Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What I cannot understand given their age profile is the lac

24

Comments

  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048
    Looking at the discussion about polling accuracy and the expected drop in UKIP share in the run up to the GE.

    It is worth noting that the ICM poll for the Guardian in July 2009 - 10 months before the last GE - had UKIP on 3%. It does not appear there was much in the way of a drop in supoprt for them between that poll and the GE itself.

    http://www.icmresearch.com/pdfs/2009_july_guardian_poll.pdf
  • Options
    Ishmael_XIshmael_X Posts: 3,664
    edited July 2014
    @bigjohnowls‌

    Don't be silly. It is Mike's view, not "PB rule 1", that ICM is the gold standard. He can defend that view for himself if he wants to, but I believe he held it prior to 2010 and that he might think you were putting quite a lot of weight on a single data point.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    edited July 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    Who was top scorer in 2005 ?

    NOP - Who were then dropped by the Independent for ComRes
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048


    Absolutely. I have many similar worries. But I may have different solutions. I would argue also that you can be part of a growing minority population and a UKIP supporter as well and that UKIP should not be about ethnicity.

    I honestly do not believe that UKIP is about ethnicity. However much their opponents might try to paint them as such, as a party they have consistently maintained a position that Britishness is nothing to do with colour or ethnic background but about acceptance of shared values.

    I was just responding to the second half of SeanF's final sentence:

    They worry about multiculturalism becoming ever more entrenched, and governments of all stripes prioritising the interests of growing minority populations over their own descendants.

    I think that is right. But I think you are wrong to conflate ethnicity with multiculturalism.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702

    Silly question maybe, but how does one access the daily YouGov/Sun VI poll, usually released around 10pm, or is this only available from behind the paywall?

    Via the sun politics Twitter Feed at 10pm and 6am the following morning on the YouGov website.
    Thanks TSE, I'm not into twitter which probably explains my problem! I'm aware that this poll appears on YG's website at 6.00am (sharp!) the following morning.
    I generally post the figures on here around 10pm.
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    edited July 2014

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    Looking at the 2014 LE results I note that they were in London and far smaller area wise than the 2013 elections, also 2013 had the strong UKIP areas of the east coast (Kent, Essex, Lincolnshire)

    UKIP achieved 19% in the 2013 LEs and 17% in the 2014 LEs - just going by eye on the map and noting London in particular which is a weak UKIP area was in 2014 I find it difficult to believe that there was an underlying shift away from UKIP as the NNEVS suggest (Fwiw I think 2013 NNEVS was too HIGH for UKIP). Weighting assumptions about UKIP support are tricky...

    ICM does not have any UKIP weighting issue so far as I can tell, the raw figures are barely adjusted most months which gives me a degree of confidence that their sample is random *enough* to pick out the true UKIP support.

    Turnout at a General Election will of course be alot higher than at LEs and I expect that to work to Labour's advantage and UKIP's disadvantage somewhat (Nationally).
  • Options
    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    Retirement isn't everything is cracked up to be resorted to watching Kojak, Alias Smith and Jones and checking 2001 polling accuracy. TSE is right about Gold Standard being closest in 2001 beat Mori by 0.3%.

    Will check out 1997 after the lollipop licker episode
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2014
    Mike asks: Could it be that those oldies currently backing Farage’s party are in good health and are reasonably well off.

    I don't know about their health, but they are not in general very well off:

    23% of UKIP supporters live in households whose total income exceeds £40,000, compared with 38% of Tories and 28% of Labour voters.

    http://yougov.co.uk/news/2013/03/05/analysis-ukip-voters/

    Now, it is true that you need to be a bit careful interpreting this data because it is partly a reflection of the age profile - in that YouGov analysis, 71% of UKIP supporters were over 50 and thus many of them will be retired, with corresponding lower household income than people in employment. It may be that they see themselves as relatively comfortable, but, even so, it does seem a bit odd that they are not more worried about pensions and the economy generally.

    Maybe they should be.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    edited July 2014
    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    The Times are reporting that the Tory MP has Nadhim Zahwai has contacted the police saying David Ward is encouraging Terrorism as per the Terrorism act of 2006.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,949
    Where I think ICM is very good is that it very rarely show's extreme polling numbers.

    Where other pollsters will show 20-30% leads for an individual party (at times between 92 and 97 Labour's was going 30%+ with some pollsters) ICM will usually stay more within sensible ranges.

