Howdy, Stranger!

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

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Survation Indyref poll is out

SystemSystem Posts: 12,213
edited September 2014 in General

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Survation Indyref poll is out

On what appears to be first of a few indyref polls out today, the first one is survation, which should relax those at Better Together, as it gives them a larger lead than the ICM phone poll yesterday showed.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    FPT
    hucks67 said:

    » show previous quotes
    Are people realising that the current Tories can't govern the UK ? The Tories have not won an election since 1992 and have been lucky that the Lib Dems were willing to let them implement most of their policies. The Lib Dems could have made it much more difficult for the Tories by blocking some policies. The bedroom tax which the Lib Dems voted for, is now opposed by them. Some of the discontent in Scotland relates to Tory policies they disagree with.

    Th problem that the Tories have is that they have not persuaded a majority that their way of dealing with the countries problems is the best way forward. Margaret Thatcher would have been much more agressive in getting her message out. But Cameron can't do this, as he has portrayed himself as a touchy feely liberal Tory. Many Tory backbenchers given the opportunity would remove Cameron and choose another leader.

    Talking of getting carried away by one poll - only yesterday Ipsos-Mori had the Tories ahead. Let the dust settle after Sindy ref and the conferences before we get close to any real idea about the GE
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.


    Of course, this is what Nationalism is all about. If you spend all your time dividing people into 'us and them' its no wonder the hate spills out.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    I've never understood the popularity of Salmond - he is slimy on the surface and that only hides a really nasty underbelly. If that's what the Scots like they really are 'another country'. Sturgeon is another matter - personable and a good debater albeit another misguided leftie.
  • saddenedsaddened Posts: 2,245
    Final result 60 - 40 +/- 3.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    JonathanD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.


    Of course, this is what Nationalism is all about. If you spend all your time dividing people into 'us and them' its no wonder the hate spills out.
    No No its nation building - create differences where none exist.
  • edmundintokyoedmundintokyo Posts: 17,708
    edited September 2014
    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.
  • Update

    It is a phone poll, conducted for Better together, conducted between Wednesday and Friday of this week


    Data tables are available here

    http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Better-Together-Voting-Intention-Tables.pdf

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Much lower DK figure than figure than other phone polls.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    edited September 2014
    Alanbrooke

    "Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy."

    She probably didn't know the difference between a French Kiss and a Glaswegian one....
  • Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
  • Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Why would Better Together want to insert 'some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices'? Surely complacency is the last thing they'd want to be spreading about.
  • Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 96,578
    Well that's clear then, it will be a No win no question. #NotseriousCalmDown
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    edited September 2014

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    looks reasonable to me - although the actual figures seem to be 46.5 Yes and 53.5 No - exactly a 7 point gap rather that the 8 point gap in the rounding.
  • Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Why would Better Together want to insert 'some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices'? Surely complacency is the last thing they'd want to be spreading about.
    Hard to say. They might be worried about the yes side having self-sustaining momentum.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    nonetheless one can't avoid a hint of the Christine Keeler's; same with Panelbase.
  • Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    It isn't something survation would be associated with, if Better Together wanted really good figures, they would have commissioned Ipsos-Mori to do it, as they have had the largest leads for No
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    They sound like a throw back to the darkest days of the Troubles.

    Join the 'Yes' parade or we'll toss bricks through your windows.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    sounds like a rampage
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited September 2014
    Has Salmond disowned Sillars yet?

    Front page of FT has Salmond, Sturgeon and Sillars together photo taken on Wednesday. Such a reassuring message to business, SNP stand by their man and send message of screw you to business communities.

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9c5a500-3a98-11e4-a3f3-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DCp5OQ1q

    All is well with the SNP, as it divides Scotland into sheep and goats.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Either way - elections should be 'whiter than white' on all sides and there should not be even a hint of intimidation. Marching en masse to a polling booth is not the way to do democracy.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014
    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Paint to hide faces, and petrol filled balloons?

    The whole thing stinks.

  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    sounds like a rampage
    Yes, just think of the rush to get at the jelly and trifle!



  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    dr_spyn said:

    Has Salmond disowned Sillars yet?

