Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The great Alabama polling Gamble. Robo calls v human interview

24

Comments

  • On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.
  • Mr. Teacher, not sure whether it's out or in beta, but there's a 'full' Gwent card game. I think it's going to be free.

    I want it to be good, but I'm worried about the micro-transactions that will fund it. I'm not keen on loot boxes or the equivalent.
  • Mr. Teacher, indeed. Micro-transactions are the work of Satan. But whilst publishers can make billions from them, they'll continue.

    I also liked Dragon Age: Inquisition, but the Bioware approach of only having a 'real' ending revealed in DLC is making me wary of the next proper game (though I'm interested in the tactical side-entry in the series, a bit like XCOM, they're reportedly working on).

    On inflation: the article's been updated to include a graph. Looks like a 'spike' as Faisal Islam might call it, or the smallest measurable increase as someone else might say.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 13,570
    edited December 2017
    I wonder at what point the changeover from 'impecunious Scotch bastards are mad to think they could survive independently' to 'selfish, ungrateful Scotch bastards want to keep all the oil for themselves' will occur? $75 a barrel maybe?

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434
    Another bellend using gaylick words when tweeting in English. Pick a language and stick to it.

  • On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.

    Several of the Robo callers now seek to reach under-sampled groups online. Others do have weightings to balance out the shortages in those groups but this is a bit like GE2015 and GE2017. Using past vote as indicator of likelihood to vote now might not be good indicator now.

    An issue with Alabama is that there's is very little polling experience there. It is a rock-solid Red state s there has never been the need.





  • Mr. Teacher, indeed. Micro-transactions are the work of Satan. But whilst publishers can make billions from them, they'll continue.

    I also liked Dragon Age: Inquisition, but the Bioware approach of only having a 'real' ending revealed in DLC is making me wary of the next proper game (though I'm interested in the tactical side-entry in the series, a bit like XCOM, they're reportedly working on).

    On inflation: the article's been updated to include a graph. Looks like a 'spike' as Faisal Islam might call it, or the smallest measurable increase as someone else might say.

    DLC is another reason for liking Witcher 3: lots of free little bits and two humongous paid for bits with enough content to keep most full price games going.
  • Scottish Tory Surge Klaxon

    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434
    Scott_P said:
    How have they weighted each group's propensity to vote ?
  • Scott_P said:
    You can see why some are pushing for the voting age to go down to 16. As someone who knows lots of 16 and 17 year-olds, I would be inclined to put the voting age back up to 21...
  • My rough reading, were it not for the Scottish subsample Labour would be ahead in Great Britain.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,095
    m

    rcs1000 said:

    Interesting map of the worlds pharma exports:



    I'm amazed how little the US exports.

    A lot of US drugs and medicines are manufactured outside the US, aren't they? Is there a single indigenous Irish pharma company? But look at the exports coming out of there. I suspect the German number is so high because its big pharma companies - Bayer, Merck & Schering, etc - also do a lot of their production in Germany.

    my daughter ( civil engineer ) has just finished working on a pharma plant in Waterford, US company
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 10,354
    edited December 2017
    Fans of spurious correlations and Fantasy Premier League players should see this reddit PL post that shows Harry Kane averages 2 points a game when West Ham are away but 11 points a game when West Ham play at home.
    https://www.reddit.com/r/FantasyPL/comments/7j9byj/harry_kane_scoring_pattern_is_directly_related_to/
    (The twist, of course, is that Harry Kane is not a West Ham player.)

    Any relation to pb threads predicting elections based on gross demographics is purely coincidental.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    My rough reading, were it not for the Scottish subsample Labour would be ahead in Great Britain.

    If yer auntie had baws etc....
  • rcs1000 said:

    Interesting map of the worlds pharma exports:



    I'm amazed how little the US exports.

    A lot of US drugs and medicines are manufactured outside the US, aren't they? Is there a single indigenous Irish pharma company? But look at the exports coming out of there. I suspect the German number is so high because its big pharma companies - Bayer, Merck & Schering, etc - also do a lot of their production in Germany.

    Elan as was.
  • Tories have a 7% lead with men, and Labour have a 5% lead with women.
  • TheuniondivvieTheuniondivvie Posts: 13,570
    edited December 2017

    Scottish Tory Surge Klaxon

    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%

    The eternal PB Tory dilemma, to describe a Scotch subsample as meaningless in the context of UK Lab v Con, or go full SCon surge.
  • Tories the party of the working classes like me,

    Tory lead of 5% with the C2DEs.