    In this Parliament it's biggest Labour lead has been 12%. In the last Parliament it's biggest Conservative lead was 20%.


    This means that over time it's less effected by swingback and comes up more consistent than most pollsters, I think.

    That's my take on it anyway.


  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,045

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    edited July 2014
    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    Not sure - Can anyone on the right put forward a pro-Palestinian cause ? (Genuine question - like yours).

    Shrinking violet left winger @SeanT of this parish is reasonably pro-Palestinian. Is he the exception that proves the rule ?

  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,949
    edited July 2014
    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    If "global warming" means glorious weather like we're having this summer (and had last summer) bring it on! :D
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    edited July 2014

    isam said:

    TOPPING said:

    TOPPING said:

    CD13 said:

    Nick,

    "FWIW I find Kippers and Greens the least interested in bread and butter issues - they are mostly

    They care about what they dislike and what makes them feel better, just like the rest of us.

    I have absolutely no truck with UKIP given their lazy decision to adopt a quasi-NF/BNP tone in their election literature which I found truly shocking.

    But.

    Your response, although of course perceptive as usual, at the same time confirms their concerns that the orthodoxy is to have a multi-culti come-all-ye UK where there are few if any immigration controls and that the UK, thereby, will be changed irrevocably as a result.

    Any deviation from that orthodoxy warrants the fruitcake description.

    The Kippers have a legitimate desire not to have their country, for which read neighbourhood, changed out of all recognition. Sam has articulated this well on here many times and he is an ex-Labourite for heaven's sake.

    Kippers might ask where one draws the line wrt immigration and they would be right to do so.

    What infuriates them (and I agree the sneering charge of "metropolitan elite" is facile) is that no one allows them to ask that question.

    My response is merely that UKIP supporters are driven by the same instincts and desires as the supporters of other political parties. I am opposed to multiculturalism on the grounds that it is clear to me that some cultures - or, more accurately, ways of looking at and engaging with the world - are clearly better than others.
    But they are not treated as other political parties. They are (often) treated as loons, etc.

    I agree. But UKIPers also tend to dismiss their opponents as the sneering metropolitan elite. It's the same kind of thing in my view.

    What you're saying comes across as saying it's just as valid for the bourgeoise to call the peasants peasants, as vice versa.

    Only if you believe that UKIP supporters are all peasants and those of other parties are all bourgeois. I don't.

    You don't have to believe that for my point to be valid at all... A vast amount of ukip supporters come from uneducated, poor backgrounds, a bigger proportion than for any other party. No one said they all had to, or that everyone else had to be from a metropolitan elite
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    The Times are reporting that the Tory MP has Nadhim Zahwai has contacted the police saying David Ward is encouraging Terrorism as per the Terrorism act of 2006.
    I agree with David Anderson here:

    David Anderson QC said the legal definition of terrorism was too widely drawn and called on Parliament to revisit the legislation.

    "The problem is that our definition has begun to catch people that it was never really intended to catch," Mr Anderson told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

    Cont.

    http://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2014/07/22/watchdog-warns-on-anti-terror-laws/

    That would be a crackers way to use the Terrorism act.
  • Options
    ...and FWIW I don't think the Israel / Palestine issue will EVER get resolved unless two fundamental truths are acknowledged and resolved:

    1. Israel has a right to exist.
    Whatever the correct borders, whatever the voting rights, Israel exists - and has a right to. Unless and until the Muslim world all accepts this and acts accordingly there can be no peace.

    2. Israel is occupying land that really is not theirs.
    The Palesitinans have a right to exist and a state of their own too. Unless and until the Palestinians have a state of their own with mutually acceptable borders (which will necessarily involve Israeli withdrawal from some areas, esp on the West Bank) there can be no peace.

    Personally I hold out almost no hope whatever that the Muslim world will accept 1 or that Israel can enforce 2 without civil war within Israel (and those settler communities are the hardest cases you can imagine - make US 'Preppers' look like nuns). It will go on and on and on....
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    Interesting to see how his comments and LAB condemnation goes down with his Bradford East electorate. My view is will probably be popular but LAB will still regain Bradford East.
  • Options
    SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 38,986
    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    I love the way that one LD MP who sits on the government benches is de facto "the left".

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    This summer is glorious, out enjoying balmy evenings riding my bike.

