Has anyone got any views on who will get the most votes between the Brexit party and the Greens? A couple of bookies have this as a market and I like to bet on these kind of things but cannot make my mind up (they are both about 5/6)
Brexit Party I would think. They shouldn't fall below 2% at worst and I would expect them to finish nearer 3%. With the Greens, there's been zero difference or momentum change to their 2017 campaign, where they got 1.7%. Can't see them much above 2% (and that only to the slight boosts from the remain alliance). Plus Greens are almost all going to be hapy enough switching to Lab on the day so a last minute squeeze will depress them further (whereas BXP has already been squeezed of its potential tory support, the rest is Lab Leavers)
I do feel rather neglected in all General Elections and locals. In 15 years we’ve only been canvassed once and that was the holding/completely dominant party. Ultra Safe seats don’t allow me to have fun others seem to. Not that I’m complaining. Our MP is a very nice chap.
Just sit back and let Worcester Woman (or whoever the swing voter has been identified as this time, Bolsover Brian?) decide for you who your next government will be. You’re just a spectator.
There was an Issac Asimov short story about an election which was decided by picking the most typical voter in the country and just asking them. Saved a lot of time and effort.
There's an interesting anecdote about the US airforce designing their cockpits to fit the average pilot.
And then discovering that basically no pilot was average and it was contributing to a massive accident rate.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I do feel rather neglected in all General Elections and locals. In 15 years we’ve only been canvassed once and that was the holding/completely dominant party. Ultra Safe seats don’t allow me to have fun others seem to. Not that I’m complaining. Our MP is a very nice chap.
Just sit back and let Worcester Woman (or whoever the swing voter has been identified as this time, Bolsover Brian?) decide for you who your next government will be. You’re just a spectator.
There was an Issac Asimov short story about an election which was decided by picking the most typical voter in the country and just asking them. Saved a lot of time and effort.
Maybe we can form a government like jury service.
Every two years random members of electoral role picked to serve a government term. PM chosen by straws from amongst them.
Betting tip - if you do believe that Ashton Under Lyme is a possible Tory win, then a value bet might be to go for the Tories in neighbouring Denton and Reddish where they are 11 on Betfair vs 4.1 for Ashton. Similar votes - Labour got 63% in 2017 in D&R, which was over 60% leave. D&R had also one of the lowest turnouts at the last election at 58.5% so it might be unenthusiastic Labour voters stay home
So my anecdata for the day. We've spent the day at my parents today and we had Labour canvassers on the road and a huge number of Labour campaigners on the green handing out leaflets to anyone who would have them.
This is Enfield Southgate. I'm honestly surprised there was such a huge Labour presence in this seat it should be fairly safe but it looks like we're making a much better fight of it than I expected.
I was in Enfield Southgate today delivering pledge letters for David Burrowes with scores of other Tory activists.
David Burrowes posters on every other road, more than for Labour.
On UNS Enfield Southgate is neck and neck, even if Yougov MRP has it a Labour hold.
Plus of course all the Labour activists sent to Chingford the last few weeks will not have been in Southgate, perhaps Labour finally panicking after a decent local Tory campaign.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
Hmm. That looks a self-selecting survey to me and the tweeter himself mentions that Conservative canvasser responses are underrepresented.
I have always been suspicious of self reported canvassing anecdata. Apart from @david_herdson in his famous Tuesday night PB wobble (partly retracted the following day as I recall) people seem to report stuff that matches their
I reckon Con on 355-360 seats, unchanged from my position at the start of the campaign, but I don't see much value in the markets at present as that seems the consensus.
Personally, I’ve always taken Nick Palmer’s canvassing reports with a big pinch of salt. He’s not a big gambler and I think he’s too affected by the subliminal need to motivate rather than report.
Bunnco, Stuart Dickson, Marquee Mark, David Herdson, JohnO and Cyclefree i pay particular attention to.
Bunnco??
Our man on the spot.
He’s kinda funny in that I think he’s generally only in one spot but posts so well you’d think he’s omnipresent.
Indeed and he's stuck out in carrot country to boot! That said he talks a great deal of sense and I really hope he finds the time to make a number of guest appearances over the next week.
Yes, the fact that it is a deeply flawed deal, and not probably going to stand scrutiny no longer matters. Any dogs dinner of a Brexit will do for this GE. The buyers remorse comes later.
Would be taking the Brexit Party every time there.
Bearing in mind the candidate numbers, you are actually backing BXP candidates to do on average nearly twice as well. Yet the poll above suggests Greens are ahead in total share.
I do feel rather neglected in all General Elections and locals. In 15 years we’ve only been canvassed once and that was the holding/completely dominant party. Ultra Safe seats don’t allow me to have fun others seem to. Not that I’m complaining. Our MP is a very nice chap.
Just sit back and let Worcester Woman (or whoever the swing voter has been identified as this time, Bolsover Brian?) decide for you who your next government will be. You’re just a spectator.
There was an Issac Asimov short story about an election which was decided by picking the most typical voter in the country and just asking them. Saved a lot of time and effort.
There's an interesting anecdote about the US airforce designing their cockpits to fit the average pilot.
