Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The argument over Scottish Indyref polling methodologies: S

SystemSystem Posts: 12,224
edited July 2014 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The argument over Scottish Indyref polling methodologies: Survation puts its case

This week Peter Kellner, President of YouGov, published an article both on YouGov’s website and in The Times newspaper, with his views on why opinion polls in Scotland by different polling companies have produced consistently divergent results on the question of the Scottish independence referendum.

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031
    Excellent response from Survation.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,501

    Excellent response from Survation.

    Agreed - and thanks to the author and the site for this.

  • shadsyshadsy Posts: 289
    I doubt it is fair to say that YouGov did their research "solely for the purpose of criticizing another polling company". It's surely a good thing that they are trying to explain the difference in results, both for YouGov and Survation.
    It was probably prompted by a very healthy sense of enquiry and doubt rather than to bash Survation over the head.
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    I suspect a question that cannot be answered until after the Indy ref.

    However yougov seem closer to Jack's ARSE..
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427
    With such a high predicted turnout, and a binary choice is random sampling not possible ?
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    edited July 2014
    Do you intend to vote?
    Out of ten how likely are you to vote?
    How will you vote?

    Forget past weightings and party bs.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815
    FPT
    Smarmeron said:

    I post this without comment, other than that there is a short advert before it starts.
    For those interested in making the comparison with @Pulpstar's video,

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2013/oct/08/inequality-how-wealth-distributed-uk-animated-video

    I need to go, but thanks for the discussion

    Huh!

    When the going gets tough, the left start going!

    P.S. Lucky that US video on wealth distribution was public domain as The Guardian would have had to answer for copyright infringement as well as plagiarism!

  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031

    Do you intend to vote?
    Out of ten how likely are you to vote?
    How will you vote?

    Forget past weightings and party bs.

    That's Ipsos-Mori's methodology.

    Interestingly they show the same sort of leads for No that YouGov do.
  • dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786

    That's Ipsos-Mori's methodology.

    Interestingly they show the same sort of leads for No that YouGov do.
    A superior approach.
  • shadsyshadsy Posts: 289
    Which company's final poll get closest to the #indyref result?
    2/5 YouGov
    7/4 Survation
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031
    shadsy said:

    Which company's final poll get closest to the #indyref result?
    2/5 YouGov
    7/4 Survation

    Heh. Can we get odds on Ipsos-Mori please.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    edited July 2014
    Given YouGov's record in at the AV referendum and the last Holyrood elections you would have thought they'd have been less eager to point the finger at other firms.
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited July 2014
    shadsy said:

    Which company's final poll get closest to the #indyref result?
    2/5 YouGov
    7/4 Survation

    Money talks!
    At these odds, Shadsy is presumably referring to the closer (rather than closest), i.e. between these two pollsters.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited July 2014
    O/T

    Sorry go go flying off topic so soon, but I have just had a jolly good email from Nick Palmer entitled, "Serious politics: Exports, industry, training, small business, science" (I'm on his re-elect me mailing list). I can't find fault with a word he says, though he links to the Adonis Report in whose conclusions I am sure I will find much to argue.

    None the less as the good Dr. Palmer says,

    "It’s widely believed that it is actually impossible to get serious consideration of detailed policy because (a) the media aren’t willing to report it and (b) most people don’t seem to have the attention span. This leads directly to one-sentence politics: Labour will curb your energy bills, the Tories will fight Mr Juncker, etc. It also leads to playground trivialisation. Who is the best leader at eating bacon butties? Not Mr Miliband. Do we care?
    Meanwhile, we have one of the lowest investment levels in the entire world – competing with Mali in sub-Saharan Africa. Low-skilled employment is booming (why not hire a cheap helper rather than invest?), high-skilled employment is struggling. Our balance of payment deficit is terrifying. Industry is a shadow of its former self. Do we care about any of that? Do any of the parties have any policies to deal with this?
    Actually, yes. Labour’s policy on these issues was published this week. It’s 85 pages long. Media coverage has been a tiny fraction of the bacon butties story. But if you’d like to know what Labour would do differently, it’s worth a look, at least at the one-page summary – and maybe have a skim of the full document? Issues it addresses include vocational schools training, schools career planning working with employers, boosting research for small business, encouraging industry and exports, devolving half of business rates to local Combined Authorities (which in our area would be a partnership between Nottingham and Nottinghamshire – not some kind of merged council) and eliminating mock-apprenticeships and boosting real ones.
    Not every idea may be perfect. But it’s a serious attempt to draw up serious policy. Have a look? The summary is here, and there’s a link to the full report (which has a longer summary with 30 specific recommendations) at the bottom:"

    http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/agenda-2015/policy-review/adonis-review