    If this is what Global Warming looks like, long may it continue
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited July 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    I agree with David Anderson here:

    David Anderson QC said the legal definition of terrorism was too widely drawn and called on Parliament to revisit the legislation.

    "The problem is that our definition has begun to catch people that it was never really intended to catch," Mr Anderson told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme.

    Yes, David Anderson is absolutely right and the government should change the law as he suggests, in the next parliamentary session.

    Just do it, Dave.
  • Options
    MrJonesMrJones Posts: 3,523
    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    The argument is there *was* global warming but it flat-lined 14-ish years ago.

    If you increase the thermostat in a room it goes up to the new temperature and stays there.

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    The Times are reporting that the Tory MP has Nadhim Zahwai has contacted the police saying David Ward is encouraging Terrorism as per the Terrorism act of 2006.
    Is this a clever way of undermining the ridiculous Terrorism Act 2006 and forcing Parliament to repeal it?

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    edited July 2014
    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    FYI Paddy Power is 5-6 on 9.5%+ for UKIP. (5-6 9.5%-)
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    edited July 2014
    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from my post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Neil said:

    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    The Times are reporting that the Tory MP has Nadhim Zahwai has contacted the police saying David Ward is encouraging Terrorism as per the Terrorism act of 2006.
    Is this a clever way of undermining the ridiculous Terrorism Act 2006 and forcing Parliament to repeal it?

    I hope so, I think it is the Tories doing for the publicity/partisan politics.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    I'll have that bet if you accept mine
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    @BigJohnOwls

    "Retirement isn't everything is cracked up to be resorted to watching Kojak, Alias Smith and Jones and checking 2001 polling accuracy."

    That's rather sad. I'm finding retirement is just like being a child again only better. I can play all day everyday, go on adventures with my friends, have lots more pocket money and there is no mummy telling me to stop and get on with my homework. Retirement is great.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    Which are the BPC pollsters ?
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    Good news Kojak got his man and TSE was right overall ICM were most accurate in 1997.

    Again as in 2010 they were not the best in respect of the 2 main parties and had the Lab lead over the Tories underestimated by 3% compared to Gallups 1%.

    Whatever happened to Gallup?
  • Options
    dyedwooliedyedwoolie Posts: 7,786
    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    Not sure - Can anyone on the right put forward a pro-Palestinian cause ? (Genuine question - like yours).

    Shrinking violet left winger @SeanT of this parish is reasonably pro-Palestinian. Is he the exception that proves the rule ?

    Yes. The Israelis were dumped into a made up state by the West in an act of wilful negligence based on superstition, displacing the Palestinians who have since been corralled and treated little better than cattle. Why anyone would back Israel is beyond me, it's a psychotic regime.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from my post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    It does seem that ICM massively under rate ukip in long term polls then hike it up near the finish, why is that do you think?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    isam said:

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    I'll have that bet if you accept mine
    I'm not having that bet, because I'm genuinely unsure on what UKIP will poll.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    isam said:

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    I'll have that bet if you accept mine
    Don't you basically have "the field" running for you in this bet ?

    Populus, Yougov, Survation, Ipson-Mori, Comres, Opinium - therefore isn't the starting point 6-1 ?!

    Even if you think ICM will be most accurate isn't Evens to lay them value ?...
  • Options
    GrandioseGrandiose Posts: 2,323
    Pulpstar said:

    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    Not sure - Can anyone on the right put forward a pro-Palestinian cause ? (Genuine question - like yours).

    Shrinking violet left winger @SeanT of this parish is reasonably pro-Palestinian. Is he the exception that proves the rule ?

    What I would say is that people disproportionately on the left slip from an understandable concern for the citizens of the West Bank and Gaza into a condemnation of Israel without taking the picture as a whole. They also announce the suffering of Palestinians as if it is something that British supporters of Israel don't know about or don't care about, when the reality is for many quite far from that.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Pulpstar said:

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    Which are the BPC pollsters ?
    BPC pollsters here

    http://www.britishpollingcouncil.org/officers.html
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,380
    For those outside Scotland who want to send an encouraging message to "No" supporters, there a non-partisan thing up which you might like to consider:

    https://www.letsstaytogether.org.uk/

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Good post. My impression over the years is, as others have said, that ICM's weighting makes it less bouncy because they assume, historically correctly, that people tend to drift back to their old parties). By election day the polls are all pretty similar, as you point out - all those figures except Angus Reid are just MOE variation.

