Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Case Not Proven: The suggestion that there’s been a LAB>CON sh

SystemSystem Posts: 5,841
edited February 13 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Case Not Proven: The suggestion that there’s been a LAB>CON shift amongst women

With the apparent sharpish shifts that we’ve seen in recent days in the polls to the Conservatives there has, inevitably, been a lot of examination of the detailed data.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601
    Polls......need more polls......
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,439
    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,439
    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Polls......need more polls......

    Because polling has a stellar track record of correctly predicting outcomes of events over the past few years. Or not.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,472
    edited February 13

    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
    Disagree. Polls at this stage are not meant to be predictions of the election but an ongoing barometer of the state of public opinion. Clearly public opinion can change as we saw last May June
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,472
    Sandpit said:

    Polls......need more polls......

    Because polling has a stellar track record of correctly predicting outcomes of events over the past few years. Or not.
    The 55k sample YouGov model was pretty goodg indeed if you weight the final polls from the last election by the sample size then the outcome was not that far off
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,402
    Nigelb said:

    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.

    We know of allegations made against Branding Cox and STC a few years ago already. OXFAM clearly the tip of the iceberg here. However plenty of apologists who want to look the other way. You have to wonder why.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    "South Africa's ruling ANC party will formally request that President Jacob Zuma step down after he refused to resign, media reports say.

    The reported decision to "recall" Mr Zuma followed marathon talks by senior party officials that continued into the early hours of Tuesday."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-43039928
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited February 13

    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
    I'm not so sure.

    TM's a dead woman walking. It can't go on like this, yet it does. Until it doesn't.

    When she's finally ousted, the new PM - who will have won the leadership by offering a radically different prospectus - will need a mandate.

    IMO, it's 1/2 they'll be forced into an election within the year.

    ~Evens the next GE before 2020.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 43,640
    Mumsnet is probably the election deciding demographic I suspect
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    Pulpstar said:

    Mumsnet is probably the election deciding demographic I suspect

    Since every vote is worth the same I've never really understood the idea that some types of voters are more likely to swing the result of an election, except for voters in marginal seats.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 10,331

    Polls......need more polls......

    Actually there is one more recent than the thread header polls, BMG, which seems to have been overlooked - showed Con and Lab back on level pegging, with TM 2 points ahead of JC on best PM. I'm not convinced that anything special is happening at the moment.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,820
    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mumsnet is probably the election deciding demographic I suspect

    Since every vote is worth the same I've never really understood the idea that some types of voters are more likely to swing the result of an election, except for voters in marginal seats.
    One factor might be propensity to change. Floating voters are by definition more worth courting than those whose intention is already fixed.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,402

    Polls......need more polls......

    Actually there is one more recent than the thread header polls, BMG, which seems to have been overlooked - showed Con and Lab back on level pegging, with TM 2 points ahead of JC on best PM. I'm not convinced that anything special is happening at the moment.
    Are you comparing it to a previous BMG poll or other polls when you say 'back to level pegging'?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,004
    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.

    We know of allegations made against Branding Cox and STC a few years ago already. OXFAM clearly the tip of the iceberg here. However plenty of apologists who want to look the other way. You have to wonder why.
    You have to wonder why it is all over pb the past few days with no apparent political connection. Will there be a backlash against foreign aid, or calls for more direct government action? Will the scandal influence women voters in particular (which is at least on topic for this thread)? Does this diminish the leadership chances of ministers with colourful pasts, or even men in general? Should we back Amber Rudd? What are the political and betting angles?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Sandpit said:

    Polls......need more polls......

    Because polling has a stellar track record of correctly predicting outcomes of events over the past few years. Or not.
    The 55k sample YouGov model was pretty good indeed if you weight the final polls from the last election by the sample size then the outcome was not that far off
    But most of the polls we see day-to-day are of 1,000 or 2,000 sample, then often get subsampled to death. They’re also mostly asking a hypothetical question about an election tomorrow, which (hopefully!) isn’t going to happen. There’s probably only the budget for a 55k sample size very close to an actual election.
  • ThomasNasheThomasNashe Posts: 1,934
    edited February 13
    Pong said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
    I'm not so sure.

    TM's a dead woman walking. It can't go on like this, yet it does. Until it doesn't.

    When she's finally ousted, the new PM - who will have won the leadership by offering a radically different prospectus - will need a mandate.

    IMO, it's 1/2 they'll be forced into an election within the year.