And then discovering that basically no pilot was average and it was contributing to a massive accident rate.
Can we maybe agree that this GE has seen the most inept journalism across the media of all elections
With the exception of AN no other journalist has added to their reputation other than possibly Kate McCann
Nick Robinson did well in moderating two debates. Otherwise, par for the course in my view. Perhaps it’s because we’re on the third election in four years that is colouring our campaign judgements.
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
Personally, I’ve always taken Nick Palmer’s canvassing reports with a big pinch of salt. He’s not a big gambler and I think he’s too affected by the subliminal need to motivate rather than report.
Bunnco, Stuart Dickson, Marquee Mark, David Herdson, JohnO and Cyclefree i pay particular attention to.
Appreciate the vote of confidence.
Yes, I may have some degree of inbuilt bias towards my party. Yes, after four decades of door-knocking I may be exceptionally good at talking round undecideds - and getting the reluctant to tell me who they will really be voting for. But I am always very mindful that people on this site may be staking significant sums on the basis of what I am revealing. So I feel honour bound to be scrupulous. I would never make a claim that I could not support with my canvass returns. It would totally undermine my understanding of the ethos of this site.
Can we maybe agree that this GE has seen the most inept journalism across the media of all elections
With the exception of AN no other journalist has added to their reputation other than possibly Kate McCann
Nick Robinson did well in moderating two debates. Otherwise, par for the course in my view. Perhaps it’s because we’re on the third election in four years that is colouring our campaign judgements.
Personally, I’ve always taken Nick Palmer’s canvassing reports with a big pinch of salt. He’s not a big gambler and I think he’s too affected by the subliminal need to motivate rather than report.
Bunnco, Stuart Dickson, Marquee Mark, David Herdson, JohnO and Cyclefree i pay particular attention to.
Appreciate the vote of confidence.
Yes, I may have some degree of inbuilt bias towards my party. Yes, after four decades of door-knocking I may be exceptionally good at talking round undecideds - and getting the reluctant to tell me who they will really be voting for. But I am always very mindful that people on this site may be staking significant sums on the basis of what I am revealing. So I feel honour bound to be scrupulous. I would never make a claim that I could not support with my canvass returns. It would totally undermine my understanding of the ethos of this site.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Wonder how they come up with 326? The 7 point lead is significantly below the average too
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
Neither of you is right.
If there were only one seat, the Tories would have 100% of the MPs.
If there were a million seats, the Tories would have (say) 42% of MPs
600 seats is a significant quantum closer to the former than 650.
(Further proof that Clegg didn’t understand what he was doing edit/ or rather that he did, eventually)
In terms of a polling fix before the big day we have survation at midnight, the final welsh barometer and icm tomorrow then the final polls from the usual suspects tuesday and weds with mori usually out election morning.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Wonder how they come up with 326? The 7 point lead is significantly below the average too
Has anyone got any views on who will get the most votes between the Brexit party and the Greens? A couple of bookies have this as a market and I like to bet on these kind of things but cannot make my mind up (they are both about 5/6)
Brexit were 11/10 when first priced up. I think they'll win but 5/6 not so generous.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Wonder how they come up with 326? The 7 point lead is significantly below the average too
Apparently they ‘re-weight’ some of the polls on the basis that the raw data shows a smaller gap.
Now that could be totally valid, it’s just a different weighting being applied to the same set of results, but to be convinced you are doing the right thing you are essentially saying the original weighting is wrong. Which as I mentioned a couple of days ago, is a difficult thing to say when we haven’t had a result yet.
So my anecdata for the day. We've spent the day at my parents today and we had Labour canvassers on the road and a huge number of Labour campaigners on the green handing out leaflets to anyone who would have them.
This is Enfield Southgate. I'm honestly surprised there was such a huge Labour presence in this seat it should be fairly safe but it looks like we're making a much better fight of it than I expected.
Perhaps it's just an artefact of there being lots and lots of Labour members available to campaign in London? Do they just chuck them here, there and everywhere as a consequence?
The presence of canvassers doesn't necessarily indicate that a constituency is in play, of course. The only party I've seen campaigning in town is Labour (and the other Mr Rook saw the Labour candidate in the town centre yesterday.) But this is a rock-solid Tory safe seat. The only contest they're fighting here is with the yellows for a distant and useless second place.
It matters not a jot whether Labour has 10 or 200 warm bodies out on the door-knocker, if they are all hearing "your leader is shite - so no".
Trouble is there’s the antithesis of that which is, “I f-ing hate Corbyn but still voted Labour anyway. Soz.”
On that sentiment basically hinges this whole election.
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
To date there have been no signs that this GE is following 2017 and all the anecdotes, polling and canvassing reports do not have any of the creeping doubt that was evidenced this time out in 2017
If you ask me if I am expecting a 'David Herdson' event the answer is no
Notwithstanding that, I am not willing to predict a seat majority but I am do see a hung parliament slipping away to those hopeful of such an outcome
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Wonder how they come up with 326? The 7 point lead is significantly below the average too
I find the 95% Confidence Intervals the most interesting bit, at +/-31 Con seats, or a Standard Error of 15.5 seats, if my stats are correct*. If other predictions are of similar scale of error, then they may not be as incompatible as at first glance. The error bars for the YouGov MRP look similarly broad.