    P.S. Nick, I hope you don't mind me quoting you but I thought you words were worth a wider audience, not least because they go against the left-right (evil-good) nonsense.
  • This Yougov / Survation spat ( if that’s the right way to describe it) is in fact a very welcome and rare example of the scientific method at work in an area related to politics. Try something based upon a theory, test it, see if it works, revise your theory, try something better, repeat ad astra.

    The usual political approach is: I have an ideology, implement it, fails, implement a more intense version of your ideology, fails even more, repeat ad nauseam.

    Eg on the NHS let’s really implement some fully centrally controlled (Stalinist) hospitals and some fully market based (state pays but customer of the state delivers). See what works. Go with that.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382

    Do you intend to vote?
    Out of ten how likely are you to vote?
    How will you vote?

    Forget past weightings and party bs.

    Self certified voting certainty numbers can be crap. Go look at ComRes & the Euros.

  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633

    Given YouGov's record in at the AV referendum and the last Holyrood elections you would have thought they'd have been less eager to point the finger at other firms.

    They did ok in the Euros mind you.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    O/T

    Sorry go go flying off topic so soon, but I have just had a jolly good email from Nick Palmer entitled, "Serious politics: Exports, industry, training, small business, science" (I'm on his re-elect me mailing list). I can't find fault with a word he says, though he links to the Adonis Report in whose conclusions I am sure I will find much to argue.

    None the less as the good Dr. Palmer says,

    "It’s widely believed that it is actually impossible to get serious consideration of detailed policy because (a) the media aren’t willing to report it and (b) most people don’t seem to have the attention span. This leads directly to one-sentence politics: Labour will curb your energy bills, the Tories will fight Mr Juncker, etc. It also leads to playground trivialisation. Who is the best leader at eating bacon butties? Not Mr Miliband. Do we care?
    Meanwhile, we have one of the lowest investment levels in the entire world – competing with Mali in sub-Saharan Africa. Low-skilled employment is booming (why not hire a cheap helper rather than invest?), high-skilled employment is struggling. Our balance of payment deficit is terrifying. Industry is a shadow of its former self. Do we care about any of that? Do any of the parties have any policies to deal with this?
    Actually, yes. Labour’s policy on these issues was published this week. It’s 85 pages long. Media coverage has been a tiny fraction of the bacon butties story. But if you’d like to know what Labour would do differently, it’s worth a look, at least at the one-page summary – and maybe have a skim of the full document? Issues it addresses include vocational schools training, schools career planning working with employers, boosting research for small business, encouraging industry and exports, devolving half of business rates to local Combined Authorities (which in our area would be a partnership between Nottingham and Nottinghamshire – not some kind of merged council) and eliminating mock-apprenticeships and boosting real ones.
    Not every idea may be perfect. But it’s a serious attempt to draw up serious policy. Have a look? The summary is here, and there’s a link to the full report (which has a longer summary with 30 specific recommendations) at the bottom:"

    http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/agenda-2015/policy-review/adonis-review

    P.S. Nick, I hope you don't mind me quoting you but I thought you words were worth a wider audience, not least because they go against the left-right (evil-good) nonsense.

    'playground trivialisation.'

    Labour have lead the field on that; it's one of their, and their party supporters specialities. Why has it suddenly become an insignificance in Mr Palmers eyes? One suspects because it's hitting home and hard, when used against Miliband by the other players.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    'playground trivialisation.'

    Labour have lead the field on that; it's one of their, and their party supporters specialities.