    ~Evens the next GE before 2020.
    Yes, this Government is actually a late work by Samuel Beckett: It can't go on, it'll go on.
  • Pong said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
    I'm not so sure.

    TM's a dead woman walking. It can't go on like this, yet it does. Until it doesn't.

    When she's finally ousted, the new PM - who will have won the leadership by offering a radically different prospectus - will need a mandate.

    IMO, it's 1/2 they'll be forced into an election within the year.

    ~Evens the next GE before 2020.
    Why will the new PM need a mandate? The opposition usually trot this line out and demand an election when there is a change of PM. Governments usually ignore them. Most PMs taking over in mid-term have not called an early election.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,820
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Polls......need more polls......

    Because polling has a stellar track record of correctly predicting outcomes of events over the past few years. Or not.
    The 55k sample YouGov model was pretty good indeed if you weight the final polls from the last election by the sample size then the outcome was not that far off
    But most of the polls we see day-to-day are of 1,000 or 2,000 sample, then often get subsampled to death. They’re also mostly asking a hypothetical question about an election tomorrow, which (hopefully!) isn’t going to happen. There’s probably only the budget for a 55k sample size very close to an actual election.
    After about 1,300 the payback in terms of accuracy for the cost of polling larger samples is pretty small. Funding a mega-poll only makes sense if the intention is to examine subsamples, as for YouGov's seat model.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    AndyJS said:

    "South Africa's ruling ANC party will formally request that President Jacob Zuma step down after he refused to resign, media reports say.

    The reported decision to "recall" Mr Zuma followed marathon talks by senior party officials that continued into the early hours of Tuesday."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-43039928

    If hes so bad they want him out now doesn't it beg the question why they permitted him to run the place for years?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,004
    Pong said:

    Nigelb said:

    On topic, polling is inherently subject to a significant margin of error - analysing subgroups of the electorate in particular polls necessarily more so. You need to see a very strong signal before placing much credence in it.

    Yep. And we are years from the next election. And those years look set to be eventful. Perhaps time to look at polling in other countries for a while.
    I'm not so sure.

    TM's a dead woman walking. It can't go on like this, yet it does. Until it doesn't.

    When she's finally ousted, the new PM - who will have won the leadership by offering a radically different prospectus - will need a mandate.

    IMO, it's 1/2 they'll be forced into an election within the year.

    ~Evens the next GE before 2020.
    Except there is no reason for the new leader to have offered a "radically different prospectus" -- more dynamism or charisma to appeal to voters, perhaps, or a solid record, but nothing more than bromides on the great issues of the day. The 2017 Conservative manifesto used the phrase "strong and stable" fifteen times. Will the new leader promise weakness and instability? I shan't be taking evens about an election in the next two years.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195
    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    "South Africa's ruling ANC party will formally request that President Jacob Zuma step down after he refused to resign, media reports say.

    The reported decision to "recall" Mr Zuma followed marathon talks by senior party officials that continued into the early hours of Tuesday."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-43039928

    If hes so bad they want him out now doesn't it beg the question why they permitted him to run the place for years?
    True of many leaders, including our own PM, when their time is up.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 5,439
    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.

    We know of allegations made against Branding Cox and STC a few years ago already. OXFAM clearly the tip of the iceberg here. However plenty of apologists who want to look the other way. You have to wonder why.
    I think it's fairly clear. There are plenty (the Daily Mail, for instance), who would conflate questioning how aid is delivered with whether it should be delivered at all. In response others (e.g. Nick P in the previous thread) defensively, and I think mistakenly, insist that it's just a few bad apples rather than a systemic problem.

    Those who support aid (as I do) ought to be every bit as concerned with how it is delivered, and its effectiveness, as those who do not.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    Foxy said:

    kle4 said:

    AndyJS said:

    "South Africa's ruling ANC party will formally request that President Jacob Zuma step down after he refused to resign, media reports say.

    The reported decision to "recall" Mr Zuma followed marathon talks by senior party officials that continued into the early hours of Tuesday."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-43039928

    If hes so bad they want him out now doesn't it beg the question why they permitted him to run the place for years?
    True of many leaders, including our own PM, when their time is up.
    Yes it is, and though it is part of the game politicians cannot be allowed to get away with it unchallenged - they cannot say someone is terrible if they personally would have attacked anyone making the same point previously, not without being a massive hypocrit.
  • EssexitEssexit Posts: 1,652
    IanB2 said:

    AndyJS said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Mumsnet is probably the election deciding demographic I suspect

    Since every vote is worth the same I've never really understood the idea that some types of voters are more likely to swing the result of an election, except for voters in marginal seats.
    One factor might be propensity to change. Floating voters are by definition more worth courting than those whose intention is already fixed.
    Also, certain demographics might be over-represented in marginal seats.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Good morning, everyone.

