UK General Election - May 7th 2015
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2024, 04:59:52 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  UK General Election - May 7th 2015
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 75
Author Topic: UK General Election - May 7th 2015  (Read 275358 times)
ChrisDR68
PoshPaws68
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United Kingdom
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1475 on: February 16, 2015, 12:15:50 PM »

Excellent article from Andrew Rawnsley about the Conservative fund raising ball held last week:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/feb/15/tories-black-white-ball-fundraiser-rich-arrogance

As is this comment from a poster underneath it which probably explains why they somewhat mysteriously cling on to the status as one of the big political parties of the UK:

"A bit like Millwall fans, everyone hates us but we don't care, the Tories are saying 'We are rich, so are our donors, and we don't give a sh**t about the rest of you'.

The fact they still manage to attract 32% of support in the latest opinion polls is a source of mystery to me. I'd suspect a large percentage of their number are born, anti-union Labour haters"
Logged
windjammer
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,512
France


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1476 on: February 16, 2015, 12:37:00 PM »

UKIP at 14%?

Really?
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1477 on: February 16, 2015, 02:36:15 PM »

Tories will be pleased by the ICM poll, as it is seen as the 'gold standard'. But actually that it one of those myths that is widely accepted as fact; they were not the most accurate polling outfit in the two most recent general elections

Who were the most accurate pollsters?
-

"This newspaper" speculates on Ukip in 2020, a topic I must admit had not crossed my mind. But the Alliance survived for years after its breakthrough, even though it didn't do well at their best general election, so perhaps Ukip will persist in turn. It does make sense that if Labour get into government these days, they probably won't increase their vote at the next general election, nor will they placate concerns about immigration or the north-south wage gap, so gains in the north would be a prospect. This putative strategy requires no co-operation with the Conservatives.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1478 on: February 16, 2015, 04:32:48 PM »

Tories will be pleased by the ICM poll, as it is seen as the 'gold standard'. But actually that it one of those myths that is widely accepted as fact; they were not the most accurate polling outfit in the two most recent general elections

Who were the most accurate pollsters?

I believe NOP was spot on with all three major party percentages in 2005 (who don't seem to be active anymore). In 2010, it was actually some obscure Indian organization IIRC.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,847


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1479 on: February 16, 2015, 05:39:40 PM »

Tories will be pleased by the ICM poll, as it is seen as the 'gold standard'. But actually that it one of those myths that is widely accepted as fact; they were not the most accurate polling outfit in the two most recent general elections

Who were the most accurate pollsters?

I believe NOP was spot on with all three major party percentages in 2005 (who don't seem to be active anymore). In 2010, it was actually some obscure Indian organization IIRC.

The British Polling Council declared ICM the most accurate in 2010. It was the second most accurate after YouGov in the 2014 European Elections (given that it's last poll was two weeks before the election itself)
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,676
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1480 on: February 16, 2015, 05:49:40 PM »


Ah, metropolitan ignorance as a substitute for actual analysis. With uncritical recycling of party talking points and the inevitable appearance of dreadful hack academics peddling spurious theories as facts. And this from The Economist. Journalism is dead.
Logged
EPG
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 992
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1481 on: February 16, 2015, 06:53:41 PM »

Oh dear, is there anything by anyone that this forum likes? I may be insufficiently cynical for its tastes.
Logged
Zanas
Zanas46
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,947
France


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1482 on: February 17, 2015, 05:33:11 AM »

I've seen 2 polls this morning. One had Conservatives up 36-34 and the other had Labour up 33-31.

Glad to see UK polling can be just as erratic as ours. Smiley
This is not called erraticness ; this is called margin of error.

Oh dear, is there anything by anyone that this forum likes? I may be insufficiently cynical for its tastes.
The correct answer to that question is no. Except maybe Aliya Mustafina.
Logged
Tetro Kornbluth
Gully Foyle
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,846
Ireland, Republic of


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1483 on: February 17, 2015, 08:20:56 AM »

Oh dear, is there anything by anyone that this forum likes? I may be insufficiently cynical for its tastes.

It's just that the article you posted is clear and utter nonsense.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,431
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1484 on: February 17, 2015, 08:16:28 PM »

One aspect all these polls seems to be similar. CON+UKIP is always around 46-48.
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,544
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1485 on: February 18, 2015, 02:50:29 PM »

Oh dear, is there anything by anyone that this forum likes? I may be insufficiently cynical for its tastes.

