politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Let this week be a lesson for us all: Don’t get too excited

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Let this week be a lesson for us all: Don’t get too excited about a single survey

We’ve now got to Friday in what has been a dramatic polling week and the chart above shows what’s happened to the five times a week YouGov “daily polls”. After three surveys which really looked as though Labour’s lead had narrowed we’ve now got Miliband’s party in its best position of the year with any pollster.

Read the full story here

edmundintokyo

Hmm, dunno, it was three days in a row with low leads, although admittedly the change to the Lab share wasn't huge. I don't know what it was, but it doesn't seem like sampling error.

If they repeat often enough not to just be sampling error I think these short-lived changes in the lead have a lot of predictive importance. What should be scaring the Tories right now isn't so much the leads as the consistency of the leads. If the Lab share was 48 some days but 29 on others I'd be a lot more optimistic about Con maj or Con NOM than if it's always 38 to 41. It's easy to see the wavering voters ending up backing the government, so the question of whether anyone is actually wavering is an important one. Even if tomorrow is an 8% lead as well, things look better for the Tories this week than they did last.

NickPalmer

I agree with Edmund that something seemed to be happening. But it wasn't a significant drop in Labour's share, rather a temporary rise in the Tory share. My guess is that this reflected some rallying to the Tory colours with more publicity on what Labour would do, and they can reasonably expect to get this effect again when the election campaign comes round.

What we're not seeing is any shift in the very longstanding 37+ Labour vote share. I think that punters should work on the basis that Labour's result will be at that level, and bet according to whether they think the Tories can beat it. I doubt it myself, but um, I might be biased.

(Or just jetlagged - 20-hour journey yesterday, and feel tiresomely bright and awake after 3 hours' sleep.)

Casino_Royale

NickPalmer said:

I agree with Edmund that something seemed to be happening. But it wasn't a significant drop in Labour's share, rather a temporary rise in the Tory share. My guess is that this reflected some rallying to the Tory colours with more publicity on what Labour would do, and they can reasonably expect to get this effect again when the election campaign comes round.

What we're not seeing is any shift in the very longstanding 37+ Labour vote share. I think that punters should work on the basis that Labour's result will be at that level, and bet according to whether they think the Tories can beat it. I doubt it myself, but um, I might be biased.

(Or just jetlagged - 20-hour journey yesterday, and feel tiresomely bright and awake after 3 hours' sleep.)

There is no way Labour will poll 37%+ next year - that'd be an increase of 8% points from 2010. Put my money where my mouth is? I have. A four figure sum.

Labour will poll in the 33-35% range.

OldKingCole

Casino_Royale said:

NickPalmer said:

I agree with Edmund that something seemed to be happening. But it wasn't a significant drop in Labour's share, rather a temporary rise in the Tory share. My guess is that this reflected some rallying to the Tory colours with more publicity on what Labour would do, and they can reasonably expect to get this effect again when the election campaign comes round.

What we're not seeing is any shift in the very longstanding 37+ Labour vote share. I think that punters should work on the basis that Labour's result will be at that level, and bet according to whether they think the Tories can beat it. I doubt it myself, but um, I might be biased.

(Or just jetlagged - 20-hour journey yesterday, and feel tiresomely bright and awake after 3 hours' sleep.)

There is no way Labour will poll 37%+ next year - that'd be an increase of 8% points from 2010. Put my money where my mouth is? I have. A four figure sum.

Labour will poll in the 33-35% range.

Isn't that almost exactly the percentage that has switched from the LD's as a result of the coalition?

Millsy

I would agree, don't get too excited about this single survey.

Meanwhile approval is at -21 again today, on its best run for the government since early 2012: http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/692f6e1oz1/YG-Archives-Pol-Trackers-Approval-300114.pdf

dugarbandier

So, in the end, is there actually any advantage to the daily polls?

Would a weekly poll with a sample 5 times as large be more useful?

I bet someone on here has done the sums. Are the daily ones more volatile? And if so, is it noise, or can they resolve trends that more widely spaced polls cannot?

NickPalmer

dugarbandier said:

So, in the end, is there actually any advantage to the daily polls?

Would a weekly poll with a sample 5 times as large be more useful?

I bet someone on here has done the sums. Are the daily ones more volatile? And if so, is it noise, or can they resolve trends that more widely spaced polls cannot?

Better to have 5 smaller samples than 1 big sample (unless it's to look at weighted subsamples a la Ashcroft): the difference in MOE is not that great between a sample of 1200 and one of 6000 (think of picking coloured balls out of a box - with 1200 picks and 5 colours you get a pretty good estimate, and picking 4800 more doesn't change it much). The advantage of daily polls is that it avoids giving excessive weight to some short-term factor that happens the day before a weekly poll, and in principle one can spot any major effects if they do happen. We are all quite good at avoiding outliergasms these days as we've been caught too often.

The sober fact is probably that not much is happening to voting intention (and that's worth kowing in itself) - Lab normally 37-39, Con normally 31-34. The lead varies more randomly than the basic stable ranges. As Millsy points out, government approval has recovered from about -30 to -21 - this is mainly due to Tory voters cheering up rather than a shift in voting intention (though it may help certainty to vote).

Casino_Royale

OldKingCole said:

Casino_Royale said:

NickPalmer said:

I agree with Edmund that something seemed to be happening. But it wasn't a significant drop in Labour's share, rather a temporary rise in the Tory share. My guess is that this reflected some rallying to the Tory colours with more publicity on what Labour would do, and they can reasonably expect to get this effect again when the election campaign comes round.

What we're not seeing is any shift in the very longstanding 37+ Labour vote share. I think that punters should work on the basis that Labour's result will be at that level, and bet according to whether they think the Tories can beat it. I doubt it myself, but um, I might be biased.