    These women have clearly found the charms of Penny Mordaunt, future Prime Minister, impossible to resist.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    edited February 13
    Nigelb said:

    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.

    We know of allegations made against Branding Cox and STC a few years ago already. OXFAM clearly the tip of the iceberg here. However plenty of apologists who want to look the other way. You have to wonder why.
    I think it's fairly clear. There are plenty (the Daily Mail, for instance), who would conflate questioning how aid is delivered with whether it should be delivered at all. In response others (e.g. Nick P in the previous thread) defensively, and I think mistakenly, insist that it's just a few bad apples rather than a systemic problem.

    Those who support aid (as I do) ought to be every bit as concerned with how it is delivered, and its effectiveness, as those who do not.
    Seems reasonable. Doing good does not excuse doing bad, and nothing inherently wrong with ensuring that it is the case only the former is occurring. As you say there are reasons for defensiveness, but the principle of systemic review is sound, nay, necessary from time to time.
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,501
    Scott_P said:
    He's demonstrating the grip he uses when he and Hannan are edging each other.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    IanB2 said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    Polls......need more polls......

    Because polling has a stellar track record of correctly predicting outcomes of events over the past few years. Or not.
    The 55k sample YouGov model was pretty good indeed if you weight the final polls from the last election by the sample size then the outcome was not that far off
    But most of the polls we see day-to-day are of 1,000 or 2,000 sample, then often get subsampled to death. They’re also mostly asking a hypothetical question about an election tomorrow, which (hopefully!) isn’t going to happen. There’s probably only the budget for a 55k sample size very close to an actual election.
    After about 1,300 the payback in terms of accuracy for the cost of polling larger samples is pretty small. Funding a mega-poll only makes sense if the intention is to examine subsamples, as for YouGov's seat model.
    Don’t disagree about sample sizes, but when, as now, opinion is close between two political parties, the vast majority of the polls are within the margin of error. A large sample size poll might actuallly be quite useful to us right now, although I’m not sure why anyone would want to pay for one at the moment.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....
  • MetatronMetatron Posts: 124
    If more females are switching to Tory it is likely to do with voter identification.
    A lot of ageing females probably identify with Teresa` s resilience and if the Tories replace her that might have a negative impact on them
    I have a little doubt that history will judge May as the worse PM ever however it is risky for Tories to replace her when they are over 40% in the polls
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 30,349
    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    I can believe it. Any number of people will believe party x is bad for women, or minorities or whoever, even if top figures come from within such groups. Is it in fact the case now? No idea though.
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195
    Nigelb said:

    felix said:

    Nigelb said:

    A Guardian report suggests that the abuse problems in the aid sector are not confined to Oxfam:
    https://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2018/feb/12/metoo-strikes-aid-sector-as-sexual-exploitation-allegations-proliferate

    This does not seem entirely surprising to me. As we discussed in the previous thread, the relationship between aid worker and recipient is one of great power imbalance and without proper systems of safeguarding, abuses are highly likely to occur.
    In a manner similar to the abuse scandals in schools last century, it seems that the management of many of these organisation preferred not to know.

    We know of allegations made against Branding Cox and STC a few years ago already. OXFAM clearly the tip of the iceberg here. However plenty of apologists who want to look the other way. You have to wonder why.
    I think it's fairly clear. There are plenty (the Daily Mail, for instance), who would conflate questioning how aid is delivered with whether it should be delivered at all. In response others (e.g. Nick P in the previous thread) defensively, and I think mistakenly, insist that it's just a few bad apples rather than a systemic problem.

    Those who support aid (as I do) ought to be every bit as concerned with how it is delivered, and its effectiveness, as those who do not.
    I agree. I have a little experience in the sector (in a medical and church context) and have ambivalent feelings about aspects of the sector, but want to see reform not abolition. I note that this is the view of the former head of safeguarding at Oxfam in the Channel 4 new last night. She is now a Labour councillor, so not a natural partner of the Priti Patel's of this world.

    The 2001 report on sexual exploitation of West African refugees linked in the Guardian article lists extensive abuse by aid workers, peacekeepers and civilians such as miners, but were locally engaged staff.

