Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
So, does an open thread mean we're encouraged to bring something new to the table for discussion, as per the old nightowls protocols? Let me go away and have a think...
I think means The Screaming Eagles is having a romantic weekend away, so headers cupboard is bare. 🙂
No incredibly subtle metaphor involving soccer mom and STV for us today? 😕
I can submit a thread header on what should happen to all civil servants at the DfE, but it might upset @Northern_Al so I won't.
I thought we had that sorted?
We have a possible arrangement. But as it doesn't include starving Blast Ended Skrewts I am still open to further offers.
You had a better offer than the entire DfE participating in the first manned landing on the Sun?
Not yet, but I'm willing to keep options open should one materialise.
I am also concerned at the thought of that critical mass of bone being injected into the sun. The gravimetric distortions might have a most unfortunate effect.
A fuckton of calcium will have no effect on the Sun. It's still a main sequence star.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
- Cases. Down. R below 1 and falling in all measures - Hospital admissions. R below 1. Down. - MV Beds. Down - In Hospital. Down. - Deaths. Down and and the fall is accelerating.
I've always wondered, do you have images ready for the complete scale?
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
It's what didn't happen in 1997 or 2017 too.
To some extent it did happen in 1997 as the Tory voteshare was higher than most final polls.
It did not happen in 2017 as more Tory voters were committed to keep out Corbyn, some of those will be undecided with Starmer now Labour leader but still likely go Tory in the end. Even if most of the redwall voters who normally vote Labour but lent their votes to Boris in 2019 to get Brexit done now go back to Labour with Brexit having got done
- Cases. Down. R below 1 and falling in all measures - Hospital admissions. R below 1. Down. - MV Beds. Down - In Hospital. Down. - Deaths. Down and and the fall is accelerating.
I've always wondered, do you have images ready for the complete scale?
Ignore the talk of the greatest growth since the second world war: that’s just a function of the economy having collapsed so badly in 2020. Note instead the Bank of England’s forecast of 1.25% growth in 2023, falling to just 1% in 2024. David Smith, economics editor of the Sunday Times and no remoaner fanatic, puts that down partly to Covid but partly to the “adverse fiscal consequences of leaving the EU”, which left the country “with a budget hole that has had to be filled with higher taxes. We now have a high-tax economy strangled by red tape and hampered by trade restrictions..
Brexit was always a dog-t*rd wrapped in Xmas paper. Now that the Leavers have opened the wrapping....
They got what they wished for.
Arguing ad infinitum about Brexit is, essentially, a distraction. Post-Brexit trading arrangements are extremely unhelpful for some businesses, but in other respects it's a convenient excuse for ignoring more fundamental problems (as well as being a culture wars weapon to be deployed in desperation by this pathetic excuse for a Government, of course.)
We'd still be stuck with a population getting older, fatter, sicker and more disabled with every passing year whether we had stayed in the EU or not. We'd still be suffering with an unbalanced system of taxation - too much on incomes, too little on assets - whether we had stayed in the EU or not, because of the power of the grey vote. We'd still be stuck with ludicrous property prices, and the resulting concentration of national wealth in houses rather than productive investment, whether we'd stayed in the EU or not. We'd be trapped in a socio-economic order arranged primarily to the benefit of rich retirees and their heirs in Southern England whether we'd stayed in the EU or not.
In absolute terms, the reduction in exports to the EU post-Brexit is important. Relative to the entire size of the economy, however, it is small beer. Our problems run a Hell of a lot deeper than non-tariff barriers on the export of sheep and petty arguments over fishing quotas.
- Cases. Down. R below 1 and falling in all measures - Hospital admissions. R below 1. Down. - MV Beds. Down - In Hospital. Down. - Deaths. Down and and the fall is accelerating.
I've always wondered, do you have images ready for the complete scale?
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5%
Not very sensible changing the methodology at a time like this. Poll watchers want to compare like with like. I remember Ipsos did the same several years ago when they brought out two polls. One on people most likely to vote using a one to ten possibility and the other ignoring it. It made no sense to anyone and On PB they weren't in favour for a long time. The 'John West' of the polling world.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
Indeed - polls can be wrong. The recent Portuguese General Election shows the continuing inaccuracies in polling. None predicted a Socialist overall majority but that's what happened.
The fact remains you called the headline numbers "good" for Boris Johnson (as distinct from the Conservative Party but that's a nuance of another nature) whereas Opinium themselves have confirmed had they used the old methodology the result would have been a 10-point Labour lead.
They have also twice stressed there is no evidence of Labour's position weakening - it's also worth pointing out the LD position has improved as much as that of the Conservatives if we're going to play that game.
Ignore the talk of the greatest growth since the second world war: that’s just a function of the economy having collapsed so badly in 2020. Note instead the Bank of England’s forecast of 1.25% growth in 2023, falling to just 1% in 2024. David Smith, economics editor of the Sunday Times and no remoaner fanatic, puts that down partly to Covid but partly to the “adverse fiscal consequences of leaving the EU”, which left the country “with a budget hole that has had to be filled with higher taxes. We now have a high-tax economy strangled by red tape and hampered by trade restrictions..
Brexit was always a dog-t*rd wrapped in Xmas paper. Now that the Leavers have opened the wrapping....
They got what they wished for.
Gosh, well, if even Jonathan Freedland has come out against Brexit...
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
It's what didn't happen in 1997 or 2017 too.
To some extent it did happen in 1997 as the Tory voteshare was higher than most final polls.
It did not happen in 2017 as more Tory voters were committed to keep out Corbyn, some of those will be undecided with Starmer now Labour leader but still likely go Tory in the end. Even if most of the redwall voters who normally vote Labour but lent their votes to Boris in 2019 to get Brexit done now go back to Labour with Brexit having got done
The Telegraph reminds us that breaking the triple lock means pensioners are worse off. How, and whether, this will affect the next election... Maybe they will have to stop buying the Telegraph.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5%
Not very sensible changing the methodology at a time like this. Poll watchers want to compare like with like. I remember Ipsos did the same several years ago when they brought out two polls. One on people most likely to vote using a one to ten possibility and the other ignoring it. It made no sense to anyone and On PB they weren't in favour for a long time. The 'John West' of the polling world.