(Or just jetlagged - 20-hour journey yesterday, and feel tiresomely bright and awake after 3 hours' sleep.)

There is no way Labour will poll 37%+ next year - that'd be an increase of 8% points from 2010. Put my money where my mouth is? I have. A four figure sum.

Labour will poll in the 33-35% range.

Isn't that almost exactly the percentage that has switched from the LD's as a result of the coalition?

If you believe that all of them currently saying they've switched are not protesting, have done so permanently and will all actually vote and all actively cast a vote for a Miliband government next year. Some definitely will, but nowhere near all. Although the trend is definitely there and sustained to believe otherwise would be naive. It's like a (prolonged) Cleggasm in reverse and it will have a disappointing climax.

There's a lot of wishful thinking going on here amongst Labour supporters.

Innocent_Abroad

dugarbandier said:

So, in the end, is there actually any advantage to the daily polls?

Would a weekly poll with a sample 5 times as large be more useful?

I bet someone on here has done the sums. Are the daily ones more volatile? And if so, is it noise, or can they resolve trends that more widely spaced polls cannot?

Don't assume that accuracy and marketability are the same thing when it comes to selling polls to clients.

[Deleted User]

Outliergasms!

Well done NPXMP for inventing a cool and funny new word! I like.

[Deleted User]

Couple of thoughts on the poll chart above:

1. It remains the case, despite their utter wretchedness, that we will very very likely see Ed n Ed running the country in 2015. Prepare yourselves for this. Especially if you have a mortgage or other debts.

2. Something's screwed up with polling methods. A 3 point gap cannot become an 8 point gap overnight. Yes, yes, margin of error, yadda, yadda. But somehow one or both of these polls was badly out.

foxinsoxuk

Daily polls outside an election campaign are just noise. No one should get too excited. The pollsters use weightings to try to get the results to match what they expected, but we can only assess the accuracy when there is an election, and they will have tinkered with the methodology by then.

I think that there has been hardly any real movement in months. Just noise.

Innocent_Abroad said:

dugarbandier said:

So, in the end, is there actually any advantage to the daily polls?

Would a weekly poll with a sample 5 times as large be more useful?

I bet someone on here has done the sums. Are the daily ones more volatile? And if so, is it noise, or can they resolve trends that more widely spaced polls cannot?

Don't assume that accuracy and marketability are the same thing when it comes to selling polls to clients.

SouthamObserver

The Labour vote share is ridiculously stable. The time to get excited is when/if it starts to dip below 37%. If that happens a few times then something really will be happening. If it starts dipping below 35% then it's game on for the Tories.

The good news for them is that they have a very good chance of repeating their 2010 vote share. The bad news is that this is unlikely to be anywhere near enough to win a majority; which, of course, is great news for the rest of us.

Pulpstar

Hmm Just had a quick look at the internals - Labour weighted up from 594 -> 628. OK - But they ain't on 42%. ~38.5% still it is a good poll for Labour.

The REAL internal shockers come from the Lib Dems - even worse than the headline figure:


2010 vote: 404 -> 406 (Weighted)

Current VI: 101 -> 117 (Weighted)

Talk about falling off a cliff !

SouthamObserver

Patrick said:

Couple of thoughts on the poll chart above:

1. It remains the case, despite their utter wretchedness, that we will very very likely see Ed n Ed running the country in 2015. Prepare yourselves for this. Especially if you have a mortgage or other debts.

2. Something's screwed up with polling methods. A 3 point gap cannot become an 8 point gap overnight. Yes, yes, margin of error, yadda, yadda. But somehow one or both of these polls was badly out.

Interest rates are going up whoever wins in 2015. In fact, if you're right about how crap Labour will be there is a better chance of lower rates under them than in a soaraway, booming, Tory Britain.

Pulpstar

SouthamObserver said:

The Labour vote share is ridiculously stable. The time to get excited is when/if it starts to dip below 37%. If that happens a few times then something really will be happening. If it starts dipping below 35% then it's game on for the Tories.

The good news for them is that they have a very good chance of repeating their 2010 vote share. The bad news is that this is unlikely to be anywhere near enough to win a majority; which, of course, is great news for the rest of us.

Hah - Yes a Conservative majority is my essential Lay for the next General Election.

A continuation of the coalition could be a brilliant result financially for me ! (NOM, Lib-Con Coalition, and a fair few seats bets should come in)

Fat_Steve

@Patrick
"2. Something's screwed up with polling methods. A 3 point gap cannot become an 8 point gap overnight. Yes, yes, margin of error, yadda, yadda. But somehow one or both of these polls was badly out."

I haven't looked in detail at today vs yesterday, but look at the "Weighted Sample" vs "Unweighted Sample" line at the top of the poll
http://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/aoiewz6xxm/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-300114.pdf

I think it shows us that it's really difficult to get similar representative samples day to day - So a lot of art and science goes in to the weightings.

Pulpstar

I think the ONLY weighting should be to past vote VI, the various demographic meanderings should be accounted for in past voting...

Just a personal view mind.

Lennon

Pulpstar said:

I think the ONLY weighting should be to past vote VI, the various demographic meanderings should be accounted for in past voting...

Just a personal view mind.

Of course the known problem with that is 'false recall' - when asked currently, far more than 3% of the country will say that they voted UKIP at the last election.

Casino_Royale

Yougov tends to underestimate Libdem and overstate Labour. Other than that it seemly broadly ok next to other pollsters.

Lennon

On thread - it occured to me the other day that what would probably be good with YouGov is a 'decaying' average of some kind which changes daily given new information, isn't overly responsive to a single poll, but treats more recent information as more valid than more distant information. Something like W(n+1) = 2/3 Wn, with W1 being 33% would probably work reasonably.