    Aid organisations get criticised for spending too much on admin, yet sound admin is the core of good internal governance. It is challenging to have good practice in this country. How much harder is it to have it in a country where the authorities are venal, corrupt and abusive themselves? The idea that the Haitian police would have taken effective action in 2011 is delusional.

    The Aid industry has long debated these issues and there is an extensive literature. In particular I would recommend as an eye opener "Lords of Poverty" by Graham Hancock, and "White Mans burden" by Easterly.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    kle4 said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    I can believe it. Any number of people will believe party x is bad for women, or minorities or whoever, even if top figures come from within such groups. Is it in fact the case now? No idea though.
    I'm not saying it is impossible in any circumstances. A party may well have particular policies that attract a lot of one sex and not another, a significant increase in CB for example. But I am really struggling to see what could drive such a differential right now.

    Thinking hard the Tories got some bad publicity about the cuts in funding to women's refuges 3-4 weeks ago. I would be astonished if that was still having a significant impact. Anything else?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 17,601
    Foxy said:

    The idea that the Haitian police would have taken effective action in 2011 is delusional.

    A view shared by certain aid workers, it seems.

  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 2,195
    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,493
    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Women are more directly affected by austerity. So yes I think it’s possible.

    I think Mike, unusually, underestimates Mumsnet. The question of gender identity has become extremely highly charged among those who care about it and Labour have found themselves on the wrong side of Mumsnet opinion on the subject. It occupies the “asylum seeker in £1.2 million house” slot of public debate: something that is highly marginal in reality but that acts as an emblem of what many see as something very wrong with the world.

    Elsewhere on Mumsnet right now there’s a vigorous debate about whether a man who persists in showering naked in the men’s communal area of the changing rooms at a local swimming pool should be stopped from doing so when children are present. The consensus seems to be that he’s a deviant, despite that fact that so far as I can tell he is using the facilities exactly as they are designed. Self-identification as a woman needs to be understood against that background.

    I don’t think we’re yet seeing an anti-trans swing to the Tories. It is, however, possible that Labour are alienating some potential supporters on this subject.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
    At the last election the gap was 6% with women even between Tories and Labour and men favouring the Tories by 6%: https://yougov.co.uk/news/2017/06/13/how-britain-voted-2017-general-election/

    I am very doubtful there has been such a significant change.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 19,493
    On Oxfam: positions of power will attract those who see the possibility of abusing that power. Priests, football coaches, teachers and doctors have all been found to include such people among their number. Aid workers have power too.

    Oxfam will inevitably attract such people then. The question therefore is not whether Oxfam has employed such abusers but what it has done to stop them and what actions it has taken after the fact. So far the evidence seems to suggest that Oxfam have taken the matter seriously (as compared with other bodies in a similar position) but not seriously enough and at times have been more concerned about their short term reputation than the long term harm.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    edited February 13
    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    edited February 13
    The male vote is now generally more pro Tory but it may be some women like the fact there is a woman PM and are concerned about some of the misogyny around some of Corbyn and McDonnell's supporters, including the recent removal by Momentum of the moderate female leader of Haringey council
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
    Nah, don't worry. Women can always earn more being felt up by rich men - and any woman serving at events is obviously an escort, and is therefore fair game to be groped or worse.

    At least, according to some on here ...
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 4,472
    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    edited February 13
    Metatron said:

    If more females are switching to Tory it is likely to do with voter identification.
    A lot of ageing females probably identify with Teresa` s resilience and if the Tories replace her that might have a negative impact on them
    I have a little doubt that history will judge May as the worse PM ever however it is risky for Tories to replace her when they are over 40% in the polls

    May is certainly better than Eden, Heath, Callaghan and Brown and that is just post-war PMs.

    The economy is still doing OK, she is gradually making progress in negotiations with the EU on Brexit while respecting the Leave vote and she has not involved the UK in any disastrous wars
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    HYUFD said:

    The male vote is now generally more pro Tory but it may be some women like the fact there is a woman PM and are concerned about some of the misogyny around some of Corbyn and McDonnell's supporters, including the recent removal by Momentum of the moderate female leader of Haringey council

    I think there's a much bigger difference in voting intention between younger and older women compared to younger and older men. Young women tend to be very anti-Tory but older women are slightly more Tory than older men.