    My reservation about ICM (and Populus) is that their assumptions about drifting back and certainty to vote may well be out in the current climate. The rise of UKIP has put polling in uncharted waters, and any sort of fix to address past problems in assessing responses may be problematic. Specifically, there are almost no "Former UKIP voters" so the adjustment doesn't necessarily pick up people who don't know and will take them as the "change" option, and many LibDem voters seem so disgruntled this time round that I really doubt if they're going to drift back.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702

    Good news Kojak got his man and TSE was right overall ICM were most accurate in 1997.

    Again as in 2010 they were not the best in respect of the 2 main parties and had the Lab lead over the Tories underestimated by 3% compared to Gallups 1%.

    Whatever happened to Gallup?

    They are back as ORB
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065

    isam said:

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    I'll have that bet if you accept mine
    I'm not having that bet, because I'm genuinely unsure on what UKIP will poll.
    So am I!

    Let's say £100 on each bet then?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    isam said:

    isam said:

    ICM is the Gold Standard (PB rule 1)

    ICM was the most accurate at GE2010 (refer to PB rule 1 above)

    Well at GE 2010 it understimated Lab by 2% and Con by 1%

    ComRes and Populus got the Con % spot on and were both only 2% wrong on Lab. Mori got both main parties within 1%

    Despite that PB Rule 1 applies because ICM was less wrong on LD %

    Full details on main 2 parties differences between each poll and the actual result?

    ICM Guardian: Con -1; Lab -2:
    ComRes/ITV/Independent: Con 0; Lab -2:
    Angus Reid/PB: Con -1; Lab -6;
    Populus/Times: Con 0; Lab -2;
    YouGov/Sun: Con -2; Lab -2;
    Harris/Daily Mail: Con -2; Lab -1;
    MORI/London Evening Standard: Con -1; Lab -1;

    But apparently PB rule 1 is not to be challenged.

    Getting the Lib Dem share correct/nearest is an achievement given the Cleggasm.

    Plus ICM were the most accurate at GEs 1997, 2001 and the AV referendum was spot on

    So not been most accurate at a GE on main two parties since 2001?
    Not quite.

    Put it this way, from a betting viewpoint, it is very profitable following ICM's Westminster polls.
    Shall we bet then?

    I'll have £500 at EVS with you that UKIP get over ICMs current 9%
    I missed out a word from my post, it should have read, it is very profitable following ICM's final Westminster polls.

    I'll have a bet with you though on this, for £100.

    ICM will be the most accurate BPC pollster for UKIP's GB share of the vote at the GE.

    It does seem that ICM massively under rate ukip in long term polls then hike it up near the finish, why is that do you think?
    "Hiking up" was done after LEs in 2013...

    And Yougov were more accurate in 2014 Euros.

    @TSE £100 is too much for me on that bet but I'll have £20 laying ICM @ Evens that they are the most accurate final BPC pollster for UKIP if you are offering...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    isam said:

    It does seem that ICM massively under rate ukip in long term polls then hike it up near the finish, why is that do you think?

    That myth has been quashed. See my post at 9.59am
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Pulpstar/isam - Deals.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065

    isam said:

    It does seem that ICM massively under rate ukip in long term polls then hike it up near the finish, why is that do you think?

    That myth has been quashed. See my post at 9.59am
    Hardly

    What about the euros? Does that unquash it?!
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912

    @BigJohnOwls

    "Retirement isn't everything is cracked up to be resorted to watching Kojak, Alias Smith and Jones and checking 2001 polling accuracy."

    That's rather sad. I'm finding retirement is just like being a child again only better. I can play all day everyday, go on adventures with my friends, have lots more pocket money and there is no mummy telling me to stop and get on with my homework. Retirement is great.

    I know Doncaster races tomorrow, cricket Friday and Saturday and a day at the Commonwealth Games next Tuesday. Today was slightly duller although I did actually enjoy Kojak. I have to make the most of the next 12 monyhs Mrs BJ retires July 2015
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Isam/Pulpstar - Can I make one thing clear.

    I'm talking about the final ICM phone poll, not any of their wisdom or online polls.

    Is that ok.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    edited July 2014

    Isam/Pulpstar - Can I make one thing clear.