Polls, we've got 'em. And if you don't like 'em we've got others.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
It's what didn't happen in 1997 or 2017 too.
To some extent it did happen in 1997 as the Tory voteshare was higher than most final polls.
It did not happen in 2017 as more Tory voters were committed to keep out Corbyn, some of those will be undecided with Starmer now Labour leader but still likely go Tory in the end. Even if most of the redwall voters who normally vote Labour but lent their votes to Boris in 2019 to get Brexit done now go back to Labour with Brexit having got done
Brexit is far from done
Do you not read this forum
It is, though that would also help Boris as the more redwall voters think Starmer will take us back into the single market with free movement or even rejoin, the more they will stick with Boris next time.
Hence Starmer is only talking about closer alignment to the EEA not rejoining the EEA in full
Effective bit of work by Scottish Tories. The ferry fiasco north of the border has moved from satire to farce. Hulls launched with false funnels and painted-on windows.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5%
Not very sensible changing the methodology at a time like this. Poll watchers want to compare like with like. I remember Ipsos did the same several years ago when they brought out two polls. One on people most likely to vote using a one to ten possibility and the other ignoring it. It made no sense to anyone and On PB they weren't in favour for a long time. The 'John West' of the polling world.
Understandable if they think this is a better way of converting their poll responses into national scores- they want to get it right, and the closer we get to an election, the more problematic the step change due to new processing would be.
Are they more right now than before? Only one way to find out...
Effective bit of work by Scottish Tories. The ferry fiasco north of the border has moved from satire to farce. Hulls launched with false funnels and painted-on windows.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5%
Not very sensible changing the methodology at a time like this. Poll watchers want to compare like with like. I remember Ipsos did the same several years ago when they brought out two polls. One on people most likely to vote using a one to ten possibility and the other ignoring it. It made no sense to anyone and On PB they weren't in favour for a long time. The 'John West' of the polling world.
Understandable if they think this is a better way of converting their poll responses into national scores- they want to get it right, and the closer we get to an election, the more problematic the step change due to new processing would be.
Are they more right now than before? Only one way to find out...
I too like it. I’m glad I’m not alone.
MoonRabbits analysis - like or spam me based on wether it’s analysis that fits your own way thinking as befits the FIRST PB LAW golden rule thing 😆
I like this approach, this change is welcome and at the right time, what they have done is make it more accurate predicting if there was a general election this week, they have built in the SWINGBACK that is difference from a hypothetical mid term poll to forced choice of real election this week. Very clever.
At face value it looks like the under bonnet tweak has taken 5 off Labour added two to Conservatives. But it also needs to be related to last poll from this firm - where Labours lead now grown from 7 on method used two weeks ago. That tells us they think Labour have gone up quite a bit in last two weeks.
At first it looks an awful poll for the Conservatives, equivalent to last two weeks Labour growing to a double digit lead from this usually miserly polling company, but also, with swingback methodology built in, they still can’t break 35.
But if this poll is a more true picture of what would happen if an election is called, 3% behind is actually good news for the Conservatives, as it shows Labour with the work to do on the votes the under the bonnet swing back gave back to the Tories, and the Conservatives are not out of the picture yet having not lost those votes.
But then the political reality kicks in, of the direction of travel - with a broken unelectable leader needing to be replaced, and an election not going to happen anytime soon, Labour could have an even bigger under the bonnet poll lead by the time next election is called.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
Indeed - polls can be wrong. The recent Portuguese General Election shows the continuing inaccuracies in polling. None predicted a Socialist overall majority but that's what happened.
The fact remains you called the headline numbers "good" for Boris Johnson (as distinct from the Conservative Party but that's a nuance of another nature) whereas Opinium themselves have confirmed had they used the old methodology the result would have been a 10-point Labour lead.
They have also twice stressed there is no evidence of Labour's position weakening - it's also worth pointing out the LD position has improved as much as that of the Conservatives if we're going to play that game.
The Portuguese general election also saw the populist right Chega do better than expected in the polls at the expense of the main opposition centre right Social Democrats. That helped the Socialists get a majority even though the Socialists polled about what most final polls were forecasting
Quite an impressive ZERO medals for Britain in the Narnia Olympics
We’re actually being beaten by that well known frozen alpine sporting giant Belgium, which at least has a bronze
Britain is historically extremely weak in the Winter Games, and the team only did as well as it did in the last two editions because of the Bath Uni tea tray squad, who have comprehensively bombed this time (along, so far, with almost all the rest of the British entrants; I think there's been one fourth place and one fifth place finish and that's about it.)
There are three realistic chances left to win something of which I'm aware (courtesy of the Scottish curling teams and one decent entrant in the Men's Slalom skiing) and most likely one or two more that I don't know about, since I don't follow these things closely, but the pressure will be building on the BOA.
Whatever your opinion on the merits or otherwise of state funding for Olympic athletes, if the medal return on it turns out to be the first zilch in thirty years, then the £28m of funding that's gone into elite Winter sports since 2018 - mostly in events that attract negligible public participation - is bound to be seriously questioned.
They only get any money at all because posh people love skiing. If you ask most British people to name a famous sportsman from the winter Olympics they would say Eddie the Eagle and maybe the Jamaican bobsleigh team, and that's it.
We should just withdraw from the Winter Olympics. Seriously. Who gives a flying iota of a micro-fuck?
Why not start our own “spring Olympics”. The best Cotswold cheese rolling. The first dogging after the last frost. Cricket in unseasonable sleet
We’d win. Give them half a mill. Defund the wanky posh winter crap
The winter Olympics are both more entertaining and more inane than they were 20 years ago. Countless events which are basically titting about. Impressive to see, but not really sports. And the utter imbecility of the commentary! I'm 46, so not exactly the BBC's target market. But still, it must grate almost as much on young people as it does on me.
Interesting changes by Opinium polling . An issue with their turn out model though is it won’t take account of the utter loathing of Johnson by many who would walk through a hurricane to vote the pathological liar out of no 10 .