    Labour 2% ahead with ABC1s.

    We truly live on Bizarro world.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,095

    Tories have a 7% lead with men, and Labour have a 5% lead with women.

    Tories need to offer discount vouchers for shoes
  • Mr. Eagles, that gender divide seems to tally with the EU referendum vote. Not necessarily the same thing precisely, of course.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    Tories the party of the working classes like me,

    Tory lead of 5% with the C2DEs.

    Labour 2% ahead with ABC1s.

    We truly live on Bizarro world.

    ABC1's have more free time for virtue signalling.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,035

    Scott_P said:
    You can see why some are pushing for the voting age to go down to 16. As someone who knows lots of 16 and 17 year-olds, I would be inclined to put the voting age back up to 21...
    You need to talk politics with more older people.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 73,185
    edited December 2017
    TGOHF said:

    Tories the party of the working classes like me,

    Tory lead of 5% with the C2DEs.

    Labour 2% ahead with ABC1s.

    We truly live on Bizarro world.

    ABC1's have more free time for virtue signalling.
    We also contribute more to the Exchequer.

    No taxation without representation.
  • Mr. B2, under EHV (Enormo-Haddock Voting) we can do away with the human electorate problem altogether.
  • David Davis is a tit.

    Well played David, well fucking played.

  • Scott_P said:
    You can see why some are pushing for the voting age to go down to 16. As someone who knows lots of 16 and 17 year-olds, I would be inclined to put the voting age back up to 21...
    According to the Shipman book, David Cameron blocked 16 and 17-year-olds participating in EUref for fear it would help Labour if the voting age were ever lowered for general elections. Ironically, he'd most likely still be Prime Minister.
  • Scottish Tory Surge Klaxon

    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%

    The eternal PB Tory dilemma, to describe a Scotch subsample as meaningless in the context of UK Lab v Con, or go full SCon surge.
    I'm going to ask Shadsy to price up the odds on the Tories taking every seat in Glasgow, I'm feeling lucky.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 15,035
    Two thirds of young people believe Brexit should be abandoned, according to a new poll, in an apparent “wake-up call” to the Government.
  • Mr. L, Cameron was right about that. It's bloody stupid saying someone's too young to leave school but old enough to vote.

    Mr. B2, what percentage of the elderly and those in between who never seem to get mention agree, though?
  • My quick reading is the 10/1 on Moore getting 40%-45% looks value

  • IanB2 said:

    Scott_P said:
    You can see why some are pushing for the voting age to go down to 16. As someone who knows lots of 16 and 17 year-olds, I would be inclined to put the voting age back up to 21...
    You need to talk politics with more older people.
    Like on here you mean?
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,095
    IanB2 said:

    Two thirds of young people believe Brexit should be abandoned, according to a new poll, in an apparent “wake-up call” to the Government.

    I guess they should have voted then
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    David Davis is a tit.

    Well played David, well fucking played.

    Davis said this back in June too :

    “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed,” he said, using a line also expressed by the EU."


    "https://euobserver.com/uk-referendum/138280"

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 19,095

    David Davis is a tit.

    Well played David, well fucking played.

    or it could be Guy Verhofstadt is the tit since he just loves playing politics
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434
    Iran negotiations from 2014

    http://www.payvand.com/news/14/jan/1092.html

    "What is the significance of "Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"?
    By Bahman Aghai Diba, PhD International Law of the Sea

    In the Geneva Accords of 24 November 2013 between Iran and 5+1 Powers regarding the nuclear case of Iran, in two parts of the text that is known as “the Joint Plan of Action” (intentionally not called accord, agreement, contract, treaty or any similar words like that), it is mentioned that “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed”. What is the significance of this expression and what are its legal implications?"

    Yeah but Davis ...
  • IanB2 said:

    Two thirds of young people believe Brexit should be abandoned, according to a new poll, in an apparent “wake-up call” to the Government.

    If only we had a vote which took into account the views of all people....
  • Mr. Flashman (deceased), indeed. Davis expressed the exact sentiment the EU has repeatedly come out with, yet some people are wetting themselves over it.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    Mr. Flashman (deceased), indeed. Davis expressed the exact sentiment the EU has repeatedly come out with, yet some people are wetting themselves over it.

    Asymmetric rules apply for UKGOV vs EU officials it seems. Sad.

  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938

    David Davis is a tit.