    I'm talking about the final ICM phone poll, not any of their wisdom or online polls.

    Is that ok.

    Sure - I think they are a great polling company (And probably actually do deserve favouritism), but Evens is a tremendous price to have the field working for me on this one !
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    edited July 2014

    Isam/Pulpstar - Can I make one thing clear.

    I'm talking about the final ICM phone poll, not any of their wisdom or online polls.

    Is that ok.

    Yes, have emailed you confo

  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    Shadsy on Bradford East (David Ward's seat)

    Labour 1/8
    LD 5/1
    Con 33/1
    Respect 33/1
    UKIP 66/1

  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    isam said:

    Isam/Pulpstar - Can I make one thing clear.

    I'm talking about the final ICM phone poll, not any of their wisdom or online polls.

    Is that ok.

    Yes, have emailed you confo

    Cheers.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013
    9% is a plausible figure for the UKIP vote share next May. It would be almost 3 million votes.

    I think it's touch and go whether UKIP outpoll the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    edited July 2014
    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 31,048
    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.

    I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.

    On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.

    Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Aww crap, just remembered, that Martin Boon of ICM told us that their wisdom poll was the most accurate at the 2010 General Election.
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    We've already done the conf haven't we - you worried about getting banned ? :)
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    I am about to go for a 5k run... Anyone want to guess my time?

    Searing essex heat, uphill for 2k downhill for 1.5 then a gradual climb to the finish
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    We've already done the conf haven't we - you worried about getting banned ? :)
    Yes sorry we have... And if I'm banned I can't read the emails anyway!!
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Aww crap, just remembered, that Martin Boon of ICM told us that their wisdom poll was the most accurate at the 2010 General Election.

    The funniest thing would be if I won the bet because of a TNS-BRMB outlier for UKIP on the low side :D
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    isam said:

    I am about to go for a 5k run... Anyone want to guess my time?

    Searing essex heat, uphill for 2k downhill for 1.5 then a gradual climb to the finish

    Dunno - you run a fair bit from what I can work out...

    But its not a race - hmm

    25 minutes ?
  • Options
    TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 21,633
    isam said:

    TGOHF said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    We've already done the conf haven't we - you worried about getting banned ? :)
    Yes sorry we have... And if I'm banned I can't read the emails anyway!!
    And it's on real votes not flaky polling :)

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Aww crap, just remembered, that Martin Boon of ICM told us that their wisdom poll was the most accurate at the 2010 General Election.

    Is the exit poll part of BPC :D ?
  • Options
    Bond_James_BondBond_James_Bond Posts: 1,939
    On topic:

    "Could it be that those oldies currently backing Farage’s party are in good health and are reasonably well off"

    Could it be that kippers look backwards rather than forwards?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

  • Options
    murali_smurali_s Posts: 3,045
    edited July 2014

    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.

    I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.

    On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.

    Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
    I'm glad to be tagged scientifically illiterate. Puts me in the same boat as 99% of the world's experts...

    I'm sorry, I'll always take actual measurements from NOAA and Hadley over satellite data.
  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Isam,

    Prop forward - 25 minutes
    Flanker - 23 minutes
    Back - 21 minutes
  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098

    @BigJohnOwls

    "Retirement isn't everything is cracked up to be resorted to watching Kojak, Alias Smith and Jones and checking 2001 polling accuracy."

    That's rather sad. I'm finding retirement is just like being a child again only better. I can play all day everyday, go on adventures with my friends, have lots more pocket money and there is no mummy telling me to stop and get on with my homework. Retirement is great.

    I know Doncaster races tomorrow, cricket Friday and Saturday and a day at the Commonwealth Games next Tuesday. Today was slightly duller although I did actually enjoy Kojak. I have to make the most of the next 12 monyhs Mrs BJ retires July 2015
    I have the same issue. Herself also packs up "work" next July (she does a couple of hours a day helping out at the local infants school), though hopefully she will carry on with the three afternoons a week she does voluntary charity stuff. Meanwhile, I am about to get a foretaste of what life will be like. The school breaks up today and I fear a multi-page list of things for me to do will be presented in the morning as my wife morphs into being my mother for the next 6 weeks.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 36,013

    On topic:

    "Could it be that those oldies currently backing Farage’s party are in good health and are reasonably well off"

    Could it be that kippers look backwards rather than forwards?