    Front page of FT has Salmond, Sturgeon and Sillars on front page, photo taken on Wednesday. Such a reassuring message to business, SNP stand by their man and send message of screw you to business communities

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/f9c5a500-3a98-11e4-a3f3-00144feabdc0.html#axzz3DCp5OQ1q

    Have a look at the Graun feed. Obviously basic summary, and I haven't read up further around it.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    It is a strange fact that polls commissioned by those with an interest usually seem to favour that interest (Witness Panelbase)

    I'm sure there's no jiggery-pokery so it must just be that unfavourable polls are not shown to the public.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Paint to hide faces, and petrol filled balloons?

    The whole thing stinks.

    If you think the average balloon can hold petrol without dissolving in a few moments, I don't want to be anywhere near you when you try the experiment!

  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    Zeroing in on 55 -45 with a 75% turnout.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Paint to hide faces, and petrol filled balloons?

    The whole thing stinks.

    If you think the average balloon can hold petrol without dissolving in a few moments, I don't want to be anywhere near you when you try the experiment!

    Not something that I've ever felt the need to try. Have you?
  • Not saying this has happened here but out of interest can you commission three polls and only release your favourite one, or do the British Polling Association rules have that covered?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    felix said:

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Either way - elections should be 'whiter than white' on all sides and there should not be even a hint of intimidation. Marching en masse to a polling booth is not the way to do democracy.
    That's quite so. The law should be obeyed. But I haven't seen any official statement about whether this is acceptable or not. At the moment there seems to be absurd overreaction on PB to a local initiative (or two?) which may or may not come off depending on the polis and Returning Officer.

  • dr_spyn said:

    Has Salmond disowned Sillars yet? .

    Not exactly, in fact he has praised his contribution, albeit with an attempt to spin it as less unpleasant and menacing than it was:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29190302
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336

    Carnyx said:

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Paint to hide faces, and petrol filled balloons?

    The whole thing stinks.

    If you think the average balloon can hold petrol without dissolving in a few moments, I don't want to be anywhere near you when you try the experiment!

    Not something that I've ever felt the need to try. Have you?
    No, just common knowledge and a bit of experience with paints/turps generally rather than gasoline per se.

  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    Looking at the methodology, is it usual to interview multiple people from one household and apply the 0.5 factor?

    Would be interesting to know how man split households they found.
  • Roger said:

    It is a strange fact that polls commissioned by those with an interest usually seem to favour that interest (Witness Panelbase)

    I'm sure there's no jiggery-pokery so it must just be that unfavourable polls are not shown to the public.

    TBF when YouGov had Yes at +2% PanelBase were stuck stubbornly at No +4%...
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    What superlative was used today?
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    edited September 2014
    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    That's a little unfair. If you had said that the number of Unionist tanks had gone down by 100% that would have been a better comparison. Both are, as it happens, true AFAIK (since the CVR(T) at Edinburgh Castle was removed some years back, if one adopts the assumption that HMG is Unionist ...).

    Edit: strictly speaking it may have been on the books of one of the regimental museums.

  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    LOL. However, more seriously I have always felt that on-line polling has to be susceptible to organised infiltration - particularly so to something like Y/N referenda. I know the polling companies have methods to counter this but I remain sceptical.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    RobD said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    What superlative was used today?
    Tanks? or poll? The latter is on Scotgoespop as it happens, but only with a brief discussion so far.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    edited September 2014
    @Carnyx Salmond appears to have massaged Comrade Sillars' words - 12.13 on Guardian pages, but it was 24 hours too late. If he had spun this line before the papers went to press, he might have avoided the damning front pages.

    Perhaps The FT will now be added to the proscribed list of unfit reading.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    edited September 2014
    "dr_spyn said:

    Has Salmond disowned Sillars yet?"

    Interesting if you compare Sillars comments with some of the posts on the last thread. The retribution he was calling for quite accurately reflects the punishment many of the NO supporters on here want meted out to the Scots.

    I know he should no better than to behave as some on here behave but in the heat of battle I think he can be forgiven.
  • felixfelix Posts: 15,173
    Carnyx said:

    felix said:

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    Stand by for a shitstorm, beeboid interviewer saying she came across widespread intimidation from Yes during the campaign. Interviewing reid and Murphy.

