Howdy, Stranger!

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

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Are we suffering from polling overload?

SystemSystem Posts: 11,688
edited August 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Are we suffering from polling overload?

I know that might be a churlish thing for us polling addicts to say but the below graph shows the comparison of the number of Westminster VI polls conducted by BPC pollsters, in July 2009 and July 2014.

Read the full story here


«1

Comments

  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
  • Options
    AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited August 2014
    India 68/7, 36 overs.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,933
    edited August 2014
    I tend to agree with TSE on the thread header.

    Increasingly people are saying they don't have anything to do with the final result anyway, so what's the point of them?

    I said a week or so ago, it might lead to better government if political polling were forbidden, and I think I agree with myself! It encourages short termism
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    QTWTAIY
  • Options
    stodgestodge Posts: 12,864
    As well as the news flashes from other sports (why, nobody's interested ?), this place is more and more like a forum for football supporters. Your Party is your "team", the polls are the "matches" and the commentary on the polls isn't that far removed from the comments you hear or read from opposing Managers.

    "It's a five year game", "I'm as sick as a dead parrot", "We wuz robbed, that PPB was clearly offside" etc, etc.

    Most of the comments on here are about slagging off the rival teams as much as asserting why your team is the best.

    It's the football season ad infinitum with no break or pause. It's the very cusp of purgatory but we keep on coming back...
  • Options
    Without polling, PB.com wouldn't exist - it's the site's backbone and main point of reference.

    This would result in a dozen or so individuals on here having to totally re-organise their lives.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    edited August 2014
    No - You need to look at poll averages, broad direction of travel.

    What would be useful is if polls were published to the first decimal point. Although noone with any sense would refer to the decimal number on an individual poll, it would help with Yougov monthly averages which could THEN be rounded to the nearest whole number.

    The trend IS towards the Conservatives, but it is moving at a snail's pace, which makes the Labour Seats, Con Votes betting position a smart one I think.
  • Options

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    Probably both.

  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Yup. If the Tories are dismissing the ICM that showed them 7 points adrift as an outlier as some on here have in favour of Mori and YouGov because they paint a more palatable picture then they are being very foolish. There is a lot of work to do. The Tories need to score between 36 and 38, and limit Labour to between 32 and 34. The ICM should serve as a wake up call. Osborne needs to get his head back in the game and dump all of this pre-paymemt of taxes and govobg HMRC direct access to accounts. It is deeply unpopular with Tory voters and is driving people to UKIP.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Hmm. Site was taking a long time to load for me. Posting this via Vanilla.

    Too many polls end up affecting more than reflecting public sentiment. There should be limits on the frequency.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    India 79-8.

    England to declare by tea tommorow ?
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    Hmm. Site was taking a long time to load for me. Posting this via Vanilla.

    Too many polls end up affecting more than reflecting public sentiment. There should be limits on the frequency.

    I don't think the polls affect sentiment. Moreso it is the spin that journos, hacks and party astroturfers put on individual polls.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Pulpstar, polls don't exist in a vacuum, though.
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    People with cash have woken up to the fact that polls can set, rather than reflect, the agenda.

    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453

    Without polling, PB.com wouldn't exist - it's the site's backbone and main point of reference.

    That is probably true, but the volume does make a difference.

    With one poll a week people have time to digest, review, discuss, pontificate and opine.

    With four (contradictory) polls a day they barely have time to say "oh, look at that" before we are off again.

    Of course PB is a strange constituency. The people paying for these polls expect an audience for their polls, not necessarily every poll published by anyone with a clipboard.
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955
    isam said:

    I tend to agree with TSE on the thread header.

    Increasingly people are saying they don't have anything to do with the final result anyway, so what's the point of them?

    I said a week or so ago, it might lead to better government if political polling were forbidden, and I think I agree with myself! It encourages short termism

    I certainly agree they should be banned during the run up to elections.
  • Options
    Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    Hugh said:


    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.