    Well played David, well fucking played.

    or it could be Guy Verhofstadt is the tit since he just loves playing politics
    Verhofstadt is incorrect in his assumption that anything should or even can be binding. There is one article 50 agreement - and only one. It has to go as a whole before the European Parliament after being cleared by the commission.

    It is not a multiple stage process in the sense that each part of the agreement is separate, as even if the EP agreed to it now, they have the right themselves to change their minds at the end of the process.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,973

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    They include a nice graph which lets you see the answer to those questions.
  • Verhofstadt is just the mirror image of the looney ukippers. He doesn't want a deal, and he doesn't want successful negotiations.

    Lucky the grown ups on both sides are making progress.
  • rkrkrk said:

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    They include a nice graph which lets you see the answer to those questions.
    That's been added, it wasn't there before.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Brooke, not the first time the Germans have got bogged down in the snow, to their great consternation.

    Interesting article on so-called 'skin betting':
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-42311533

    The gaming industry disputes that it's gambling, I believe.

    I saw a video recently indicating that one publisher has applied for a patent for a system whereby if you're killed in multiplayer you're informed if your killer had a better weapon, and the same publisher has apparently applied for a patent to enable matchmaking that deliberately matches players wildly different in level and equipment. In short, it's aiming to maximise envy to get you to spend on virtual items (so-called 'pay to win').

    I play videogames but never multiplayer, so this doesn't affect me directly at all, but I do think it's quite concerning.

    Of course, lots of money has been shovelled into games before. I forget the title, might be EVE Online, but some virtual space battles have destroyed literally hundreds of thousands of pounds' worth of spacecraft, if not millions'.

    Heard about this sort of thing before, it's pretty sleazy even if is not deemed gambling. CSGO lotto was an example.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    rkrkrk said:

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    They include a nice graph which lets you see the answer to those questions.
    I thought they were much more impressive over the weekend when they managed to turn a story about a hospital chief being 'sacked' into a story about a hospital chief resigning in protest of government spending plans. Did they also manage to forget that he was also an advisor to the Labour Party?

    Now that's quite an achievement.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 73,185
    edited December 2017
    ICM

    CON: 42% (+1)
    LAB: 40% (-1)
    LDEM: 8% (+1)
    UKIP: 5% (-)
    GRN: 2% (-1)

    Fieldwork 08 - 10 Dec
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 10,599

    On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.

    Several of the Robo callers now seek to reach under-sampled groups online. Others do have weightings to balance out the shortages in those groups but this is a bit like GE2015 and GE2017. Using past vote as indicator of likelihood to vote now might not be good indicator now.

    An issue with Alabama is that there's is very little polling experience there. It is a rock-solid Red state s there has never been the need.


    Quite - they wouldn't be weighting; they'd be guessing.
    And they acknowledge as much.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825
    TonyE said:

    David Davis is a tit.

    Well played David, well fucking played.

    or it could be Guy Verhofstadt is the tit since he just loves playing politics
    Verhofstadt is incorrect in his assumption that anything should or even can be binding. There is one article 50 agreement - and only one. It has to go as a whole before the European Parliament after being cleared by the commission.

    It is not a multiple stage process in the sense that each part of the agreement is separate, as even if the EP agreed to it now, they have the right themselves to change their minds at the end of the process.
    Why woukd that even be in dispute? As the EU says, nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,232
    edited December 2017

    Mr. Teacher, the Witcher 3 is fantastic (also, they're making a new Witcher TV series, apparently).

    Hmm. It might have been Demon's Souls [the first game], but I recall Zero Punctuation ragging on it quite a bit.

    No apparently about it, the show is about to go into production. It's set to be one of Netflix's largest budget productions. 6 or 7 seasons, big FX budget and top show runners. Now it's all about casting, hopefully they will nail the roles of Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri. Nobody else really matters.
  • A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.
  • Second referendum?
    Then we asked about a second referendum.

    Around a third of voters want a second referendum on leaving the EU, the poll suggests. This is higher than when we last asked this question in January, when around a quarter of voters were in favour, but supporters of a second referendum are still easily outnumbered by those saying Brexit should go ahead come what may.
    Respondents were given three possible Brexit outcomes and asked which they would prefer. The results were:

    UK leaving, regardless of what happens in negotiations: 45% (down 8 from Guardian/ICM in January)

    Parliament to decide whether the UK leaves, based on the outcome of negotiations: 10% (down 2)

    A second referendum to let people decide, based on the outcome of the negotiations: 32% (up 6)

    Don’t know:13% (up 4)

    Leave or remain?
    We also asked how people would vote if there was another EU referendum tomorrow.