* It has been a long day, and I had some beers after the footy!
I may be repeating myself again but I don’t see backing a Tory majority in the 1.3-1.35 box as value.
It might look like it, with hindsight, in four days time but there’s plenty of risk in there.
It’s worth bearing in mind a hung parliament is now rated as about the same chance as Leave / Trump in 2016, and we all know what happened next.
Casino ... as we approach the big day, what is your Nap bet right now, or perhaps you don't have one? Actually, compared with your previous considerable GE betting comments/views, you do seem rather less interested in such aspects this time.
Not so, I don’t think I’ve ever been more interested! I’ve got more on this election than ever before. My strategy is to look for value outside the central herding of 340-360 Tory seats, on both sides of the pyramid.
For example, my most recent play is buying up Con seats on the upside (landslide) side on Betfair exchange.
Have a look at 370+ ups on the Conservative Seats 2 market. The odds on offer there easily beat the bookies.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
This 326 politics people only started their twitter account in 2018 and have bugger all followers / no website. Is there something I am missing here, why we should be listening to them?
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
The boundary commission is impartial.
The process is heavily swayed by the representations - which come almost exclusively from two groups, actual politicians, and party members pretending to be ordinary members of the public.
The Labour Party in particular got very good at ‘managing’ the review process during its years in office. Some review experts think this gave them an edge of say up to a dozen seats over the Tories.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
In terms of a polling fix before the big day we have survation at midnight, the final welsh barometer and icm tomorrow then the final polls from the usual suspects tuesday and weds with mori usually out election morning.
326 looks absolute bollocks. 7 point lead and only taking 20 odd seats off Labour seems very unlikely. Combined Tory BXP vote share 44% also very low. Would expect it to be 46% minimum.
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
Neither of you is right.
If there were only one seat, the Tories would have 100% of the MPs.
If there were a million seats, the Tories would have (say) 42% of MPs
600 seats is a significant quantum closer to the former than 650.
(Further proof that Clegg didn’t understand what he was doing edit/ or rather that he did, eventually)
Beg to differ. The movement from existing to "2018" boundaries does three things:
1) redraws boundaries based on more recent census data 2) equalises seat sizes to within +/- 5% (or is it 10%?) of each other 3) reduces from 650 to 600 seats total
The projected increase in Tory majority from one to the other is some function of these three factors. My guess would be that the first factor is basically a wash, and the second factor outweighs the third, maybe 60:40. I'm sure Baxter himself would have a better guess.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
The boundary commission is impartial.
The process is heavily swayed by the representations - which come almost exclusively from two groups, actual politicians, and party members pretending to be ordinary members of the public.
The Labour Party in particular got very good at ‘managing’ the review process during its years in office. Some review experts think this gave them an edge of say up to a dozen seats over the Tories.
Doesn't the 600 seat proposal split actual wards between constituencies, or have I imagined that?
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
Wonder how they come up with 326? The 7 point lead is significantly below the average too
Apparently they ‘re-weight’ some of the polls on the basis that the raw data shows a smaller gap.
Now that could be totally valid, it’s just a different weighting being applied to the same set of results, but to be convinced you are doing the right thing you are essentially saying the original weighting is wrong. Which as I mentioned a couple of days ago, is a difficult thing to say when we haven’t had a result yet.
The only way to figure out if a pollster is weighting things wrong is to invent a time machine or wait, anything else is guesswork, and close to worthless.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
I really wish pollsters and pundits that make these predix would THEN do the simple service of giving the implied Majority, or Minority, or whatever
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Labours policies are a fantasy of unpayable for election lies.
Corbyn is a liar esp about anti semitism and he would sell the UK down the river and thats before we get to his support for terrorist organisations ...a shocker of a man unfit to be PM
Boris hasn’t been on a straight campaigning visit to Labour held target seat since 20 November (County Durham). All his recent visits have been to Tory held seats (see Chingford today). Worried about Remainer votes in Souther England....?
Corbyn has been going to seats with narrow Tory majorities. If you closed your eyes to the polling, the two parties are behaving as though the Tories are losing seats to Labour.
Of course this might not be relevant with the war being fought on social media, but worth pondering at least.
Unless somebody has real standing i.e. from some uni of note or have serious track record, I am not going to put much weight in some rando off twitter with a few 100 followers, no matter what fancy info-graphic they do.
In terms of a polling fix before the big day we have survation at midnight, the final welsh barometer and icm tomorrow then the final polls from the usual suspects tuesday and weds with mori usually out election morning.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
I really wish pollsters and pundits that make these predix would THEN do the simple service of giving the implied Majority, or Minority, or whatever
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
I really wish pollsters and pundits that make these predix would THEN do the simple service of giving the implied Majority, or Minority, or whatever
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
This is a very small Tory maj, isn't it?
326 is officially the winning post. Though with SF not taking their seats, it gives an effective single figure majority.
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
You're a Corbyn fan. A __Corbyn__ fan. And you're talking about other people's reality distortion fields?