    Quality trolling there. Very close to a bite...
  • Options
    taffystaffys Posts: 9,753
    Osborne needs to get his head back in the game and dump all of this pre-paymemt of taxes and govobg HMRC direct access to accounts. It is deeply unpopular with Tory voters and is driving people to UKIP.

    100% correct, but the damage may be already done. Even if these measures are thwarted the very fact Osborne has considered them shows he simply cannot be a tory

    Any tory would have chucked these on the fire and had the f8ckwit who suggested them strung up.
  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    A recent poll showed there are far too many threads, on there being too many polls.
  • Options
    felixfelix Posts: 15,124
    Hugh said:

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    People with cash have woken up to the fact that polls can set, rather than reflect, the agenda.

    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.
    Really thick post missing the point for a cheap shot.
  • Options
    HughHugh Posts: 955
    felix said:

    Hugh said:

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    People with cash have woken up to the fact that polls can set, rather than reflect, the agenda.

    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.
    Really thick post missing the point for a cheap shot.
    You don't think polls are used to advance an agenda, including by media organisations?

    How thick.
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607
    Hugh said:

    felix said:

    Hugh said:

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    People with cash have woken up to the fact that polls can set, rather than reflect, the agenda.

    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.
    Really thick post missing the point for a cheap shot.
    You don't think polls are used to advance an agenda, including by media organisations?

    How thick.
    Which is why Conservative peer and millionaire Lord Ashcroft has been funding expensive polls that all find that the Tories have a lot of work to do in marginal seats. A serious amount of work.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012
    taffys said:

    Osborne needs to get his head back in the game and dump all of this pre-paymemt of taxes and govobg HMRC direct access to accounts. It is deeply unpopular with Tory voters and is driving people to UKIP.

    100% correct, but the damage may be already done. Even if these measures are thwarted the very fact Osborne has considered them shows he simply cannot be a tory

    Any tory would have chucked these on the fire and had the f8ckwit who suggested them strung up.

    Can you provide the link for where Osborne has proposed prepayment of taxes? I can't find it - although it does seem quite common elsewhere.
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
  • Options
    MaxPBMaxPB Posts: 37,607

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Or maybe they shouldn't allow incompetent idiots at HMRC direct access to everyones bank accounts? That's not exactly a giveaway...

    Poor policymaking is why the Tories can't connect to their voter base.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344
    FPT:


    Pulpstar said:



    http://www.ukip.org/commercial_and_fringe_packages

    Sent the form off ?

    Excellent, many thanks! I can't read G*ogle in China (on the block list) but I've passed it on to a colleague to go ahead and book.

    MikeK said:


    I really am sorry about that Nick. all I can suggest is that you contact the organisers direct through the UKIP web page devoted to the conference. They really deserve a kicking.

    There is a line further down the page that says: "To apply for individual media accreditation please click here'' Maybe that will help you.

    http://www.ukip.org/doncaster

    Thanks, Mike, but Pulpstar seems to have found a link, so with luck all will be well. The organisers should have let us know as they promised, but that's the sort of minor cockup that happens. Come over at the conference if you're there and we can have a drink.

    state_go_away said:


    I wish sometimes when various pressure groups want spending on their pet project some time is expended as to say ' That's nice where do you propose the money comes from, what will you cut?'

    I've tried that as an MP - doesn't work at all. EVERYONE has a pet project they'd like to cut that they can't BELIEVE we are wasting money on instead of this fine project. Trident, MPs' expenses, council translators for immigrants, motorways, opera houses, foreign aid, aircraft carriers, green energy, energy imports, etc etc etc. I do myself, as I'm sure do you. The complex message has to be "Other spending and taxation is determined by the democratic process so must be assumed to be constant at the current or planned level, thus your proposal must be at the expense of something similar." Good luck with that.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Cameron's problems have little to do with cash and a lot to do with managing a broad church.

    The fact is he can't. Hence he's lost about 8-10% of his natural voters and that's down to bad politics.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    FPT:


    Pulpstar said:



    http://www.ukip.org/commercial_and_fringe_packages

    Sent the form off ?