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2017-election
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
    Not really. I am doubtful that the Tories have increased their lead amongst men as well. I am perplexed that the gender split is reaching such extreme levels but all of these polls show the Tories doing better than I would have expected standing the current media frenzy.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Looking very doubtful for England down under. Going to need something truly remarkable from Buttler to make this.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    If anybody backed Mr. Herdson's tip on Putin at 5.25 for a 70-80% poll share in next month's election, you can back 80-90% at 6.5 and 90%+ at 31 (both with boost) on Ladbrokes, and lay 70%+ (covering those three bands) at 1.25 on Betfair Exchange, to be all green whatever happens.

    Of course, if laying 70-80% directly were possible that'd be easier, but Betfair doesn't have that specific band and the Ladbrokes Exchange doesn't have the market at all (that I can see).
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    Around 90,000 voters are entitled to cast a ballot on Thursday in 14 local government by-elections, more than in most parliamentary by-elections.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    edited February 13
    AndyJS said:

    HYUFD said:

    The male vote is now generally more pro Tory but it may be some women like the fact there is a woman PM and are concerned about some of the misogyny around some of Corbyn and McDonnell's supporters, including the recent removal by Momentum of the moderate female leader of Haringey council

    I think there's a much bigger difference in voting intention between younger and older women compared to younger and older men. Young women tend to be very anti-Tory but older women are slightly more Tory than older men.

    https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2017-election
    A reference to in all probability the fact that older women are much more likely to be married than younger women or retired while more younger women will be likely to work in the public sector than younger men who will have a higher percentage of private sector workers
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 21,853
    O/T

    "Unilever has threatened to withdraw ads from platforms like Google and Facebook if they do not do enough to police extremist and illegal content.

    Unilever said consumer trust in social media is now at a new low.
    "We cannot have an environment where our consumers don't trust what they see online," said Unilever's chief marketing officer Keith Weed."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43032241
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
    Not really. I am doubtful that the Tories have increased their lead amongst men as well. I am perplexed that the gender split is reaching such extreme levels but all of these polls show the Tories doing better than I would have expected standing the current media frenzy.
    The public don't care about Westminster stories. But, I expected the NHS to hurt the Conservatives.

  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Malan gone, and with it England’s chances.
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,640
    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    FWIW there is a similar effect with Trump and also with independence for Scotland at the time of that referendum.

    In this case I am wondering whether differential turnout may apply. Younger women say they are more likely to vote than younger men.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
    Not really. I am doubtful that the Tories have increased their lead amongst men as well. I am perplexed that the gender split is reaching such extreme levels but all of these polls show the Tories doing better than I would have expected standing the current media frenzy.
    The public don't care about Westminster stories. But, I expected the NHS to hurt the Conservatives.

    I think the media almost overdid the NHS winter crisis storyline. It got to the point most were thinking that this is not short sighted incompetence but indicative of a much more fundamental problem: how do we cope with an ageing population and ever increasing demand at a time of limited resources? Once the story got to that the pressure on the government lifted. I am not sure if Hunt was good or lucky. Maybe both.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297
    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    FWIW there is a similar effect with Trump and also with independence for Scotland at the time of that referendum.

    In this case I am wondering whether differential turnout may apply. Younger women say they are more likely to vote than younger men.
    Girls are more likely to go to university so it seems reasonable to assume that they're more likely to be engaged in politics and perhaps more likely to turnout.
  • Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
    Not really. I am doubtful that the Tories have increased their lead amongst men as well. I am perplexed that the gender split is reaching such extreme levels but all of these polls show the Tories doing better than I would have expected standing the current media frenzy.
    The public don't care about Westminster stories. But, I expected the NHS to hurt the Conservatives.

    It is surely now a given that the NHS will struggle in winter. Unless one needs to use the service directly during the peak period the news stories are merely white noise.
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
    Nah, don't worry. Women can always earn more being felt up by rich men - and any woman serving at events is obviously an escort, and is therefore fair game to be groped or worse.

    At least, according to some on here ...
    I would never permit my wife or servants to take any job which involved wearing a shorter than mid calf length skirt.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Sandpit said:

    Malan gone, and with it England’s chances.

    Scoreboard pressure killing England. NZ just got too many runs. Quite a brave effort but just too many.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    AndyJS said:

    O/T

    "Unilever has threatened to withdraw ads from platforms like Google and Facebook if they do not do enough to police extremist and illegal content.

    Unilever said consumer trust in social media is now at a new low.
    "We cannot have an environment where our consumers don't trust what they see online," said Unilever's chief marketing officer Keith Weed."

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43032241

    Facebook and Youtube both really struggling with their customers at the moment, funnily enough massive companies like Unilever don't want their adverts around dodgy content.