    Bless.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    OT EU: Cameroon think tank Open Europe having a go at the idiocy of sending Lansley to the Commission, although too polite to mention him by name:
    http://www.openeurope.org.uk/Article/Page/en/LIVE?id=20335&page=PressReleases

    Shadsy lists some of the not-recently-fired-for-incompetence candidates:
    http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/has-lansley-been-junckered/


  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    I've bet on Survation at 7/4 in the Ladbrokes market. This is very much a 50:50 call so the 7/4 price is value.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427

    OT EU: Cameroon think tank Open Europe having a go at the idiocy of sending Lansley to the Commission, although too polite to mention him by name:
    http://www.openeurope.org.uk/Article/Page/en/LIVE?id=20335&page=PressReleases

    Shadsy lists some of the not-recently-fired-for-incompetence candidates:
    http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/has-lansley-been-junckered/


    Trevor Kavanagh and Guido have told me it won't be Lansley though !
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    Patrick said:

    This Yougov / Survation spat ( if that’s the right way to describe it) is in fact a very welcome and rare example of the scientific method at work in an area related to politics. Try something based upon a theory, test it, see if it works, revise your theory, try something better, repeat ad astra.

    The usual political approach is: I have an ideology, implement it, fails, implement a more intense version of your ideology, fails even more, repeat ad nauseam.

    Eg on the NHS let’s really implement some fully centrally controlled (Stalinist) hospitals and some fully market based (state pays but customer of the state delivers). See what works. Go with that.

    Mr. Patrick, on the NHS the Hitchinbroke example would seem to show the way forward. The state pays but the private sector delivers because it has worked. God bless Andy Burnham I say for taking the gamble and setting up a private hospital within the NHS. Why Labour aren't trumpeting their triumph we need to think about.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822


    http://www.yourbritain.org.uk/agenda-2015/policy-review/adonis-review

    P.S. Nick, I hope you don't mind me quoting you but I thought you words were worth a wider audience, not least because they go against the left-right (evil-good) nonsense.

    Lord Adonis is definitely one of the good guys in Labour; he and Michael Gove agree on a lot as regards educational policy, and this latest report (as Adonis generously admits) draws on some of the work Lord Heseltine did a couple of years ago on the same subject.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited July 2014
    Algeria's World Cup team giving the money earned from the competition to the people of Gaza

    http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2118017-islam-slimani-algeria-will-donate-their-world-cup-prize-money-to-gaza
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    I've bet on Survation at 7/4 in the Ladbrokes market. This is very much a 50:50 call so the 7/4 price is value.

    I agree.. I thought everyone would steam into YouGov and I'd get 9/4 Survation.. Another wrong call!
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    Afternoon all and an interesting response from Survation. In a poll I participated in last week, I was asked 3 or 4 times during the course of a 20 minute poll which party I had voted for at X election. As I have only ever voted Tory (or independent in council elections) since my first vote at the GE1979 I had no difficulty recollecting how I voted. However for people who confer their vote among different parties at different elections, recall must at times be difficult.
  • EasterrossEasterross Posts: 1,915
    As I understand there are a fair number of council by-elections today, I assume we will be getting one of Harry's excellent threads later in the day.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983


    Mr. Patrick, on the NHS the Hitchinbroke example would seem to show the way forward. The state pays but the private sector delivers because it has worked. God bless Andy Burnham I say for taking the gamble and setting up a private hospital within the NHS. Why Labour aren't trumpeting their triumph we need to think about.

    You may not have been around at the time but one of our more excitable posters (in a previous incarnation) spent a lot of time trying to link Hitchingbrooke to the Tories through donations made by the franchise winner. The fact that it was Labour who decided to privatise it didnt seem to matter.
  • john_zimsjohn_zims Posts: 3,399
    @The Watcher

    'Low-skilled employment is booming (why not hire a cheap helper rather than invest?), high-skilled employment is struggling. Our balance of payment deficit is terrifying. Industry is a shadow of its former self. '

    Hilarious stuff, can't think which government flooded the country with low-skilled immigrants,but he's certainly right about industry being a shadow of it's former self.

    'Manufacturing accounted for more than 20 per cent of the economy in 1997, the year Labour came to power. But by 2007, that share had declined to 12.4 per cent.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1232897/Manufacturing-decline-Labour-greater-Margaret-Thatcher.html#ixzz36PchzupK
    Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
  • shadsy said:

    Which company's final poll get closest to the #indyref result?
    2/5 YouGov

    7/4 Survation

    You'd think wouldn't you that the Directors of Survation would be hugely embarrassed by these odds from the country's leading political bookmaker?

    If they have any real confidence in their product they should be rushing round to Ladbrokes' nearest shop to wager half a month's salary on being closer to the actual result than YouGov.