    Excellent, many thanks! I can't read G*ogle in China (on the block list) but I've passed it on to a colleague to go ahead and book.

    MikeK said:


    I really am sorry about that Nick. all I can suggest is that you contact the organisers direct through the UKIP web page devoted to the conference. They really deserve a kicking.

    There is a line further down the page that says: "To apply for individual media accreditation please click here'' Maybe that will help you.

    http://www.ukip.org/doncaster

    Thanks, Mike, but Pulpstar seems to have found a link, so with luck all will be well. The organisers should have let us know as they promised, but that's the sort of minor cockup that happens. Come over at the conference if you're there and we can have a drink.

    state_go_away said:


    I wish sometimes when various pressure groups want spending on their pet project some time is expended as to say ' That's nice where do you propose the money comes from, what will you cut?'

    I've tried that as an MP - doesn't work at all. EVERYONE has a pet project they'd like to cut that they can't BELIEVE we are wasting money on instead of this fine project. Trident, MPs' expenses, council translators for immigrants, motorways, opera houses, foreign aid, aircraft carriers, green energy, energy imports, etc etc etc. I do myself, as I'm sure do you. The complex message has to be "Other spending and taxation is determined by the democratic process so must be assumed to be constant at the current or planned level, thus your proposal must be at the expense of something similar." Good luck with that.

    What is your stall about by the way ?
  • Options
    MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,584

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Cameron's problems have little to do with cash and a lot to do with managing a broad church.

    The fact is he can't. Hence he's lost about 8-10% of his natural voters and that's down to bad politics.
    How may voters did Thatcher "lose" at a point in-between elections?

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    MaxPB said:

    Or maybe they shouldn't allow incompetent idiots at HMRC direct access to everyones bank accounts?

    They haven't, but don't let mere facts get in the way.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    edited August 2014
    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Cameron's problems have little to do with cash and a lot to do with managing a broad church.

    The fact is he can't. Hence he's lost about 8-10% of his natural voters and that's down to bad politics.
    How may voters did Thatcher "lose" at a point in-between elections?

    lots, but she could manage a broad church and usually got them back.

    How many voters will Cameron pick up in the next 9 months ?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Neil, it's stupid to endlessly cram ever more people into university. It was under Labour, it is now.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    How may voters did Thatcher "lose" at a point in-between elections?

    A lot more than Cameron, but the Falklands helped her recover from the low point of around 27%:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1979-1983


    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992


  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820

    How many voters will Cameron pick up in the next 9 months ?

    Probably a 3% to 5% increase in vote share.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758

    How many voters will Cameron pick up in the next 9 months ?

    Probably a 3% to 5% increase in vote share.
    Which isn't enough to win a majority.

    The unfortunate thing being if Cameron was anyway good a appealing to a broader spectrum of opinion he probably could win an outright majority.,
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    How may voters did Thatcher "lose" at a point in-between elections?

    A lot more than Cameron, but the Falklands helped her recover from the low point of around 27%:

    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-1979-1983


    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/historical-polls/voting-intention-1987-1992


    She seemed to have them back at this point in the cycle in 1982.
  • Options
    On Topic. We should be doing is looking at the trend in the polls. More polling will help improve the accuracy of the trend, so that is a good thing. UK Polling Report is always worth a look for this.
    http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/voting-intention-2

    It is clear that the trend now has the Conservatives running just under Labour, having substantially closed the major gap that was there for 2.5 years. Will we now get a regular crossover and if so when are the questions which borders on guess work in an era of fixed parliaments.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,344
    On topic, no, they're very useful. Stodge is of course spot on that we treat them like football results, but I certainly read them with a professional eye to what moves votes and what doesn't, and I'm sure I'm far from alone. The different methodologies and frequency make that easier and less likely to be distorted by the odd outlier. It's pretty clear that the ICM finding and the occasional Tory lead have been outliers, but if they'd stood alone we'd have been according them near-mystical significance.

    Adding a decimal point would, I think, reinforce the football aspect without helping the serious analysts much (they can check out the raw data anyway) - we'd be going "Ha! 0.7% up!" The extra figure would give the impression of a precision that is not present, as a pollster once said.