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
Doesn't mean they will next time - you can't extrapolate the next election from the last.
It is what happened in 1992 or 2015 for example, when most polls wrongly predicted Kinnock or Ed Miliband would be PM
It's what didn't happen in 1997 or 2017 too.
To some extent it did happen in 1997 as the Tory voteshare was higher than most final polls.
It did not happen in 2017 as more Tory voters were committed to keep out Corbyn, some of those will be undecided with Starmer now Labour leader but still likely go Tory in the end. Even if most of the redwall voters who normally vote Labour but lent their votes to Boris in 2019 to get Brexit done now go back to Labour with Brexit having got done
Brexit is far from done
Do you not read this forum
It is, though that would also help Boris as the more redwall voters think Starmer will take us back into the single market with free movement or even rejoin, the more they will stick with Boris next time.
Hence Starmer is only talking about closer alignment to the EEA not rejoining the EEA in full
And his successor will then take things somewhere else- either more or less distant. And so on for ever and ever, amen.
Partly because that's the twice-a-decade structure of the TCA, but mostly because that's how most politics works. Whatever any PM does, most of it will be undone by their successors.
The biggest Brexit lie of all was the one that said that, once Boris's deal was signed, Brexit would be "done", the UK-EU relationship would be in a perfect stable form and there'd be nothing left to argue about.
The Telegraph reminds us that breaking the triple lock means pensioners are worse off. How, and whether, this will affect the next election... Maybe they will have to stop buying the Telegraph.
OTOH house prices have gone up by something like 10% over the past year alone.
Poor pensioners in rented accommodation will suffer disproportionately badly from this (just as the poor more generally will be squeezed hardest by the cost of living crisis, as they always are in these situations.) However, the large majority of olds are owner-occupiers and are therefore getting richer with every passing year. So, sure, they'll grumble and stick bang over higher fuel prices and the blip in the growth of their pension incomes - the triple lock has been suspended, not scrapped - but fundamentally they're still the Tory client vote. They're not about to desert over £300 when the average house has appreciated in value by £25k in the last twelve months.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
That’s a true post I support.
But only if this firm is right in their guess at how don’t know swill go, as other methods give more to Labour. And also, I believe we have evidence don’t knows tend to break for governments to keep them in, but do we have any data if don’t knows break the other way in a change year? It could be, in a change election don’t knows don’t go back to government in large numbers.
Also, what looks a dramatic outcome in methodology at the top, further down greens have not changed, it’s still I high looking green figure probably at Labour and Libbdem expense in this poll but not in tactical voting on the day?
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
Well, no, but maybe Labour's position was never as good as all the other polls have suggested.
As has been pointed out many times, Labour's poll lead has gone up partly because so many Tory 2019 voters currently say "don't know". Opinium seem pretty confident that these people will vote, given that they voted in 2019, and I guess they assume that they will roughly vote in line with those, in their demographic, who do give a voting intention.
I think that's currently a fair enough conclusion. If people won't tell an opinion pollster that they are switching to vote for Labour in mid-term, seems a bit of a stretch to think that they will. And I suppose it's possible that these voters will all fail to vote, but predictions of strongly differential turnout don't seem to come to pass at GEs. Turnout seems to go up and down on the basis of how important/predictable the result is felt to be, rather than because voters for one side or the other are more or less enthused/discouraged.
Starmer and Labour have an opportunity to convince voters who currently say don't know to switch to Labour, but it's far from a done deal. A 3% Labour lead feels like a better prediction of what would happen in a GE today than a 10% lead for that reason. But implicit in this argument is that Opinium are effectively correcting for one of the main mid-term polling effects that produces a swingback from mid-term opinion polls - so you wouldn't want to take one of their polls and argue that Labour need to be x% ahead because of swingback....
Quite an impressive ZERO medals for Britain in the Narnia Olympics
We’re actually being beaten by that well known frozen alpine sporting giant Belgium, which at least has a bronze
Britain is historically extremely weak in the Winter Games, and the team only did as well as it did in the last two editions because of the Bath Uni tea tray squad, who have comprehensively bombed this time (along, so far, with almost all the rest of the British entrants; I think there's been one fourth place and one fifth place finish and that's about it.)
There are three realistic chances left to win something of which I'm aware (courtesy of the Scottish curling teams and one decent entrant in the Men's Slalom skiing) and most likely one or two more that I don't know about, since I don't follow these things closely, but the pressure will be building on the BOA.
Whatever your opinion on the merits or otherwise of state funding for Olympic athletes, if the medal return on it turns out to be the first zilch in thirty years, then the £28m of funding that's gone into elite Winter sports since 2018 - mostly in events that attract negligible public participation - is bound to be seriously questioned.
They only get any money at all because posh people love skiing. If you ask most British people to name a famous sportsman from the winter Olympics they would say Eddie the Eagle and maybe the Jamaican bobsleigh team, and that's it.
We should just withdraw from the Winter Olympics. Seriously. Who gives a flying iota of a micro-fuck?
Why not start our own “spring Olympics”. The best Cotswold cheese rolling. The first dogging after the last frost. Cricket in unseasonable sleet
We’d win. Give them half a mill. Defund the wanky posh winter crap
The winter Olympics are both more entertaining and more inane than they were 20 years ago. Countless events which are basically titting about. Impressive to see, but not really sports. And the utter imbecility of the commentary! I'm 46, so not exactly the BBC's target market. But still, it must grate almost as much on young people as it does on me.
Point of order: the BBC's target market isn't 20 years younger than you. It's 20 years older.
Interesting changes by Opinium polling . An issue with their turn out model though is it won’t take account of the utter loathing of Johnson by many who would walk through a hurricane to vote the pathological liar out of no 10 .
But if these voters loathe Johnson so much why are they telling pollsters they don't know who they will vote for? Surely they would be a strong vote for Labour or the Lib Dems?
