Political polling

[brogdale]

Smithson's take on Ashcroft's Eng Only numbers...



Con -> Lab swing still near to 5%. And as Anthony pointed out last week, any English seat that Lab take from the vermin is effectively worth double that of any Scottish seat they lose to the nationalists....ie. (in terms of the majoritarian contest) 20 English seats would cover the loss of 40 North of the border.

 

[brogdale]

Useful guide for polling anoraks from Anthony..

 

[brogdale]

YG Anthony considers the 'squeeze' on the smaller parties...

 

[William of Walworth]

brogdale : I fail to achieve the correct level of geek with your post #1891

Why, and how, do 20 Labour gains in England compensate for the loss of 40 in Scotland?

Tried to check Mike Smithson's feed just now -- but I still failed to grasp that at all

 

[Lo Siento.]

brogdale : I fail to achieve the correct level of geek with your post #1891

Why, and how, do 20 Labour gains in England compensate for the loss of 40 in Scotland?

Tried to check Mike Smithson's feed just now -- but I still failed to grasp that at all

Presumably because the 20 gains probably come from the Tories and consequently have the simultaneous effect of lowering the number of seats they require to be the largest party as well as augmenting the number they win themselves.

 

[butchersapron]

Come on william. This is basic stuff!

 

[butchersapron]

Guardian reckon 8 labour gains in london as well - but offers a really offensive analysis about how thick w/c people used to vote tory in london until the immigrants came and swamped them.

 

[DotCommunist]

the population is younger, better-educated and most particularly ethnically diverse.

classic guardian analysis there

 

[William of Walworth]

Come on william. This is basic stuff!

Sure, but I'd still like a take on it from the real experts on Urban re polling .... taking that point from Lo Siento. though. Ta.

 

[kabbes]

All forners are left-wing (but actually neoliberal and not at all left-wing) fact

 

[brogdale]

brogdale : I fail to achieve the correct level of geek with your post #1891

Why, and how, do 20 Labour gains in England compensate for the loss of 40 in Scotland?

Tried to check Mike Smithson's feed just now -- but I still failed to grasp that at all

Assuming that Lab & Con are you and a mate in the pub, both with £100...if you 'give' £40 to someone else in the pub, you're £40 down on your mate, right? So, (him being a communist sort), he offers to give you some dosh to start the evening level, like. How much does he need to give you to get back to parity?

 

[William of Walworth]

brogdale : Cheers!

Liking that analogy

 

[butchersapron]

All of the forecasts for 2015 election from leading academics #LSEforecasting -->

 

[kabbes]

How are they reassigning "others" for those who don't split out SNP and co? And what is going on with the one that predicts 9 seats for the SNP?

 

[brogdale]

How are they reassigning "others" for those who don't split out SNP and co? And what is going on with the one that predicts 9 seats for the SNP?

Certainly looks like there's some jokers in the pack there!

That said, the means look reasonably credible...even if the nationalists number looks a tad under-cooked.

 

[butchersapron]

How are they reassigning "others" for those who don't split out SNP and co? And what is going on with the one that predicts 9 seats for the SNP?

Don't know/each will have their own method. Remember, this is academics using others polling, not pollsters.

 

[brogdale]

Don't know/each will have their own method. Remember, this is academics using others polling, not pollsters.

Burp, Sloane and wanktank must be funded by Nulab!

 

[butchersapron]

Now we get the first proper poll after the program from YG:

LAB - 36% (+2)
CON - 32% (-4)
UKIP - 13% (-)
LDEM - 8% (+1)
GRN - 6% (+1)

 

[brogdale]

Now we get the first proper poll after the program from YG:

LAB - 36% (+2)
CON - 32% (-4)
UKIP - 13% (-)
LDEM - 8% (+1)
GRN - 6% (+1)

It was Burley what won it!

 

[Kaka Tim]

I think we may start to see the torys panicking soon. I think they were convinced by various models predicting that their would vote would go up in the run up in the election. It has - but only marginally, and labour's has gone up too. The latest poll is probably margin of error stuff and the 'true' picture is still very much neck and neck - but its created a narrative of plucky ed doing well in the non-debate and labour gaining momentum as a result.

 

[Spanky Longhorn]

I suspect, barring mishaps (not things like the immigration mug which will have zero impact I mean big corruption or omnishambles stuff) both main parties will continue to squeeze the smaller ones as we get closer, while remaining neck and neck, with Scotland however bucking that trend with the SNP vote holding up.

Am I right in assuming the Liberal slime are not improving anywhere?