    Somehow I don't see that happening.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    On topic: I think both Peter Kellner's original piece, and this response, are interesting. Polling is a mixture of art and science, there's no perfect answer, and there are very few data points to calibrate against. Even if a given pollster happens to come out more accurate than another for a particular election, that doesn't necessarily mean that its methodology was systematically better; it might just be luck.

    This is a particularly serious problem for IndyRef, which is very much a one-off. There's nothing directly comparable to calibrate the weightings against.

    So, given the rather large disparity between different polling organisations, we don't really have much choice but to fall back on a mixture of gut-feel, and the reputation and experience of the pollster. On balance I'm inclined to favour the Peter Kellner camp, but we shall see.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited July 2014

    OT EU: Cameroon think tank Open Europe having a go at the idiocy of sending Lansley to the Commission, although too polite to mention him by name:
    http://www.openeurope.org.uk/Article/Page/en/LIVE?id=20335&page=PressReleases

    Shadsy lists some of the not-recently-fired-for-incompetence candidates:
    http://politicalbookie.wordpress.com/2014/07/03/has-lansley-been-junckered/

    "It’s absolutely essential that the UK puts forward a high profile, ‘heavy hitting’ candidate, capable of landing a top job, not simply a candidate who happens to be available."

    I think that reads more as a vote against Mr Callanan, than one against Mr Lansley.

    That said, I don't see any obvious 'heavy hitters' amongst the Conservatives.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    edited July 2014
    Excellent reply by Survation’s Patrick Briône. – hope this is the end of it and this tit-for-tat escalates no further.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031
    edited July 2014
    Neil said:

    You may not have been around at the time but one of our more excitable posters (in a previous incarnation) spent a lot of time trying to link Hitchingbrooke to the Tories through donations made by the franchise winner. The fact that it was Labour who decided to privatise it didnt seem to matter.
    I still remember Eoin Clarke's contribution to this topic

    http://www.greenbenchesuk.com/2012/11/superbug-outbreak-jumps-200-at-1st.html?m=1
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Dow smashes 17,000 barrier after strong jobs data...
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    I still remember Eoin Clarke's contribution to this topic

    http://www.greenbenchesuk.com/2012/11/superbug-outbreak-jumps-200-at-1st.html?m=1
    I've seen him mentioned here before but cant say I've ever paid much attention to him. He seems to comply with my general rule that any non-medical person using the title Dr tends to be a bit of a prat.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    Pulpstar said:
    I have to say that I think backing the draw is probably the thing to be doing this time around. Save but for a couple of balls, both the Sri Lanka tests would have been drawn, and that was with no rain affecting them. Also - India have better batsmen than Sri Lanka and given the weather, the pitches are likely to be dryer and slower...
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031

    "It’s absolutely essential that the UK puts forward a high profile, ‘heavy hitting’ candidate, capable of landing a top job, not simply a candidate who happens to be available."

    I think that reads more as a vote against Mr Callanan, than one against Mr Lansley.

    That said, I don't see any obvious 'heavy hitters' amongst the Conservatives.
    Some wise fellow tipped Lord Howard at 25/1.

    He's now 12/1

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2014

    As I understand there are a fair number of council by-elections today, I assume we will be getting one of Harry's excellent threads later in the day.

    This is a list of today's by-elections:

    http://vote-2012.proboards.com/thread/4403/elections-2nd-3rd-july-2014?page=1#scrollTo=170442

    Andrew Teale's preview:

    http://blog.englishelections.org.uk/2014/07/by-election-previews-23-july-2014.html
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    "It’s absolutely essential that the UK puts forward a high profile, ‘heavy hitting’ candidate, capable of landing a top job, not simply a candidate who happens to be available."

    I think that reads more as a vote against Mr Callanan, than one against Mr Lansley.

    That said, I don't see any obvious 'heavy hitters' amongst the Conservatives.
    William Hague. Or if we're restricting this to people Dave owes a favour to, Michael Howard.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822

    Some wise fellow tipped Lord Howard at 25/1.

    He's now 12/1

    He's 72. Is he really going to want to plunge himself into the Byzantine intrigues of the EU courtiers?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427
    edited July 2014
    Lennon said:

    I have to say that I think backing the draw is probably the thing to be doing this time around. Save but for a couple of balls, both the Sri Lanka tests would have been drawn, and that was with no rain affecting them. Also - India have better batsmen than Sri Lanka and given the weather, the pitches are likely to be dryer and slower...
    Fortunately we have a dynamic captain that won't hesitate to make an aggressive declaration in order to win a test.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031
    edited July 2014
    Neil said:

    I've seen him mentioned here before but cant say I've ever paid much attention to him. He seems to comply with my general rule that any non-medical person using the title Dr tends to be a bit of a prat.
    Dr Sunil Prasannan would disagree with you.