    Like the planned Nat 'Intimidation' Parades on Election Day.
    Those are utterly disgusting, IMO.
    And you don't know anything about them except that there will be facepaint! and balloons!!

    Either way - elections should be 'whiter than white' on all sides and there should not be even a hint of intimidation. Marching en masse to a polling booth is not the way to do democracy.
    That's quite so. The law should be obeyed. But I haven't seen any official statement about whether this is acceptable or not. At the moment there seems to be absurd overreaction on PB to a local initiative (or two?) which may or may not come off depending on the polis and Returning Officer.

    I think your inner decency is telling you one thing although you're writing another. But hey-ho.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    saddened said:

    Final result 60 - 40 +/- 3.

    As I've been saying since the start.
    And been pilloried for my prescience by Sean "The Seer" Thomas.
  • CarnyxCarnyx Posts: 43,336
    felix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    LOL. However, more seriously I have always felt that on-line polling has to be susceptible to organised infiltration - particularly so to something like Y/N referenda. I know the polling companies have methods to counter this but I remain sceptical.
    There was an occasion about 2 years back where the No side raised a chorus of worries of infiltration by the Yes side with the effect that one pollster's panel was frozen - or something of the sort. (Which raises questions about how it has kept up with tecent changes.) Others will know about 100x more than me about that.

  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited September 2014
    rcs1000 said:

    saddened said:

    Final result 60 - 40 +/- 3.

    As I've been saying since the start.
    And been pilloried for my prescience by Sean "The Seer" Thomas.
    Not just that RCS but while you were sleeping Black Douglas popped back in the wee small hours and proclaimed victory over you as you'd run out of arguments.

    Loser;-)
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    nonetheless one can't avoid a hint of the Christine Keeler's; same with Panelbase.
    Mandy Rice-Davies, you mean.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Ninoinoz said:

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    nonetheless one can't avoid a hint of the Christine Keeler's; same with Panelbase.
    Mandy Rice-Davies, you mean.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
    well you would say that wouldn't you ?
  • Carnyx said:

    felix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    LOL. However, more seriously I have always felt that on-line polling has to be susceptible to organised infiltration - particularly so to something like Y/N referenda. I know the polling companies have methods to counter this but I remain sceptical.
    There was an occasion about 2 years back where the No side raised a chorus of worries of infiltration by the Yes side with the effect that one pollster's panel was frozen - or something of the sort. (Which raises questions about how it has kept up with tecent changes.) Others will know about 100x more than me about that.

    It was the pollsters themselves that raised the concerns on the Nat infiltration.
  • JonathanDJonathanD Posts: 2,400
    To be cynical, did we know in advance that this poll was coming out or was it released out of no where? A sudden release suggests this evenings polls may be worse for No.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,030
    How many telephone polls have there been, I'd laugh if the number were two!
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Salmond's statement.

    " "Jim Sillars is a great campaigner who has put aside his personal grief over the loss of his wife Margo MacDonald to put his heart and soul into galvanising the Yes vote. He is fighting a fine campaign all over Scotland - but the day after a Yes vote will be a day of celebration for the people, not reckoning for big companies drawn into the No campaign by Downing Street.

    Jim was simply trying to express the anger felt by so many people about the revelations that some supermarket statements were orchestrated by the Prime Minister himself.

    However, we must rise above these underhand Tory tactics, and be confident of the new spirit in Scotland. The people are showing no signs whatsoever of being cowed. They are in no mood to be bullied by big Westminster Government putting pressure on big business to intimidate the people of Scotland. Indeed, just the opposite is happening.

    We should also remember two things.

    One is that many businesses have refused to be pressurised by Downing Street. For every supermarket drawn into it, there is a Tesco who are properly neutral. For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.

    Second, there are now almost 3,000 members of Business for Scotland led by some of the greatest job creators in the country. People like Jim McColl don’t just talk about Scotland’s prospects. They transform the position of workers at Ferguson’s to save shipbuilding on the lower Clyde."

    But Sillars is still giving interviews. He has just finished one on News 24. I’ll post quotes from it later."



    Will businesses fall for this spin hook, line and sinker? Sillars has landed Salmond in serious trouble, and Salmond has been too slow witted to unpick the damage. How does he expect to mend fences whatever the outcome next Thursday?
  • RobD said:

    How many telephone polls have there been, I'd laugh if the number were two!