    Reman would be ahead of leave by three points if there were another referendum tomorrow, the poll suggests. Some 46% of respondents said they would vote remain and 43% said they would vote leave. At the referendum in June last year leave won by 52% to 48%.
    Turk writes:

    If there was another referendum tomorrow, 46% of our poll’s respondents say they would vote Remain, a slim lead over the 43% who would vote Leave. Overall this marks very little change from the 2016 referendum result, as evidenced by the 91% of 2016 Remainers and 87% of 2016 Leavers not changing their vote choice. Nevertheless, it looks like there may be a slight trend towards Remain benefiting over Leave since the 2016 Referendum. Of those who either didn’t vote or can’t remember their vote in 2016, almost twice as many say they would vote for Remain (28%) rather than Leave (15%) at a future referendum.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 10,599
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    Mr. Teacher, indeed. Micro-transactions are the work of Satan. But whilst publishers can make billions from them, they'll continue.

    I also liked Dragon Age: Inquisition, but the Bioware approach of only having a 'real' ending revealed in DLC is making me wary of the next proper game (though I'm interested in the tactical side-entry in the series, a bit like XCOM, they're reportedly working on).

    On inflation: the article's been updated to include a graph. Looks like a 'spike' as Faisal Islam might call it, or the smallest measurable increase as someone else might say.

    I'll defend bio ware a little on the real ending bit - the ending pre dlc was perfectly appropriate to the conflict and villain of the main game, and the dlc really was an addendum, it would not have flowed if Included originally, as the dlc was a 'years layer set up for next game' situation, not something that really works as a 6 hour post climax with the main villain of Inquisition.

  • No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    I've had a lot of days off this year for cancer treatment and recovering from general anaesthetics and I have spent more hours than I care to think playing through Witcher 3. Great game both visually and from a storytelling perspective.

    All the more impressive considering the first game is a bit bland, poorly designed and the story telling is not great. Huge leaps forward for 2 and 3.
  • rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 4,973
    TonyE said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    They include a nice graph which lets you see the answer to those questions.
    I thought they were much more impressive over the weekend when they managed to turn a story about a hospital chief being 'sacked' into a story about a hospital chief resigning in protest of government spending plans. Did they also manage to forget that he was also an advisor to the Labour Party?

    Now that's quite an achievement.
    The BBC report where I live carried the Conservative interpretation of events as well and included quotes from a member of the public who said they should get on with making these health cuts.

    Tories moaning about the bias media is normally a decent indicator things are going well for Labour ;)
  • kle4 said:

    Mr. Teacher, indeed. Micro-transactions are the work of Satan. But whilst publishers can make billions from them, they'll continue.

    I also liked Dragon Age: Inquisition, but the Bioware approach of only having a 'real' ending revealed in DLC is making me wary of the next proper game (though I'm interested in the tactical side-entry in the series, a bit like XCOM, they're reportedly working on).

    On inflation: the article's been updated to include a graph. Looks like a 'spike' as Faisal Islam might call it, or the smallest measurable increase as someone else might say.

    I'll defend bio ware a little on the real ending bit - the ending pre dlc was perfectly appropriate to the conflict and villain of the main game, and the dlc really was an addendum, it would not have flowed if Included originally, as the dlc was a 'years layer set up for next game' situation, not something that really works as a 6 hour post climax with the main villain of Inquisition.
    Agreed: the game is part of a series so the 'real ending' may be several games off yet, or may never really come.
  • Mr. kle4, yeah, agree with you on CSGO.

    Mr. Max, don't say that to #TeamTriss!
  • eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
  • saddosaddo Posts: 503

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,232

    Mr. kle4, yeah, agree with you on CSGO.

    Mr. Max, don't say that to #TeamTriss!

    Ugh, team Triss. Even CDPR recognise that the true ending of the game was Geralt settling down with Yennefer in Toussaint.
  • TonyETonyE Posts: 938
    rkrkrk said:

    TonyE said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    Impressive how this BBC news article on rising inflation manages not to say what the rate was before (or how large the increase is):
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-42320052

    They include a nice graph which lets you see the answer to those questions.
    I thought they were much more impressive over the weekend when they managed to turn a story about a hospital chief being 'sacked' into a story about a hospital chief resigning in protest of government spending plans. Did they also manage to forget that he was also an advisor to the Labour Party?