    He's more of a professional apologiser

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100194054/another-glorious-apology-from-dr-eoin-clarke/
  • SocratesSocrates Posts: 10,322

    William Hague. Or if we're restricting this to people Dave owes a favour to, Michael Howard.
    John Redwood would certainly be a heavy hitter.

    If we put forward a candidate, and then Juncker gives them a minor position, what happens if they then resign?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    On topic: I think both Peter Kellner's original piece, and this response, are interesting. Polling is a mixture of art and science, there's no perfect answer, and there are very few data points to calibrate against. Even if a given pollster happens to come out more accurate than another for a particular election, that doesn't necessarily mean that its methodology was systematically better; it might just be luck.

    This is a particularly serious problem for IndyRef, which is very much a one-off. There's nothing directly comparable to calibrate the weightings against.

    So, given the rather large disparity between different polling organisations, we don't really have much choice but to fall back on a mixture of gut-feel, and the reputation and experience of the pollster. On balance I'm inclined to favour the Peter Kellner camp, but we shall see.

    Doesn't the same follow for Ukip %s in GE polls? We haven't had four party politics before and we have the outrageous 11point spread on a party whose midpoint is 16.5

    I say the 2015 election is one where betting success will be more about betting nous than pollster following, which makes it a rare thing in the Betfair dominated market
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,292
    You know what...I have an inkling that the UK's EU Commissioner will be Sir Malcolm Rifkind. Ticks the seniority box as ex Foreign and Defence Secretary, ultra safe seat (will the kippers even bother?); and perfect for Boris's return.

    The Hersham Bugle (deputy ed - tim) has also learned that Ms Nuala Byrne has booked two tickets to Brussels.

    You heard it here first, folks.
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Some wise fellow tipped Lord Howard at 25/1.

    He's now 12/1

    He was on the DP yesterday and seemed to suggest he would take the job if it were offered
  • Ladbrokes are now going 1/7 for a No vote in the Indy Referendum. All over bar the shouting it would seem.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031

    He's 72. Is he really going to want to plunge himself into the Byzantine intrigues of the EU courtiers?
    Hillary will be 73 at the end of her first term. 70 is the new 50
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    Pulpstar said:

    Fortunately we have a dynamic captain that won't hesitate to make an aggressive declaration in order to win a test.
    Indeed... what price 0-0 for the series of 5 tests?
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031

    Ladbrokes are now going 1/7 for a No vote in the Indy Referendum. All over bar the shouting it would seem.

    Considering we've had polls from ICM showing the Indyref to be very close, I'm perplexed by these odds.
  • LennonLennon Posts: 1,782
    JohnO said:

    You know what...I have an inkling that the UK's EU Commissioner will be Sir Malcolm Rifkind. Ticks the seniority box as ex Foreign and Defence Secretary, ultra safe seat (will the kippers even bother?); and perfect for Boris's return.

    The Hersham Bugle (deputy ed - tim) has also learned that Ms Nuala Byrne has booked two tickets to Brussels.

    You heard it here first, folks.

    But why would Cameron want to assist Boris's return to the Common's?
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,772

    Dr Sunil Prasannan would disagree with you.

    He's more of a professional apologiser

    http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/damianthompson/100194054/another-glorious-apology-from-dr-eoin-clarke/
    Whereas of course they’re entitled to the title and for the medical professional it’s merely a courtesy one!
  • He's 72. Is he really going to want to plunge himself into the Byzantine intrigues of the EU courtiers?
    Oh I don't know .... he's less than 2 years older than Vince Cable and by all accounts these EU Commissioner chappies enjoy an exceptionally luxurious lifestyle and are hugely overpaid into the bargain.

  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    isam said:

    Doesn't the same follow for Ukip %s in GE polls? We haven't had four party politics before and we have the outrageous 11point spread on a party whose midpoint is 16.5

    I say the 2015 election is one where betting success will be more about betting nous than pollster following, which makes it a rare thing in the Betfair dominated market

    Yes, fair points. Mind you, there were some pretty big spreads last time as well, even without the UKIP effect - the last Angus Reid poll had Labour on 24% and the LibDems on 29%.

