LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Look, I know I'm biased but I'd say the same if it was the other way around: this is for the can.
That having been said, don't think there's too much doubt that for 2 or 3 days we've seen a slight nudge up on Labour's share. It's not so much a Cons fall, but Labour firming up.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
Whatever their methodology, they managed to find Lab ahead among over 55s. Is this likely?
Individual subsamples don't invalidate a whole poll, I raise my eyebrows when Populus has SNP and Labour level, but that reason alone doesn't make the whole poll invalid.
An average of polls using different methodologies is the best poll of all. If they all start using the same methodology then herding bias creeps in, and the average is less accurate. So we should be thankful to see apparent outliers, and all else being equal there should be outliers on the opposite side if the true picture is one of level pegging. You need alot of polls to produce them, but they are coming thick and fast now... I expect to see the Conservatives ahead by 5 or so in one poll in the next couple of weeks.
I don't seek to "invalidate a whole poll", but I think it's worth noting that the previous TNS, with Lab/Con level, had for the unweighted over 55s: Lab 78, Con 119. This poll had Lab 101, Con 94.
One of these looks more in line with (what I think are) reasonable expectations of voting intentions for over 55s.
Yesterday's TNS poll was not politically weighted (I think because it was for the BBC, who don't allow their polls to be weighted as such, IIRC). This one is presumably their regular poll.
Do you have evidence of that? Last night's poll certainly includes data on how people voted in 2010, presumably for weighting purposes. Having said that, I haven't looked at the tables myself yet as I have been doing internet on my phone since it was posted, and the file is just too big and clunky to look at easily.
The weighted tables have 2010 vote recall as Con 31% Lab 29% LD 14%.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
Whatever their methodology, they managed to find Lab ahead among over 55s. Is this likely?
Individual subsamples don't invalidate a whole poll, I raise my eyebrows when Populus has SNP and Labour level, but that reason alone doesn't make the whole poll invalid.
An average of polls using different methodologies is the best poll of all. If they all start using the same methodology then herding bias creeps in, and the average is less accurate. So we should be thankful to see apparent outliers, and all else being equal there should be outliers on the opposite side if the true picture is one of level pegging. You need alot of polls to produce them, but they are coming thick and fast now... I expect to see the Conservatives ahead by 5 or so in one poll in the next couple of weeks.
I don't seek to "invalidate a whole poll", but I think it's worth noting that the previous TNS, with Lab/Con level, had for the unweighted over 55s: Lab 78, Con 119. This poll had Lab 101, Con 94.
One of these looks more in line with (what I think are) reasonable expectations of voting intentions for over 55s.
TNS for 19th Jan was an online poll, not a phone poll as was the case for last night's.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
Even if you think they're generous to Labour somehow in the methodology, that's a horror poll for the Blues.
Whatever their methodology, they managed to find Lab ahead among over 55s. Is this likely?
Individual subsamples don't invalidate a whole poll, I raise my eyebrows when Populus has SNP and Labour level, but that reason alone doesn't make the whole poll invalid.
An average of polls using different methodologies is the best poll of all. If they all start using the same methodology then herding bias creeps in, and the average is less accurate. So we should be thankful to see apparent outliers, and all else being equal there should be outliers on the opposite side if the true picture is one of level pegging. You need alot of polls to produce them, but they are coming thick and fast now... I expect to see the Conservatives ahead by 5 or so in one poll in the next couple of weeks.
I don't seek to "invalidate a whole poll", but I think it's worth noting that the previous TNS, with Lab/Con level, had for the unweighted over 55s: Lab 78, Con 119. This poll had Lab 101, Con 94.
One of these looks more in line with (what I think are) reasonable expectations of voting intentions for over 55s.
TNS for 19th Jan was an online poll, not a phone poll as was the case for last night's.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
Yesterday's TNS poll was not politically weighted (I think because it was for the BBC, who don't allow their polls to be weighted as such, IIRC). This one is presumably their regular poll.