    (Remember that the advertisers are their customers, those who use their services are the product).
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    DavidL said:

    Sandpit said:

    Malan gone, and with it England’s chances.

    Scoreboard pressure killing England. NZ just got too many runs. Quite a brave effort but just too many.
    Yup, good effort from the Kiwis with the bat to score 196, looks like we're going to be about 15 short.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 8,004
    DavidL said:

    Sean_F said:

    DavidL said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    YouGov's gender split in this latest survey totally different from most other polls since GE17.

    I think there's an element here of Tory supporters wanting to believe that it is the case.
    Not really. I am doubtful that the Tories have increased their lead amongst men as well. I am perplexed that the gender split is reaching such extreme levels but all of these polls show the Tories doing better than I would have expected standing the current media frenzy.
    The public don't care about Westminster stories. But, I expected the NHS to hurt the Conservatives.

    I think the media almost overdid the NHS winter crisis storyline. It got to the point most were thinking that this is not short sighted incompetence but indicative of a much more fundamental problem: how do we cope with an ageing population and ever increasing demand at a time of limited resources? Once the story got to that the pressure on the government lifted. I am not sure if Hunt was good or lucky. Maybe both.
    Most voters will know a patient, so I am sceptical the headlines make much difference either way. The underlying issues are already obvious.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    AndyJS said:
    By forming a coalition government with the anti immigration Northern League?
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    It would be an interesting study to look at the changing demographics of the main party supporters over time. I'm inclined to agree with your point that rural v urban is now probably a bigger indicator than social class, education or job category. Similar issues have I think been studied in the USA.
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 23,943
    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Without making sweeping generalisations, that kind of makes sense.

    In the 1970s, most married women were still housewives. They would have likely been responsible for spending the household budget, and worried about inflation and the overbearing effect of trade unions on their husbands. Meanwhile, for many working-class
    men, trade unionism and blue-collar heavy industry was still a major part of their identity.

    Fast-forward to today, and working women are more concerned with
    workplace fairness/ equality, affordable childcare, education and the NHS,
    so are probably more likely to find Corbyn's messages attractive with his past utterances on defence/terrorism either irrelevant or a historical curiosity. Working class men will be more likely to think it says a lot about him.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 19,520
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
    Nah, don't worry. Women can always earn more being felt up by rich men - and any woman serving at events is obviously an escort, and is therefore fair game to be groped or worse.

    At least, according to some on here ...
    I would never permit my wife or servants to take any job which involved wearing a shorter than mid calf length skirt.
    Don't be silly.
  • HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 40,425
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    It would be an interesting study to look at the changing demographics of the main party supporters over time. I'm inclined to agree with your point that rural v urban is now probably a bigger indicator than social class, education or job category. Similar issues have I think been studied in the USA.
    Same in France and indeed most of the western world, big cities and university towns vote for left liberal parties, rural areas vote for conservative parties and suburbs and small and medium sized towns are the swing areas
  • Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 5,428

    Ishmael_Z said:

    Foxy said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    Yes. A few female faces at the top can only do so much*.

    Women are in lower paid work, and more likely to have frequent use of public services such as schools, NHS and adult social care for themselves and their families. These frame their world view more than Brexit trivia.

    *diversity at the top can be very superficial. Female and BME for example, but still rich and privately educated in the main. This is true of all parties and organisations.
    Nah, don't worry. Women can always earn more being felt up by rich men - and any woman serving at events is obviously an escort, and is therefore fair game to be groped or worse.

    At least, according to some on here ...
    I would never permit my wife or servants to take any job which involved wearing a shorter than mid calf length skirt.
    Don't be silly.
    That bloody Pankhurst woman.
  • JonathanJonathan Posts: 8,075

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Without making sweeping generalisations, that kind of makes sense.

    In the 1970s, most married women were still housewives. They would have likely been responsible for spending the household budget, and worried about inflation and the overbearing effect of trade unions on their husbands. Meanwhile, for many working-class
    men, trade unionism and blue-collar heavy industry was still a major part of their identity.