    The elephant in the room, in my opinion, is the huge adjustments being made to fit the data to past voting, which Pulpstar highlights from time to time. That too varies randomly and I've not had time to check out a series in detail but it'd make an interesting article if Pulpstar or anyone else did, for say the last 10 YouGovs and the last 4 ICMs. My impression, which may be wrong, is that the adjustments are rescuing the LibDem rating from being even worse (because they're finding too few people who admit to voting LD last time, so those who do are being upweighted) and depressing the UKIP score (because many Kippers were non-voters last time, which many pollsters count as not really serious). I don't think, though I could be wrong, that the Tory/Lab shares are being much affected?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983



    The unfortunate thing being if Cameron was anyway good a appealing to a broader spectrum of opinion he probably could win an outright majority.,

    Why do you view that as unfortunate? You clearly think he and his government are disastrous (particularly on economic policy) so surely his failure to appeal widely is a matter of relief more than anything else?
  • Options
    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    Yes the coalition does not have a target and most extra places are for higher grade adjustments. Students now have to weigh up carefully the advantages vs debt burden that most will incur. It is forcing a more realistic assessment of life. Maybe why they are also turning more conservative according to some studies (newsnight mentioned one recently).
  • Options

    MaxPB said:

    Or maybe they shouldn't allow incompetent idiots at HMRC direct access to everyones bank accounts?

    They haven't, but don't let mere facts get in the way.
    They haven't .... yet.
  • Options
    oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,831
    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    But there is a difference between setting artificial targets and opening things up so that universities can offer places on popular courses to more qualified applicants.

    I guess it is the difference between equality of outcome and equality of opportunity.

    I believe that everyone who wants to attend university should be able to do so - provided that they meet the entry requirements of the course (and the course is properly accredited). I don't believe that there is an ideal percentage of people in any one generation who should be looking to get a degree.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983

    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    Yes the coalition does not have a target and most extra places are for higher grade adjustments. Students now have to weigh up carefully the advantages vs debt burden that most will incur. It is forcing a more realistic assessment of life. Maybe why they are also turning more conservative according to some studies (newsnight mentioned one recently).
    I see - Labour expanding access is bad, Coalition expanding access is good!
  • Options
    kle4kle4 Posts: 91,798
    Heresy!

    In all seriousness, I don't think there can be too many or too few really. There is a finite amount of interest in polling in general, it seems, and it gets spread out thinner if there are more, but that they drive discussion less on their own does not in itself make having fewer good idea. It is not necessarily a bad thing if polling does not drive the narrative as much.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    Neil said:



    The unfortunate thing being if Cameron was anyway good a appealing to a broader spectrum of opinion he probably could win an outright majority.,

    Why do you view that as unfortunate? You clearly think he and his government are disastrous (particularly on economic policy) so surely his failure to appeal widely is a matter of relief more than anything else?
    I view it as unfortunate for Cameron.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    While you're about it, you could also ask whatever happened about those forecasts that tuition fees would put students off university altogether.
  • Options
    Hugh said:

    I wonder why we are getting so many more polls? Is it simply because the contest looks closer this time than it did in 2009? Or because on-line polls can be done cheaply nowadays?

    People with cash have woken up to the fact that polls can set, rather than reflect, the agenda.

    Witness the way in which Murdoch's press try to use YouGovs to cheer on their Tory chums.
    Yes that is why a Yougov poll last week had a 5 point lead for Labour....
    Hugh, Yougov has been showing a better picture for Labour than some other polling companies (until the last ICM). It would be helpful if you could look at the facts rather than an uninformed spate of trolling.
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758
    edited August 2014

    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    While you're about it, you could also ask whatever happened about those forecasts that tuition fees would put students off university altogether.
    Well if 50% of students don't have to pay them back, why would it put them off ?