    Now that's quite an achievement.
    The BBC report where I live carried the Conservative interpretation of events as well and included quotes from a member of the public who said they should get on with making these health cuts.

    Tories moaning about the bias media is normally a decent indicator things are going well for Labour ;)
    There isn't an 'interpretation' of events - there are facts. He was asked to resign. Anyway, I'm not moaning, I thought it was rather funny because as much as people made of the story the truth was always going to become apparent quite quickly. Sky didn't do 'any' due diligence on the story at all, and for me they have much more egg on their faces.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434
    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    Plus millions of schoolkids paying VAT when they spend their pocket money.

    So meh - suck it up.
  • Mr. Max, still don't have the DLC, but I do prefer Yen.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,014
    saddo said:

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.
    The lesson from phase one is that no change and capitulating on everything can be spun as a success. Negative change is harder to disguise.

    May is hoping she can get away with signing a standstill transition deal with no real prospect of ever moving into a looser relationship for as long as the UK stays together.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 6,346

    On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.

    Several of the Robo callers now seek to reach under-sampled groups online. Others do have weightings to balance out the shortages in those groups but this is a bit like GE2015 and GE2017. Using past vote as indicator of likelihood to vote now might not be good indicator now.

    An issue with Alabama is that there's is very little polling experience there. It is a rock-solid Red state s there has never been the need.





    It is not so many years since it was a Dixie Democrat state - the era of George Wallace etc.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    saddo said:

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.
    The lesson from phase one is that no change and capitulating on everything can be spun as a success. Negative change is harder to disguise.

    May is hoping she can get away with signing a standstill transition deal with no real prospect of ever moving into a looser relationship for as long as the UK stays together.
    Wibble.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 40,825

    saddo said:

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.
    The lesson from phase one is that no change and capitulating on everything can be spun as a success. Negative change is harder to disguise.

    May is hoping she can get away with signing a standstill transition deal with no real prospect of ever moving into a looser relationship for as long as the UK stays together.
    The lesson from phase 1 is that ultras cannot be satisfied. But we knew that.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 6,346

    Scottish Tory Surge Klaxon

    YouGov Scottish subsample

    Tories 37%

    SNP 34%

    Lab 21%

    Lib Dem 4%

    How likely is that I wonder? Crossbreaks from the last Yougov poll a few days ago had - SNP 38 Lab 30 Con 23.
  • Ally_BAlly_B Posts: 180
    edited December 2017
    TGOHF said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.
    Plus millions of schoolkids paying VAT when they spend their pocket money.
    So meh - suck it up.
    I've read so much rubbish from Leavers on here but your response takes the tuck shop biscuit!
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,014
    kle4 said:

    saddo said:

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Whilst some within the Conservative party have heralded the first stage of negotiations as a success for Britain, it’s clear that the British public are less enthusiastic about how the Brexit process is going. Only one in five Brits (21%) think Brexit is going well, with a majority (51%) thinking it is going badly. Conservative voters are the most likely to think the Brexit process is going well (39%), more so than Leavers at the 2016 referendum (28%). Whilst those who voted Remain at the 2016 referendum are more likely to think Brexit is going badly than Leavers, it’s worth noting the substantial minority (41%) of those who voted Leave in 2016 that think the Brexit process is going badly.

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.
    The lesson from phase one is that no change and capitulating on everything can be spun as a success. Negative change is harder to disguise.

    May is hoping she can get away with signing a standstill transition deal with no real prospect of ever moving into a looser relationship for as long as the UK stays together.
    The lesson from phase 1 is that ultras cannot be satisfied. But we knew that.
    It's surprising how many of them are still on board. Is it because she's successfully fooled them, successfully spiked their guns, or neither?
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 6,346

    My rough reading, were it not for the Scottish subsample Labour would be ahead in Great Britain.

    I think you are correct there. The Scotland subsample appears to have skewed it somewhat.
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,367
    MaxPB said:

    Mr. Teacher, the Witcher 3 is fantastic (also, they're making a new Witcher TV series, apparently).

    Hmm. It might have been Demon's Souls [the first game], but I recall Zero Punctuation ragging on it quite a bit.

    No apparently about it, the show is about to go into production. It's set to be one of Netflix's largest budget productions. 6 or 7 seasons, big FX budget and top show runners. Now it's all about casting, hopefully they will nail the roles of Geralt, Yennefer and Ciri. Nobody else really matters.
    Surely there can be only one...



