could mean that people who come third in elections end up winning. It is not attacking Nick Clegg.

(3) If he wants to take a high profile lead in this campaign let him do so in favour of a campaign on the basis of honesty and decency. I'd like to hear him make a commitment on that.

The prime minister is focused on making the argument against AV - it is a system that is obscure, unfair and expensive and could mean that people who come third in elections end up winning.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2011/04/fightback.html

political quiz laser politic politic political blogs canadian political parties politic politic leave

Up until a few mornings ago, there was this idea floating around political chatrooms that "Iowa doesn't matter" for the Republican presidential hopefuls in 2012. Actually, it's an idea that floats around seemingly every year between presidential elections, and it's not so much based on fact as on fancy. What if, the thinking goes, there's a candidate who owns the independents? Or the evangelicals? They could just skip the Iowa caucuses altogether and wrap up the nomination with wins in New Hampshire or across the South.

And what do you know, in every election cycle there seems to be a candidate who fits one of those fancies, and the "Iowa doesn't matter" conversation rises anew. This year, Mitt Romney was the one declared Iowa-proof, the guy who could leave the cornfields to the freaks (Paul, Cain) and duds (Pawlenty) — but still win it, thanks to his relative normalcy — go on to dominate his "native" New Hampshire, and glide to the nomination on a cloud of anti-Obama rhetoric and Aqua Net.

Then Michele Bachmann surprised the field...

Source: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/romney-vs-bachmann-iowa-6013232?src=rss

Governor politics cnn politics political jobs daily politics

Ed Miliband has told me that his party "got it wrong in a number of respects" over immigration and identified the issue as one reason the party "lost trust particularly in the south of England". However, he insisted that his friend and former speechwriter Lord Glasman was wrong to say that Labour had lied about the extent of immigration.

I travelled to Dover and Gravesend yesterday with Labour's leader - both places where Labour's vote collapsed by the end of its time in government. Asked why that had happened Mr Miliband said:

"I think the problem is that we lost trust and we lost touch particularly in the south of England. I think living standards is a big part of it, immigration is a big part too. I think maybe a combination of those two issues - most importantly."

I also asked him to respond to the comments of Maurice Glasman who he recently ennobled and who wrote in Progress magazine that "Labour lied to people about the extent of immigration and the extent of illegal immigration and there's been a massive rupture of trust."

He said:

"I don't think we lied but I do think we got it wrong in a number of respects. I think that first of all we clearly underestimated the number of people coming in from Poland and that had more of an effect therefore than we would otherwise have thought. And secondly, I think there's this really important issue about people coming into the country and the pressures on people's wages. People aren't prejudiced but people say to me look I'm worried about the pressure on my wages of people coming into this country, I'm worried about what it does to housing supply - all those issues. Now some of that is real and some of it isn't but I think you have to address not just tough immigration policy but underlying issues as well."

When I put to him Lord Glasman's suggestion that Labour had been "hostile to the English working classes" he paused and then changed the subject. My sense is that he may well share that analysis.

This is not the first occasion Ed Miliband has spoken of Labour mistakes on immigration. In his leadership campaign he spoke about the drop in people's wages due to the interaction of migration with flexible labour markets. But the timing of these comments - in the midst of an election campaign and just days after David Cameron's own pitch to limit immigration from outside the EU to the "tens of thousands" - and his unwillingness to challenge Maurice Glasman's critique makes them especially interesting.

The question is whether his promises of more training, apprenticeships and a living wage will re-connect Labour with the working class supporters who have abandoned it.

---

Here is the transcript of my interview with Ed Miliband:

NR: Southern seats seen massive drops in Labour support in recent years - what's the problem?

EM: I think the problem is that we lost trust and we lost touch particularly in the south of England. I think living standards is a big part of it, immigration is a big part too. I think maybe a combination of those two issues - most importantly. So that people were seeing people coming into the country, worrying about their own standards of living which weren't going up as they had been in the first part of the decade and holding us responsible for it.

NR: You mentioned immigration. A friend of yours, former speechwriter, Maurice Glasman said Labour lied to people about the extent of immigration?

EM: I don't think we lied but I do think we got it wrong in a number of respects. I think that first of all we clearly underestimated the number of people coming in from Poland and that had more of an effect therefore than we would otherwise would have thought. And secondly, I think there's this really important issue about people coming into the country and the pressures on people's wages. People aren't prejudiced but people say to me look I'm worried about the pressure on my wages of people coming into this country, I'm worried about what it does to housing supply - all those issues. Now some of that is real and some of it isn't but I think you have to address not just tough immigration policy but underlying issues as well.

NR: But as he said - and you know him well - as he said to you let's be honest about this Ed you lied about it?

EM: Well, err, the first time I saw it was when he said it - I don't think we did lie. I don't think that's the right thing to say.

NR: But did you mis-lead - if not deliberately. (EM interjects: no, no) Did people get the impression immigration was much lower than it turned out to be?

EM: Well no, I think people actually thought it was the opposite. I think what happened was that we thought there would be a certain number of people coming into the country from Poland - it turned out to be much larger - it did have an affect. And it's something I said very much during my leadership campaign. And look it's part of my leadership Nick - I'm not going to go round saying everything the last Labour government did was right - I think it was a good government, I think it made our country stronger and fairer in a number of respects but I think we got some things wrong as well.