    The taxpayer is still destined to pick up the bill courtesy of Willetts.
  • Options
    Neil said:

    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    Yes the coalition does not have a target and most extra places are for higher grade adjustments. Students now have to weigh up carefully the advantages vs debt burden that most will incur. It is forcing a more realistic assessment of life. Maybe why they are also turning more conservative according to some studies (newsnight mentioned one recently).
    I see - Labour expanding access is bad, Coalition expanding access is good!
    Labour's access was mainly in low grade exam passes. The Coalition AFAIK are allowing expansion for high grade passes, ABB+. That seems ensible for those academically oriented and also encourages the better universities to expand and the bottom end to shrink.

  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    edited August 2014

    The taxpayer is still destined to pick up the bill courtesy of Willetts.

    That's a good thing, according to those who opposed the policy.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    On topic, no, they're very useful. Stodge is of course spot on that we treat them like football results, but I certainly read them with a professional eye to what moves votes and what doesn't, and I'm sure I'm far from alone. The different methodologies and frequency make that easier and less likely to be distorted by the odd outlier. It's pretty clear that the ICM finding and the occasional Tory lead have been outliers, but if they'd stood alone we'd have been according them near-mystical significance.

    Adding a decimal point would, I think, reinforce the football aspect without helping the serious analysts much (they can check out the raw data anyway) - we'd be going "Ha! 0.7% up!" The extra figure would give the impression of a precision that is not present, as a pollster once said.

    The elephant in the room, in my opinion, is the huge adjustments being made to fit the data to past voting, which Pulpstar highlights from time to time. That too varies randomly and I've not had time to check out a series in detail but it'd make an interesting article if Pulpstar or anyone else did, for say the last 10 YouGovs and the last 4 ICMs. My impression, which may be wrong, is that the adjustments are rescuing the LibDem rating from being even worse (because they're finding too few people who admit to voting LD last time, so those who do are being upweighted) and depressing the UKIP score (because many Kippers were non-voters last time, which many pollsters count as not really serious). I don't think, though I could be wrong, that the Tory/Lab shares are being much affected?

    The extra dp would be useful for UK Polling Report's moving average. Obviously it is meaningless nonsense in isolation so the published poll should be given to the nearest whole number BUT if a poll is say

    34.2 Con
    33.6 Lab
    10.0 UKIP
    10.0 LD

    Then the Conservative Lead is 1 rather than level even though they have equal shares. Doubtless journalists would attribute far too much importance to the last dp however...

    The raw figures for Lib Dem and UKIP are always quite funny to look at - I think ICM in particular may well get the Lab-Con battle correct but be the wrong way round on LD-UKIP.
  • Options

    Neil said:

    Lots of posters used to complain loudly about New Labour's targets for getting more kids into university. Any comment from the same posters on the Coalition's making a record 0.5m university places available to school leavers?

    While you're about it, you could also ask whatever happened about those forecasts that tuition fees would put students off university altogether.
    That is a Danny Blanchflower type of forecast..... Just bet the contrary view.
    Flat lining anyone?
    Whatever happened to the forecast that the private sector could not create 1m new jobs?
  • Options
    AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 23,758

    The taxpayer is still destined to pick up the bill courtesy of Willetts.

    That's a good thing, according to those who opposed the policy.
    Not really since the amount the taxpayer has to pick up is larger by a factor of 3 than the previous method. So we all have to pay back a larger sum for the 50% default.

    And the other poor sods are stuck with wopping bills which they'll have to get back in their salaries so we pay higher prices when companies payrolls increase accordingly.
  • Options

    .....My impression, which may be wrong, is that the adjustments are rescuing the LibDem rating from being even worse (because they're finding too few people who admit to voting LD last time, so those who do are being upweighted) and depressing the UKIP score (because many Kippers were non-voters last time, which many pollsters count as not really serious). I don't think, though I could be wrong, that the Tory/Lab shares are being much affected?