Lennon

Following my thought - is there anywhere to get the YouGov Data historically in Data format? On the YouGov website all I can find is the individual pdf's of each poll which for data manipulation is worse than the proverbial chocolate teapot?

Mick_Pork

Labour, the tories and the kippers have been basically stable since September last year. Before that there were very telling moves in VI which will likely be repeated come the EU elections.

The only completely reliable and utterly stable polling is the lib dems flatlining on 10% since late 2010. That's not a blip. That's locked in.

They are getting no benefit, boost, drop, surge no matter what has happened politically since 2010. It will take a bomb or truly massive political event to shift them off of that 10% right now. Anyone pinning their hopes on a big lib dem surge, that would get a mass of lib dem MPs that would actually make a hung parliament likely, really should have woken up by now.

If you want to cut out the spikes, more volatile polling and quick moves (because opinion can and does change from week to week or month to month let us never forget) then look at ALL the polls and look at them since 2010. Not just a week or a month.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

CarlottaVance

Well said, Fraser Nelson:

The Tories’ loop of vengeance could sink their election hopes
Many Conservative MPs are more fixated on internal battles over Europe than on winning the public vote in 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10607626/The-Tories-loop-of-vengeance-could-sink-their-election-hopes.html

tpfkar

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'. If we accept accuracy of both polls, imagine the difference between a GE run on Thursday and one on Friday. Would give a radically different result from a poll just a day later, but would change complexion of Govt for four / five years.

I've often wondered whether the council system of electing in thirds would be better for Westminster too. You lose stability, but gain an ability to kick a lost government out quicker, fewer bribes in election year, and more serious opposition as you have to be ready to take over, so less posturing.

Easterross

Surely the lesson is that as has been said before the daily YouGovs are a joke because they are so inconsistent. Labour didn't become 7% more popular overnight Wednesday/Thursday. YouGove simply random polled a more Labour friendly part of its database.

Some have suggested that we will see the polls leading up to next year to be as relevant as those leading up to 1992. While the daily YouGovs are fun for us, are they really helping inform the political class on how the electorate is thinking?

TOPPING

CarlottaVance said:

Well said, Fraser Nelson:

The Tories’ loop of vengeance could sink their election hopes
Many Conservative MPs are more fixated on internal battles over Europe than on winning the public vote in 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10607626/The-Tories-loop-of-vengeance-could-sink-their-election-hopes.html

Is becoming quite a recurring theme but you have to wonder when and if and why those numpty rebels will listen.

In their own minds they are fighting the good fight for freedom and conscience. In actual fact they are proving themselves to be supremely misguided and, which is more surprising, extraordinarily naive. No one is going to thank them for such a fabricated point of principle and, as all the commentaries point out, many will penalise them.

richardDodd

Labour still soaring..should be completely out of sight by now...

rcs1000

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'. If we accept accuracy of both polls, imagine the difference between a GE run on Thursday and one on Friday. Would give a radically different result from a poll just a day later, but would change complexion of Govt for four / five years.

I've often wondered whether the council system of electing in thirds would be better for Westminster too. You lose stability, but gain an ability to kick a lost government out quicker, fewer bribes in election year, and more serious opposition as you have to be ready to take over, so less posturing.

While I like that idea, my preferred method would be for there to be two by-elections every week. However, I would try and mix it up a bit by having the by-elections chosen at random. So, an MP might face his voters twice in a month, or only once in 10 years. But because they wouldn't know for sure when they would be up for re-election, there would be no opportunity to be lazy or take their foot off the peddle.

In addition, a government could be punished in real time with real votes. Maintaining a majority would require continued sensible governance.

Finally, there is the added advantage of regular betting events - on who's going to win an individual election, and even on where the next by-election would be.

Pulpstar

Mick_Pork said:

Labour, the tories and the kippers have been basically stable since September last year. Before that there were very telling moves in VI which will likely be repeated come the EU elections.

The only completely reliable and utterly stable polling is the lib dems flatlining on 10% since late 2010. That's not a blip. That's locked in.

They are getting no benefit, boost, drop, surge no matter what has happened politically since 2010. It will take a bomb or truly massive political event to shift them off of that 10% right now. Anyone pinning their hopes on a big lib dem surge, that would get a mass of lib dem MPs that would actually make a hung parliament likely, really should have woken up by now.

If you want to cut out the spikes, more volatile polling and quick moves (because opinion can and does change from week to week or month to month let us never forget) then look at ALL the polls and look at them since 2010. Not just a week or a month.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

To counterbalance though - The Lib Dems won in Eastleigh, the SNP is polling well north of the border and the left looks as if it will vote more tactically this time round. In addition there is a 4th party in the mix that could take add unpredictability, particularly in the east of England. I still think No Overall Majority is a real (Most likely) possibility.

Lennon

O/T - I see that the England cricket team are up to their usual tricks - 5 down and only 9 overs gone... scrapheap will be pleased that Spurs aren't playing this evening.

Mick_Pork

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Well said, Fraser Nelson:

The Tories’ loop of vengeance could sink their election hopes
Many Conservative MPs are more fixated on internal battles over Europe than on winning the public vote in 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10607626/The-Tories-loop-of-vengeance-could-sink-their-election-hopes.html

Is becoming quite a recurring theme but you have to wonder when and if and why those numpty rebels will listen.

I'll go out on a limb here and predict that if Cammie doesn't want any more rebellions then caving in to the tory rebels might not be the best way to ensure that happens. It may even make things worse. Hard to believe I know.