They're certainly not as happy as they were a few months ago, but they're not irretrievably lost to the Tories.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
Effective bit of work by Scottish Tories. The ferry fiasco north of the border has moved from satire to farce. Hulls launched with false funnels and painted-on windows.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
Your second sentence is the major flaw in that argument. Germany will put up with anything for cheap gas.
The figure that Labour should worry about is 26% think Starmer would be a better PM than Boris at 24% with 35% neither
I think that the Corbyn episode has done Labour serious lasting damage. A lot of voters will need a lot more convincing that the party can be trusted and that giving Labour another go is worthwhile, but it appears at least to be moving in the right direction.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
But it wouldn't be just Germany would it? I know little about the global energy market, but surely cutting off a huge supplier increases the price of energy generally? Conversely, opening up the Nordstream pipeline beings cheaper gas into Europe and drives the price down everywhere else.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
Your second sentence is the major flaw in that argument. Germany will put up with anything for cheap gas.
We shall see. There is also critical damage to NATO and the EU to be considered here if it dumps on its supposed friends.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
Your second sentence is the major flaw in that argument. Germany will put up with anything for cheap gas.
The disdainful remarks here about Germany's emphasis on 'cheap gas' perhaps go some way to explaining the relative positions of the German and British economies.
Quite an impressive ZERO medals for Britain in the Narnia Olympics
We’re actually being beaten by that well known frozen alpine sporting giant Belgium, which at least has a bronze
Britain is historically extremely weak in the Winter Games, and the team only did as well as it did in the last two editions because of the Bath Uni tea tray squad, who have comprehensively bombed this time (along, so far, with almost all the rest of the British entrants; I think there's been one fourth place and one fifth place finish and that's about it.)
There are three realistic chances left to win something of which I'm aware (courtesy of the Scottish curling teams and one decent entrant in the Men's Slalom skiing) and most likely one or two more that I don't know about, since I don't follow these things closely, but the pressure will be building on the BOA.
Whatever your opinion on the merits or otherwise of state funding for Olympic athletes, if the medal return on it turns out to be the first zilch in thirty years, then the £28m of funding that's gone into elite Winter sports since 2018 - mostly in events that attract negligible public participation - is bound to be seriously questioned.
They only get any money at all because posh people love skiing. If you ask most British people to name a famous sportsman from the winter Olympics they would say Eddie the Eagle and maybe the Jamaican bobsleigh team, and that's it.
We should just withdraw from the Winter Olympics. Seriously. Who gives a flying iota of a micro-fuck?
Why not start our own “spring Olympics”. The best Cotswold cheese rolling. The first dogging after the last frost. Cricket in unseasonable sleet
We’d win. Give them half a mill. Defund the wanky posh winter crap
The winter Olympics are both more entertaining and more inane than they were 20 years ago. Countless events which are basically titting about. Impressive to see, but not really sports. And the utter imbecility of the commentary! I'm 46, so not exactly the BBC's target market. But still, it must grate almost as much on young people as it does on me.
Point of order: the BBC's target market isn't 20 years younger than you. It's 20 years older.
Really? It doesn't act like it. Exhibit a us the Olympics coverage; exhibit b is any other sports coverage - where experience is habitually sacrificed to make way for younger voices; exhibit c is its basic worldview - which doesn't seem to be one of a pensioner; exhibit d is the return of BBC3 and the sidelining of BBC4; exhibit e is radio 2, which makes no secret of chasing a younger audience. Granted, they still do - I think - the antiques roadshow, but very rarely do I come across anything on the BBC - radio, television or online - and think, hmm, this is aimed at an older audience than me. Maybe BBC local radio.
In 40 tweets I’ll explain 40 useful concepts you should know.
Reading time: ~7 minutes. Value: potentially a lifetime!
Number 2 is a more generalised rule of one we're familiar with: an interesting poll is probably wrong.
And this one in particular is worth quoting in full:
38. Idiocy Saturation: Online, people who don't think before they post are able to post more often than people who do. As a result, the average social media post is stupider than the average social media user. Worth remembering whenever Twitter dumbassery drives you to despair.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
Well, no, but maybe Labour's position was never as good as all the other polls have suggested.
As has been pointed out many times, Labour's poll lead has gone up partly because so many Tory 2019 voters currently say "don't know". Opinium seem pretty confident that these people will vote, given that they voted in 2019, and I guess they assume that they will roughly vote in line with those, in their demographic, who do give a voting intention.
I think that's currently a fair enough conclusion. If people won't tell an opinion pollster that they are switching to vote for Labour in mid-term, seems a bit of a stretch to think that they will. And I suppose it's possible that these voters will all fail to vote, but predictions of strongly differential turnout don't seem to come to pass at GEs. Turnout seems to go up and down on the basis of how important/predictable the result is felt to be, rather than because voters for one side or the other are more or less enthused/discouraged.
Starmer and Labour have an opportunity to convince voters who currently say don't know to switch to Labour, but it's far from a done deal. A 3% Labour lead feels like a better prediction of what would happen in a GE today than a 10% lead for that reason. But implicit in this argument is that Opinium are effectively correcting for one of the main mid-term polling effects that produces a swingback from mid-term opinion polls - so you wouldn't want to take one of their polls and argue that Labour need to be x% ahead because of swingback....
I like this post 🙂
It’s how to second guess swingback from how your data gatherings gets big bucket of don’t knows mid term.
Do don’t knows stick to direction of travel that’s clearly going on? I’m convinced no, otherwise there would never be unpredicted results. This subset of don’t knows, especially those who genuinely voted the government in last time have to be treated differently if pollsters want to be right on the night.
So what does this poll actually tell us, what can’t it predict, and which will be the happier party HQ analysing it.
What it tells us is how soft Labours leads are mid term without an election this week. It shows how voters Conservatives had at last election have gone to don’t know, not to Labour to the degree other methodologies are showing. That’s true. I believe it. I expect Starmer and his team do to.
But 37 to 34 is still a dramatic switch on the last election result. And this poll doesn’t say for certain the Conservatives get those lost to don’t know back - only the direction of political narrative can give us hint of that. The political narrative captured by polling since IshmaelZ called peak Boris last May suggests Labour can grow on these figures at Conservative expense before next election is called, unless that narrative of Conservatives on back foot, Labour on the up is changed. Even if all polls since last May used This new methodology, the current direction of travel is unarguable isn’t it?