NR: But his analysis and he used to write speeches for you - Labour were "hostile" to the English working classes - that you treated that anxiety about immigration as if sometimes it was racism or bigotry or ignorance and I sense you share a bit of that concern?

EM: Well, look I would say we, we, we did realise the scale of the problem. We talked about the points based system for immigration - we made that one of our key priorities. I think it's this mix of immigration and the impact on living standards. I think that's what.... we were still saying let's have flexible labour markets, maximum flexibility at work and that was, that was causing problems for people and that's why we need to re-think.

NR: But if your message to people is not look we don't want anybody to come to this country but we can help you in other ways what are you driving at with people? If they're saying to you we can't get jobs, I stopped a builder you passed there - we can't get jobs he said to me - I've been unemployed but I'm skilled. What is Labour saying to them if it's not saying we'll stop the immigration?

EM: Well let me give you a practical example, we said before the budget have a bankers' bonus tax and put the young unemployed back to work, get the housing industry moving, help support enterprise - practical differences, practical things that we could have done. I think the thing this government is getting wrong on immigration is that they've got big promises which I don't think are going to be matched by reality but they're not dealing with those underlying economic issues which I think caused a lot of the concern that people had.

Source: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/nickrobinson/2011/04/ed_miliband_we.html

politic politic leave political websites Obama President Obama US Secretary

Source: http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2011/07/do-you-want-the-world-to-be-a-better-place/

politics cnn politics political jobs daily politics united states politics

Source: http://www.capitaltonight.com/2011/07/source-queens-gop-loses-ny-9-candidate-battle/

politic processor politic real clear politics polls politics news cq politics politics and religion

Source: http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2011/06/postal-filibuster-was-a-practice-round/

political buttons political consulting firms political advertisements political quiz laser politic politic

Source: http://brightonpoliticsblogger.wordpress.com/2011/06/21/praying-for-peace-and-harmony-between-jason-and-grant-and-dawn-and-the-travellers/

political blogs canadian political parties politic politic leave political websites Obama

Because we already covered the serious stuff on Wednesday (read exclusive interviews here) — and because Jon Huntsman released a campaign video, too — we thought we'd ask: Which of these makes you feel more American?

OR...

Source: http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/jon-huntsman-campaign-video-5930009?src=rss

the daily politics political liberalism political signs political ad political buttons

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/christianitytoday/ctpolitics/~3/zGLCpDmvL3k/poll_americans.html

enter stuff politic crack politic processor politic processor crack processor crack politic political parties

The House Ethics Committee is reviewing allegations that a top aide to one of its own members, Rep. Michael McCaul, violated House rules -- possibly by misreporting payments from the Austin Republican's campaign.

The committee almost never publicly discloses inquiries involving staff members. But it did announce an ongoing review involving Greg Hill, McCaul's chief of staff. In mid-May, the Office of Congressional Ethics urged the committee to review unspecified ethics allegations against Hill.

Hill declined comment through McCaul's spokesman Mike Rosen.

Rosen said that "this is a payroll issue. Mr. Hill believes that he has corrected it, and he is fully cooperating with the committee."

LegiStorm, an organization that aims to promote congressional transparency by collecting and publishing salary and other data, reported that the payroll issue could be a discrepancy between Hill's financial disclosure documents and filings from McCaul's campaign. Hill reported receiving more money from the campaign than the campaign reported it paid to him.

The ethics committee says it will decide what to do by Aug. 16.

Source: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/07/mccauls-chief-of-staff-under-ethics-committee-investigation.html

alabama politics recent political news articles political party major political parties data data politic

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/christianitytoday/ctpolitics/~3/UHqjX0eZA-k/want_to_fire_up.html

political buttons political consulting firms political advertisements political quiz laser politic politic

Source: http://cincinnati.com/blogs/politics/2011/07/07/incoming-cincinnati-police-chief-to-visit-queen-city-next-week/

political websites Obama President Obama US Secretary US Politics

Source: http://www.stephentaylor.ca/2011/07/do-you-want-the-world-to-be-a-better-place/

political liberalism political signs political ad political buttons political consulting firms

Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/06/demint-tea-party-activists-to-attend-tele-townhall-on-nations-budget-debt/

political collectibles politics 1 the daily politics political liberalism political signs

Sen. John Cornyn wants the Senate to back him up after he called the idea that President Barack Obama could bypass Congress to raise the debt ceiling "crazy talk" on Fox News Sunday.

Cornyn, along with fellow Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, introduced a non-binding "Sense of the Senate" resolution Thursday to send a message to Obama that he has to deal with Congress on the debt issue.

"It is unacceptable for Congress and the President to continue to abdicate their responsibility and fail to acknowledge that Washington has a spending problem," Cornyn said in a news release.

Currently, Obama has made no such threat. The controversy began over reports that the Obama administration was considering ways to avoid a debt default if Congress did not raise the debt ceiling by the Aug. 2 deadline. The question is over whether a portion of the 14th Amendment renders a debt ceiling unconstitutional.

Source: http://trailblazersblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/07/cornyn-wants-resolution-to-war.html

President Obama US Secretary US Politics US Government The Power of Politics

Source: http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/07/obama-congressional-leaders-to-meet-sunday/

daily politics united states politics political ads office politics political cartoons 2009

His marital past may be too much for some conservative Republicans.

Source: http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/christianitytoday/ctpolitics/~3/3X2XbuMT8cI/gingrich_woos_s.html

politic processor politic real clear politics polls politics news cq politics politics and religion