Nor is it just the Cameroon leadership that emerged from yesterday's immigration bill shambles looking clueless and incompetent. This really does bear repeating as it is an object lesson in how not to do things

"My understanding this morning was that the LDs had agreed to the home secretary’s power to remove citizenship only to see off the unacceptable rebel amendments. But the Government has just announced it won’t oppose the Raab amendment"

http://www.libdemvoice.org/why-has-nick-clegg-backed-plan-to-deprive-terror-suspects-of-citizenship-38025.html#comments

Master strategising 'genius'. Cammie was so terrified of his backbenches he begged Clegg to accept all the concessions to the tory rebels (which unbelievably Clegg agrees to) then when it becomes clear the tory rebels have told Cammie where to stick his concessions he caves in anyway and leaves Clegg to vote it out and holding the bag as angry lib dems realise just what he's signed them all up for.

TOPPING said:

In their own minds they are fighting the good fight for freedom and conscience. In actual fact they are proving themselves to be supremely misguided and, which is more surprising, extraordinarily naive. No one is going to thank them for such a fabricated point of principle and, as all the commentaries point out, many will penalise them.

They also think they are in power right now and want to do something with that power while they still have it. Leaders who can only think in terms of what is politically expedient for the next election are no less deluded than rebels who only ever think in the very short term.
The tory rebels didn't all just suddenly pop up one day. This has been long in the making.

Pulpstar

I expect tonight's Yougov will give a reversion to the mean:

Lab 38
Con 34
LD 10
UKIP 13

DavidL

Surely the difference is that the election has a margin of error of 0%, if only by definition. To suggest that peoples' views are really changing on an almost daily basis because of the almost random noise produced by polling organisations is a bit of a delusion.

Not quite as delusional as the belief England can play cricket, but close. I hope suicide is no longer illegal in Australia either.

NickPalmer

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'

I remember after one election with a surprise result contradicting the polls, there was a reader's letter in The Times suggesting that in view of the low turnout, the polls were right and the result was wrong :-).

rcs' idea of gradual election is seen in various forms in other countries, e.g. the Senate in the USA. A problem is that it puts the parties into permanent election frenzy, since there's always a crucial election coming up. We've got used to our pattern of governments doing unpopular stuff early in the 5 years, and cynical though that is, perhaps it does meet a real need to give governments space to do difficult things and show the results before having to face voters again.

lennon's idea of rolling averages has also been seen in US polls, where it doesn't have a very successful record. I suspect a reason may be that the subsamples that are being added together are not balanced overall, i.e. you may get (say) an older-voter bit of the Tues-Thur sample combined with an older-voter bit of the Friday sample.

TwistedFireStopper

richardDodd said:

Labour still soaring..should be completely out of sight by now...

It doesn't matter. On these figures, it's still PM Milliband.

RobD

Doesn't this break the rule of the Sun only posting poll results on Twitter if it is good for the blues?

AlastairMeeks

Opinion polls individually very rarely tell us anything of importance at all (though curiously when they do, they are usually completely overlooked). Even in aggregate they don't tell us very much.

TGOHF

Patrick said:

Couple of thoughts on the poll chart above:

1. It remains the case, despite their utter wretchedness, that we will very very likely see Ed n Ed running the country in 2015. Prepare yourselves for this. Especially if you have a mortgage or other debts.

Remortgaging at the minute - offer of a 5 year fix at 2.89 - think I may take it to make it Ed proof.

RobD

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'. If we accept accuracy of both polls, imagine the difference between a GE run on Thursday and one on Friday. Would give a radically different result from a poll just a day later, but would change complexion of Govt for four / five years.

The scatter in the polls is caused by sampling error (i.e. you are not properly sampling the population). If you had polls the size of the general election on a daily basis, there would be very small scatter.

TheScreamingEagles

Best thing about the daily yougov is that it gives you something to focus on and talk about something other than the great shower of shite that is the England men's cricket team.

Blue_rog

NickPalmer said:

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'

I remember after one election with a surprise result contradicting the polls, there was a reader's letter in The Times suggesting that in view of the low turnout, the polls were right and the result was wrong :-).

rcs' idea of gradual election is seen in various forms in other countries, e.g. the Senate in the USA. A problem is that it puts the parties into permanent election frenzy, since there's always a crucial election coming up. We've got used to our pattern of governments doing unpopular stuff early in the 5 years, and cynical though that is, perhaps it does meet a real need to give governments space to do difficult things and show the results before having to face voters again.

lennon's idea of rolling averages has also been seen in US polls, where it doesn't have a very successful record. I suspect a reason may be that the subsamples that are being added together are not balanced overall, i.e. you may get (say) an older-voter bit of the Tues-Thur sample combined with an older-voter bit of the Friday sample.

Some very good points there Nick.

How about developing the American approach of separating the legislature from the executive? If some way could be developed of maintaining a stable long term government, supported by a variable HoC with regular elections, we could get a situation where the long term planning is possible.

anotherDave

TOPPING said:

CarlottaVance said:

Well said, Fraser Nelson:

The Tories’ loop of vengeance could sink their election hopes
Many Conservative MPs are more fixated on internal battles over Europe than on winning the public vote in 2015

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10607626/The-Tories-loop-of-vengeance-could-sink-their-election-hopes.html

Is becoming quite a recurring theme but you have to wonder when and if and why those numpty rebels will listen.

In their own minds they are fighting the good fight for freedom and conscience. In actual fact they are proving themselves to be supremely misguided and, which is more surprising, extraordinarily naive. No one is going to thank them for such a fabricated point of principle and, as all the commentaries point out, many will penalise them.

The two biggest negatives for the Conservatives with Con supporters are:
1. Immigration
2. EU

http://yougov.co.uk/news/2014/01/27/how-tories-can-win-next-election/

Those backbenchers want to win too.