    Yes I have wondered that. We are in new territory for the LD polling. In Govt, massive decline in votes to "core level" (Euros), yet ICM weighting boosts LDs to 12! Often double other polling companies.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @SeanT
    Apes with pointed sticks are fairly predictable.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    If the Russian news is accurate, hard to see Russia not sending in troops. Ukraine, which had been on the verge of retaking territory from the separatists, will lose a one-on-one war quickly.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @Morris_Dancer
    Then they come up against NATO countries with no buffer between.
    It's all kind of funny in a sadly repetitive way.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,933
    Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
    15/08/2014 16:22
    My article on the polling of the @MayorofLondon 's chances if he were to stand in Uxbridge will be on @ConHome tomorrow.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    isam said:

    Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
    15/08/2014 16:22
    My article on the polling of the @MayorofLondon 's chances if he were to stand in Uxbridge will be on @ConHome tomorrow.

    I could have told him his chances for half the price!

  • Options
    SeanT said:

    Andrew Neil ‏@afneil 4m
    Russian foreign ministry reports intense fighting with Ukrainian forces.



    That's it, isn't it? World War 3.

    *hoards gin*

    That plus ISIS?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Mr. Smarmeron, only if they take all of Ukraine. Also, aren't the Baltic tigers in NATO?
  • Options
    Too many polls, definitely. What's the point of daily polls this far out from Election Day?
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:

    If the Russian news is accurate, hard to see Russia not sending in troops. Ukraine, which had been on the verge of retaking territory from the separatists, will lose a one-on-one war quickly.

    Which presumably is what Putin wanted (if these reports are correct, caveat emptor etc). He'll seize eastern Ukraine. We will do nothing, as we do nothing about ISIS.
    The west will do nothing militarily but there will be an economic war that will cause merry hell in Russia.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @SeanT
    What you really mean is that ISIS does not have ICBM's and Putin does?
    *starts singing "We'll all go together when we go"*
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 60,988
    Putin's not insane. ISIS are totally ****ing nuts.
  • Options
    Don't the Indian cricketers know it's their Independence Day?

    :)
  • Options
    bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 21,873

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Like the 50p rqte cut?
  • Options

    Also, aren't the Baltic tigers in NATO?

    Correct, Mr Dancer.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930

    Don't the Indian cricketers know it's their Independence Day?

    :)

    MS Dhoni is doing his best to ensure that the match goes into a 3rd day.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:

    He's doing fine as he is, slowly reincorporating non-NATO bits of the Soviet Union. There's plenty more to choose from without provoking a serious western response.

    Fine? Sure, if he wants to rule over a bankrupt rump USSR rather than a thriving Russia. I'm not seeing this going so well from his point of view.
  • Options
    Hungary PM Orban condemns EU sanctions on Russia

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28801353
  • Options
    volcanopetevolcanopete Posts: 2,078
    As discussed on a previous blog,the trend is your friend and as far as it goes the more polling the better if it helps identify the longer term trends from a bigger sample-size.
    The other point in seeing the wood from the trees is remembering the UNV is at most a guide when dealing with Ukip and L/Ds.The local election results IMHO are more reliable as it is going to be local factors in the constituencies that count that determine the outcome.The Ashcroft marginal polling is part of that picture as well.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:

    If the Russian news is accurate, hard to see Russia not sending in troops. Ukraine, which had been on the verge of retaking territory from the separatists, will lose a one-on-one war quickly.

    Which presumably is what Putin wanted (if these reports are correct, caveat emptor etc). He'll seize eastern Ukraine. We will do nothing, as we do nothing about ISIS.
    The west will do nothing militarily but there will be an economic war that will cause merry hell in Russia.
    No, there won't, because if there's all out economic war we will lose just as much as them - from trade to energy to the City - and right now the eurozone economy is f*cked. Already.

    Europe cannot AFFORD an economic war with Russia. Can you imagine what would happen if there was ANOTHER crash and ANOTHER depression in Europe?

    Putin knows this.

    Let's see.
  • Options
    isamisam Posts: 40,933
    Unbiased bbc!