    As a general rule, putting your faith in the best-established pollsters rather than the new kids on the block has tended to be a good policy.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,822
    Those predicting a Boris return to the Commons should remember that, to stand as a Tory candidate, you have to be on the Candidates List.

    Jus' sayin'. Might not have any significance.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Mike Weatherley is more of a surprise — he was only elected in 2010. James Clappison has been MP for Hertsmere since 1992 when he succeeded Cecil Parkinson.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787
    TGOHF said:

    I suspect a question that cannot be answered until after the Indy ref.

    However yougov seem closer to Jack's ARSE..

    It's mildly amusing to see a pair of pollsters fighting over who might take the minor medals to my McARSE gold medal performance.

    Somewhat like a pair of bald men fighting over a solitary comb when Sweeny Todd is inviting them to occupy the barbers chair.

    Snip snip ....

  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    AndyJS said:

    Mike Weatherley is more of a surprise — he was only elected in 2010. James Clappison has been MP for Hertsmere since 1992 when he succeeded Cecil Parkinson.
    Isn't he just acknowledging Hove as a likely loss?
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427
    Lennon said:

    Indeed... what price 0-0 for the series of 5 tests?
    250-1 Stan James.
  • JohnOJohnO Posts: 4,292
    Lennon said:

    But why would Cameron want to assist Boris's return to the Common's?
    No threat to Dave who if he wins in 2015 is unassailable and if he loses will quit anyway.
  • Yes, fair points. Mind you, there were some pretty big spreads last time as well, even without the UKIP effect - the last Angus Reid poll had Labour on 24% and the LibDems on 29%.

    As a general rule, putting your faith in the best-established pollsters rather than the new kids on the block has tended to be a good policy.
    Taking account of the points from Isam and RN, I'm inclined to think that Shadsy might have slightly over-egged Survation's odds in this contest. Although I believe YouGov will be closer, I rather fancy that 175% return available should Survation prevail, more than four times the 40% return on offer by backing their competitor.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621

    Considering we've had polls from ICM showing the Indyref to be very close, I'm perplexed by these odds.
    Indeed. Must be a helluva lot of punters on NO to drive it down that far.
  • MyBurningEarsMyBurningEars Posts: 3,651
    Very pleased to see Mike got Survation to comment here, it's a cracking response. There's one bit I take issue with, but I notice that shadsy made my point before me:
    shadsy said:

    I doubt it is fair to say that YouGov did their research "solely for the purpose of criticizing another polling company". It's surely a good thing that they are trying to explain the difference in results, both for YouGov and Survation.
    It was probably prompted by a very healthy sense of enquiry and doubt rather than to bash Survation over the head.

    "Healthy sense of enquiry" is an understatement. The Indyref disagreements should be throwing all the pollsters into a sense of panic and existential angst, 1992-style. If they can't remotely reliably forecast (I won't say "predict", that's more for the trend-watchers, the analysts and gamblers) an imminent electoral result, then frankly what is the point of all their labours, and why should anyone stuff them more cash to produce more of the same? If they don't have at least a "curiosity" about what is underlying these critical discrepancies, and throw some investment at tracking down the root cause(s), they darned well ought to.

    Obviously the critical difference with 1992 is that this time we can tell there is a serious problem even prior to the result. But it's no good them sitting on their hands and waiting for the counts to come in to determine who got it right, in part because of the difference between a prediction and a forecast. If the electoral winds change, and they may wend a slightly different path even very late in the day (while few voters swing in the final 24-48 hours, less committed electors may only take on the final day the decision to hike, or not, to the polling booth) then it's possible that the team with the best methodology might end up with a slightly less "accurate" result. Nor would a mere comparison of polling with the final count explain the discrepancies between the pollsters, in both level and trend. I think self-funded research like YouGov's is to be praised. I'm sure all serious pollsters are self-critical and reflective practitioners of their art, but unless they seek out additional data then a lot of their hypotheses for the current gap will remain pure speculation. And it's better to seek the data now than in the post-mortem, both for the obvious reasons (a post-mortem is by definition too late!) and because issues like voter recall are surely only going to worsen by the passage of time and a supervening vote.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Hertsmere is a possibility for Boris Johnson, although he'd obviously prefer somewhere like Kensington.
  • JackWJackW Posts: 14,787

    Oh I don't know .... he's less than 2 years older than Vince Cable and by all accounts these EU Commissioner chappies enjoy an exceptionally luxurious lifestyle and are hugely overpaid into the bargain.