Lennon

NickPalmer said:

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'

I remember after one election with a surprise result contradicting the polls, there was a reader's letter in The Times suggesting that in view of the low turnout, the polls were right and the result was wrong :-).

rcs' idea of gradual election is seen in various forms in other countries, e.g. the Senate in the USA. A problem is that it puts the parties into permanent election frenzy, since there's always a crucial election coming up. We've got used to our pattern of governments doing unpopular stuff early in the 5 years, and cynical though that is, perhaps it does meet a real need to give governments space to do difficult things and show the results before having to face voters again.

lennon's idea of rolling averages has also been seen in US polls, where it doesn't have a very successful record. I suspect a reason may be that the subsamples that are being added together are not balanced overall, i.e. you may get (say) an older-voter bit of the Tues-Thur sample combined with an older-voter bit of the Friday sample.

I meant take a rolling average of properly weighted genuine polls (ie the YouGov daily), rather than average unweighted subsamples as they do in the US.

foxinsoxuk

@pork

While 10% is consistent for the LDs, they are not being slaughtered in elections. Indeed they gained one last night. The overall share matters less than where they do have concentrated support.

The hijinks in parliament yesterday do not matter much. Even as a political nerd it was impossible to follow. The only meme to emerge is that the Tory party is more anti immigration and pro deportation than other parties in parliament. That isn't exactly a shock.

AlastairMeeks

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

TheScreamingEagles

I remember in the aftermath of the Syria vote, there was a YouGov poll that showed an increase in the Labour lead from 4 to 10 points.

Far too many people got excited that time as well.

As Mike says, don't get excited by one poll.

Mick_Pork

Pulpstar said:

Mick_Pork said:

Labour, the tories and the kippers have been basically stable since September last year. Before that there were very telling moves in VI which will likely be repeated come the EU elections.

The only completely reliable and utterly stable polling is the lib dems flatlining on 10% since late 2010. That's not a blip. That's locked in.

They are getting no benefit, boost, drop, surge no matter what has happened politically since 2010. It will take a bomb or truly massive political event to shift them off of that 10% right now. Anyone pinning their hopes on a big lib dem surge, that would get a mass of lib dem MPs that would actually make a hung parliament likely, really should have woken up by now.

If you want to cut out the spikes, more volatile polling and quick moves (because opinion can and does change from week to week or month to month let us never forget) then look at ALL the polls and look at them since 2010. Not just a week or a month.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/96/UK_opinion_polling_2010-2015.png

To counterbalance though - The Lib Dems won in Eastleigh.

They only just won in Eastleigh but yes, in small tests like one-off by-elections and individual local by-elections they can marshall what strength remains usually pretty effectively. On a much bigger scale like a mass of local elections every year or EU elections this year? Not so much. To say the least.

Pulpstar said:

I still think No Overall Majority is a real (Most likely) possibility.

It's always a possibility, but likely under FPTP with even less lib dem MPs this time around to make the narrow band where all the the votes must fall even narrower in 2015? I can't see it myself.

TGOHF

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

TheScreamingEagles

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

You're wrong.

What we need is need more plebiscites on the big issues.

Apart from the fillip for democracy that would give, think of the betting opportunities.

[Deleted User]

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

I think a bigger problem is that we select the executive exclusively from the legislature. This means there is a limited and necessarily party political talent pool - and that the gpovernment of the day simply has too much power. A muppet minister with a compliant / well whipped House can wreak untold havoc.

Lennon

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It is a 2 way street though - politicians (with media assistance) treat the electorate like children, and so the electorate behave like it. How you break that cycle is difficult as a single politician or party that treats the electorate like an adult gets slaughtered, so no-one else tries.

rcs1000

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

Is there any correlation between politicians having power and the people prospering?

I suspect if there is a correlation, it is an inverse one: the less the politicians are able to do, the better for the people. Italy's golden age (the 1970s and 1980s) was a period when it completely lacked stable government. The arrival of Berlusconi and political stability marked the beginning of economic stagnation. In the US, political gridlock usually presages periods of improved economic performance.

DavidL

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

Agreed. The short terms of Congress show what this would be like. Politicians almost totally fixed on running for election and, in safer seats, more scared of challenges from radical elements within the party than anything else. We need politicians who govern for at least part of the time.

Whether the Conservative party remains capable of the discipline necessary to form an administration remains in doubt after yesterday. No wonder some are promoting the idea of Andrew Strauss as a Conservative MP. The parallels between Conservative back benchers and English batsmen are striking.

AlastairMeeks

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

One more who doesn't trust the electorate.

Mick_Pork

foxinsoxuk said:

@pork

While 10% is consistent for the LDs, they are not being slaughtered in elections.

If Clegg's ostrich faction truly believe that then the lib dems are in for a world of pain. Year on year in the big mass local election tests they and their councillor and activist base are getting pounded. They were slaughtered in 2011 in scotland and now have a taxi full of MSPs. They're now behind the kippers for the EU elections in scotland. We'll see in May if there is any substance whatsoever to any hypothetical lib dem comeback.

foxinsoxuk said:

The hijinks in parliament yesterday do not matter much. Even as a political nerd it was impossible to follow. The only meme to emerge is that the Tory party is more anti immigration and pro deportation than other parties in parliament. That isn't exactly a shock.

The only thing that emerged from yesterday was what a complete and utter shambles it was. That's why it was impossible to follow and that's why there was and could be no coherent spin from that ludicrous mess.What isn't a shock is that Farage will be laughing long and hard at the extraordinary chaos and rubbing his hands in glee at the fear he clearly provokes inside the tory party.

Is that going to hit VI tomorrow or anytime soon? Nope. Does it mean that tory rebellions are just going to become more likely now that Cammie has caved in to the rebels? Oh yes.