The Portuguese general election also saw the populist right Chega do better than expected in the polls at the expense of the main opposition centre right Social Democrats. That helped the Socialists get a majority even though the Socialists polled about what most final polls were forecasting
That's just not quite accurate.
The Portuguese exit polls produced a range of outcomes - PS were expected to get between 37-42% of the vote and PSD had 27-32%. Now, that covered every eventuality from a PS win by five points to a landslide of fifteen points. As it turned out, PS polled at the top end of their range and PSD at the bottom end of theirs. Indeed, compared to 2019, PS were up five points (mainly from the collapse of Left Bloc) and PSD were up just under two points.
The pollsters could say they were right but the spread was so wide they couldn't be anything else. In the more meaningful polling before the election, no poll put PS above 40%. Chega were shown on the exit polls at 4-8%, they got 7.3% - the more traditional polling had them at 6-7% so that was pretty close.
Now, if we applied such broad ranges to the spread here in the UK (apart from the fact Shadsy would be laughed out of the betting industry) you could say Labour will poll between 35-40% and the Conservatives 30-35% and that covers everything from a dead heat to a Labour win by 10 points and a huge variation in seat totals.
Quite an impressive ZERO medals for Britain in the Narnia Olympics
We’re actually being beaten by that well known frozen alpine sporting giant Belgium, which at least has a bronze
Britain is historically extremely weak in the Winter Games, and the team only did as well as it did in the last two editions because of the Bath Uni tea tray squad, who have comprehensively bombed this time (along, so far, with almost all the rest of the British entrants; I think there's been one fourth place and one fifth place finish and that's about it.)
There are three realistic chances left to win something of which I'm aware (courtesy of the Scottish curling teams and one decent entrant in the Men's Slalom skiing) and most likely one or two more that I don't know about, since I don't follow these things closely, but the pressure will be building on the BOA.
Whatever your opinion on the merits or otherwise of state funding for Olympic athletes, if the medal return on it turns out to be the first zilch in thirty years, then the £28m of funding that's gone into elite Winter sports since 2018 - mostly in events that attract negligible public participation - is bound to be seriously questioned.
They only get any money at all because posh people love skiing. If you ask most British people to name a famous sportsman from the winter Olympics they would say Eddie the Eagle and maybe the Jamaican bobsleigh team, and that's it.
We should just withdraw from the Winter Olympics. Seriously. Who gives a flying iota of a micro-fuck?
Why not start our own “spring Olympics”. The best Cotswold cheese rolling. The first dogging after the last frost. Cricket in unseasonable sleet
We’d win. Give them half a mill. Defund the wanky posh winter crap
The winter Olympics are both more entertaining and more inane than they were 20 years ago. Countless events which are basically titting about. Impressive to see, but not really sports. And the utter imbecility of the commentary! I'm 46, so not exactly the BBC's target market. But still, it must grate almost as much on young people as it does on me.
Point of order: the BBC's target market isn't 20 years younger than you. It's 20 years older.
That’s their actual market. Their target market is the young. Mainly due to the desire for self preservation in its current form. Although BBC3 back on terrestrial has been an utter failure ratings wise 😂😂😂😂
License fee payers to the BBC - don’t put BBC3 back on terrestrial. The viewers aren’t there.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
But it wouldn't be just Germany would it? I know little about the global energy market, but surely cutting off a huge supplier increases the price of energy generally? Conversely, opening up the Nordstream pipeline beings cheaper gas into Europe and drives the price down everywhere else.
Is it the case that 'cheap gas' coming into Europe has an affect on the general market price, and that if Germany has to start competing with say the UK for other suppliers' gas, the price will go up even more? Genuine question btw, but it seems that way to me from a very superficial reading.
I think that the Corbyn episode has done Labour serious lasting damage.
Labour will recover from Corbyn more easily than the Conservatives will recover from BoZo
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Labour's flirtation with the far left has done it lasting damage with its erstwhile core vote (a lot of which has gone from reflexively Labour to being up for grabs) and the party generally suffers from more structural problems: a lower floor of support, a less efficiently distributed vote, the collapse in Scotland.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
I think that the Corbyn episode has done Labour serious lasting damage.
Labour will recover from Corbyn more easily than the Conservatives will recover from BoZo
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Labour's flirtation with the far left has done it lasting damage with its erstwhile core vote (a lot of which has gone from reflexively Labour to being up for grabs) and the party generally suffers from more structural problems: a lower floor of support, a less efficiently distributed vote, the collapse in Scotland.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
In the last 24 hours Dianne Abbott has come out in support of Russia, the Guardian did a column criticising Starmer support for Nato, Neil Coyle is suspended for alleged racism, and Rosie Duffield attacks Starmer for not supporting her over harassment and threatens to defect to the conservatives, and Unite union threatens funding of labour who are near bankrupt anyway
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
I think that the Corbyn episode has done Labour serious lasting damage.
Labour will recover from Corbyn more easily than the Conservatives will recover from BoZo
I wouldn't be so sure of that. Labour's flirtation with the far left has done it lasting damage with its erstwhile core vote (a lot of which has gone from reflexively Labour to being up for grabs) and the party generally suffers from more structural problems: a lower floor of support, a less efficiently distributed vote, the collapse in Scotland.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
It's true that Corbyn has done lasting damage to the Labour brand. However:
Labour's madness happened while they were in opposition. Johnson and co are in government, which makes them more significant.
Whilst Corbyn drove out some centrist party members and attracted some nutters, it's striking how rapidly the party has returned to something broadly sane. Not perfect, but recognisably sane. Johnson seems to have stamped his image on the Conservatives much more effectively than Corbyn did to Labour. It may take longer for the Conservatives to regroup.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
Are you advocating the UK rejoining the EU with or without a referendum?