I'm a leftie/Labour fan, not a Corbyn fan as such, he's just the current leader. He's better than Johnson in my opinion, that's the bar. It's not a high bar.
Personally, I think Corbyn should have resigned in 2017.
And once again...I'm voting Lib Dem (albeit tactically), is that something a rabid Corbynite would do? They seem to spend their time on Twitter calling Lib Dems scum.
For me this election is the stop Johnson election, that's where I am coming at it from.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Differential poll weighting by age and certainty to vote is where previous polling mistakes have arisen. I am not convinced the solution has been found, as the answer seems to vary by election. The biggest difference between pollsters is in this refighting. Averaging polls does not resolve the issue, as not all polls will be equally correct.
What's your best value constituency bet? Got a whole £10 at 7-1 on the Tories to win Westmorland and Lonsdale.
£2 at (IIRC) 259-1 on gaining Warley.
Shouldn't you wait until Friday before declaring your best value constituency bets?
Value and success aren't the same thing.
(And indeed success doesn't necessarily indicate value. The only way to truly demonstrate value would be to run the same event a large number of times under identical conditions, which is obviously impossible.)
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
I really wish pollsters and pundits that make these predix would THEN do the simple service of giving the implied Majority, or Minority, or whatever
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
This is a very small Tory maj, isn't it?
Effective majority of 8. 322 is the zero line for all practical purposes.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Differential poll weighting by age and certainty to vote is where previous polling mistakes have arisen. I am not convinced the solution has been found, as the answer seems to vary by election. The biggest difference between pollsters is in this refighting. Averaging polls does not resolve the issue, as not all polls will be equally correct.
In 2017 if you'd gone off poll averages you'd have been horrifically far off the result.
There were about two polls that indicated the final result within the margin of error. But we only know that with hindsight..
Frankly although the polls are coming in around 9-10 points, that's really no evidence they're right or not. We simply don't know until election day.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
To be fair
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
Although 2017 there were also very clear other trends i.e. gap closing week on week, supplementary closing. And we had some pollsters saying different / we had had Labour leads etc.
Also, this bloke in his basement has been told by YouGov bods what he is doing isn't valid before.
I have always been suspicious of self reported canvassing anecdata. Apart from @david_herdson in his famous Tuesday night PB wobble (partly retracted the following day as I recall) people seem to report stuff that matches their bias.
I haven't been able to do any canvassing myself this year, owing to work and church commitments so have only social anecdata to report. That seems to show a lack of interest in the GE, so I forecast a low turnout, which in turn probably means a Tory majority. Interestingly it is the WWC that seem least motivated to vote, so could play the other way.
I reckon Con on 355-360 seats, unchanged from my position at the start of the campaign, but I don't see much value in the markets at present as that seems the consensus.
There is a huge false analogy built into your use of "anecdata." In a scientific context you have Mrs Miggins saying she is sure her cancer is getting better since she started taking x, and then you have a study of 100 Mrs Migginses taking x, vs another 100 taking placebo, and you are making objective measurements of Mrs Miggins which are independent of her state of mind. Polling is NOT analogous to your study; it has the numbers, but it has neither the control nor the objectivity. It is like giving x to 100 Mrs Migginses and asking them if they think it makes their cancer better. It is just anecdote aggregation.
Here is a possibility: perhaps people are much, much more likely to lie to a pollster on the phone than to a canvasser face to face. I know I am, because I am not a convincing actor. If that is true of other people then it is perfectly possible that anecdotal accounts of face to face encounters are inherently more likely to be correct then polling results.
And your "apart from Herdson" sounds a bit like "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
Labour had a decent week before last. That's what throwing a trillion pounds around buys you. 3%.
But since then - nada. Andrew Neil effect? Zip. Debates? Nope. This campaign has been in the deep freeze for ten days.
The day the BXP pulled out of the tory seats the die was cast. The LibDems strategy relied on a split brexit vote in their targets. Tory Maj went from Evs to 1/2 that day, and nothing has changed since.
I've just been feeding the latest BMG polling data into Baxter, which came up with a meagre Tory majority of 24. I'm convinced that Baxter has significantly changed his methodology recently since the regular 60-90 seat majorities we were seeing just 6-8 weeks ago are no more and instead we are fed a regular diet of 12-45 seat majorities, very seldom outside these parameters. What I *did* find interesting however was in playing with the seat prediction options, one can select the so-called 2018 boundaries, based on a 600 seat, instead of the present 650 seat configuration. On running this option out of curiosity, I was amazed to discover that this produced a Tory majority of no less than 110 seats, with the Tories winning 355, Labour fewer than half as many on 174 and the LibDems bringing up the rear on just 12 seats. Bring on the 2024 GE is what I say, always assuming that the Tories, if re-elected, actually finally get around to implementing the boundary changes which are now EIGHT YEARS OVERDUE!
Just goes to show how outdated the boundaries are if they change the result by such a huge margin.
Or how Gerry mandered they are going to be!
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
Neither of you is right.
If there were only one seat, the Tories would have 100% of the MPs.
If there were a million seats, the Tories would have (say) 42% of MPs
600 seats is a significant quantum closer to the former than 650.