 

[danny la rouge]

As this is the closest thing we have to a stats thread, here's a useful site:

Introductory blurb:

http://www.democraticaudit.com/?p=12024

The search function gives you all the stats on your (or any given) constituency. Population demographics, who won in last 5 general elections, who is forecast to win this time, comparisons with locals and Europeans, and so on.

Groovy.

The search function. Enter your chosen constituency here:

http://democraticdashboard.com

 

[brogdale]

Love this polling...

In my weekly round up I mentioned some YouGov polling about which taxes would rise under a Labour or Conservative government, conducted before Prime Minister’s Question time, Cameron ruling out a VAT rise and Ed Balls ruling out an NI rise. YouGov repeated those questions in this poll to see if they had changed. At the start of the week, 31% of people thought VAT would rise if the Conservatives won. Following David Cameron ruling out a rise in VAT, this is now…32%. At the start of the week 39% of people expected national insurance to rise if Labour won, but since Ed Balls ruled it out, that has changed to… 40%. A lovely illustration of how much of the politicians’ arguments, exchanges and pledges make not the slightest difference to public opinion.

 

[brogdale]

I think we may start to see the torys panicking soon. I think they were convinced by various models predicting that their would vote would go up in the run up in the election. It has - but only marginally, and labour's has gone up too. The latest poll is probably margin of error stuff and the 'true' picture is still very much neck and neck - but its created a narrative of plucky ed doing well in the non-debate and labour gaining momentum as a result.

They will certainly be concerned about the early evidence that their negative campaigning strategy may not work to their advantage. Crosby has clearly staked a great deal on the 'scary Miliband in No.10' idea, and it's not surprising when so much else of their record/'vision' does not stand up to examination.

 

[Roadkill]

They will certainly be concerned about the early evidence that their negative campaigning strategy may not work to their advantage. Crosby has clearly staked a great deal on the 'scary Miliband in No.10' idea, and it's not surprising when so much else of their record/'vision' does not stand up to examination.

Crosby's strategy has just reminded me of this, tbh:

 

[Fez909]

Crosby's strategy has just reminded me of this, tbh:

That's all they've got, though.

Tory policies are shit, and Labour's are similar, so they can't argue on policy. It's just the 'danger'. Oh, and unions...again.

 

[brogdale]

That's all they've got, though.

Tory policies are shit, and Labour's are similar, so they can't argue on policy. It's just the 'danger'. Oh, and unions...again.

The vermin's policies are not shit; not if you appreciate that they used the bank crash as the pretext for achieving their goal of a much smaller (consolidator) state. The challenge they face is concealing their motivation and aspiration in an less fraught economic climate. Hence the reliance on negative campaigning.

 

[Fez909]

The vermin's policies are not shit; not if you appreciate that they used the bank crash as the pretext for achieving their goal of a much smaller (consolidator) state. The challenge they face is concealing their motivation and aspiration in an less fraught economic climate. Hence the reliance on negative campaigning.

Their goal and their policies are shit for the vast majority of society.

Just because they bring about their own aims, doesn't make them good. That's why they have to conceal everything. No one would vote for them if they were honest.

 

[brogdale]

Their goal and their policies are shit for the vast majority of society.

Just because they bring about their own aims, doesn't make them good. That's why they have to conceal everything. No one would vote for them if they were honest.

Of course. But I think it's important not, (just), to say their policies are shit. In their own terms, or rather the terms determined by financial capital, they have been remarkably successful, particularly given that they were compelled to work in coalition.

As ever, their challenge is to conceal that and persuade many millions of people to vote against their own interests, but even greater difficulty arises when their trope is predicated on a financial crisis that they are claiming to have averted. Hence the negative route.

 

[Roadkill]

The vermin's policies are not shit; not if you appreciate that they used the bank crash as the pretext for achieving their goal of a much smaller (consolidator) state.

I think the Tories have been pursuing three main agendas in that respect. The first is a genuine attempt to put the public finances back on an even keel after the crash. They've gone about it the wrong way and it's not worked, but I think they're so sunk in liberal ideology that they genuinely believe there's no alternative. The second is that they've used the crisis as a cover for pursuing the ideological goal of a much smaller state, and as you say they've done so worryingly successfully. The third is simply to protect their own electoral base by making damn sure that the spending cuts have fallen disproportionately hard on the cities, the poor and on young people, since none tend to vote Tory. That's profoundly stupid and short-sighted - in the end, Birmingham, Liverpool or Hull all contribute far more to the economy than some no-mark Tory commuter town - quite apart from being cynical to the last degree.