Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How sensitive are the poll figures?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » How sensitive are the poll figures?
Let’s take a step back from the day-to-day swings and look at the overall picture, focused on the likelihood of a Conservative overall majority (I’m not going to look here at changes between the opposition parties). The result at the last election was
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
https://twitter.com/exstrategist/status/1190861890106404864?s=21
Despite what Square Root disparagingly remarked, I'm planning my exit from Brexit. Actually, call that exit from Boris.
Firstly, UNS. In general I'm a defender of UNS for seat totals as being broadly right. However I think that's less likely to be true when the change in the Labour share is so large. There is also reason to suspect that the change will be highly non-uniform, but will be greater where the Leave vote was stronger. Both of these factors favour greater Tory gains.
On tactical voting I suspect that there will be net less tactical voting. The relative strength of the Liberal Democrats makes it harder, as do the higher unfavourable ratings for Corbyn.
Also, the differential tactical voting. There will be more Brexit to Con tactical voting because UKIP were squeezed to nothing by polling day.
https://youtu.be/OsBOWSjOLsE
(Great discussion about constituency seat markets at the end of the last thread BTW, some great tips there and PB at its best 👍)
For car manufacturers.
It revolts me. There is next-to-no social provision. When did you ever see an old person in Singapore? No, me neither.
It's a money making machine. It's not Britain.
So if he wins, I'm out.
I think there probably will be on balance, but it's not really clear; Corbyn seems to be actively disliked in a way that he wasn't really last time, and Labour tribalists seem to hate Jo Swinson with a passion they couldn't really summon up against Tim Farron. It's not beyond the bounds of possibility that there could be *less* tactical voting, in which case you need to adjust in the opposite direction.
I had to pick up this part of the discussion though as I had the strangest feeling. It was deja vu. Something eerily eerily flashback. Like straight out of 2017. We had all this then. London was going Tory. Scotland too. The Labour heartlands were turning blue. Think the unthinkable. Theresa May taking her bus to places no Tory had ever won.
Nor the tax on the £20 pint of beer.
Also the fact that 80% of Singaporeans live in subsidised public housing but own their own apartment.
https://www.economist.com/asia/2017/07/06/why-80-of-singaporeans-live-in-government-built-flats
And a compulsory state pension system that even accrues to foreign residents
https://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/singapore-has-best-pension-system-in-asia-mercer-index
Latest reported YouGov.
https://twitter.com/ElectionMapsUK/status/1190764096007942144
Given the scale of those swings, I wonder whether YouGov have changed their methodology? Their prompting for the Greens and (to an extent) the Brexit Party differs from most other companies and up to now has contributed to a Green vote share well in excess of that of other companies. They may have ceased such prompting. The alternative is that there has been a big shift in opinion. We will see.
Another point is even if the number of tactical voters has stayed similar, the constituency proportions change with every election and the national outlook changes. This can change the way in which the same tactical voters will vote in the same constituency, because they er... vote tactically.
My prediction is that tactical voting will have a noticeable effect. That the number of Labour seats will not drop much, even if their national vote share drops to the low twenties. The reason: tactical voting in seats that are clear Con/Lab fights.
F1: ha. Well, Bottas *did* get pole. Ah well.
Will try and get the pre-qualifying thing up in an hour or so.
Tories wont possibly get such a large majority. Why?
If libdems and Brexit party are squeezed to below 10% and tories maintain a lead of 12% than UNS is great again.
https://twitter.com/philrodgers/status/1190256823909208065?s=21
We might be suprised at how many Tory REMAIN voters go back to Boris to stop Corbyn. I predict the Libdem vote to be further squeezed this week, and Tories to pick half of them.
#lightningstrikestwice
https://twitter.com/tonyberkeley1/status/1190562242581938176
Now, if Berkeley is telling the truth (a fairly big if) this means the following:
1) The review has concluded
2) The report will not be published this side of the election, so it will be delayed
3) The very bitter and angry tone of his tweet suggests he has been overruled on the conclusions. Given his extremely vicious and indeed visceral anti-HS2 views, that would almost certainly mean that Oakervee will recommend HS2 should go ahead as planned.
If therefore the report is leaked in the campaign that might put the Tories under pressure in some Home Counties seats, but should also see them clean up in the Midlands, especially Birmingham.
The question it raises for Labour supporters like myself is why you and others like you didn't tell Corbyn what was obvious; That if he remained leader Labour would lose but if he passed the mantle to someone else the chances were good that we could have a Labour government?
Surely someone with your and his principles would want to put the party's interest before his personal ambition?
- UNS being bust might work against the Tories in the case of the LibDem vote, which is likely to rise the most in areas of past/local government strength and remain supporting, which outside London targets the Tories;
- Whilst tactical voting toward Labour might reduce, greater distance from the coalition and their strong stance on Brexit make the LibDems more likely to attract Labour support where it matters;
- with BXP down in single figures there is an argument to be made that most of those Tory leaning leavers are now already back in the Tory percentage. BXP’s appeal is now to those who think Labour isn’t Leave enough.
