Labourhome - Stories by david reeves

Labourhome - Stories by david reeves http://www.labourhome.org/ Back to the roots... en-us Copyright 2007 - LabourHome.org Tue Oct 7 00:19:02 2008 Labourhome Labourhome Labourhome http://www.labourhome.org/favicon.ico http://www.labourhome.org/ [Blogs] US Presidential Election Update and Prediction http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/4/24/151729/215 The 2008 US Presidential elections have reached a crucial stage. As a former Gore campaign staffer, I thought I might take now as the opportunity to comment on where the parties stand and what the future may hold.

Democrats

Neither Obama nor Clinton will secure the sufficient number of elected delegates to win the race outright. The Pennsylvanian contest was significant because it will sway the super delegate voters; party officials who hold the balance of power in the nominee contest.

If Hillary secured a margin of less than 10% over Obama the super delegates would have backed Obama and quietly asked Hillary to drop out. If Hillary had won by more than a 10% margin, the super delegates would have backed Hillary as she has won all the big Democrat states. To confuse matters Hillary only won by 10%. This means that the period of uncertainty is set to continue right up to the Convention in September.

The Democrats use a system whereby the total number of delegates in a state is split in proportion to the percentage share vote. The Republicans however use first past the post. Hillary is now arguing that under the Republican system she would already be the Democrat nominee.

Obama has a greater number of victories, though in smaller states. He argues that he has won the popular vote. The issue of fairness is of greater importance to the super delegates. They don’t want a repeat scenario of the 2000 Presidential election where Al Gore won the popular vote but George W Bush won the Whitehouse.

However, the super delegates also have an eye to the November polls. Hillary is leading in the polls with both the older and female voter demographic. These two groups hold the balance of power in a November general election.

In the end I think Obama will prevail in the guise of fairness.

McCain

Born in 1936 and a veteran of Vietnam, McCain would be the oldest first term President in American history. Whilst age is not an issue, his health is increasingly becoming the focus of interest.

I met McCain in Iraq in 2003. He then appeared to be in excellent health. Today on television he appears frail. McCain is registered disabled and draws a Naval pension for injuries sustained whilst a POW in Vietnam. His injuries restrict his mobility.

It is now being asked what would happen if McCain died before the November election. In recent history a US Senator was re-elected, despite his death prior to polling day. The official position on this is that during the primary contests, state delegates are elected. These delegates are loyal to a candidate e.g. McCain. In the event of a death or incapacitation, the Republican party hierarchy would select a replacement candidate, and put it to the state delegates to approve/ratify.

This is slightly complicated by the freezing of candidate names on the ballot paper in certain states, weeks in advance of the polling day. If for example McCain was incapacitated after the freeze, his name and not the name of the new Republican candidate would appear on the ballot paper. In theory a dead president could be elected. This is worst case, and I hope does not happen.

Problematic for McCain would be if during a busy day of speeches and visits, in the heat of the midday sun, having not eaten, drunk or slept for a couple of days, he stumbles, shakes or fails to respond coherently to questions. In a 24hr news culture this would be beamed around the world immediately and his election prospects destroyed beyond hope. This may have nothing to do with health or age, but that does not matter.

Money

Obama has raised a massive amount of money over both McCain and Clinton. In America money wins elections – contests are fought out on the airways through the purchase of advertising time.

McCain needs to raise a lot of money, and quickly if he is to compete with the eventual Democrat candidate. Whilst the ongoing contest between Hillary and Obama could be divisive for the party, it does keep both Democrat candidates in the news.

Running Mates

I am putting my money on Obama selecting John Edwards, running mate to John Kerry in 2004. Both men were recently filmed together outside the home of Obama.

For McCain the choice of running mate is difficult and potentially politically divisive. McCain has been accused of being too liberal for the Republican party, and a natural choice would be for McCain to shore up the religious right through his choice of running mate. This is too obvious I think, and judging by his recent foreign trips and choice of right hand man in every camera shot, former Democrat now turned Independent Senator Joe Lieberman may be an interesting choice. Lieberman who was running mate to Al Gore in 2000 would appeal strongly to middle America – those who rarely vote but if persuaded would hold the balance of power.

Advertise on this site with MessageSpace

]]> 2008-04-24T15:17:29-05:00 [Blogs] Ramblings of a Tory MP http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/4/24/141634/065
Another day another bizarre rant and ramble from Nadine Dorries:

Secrets
Posted Thursday, 24 April 2008 at 13:37
Everyone has secrets. Some people can keep a secret and never tell a soul, but most people have to tell just one other person.

This is why the darkest of secrets eventually came to light, but it takes time, one at a time.

I found out a secret the other day which had been puzzling me for a while, but I knew that if I did nothing and waited, one day I would be the one to be told.

Now that I know, I'm going to tell lots of people, but not just any people, only the ones who matter, important people.