(Further proof that Clegg didn’t understand what he was doing edit/ or rather that he did, eventually)
Beg to differ. The movement from existing to "2018" boundaries does three things:
1) redraws boundaries based on more recent census data 2) equalises seat sizes to within +/- 5% (or is it 10%?) of each other 3) reduces from 650 to 600 seats total
The projected increase in Tory majority from one to the other is some function of these three factors. My guess would be that the first factor is basically a wash, and the second factor outweighs the third, maybe 60:40. I'm sure Baxter himself would have a better guess.
Nonsense.
And they don’t even use census data, except indirectly.
So my anecdata for the day. We've spent the day at my parents today and we had Labour canvassers on the road and a huge number of Labour campaigners on the green handing out leaflets to anyone who would have them.
This is Enfield Southgate. I'm honestly surprised there was such a huge Labour presence in this seat it should be fairly safe but it looks like we're making a much better fight of it than I expected.
Perhaps it's just an artefact of there being lots and lots of Labour members available to campaign in London? Do they just chuck them here, there and everywhere as a consequence?
The presence of canvassers doesn't necessarily indicate that a constituency is in play, of course. The only party I've seen campaigning in town is Labour (and the other Mr Rook saw the Labour candidate in the town centre yesterday.) But this is a rock-solid Tory safe seat. The only contest they're fighting here is with the yellows for a distant and useless second place.
It matters not a jot whether Labour has 10 or 200 warm bodies out on the door-knocker, if they are all hearing "your leader is shite - so no".
Trouble is there’s the antithesis of that which is, “I f-ing hate Corbyn but still voted Labour anyway. Soz.”
On that sentiment basically hinges this whole election.
I'm inclined to think it's the latter. People hate Corbyn, but they hate "the Tories" even more. I think Boris is personally quite popular, but he's a Tory nonetheless.
Perversely, I think this makes the anecdotes from labour canvassers sound much worse than they actually are.
From a psychological point of view, so long as people are actively telling you they hate your guy this time round, they are still on your team. They want you to get better. Like a football supporter being angry with the manager but still wanting his club to come good.
You see it in branding all the time when brands with huge amounts of loyalty make terrible mistakes. Corbyn is like when Twinings changed the recipe of their Earl Grey, or when Cadbury started putting less milk chocolate into their Creme Eggs.
It's when people stop shouting about how much they hate what Labour has become and silently vote Conservative that you'll see a Tory landslide. We're not there yet. People hate Corbyn, but the Labour brand remains strong.
The majority of PB breathes as a sigh of relief as a greater tory lead is posted.
However, that poll seems not in fact to be that up to date, as it seems to have been conducted largely, or completely, before a very close debate. Only 4 million watched, but it may take a point or two off that total.
I think at the moment we are maybe in a tory majority of 20 zone, with Labour having three days to do anything about that.
The Tories are on average about 10-11% ahead.
Even ignoring other factors (eg Boris' probable out-performance in Labour marginals) such a result would give them a significantly bigger majority than 20.
Not, though, if what people are saying are wild and unprecedently odd patterns of tactical voting are taken into account. A lot of people seem to be scrabbling around in the dark trying either to keep Corbyn or Brexit out. I don't think there's ever been an election like this, in that sense.
Sure. But I am saying: just look at the polls. Because, for every anecdote you can produce - there's a youthquake! - I can do the same - look at the feedback from canvassers and focus groups!
So let's just stick to hard data and the hard data we have are: regular polls, MRP polls, and constituency polls, and ALL of those are now pointing to a sizeable Tory majority. With three days to go.
326 politics has canvassed the canvassers and come up with a prediction of Con 326. Nice to see confidence intervals too.
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
I really wish pollsters and pundits that make these predix would THEN do the simple service of giving the implied Majority, or Minority, or whatever
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
This is a very small Tory maj, isn't it?
The clue is in the Twitter title. 326 is the official number required for a majority (of 2) because there are 650 seats in the HoC.
Practically of course you can get by with less due to SF etc. but all the seat predictors will show the majority as (winning party seats - 325) x 2
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Boris has many faults but he is the only option to defeat Corbyn who has so many faults he makes Boris look a saint
So yes, you do think the lying is okay. Thanks for being honest about it.
No more so than Corbyn and his fully costed manifesto
Fair point - so why don't you vote Lib Dem or Green then?
The point I am making is you're a hypocrite. If you're happy to accept that then fair enough. But you can't take the moral high ground on pretty much anything then.
Has anyone got any views on who will get the most votes between the Brexit party and the Greens? A couple of bookies have this as a market and I like to bet on these kind of things but cannot make my mind up (they are both about 5/6)
So... The Brexit Party is not standing in 320-odd seats, while the Greens are not standing in perhaps 40. That means that BXP needs to get almost twice the vote share of the Greens in their seats.
I also suspect that Mr Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" means that BXP is more likely to get squeezed by the Greens.
Given both parties got very similar vote shares in 2017, I'm going to go Green.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
To be fair
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
You have to hope they have adjusted their modelling after last time though...