There is also the long observed tendency of British electorates to be wary of large majorities and to swing back a little before a polling day when such an outcome looks likely.
Personally I doubt that many votes actively switch to the opposition for fear of a large majority. My guess it that this tendency arises from a combination of “we’ve won anyway” abstainers - the guy who goes to the pub after work, or the couple making dinner on a wet evening, who decide not to bother voting since their side has won anyway - and people who go back to their original preference for a minor party now that the incoming government no longer needs their tactical vote.
‘The Singapore-on-Thames gang always ignore the subsidised housing. Can’t think why!!’
Yes never understood why the apparent hatred for this supposedly terrible Singaporean model.
Mass provision of government housing which ensures all ethnic groups are mixed together so you get integration not segregation. Thus promoting a strong national identity as well - so there is little or no ethnic or religious division.
Almost no street crime or indeed any crime. It’s very safe - no shootings, stabbings or acid attacks. Mums don’t live in fear when their kids go out unlike some of our cities
Limited drug problem - yes the policies are harsh but it works for them. We just let the drug users die instead. No public drunkenness or general chavvy/bad behaviour.
No homeless on the street - and no beggars - perhaps partly to do with the effective public housing provision.
It’s clean with a cheap well run public transport system - only £1 to cross the entire island from west to east on the metro. They even have videos on the platforms to show you how to be a decent human being and let people off the train first so its makes it easier to get on and give up your seat for a more needy person - Londoners please learn the merits of the former!
People are polite and helpful
As for supposed lack of old people - well like London they aren’t hanging about the bars in the CBD but in their state flats. Our social care system is hardly effective!
They even have Marks and spencer, Virgin active and fitness first gyms and their shopping parades are full of UK brands and shops.
Singapore is far from perfect but it’s certainly not all bad! But if you enjoy lots of crime in the inner cities, poor infrastructure, dirty streets, poor overpriced public transport and a lack of decent Public housing provision while the rich live in relative luxury - the UK has its merits too!
Always remember that the theory behind UNS is of a two-party system where the government is less popular than it was.
If those conditions don’t apply, there is no reason why the model should work.
I must confess I like this idea that nerdy people should have priority in seating on public transport.
Jo Swinson's "let's just revoke" is not seen as realistic - if only because this is the LibDems we're talking. Even if they massively exceeded on the upside and got 100 seats, they are still the junior partner in any coalition - and that might be with the loathed Corbyn. But whoever it is, Swinson is still seeking to impose the very niche idea of revoking Article 50 as "her price".
Let's get real - they won't succeed with revoking Article 50. So the "never Labour" voter is faced with the unrealistic Swinson versus Boris's Deal. Boris's Deal is the best shot in their mind at making Brexit go away as an issue in their lives. So Boris's Deal it is.
(Similar logic applies to the "Never Tories" too. The LibDems are still the junior partner in any coalition - and that might be with the loathed Boris. So Corbyn it is.)
But thanks for the welcome - and the observation of my initial spelling mistake. Cos commenting on that rather than content is always useful!
No, I don't think they do. And that is one of the reasons why Swinson's message is so poorly received.
As things stand at present, and of course we have a lot more volatility than previous years, I am inclined to back UNS and Con on about 350 seats. The areas under swinging are balanced by those over swinging in others when looking at so many seats.
Tactical voting made a big difference in 1997, doubling LD seats, and probably helped as much in Lab seats. It took place after a period of amicability between the two parties, and the policy differences between Ashdown and Blair were modest. There was also a feeling that after 18 years of the Tories a feeling that joint action was needed to boot them out. I don't sense those factors in play to the same degree at the moment.
Many years ago I was on a training course, given a policy on communications as an exemplar and told to read it and comment on it. After three lines I had five spelling mistakes, two punctuation errors and numerous grammatical howlers.
So I spent the whole fifteen minutes correcting it. So when she asked for feedback it suddenly dawned on me I hadn’t a clue what the actual content was.
Edit - in my defence, yesterday I had a rather miserable time on public transport and essentially had to stand from Victoria to Warwick Parkway. So my flippancy was partly due to current events.
No, something on policy or behaviour seems to have gone badly awry to take them from the 20% to 14% level.
In Edinburgh people are generally much nicer about letting other people onto public transport first. I've even had a few "no *you* first" battles. One exception is at the stops by Waverley Steps (just outside the station bringing passengers from London).
The question is whether something in the campaign, or the imminence of actual Brexit, or the looming inevitability of a big Bozo win, or Corbyn falling flat, or the defections of more prominent moderate Tories - makes those remainers give the LibDems another look?
I guess in a nutshell I'd point to the squeaky clean, uptight, lack of freedom in the place.
It's just not chilled.