I don't think you need to be particularly cynical to notice that quite a lot of political punditry is Not Very Good.  This isn't an exclusively UK phenomenon either; remember the 2012 US campaign, especially that Dick Morris Obama vs. Romney map?

In this case, the article quotes Matthew Goodwin; did you expect Al to have a high opinion of it?  (Actually, I'd be quite interested if Al would find the time to give a more detailed critique of Goodwin and Ford.)
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,544
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1486 on: February 18, 2015, 02:53:45 PM »

UKIP's parachuting of George Hargreaves into Coventry South is apparently off, and the original candidate has been reinstated:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ukip-scraps-general-election-plan-8670771
Logged
ChrisDR68
PoshPaws68
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United Kingdom
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1487 on: February 18, 2015, 04:46:53 PM »

Should we have state funding for UK political parties to level the financial playing field somewhat (and have less buying of influence over policy) or whether the status quo is generally okey dokey? Smiley

2010 General Election spending:

Conservatives...... £16.6m
Labour.................. £8.0m
Liberal Democrats £4.7m
UKIP..................... £0.7m
SNP...................... £0.3m

The Standards In Public life Committee recommended in 2011 state funding of £3 per vote for the parties, representing £23m a year over five years. This amounts to 50p per elector a year, little more than the cost of a first-class stamp Cheesy
 
Logged
joevsimp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 482


Political Matrix
E: -5.95, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1488 on: February 18, 2015, 04:59:16 PM »

UKIP's parachuting of George Hargreaves into Coventry South is apparently off, and the original candidate has been reinstated:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ukip-scraps-general-election-plan-8670771

That's a shame, could've been entertaining (not to mention damaging:)
Logged
Clyde1998
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,936
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1489 on: February 18, 2015, 05:25:16 PM »

Survation Scotland Poll:
SNP - 45% (-1)
Lab - 28% (+2)
Con - 15% (+1)
Lib - 5% (-2)

Seems to just be margin of error noise.
Logged
doktorb
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,072
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1490 on: February 18, 2015, 08:26:47 PM »

UKIP's parachuting of George Hargreaves into Coventry South is apparently off, and the original candidate has been reinstated:
http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/ukip-scraps-general-election-plan-8670771

Shocked, I am, shocked.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1491 on: February 18, 2015, 10:04:05 PM »

But that Winston "Farage is Jesus" McKenzie will be standing for UKIP somewhere no doubt.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1492 on: February 19, 2015, 07:44:02 AM »

UKIP struggling to make a breakthrough in places they're targeting, where they did well in May last year.

Logged
DL
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,412
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1493 on: February 19, 2015, 08:30:42 AM »

Notice that at the constituency level support for the Greens falls to low single digits
Logged
Hifly
hifly15
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,937


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1494 on: February 19, 2015, 08:35:09 AM »

Notice that at the constituency level support for the Greens falls to low single digits

Uhh it's already on low single digits in the standard voting intention...
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1495 on: February 19, 2015, 09:47:40 AM »

Also, I think 20-36 point increases counts as a breakthrough.
Logged
DL
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,412
Canada


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1496 on: February 19, 2015, 10:20:23 AM »

Notice that at the constituency level support for the Greens falls to low single digits

Uhh it's already on low single digits in the standard voting intention...

Some national polls suggest the Greens are as high as 7 or 8 percent. This suggests they are more like 2 or 3%
Logged
YL
YorkshireLiberal
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,544
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1497 on: February 19, 2015, 10:30:15 AM »

Notice that at the constituency level support for the Greens falls to low single digits

Uhh it's already on low single digits in the standard voting intention...

Some national polls suggest the Greens are as high as 7 or 8 percent. This suggests they are more like 2 or 3%

These are not constituencies you would expect the Greens to be doing well in.
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1498 on: February 19, 2015, 10:43:19 AM »

Notice that at the constituency level support for the Greens falls to low single digits

Uhh it's already on low single digits in the standard voting intention...

Some national polls suggest the Greens are as high as 7 or 8 percent. This suggests they are more like 2 or 3%

These are not constituencies you would expect the Greens to be doing well in.

These seats are anathema to the Greens. Wait for polls in studenty seats where all the inner-city hipsters live.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1499 on: February 19, 2015, 11:11:00 AM »

Yeah, the Greens will pick up a lot of the trendy left-liberal middle-class student types who would be backing the Lib Dems if not for the coalition. They are reluctant to vote Labour due to the party's (still) working-class image and they'd eat their own babies before voting Tory or UKIP.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 55 56 57 58 59 [60] 61 62 63 64 65 ... 75  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.057 seconds with 13 queries.