And as they say, revenge is a dish best served cold.

The article was posted after lunch today on her blog (now withdrawn). Who is she threatening? Why? Who are the important people? Why do they matter? What did she eat/drink for lunch? This is beginning to sound like an episode of Lost.

This latest ramble joins the long list of Nad-isms. My particular favourites are:

On Minority Groups

- When the tinkers called with their big horse drawn wagons, Aunty Bridget used to fly behind the counter and shoo us into the back room. The fear was that because I had Blonde hair, a rare thing in Eire, the tinkers might steal me. (Blog 13 Apr 07)

On Parent and Child Car Park Spaces

- I pulled into a parent and child [car park space]. I may not be a parent and child, however, it was raining and I am a woman with hair, very important! (Blog 22 Mar 07)

On Teachers

- The Stalinesque care of a group of left wing robots (Blog 23 Nov 07)

This is yet more proof that Nadine Dorries is out of touch with the reality based community, and becoming the unacceptable face of the unreconstructed Conservative Party.

David Reeves
Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Mid Beds
www.davidreeves.org.uk

]]> 2008-04-24T14:16:34-05:00 [Blogs] Miliband: See World With Voter's Eyes http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/4/20/8157/87145 News of the World Foreign Secretary David Miliband gave a tough and honest assessment of the Labour Party's standing in the polls, and posed the question of how we best respond.

I fully agree with his comments below: "We need instead to put up a fight, show our determination to change what is wrong with this country, put our case with clarity and conviction, and ensure the public realise what is at stake when it comes to elections rather than opinion polls.

We know what will ensure default. First, if we try to do too many things and don't do enough of them well. Second, if we don't follow through the things we have started. Third, if we worry too much about our opponents. Fourth, if we argue among ourselves, failing to defend each other and our leader. Fifth, if we water down our core convictions.

Gordon Brown has strong values and convictions. The route to victory needs us to do more.

First, see the world through the eyes of voters. The best way of defending our record is by offering and honest assessment of it. People will only listen to what we have done right if we are candid about what we have not. Employment has never been higher but people are worried about housing. Crime is down but people think it's up. Universal nursery education has been delivered but people worry about care for the elderly.

Second, we need ideology, not just pragmatism. Labour needs to stake out its ground as the party of fairness and freedom. We must promote fairness; but also give people the power to shape their own lives. So in the economy, in public services, in community life, we need to give people more power.

Third, tell a compelling national story. Britain is no longer a country in decline. We have one of the largest economies in the world. The NHS has been rescued from third world standards. We won the 2012 Olympics because people respect us not pity us.

We must engage with the world not retreat from it. Finally, political institutions become trapped; and we were created to challenge what exists and change it. We need to open up politics. Since 1997 New Labour has redrawn the political map. Britain is richer and fairer. But there are new issues that challenge us to think afresh, building on our record but also learning from it. The Tories are betting the house on Labour giving up the fight. They've got another thing coming."

Taken from News of the World, page 2.

David Reeves
Labour Party Parliamentary Candidate for Mid Beds
www.davidreeves.org.uk

]]> 2008-04-20T08:01:57-05:00 [Blogs] Nadine Dorries: Playing Politics With Ethics http://www.labourhome.org/story/2008/4/20/43225/4547 Last week Conservative MP for Mid Beds Nadine Dorries wrote in her blog: "Being of neither the pro-abortion or pro-life lobby." This was in the context of Nadine arguing that the upper limit for abortions should be reduced from 24 to 20 weeks.

This statement is not strictly true Nadine is it?

When Nadine was running as Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Hazel Grove in 2001, under her maiden name (though at the time married) of Nadine Bargery, Nadine made very clear pro-abortion statements and expressed her support for abortions. This may have had something to do with her running against, and trying to ‘out’ the pro-life Labour candidate.

Since 2001 things have changed, including Nadine's name. So a new name, a new ideology, or rather a new opportunity to further her political career.

Her political advisers would have told her that there was an opportunity to exploit and reinvigorate the pro-life/pro-choice debate in the UK, and introduce into play proven American tactics. These tactics include subverting the majority into believing that medical evidence supports a reduction in the current 24 week limit, and incrementally restricting the access of women to an abortion; even if required in the event of a medical emergency. The very fact that Nadine ran with the hand of hope story in March is evidence of this subversive campaign.

Nadine, put your political career aside, put your personal ambitions aside, put yourself aside, and think of the damage you are doing as you play politics with peoples lives.

For the record I am pro choice (though this is not a party political issue). 90% of abortions take place in the first 12 weeks of pregnancy, very few between 20 and 24 weeks, and those that do in most cases are for medical reasons.

David Reeves
Labour Parliamentary Candidate for Mid Beds
www.davidreeves.org.uk

]]> 2008-04-20T04:32:25-05:00 Search Labourhome string http://www.labourhome.org/search/