United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 07:15:23 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)
  United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55 56 57 58 59 ... 69
Author Topic: United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019  (Read 135679 times)
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,959
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1325 on: December 08, 2019, 06:49:30 PM »


There's a Scottish constituency that voted 61% Leave? Shocked Huh.
Logged
urutzizu
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 587
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1326 on: December 08, 2019, 06:58:04 PM »


Common Fisheries Policy had a very significant impact there. Banff and Buchan is home to the Fishing ports of Fraserburgh and Peterhead. Even the SNP dont like that particular part of EU membership.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1327 on: December 08, 2019, 07:08:53 PM »
« Edited: December 08, 2019, 07:12:20 PM by Oryxslayer »



Uhhhhh.... I guess Labour peaked? Could be over-herding.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,151
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1328 on: December 08, 2019, 07:16:27 PM »



Uhhhhh.... I guess Labour peaked? Could be over-herding.

Survation in their final 2015 and 2017 polls went against the convention (unusually large lead for CON in 2015 and unusually small lead for CON in 2017) and were correct.  Could lighting strike the third time ?  Of course this is not their final poll which I imagine would come out the day before the election.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1329 on: December 08, 2019, 07:45:05 PM »

Note that this was done around the same time as the rest of the weekend poll glut, even if it has been published later. It's actually quite interesting that there has been no consistent pattern of movement across said poll glut this weekend. Put them all together and we have swings of 2.5 to 6.5, with the overwhelming majority (as previously noted) towards the middle of that.
Logged
Arkansas Yankee
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,175
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1330 on: December 08, 2019, 08:30:52 PM »

If Labour antisemitic problem are as set out in this article below it needs to take severe whipping and be forced to complete a total house cleaning before allowed back in #10.


https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2019/12/the-secret-labour-files-of-shame.php
Logged
Arkansas Yankee
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,175
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1331 on: December 08, 2019, 08:35:31 PM »



Uhhhhh.... I guess Labour peaked? Could be over-herding.

Lol!!

Opinium may have been right from the beginning and refused to be herded.

I think the British public is making a judgment on Corbyn this election. It may not be pleasant for Labour.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1332 on: December 08, 2019, 08:52:20 PM »

I wouldn't be surprised if very little changes when YouGov releases their updated MRP on Tuesday. The Conservative polling lead is only slightly smaller than the lead shown a week ago when the MRP was unveiled.
Logged
mileslunn
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,797
Canada


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1333 on: December 08, 2019, 09:13:48 PM »

I think at this point, its pretty much a certainty that the Tories will win most seats and unless a lot goes right for Labour, a Tory majority is almost a near certainty.  You would need tactical voting on a stage never seen and a huge youth surge just to prevent a narrow Tory majority.  So at this point a Tory majority most likely, quite possibly a landslide.
Logged
King of Kensington
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,068


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1334 on: December 08, 2019, 10:05:26 PM »

How much damage can the Brexit Party do to Labour?
Logged
Arkansas Yankee
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,175
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1335 on: December 08, 2019, 10:38:54 PM »

How much damage can the Brexit Party do to Labour?

They can save Labour from Corbyn and his antisemitic friends.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1336 on: December 09, 2019, 08:52:41 AM »

You can read too much into this sort of thing, but from the tone of some of their tweets and the little summary article they put together, Survation don't seem to be particularly happy with the sample for that poll. A lot of emphasis put on it being 'just a snapshot' and so on - familiar euphemisms. Such things do, of course, happen - they are even statistically unavoidable.

Of course the very odd and abnormal nature of so much of this election means that it technically isn't impossible that a sample that seems to stink isn't bad. Who knows.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1337 on: December 09, 2019, 08:58:54 AM »

How much damage can the Brexit Party do to Labour?

No one really knows what their impact will be, in any sense.
Logged
Lord Halifax
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,304
Papua New Guinea


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1338 on: December 09, 2019, 10:02:44 AM »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink

Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,370
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1339 on: December 09, 2019, 10:06:09 AM »

I mean, that's very nice looking, but it is basically just guesswork. Not that I think the polls are definitely right of course, I've thought for quite a while that the pollsters don't have the tiniest idea of what kind of electorate will turn out on Thursday.
Logged
BigSerg
7sergi9
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,265


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1340 on: December 09, 2019, 10:06:30 AM »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink



Lol
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1341 on: December 09, 2019, 10:07:23 AM »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink



Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.

Anyway...



Con+6 appears to be the Tories low end right now, with Con+12 the high end. Fairly good spread pointing towards something like +8/9.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1342 on: December 09, 2019, 11:10:40 AM »
« Edited: December 09, 2019, 11:30:39 AM by cp »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1343 on: December 09, 2019, 11:50:06 AM »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.

Polling companies by their nature are supposed  to try and get accurate numbers. They do not want to release bad data because the people paying for these polls won't give the  polling company money in the future if the results are just going to be off. I remember how hungover it was around the YouGov office after Brexit because we had put out the 'exit poll' calling a Remain victory, and I also remember the proverbial champagne coming out after 2017 for a similar reason.

If you start messing around with naturally low crosstabs then you are asking for trouble. How many times on this forum have people noticed how high the GOP vote in the crosstabs is with African Americans? Or what about the Urban/Suburban/Rural breakdown? Or how about in this very thread, where we have to be cautious about low-response constituency polls.