    Fast-forward to today, and working women are more concerned with
    workplace fairness/ equality, affordable childcare, education and the NHS,
    so are probably more likely to find Corbyn's messages attractive with his past utterances on defence/terrorism either irrelevant or a historical curiosity. Working class men will be more likely to think it says a lot about him.
    I love this post. Starts with "without making sweeping generalisations" and then proceeds immediately to make quite big sweeping generalisations.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,115
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    It would be an interesting study to look at the changing demographics of the main party supporters over time. I'm inclined to agree with your point that rural v urban is now probably a bigger indicator than social class, education or job category. Similar issues have I think been studied in the USA.
    You'd see a huge fall in Conservative support among public sector professionals, since the mid-sixties (so seats like Leeds NE, Birmingham Edgbaston, Hornsey & Wood Green switch from safe Conservative to safe Labour) and a steady rise in support among working class voters in the private sector (so new town constituencies shift from Labour to Conservative).
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 9,685
    Inflation didn't move, I see.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Good news for City Airport - looks like the Navy have removed the 500kg WWII bomb they found in the dock over the weekend.
  • Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    It would be an interesting study to look at the changing demographics of the main party supporters over time. I'm inclined to agree with your point that rural v urban is now probably a bigger indicator than social class, education or job category. Similar issues have I think been studied in the USA.
    You'd see a huge fall in Conservative support among public sector professionals, since the mid-sixties (so seats like Leeds NE, Birmingham Edgbaston, Hornsey & Wood Green switch from safe Conservative to safe Labour) and a steady rise in support among working class voters in the private sector (so new town constituencies shift from Labour to Conservative).
    I think its most interesting where opposite trends have happened in adjacent constituencies - Sheffield Hallam and Derbyshire NE for example or Gedling and Sherwood.
  • Mortimer said:

    Inflation didn't move, I see.

    HPI has increased to 5.2%.

    But is that a good thing despite Brexit or a bad thing because of Brexit ?
  • RecidivistRecidivist Posts: 1,840
    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    I think it is just that we are all influenced by people we meet. Middle class people who live in very Labour areas tend to vote Labour more than elsewhere, and working class people in the south east tend to be more Conservative than the demographic norm. One of those things.
  • Mortimer said:

    Inflation didn't move, I see.

    HPI has increased to 5.2%.

    But is that a good thing despite Brexit or a bad thing because of Brexit ?
    Fall in real terms in London so a bit of a rebalance (though I stress "bit")
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Recidivist, indeed. Reminds me of social pressure and the effect of others even when they aren't there (not buying a certain shirt because you know your wife won't like it, for example).

    Although that does raise an interesting echo chamber question. Does rising social media use entrench political perspectives (compared to the recent past) or lead to higher 'shy' voting, whereby action and stated intentions differ?
  • stevefstevef Posts: 1,044
    As the article says, case unproven.

    But whatever, the transgender issue is totally irrelevant to how women vote.

    Women are more likely to be influenced by economic issues.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297

    Mortimer said:

    Inflation didn't move, I see.

    HPI has increased to 5.2%.

    But is that a good thing despite Brexit or a bad thing because of Brexit ?
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,640
    tlg86 said:

    FF43 said:

    DavidL said:

    Does anyone seriously believe that there is a 12-13 point difference in the voting intention of men and women at the moment? And in favour of Labour when we have a female PM and an unprecedented number of women holding Cabinet posts on the news regularly? The differentials supposedly found in both Opinium and ICM are a reason to be sceptical about their results in my opinion.

    Yougov's finding with a marginal difference is much more credible. Of course that is not to say that their finding of a Tory lead was right either....

    FWIW there is a similar effect with Trump and also with independence for Scotland at the time of that referendum.

    In this case I am wondering whether differential turnout may apply. Younger women say they are more likely to vote than younger men.
    Girls are more likely to go to university so it seems reasonable to assume that they're more likely to be engaged in politics and perhaps more likely to turnout.
    In am thinking also of women with school age children. That they may be more likely to vote than their partners.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    F1: Azerbaijan rumoured to not want to continue with F1.

    Now we just need Monaco to do likewise...
  • FF43FF43 Posts: 6,640
    AndyJS said:
    Berlusconi campaigning against populism. How ironic. But there is a lesson here that other people's populism can be more popular than yours to the people you are targeting. Something Boris Johnson might suffer from vis a vis Jacob Rees Mogg.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657

    F1: Azerbaijan rumoured to not want to continue with F1.

    Now we just need Monaco to do likewise...

    Azerbaijan was a great race last year, loads of overtaking. As was Singapore, in the rain.

    Monaco is way too small for the modern F1 cars, but there's no chance of that race ever changing. Qualifying is always great to watch there though, as the grid position is so important. Still upset with Jenson Button for spoiling my No SC bet last year though :(
  • Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 1,501
    Sandpit said:

    Good news for City Airport - looks like the Navy have removed the 500kg WWII bomb they found in the dock over the weekend.