Nor does it speak well of Clegg that he was taken for a ride yet again by Cammie.

isam

Matthew Goodwin (@GoodwinMJ)
30/01/2014 22:20
You could get excited about one poll that most likely means nothing. Or you could read the Polling Observatory --> blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/author/po…

TGOHF

antifrank said:

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

One more who doesn't trust the electorate.

Why not a GE every year then ?

foxinsoxuk

I am not expecting the LDs to make gains, but neither will they be wiped out. Hyperbole is the stuff of politics, but the reality is more prosaic.

Yesterday just shows that the Tories are as restive as the LDs with a coalition that cannot keep all in both parties happy.

The two Eds are likely to lead the next government, but it is not going to be a big majority, despite the swivel eyed loons fighting the fruitcakes for the europhobic crown, and the glory of principled opposition.

Mick_Pork said:

foxinsoxuk said:

@pork

While 10% is consistent for the LDs, they are not being slaughtered in elections.

If Clegg's ostrich faction truly believe that then the lib dems are in for a world of pain. Year on year in the big mass local election tests they and their councillor and activist base are getting pounded. They were slaughtered in 2011 in scotland and now have a taxi full of MSPs. They're now behind the kippers for the EU elections in scotland. We'll see in May if there is any substance whatsoever to any hypothetical lib dem comeback.

foxinsoxuk said:

The hijinks in parliament yesterday do not matter much. Even as a political nerd it was impossible to follow. The only meme to emerge is that the Tory party is more anti immigration and pro deportation than other parties in parliament. That isn't exactly a shock.

The only thing that emerged from yesterday was what a complete and utter shambles it was. That's why it was impossible to follow and that's why there was and could be no coherent spin from that ludicrous mess.What isn't a shock is that Farage will be laughing long and hard at the extraordinary chaos and rubbing his hands in glee at the fear he clearly provokes inside the tory party.

Is that going to hit VI tomorrow or anytime soon? Nope. Does it mean that tory rebellions are just going to become more likely now that Cammie has caved in to the rebels? Oh yes.

Nor does it speak well of Clegg that he was taken for a ride yet again by Cammie.

TGOHF

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

foxinsoxuk

The only policy of the chartists that was not implemented was annual parliaments.

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

TGOHF said:

antifrank said:

I like the idea of rolling elections. Rather than it being a drawback that governments would need to do unpopular stuff in an election year, it would help force the politicians to treat the electorate like adults.

The single biggest problem that we have in Britain is that our politicians do not trust the electorate. If they started doing so, they might find in turn that the electorate might start trusting them.

It would be awful and nothing radical would get done - even less than now.

No no and thrice no.

One more who doesn't trust the electorate.

Why not a GE every year then ?

Scrapheap_as_was

Just got back in - not heard the cricket, going to go and hear how the boys are doing now.

Can't be worse than the rest of the tour at least.. I think we're due a convincing win!

TheScreamingEagles

TGOHF said:

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

They'll be able to reach this total from just Jade Dernbach's four overs.

Tissue_Price

Regardless of how terrible we are, 10/1 looks a reasonable bet from here.

TGOHF

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

They'll be able to reach this total from just Jade Dernbach's four overs.

England will be down to 8th in the 20/20 rankings.

TheScreamingEagles

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

They'll be able to reach this total from just Jade Dernbach's four overs.

England will be down to 8th in the 20/20 rankings.

Perfect timing for the t20 world cup.

isam

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

TGOHF

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

They'll be able to reach this total from just Jade Dernbach's four overs.

England will be down to 8th in the 20/20 rankings.

Perfect timing for the t20 world cup.

Poor old Darren Lehman - he has to coach the test, ODI and 20-20 teams - no wonder his team is struggling.

Mick_Pork

foxinsoxuk said:

I am not expecting the LDs to make gains, but neither will they be wiped out. Hyperbole is the stuff of politics, but the reality is more prosaic.

The reality is I never made any hyperbolic claim they would be wiped out. It also might not speak well of where the lib dems are if they best they can do is claim they won't lose all their MPs and be wiped out.

foxinsoxuk said:

Yesterday just shows that the Tories are as restive as the LDs with a coalition that cannot keep all in both parties happy.

There's 'happy' and then there's a complete shambles. The two are not hard to tell apart.

foxinsoxuk said:

The two Eds are likely to lead the next government, but it is not going to be a big majority, despite the swivel eyed loons fighting the fruitcakes for the europhobic crown, and the glory of principled opposition.

Could be. Though I for one do not think all the polling is locked where it is right now till 2015.
It wasn't last year and it won't be this year. As I pointed out the only really static and reliable polling is the lib dems flatlining at 10% since 2010. All the rest can and will change. I also think the lib dems will eventually go up a bit when we are very close to May 2015. But not by all that much and certainly not a huge surge.

AndreaParma_82

Thirsk and Malton Conservative Association will count the votes for Anne McIntosh's reselection ballot today. Result expected at 3PM

TheLastBoyScout

Pulpstar said:

Hmm Just had a quick look at the internals - Labour weighted up from 594 -> 628. OK - But they ain't on 42%. ~38.5% still it is a good poll for Labour.

The REAL internal shockers come from the Lib Dems - even worse than the headline figure:


2010 vote: 404 -> 406 (Weighted)

Current VI: 101 -> 117 (Weighted)

Talk about falling off a cliff !

Pulpstar is right about this. It's a very pro Lab sample upweighted (we had a similar poll in reverse earlier in the week). I find the best way to rate the robustness of the poll is to look at the generational subsamples. A good rule of thumb is that the Baby Boom are loyally Blue, Gens X and Y Red. However, in this sample pensioners are level pegging while those in their prime are so blood red a better opening question might have been "if there were a revolution tomorrow..."

So just sampling noise. I suspect the real picture is ~33/38, which it has been for an eternity.

