Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New study of the Scottish IndyRef finds that the turnout le
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New study of the Scottish IndyRef finds that the turnout level amongst 16 and 17 years olds was 75%
An explanation by Professor John Curtice of why the very youngest segment was more likely to vote is that maybe they were encouraged to do so by mum and dad who probably have less influence over older groups.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
JoCo "Do you think Douglas Carswell could ever be tempted back to the Conservative Party?"
LH "I hope not"
DC "We agree on much, including that"
JoCo "In terms of the Conservative Party, do you think Europe will eventually split the party?"
LH "No. The Tory party is an immensely sophisticated political force. It is the most successful democratic organisation in human history..."
DC "It hasn't won an election since 1992"
LH ".. and it has an enormous sense of..."
DC "entitlement"
LH "...survival"
Would he have made it into the HoC otherwise? I doubt it.
That said the Indy Ref must be a polling companies best gift when it comes to weighting the sample. The chance of false recall of vote must be pretty close to nil at the moment and I'm sure people will remember for years to come.
I realise that I can't remember who I voted for in either the 2001 or 2005 General Election. I can do all the Holyrood elections though..
an assertion without any evidence, not really an explanation.
Lord A found 16-24 age group voted 51/49 in favour of yes
http://lordashcroftpolls.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/Lord-Ashcroft-Polls-Referendum-day-poll-summary-1409191.pdf
And then we deny them the vote. I seem to recall that the Americans didn't take kindly to that sort of treatment either.
Also, the line on voting age has to be drawn somewhere.
The Scots are drunk on constitutional arrogance and self-righteousness > Telegraph > http://tinyurl.com/m9alfyo
Brilliant article by DH.
Quite plausible IMHO - Sensible chap that Mr Curtice.
And, they ought to be the people who really, really want "their turn" and change.
To misquote: if a man is not a revolutionary at twenty he has no heart; if he is still one at forty, he has no head!
This might go some way to changing the skew on public policy towards the elderly.
Like DavidL I don't think we treat young people well, but I have to say that young voters who I meet seem pretty nonchalant about it, i.e. they tend not to vote. There are both causes and effects mixed in there.
Oh, and British universities are some of the best in the world. In global university rankings, it's the Americans and us, and no-one else comes close.
The Scottish government produced forecasts of oil revenues for an independent Scotland. They came up with six scenarios. Their main price forecast was for $110 per barrel. So anyway I wondered what their most pessimistic forecast was, as obviously you need to consider the worst case scenario. I've looked that up, it is $107 falling to $99 per barrel. That's a scenario derived from OBR figures that YES flatly rejected as ludicrously pessimistic. Brent Crude is currently $59.
In fact none of the organisations that the Scottish and UK governments consulted forecast figures as low as they are now, $85 was the lowest from the 22 forecasters the OBR used.
I think it's fair to say that at the current price the Scottish economic miracle that YES were promising would be up the proverbial creek.
If this current fall had coincided with the referendum it might not have been as close as it was.
Oh and production forecasts might also be way off with such low prices.
Whats in a name? Shakespere answered the question and Douglas Murray tries to.
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4949/mohammed-boy-name
I mean - that is the logical conclusion of Mr Dodd's analysis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_constituency
During the AV referendum when people wanked on about the unalterable, timeless, principle of one man one vote I did wonder how stupid and ignorant of history they were. The fact they used STV and the like was even funnier.
As for having babies. You can have them at 13 or younger unfortunately. The fact that we legally recognise the inevitable at 16 does not mean we should be encouraging it.
And the age at which parental responsibility legally ends is 18. So to my mind that should also be the age at which people should be able to vote.
Looks to me like the decision to give the vote to 16 and 17 year olds has been thoroughly vindicated. Maybe if the 18 to 24 year olds had been given the vote earlier they might have become more interested in getting involved.
From ComRes yesterday:
There should be a legal requirement to eliminate the deficit by a specific date
Agree 36%
Disagree 59%
Government spending should be reduced until the deficit is cleared
Agree 30%
Disagree 66%
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/expat/expatnews/11068438/Tories-pledge-to-give-vote-back-to-all-expats.html
As part of the negotiations, the British Government conceded that English spelling had some room for improvement and has accepted a 5-year phase-in plan that would become known as "Euro-English".