    Five phone indyref polls published this year, 3 of those are by Ipsos-Mori, who have shown the larger leads for No.
  • AllyMAllyM Posts: 260
    RobD said:

    How many telephone polls have there been, I'd laugh if the number were two!

    I was about to say... Is it not, 2?
  • JonathanD said:

    To be cynical, did we know in advance that this poll was coming out or was it released out of no where? A sudden release suggests this evenings polls may be worse for No.

    Sounds about right.

  • AllyMAllyM Posts: 260

    RobD said:

    How many telephone polls have there been, I'd laugh if the number were two!

    Five phone indyref polls published this year, 3 of those are by Ipsos-Mori, who have shown the larger leads for No.
    Ah, thanks. I was only aware of the recent 2.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312
    felix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    LOL. However, more seriously I have always felt that on-line polling has to be susceptible to organised infiltration - particularly so to something like Y/N referenda. I know the polling companies have methods to counter this but I remain sceptical.
    You're not kidding.

    See any 'academic' paper on gay parents and their children.

    'Convenience sample' is the technical name for it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprobability_sampling
  • JonathanD said:

    To be cynical, did we know in advance that this poll was coming out or was it released out of no where? A sudden release suggests this evenings polls may be worse for No.

    More likely, with the vast amount of money being placed at bookies on the referendum, once there is a hint of a leak, they have to publish to avoid the risk of "insider trading".
  • AllyMAllyM Posts: 260
    RE: Survation Poll. My brother said there was one due to me the other day.

    Though I hadn't seen much about it.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608

    rcs1000 said:

    saddened said:

    Final result 60 - 40 +/- 3.

    As I've been saying since the start.
    And been pilloried for my prescience by Sean "The Seer" Thomas.
    Not just that RCS but while you were sleeping Black Douglas popped back in the wee small hours and proclaimed victory over you as you'd run out of arguments.

    Loser;-)
    Did he?

    I shall return to my cave and cry :-)
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Form T'Gaurdian.

    "Tony Blair has spoken out in support of the union. According to the BBC, at an event in Kiev he said:

    Obviously I hope that Scotland votes to stay part of the United Kingdom.

    Blair has generally kept a low profile in this contest. The last time he spoke out in favour of a new, the SNP immediately issued a press release implying he was a war criminal and claiming his intervention was a huge boost for the yes side."

    Trust the SNP to make that link.
  • TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 119,959
    edited September 2014
    Mike's twitter reply to those disisng Survation

    Mike Smithson

    @hugaufx Who commissioned the Survation 54% poll is irrelevant when it comes to assessing it. Methodology looks well thought out
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 57,608
    Ninoinoz said:

    felix said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    LOL. However, more seriously I have always felt that on-line polling has to be susceptible to organised infiltration - particularly so to something like Y/N referenda. I know the polling companies have methods to counter this but I remain sceptical.
    You're not kidding.

    See any 'academic' paper on gay parents and their children.

    'Convenience sample' is the technical name for it.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonprobability_sampling
    Do the children of gas parents have four arms? Or can they read minds?

    Please do tell, as I know we're all dying to hear your insights on this.
  • Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    What superlative was used today?
    Tanks? or poll? The latter is on Scotgoespop as it happens, but only with a brief discussion so far.

    James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514

    Carnyx said:

    RobD said:

    dr_spyn said:

    @Carnyx just about to look.

    But...

    3.14pm BST
    James Kelly, a pro-independence blogger, says this poll gives the yes camp their second highest ratings in a telephone poll.

    There are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh.

    What superlative was used today?
    Tanks? or poll? The latter is on Scotgoespop as it happens, but only with a brief discussion so far.

    James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase.
    James was a hoot.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 33,701
    Roger said:

    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.

    How about chicken entrails?
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    So the market has settled a bit and it looks to have moved out from 4.9 to 5.1 for Yes. That is way less than I as expecting.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    edited September 2014
    Roger said:

    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.

    I rather like those, your adventures in the patisserie were much missed.
  • NinoinozNinoinoz Posts: 1,312

    Ninoinoz said:

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    nonetheless one can't avoid a hint of the Christine Keeler's; same with Panelbase.
    Mandy Rice-Davies, you mean.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
    well you would say that wouldn't you ?
    Very droll, Field Marshal.