TheScreamingEagles

isam said:

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

He's a bit premature, there's at least three more polls out with fieldworks that end in January.

Toms

Judging from the topics popping up in this site, polling seems to be a growth industry. Apart from Ashcroft, who or what pays for them? Is it the sneaky questioning about consumer attitudes mixed into a 'phone poll I experienced recently? Or the news media?

I confess to finding some of Ashcroft's polls somewhat interesting for their social implications.

TheScreamingEagles

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

Can Oz reach this total in 10 overs ?

They'll be able to reach this total from just Jade Dernbach's four overs.

England will be down to 8th in the 20/20 rankings.

Perfect timing for the t20 world cup.

Poor old Darren Lehman - he has to coach the test, ODI and 20-20 teams - no wonder his team is struggling.

I suspect at least one, maybe two of the following will be gone by the start of the English summer, Flower, Cook (as Captain) or KP

isam

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

He's a bit premature, there's at least three more polls out with fieldworks that end in January.

Would have thought this is the average of polls published in Jan compared with those published in Dec.

TheLastBoyScout

richardDodd said:

Labour still soaring..should be completely out of sight by now...

Why?

TheScreamingEagles

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

He's a bit premature, there's at least three more polls out with fieldworks that end in January.

Would have thought this is the average of polls published in Jan compared with those published in Dec.

Even by that criteria, he's premature, there's another poll due out in the next few hours.

TheLastBoyScout

@TSE

Indeed. Your point about the cricket is a very strong argument in favour of a daily poll that I'm certain will unite colleagues from both sides of the political divide.

[Deleted User]

Contrary to popular rumours, the Bangkok One is still alive:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/seanthomas/100257505/is-the-american-president-still-the-most-powerful-man-on-earth/

isam

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

isam said:

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

He's a bit premature, there's at least three more polls out with fieldworks that end in January.

Would have thought this is the average of polls published in Jan compared with those published in Dec.

Even by that criteria, he's premature, there's another poll due out in the next few hours.

Haha ok

Freggles

The Tories on here were so desperate for progress, bless them. They got a bit excited and embarrassed themselves

OblitusSumMe

tpfkar said:

The really scary thing? The general election is itself a 'single survey.'. If we accept accuracy of both polls, imagine the difference between a GE run on Thursday and one on Friday. Would give a radically different result from a poll just a day later, but would change complexion of Govt for four / five years.

I've often wondered whether the council system of electing in thirds would be better for Westminster too. You lose stability, but gain an ability to kick a lost government out quicker, fewer bribes in election year, and more serious opposition as you have to be ready to take over, so less posturing.

Three by-elections every week - political betting nirvana and you'd completely renew the Commons every four years.

Pulpstar

Tissue_Price said:

Regardless of how terrible we are, 10/1 looks a reasonable bet from here.

10/1 would be an excellent price if England weren't garbage.

TheScreamingEagles

Populus ‏@PopulusPolls 10m

New Populus VI figures: Lab 39 (-1); Cons 32 (-1); LD 11 (=); UKIP 10 (+2); Oth 8 (=) Tables http://popu.lu/s_vi140131

rcs1000

OK peeps,

Busy economics day today.

UK first. The Lloyds Business Barometer for January is out - and shows a 63 number, up from 48 in December. This is a very strong number for a seasonally weak time of the year. It's also the highest figure for (at least) a decade, and suggests my optimistic 2014 UK GDP number is not wildly ridiculous. The GfK consumer number also showed a much better number than expected - -7 against -12/

Retail sales numbers are out for France and Germany. Unusually, the French number is strong (up 1.4% in December, against an expected 0.9%), while the German number is weak (down 2.4%, against expected growth of 1.9%). Good news from Greece, where retail sales came out flat in December, suggesting the truly horrendous recession there might be nearing an end.

Italian unemployment numbers are also out, and show a slightly surprising reduction to a - still high - 12.7%. Eurozone unemployment edged down similarly to 12.0%.

Finally, Spain continued its recent run of current account surpluses - posting a €900m one in November, slightly down on October.

Pulpstar

@TheScreamingEagles Hmm - All MoE but UKIP up at 10% indicates the underlying support is still steady for them.

TheScreamingEagles

Paddy Power have got a market on the Jim White's cliches on Transfer Deadline Day.

Taken the 7/2 on Before the window slams shut

http://www.paddypower.com/football/football-specials/deadlineday-spec?ev_oc_grp_ids=1299049&AFF_ID=16562

isam

Dernbachs giving it the Barry McGuigan to White after going for two dozen in two overs...

Just a pretty face

SouthamObserver

rcs1000 said:

OK peeps,

Busy economics day today.

UK first. The Lloyds Business Barometer for January is out - and shows a 63 number, up from 48 in December. This is a very strong number for a seasonally weak time of the year. It's also the highest figure for (at least) a decade, and suggests my optimistic 2014 UK GDP number is not wildly ridiculous. The GfK consumer number also showed a much better number than expected - -7 against -12/

Retail sales numbers are out for France and Germany. Unusually, the French number is strong (up 1.4% in December, against an expected 0.9%), while the German number is weak (down 2.4%, against expected growth of 1.9%). Good news from Greece, where retail sales came out flat in December, suggesting the truly horrendous recession there might be nearing an end.

Italian unemployment numbers are also out, and show a slightly surprising reduction to a - still high - 12.7%. Eurozone unemployment edged down similarly to 12.0%.

Finally, Spain continued its recent run of current account surpluses - posting a €900m one in November, slightly down on October.

For the first time in a long time the Socialists in Spain are beginning to place first in opinion polls. If they do win the next GE it will go a long way towards resolving the problems I Catalonia.