    Or look forwards and don' like what they see.

  • Options
    CD13CD13 Posts: 6,352
    Isam,

    Forgot to add one ...

    Young man who runs in searing heat, overtaking mad dogs and Englishmen - 19 minutes.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 41,065
    CD13 said:

    Isam,

    Prop forward - 25 minutes
    Flanker - 23 minutes
    Back - 21 minutes

    My best on this route is 21:21 but that was some time ago... I'll be happy with 23:30

    Will let you know in half hour once I've recovered!
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,949
    Pulpstar said:

    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    This summer is glorious, out enjoying balmy evenings riding my bike.

    If this is what Global Warming looks like, long may it continue
    Make the most of it. After a superb summer last year and another one this year, we're bound to be back to our usual summer deluge next year. ;)

  • Options
    HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    murali_s said:

    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.

    I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.

    On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.

    Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
    I'm glad to be tagged scientifically illiterate. Puts me in the same boat as 99% of the world's experts...

    I'm sorry, I'll always take actual measurements from NOAA and Hadley over satellite data.
    Mr. S, you can have science or you can have consensus. What you can't have in any meaningful way is scientific consensus.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    Looking back through old threads you come across gems such as this:

    Dan Hodges @DPJHodges
    Follow
    Vince Cable's going to have to resign, surely?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Oh, I wont forget that one in a hurry! Havent had such good value since Mark Senior offered me 8/1 on Caroline Lucas retaining her seat ;)

  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    edited July 2014
    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    I'm regretting not putting more than £20 quid on.

    *Innocent face*
  • Options
    YorkcityYorkcity Posts: 4,382
    Has the last 4 years as leader of the opposition helped create another coalition ?

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/23/ed-miliband-old-new-labour-strategy
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

  • Options
    logical_songlogical_song Posts: 9,739

    murali_s said:

    Neil said:

    MikeK said:

    So as not to alarm Greens and fellow travellers:

    Keith ‏@KGBut 3m
    To all global warming nutters out there -This "freak" weather we're currently having is technically known as "Summer"

    How clever.

    And unlike most of the global warming models, it has the added benefit of being accurate.
    June 2014 was globally the warmest June ever recorded (records date back to 1880), following the warmest May ever recorded according to NOAA.

    Let's just pretend that global warming isn't happening...

    Guess what, you are wrong again. Go look at the satellite data and you will find that neither May nor June were the warmest on record.

    I pointed this out to you last month when you repeated this idiotic claim and you were strangely silent.

    On the two main satellite systems May was either the 3rd or 6th warmest on record. June was the 4th warmest.

    Given that everyone knows the world has been warming slowly (and naturally) since the end of the last Maunder minimum it is no surprise that the highest temperatures are the most recent. Of course that says nothing about cause in spite of what the scientifically illiterate like yourself might like to claim.
    Whether it's third, fourth or sixth warmest on record is in the noise level.
    AGW is happening, the evidence is there and is being refined continuously by scientists using what is known as the scientific method ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method ). The vast majority of scientists are not climate change deniers ( http://www.salon.com/2014/03/25/10853_out_of_10855_scientists_agree_man_made_global_warming_is_happening/ ).
    The scientific method is designed to work out what is happening based on experimentation. When there are contrary indications experiments are made to see if the results are repeatable.If so the theory is refined. Newton wasn't wrong, but Einstein's work extended our knowledge.
    AGW is an important subject and needs to be talked about logically.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,949
    edited July 2014
    Is the Q2 GDP number out tomorrow or Friday?

    Q3 GDP should be strong with this hot summer - Sales spending always seems to go up when the weather is nice - Indeed it was last years hot summer that seemed to defrost the frozen green shoots and start kicking things off!
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Oh haha - ye Now I remember you were backing the greens here.

  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,921
    Patrick said:

    Noting the hoohah around LibDem David Ward and his comments on bombing Israel makes me wonder: Is an instinctive Anti-Israeli / Anti-Semitic mindset now a default setting on the left? (p.s. this is NOT a pro-Israel post but a genuine question if anyone on the left can now openly voice any pro-Israel opinion without immediately being sent to Coventry).

    While I wouldn't consider myself "on the left", my view is that Israel, like any sovereign nation, has the right to defend its borders and its people - no argument. I do have issues about the scale of the measures taken to enforce that.