    Andrew Neil (@afneil)
    15/08/2014 16:46
    Sky News setting the pace covering Ukraine Russian clash. All other news channels nowhere.
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    Will turning London into a lake of molten glass knacker the economy?
    ;-)
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    SeanT said:

    Neil said:

    SeanT said:

    He's doing fine as he is, slowly reincorporating non-NATO bits of the Soviet Union. There's plenty more to choose from without provoking a serious western response.

    Fine? Sure, if he wants to rule over a bankrupt rump USSR rather than a thriving Russia. I'm not seeing this going so well from his point of view.
    Putin's polling:

    Russian Approval of Putin Soars to Highest Level in Years

    http://www.gallup.com/poll/173597/russian-approval-putin-soars-highest-level-years.aspx

    If his Napoleonic games play out as he wants, he will be remembered as the great Russian leader who restored Russia to its former glory, regaining vast swathes of territory. He won't mind if the Moscow stock market tanks for a few years. The Russian people seem to like his style, despite the pain.
    He's signing huge trade deals with China.

    China has the cash and Russia has the gas.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,930
    Also it's quite funny that we threaten sanctions and whatnot with Russia but not the despicable Saudis that are most responsible for Al Qaeda, ISIS etc.
  • Options
    MikeLMikeL Posts: 7,289
    Why did share markets fallen suddenly and significantly at 3.30pm this afternoon?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/overview/
  • Options
    ArtistArtist Posts: 1,882
    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
    15/08/2014 16:22
    My article on the polling of the @MayorofLondon 's chances if he were to stand in Uxbridge will be on @ConHome tomorrow.

    I could have told him his chances for half the price!

    Uxbridge is not ultra safe to be fair, there's a decent Labour/Lib Dem presence there.
  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    MikeL said:

    Why did share markets fallen suddenly and significantly at 3.30pm this afternoon?

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business/market_data/overview/

    News of the Ukraine / Russia clash presumably.

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    Artist said:

    Neil said:

    isam said:

    Lord Ashcroft (@LordAshcroft)
    15/08/2014 16:22
    My article on the polling of the @MayorofLondon 's chances if he were to stand in Uxbridge will be on @ConHome tomorrow.

    I could have told him his chances for half the price!

    Uxbridge is not ultra safe to be fair, there's a decent Labour/Lib Dem presence there.
    Not ultra safe for a normal Tory but Boris would walk it.

  • Options
    NeilNeil Posts: 7,983
    SeanT said:

    Can I be the first to point out that this news of a potential global war breaking out in the Ukraine is yet more good news for the YES campaign.

    If it's not good news for 'yes' then it's evidence that Putin is a secret Brit Nat involved in a BBC / you gov conspiracy to undermine independence.

  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @SeanT
    Can I point out that the target for part time soldiers might fall even further behind schedule?
  • Options
    FlightpathFlightpath Posts: 4,012

    taffys said:

    FPT

    The tory problem isn't Cameron, its Osborne. As the polls reveal.

    The Tories issue is that their leadership can't connect with a big chunk of their natural constituency so they don't get their votes.
    Its a real shame the tory pary have to bite the bullet and clear up labour's mess. What a bummer for the general public.
    I suggest they don't bother and just authorise a load of giveaways to 'their natural constituency' and let the country go to hell in a handcart.

    Or have I got the wrong party there?
    Like the 50p rqte cut?
    Well if you are right then Alanbrook is wrong.

    But of course the rate is still higher than when the tories left office and higher than for 13 years of Labour in office. So whats your point?
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,826
    edited August 2014
    Thanks TSE.

    Henceforth, #MegaPollingMonday will join PB phraseology folk-lore, like "swingback" "Cleggasm" and "Ed's Crap" :D

    OT, as much as I enjoy a good poll I do think polling has become too much during this Parliament, particularly with the YouGov daily poll, Populus twice a week and all of the "minor league" pollsters like Survation, TNS and Opinium that have entered the field.

    I think the last Parliament had just the right amount of monthly polls really (two YouGov's, usually two ICM's, one MORI, two ComRes, one Populus)

    It was enough to keep the story-line going and create plenty of drama, but without being too much.

  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    SKY – “World stock markets fall after Kiev's forces said they attacked Russian tanks that crossed into Ukraine.”