TGOHF

Pulpstar said:

Tissue_Price said:

Regardless of how terrible we are, 10/1 looks a reasonable bet from here.

10/1 would be an excellent price if England weren't garbage.

Dirtbag nailing down his spot for the 20/20 WC here..

Fernando

My experience is that government’s get a reputation for weakness when they can’t get important legislation enacted. Labour in the mid 1970s couldn’t pass the measures needed during an economic crisis and had to call in the IMF. Major couldn’t get his party to pass the Maastricht Treaty and had to scratch around for supporters. Those were divided governments and were punished by the voters. Apart from some rather minor constitutional matters the coalition has been quite effective. Now, if the Tories win in 2015 and try to renegotiate the terms of EU membership and then have an in/out referendum, the divisions could possibly become fatal. However, as regards the voters’ experience of this parliament, this hasn’t been an especially weak or divided government.

TheLastBoyScout

I think the line earlier in the week from Jack W was: "tick tock tick tock"

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, Jack.

TheScreamingEagles

TheLastBoyScout said:

I think the line earlier in the week from Jack W was: "tick tock tick tock"

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day, Jack.

JackW's predictions in the past have been

1) Very accurate

2) Very profitable

I was reviewing my 2012 Presidential Election portfolio, trying to see what to make of 2016, and I have to say, the most profitable tipster was JackW, followed closely by Mike Smithson, very honourable mention to Richard Nabavi as well.

Lennon

rcs1000 said:

OK peeps,

Busy economics day today.

UK first. The Lloyds Business Barometer for January is out - and shows a 63 number, up from 48 in December. This is a very strong number for a seasonally weak time of the year. It's also the highest figure for (at least) a decade, and suggests my optimistic 2014 UK GDP number is not wildly ridiculous. The GfK consumer number also showed a much better number than expected - -7 against -12/

Retail sales numbers are out for France and Germany. Unusually, the French number is strong (up 1.4% in December, against an expected 0.9%), while the German number is weak (down 2.4%, against expected growth of 1.9%). Good news from Greece, where retail sales came out flat in December, suggesting the truly horrendous recession there might be nearing an end.

Italian unemployment numbers are also out, and show a slightly surprising reduction to a - still high - 12.7%. Eurozone unemployment edged down similarly to 12.0%.

Finally, Spain continued its recent run of current account surpluses - posting a €900m one in November, slightly down on October.

Did I miss it earlier, or did you not post the unexpectedly low Euro area Jan CPI number? 0.7% vs 0.9% expected and 0.8% previous month. Interest rate cuts from Draghi?

SouthamObserver

Fernando said:

My experience is that government’s get a reputation for weakness when they can’t get important legislation enacted. Labour in the mid 1970s couldn’t pass the measures needed during an economic crisis and had to call in the IMF. Major couldn’t get his party to pass the Maastricht Treaty and had to scratch around for supporters. Those were divided governments and were punished by the voters. Apart from some rather minor constitutional matters the coalition has been quite effective. Now, if the Tories win in 2015 and try to renegotiate the terms of EU membership and then have an in/out referendum, the divisions could possibly become fatal. However, as regards the voters’ experience of this parliament, this hasn’t been an especially weak or divided government.

It's hard to see how there will not be Tory civil war after 2015. If they are kicked out of power, carnage is inevitable. But if they stay in power, the following two years will be dominated by Europe. Cameron will have to reveal his negotiating red lines; these will cause a lot of grief when it's seen just how pink they are; then he'll be campaigning for an "In" on the back of a Brussels fudge. It's not going to be nice. These days, surely only the most wide-eyed Cameron cheerleader would argue that his EU posturing during this Parliament has been anything other than a pretty feeble (though just about holding together) attempt to delay the inevitable, flaming, Tory EU bust-up.

rcs1000

Lennon said:

Did I miss it earlier, or did you not post the unexpectedly low Euro area Jan CPI number? 0.7% vs 0.9% expected and 0.8% previous month. Interest rate cuts from Draghi?

You didn't miss it, I did :-)

With interest rates down at 0.25%, there is no room for further cuts to rates.

If we see continued weak inflation numbers in the EZ, I would suspect we'll probably see more unconventional measures - more cheap financing for peripheral banks, and perhaps some intervention in the corporate bond market.

However, I don't think this datapoint on its own will be enough to cause action, especially with everywhere (bar France) appearing to be on the (very gradual) mend.

Socrates

Apparently gangs are expanding across the UK outside of London:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-25974360

Is it any wonder when the vast majority of teenage criminals get community sentences or short prison sentences for their first half dozen crimes. It's not until you're in your late 20s/early 30s and have become a hardened criminal that you get a long sentence. So when 14 year old kids look up to the cool 21 year old gang leaders, all they can see is that crime pays. The only way to break up these gangs is to keep these people in prison for a long time. If the young teens see their elders commit crime and disappear from the neighbourhood for a decade, gang life will be a lot less glamourised.

MarkSenior

Moray by election yesterday had SNP vote down around 9%
Ind Cowie 830 SNP 670 Ind Macrae 220 Con 143
after eliminations Ind Cowie 1034 SNP 710

Sean_F

isam said:

MSN UK News (@msnuknews)
31/01/2014 09:18
Final averages for all Jan's opinion polls, compared with Dec: LAB 38.0% (-0.8%); CON 32.3% (-0.6%); UKIP 12.6% (+1.5%); LIB 9.9% (-0.1%).

I'd expect UKIP to keep edging upwards as May's elections approach.

BenM

‏@StewartWood
Update on that Conservative Party poll bounce:
-Nov 29 2012: 32%
-June 19 2013: 32%
-Oct 23 2013: 32%
-Dec 3 2013: 32%
-Today: 32%

@YouGov

Chuckle.