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
Astonishingly good poll for Boris, even with the methodology change. The Tories would likely win most seats in a hung parliament after the boundary changes if just 3% behind, even if Starmer became PM with SNP support
No it isn't. If you bother to read the Twitter thread instead of clutching at the headline numbers like a drowning man clings on to a life jacket, you would read further down:
Under our old methodology the result would have been Con 32% Lab 42% Lib Dem 9% Green 5% So there is no evidence that Labour’s position has weakened over the past two weeks
The key is it takes better account of election day voters with a committed voting intention to make it more accurate, most of those undecided voted Tory in 2019
I agree. You are right I suspect, the next election boils down to that don’t knows bucket. But, we can do better than state “plenty will vote Tory like they did 2019”.
Because what we have been given tonight are some great questions which can actually be answered for us by the experts, revisiting previous elections and tell us in hard cold fact how mid term don’t knows broke in those eventual elections.
And there can be no selective spinning or any arguing with the hard cold facts, from elections governments won, with don’t know swingback, and those years governments lost, what did mid term don’t knows do.
And laid out like that, trends may appear in the data to help with predictions. For example, in a change year where government lost, was their a much smaller pool of don’t knows mid term compared to when governments went on to win from behind? Or are the levels of mid term don’t knows actually similar or all parliaments, but dwindle earlier in parliaments before a change of government - showing time for change - whilst remain high with don’t knows breaking late in years governments are returned? Not time for change but shy about it.
The answers to these questions are out there in the historical archive.
I think it's an interesting exercise by Opinium, reflecting a fact that we all suspected - the big Labour lead is in all the other polls (and this one on old methodology) is because:
1. The Government and PM are unpopular at the moment. I don't think even HYUFD would disagree. 2. Lots of LibDems are saying "Labour" , perhaps partly as Starmer is much more visible than Davey 3. A lot of 2019 Tories aren't sure what to do - they really don't like Johnson (and maybe not Sunak or Truss either) but they've not heard much that makes them rush to another party 4. Some people who didn't like Corbyn and sat 2019 out are now planning to vote Labour.
It seems reasonable to assume that some of the 2019 Tories will return and some will sit the election out; a few will actually switch to Labour, as a small number already have. As Lost Password says, this is a major factor in swingback, so it's double-counting if one assumes they mostly switch back AND then says "anyway there's swingback as well".
My gues FWIW: Labour have a real lead of 6-7 among those who will actually vote (combining the effects of 3 and 4), but there's scope for either party to be the first to emerge with persuasive policies before 2024. Advantage Labour, but not a slam-dunk.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
But it wouldn't be just Germany would it? I know little about the global energy market, but surely cutting off a huge supplier increases the price of energy generally? Conversely, opening up the Nordstream pipeline beings cheaper gas into Europe and drives the price down everywhere else.
Is it the case that 'cheap gas' coming into Europe has an affect on the general market price, and that if Germany has to start competing with say the UK for other suppliers' gas, the price will go up even more? Genuine question btw, but it seems that way to me from a very superficial reading.
Russia needs to sell to someone - probably China - but will get a less good price because China knows there is no competition.
China then buys less in the world market - the net impact is to drive prices down.
The issue is the disruption it would cause in the short term. I suspect the likes of BP have bought a few tankers of LPG and have them floating on the high seas…
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
The unreconciled Remainers don't believe it will happen either. If they thought it was plausible, they wouldn't have fought so hard to overturn the referendum result in the first place...
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
So, it seems inevitable that Russia will invade Ukraine this week.
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
Russia is hugely important geopolitically but it's an economic middleweight (ranking below Canada and South Korea.) Basically, if Germany can tolerate an EU move to turn off the gas taps then there's no particular reason why the entire West couldn't embargo imports of everything from Russia. Insofar as I'm aware Russia, unlike China, isn't systemically important to any aspect of world trade.
But it wouldn't be just Germany would it? I know little about the global energy market, but surely cutting off a huge supplier increases the price of energy generally? Conversely, opening up the Nordstream pipeline beings cheaper gas into Europe and drives the price down everywhere else.
Is it the case that 'cheap gas' coming into Europe has an affect on the general market price, and that if Germany has to start competing with say the UK for other suppliers' gas, the price will go up even more? Genuine question btw, but it seems that way to me from a very superficial reading.
Russia needs to sell to someone - probably China - but will get a less good price because China knows there is no competition.
China then buys less in the world market - the net impact is to drive prices down.
The issue is the disruption it would cause in the short term. I suspect the likes of BP have bought a few tankers of LPG and have them floating on the high seas…
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
I think the future is the EEA, as a vassal state.
Slightly emotive choice of words there...
A classic sign of an unreconciled Remainer who doesn't actually understand the EEA.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
The thoroughgoing reboot under new management will need to include repudiation of Brexit for that to work though
What does repudiation mean? We can't revoke Article 50.
We can rejoin the EU. As a full member. Including the euro and Schengen...
I find it hard to believe that will happen. I can see a different government moving a lot closer to the eu, but why the hell would the eu want the trouble maker back in? Plus it’ll cost us a lot more with no rebate. Some might think it worth it, and it may be, but up it would be a hard sell.
I think the future is the EEA, as a vassal state.
Slightly emotive choice of words there...
A classic sign of an unreconciled Remainer who doesn't actually understand the EEA.
Yep. You can always tell the Remainers who haven't accepted we have left. Nothing less than full membership will ever satisfy them and they come up with all sorts of dumb and ill informed comments to scotch anything short of that.
Comments
Boris has to go and now
It did not happen in 2017 as more Tory voters were committed to keep out Corbyn, some of those will be undecided with Starmer now Labour leader but still likely go Tory in the end. Even if most of the redwall voters who normally vote Labour but lent their votes to Boris in 2019 to get Brexit done now go back to Labour with Brexit having got done
We'd still be stuck with a population getting older, fatter, sicker and more disabled with every passing year whether we had stayed in the EU or not. We'd still be suffering with an unbalanced system of taxation - too much on incomes, too little on assets - whether we had stayed in the EU or not, because of the power of the grey vote. We'd still be stuck with ludicrous property prices, and the resulting concentration of national wealth in houses rather than productive investment, whether we'd stayed in the EU or not. We'd be trapped in a socio-economic order arranged primarily to the benefit of rich retirees and their heirs in Southern England whether we'd stayed in the EU or not.