    I might have been persuaded to offer my services but frankly from what you say I'm underwhelmed by the thought of a substantial lowering of my living standard.

    Oh well ....

  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    The real battle with the IndyRef polling is between ICM and YouGov and Survation are closer to the former.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    JohnO said:



    The Hersham Bugle (deputy ed - tim) has also learned that Ms Nuala Byrne has booked two tickets to Brussels.

    Single or return?

    I hope they dont end up in Bournemouth.
  • MarkSeniorMarkSenior Posts: 4,699
    An interesting response from Survation worthy of further study .
    Just 2 comments

    1 He mentions an ICM panel but ICM are a telephone pollster and do not therefore have a panel .
    2 He attributes the response that 56% of Survation panel voters actually voted in the Euro elections to false recall rather than the more likely cause being the more likely reason that the panel members are not truly representative of the population as a whole . He does rightly draw attention that Yougov may be even worse in this respect .
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,187

    Dr Sunil Prasannan would disagree with you.

    Your cheque is in the post :)
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708

    Those predicting a Boris return to the Commons should remember that, to stand as a Tory candidate, you have to be on the Candidates List.

    Jus' sayin'. Might not have any significance.

    Boris only needs to get into parliament quickly if Cameron is going to lose. That implies he needs a reasonably safe seat.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,187
    Neil said:


    He seems to comply with my general rule that any non-medical person using the title Dr tends to be a bit of a prat.

    Bang goes the probability of me buying Neil a drink at the next PB bash :)
  • taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/school-performance-measure-axed-welsh-7365810
    This article shows how Labour is desperate to cover up its education catastrophe in Wales by making comparisons between English and Welsh schools more difficult.

    The article says Labour are thinking of junking some health performance targets, too.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427
    edited July 2014

    The real battle with the IndyRef polling is between ICM and YouGov and Survation are closer to the former.

    What are their figures ?

    43 -> 49.9 (Yes) would be a very satisfying result for me as it would mean both the Nats and the Salmond doom mongers on here will have to pay out to me or charities of my choice.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427

    Boris only needs to get into parliament quickly if Cameron is going to lose. That implies he needs a reasonably safe seat.
    If he's going to get any seat hopefully Zac Goldsmith's !
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Bang goes the probability of me buying Neil a drink at the next PB bash :)
    I said it's a *general* rule! ;)

    If you buy me a drink at the next do I'll pronounce you an exception to it.
  • Hillary will be 73 at the end of her first term. 70 is the new 50
    Which, unlike a number of highly-respected PBers I seriously doubt. Yes, if she's the Dems' nominee she'll win. I just don't see her standing for one of at least three different reasons.
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited July 2014
    7 Tory seats have no candidate at present:

    Cannock Chase
    South Ribble
    Thanet South
    Hove
    Louth & Horncastle
    Hampshire NW
    Hertsmere
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    I just don't see her standing for one of at least three different reasons.

    You think she's doing the book just for the money?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118

    Yes, fair points. Mind you, there were some pretty big spreads last time as well, even without the UKIP effect - the last Angus Reid poll had Labour on 24% and the LibDems on 29%.

    As a general rule, putting your faith in the best-established pollsters rather than the new kids on the block has tended to be a good policy.
    Sorry I meant big spread around the Ukip score 12-23 is the range when really any thing scoring in the teens with a min max of 0-100 should have a 3-4 spread (particularly as ukips range is prob 7-20)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427

    An interesting response from Survation worthy of further study .
    Just 2 comments

    1 He mentions an ICM panel but ICM are a telephone pollster and do not therefore have a panel .
    2 He attributes the response that 56% of Survation panel voters actually voted in the Euro elections to false recall rather than the more likely cause being the more likely reason that the panel members are not truly representative of the population as a whole . He does rightly draw attention that Yougov may be even worse in this respect .

    Won't any panel suffer from this - if you are answering a political questionnaire I'd have thought there would be a good chance you are both more likely to vote, and more interested in politics than a general member of the public.