  • On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.

    Several of the Robo callers now seek to reach under-sampled groups online. Others do have weightings to balance out the shortages in those groups but this is a bit like GE2015 and GE2017. Using past vote as indicator of likelihood to vote now might not be good indicator now.

    An issue with Alabama is that there's is very little polling experience there. It is a rock-solid Red state s there has never been the need.
    Generally speaking, Alabama is a rock-solid Red state, though that's only recently become the case across the board. The last close state-wide election was the gubernatorial contest in 2002 which Bob Rile (the Republican) won by just 0.2% - or 3120 out of 1.37m votes cast. The state legislature only finally flipped from the Democrats (who'd controlled it since the end of Reconstruction) in 2010, though both Houses now have heavy GOP majorities.

    But yes, a paucity of modelling data is another reason for caution in trusting the published results.
  • eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,014

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Would you correct the anomaly by removing the vote from Commonwealth citizens?
  • eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 33,167
    edited December 2017
  • TSE

    Interesting questions, TSE, but extremely hypothetical and open to all manner interpretation.

    Take me for example. You couldn't have a more convinced europhile and obviously I voted remain, but were I set these questions now I would definitely have answered the first question by saying that the UK should now leave, whatever. This isn't because I have changed my mind. Brexit was to me a daft idea, and as the days roll by it looks increasingly daft. But we voted for it, we have to stick to it, and live with the consequences. Even if it were possible to reverse out, which is unlikely, it wouldn't do us much good because the damage has now been done and we would only lock in the harm without earning any of the benefits of Brexit, whatever they might be.

    As for the type of Brexit, it matters little to people like me because if a policy is crazy, being a little less crazy doesn't improve it much. In fact I wouldn't want a wishy-washy Brexit because I wouldn't want anybody saying the reason it turned out bad was because it wasn't Brexity enough. Let's have it full on, and let's see the benefits.

    Now if I answered the questionnaire in accordance with such views, I'm sure my votes would have been interpreted as an indication of support for what in reality I think was the daftest political decision the UK has made in my lifetime.

    So interpret with caution!
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,684
    edited December 2017
    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/dec/12/craig-mackinlay-tory-aide-samuel-armstrong-parliament Tory aide raped woman in boss's office in parliament, court hears.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 43,661
    @DPJHodges: Guardian: "Corbyn’s team believe Labour’s general election strategy of appealing to both leavers and remainers worked well and that spelling out a more specific position now would risk alienating key groups". Told you Remainers. He mugged you good and proper.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 19,434

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Would you correct the anomaly by removing the vote from Commonwealth citizens?
    Did EU citizens not get to vote in Euro Parliament elections ?

    Anyone remember them ?
  • kyf_100kyf_100 Posts: 1,367

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    It's rather like giving prisoners the vote, isn't it? If you give enough of them the vote, they will vote to make crime legal.

    Or, to use a more accurate analogy, if the prisoner "lobby" becomes big enough, you may see politicans suggesting more lenient sentences in order to secure (no pun intended) the prisoner vote.

    Similarly if you have enough people whose main loyalty is to Germany, or to the EU, or the US or wherever, eventually you would see politicians forced by electoral mathematics to pander to the interests of those countries to which said voters have their allegiance.

    Prisoners do not have the best interests of the UK at heart, neither do those whose primary allegiance is to another country.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
    Which is a silly anachronism borne out post-colonial guilt.
  • justin124 said:

    On topic, very interesting analysis from Mike. Two questions though:

    1. Why do the companies not weight for their undersampled groups? Even if robocalls hit fewer young / Democrat-inclined voters, presumably they must know this and ought to weight the responses accordingly? Clearly, some don't have their methodology and adjustments right - you simply don't get that kind of spread from sampling - but the question is who?

    2. To what extent is a shy-GOP vote operating here? Robocalls (I presume these are genuinely automated "press 1 for Republican" type methodologies) should be less susceptible to voters adjusting their answers according to what they perceive to be the socially acceptable response.

    I agree with the contention that the race is wide open. I also agree that turnout will be critical: there is a limit to the Democrat vote. Who would I be backing if I were to place money? Jones. It's a lot closer than the 70:30-ish split the odds imply. Indeed, having just checked the odds, I think I might place a bet.