In absolute terms, the reduction in exports to the EU post-Brexit is important. Relative to the entire size of the economy, however, it is small beer. Our problems run a Hell of a lot deeper than non-tariff barriers on the export of sheep and petty arguments over fishing quotas.
The fact remains you called the headline numbers "good" for Boris Johnson (as distinct from the Conservative Party but that's a nuance of another nature) whereas Opinium themselves have confirmed had they used the old methodology the result would have been a 10-point Labour lead.
They have also twice stressed there is no evidence of Labour's position weakening - it's also worth pointing out the LD position has improved as much as that of the Conservatives if we're going to play that game.
Do you not read this forum
State pension faces biggest real-terms cut in nearly 50 years
Pensioners will be £308 worse off when the state pension fails to keep up with soaring inflation
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/pensions-retirement/news/state-pension-faces-biggest-real-terms-cut-nearly-50-years/ (£££)
Hence Starmer is only talking about closer alignment to the EEA not rejoining the EEA in full
https://twitter.com/ScotTories/status/1492438337092730884
Are they more right now than before? Only one way to find out...
MoonRabbits analysis - like or spam me based on wether it’s analysis that fits your own way thinking as befits the FIRST PB LAW golden rule thing 😆
I like this approach, this change is welcome and at the right time, what they have done is make it more accurate predicting if there was a general election this week, they have built in the SWINGBACK that is difference from a hypothetical mid term poll to forced choice of real election this week. Very clever.
At face value it looks like the under bonnet tweak has taken 5 off Labour added two to Conservatives. But it also needs to be related to last poll from this firm - where Labours lead now grown from 7 on method used two weeks ago. That tells us they think Labour have gone up quite a bit in last two weeks.
At first it looks an awful poll for the Conservatives, equivalent to last two weeks Labour growing to a double digit lead from this usually miserly polling company, but also, with swingback methodology built in, they still can’t break 35.
But if this poll is a more true picture of what would happen if an election is called, 3% behind is actually good news for the Conservatives, as it shows Labour with the work to do on the votes the under the bonnet swing back gave back to the Tories, and the Conservatives are not out of the picture yet having not lost those votes.
But then the political reality kicks in, of the direction of travel - with a broken unelectable leader needing to be replaced, and an election not going to happen anytime soon, Labour could have an even bigger under the bonnet poll lead by the time next election is called.
Partly because that's the twice-a-decade structure of the TCA, but mostly because that's how most politics works. Whatever any PM does, most of it will be undone by their successors.
The biggest Brexit lie of all was the one that said that, once Boris's deal was signed, Brexit would be "done", the UK-EU relationship would be in a perfect stable form and there'd be nothing left to argue about.
It lies as a matter of policy.
It lies as a matter of course.
It lies because it doesn’t know what else to do.
It lies because it is all it can do.
This is a government that lies.
Me in @ObserverUK
https://twitter.com/NickCohen4/status/1492575561817931790
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/feb/12/lies-lies-and-more-lies-a-government-built-on-lies-is-incapable-of-anything-else?CMP=Share_AndroidApp_Other
Poor pensioners in rented accommodation will suffer disproportionately badly from this (just as the poor more generally will be squeezed hardest by the cost of living crisis, as they always are in these situations.) However, the large majority of olds are owner-occupiers and are therefore getting richer with every passing year. So, sure, they'll grumble and stick bang over higher fuel prices and the blip in the growth of their pension incomes - the triple lock has been suspended, not scrapped - but fundamentally they're still the Tory client vote. They're not about to desert over £300 when the average house has appreciated in value by £25k in the last twelve months.
But only if this firm is right in their guess at how don’t know swill go, as other methods give more to Labour. And also, I believe we have evidence don’t knows tend to break for governments to keep them in, but do we have any data if don’t knows break the other way in a change year? It could be, in a change election don’t knows don’t go back to government in large numbers.
Also, what looks a dramatic outcome in methodology at the top, further down greens have not changed, it’s still I high looking green figure probably at Labour and Libbdem expense in this poll but not in tactical voting on the day?
When it comes to the impact this saga has had on views of the party leaders.
Just 12% say it has made them think worse of Starmer, 16% now think better of him.
But 26% say it has made them think worse of Johnson, just 8% say it mas made them think better of him. https://twitter.com/OpiniumResearch/status/1492603153111560199/photo/1
As has been pointed out many times, Labour's poll lead has gone up partly because so many Tory 2019 voters currently say "don't know". Opinium seem pretty confident that these people will vote, given that they voted in 2019, and I guess they assume that they will roughly vote in line with those, in their demographic, who do give a voting intention.
I think that's currently a fair enough conclusion. If people won't tell an opinion pollster that they are switching to vote for Labour in mid-term, seems a bit of a stretch to think that they will. And I suppose it's possible that these voters will all fail to vote, but predictions of strongly differential turnout don't seem to come to pass at GEs. Turnout seems to go up and down on the basis of how important/predictable the result is felt to be, rather than because voters for one side or the other are more or less enthused/discouraged.
Starmer and Labour have an opportunity to convince voters who currently say don't know to switch to Labour, but it's far from a done deal. A 3% Labour lead feels like a better prediction of what would happen in a GE today than a 10% lead for that reason. But implicit in this argument is that Opinium are effectively correcting for one of the main mid-term polling effects that produces a swingback from mid-term opinion polls - so you wouldn't want to take one of their polls and argue that Labour need to be x% ahead because of swingback....
What sanctions will be applied, and what will be their effect on Russai and on the world economy?
They're certainly not as happy as they were a few months ago, but they're not irretrievably lost to the Tories.