Boris hasn’t been on a straight campaigning visit to Labour held target seat since 20 November (County Durham). All his recent visits have been to Tory held seats (see Chingford today). Worried about Remainer votes in Souther England....?
Corbyn has been going to seats with narrow Tory majorities. If you closed your eyes to the polling, the two parties are behaving as though the Tories are losing seats to Labour.
Of course this might not be relevant with the war being fought on social media, but worth pondering at least.
Possibly. I suspect he also wants to keep an eye on his own seat.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
To be fair
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
Although 2017 there were also very clear other trends i.e. gap closing week on week, supplementary closing. And we had some pollsters saying different / we had had Labour leads etc.
Also, this bloke in his basement has been told by YouGov bods what he is doing isn't valid before.
Actually I read the YG responses.
They didn't actually say he was wrong (presumably because they like us don't actually know, until polling day), they said they already account for at least some of the things he said. And that was only in the case of YG, not the other pollsters (they didn't know).
I think he is wrong BTW, I'm just adding that for balance.
Maybe the bigger surprise might not be on the Tory/Labour battles but on the LDs.
The fact that some constituency polling for them is actually quite good but at odds with the national polling still hasn’t been properly explained.
What if they surprise significantly on the upside and walk away with 35 seats?
That could be a BONG! exit poll surprise on Thursday night.
It is in effect what happened to the SLD in 2017. A reduced vote share, but 4 seats instead of 1. The LD vote may well also be getting a lot more efficient South of the border. I expect seat numbers for LD in Low 20s.
Indeed my guess (and it has little evidence base) is:
Con 355 Lab 207 LD 23 SNP 42 PC 3 Green 1 Speaker 1 NI 18.
Boris hasn’t been on a straight campaigning visit to Labour held target seat since 20 November (County Durham). All his recent visits have been to Tory held seats (see Chingford today). Worried about Remainer votes in Souther England....?
Corbyn has been going to seats with narrow Tory majorities. If you closed your eyes to the polling, the two parties are behaving as though the Tories are losing seats to Labour.
Of course this might not be relevant with the war being fought on social media, but worth pondering at least.
Maybe Corbyn likes some of his target seat candidates more than most of his sitting MPs?
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
To be fair
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
Although 2017 there were also very clear other trends i.e. gap closing week on week, supplementary closing. And we had some pollsters saying different / we had had Labour leads etc.
Also, this bloke in his basement has been told by YouGov bods what he is doing isn't valid before.
Indeed, Chris Curtis did comprehensive debunking, I did have chat with another pollster earlier on this week on why the polls might be wrong for different reasons this time.
Simple truth Corbyn's policies are very popular even if Corbyn isn't and more crucially apart from voting for Brexit Labour Leave voters don't have much in common with Boris Johnson.
They want higher taxes and spending, they want economic protectionism, they want more benefits etc.
Is Johnsonian Conservatism much different to the stuff the SDP is/was proposing? Socially (relatively) conservative, economically liberal? He will have to keep tacking that way if he really does break down Labour's northern "Red Wall".
Nick Timothy (yes, I know) has written several articles in the Telegraph arguing that that is exactly what would happen should the Conservative Party find itself with a majority based on places like Bassetlaw.
It is an interesting point that in the end all political parties focus on the voters in the seats of their elected members particularly for their political priorities. If Conservatives do make serious inroads into Labour heartlands, then the logical follow-up outcome is that the voters that made it happen will actually be rewarded as a result.
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Boris has many faults but he is the only option to defeat Corbyn who has so many faults he makes Boris look a saint
So yes, you do think the lying is okay. Thanks for being honest about it.
"Lying" is just a Labour attack line. Is Labour's Grey book true then?
I think Labour have been shitty in this campaign too if I am honest. But the point I was making is that you really can't sit here and take the moral high ground on anything if you vote for the two main parties.
Both are utterly shite now - and both need new leadership ASAP, in my mind.
Centrist Dad seems to do re-weighting as well. But not being a stats expert, I really have no idea whether what he is doing is "correct" or not.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
Polling average - Con +10% | "Centrist Phone" claims Actual Con lead: 2.84%
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
To be fair
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
You have to hope they have adjusted their modelling after last time though...
They adjusted their methodologies after their failure in 2015.
This GE appears to be a nailed-on Tory majority. As far as I can see only two possible factors could lead to a hung parliament:
1. A wholesale cock-up by the pollsters. 2. A very unusual translation of the overall percentages into actual seats.
Point 1. might be driven by incorrect weightings aided by a bit of herding, maybe. Point 2. could result from a combination of Leave/Remain tactical voting, the number of Independent or changed party ex-MPs standing, a few self-destruct MPs (Hastings?)...
But, sadly, from my perspective this feels like wishful thinking
Labour up 8% in London (yougov poll) but a tory lead of 15% in Wrexham with a 10% tory lead nationally = Tory landslide
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Boris has many faults but he is the only option to defeat Corbyn who has so many faults he makes Boris look a saint
So yes, you do think the lying is okay. Thanks for being honest about it.
No more so than Corbyn and his fully costed manifesto
Fair point - so why don't you vote Lib Dem or Green then?