1) Corbyn and Johnson have ramped up the lie machine and got lots of publicity for huge spending commitments that they have neither the intention of keeping or for that matter the ability to keep. However, people will fall for it because they want to believe it;
2) It has concentrated minds we are electing a government and however well the Liberal Democrats were doing immediately beforehand it’s obvious they will not be forming it themselves. They are in the position they have been in every election since 1929 of being possible kingmakers in a hung parliament, but not the kings;
3) It has pushed the news agenda off Brexit, where their policy offering is most appealing to their target voters, and onto other areas where their policies are not known.
From the Liberal Democrat point of view, this election came about six months too soon. A few months more of Corbyn’s windy prevarication, Johnson’s incompetence and Swinson demanding Revoke instead of a crashout on the airwaves every evening could well have seen them go into a sustained second place. But I don’t think they’ll make the breakthrough now. It would take a really big, disastrous scandal for Labour in the next three weeks to do that, and that’s not impossible but it’s not in their control.
There was this awful silence and then the very senior examiner convening the meeting said quietly, ‘I wrote this document, Dr.’
I do think Verstappen's still value for the win (enhanced) at 4.33. However, if you backed my early tip on him each way at 10 (10.5 with boost), I'd suggest laying at 4.8 on Betfair.
So, yes. I'm arguing that you should bet for or against Verstappen, depending on circumstance.
And, for what it's worth (probably not much, but then I'm using tiny stakes) I've backed Leicester at evens to beat Crystal Palace and Spurs/Everton to draw at 3.5.
Do you think the 'Revoke Article 50' has backfired? I sort-of-think it might have. It seemed to highlight that old adage that there's no one more illiberal than a liberal.
But it may be more of what you and Cumbria are suggesting. Tribal loyalties resume now that it's no longer a hypothetical or meaningless election. 'How will you vote in the General Election on Dec 12th?' is suddenly very real.
I'd add this: I was never comfortable about the way the Opposition were dicking around with Boris Johnson and the fag-end of Parliament. They appeared to be toying with him and in some respects it's quite amusing that they got their comeuppance. If someone like Johnson is in the corner you don't start giving it the Muhammed Ali shuffle.
They had their chance and blew it. September 24th when Lady Hoyle delivered the Supreme Court verdict they almost certainly would have succeeded in a VONC if they'd got their joint act together.
They didn't. The rest, as they say, is history.
With apologies to Keith Waterhouse.
If we ever had STV, or some other PR system, the Labour Party share of the vote would collapse.
https://enormo-haddock.blogspot.com/2019/11/usa-pre-race-2019.html
Reminds me of the AI in the ZX Spectrum of Monopoly, which was so desperate to complete a set it would trade you anything for the last card, including the two other cards it holds.
The opposition should exploit this. Get Boris on the record with ever more outlandish claims. He can’t help himself.
The campaign hasn’t started proper and the parties bar the main two get slightly more equal airtime and access to debates. Will the BXP run over 600 candidates or less than 60? How many seats will other parties not stand in to help the pro remain leading challenger.
Boris is a more effective campaigner but more gaffe prone than May.
And of course the Russians, the Russians....... and all their twitter bots turning people. If you believe some that’s the biggest factor of all!
I just hope the Election Day is better for me than the last two. On Election Day on 7 May 2015 I was involved in a car accident and on election night in 2017 I had to spend the entire night in A&E as my dad had to be rushed into hospital. I just want a stress free 12/13th December 2019 - bar the results!
https://twitter.com/alasdair_clark/status/1190769860961280000?s=20
But they MIGHT have a real problem, and the current polls MIGHT reflect it.
For all the other parties, the Brexit crisis is at worst a total distraction (eg from Johnson's main priority of staying PM for 5 years) or at best an opportunity to promote their real objective. For the LDs, it's almost existential: free trade, arguably, is the glue that binds most of its members.
No-one but the voters can decide what an election's about, but it IS possible that the natural dynamic of a UK election - at least in England - gives the two major parties an ability to re-assert the two-party system. And right now, Corbyn's desire to concentrate on his variant of Americaphobic neo-Marxism and Johnson's desire to concentrate on Corbyn's awfulness share a common interest in re-asserting the two-party system.
Nothing, both think, stimulates votes for them as much as stirring up a phobia against the other. And both the public-spirited and the foreign billionaire-owned media find that a headline-generating narrative to publicise.
Can the LDs overcome this? That depends on the ground war. And on the question of whether their superior strength in electoral guerilla warfare can work in a freezing, dark and damp campaign increasingly influenced (but still not dominated) by nationally-generated electronics.
But it doesn't help with those moderate Tories who want a pragmatic compromise on Brexit and a government who respect established constitutional norms, and behave responsibly with the nation's finances. They need a message for those voters too.
Oh.
Hardcore remainers seem to view Johnson through the opposite of rose tinted glasses as they assume everyone else is as angry with him as they are but that's just not true according to the polling figures.
Second paragraph - that might work if the Opposition weren’t doing exactly the same thing. Indeed, Corbyn would be even more hamstrung than Johnson because he’s making even more outlandish promises and there is the non-trivial chance that people would refuse to buy gilts with him in charge leaving him unable to pay day-to-day running expenses of government.
And the next question is why is Boris blocking the report into Russian meddling?