Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The best test of a pollster is not how they’re currently doing
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The best test of a pollster is not how they’re currently doing against other firms but what happened last time they were tested
I am afraid that I have to disagree with David Herdson on his latest Saturday thread about YouGov understating Labour. Firstly you cannot judge pollsters’ based on their current surveys when less than 5 weeks ago they were tested against a real election involving real voters.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
13.6m people voted Conservative in the 2017 General Election.
The Brexit Party got 5.2m votes in the 2019 Euros.
Even if EVERY Brexit voter was 2017 Tory (they weren't), they were still nowhere near 50% of 2017 Tory voters.
The recent opinion polls tell us all the parties might be somewhere around the low 20s. I wouldn't overly worry about the minutiae as we're not in an election period yet.
https://twitter.com/DenisonChapman/status/1144913996157530112?s=19
Indeed to add insult to injury, LDs take Corbyns seat:
https://twitter.com/IslingtonLibDem/status/1144989024873938944?s=19
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7198137/Labour-plots-scrapping-inheritance-tax-replacing-lifetime-gifts-tax.html
We already know he has multiple affairs etc etc etc. Its like finding out Jezza spoke at a rally for some very dodgy cause. It is already priced in.
https://twitter.com/stephenharper/status/1145110019915911169?s=20
"However the YouGov data suggests a very different result if Labour publicly backs a second public Brexit vote, as many of its MPs are demanding.
In this scenario the Conservatives would lead on 26 percent of the vote, ahead of Labour and the Liberal Democrats on 22 percent each.
Nigel Farage’s Brexit Party would be pushed into fourth place with 19 percent of the vote."
Ps - I am wearing lederhosen
It all seems rather futile.
I think it's possible that YG methodology works better for low-turnout elections, though, since they may pick up the committed voters for their panel better.
Suits me!
We had Cleggasm not so long ago
The LDs have no policy platform beyond Bollocks to Brexit. They don't currently have a leader.
This sort of polling reflects 'a plague on both your houses' for Labour and Conservatives - not real enthusiasm for the idea of a LD government.
https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/06/28/what-would-it-take-labour-win-general-election-new
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=24&LAB=17&LIB=30&Brexit=19&Green=4&UKIP=2&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
If Labour back EUref2 before a general election this year though the figures are Tories 26%, Labour 22%, LDs 22% and Brexit Party 19% and according to Electoral Calculus that gives Tories 258, Labour 211, LD 69, Brexit Party 52 and SNP 38.
https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/cgi-bin/usercode.py?CON=26&LAB=22&LIB=22&Brexit=19&Green=4&UKIP=2&TVCON=&TVLAB=&TVLIB=&TVBrexit=&TVGreen=&TVUKIP=&SCOTCON=&SCOTLAB=&SCOTLIB=&SCOTBrexit=&SCOTGreen=&SCOTUKIP=&SCOTNAT=&display=AllChanged&regorseat=(none)&boundary=2017base
The one I've seen involves asking respondents what they would do if Corbyn sticks to a pro-Brexit position. I don't think that counts as a run-of-the-mill voting intention survey.
The Tories have not yet delivered Brexit
And
Labour has not yet backed EUref2
?
Either cutting corp tax to 12.5 or cutting taxes for over 50k earners
https://twitter.com/ddiamond/status/1145205386397519874
Is there any evidence their European election success can transfer to a general election?
Although a quick look shows plenty of cases of the best pollster at a previous election doing badly at the next one so I don't think you can use the argument of best last time to use say Survation either.
We can all pick and choose to suit our biases but people won't know who the most accurate pollster for the next election will be until we have the election and we can compare the results...
Even that doesn't help us much as the best pollster could be laughably far off now but just becomes more accurate when people pay more attention at election time.
Personally I think even looking at the most recent, most comparable election isn't that wonderful a way of judging a pollster. They have probably all tweaked their methodology since and the situation at present is potentially a 4 horse race!
Presumably all the right wing, small govt posters will join me in complaining about this unnecessary state spending on a "client" group? Or perhaps not....the landed gentry should of course be looked after.....it is the elites renting and bothering to go university and work who must suffer.
Then come after the NHS, the immigrants and maybe a foreign war for good measure.
I am sure my fellow right-wing small govt compatriots here are just as consistent.
Mr. Above/Mr. Pauly, isn't the dislike of British taxes funding French farmers rather than supporting British ones?
New Zealand is the model. This is a verbatim copy from the "Agriculture in New Zealand" Wikipedia page:
"In 1984 the Labour government ended all farm subsidies under Rogernomics, and by 1990 the agricultural industry became the most deregulated sector in New Zealand. To stay competitive in the heavily subsidised European and US markets New Zealand farmers had to increase the efficiency of their operations."
If Jezza's Labour polling around 20% and getting spanked at the local and Euro elections isn't enough evidence of the hole that Labour find themselves in I'm unsure what would be - polling around 10% from the company of your choice?
Your people are "in charge of Labour" and they're doing a god damn bloody awful job of it at a time when the Tories are a complete shambles. Both major parties have breathed life into a dormant UKIP reinvented as TBP and a moribund LibDems.
Genius.
I concede it has its roots in Western Canada rather than Ontario, but that’s about it.
Thanks @JackW, will set my recorder for the hustings.
http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/106313
In case that triggers TSE (or the "golden period of government" mob) the FT blamed Oxford.
How Oxford university shaped Brexit — and Britain’s next prime minister
https://www.ft.com/content/85fc694c-9222-11e9-b7ea-60e35ef678d2
https://twitter.com/robfordmancs/status/1142049815859257346?s=19
For that matter, a priori thinking (starting with a conclusion then hunting for matching evidence) is the basis of religion, with a posteriori (considering evidence before reaching a conclusion) is the way of science.
As we saw during the coalition, the LibDems are much better on the trees than the wood.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falsifiability
*not that I agree with your view of how religion works!
Both are measures of better off pensioners on fixed incomes who don’t like money being given to other people.
I think that 2014 UKIP voters represent quite a coalition, but weighted towards those who were financially secure and older, particularly homeowners without mortgages, often retired. The turnout for Leave was much higher than this core, so often a different demographic. We see this phenomenon on here all the time. Austerity was and is for other people, like taxes.
Refuting or proving religion by hypothesis testing is simply the wrong tool for the job, as futile as understanding the meaning of a painting by chemically analysing the pigment.
"the difference is that the hypothesis has to be falsifiable."
That used to be the case in theory. Science should try to prove the hypothesis is false, but sometimes grants and careers are built om maintaining the hypothesis.
That's why it doesn't always work that way. Outside my expertise, but didn't string theory become popular without being falsifiable?
We know he’s unfaithful and untrustworthy. It just satisfies your prurience nothing else.
But why do you insist on condemning the child for the sins of the father?
The leave coalition in 2010 was a much smaller group, mostly small state, right wing tories, and therefore pro-austerity. It was bolstered during austerity by people impacted by the weak economy, lack of hope and opportunity, and offended by the corruption of the "elite" in simultaneously boosting asset prices and cutting incomes and services for the poor.
The newcomers to the leave coalition have very different and less consistent views on the economy to the pre 2010 leave cohort. That is the reason for the paradox, the leave coalition has two very different parts.
This is also why leavers have been unable to agree on what the post Brexit world should look like.
The idea that BXP or LDs is going to form a govt is for the birds. Even if there was an election in the next six months, disrupting the electoral cycle, the FPTP system combined with the financial and organisational clout of the major parties would give LD/BXP a run for their money.