The point I am making is you're a hypocrite. If you're happy to accept that then fair enough. But you can't take the moral high ground on pretty much anything then.
Who do you think you are. I am content to do everything to see Corbyn defeated
I am not a lib dem or green and neither are you but you are going to vote lib dem.
What's your best value constituency bet? Got a whole £10 at 7-1 on the Tories to win Westmorland and Lonsdale.
£2 at (IIRC) 259-1 on gaining Warley.
Shouldn't you wait until Friday before declaring your best value constituency bets?
Value and success aren't the same thing.
(And indeed success doesn't necessarily indicate value. The only way to truly demonstrate value would be to run the same event a large number of times under identical conditions, which is obviously impossible.)
7/1 looks great (7/4 today). Got to be pleased with that.
I have 3/1 Con North Norfolk (1/2 today).
Conversely I have 11/8 Lib Dem Portsmouth South (33/1 today).
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Boris has many faults but he is the only option to defeat Corbyn who has so many faults he makes Boris look a saint
So yes, you do think the lying is okay. Thanks for being honest about it.
No more so than Corbyn and his fully costed manifesto
Fair point - so why don't you vote Lib Dem or Green then?
The point I am making is you're a hypocrite. If you're happy to accept that then fair enough. But you can't take the moral high ground on pretty much anything then.
Who do you think you are. I am content to do everything to see Corbyn defeated
I am not a lib dem or green and neither are you but you are going to vote lib dem.
Who is the real hypocrite?
You pretend to take the moral high ground on loads of issues like racism - and yet you vote Tory.
You are a hypocrite, whether you want to admit it or not.
I am also a hypocrite, I'm happy to accept that. Are you?
This attitude is an absolute disgrace. Do you not think this matters?
Not really. It is not going to change a vote
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
I didn't mean about changing votes, I meant about the fact the Tories have lied, again.
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Boris has many faults but he is the only option to defeat Corbyn who has so many faults he makes Boris look a saint
So yes, you do think the lying is okay. Thanks for being honest about it.
No more so than Corbyn and his fully costed manifesto
Fair point - so why don't you vote Lib Dem or Green then?
The point I am making is you're a hypocrite. If you're happy to accept that then fair enough. But you can't take the moral high ground on pretty much anything then.
I think we can take the moral high ground against anyone who wants to see a party infested with antisemites in power, thank you very much.
Comments
And then discovering that basically no pilot was average and it was contributing to a massive accident rate.
https://www.thestar.com/news/insight/2016/01/16/when-us-air-force-discovered-the-flaw-of-averages.html
David Burrowes posters on every other road, more than for Labour.
On UNS Enfield Southgate is neck and neck, even if Yougov MRP has it a Labour hold.
Plus of course all the Labour activists sent to Chingford the last few weeks will not have been in Southgate, perhaps Labour finally panicking after a decent local Tory campaign.
Would be taking the Brexit Party every time there.
https://twitter.com/326Pols/status/1203629730601279488?s=19
I see Flavible have Con on 368 and Electoral calculus on Con 348. Flavible was fairly good on the Euros, and 326 on last GE, but could have been beginners luck.
With the exception of AN no other journalist has added to their reputation other than possibly Kate McCann
The election is over - it is just a matter of counting the votes now
No idea, haven't read enough about it, just pointing out an alternative interpretation
Yes, I may have some degree of inbuilt bias towards my party. Yes, after four decades of door-knocking I may be exceptionally good at talking round undecideds - and getting the reluctant to tell me who they will really be voting for. But I am always very mindful that people on this site may be staking significant sums on the basis of what I am revealing. So I feel honour bound to be scrupulous. I would never make a claim that I could not support with my canvass returns. It would totally undermine my understanding of the ethos of this site.
If there were only one seat, the Tories would have 100% of the MPs.
If there were a million seats, the Tories would have (say) 42% of MPs
600 seats is a significant quantum closer to the former than 650.
(Further proof that Clegg didn’t understand what he was doing edit/ or rather that he did, eventually)
But you don't seem to care about lying, don't you think that's a worrying path we're going down?
You're truly in the Johnson reality distortion field, it's quite a sight to behold if I am honest.
Now that could be totally valid, it’s just a different weighting being applied to the same set of results, but to be convinced you are doing the right thing you are essentially saying the original weighting is wrong. Which as I mentioned a couple of days ago, is a difficult thing to say when we haven’t had a result yet.
On that sentiment basically hinges this whole election.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7769783/Steve-Coogan-Ive-grown-beard-Im-Liberal-Democrat.html
If you ask me if I am expecting a 'David Herdson' event the answer is no
Notwithstanding that, I am not willing to predict a seat majority but I am do see a hung parliament slipping away to those hopeful of such an outcome
* It has been a long day, and I had some beers after the footy!
For example, my most recent play is buying up Con seats on the upside (landslide) side on Betfair exchange.
Have a look at 370+ ups on the Conservative Seats 2 market. The odds on offer there easily beat the bookies.
Just one more sleep before the final #welshpoliticalbarometer of the #GE2019 campaign...
https://twitter.com/roger_scully/status/1203739464402657280?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
The Labour Party in particular got very good at ‘managing’ the review process during its years in office. Some review experts think this gave them an edge of say up to a dozen seats over the Tories.