    Several of the Robo callers now seek to reach under-sampled groups online. Others do have weightings to balance out the shortages in those groups but this is a bit like GE2015 and GE2017. Using past vote as indicator of likelihood to vote now might not be good indicator now.

    An issue with Alabama is that there's is very little polling experience there. It is a rock-solid Red state s there has never been the need.





    It is not so many years since it was a Dixie Democrat state - the era of George Wallace etc.
    Like much of the South it flipped when the Democrats decided to oppose racism.

    It's unlikely to be forgiven lightly.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,232

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
    Better to get rid of that, if someone wants to vote in a UK election then they should be a citizen of the UK. I felt like a complete idiot telling my partner of 7 years that she couldn't vote but some random Indian getting off a plane to do a dodgy language course could. Either foreigners can or can't vote, the halfway house that we have is stupid.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516

    kle4 said:

    saddo said:

    A majority of people (51%) think the Brexit process is going badly, the poll suggests. Only 21% think it is going well. What is striking is that ICM generated this result even though polling was carried out between Friday and Sunday, when news coverage was dominated by mostly positive reports about May managing to secure a Brexit deal early on Friday morning.
    Here are the detailed figures. People were asked overall how they thought the Brexit process was going.

    Very well: 4%

    Quite well: 17%

    Net well: 21%

    Quite badly: 29%

    Very badly: 22%

    Net badly: 51%

    Don’t know: 6%

    ICM’s Alex Turk writes:

    Hardly surprising that the public don't think much of it so far. You've got all the TV media channels constantly rubbishing the government until last Friday and the remainers are always going to be more passionate as they lost.

    Just as importantly, if the negotiations are going well, the government are hardly likely to go public as the EU will reset it's stance and make the next phases harder.

    The lesson from phase one is that no change and capitulating on everything can be spun as a success. Negative change is harder to disguise.

    May is hoping she can get away with signing a standstill transition deal with no real prospect of ever moving into a looser relationship for as long as the UK stays together.
    The lesson from phase 1 is that ultras cannot be satisfied. But we knew that.
    It's surprising how many of them are still on board. Is it because she's successfully fooled them, successfully spiked their guns, or neither?
    To my mind, I have been impressed Remainers have been kept on side despite no freedom of movement, the ECJ's influence ending and single market exit. That Remainers are now spinning this as "hahaha Leavers lost" suggests they actually care more about feeling they've symbolically won than anything else. For them the actual relationship doesn't matter so much as being able to feel superior to Leavers. That is useful knowlegde for Theresa May to exploit.
  • Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Guardian: "Corbyn’s team believe Labour’s general election strategy of appealing to both leavers and remainers worked well and that spelling out a more specific position now would risk alienating key groups". Told you Remainers. He mugged you good and proper.

    For those in the cult he can do no wrong.
  • not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 2,685
    kyf_100 said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    It's rather like giving prisoners the vote, isn't it? If you give enough of them the vote, they will vote to make crime legal.

    Or, to use a more accurate analogy, if the prisoner "lobby" becomes big enough, you may see politicans suggesting more lenient sentences in order to secure (no pun intended) the prisoner vote.

    Similarly if you have enough people whose main loyalty is to Germany, or to the EU, or the US or wherever, eventually you would see politicians forced by electoral mathematics to pander to the interests of those countries to which said voters have their allegiance.

    Prisoners do not have the best interests of the UK at heart, neither do those whose primary allegiance is to another country.
    Neither is necessarily true. Laws are ultimately made by the democratically elected representatives.

    My quick reading is the 10/1 on Moore getting 40%-45% looks value

    Moore will win easily
  • TGOHF said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Would you correct the anomaly by removing the vote from Commonwealth citizens?
    Did EU citizens not get to vote in Euro Parliament elections ?

    Anyone remember them ?
    Yes, which is eminently reasonable as they were Euro citizens.

    They also got to vote in local elections, which again made sense as they were locals.

    They only didn't get to vote in national elections, which again makes sense as they're not nationals.
  • ElliotElliot Posts: 1,516
    MaxPB said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
    Better to get rid of that, if someone wants to vote in a UK election then they should be a citizen of the UK. I felt like a complete idiot telling my partner of 7 years that she couldn't vote but some random Indian getting off a plane to do a dodgy language course could. Either foreigners can or can't vote, the halfway house that we have is stupid.
    I have heard it justified as being payback for what Britain inflicted on India, Jamaica etc. Meanwhile my father came from Iran, a country whose democracy was literally abolished by the UK and didn't get the vote until citizenship.
  • Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Guardian: "Corbyn’s team believe Labour’s general election strategy of appealing to both leavers and remainers worked well and that spelling out a more specific position now would risk alienating key groups". Told you Remainers. He mugged you good and proper.