In the first year, "s" will replace the soft "c". Sertainly, this will make the sivil servants jump with joy. The hard "c" will be dropped in favour of "k". This should klear up konfusion, and keyboards kan have one less letter. There will be growing publik enthusiasm in the sekond year when the troublesome "ph" will be replaced with "f". This will make words like fotograf 20% shorter.
In the 3rd year, publik akseptanse of the new spelling kanbe expekted to reach the stage where more komplikated changes are possible. Governments will enkourage the removal of double letters which have always ben a deterent to akurate speling. Also, al wil agre that the horibl mes of the silent "e" in the languag is disgrasful and it should go away. By the 4th yer people wil be reseptiv to steps such as replasing "th" with "z" and "w" with "v".
During ze fifz yer, ze unesesary "o" kan be dropd from vords kontaining "ou" and after ziz fifz yer, ve vil hav a reil sensibl riten styl. Zer vil be no mor trubl or difikultis and evrivun vil find it ezi tu understand ech oza. Ze drem of a united urop vil finali kum tru. Und efter ze fifz yer, ve vil al be speking German like zey vunted in ze forst plas.
A tired argument that has been since time immemorial to resist any wise liberalising measure, from gay sex to gay marriage. It's either right or wrong. The parly time argument is a stinker.
Why not fractions of a vote, increasing gradually until you are old enough to exercise it properly - say 1/60 of a vote at five, increasing by a tenth per year until you reach maturity at 65?
I still think the only reason people ever even grudgingly accepted the need for austerity was not because of the level of the UK's deficit itself, it was because it coincided with the Euro debt crisis -- that gave what looked like a very vivid example of the consequences of what could happen to us if we didn't "do something". But since the news has long since stopped being full of news about the markets turning on countries with high deficits, it's no longer clear why there's a need to cut spending no matter how high the deficit remains on paper.
So a 54% turnout suggests 4% illegally voted twice. Except some students live at home and not all 18-24 year olds are students. But I don't think there are any cross checks to stop a student voting where they live (by post?) and where they study.
Hat tip to Scottish Skier on the site that can't be linked to.
Yougov results by age, sex and socio-economic grouping.
By age:
18-24
47% SNP, 22% Lab, 13% Con, 4% Lib
25-39
56% SNP, 21% Lab, 13% Con, 3% Lib
40-59
46% SNP, 31% Lab, 14% Con, 2% Lib
60+
42% SNP, 29% Lab, 20% Con, 3% Lib
By sex:
Male:
49% SNP, 26% Lab, 16% Con, 3% Lib
Female
46% SNP, 28% Lab, 15% Con, 2% Lib
By socio-economic group:
ABC1
47% SNP, 24% Lab, 20% Con, 4% Lib
C2DE
46% SNP, 30% Lab, 12% Con, 2% Lib
"Since Nov 10 all polls bar YouGov’s have had LAB leads"
Not true if you include the Opinium "poll that never was" on 17th Nov
Think what could be done with that - massive lovely tax cuts for all.
If your fantasy of 10%+ deficits in perpetuity was stated government policy there would be no lending and no money for benefits or public services. Granted noone is going to be crazy enough to actually implement your desired policy to show you what would happen but I would have thought it's been explained often enough and clearly enough for you to understand by now.
Overall I'm grateful for the gas and oil available from fracking and have no problem with sharing it nationwide.
363 ?
Etc...
I'd have thought you would be glad to spare them the agonising injustice of FPTP until they were old enough to cope with the mental torture..
Now, please, before you again post that it would be a good idea for HMG to borrow even more than it does already, please, please explain what you think the long term effects of such borrowing will be.
You could argue that anyone who will be 18 during the next 5 year parly should have a vote - so make it 13 ?
My arbitrary limiti is better than yours etc etc. They all get a vote in the end and for 70+ years - why the big deal.
Or even an excellent attendance record at school