I'm very much inclined to believe he's wrong - although he claims he called 2017 right from doing a similar thing on the polls then - but I posted it because I know some here like seeing their posts.
1) redraws boundaries based on more recent census data
2) equalises seat sizes to within +/- 5% (or is it 10%?) of each other
3) reduces from 650 to 600 seats total
The projected increase in Tory majority from one to the other is some function of these three factors. My guess would be that the first factor is basically a wash, and the second factor outweighs the third, maybe 60:40. I'm sure Baxter himself would have a better guess.
Bullshit....There is polling inaccuracies and there is...
I have to add these totals together in both cases then try and remember how many Ulster dudes there are, and how many sit (Sinn Fein), blah blah, it's boring!
This is a very small Tory maj, isn't it?
Corbyn is a liar esp about anti semitism and he would sell the UK down the river and thats before we get to his support for terrorist organisations ...a shocker of a man unfit to be PM
Corbyn has been going to seats with narrow Tory majorities. If you closed your eyes to the polling, the two parties are behaving as though the Tories are losing seats to Labour.
Of course this might not be relevant with the war being fought on social media, but worth pondering at least.
The fact that some constituency polling for them is actually quite good but at odds with the national polling still hasn’t been properly explained.
What if they surprise significantly on the upside and walk away with 35 seats?
That could be a BONG! exit poll surprise on Thursday night.
But since then - nada. Andrew Neil effect? Zip. Debates? Nope. This campaign has been in the deep freeze for ten days.
Personally, I think Corbyn should have resigned in 2017.
And once again...I'm voting Lib Dem (albeit tactically), is that something a rabid Corbynite would do? They seem to spend their time on Twitter calling Lib Dems scum.
For me this election is the stop Johnson election, that's where I am coming at it from.
(And indeed success doesn't necessarily indicate value. The only way to truly demonstrate value would be to run the same event a large number of times under identical conditions, which is obviously impossible.)
2017
Ipsos MORI - 8% Tory lead
BMG - 13% Tory lead
ICM - 12% Tory lead
ComRes - 10% Tory lead
Reality = Tory lead of 2.5%
There were about two polls that indicated the final result within the margin of error. But we only know that with hindsight..
Frankly although the polls are coming in around 9-10 points, that's really no evidence they're right or not. We simply don't know until election day.
I hope they're wrong!
Also, this bloke in his basement has been told by YouGov bods what he is doing isn't valid before.
Here is a possibility: perhaps people are much, much more likely to lie to a pollster on the phone than to a canvasser face to face. I know I am, because I am not a convincing actor. If that is true of other people then it is perfectly possible that anecdotal accounts of face to face encounters are inherently more likely to be correct then polling results.
And your "apart from Herdson" sounds a bit like "What have the Romans ever done for us?"
And they don’t even use census data, except indirectly.
Perversely, I think this makes the anecdotes from labour canvassers sound much worse than they actually are.
From a psychological point of view, so long as people are actively telling you they hate your guy this time round, they are still on your team. They want you to get better. Like a football supporter being angry with the manager but still wanting his club to come good.
You see it in branding all the time when brands with huge amounts of loyalty make terrible mistakes. Corbyn is like when Twinings changed the recipe of their Earl Grey, or when Cadbury started putting less milk chocolate into their Creme Eggs.
It's when people stop shouting about how much they hate what Labour has become and silently vote Conservative that you'll see a Tory landslide. We're not there yet. People hate Corbyn, but the Labour brand remains strong.
Practically of course you can get by with less due to SF etc. but all the seat predictors will show the majority as (winning party seats - 325) x 2
The point I am making is you're a hypocrite. If you're happy to accept that then fair enough. But you can't take the moral high ground on pretty much anything then.
I also suspect that Mr Johnson's "Get Brexit Done" means that BXP is more likely to get squeezed by the Greens.
Given both parties got very similar vote shares in 2017, I'm going to go Green.
They didn't actually say he was wrong (presumably because they like us don't actually know, until polling day), they said they already account for at least some of the things he said. And that was only in the case of YG, not the other pollsters (they didn't know).
I think he is wrong BTW, I'm just adding that for balance.
Indeed my guess (and it has little evidence base) is:
Con 355
Lab 207
LD 23
SNP 42
PC 3
Green 1
Speaker 1
NI 18.
Maybe Corbyn likes some of his target seat candidates more than most of his sitting MPs?
Simple truth Corbyn's policies are very popular even if Corbyn isn't and more crucially apart from voting for Brexit Labour Leave voters don't have much in common with Boris Johnson.
They want higher taxes and spending, they want economic protectionism, they want more benefits etc.
Both are utterly shite now - and both need new leadership ASAP, in my mind.
I am not a lib dem or green and neither are you but you are going to vote lib dem.
Who is the real hypocrite?
I have 3/1 Con North Norfolk (1/2 today).
Conversely I have 11/8 Lib Dem Portsmouth South (33/1 today).
You are a hypocrite, whether you want to admit it or not.
I am also a hypocrite, I'm happy to accept that. Are you?