    For those in the cult he can do no wrong.
    Yep. It is incomprehensible that the young, who were so Remainy, have fallen for this twinkly eyed grandfather nonsense. He's out and out anti-EU and always has been.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 26,014
    Elliot said:

    To my mind, I have been impressed Remainers have been kept on side despite no freedom of movement, the ECJ's influence ending and single market exit. That Remainers are now spinning this as "hahaha Leavers lost" suggests they actually care more about feeling they've symbolically won than anything else. For them the actual relationship doesn't matter so much as being able to feel superior to Leavers. That is useful knowlegde for Theresa May to exploit.

    May is still saying contradictory things to appease different groups, but the logic of what she has agreed with the EU is that the UK will never leave the single market and customs union in any meaningful way. It's simply not possible to do so and meet the commitments on Northern Ireland.

    Anyone whose goal is a different long term relationship should spend their time trying to convince unionists why they should support a united Ireland.
  • MaxPB said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
    Better to get rid of that, if someone wants to vote in a UK election then they should be a citizen of the UK. I felt like a complete idiot telling my partner of 7 years that she couldn't vote but some random Indian getting off a plane to do a dodgy language course could. Either foreigners can or can't vote, the halfway house that we have is stupid.
    It may have something to do with these 'foreigners' coming from countries that supplied soldiers and other support for us in various wars. The profits we made in 'commonwealth' countries through colonialism would be another factor.

    But yes I think the situation needs to be....er....rationalised. Let's restrict the vote to those born within the sound of Bow Bells. That would simplify matters, and enable the voice of us true indigenous people to be heard.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 14,118

    Elliot said:

    To my mind, I have been impressed Remainers have been kept on side despite no freedom of movement, the ECJ's influence ending and single market exit. That Remainers are now spinning this as "hahaha Leavers lost" suggests they actually care more about feeling they've symbolically won than anything else. For them the actual relationship doesn't matter so much as being able to feel superior to Leavers. That is useful knowlegde for Theresa May to exploit.

    Snip
    Anyone whose goal is a different long term relationship should spend their time trying to convince unionists why they should support a united Ireland.
    Best do that in writing or from some distance away.
  • BromBrom Posts: 1,339

    Scott_P said:

    @DPJHodges: Guardian: "Corbyn’s team believe Labour’s general election strategy of appealing to both leavers and remainers worked well and that spelling out a more specific position now would risk alienating key groups". Told you Remainers. He mugged you good and proper.

    For those in the cult he can do no wrong.
    Yep. It is incomprehensible that the young, who were so Remainy, have fallen for this twinkly eyed grandfather nonsense. He's out and out anti-EU and always has been.
    These kids are light and fluffy social justice on twitter safe space love anything involving the word Europe left. Corbyn is anti nuclear anti apartheid support the miners strikes done the hard protest yards left. They have virtually nothing in common and I bet he can't believe his luck that they're so easy to get on board.
  • MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 16,232

    MaxPB said:

    eristdoof said:


    No taxation without representation.

    Excuse me! there is roughly a million residents of the UK who pay tax to the UK government but do not have citizenship, and so are not allowed to vote.

    I know, it is shameful.
    No it's not. It is the same in almost every other country in Europe and around the rest of the world.

    If you want to vote become a UK citizen. If you are not willing to show that sort of commitment then why should you get to decide in the future of the country.
    Because we already give away the vote to Commonwealth and Irish citizens.
    Better to get rid of that, if someone wants to vote in a UK election then they should be a citizen of the UK. I felt like a complete idiot telling my partner of 7 years that she couldn't vote but some random Indian getting off a plane to do a dodgy language course could. Either foreigners can or can't vote, the halfway house that we have is stupid.
    It may have something to do with these 'foreigners' coming from countries that supplied soldiers and other support for us in various wars. The profits we made in 'commonwealth' countries through colonialism would be another factor.

    But yes I think the situation needs to be....er....rationalised. Let's restrict the vote to those born within the sound of Bow Bells. That would simplify matters, and enable the voice of us true indigenous people to be heard.
    I'm not sure that the Indians and other commonwealth citizens arriving in t UK today had anything to do with that.
This discussion has been closed.