    In fact, Wikipedia disputes that as the exact quotation.

    Staring at your picture provokes a question from me.

    What will happen to Scottish officers not attached to regiments on independence?

    I remember 6 regiments of the British Army were disbanded in 1922.
  • Roger said:

    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.

    Not really, if the polls are wrong and Yes win, we get to look at why they were wrong.

    My own hunch is conventional polling methods work when the turnout is around 60-70%

    The wheels fall off when turnout is mahoosive
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    I would like to respond that James Kelly has not yet written that "there are no Unionist tanks in Edinburgh", well not yet.

    Though he will enjoy receiving more traffic from The Guardian.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    dr_spyn said:

    Form T'Gaurdian.

    "Tony Blair has spoken out in support of the union. According to the BBC, at an event in Kiev he said:

    Obviously I hope that Scotland votes to stay part of the United Kingdom.

    Blair has generally kept a low profile in this contest. The last time he spoke out in favour of a new, the SNP immediately issued a press release implying he was a war criminal and claiming his intervention was a huge boost for the yes side."

    Trust the SNP to make that link.

    Unfortunately, it is true.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Ninoinoz said:

    Ninoinoz said:

    Per @ britainelects this one was commissioned by Better Together. I doubt Survation would agree to any really outrageous shenanigans, but there may be some reasonable-but-no-friendly methodological choices in there.

    Unfair, cursory glance at the data tables, everything seems to be legit.
    Certainly nothing there leaps out as dodgy particularly.
    nonetheless one can't avoid a hint of the Christine Keeler's; same with Panelbase.
    Mandy Rice-Davies, you mean.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandy_Rice-Davies
    well you would say that wouldn't you ?
    Very droll, Field Marshal.

    In fact, Wikipedia disputes that as the exact quotation.

    Staring at your picture provokes a question from me.

    What will happen to Scottish officers not attached to regiments on independence?

    I remember 6 regiments of the British Army were disbanded in 1922.
    presumably they'll get the choice to stay with rUK or to transfer to the Salmond Fusiliers.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670

    Roger said:

    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.

    Not really, if the polls are wrong and Yes win, we get to look at why they were wrong.

    My own hunch is conventional polling methods work when the turnout is around 60-70%

    The wheels fall off when turnout is mahoosive
    Yeah, in my view at this point any result from 60/40 to 40/60 would be perfectly plausible and wouldn't make me bat an eye-lid in terms of their deviation from the polls.
  • It's not a true poll until Jim Sillars threatens to boycott the firm.. ; )
  • Luckyguy1983Luckyguy1983 Posts: 28,813
    edited September 2014
    'For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.'

    So the oil industry is f****d but we'll still sell you cheap curry and beer.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,954
    Roger said:

    I think we've now had 58 Indy polls of which 57 have shown a NO lead. If YES goes on to win this site which lives from hypothetical poll to hypothetical poll will be devastated. It's rock will have collapsed. We'll be back to anecdotes and tea-leaves.

    We'll always have you Roger, confidently predicting the opposite to what will happen.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262

    'For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.'

    So the oil industry is f****d but we'll still sell you cheap curry and beer.

    More unemployed = More customers
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    "James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase."

    One of the quirks of PB is that posters who get the Kelly/Tim/Snowflake treatment are invariably the most interesting. Tell him to stop being a big Jessie and get back here
  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    "presumably they'll get the choice to stay with rUK or to transfer to the Salmond Fusiliers."

    Sounds fishy...
  • 'For every negativity from Bob Dudley of BP there is the positivity of Tim Martin of Wetherspoons.'

    So the oil industry is f****d but we'll still sell you cheap curry and beer.

    More unemployed = More customers
    Exactly. Wetherspoons are hardly going to piss off their key demographic by coming out against independence. By the same token I'm astonished ANY supermarket has admitted prices will rise, not that one or two have decided to remain silent.
  • AlanbrookeAlanbrooke Posts: 25,514
    Roger said:

    "presumably they'll get the choice to stay with rUK or to transfer to the Salmond Fusiliers."

    Sounds fishy...