The ferries are two years late (and counting)
For the first time, most of my tweets this weekend have been checked by our lawyers…so at least there will be fewer typos!!
https://twitter.com/ShaunLintern/status/1492597044229419015
Exhibit a us the Olympics coverage; exhibit b is any other sports coverage - where experience is habitually sacrificed to make way for younger voices; exhibit c is its basic worldview - which doesn't seem to be one of a pensioner; exhibit d is the return of BBC3 and the sidelining of BBC4; exhibit e is radio 2, which makes no secret of chasing a younger audience. Granted, they still do - I think - the antiques roadshow, but very rarely do I come across anything on the BBC - radio, television or online - and think, hmm, this is aimed at an older audience than me. Maybe BBC local radio.
My friends, a new MEGATHREAD has arrived!
In 40 tweets I’ll explain 40 useful concepts you should know.
Reading time: ~7 minutes.
Value: potentially a lifetime!
Number 2 is a more generalised rule of one we're familiar with: an interesting poll is probably wrong.
And this one in particular is worth quoting in full:
38. Idiocy Saturation:
Online, people who don't think before they post are able to post more often than people who do. As a result, the average social media post is stupider than the average social media user. Worth remembering whenever Twitter dumbassery drives you to despair.
It’s how to second guess swingback from how your data gatherings gets big bucket of don’t knows mid term.
Do don’t knows stick to direction of travel that’s clearly going on? I’m convinced no, otherwise there would never be unpredicted results. This subset of don’t knows, especially those who genuinely voted the government in last time have to be treated differently if pollsters want to be right on the night.
So what does this poll actually tell us, what can’t it predict, and which will be the happier party HQ analysing it.
What it tells us is how soft Labours leads are mid term without an election this week. It shows how voters Conservatives had at last election have gone to don’t know, not to Labour to the degree other methodologies are showing. That’s true. I believe it. I expect Starmer and his team do to.
But 37 to 34 is still a dramatic switch on the last election result. And this poll doesn’t say for certain the Conservatives get those lost to don’t know back - only the direction of political narrative can give us hint of that. The political narrative captured by polling since IshmaelZ called peak Boris last May suggests Labour can grow on these figures at Conservative expense before next election is called, unless that narrative of Conservatives on back foot, Labour on the up is changed. Even if all polls since last May used This new methodology, the current direction of travel is unarguable isn’t it?
The Portuguese exit polls produced a range of outcomes - PS were expected to get between 37-42% of the vote and PSD had 27-32%. Now, that covered every eventuality from a PS win by five points to a landslide of fifteen points. As it turned out, PS polled at the top end of their range and PSD at the bottom end of theirs. Indeed, compared to 2019, PS were up five points (mainly from the collapse of Left Bloc) and PSD were up just under two points.
The pollsters could say they were right but the spread was so wide they couldn't be anything else. In the more meaningful polling before the election, no poll put PS above 40%. Chega were shown on the exit polls at 4-8%, they got 7.3% - the more traditional polling had them at 6-7% so that was pretty close.
Now, if we applied such broad ranges to the spread here in the UK (apart from the fact Shadsy would be laughed out of the betting industry) you could say Labour will poll between 35-40% and the Conservatives 30-35% and that covers everything from a dead heat to a Labour win by 10 points and a huge variation in seat totals.
License fee payers to the BBC - don’t put BBC3 back on terrestrial. The viewers aren’t there.
The BBC in reply
https://twitter.com/andynosebag/status/1492550193530740739?s=21
So obviously Johnson will remain a bigger influence on the Tories than Corbyn will on Labour as he won.
The Conservatives can significantly ease their problems with a clearout of dross (Johnson and his less able acolytes) and a thoroughgoing reboot under new management. It's what the Japanese ruling party has been doing for decades, mostly with considerable success.
how do you know that? 🙂
(* Redfield & Wilton, 6th December)
Labour's madness happened while they were in opposition. Johnson and co are in government, which makes them more significant.
Whilst Corbyn drove out some centrist party members and attracted some nutters, it's striking how rapidly the party has returned to something broadly sane. Not perfect, but recognisably sane. Johnson seems to have stamped his image on the Conservatives much more effectively than Corbyn did to Labour. It may take longer for the Conservatives to regroup.
Most other polls have Morrison ahead as preferred PM over Albanese still too and in 2019 the preferred PM numbers were more accurate than the 2PP
Brexit can be made to work without joining the EU
The Conservative and Unionist Party can recover from BoZo when they admit it.
Because what we have been given tonight are some great questions which can actually be answered for us by the experts, revisiting previous elections and tell us in hard cold fact how mid term don’t knows broke in those eventual elections.
And there can be no selective spinning or any arguing with the hard cold facts, from elections governments won, with don’t know swingback, and those years governments lost, what did mid term don’t knows do.
And laid out like that, trends may appear in the data to help with predictions. For example, in a change year where government lost, was their a much smaller pool of don’t knows mid term compared to when governments went on to win from behind? Or are the levels of mid term don’t knows actually similar or all parliaments, but dwindle earlier in parliaments before a change of government - showing time for change - whilst remain high with don’t knows breaking late in years governments are returned? Not time for change but shy about it.
The answers to these questions are out there in the historical archive.
1. The Government and PM are unpopular at the moment. I don't think even HYUFD would disagree.
2. Lots of LibDems are saying "Labour" , perhaps partly as Starmer is much more visible than Davey
3. A lot of 2019 Tories aren't sure what to do - they really don't like Johnson (and maybe not Sunak or Truss either) but they've not heard much that makes them rush to another party
4. Some people who didn't like Corbyn and sat 2019 out are now planning to vote Labour.
It seems reasonable to assume that some of the 2019 Tories will return and some will sit the election out; a few will actually switch to Labour, as a small number already have. As Lost Password says, this is a major factor in swingback, so it's double-counting if one assumes they mostly switch back AND then says "anyway there's swingback as well".
My gues FWIW: Labour have a real lead of 6-7 among those who will actually vote (combining the effects of 3 and 4), but there's scope for either party to be the first to emerge with persuasive policies before 2024. Advantage Labour, but not a slam-dunk.
China then buys less in the world market - the net impact is to drive prices down.
The issue is the disruption it would cause in the short term. I suspect the likes of BP have bought a few tankers of LPG and have them floating on the high seas…
This thread has undergone New Methodology