    I know Yougov ask about other stuff too, as do the other polling companies but I'd venture to guess that the average PBer is more likely to be in a panel, and more likely to vote than a general member of the public ?
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,187
    Neil said:

    I said it's a *general* rule! ;)

    If you buy me a drink at the next do I'll pronounce you an exception to it.
    Deal! :)
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031
    edited July 2014

    An interesting response from Survation worthy of further study .
    Just 2 comments

    1 He mentions an ICM panel but ICM are a telephone pollster and do not therefore have a panel .
    2 He attributes the response that 56% of Survation panel voters actually voted in the Euro elections to false recall rather than the more likely cause being the more likely reason that the panel members are not truly representative of the population as a whole . He does rightly draw attention that Yougov may be even worse in this respect .

    The ICM polls on the Indyref are online polls not telephone polls

    http://www.icmresearch.com/media-centre/polls/scottish-independence-poll-june-2014
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,427

    Which, unlike a number of highly-respected PBers I seriously doubt. Yes, if she's the Dems' nominee she'll win. I just don't see her standing for one of at least three different reasons.
    Heh If you're right, Peter the Punter is bang out of cash !
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,187
    AndyJS said:

    Hertsmere is a possibility for Boris Johnson, although he'd obviously prefer somewhere like Kensington.

    London would definitely be his natural territory.
  • An interesting response from Survation worthy of further study .
    Just 2 comments

    1 He mentions an ICM panel but ICM are a telephone pollster and do not therefore have a panel .
    2 He attributes the response that 56% of Survation panel voters actually voted in the Euro elections to false recall rather than the more likely cause being the more likely reason that the panel members are not truly representative of the population as a whole . He does rightly draw attention that Yougov may be even worse in this respect .

    Hi Mark. ICM are mixed-method and the ICM polls we refer to were internet panel.

    You are right, there are a number of reasons for false recall. It's an issue for all.
  • AveryLPAveryLP Posts: 7,815

    Boris only needs to get into parliament quickly if Cameron is going to lose. That implies he needs a reasonably safe seat.
    The idea that Zac Goldsmith and Boris will swap jobs is absurd.

    Zac's strength in Richmond is due to his family's location and presence in the constituency.

    Boris's appeal as Mayor is mainly due to his rare personal appeal to a wide spectrum of voters and the way he has and has been able to promote this in the media (starting from HIGNFY and his own journalism).

    A swap would not be playing to each's strength. More probably it would end in disaster for both, though Boris is more likely to win Richmond than Zac the London mayoralty.

  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    Neil said:

    You think she's doing the book just for the money?
    Hypothetically if you were going to do a book launch it would be better to do when people thought you were going to be president.
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,382
    Note: ICM's IndyRef polls have been online.
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Hypothetically if you were going to do a book launch it would be better to do when people thought you were going to be president.
    Hillary not running would be Rod's best ever call given how early he made it and the certainty of it.

  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 120,031

    Which, unlike a number of highly-respected PBers I seriously doubt. Yes, if she's the Dems' nominee she'll win. I just don't see her standing for one of at least three different reasons.
    I think she wants it, and given the demographics and unappealing nature of the Republican Party candidates the Dem candidate is favourite she knows it's hers if she wants it.

    And she wants it.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    AndyJS said:

    7 Tory seats have no candidate at present:

    Cannock Chase
    South Ribble
    Thanet South
    Hove
    Louth & Horncastle
    Hampshire NW
    Hertsmere

    They have a candidate for South Ribble.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-28078466
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395

    They have a candidate for South Ribble.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lancashire-28078466
    Thanks.
  • anotherDaveanotherDave Posts: 6,746
    edited July 2014

    I think she wants it, and given the demographics and unappealing nature of the Republican Party candidates the Dem candidate is favourite she knows it's hers if she wants it.

    And she wants it.
    National Review had a piece touting Ms Warren as the anti-Hilary candidate.

    http://www.nationalreview.com/article/381344/elizabeth-warren-obama-2016-jonah-goldberg
  • NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    National Review had a piece touting Ms Warren as the anti-Hilary candidate.
    Being the first native American as well as woman President does give her a certain edge over Hillary.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,698
    Neil said:

    Hillary not running would be Rod's best ever call given how early he made it and the certainty of it.

    If IIRC, Rod Crosby was also certain that Obama would not and could be President for some reason...
This discussion has been closed.