    It takes a special sort to be an MCD. There's about twenty different ways to kill yourself with a moment's inattention every day and that's just the training. They also have, I believe, the most stringent fitness test in the UK armed forces and earn less than a McDonalds cashier. I once saw one swim across an open cesspit in Basra to win a 20 quid bet.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 42,410
    Mr. Sandpit, I remember that. Stupid move by Button.

    I very nearly had a 200/1 winner in Azerbaijan, having backed Perez each way for the win. Another needless collision cost me that.

    The race was entertaining, but farcical too.

    Incidentally, Ladbrokes has a market on fastest car in the first test. My current inclination is to avoid it at all costs.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 9,820
    edited February 13
    Sandpit said:

    Sean_F said:

    Sandpit said:

    Sandpit said:

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Yes that was definitely true. Being left wing was very blokey back then.
    Union membership was certainly a lot higher then, than it is now. Especially so in the private sector.
    That provokes an interesting question. With the rise of Corbynism, is union membership going to appreciably increase, or will it continue its long-term decline?

    (I guess not with him only as leader; as PM he might introduce some more union-friendly policies).
    I think most of the Corbyn fan club are middle class students and young professionals, rather than the manual workers who traditionally formed their base.

    I’m sure Labour in power would seek to repeal most of the last 40 years of union reform legislation though, bringing back wildcat sympathy strikes and show of hands ballots.
    Corbynism is likely popular among manual workers in Merseyside, and some big urban areas. There seems to be a considerable divide between manual workers in big urban centres, where Labour dominates, and smaller cities and large towns, where the Conservatives are more competitive.
    It would be an interesting study to look at the changing demographics of the main party supporters over time. I'm inclined to agree with your point that rural v urban is now probably a bigger indicator than social class, education or job category. Similar issues have I think been studied in the USA.
    Mostly you are looking at age (and ethnicity), rather than rural/urban per se. The two are highly correlated.
  • YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 3,171
    edited February 13

    AndyJS said:

    In the 1970s women were significantly more likely to be Tory supporters than men, to the extent of 10 percentage points IIRC.

    Without making sweeping generalisations, that kind of makes sense.

    In the 1970s, most married women were still housewives. They would have likely been responsible for spending the household budget, and worried about inflation and the overbearing effect of trade unions on their husbands. Meanwhile, for many working-class
    men, trade unionism and blue-collar heavy industry was still a major part of their identity.

    Fast-forward to today, and working women are more concerned with
    workplace fairness/ equality, affordable childcare, education and the NHS,
    so are probably more likely to find Corbyn's messages attractive with his past utterances on defence/terrorism either irrelevant or a historical curiosity. Working class men will be more likely to think it says a lot about him.
    Without making sweeping generalisations it all went wrong when women gained the vote.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 19,818
    Mortimer said:

    Inflation didn't move, I see.

    Bit disappointing. Expected to edge down a bit. Puts off the day when wages catch up just a little longer. The real wages situation is another reason why the current Tory polling is so remarkable. Under normal circumstances a government that had delivered real wages like this one would either have been out on its ear or on borrowed time.
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 17,657
    Dura_Ace said:

    Sandpit said:

    Good news for City Airport - looks like the Navy have removed the 500kg WWII bomb they found in the dock over the weekend.

    It takes a special sort to be an MCD. There's about twenty different ways to kill yourself with a moment's inattention every day and that's just the training. They also have, I believe, the most stringent fitness test in the UK armed forces and earn less than a McDonalds cashier. I once saw one swim across an open cesspit in Basra to win a 20 quid bet.
    One of those jobs that we all think no-one in their right mind would ever want, while remaining humbly grateful to those brave men who do. Hats off to the Dark Blues on this occasion.

    I read somewhere in the last couple of days that the Army and Navy teams get around 30 callouts a year to genuine unexploded bombs, plus no doubt loads of others that are less dangerous.
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 8,297
    DavidL said:

    Mortimer said:

    Inflation didn't move, I see.

    Bit disappointing. Expected to edge down a bit. Puts off the day when wages catch up just a little longer. The real wages situation is another reason why the current Tory polling is so remarkable. Under normal circumstances a government that had delivered real wages like this one would either have been out on its ear or on borrowed time.
    Don't worry about wages. They're going to take-off very shortly. Mark Carney said so.
This discussion has been closed.