Now, why might groups be weighted in some fashion? I dunno, perhaps because the electorate is going to be different than 2017? Is that really hard to believe, especially considering how different the circumstances are between the two elections? All but the worst pollsters (McLaughlin) have no reason to lie with their data, so this is their best estimate. If they are off, they will be off, and we will know either with YouGov on Tuesday or the exits on Thursday.

If the polls are going to be off, it won't be because we went diving into the weights and found errors. Rather it is what I alluded to earlier: there is a high number of undecided voters this late into the campaign. British polls love to remove these guys from the topline, but if they move as a block (who knows...) than the polls can be both right and off.
Logged
Serenity Now
tomm_86
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,174
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1344 on: December 09, 2019, 12:01:40 PM »

I've noticed some modelling has come out from an organisation called Datapraxis which was founded by Paul Hilder, who has been associated the the Open Democracy website and various other left-leaning online campaigns. While it doesn't seem to provide an interactive guide for all constituencies, it does provide themed reports based on modelling for selected constituencies. Here's the URL links to the reports:

https://www.dataprax.is/65-battleground-seats-for-labour
https://www.dataprax.is/65-battleground-seats-for-labour
https://www.dataprax.is/tory-landslide-or-hung-parliament
https://www.dataprax.is/seven-seats-that-could-change-brita
https://www.dataprax.is/24-seats-where-liberal-democrats-co

The first report concludes that they think there is "absolutely no chance of a Labour majority" and that the "likeliest scenario remains a significant Tory majority" but with the caveat that "Anti-Tory tactical voting, Labour Leavers coming home and increased youth turnout could block Boris Johnson from forming the next government."

I have not yet been able to look into this in enough detail to get any idea of how good or bad their model is.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1345 on: December 09, 2019, 12:15:14 PM »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.

Polling companies by their nature are supposed  to try and get accurate numbers. They do not want to release bad data because the people paying for these polls won't give the  polling company money in the future if the results are just going to be off. I remember how hungover it was around the YouGov office after Brexit because we had put out the 'exit poll' calling a Remain victory, and I also remember the proverbial champagne coming out after 2017 for a similar reason.

If you start messing around with naturally low crosstabs then you are asking for trouble. How many times on this forum have people noticed how high the GOP vote in the crosstabs is with African Americans? Or what about the Urban/Suburban/Rural breakdown? Or how about in this very thread, where we have to be cautious about low-response constituency polls.

Now, why might groups be weighted in some fashion? I dunno, perhaps because the electorate is going to be different than 2017? Is that really hard to believe, especially considering how different the circumstances are between the two elections? All but the worst pollsters (McLaughlin) have no reason to lie with their data, so this is their best estimate. If they are off, they will be off, and we will know either with YouGov on Tuesday or the exits on Thursday.

If the polls are going to be off, it won't be because we went diving into the weights and found errors. Rather it is what I alluded to earlier: there is a high number of undecided voters this late into the campaign. British polls love to remove these guys from the topline, but if they move as a block (who knows...) than the polls can be both right and off.

Well, yes, but then the issue at hand is *how* one believes the 2019 electorate will be different and what premises led one to that conclusion. I'd be fascinated to read what YouGov (or any other pollster's) logic is for adjusting the weighting as they do. If they make a convincing case based on reasonable assumptions and/or polling, then they lend credence to their results. If not, or in the absence of such explanations, we're left with little more than reputation and venerability on which to base a conclusion. The Twitter thread referenced above at least gives something of a justification.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,724


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1346 on: December 09, 2019, 12:21:05 PM »



Okay, this is a serious problem for Labour.

These were the barometers from 2017:



And these are the ones so far in 2019, currently without the poll released today:



So this is effectively comparable to the last Barometer of 2017. The barometers from that campaign more or less followed the national picture at the period of polling. The final barometer was very accurate, and well within the  margin of error. Therefore, this could be very close to the final welsh results, maybe slightly underpolling Labour.

So lets start with the seats. Labour fortunately has little to fear in regards to their welsh majority. The southern Valley's either have too large Labour majorities or too prominent Remain leads for the Tories to pierce them. Boris regaining Gower, Bridgend, or Cardiff North, or say picking up a Newport seat would be a serious shock. In this election, therefore Labour likely has a floor of 22ish thanks to their geographic advantage.

That floor of 22 though is separated by a large gap from their present ceiling. The majorities  in the northern Leave seats are far more shaky, and Labour is likely to lose  more votes up there than in the inflexable south. This poll spells it out plainly enough: it would be a surprise if Labour held one of their six northern seats. Five are going Blue, and one is a Tory/PC battleground.

Finally, the Lib-Dem number is to small to inferr anything serious from. Depending on how concentrated their vote is in the two seats where it matters, Ceridigion and B & R, they could have a decent night.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1347 on: December 09, 2019, 12:49:46 PM »

Given that the poll suggests a swing of around 6pts and most of the seats in question have 2017 majorities that would fall at pretty much that exact point, I'm not sure how you get to 'this poll suggests no chance at holding any' from that?

Anyway, Welsh polling is historically very volatile - it can sometimes be about right, but it can also be quite badly off and in all potential directions.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1348 on: December 09, 2019, 12:52:12 PM »

So this happened today.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,612
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1349 on: December 09, 2019, 12:59:16 PM »


It gets worse (for the Tories). Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, made an unscheduled trip to the hospital. He was heckled as he left, but the BBC falsely reported it (based on 'Tory sources', of course) as a Labour activist punching a Tory aide. Considering this is the event in question, I'd say it's *just possible* that was a misleading source.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 49 50 51 52 53 [54] 55 56 57 58 59 ... 69  
« 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 0.064 seconds with 12 queries.