    It's the pink uniforms that will attract them.
  • Plato said:

    Heartwarming stuff - £1.6m donated in 48hrs and now this. [snip]

    Indeed - In a week of rotten news, the kindness shown by the residents of Manchester and those that donated, really lifted the spirit.
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Roger said:

    "James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase."

    One of the quirks of PB is that posters who get the Kelly/Tim/Snowflake treatment are invariably the most interesting. Tell him to stop being a big Jessie and get back here

    What 'treatment'? Thought they all flounced off, never to return under their old logins.
  • eekeek Posts: 28,585
    Plato said:

    Cutting polemic from The Times, it's pretty funny and worth reading the whole thing.

    this is something I realised last week, regardless of the vote the genie is out of the bottle and investment will go south of the border rather than north.
  • PBModeratorPBModerator Posts: 665
    edited September 2014
    Plato - Don't copy anything else from the Times please.

    Mike in the past has received letters from the Times threatening legal action about the violation of their copyright.

    You were asked not to copy stuff from the Times in the past, and that still stands.
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Which way will Murdoch jump?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W6vDzf-wSbk

    Is this a clue - Groundskeeper Willie on His Master's Voice?
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Interesting factoids - blogs.telegraph.co.uk/finance/andrewlilico/100028085/scotlands-influence-in-the-commons-is-huge-why-would-it-want-to-give-that-up/
    Since 1945 there have been 18 General Elections in the UK. In six of those 18 there was a majority in Scotland for a party other than the party that won in the UK overall – so Scots were overruled on their preferences six times. But that is not the end of the story. For in two of those elections (1964 and October 1974) the majority for the party that won (Labour on both occasions) was larger in Scotland than in the UK as a whole – i.e. the winning party had a majority only because of Scottish seats. And in one other (February 1974) the party that ruled (Labour) was able to do so only because its margin on Scottish seats (nine seats) was more than its pan-UK margin on seats (four seats). So in three of the 18 General Elections since 1945, Scottish political preference have overruled everyone else's. And this is no mere historical amusement. Current opinion polls suggest that 2015 may be another such election. Even in this current Parliament (although I count it as one of the six cases of over-rule of Scottish preferences) the make-up of the government is different because of the balance of Scottish votes – the Conservatives had an overall majority of non-Scottish seats.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    So looking at the deomographics, for the 2011 Holyrood election the turnout was 50%, so 50% Did Not Vote. Survation have the DNV as 25% of the weighted sample.

    Surely, with a massive turnout predicted this is not a good weighting?
  • isamisam Posts: 41,118
    edited September 2014

    Roger said:

    "James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase."

    One of the quirks of PB is that posters who get the Kelly/Tim/Snowflake treatment are invariably the most interesting. Tell him to stop being a big Jessie and get back here

    What 'treatment'? Thought they all flounced off, never to return under their old logins.
    I don't think some of the PB Moderators could cope with James Kelly back.. have you seen what he writes about them? I am beginning to see why...
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    I think it is the same poll, seems to have same yes no split after taking out the DKs
  • PlatoPlato Posts: 15,724
    Fine. Are links allowed? I posted because others had done so.

    Plato - Don't copy anything else from the Times please.

    Mike in the past has received letters from the Times threatening legal action about the violation of their copyright.

    You were asked not to copy stuff from the Times in the past, and that still stands.

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    edited September 2014
    isam said:

    Roger said:

    "James's headlines are almost certainly aimed at his wide PB fanbase."

    One of the quirks of PB is that posters who get the Kelly/Tim/Snowflake treatment are invariably the most interesting. Tell him to stop being a big Jessie and get back here

    What 'treatment'? Thought they all flounced off, never to return under their old logins.
    I wonder why they are all banned

    http://scotgoespop.blogspot.co.uk/2014/02/political-betting-moderator-screaming.html
    tim wasn't. He flounced, but remains on good terms with Reggie.

    Strange article you linked to - he clearly has 'issues'.


  • RogerRoger Posts: 19,970
    "What 'treatment'? Thought they all flounced off, never to return under their old logins.'

    Of course they flounced off! They were the virtuosos not like the rest of us journeymen
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,300
    Perhaps James' safety valve just went pop. He might have recalled Wellington's words - publish and be damned before he wrote that piece.
This discussion has been closed.