Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Political polling

@JohnRentoul: ComRes for @IndyOnSunday & @TheSundayMirror Con 33% (-2) Lab 33% (-2) Lib Dem 8% (+1) UKIP 13% (+2) Green 7% (+1) http://t.co/KhLBguYb5b


ComRes have shown ties in their last two, more important may be they haven't had a Labour lead all year and that they are phone pollsters, which all big Tory leads are.
 
TheHoodedClaw said:
How closely do postal voters mirror the wider electorate? I'm guessing it skews older.
Click to expand...
My folks (in their 70s) have postal voted already, none of the rest of the family have yet, which fits. They voted Labour mind, so maybe not the best fit for this case.
 
Ooh, Inverness, NB & S looks amazing. Poor old Danny Alexander. Oh dear, how sad, never mind. :D But where I live is probably a Labour hold. Oh well.
 
It's bullshit , Labour uncut meant to be part of that BluLabour thing, very Blairite and anti Miliband.
Reading through blogs on UKPR, first it is extremely hard to even see an 'x' through a ballot paper placed faced down. Many posted, who've been present at counts, that it is very hard to guess.

electoral commission changed the law this year, forcing them to be placed downwards, and ID numbers match with ballot lists before being placed in sealed box (after Davison and Scottish referendum fuck up, I think she revealed some early results.

Apart from that, postal ballots are meant to be favoured by an older age profile, benefiting the Tories

Also, from looking at the article's timings of events, there would hardly have been that many posted and returned , counted to cause Miliband to plan to visit Brand as a result.


Mischief making by Hodges types, who may want to speak to their lawyers....

http://www.inbrief.co.uk/media-law/publication-of-exit-polls-law.htm

“The Representation of the People Act 2002 inserted a section 66A into the initial 1983 of the same name and this read as follows. It is a criminal offence ‘to publish, before a poll is closed, any statement about the way in which voters have voted in that election, where this statement is, or might reasonably be taken to be, based on information given by voters after they voted.’

“Not only statements and statistics but also making forecasts based on exit polls, constitute an offence. The 2002 Act specifically makes it an offence ‘to publish, before a poll is closed, any forecast – including any estimate – of that election result, if the forecast is based on exit poll information from voters, or which might reasonably be taken to be based on it.”
 
This belongs more in the Guardian down the pan thread, really, but it's popped up in the main GE 2015 thread.

'Exclusive' Guardian poll makes Tory tactical votes in Hallam keep Clegg in ....

But look at the seriously shit methodology issues below.

This is lifted from treelover's post in the GE thread, and was posted in CiF (apparantly) by some astute person

(Couldn't find that actual response in the Graun myself, but thanks to treelover for alerting me/people in the other thread to it)

Comment Is Free said:
In a poll of 501 people just 5 people changing their intended preference gives a 1% change to the polling result. 5 people.

So when we hear about Clegg's 7% 'surge' remember that only 35 people in this sample are meant to have changed their intended vote in his favour.

But of course there's the other glaring fault with the conclusions of this poll:-

"ICM then made a second adjustment, which assumes that a proportion of voters who won’t say or don’t know who they will support will go back to the party they backed last time."

So if you voted in 2010 for Clegg when he was deliberately running his campaign as a 'vote Liberal Democrat to stop the Tories" but don't want to share your views with ICM you will now be counted automatically by ICM as voting for him again despite all that has happened in the last 5 years.

We all know what happened to Clegg's reputation and personal ratings since the vote in 2010. He has now fallen from the highest rating to the very lowest, a byword for treachery and openly despised by many of those who formerly voted for him.

Even ICM must have realised that there has been a change in the public's view of Nick Clegg. So why haven't they factored that into their calculations when they make that ludicrous assumption that voters automatically vote the same in 2015 as in 2010?
Click to expand...

Worth some technical/metholodology-related comments, polling experts? :)

brogdale and @ every other expert :)
 
People are voting for him out of spite, because they know if he's at the helm of the lib Dems they'll continue to slide into obscurity. I think we win whatever the result.
 
William of Walworth said:
This belongs more in the Guardian down the pan thread, really, but it's popped up in the main GE 2015 thread.

'Exclusive' Guardian poll makes Tory tactical votes in Hallam keep Clegg in ....

But look at the seriously shit methodology issues below.

This is lifted from treelover's post in the GE thread, and was posted in CiF (apparantly) by some astute person

(Couldn't find that actual response in the Graun myself, but thanks to treelover for alerting me/people in the other thread to it)



Worth some technical/metholodology-related comments, polling experts? :)

brogdale and @ every other expert :)
Click to expand...

Small sample (by Ashcroft standards) but the general story should not really come as any surprise to anyone who has followed this (and other related) thread(s). The data on voter contact by party has demonstrated that the vermin have never conducted anything like a proper campaign in Hallam, and several 'influential' vermin have called directly for support for Clegg over their candidate.

Ashcroft has resolutely stuck with unnamed polling and he has taken criticism for this approach, but he has applied his method consistently for comparative purposes. In a few days we'll all be able to see if he was right to do so.
 
brogdale said:
Gotta say that anyone responding differently to the un-named question 1 and named question 2 strikes me as being pretty hard of thinking tbh.
Click to expand...

They could be sentimental about the value of a known face.

Then again, they could be hard-of-thinking...
 
Presumably Ashcroft's last pre-election national poll.

He has the tory lead cut down to 2%.
 
ashcroft's national polls seem a bit whacky - this one is no exception with labour as low as 30% and the greens on 7% - thats way out of line with the other polls.
 
are there any figures for england and wales only? labour's national share of the vote was 29% in 2010, if it is now 33/34 they must be doing better in england and wales than only 4/5% to make up for the collapse of their vote in scotland?
 
binka said:
are there any figures for england and wales only? labour's national share of the vote was 29% in 2010, if it is now 33/34 they must be doing better in england and wales than only 4/5% to make up for the collapse of their vote in scotland?
Click to expand...
This was a fairly recent analysis...

 
Sadly the LDs seem to be creeping up slightly
BMG’s poll is also the third of the past four to put the Lib Dems in double-digits. It gives the Lib Dems 10 per cent. The past five national polls have given the party 9, 10, 10 and 11 per cent. They seemed to have escaped the nadir of 7 per cent they fell to earlier this year, when some lone polls put them as low as 5
Click to expand...

Gah
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Veronika94
What's happened to classic,old-fashioned political scandals?
Replies
27
Views
966
tim
tim
quimcunx
  • Poll
What is your polling station usually?
2 3
Replies
60
Views
2K
ska invita
ska invita
Pickman's model
yvette cooper's pitiful politics
Replies
0
Views
195
Pickman's model
Pickman's model
N
Ever had a negative reaction to a political T-shirt?
2 3 4 5 6
Replies
163
Views
8K
Chz
Chz
Silas Loom
Practical republican politics
2
Replies
59
Views
2K
Silas Loom
Silas Loom
Back
Top Bottom