  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    Yorkcity said:

    Has the last 4 years as leader of the opposition helped create another coalition ?

    http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jul/23/ed-miliband-old-new-labour-strategy

    A positive article for Ed Miliband and the most liked comments are positive for him.

    Crikey !
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    NHS publishes its consolidated accounts.

    Acute FT sector is fooked financially.

    2013/14 Acute FTs
    £m
    Income (less impairment reversals) 29,755
    Expenditure before depreciation and impairment (28,325)
    Depreciation and amortisation (879)
    Impairments (net of reversals) (160)
    Net finance costs (661)
    Gains/(losses) from transfers by absorption 65
    Other (1)
    Surplus / (deficit) for the year (206)
    Number of trusts 83

    £206M defecit between 83 Foundation Trust Hospitals.

    This is not sustainable the NHS Acute sector ie your local A&E hospital has been squeezed so hard in the last 4 years that despite pay freezes and massive increases in numbers of patients treated it has gone from a £500m surplus in 2010/11 to a £200m loss in 2013/14.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.
    Want to increase the stake?

  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,912
    By the way the NHS now has to count its Charitable Income as part of its consolidated income position. ie your donations to a hospital charity now accounted for in its NHS accounts.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029
    edited July 2014

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.



    It's not wise to compare Westminster VI polls with actual locals votes or NNESV

    European elections are OK though :) ?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.
    Want to increase the stake?

    No, if I stake any more I'll be taking advantage of you.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    By the way the NHS now has to count its Charitable Income as part of its consolidated income position. ie your donations to a hospital charity now accounted for in its NHS accounts.

    Interesting - Are you a CIPFA man btw ?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,702
    Pulpstar said:



    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.



    It's not wise to compare Westminster VI polls with actual locals votes or NNESV

    European elections are OK though :) ?
    Yes, when discussing minor parties.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    NHS publishes its consolidated accounts.

    Acute FT sector is fooked financially.

    2013/14 Acute FTs
    £m
    Income (less impairment reversals) 29,755
    Expenditure before depreciation and impairment (28,325)
    Depreciation and amortisation (879)
    Impairments (net of reversals) (160)
    Net finance costs (661)
    Gains/(losses) from transfers by absorption 65
    Other (1)
    Surplus / (deficit) for the year (206)
    Number of trusts 83

    £206M defecit between 83 Foundation Trust Hospitals.

    A deficit of 0.7%.

    They overspent by £7 in every £1000. Hardly the end of civilised life as we know it, but further action to improve efficiency is required. Luckily progress is being made, carrying on from Andy Burnham's good work in making use of private providers to drive down costs and improve quality.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 76,029

    Pulpstar said:



    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.



    It's not wise to compare Westminster VI polls with actual locals votes or NNESV

    European elections are OK though :) ?
    Yes, when discussing minor parties.
    I think your bet may well have a chance if Westminster VI was proportional, but all the Euro-Greens I know are voting Labour at the GE.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,533
    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    we have one, Sam - UKIP above/below 10% at GE2015 @ 10p/bps.

    I will email you if I can get it to work.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Pulpstar said:

    Pulpstar said:



    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    Pulpstar said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Anyone I've has bets with for next year, can you email me on here confirmation please?

    I think it's @antifrank @johnohersham @neil @tim @tse @tgohf @rcs1000

    @mikesmithson didn't have the cojones ;)

    Done.

    Well, I've messaged you with what I *think* our bets were. I really must write these things down somewhere sometime.

    I'll message you our bet as well.

    Ladbrokes have gone 6-1 on the LD/Green match bet. Are you worried :) ?
    Do I look worried? ;)

    Lol not you :P @TSE
    I believe my response is "It's a decent trading bet"
    Sure you might as well just send me the cash now.
    Need I remind you, just two months ago, in a nationwide election the Greens outpolled the Lib Dems.



    It's not wise to compare Westminster VI polls with actual locals votes or NNESV

    European elections are OK though :) ?
    Yes, when discussing minor parties.
    I think your bet may well have a chance if Westminster VI was proportional, but all the Euro-Greens I know are voting Labour at the GE.
    It would have more of a chance if there was a prospect of the Greens fielding anything close to a full slate too! Still, £20 at 20/1 is hardly going to break the bank. Anyone else willing to follow in is more than welcome!

This discussion has been closed.