    Nothing on the Beeb – presumably still clearing the wording with their legal dept.

    http://news.sky.com/story/1319354/ukraines-forces-attack-russian-armoured-convoy
  • Options
    SmarmeronSmarmeron Posts: 5,099
    @SimonStClare
    I would imagine the BBC will want government confirmation of events before bunging it on the news.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    SKY – “World stock markets fall after Kiev's forces said they attacked Russian tanks that crossed into Ukraine.”

    Nothing on the Beeb – presumably still clearing the wording with their legal dept.

    http://news.sky.com/story/1319354/ukraines-forces-attack-russian-armoured-convoy

    IF that is true - Ukraine attacked Russian forces - then I don't see how Putin can NOTn respond, militarily.

    So what then? He will go in and seize Russian-speaking eastern Ukraine? Then it all depends if Kiev yields, and accepts partition.

    And they call this the silly season: we're meant to be talking about cats up trees.
    It wasn't the silly season 100 years ago!
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,826
    edited August 2014
    SeanT said:



    And they call this the silly season: we're meant to be talking about cats up trees.

    This summer is so grim!

  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,288
    edited August 2014

    SKY – “World stock markets fall after Kiev's forces said they attacked Russian tanks that crossed into Ukraine.”

    Nothing on the Beeb – presumably still clearing the wording with their legal dept.

    http://news.sky.com/story/1319354/ukraines-forces-attack-russian-armoured-convoy

    BREAKING NEWS:NHS in Wales to fund a cannabis-based medicine for multiple sclerosis patients...

    Nothing about Putin's little local difficulties, nothing to see folks, other than Mystery of Russia's Empty Trucks.

  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    Sorry if I missed it, but did we get today's Populus?
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,488
    edited August 2014
    *See*

    Mike takes a short break away from PB, and World War III starts.

    I can see me writing a PB thread headlined

    "So with the start of World War III, I look at the betting implications, will we have a Norway debate moment?"
  • Options
    Danny565 said:

    Sorry if I missed it, but did we get today's Populus?

    Populus @PopulusPolls · 8h
    Latest Populus VI: Lab 35 (-2), Con 32 (-1), LD 9 (=), UKIP 14 (+2), Oth 9 (=). Tables here: http://popu.lu/s_vi140815
  • Options
    OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 32,008
    GIN1138 said:

    Thanks TSE.

    Henceforth, #MegaPollingMonday will join PB phraseology folk-lore, like "swingback" "Cleggasm" and "Ed's Crap" :D

    OT, as much as I enjoy a good poll I do think polling has become too much during this Parliament, particularly with the YouGov daily poll, Populus twice a week and all of the "minor league" pollsters like Survation, TNS and Opinium that have entered the field.

    I think the last Parliament had just the right amount of monthly polls really (two YouGov's, usually two ICM's, one MORI, two ComRes, one Populus)

    It was enough to keep the story-line going and create plenty of drama, but without being too much.

    I suspect that Dr Fox will agree with me that measuring a patients temperature every five minutes is, if anything, counter-productive. Measuring blood pressure every five minutes might give a better indication, but one has to take account of what else is happening to the patient.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,826
    Danny565 said:

    Sorry if I missed it, but did we get today's Populus?

    Yes, the best Friday Populus for Labour since 12th June:

    Con 32% Lab 35% UKIP 14% Lib-Dem 9%

  • Options
    SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Smarmeron said:

    @SimonStClare
    I would imagine the BBC will want government confirmation of events before bunging it on the news.

    The story is actually 18hrs old and has been covered extensively by the Telegraph and the Guardian. The Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, has already spoken to the PM wrt the incursion and the story has now moved on to Russia claiming it was an AID convey.

    The BBC has blanked the story - simples.
  • Options
    SeanT said:

    GIN1138 said:

    SeanT said:



    And they call this the silly season: we're meant to be talking about cats up trees.

    This summer is so grim!

    I can't remember a summer as full of horror as this. Ever.
    1914?
This discussion has been closed.