Do you have evidence of that? Last night's poll certainly includes data on how people voted in 2010, presumably for weighting purposes. Having said that, I haven't looked at the tables myself yet as I have been doing internet on my phone since it was posted, and the file is just too big and clunky to look at easily.
The weighted tables have 2010 vote recall as Con 31% Lab 29% LD 14%.
Is there evidence the data have been adjusted for vote recall or otherwise? The BBC policy tells us nothing and does not state that they never commission politically weighted polls.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
If it's the one whose fieldwork finished on 29th January, it's already pretty dated. On the face of it, it gave Labour a 11% lead, but I think that TNS must have revised the raw data in some way.
The 11% lead came from a poll with fieldwork on the 23rd-26th January. I can't find any data tables for this poll yet.
If TNS are doing a weekly poll then the fieldwork dates for that would be 30th - 2nd February, I think.
There are claims of a *different* TNS poll, though, or perhaps this same poll but weighted to past-vote, and it is those data tables, giving the six-point Labour lead, rather than the 11-points of last night, that I am asking after.
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass.
It won't, Labour are simply not 5% ahead - the poll of polls polling average tells us this, and since it is using all different methodologies, it is the best guide we have.
But this poll needs to be added, TNS are on the polling council and this poll is no less or no more valid than other opinion polls. It'll shift the average very very slightly toward Labour and that is fine, the system is working well.
What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
Clearly from the spin men that brought you Gordon Brown's favourite band being the Arctic Monkeys and cringe worthy I like all foods (before listing 10 different ethnic foods), Ed the under-age boozer.
All politicians do it, why don't they just be honest and say, hey I was brought up in an academic household, I was brought up to work hard and focus on my studies and that is what I did....rather than look like a whazzock trying to be cool when you just clearly aren't as we all know politics is showbusiness for boring and ugly people.
The Thick It and the "ZeitGeist" tapes episodes on full display there.
OGH reports a TNS poll as Lab 33%, Con 27%, UKIP 18%, Lib Dem 6%, Green 8%, Others 8%. Is that the poll that appeared on their website last night, but with the figures re-worked?
Re Show of Hands, I believe @Richard_Tyndall is also a big fan, so it's fair to say that their audience reaches across the political spectrum.
To be honest, I have never found political affiliation to be a big issue with music or other artistic interests - for example I am a big fan of the late Iain Banks, who was a big lefty.
Just saw some of the disgusting footage in that Yorkshire abattoir. I also note this sentence:
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Clearly from the spin men that brought you Gordon Brown's favourite band being the Arctic Monkeys, Ed the under-age drinker.
All politicians do it, why don't they just be honest and say, hey I was brought up in an academic household, I was brought up to work hard and focus on my studies and that is what I did....rather than look like a whazzock trying to be cool when you just clearly aren't as we all know politics is showbusiness for boring and ugly people.
I dont think claiming to have drunk too much as an 18yo is trying to be cool. I'm the biggest nerd I know and I drank too much between 16yo and yesterday. It's extremely likely to just be the truth.
Clearly from the spin men that brought you Gordon Brown's favourite band being the Arctic Monkeys and cringe worthy I like all foods (before listing 10 different ethnic foods), Ed the under-age boozer.
All politicians do it, why don't they just be honest and say, hey I was brought up in an academic household, I was brought up to work hard and focus on my studies and that is what I did....rather than look like a whazzock trying to be cool when you just clearly aren't as we all know politics is showbusiness for boring and ugly people.
The Thick It and the "ZeitGeist" tapes episodes on full display there.
From that Guido piece - 'David Cameron refused to do a selfie-interview because, a CCHQ source says. “it is twattish”.'
OGH reports a TNS poll as Lab 33%, Con 27%, UKIP 18%, Lib Dem 6%, Green 8%, Others 8%. Is that the poll that appeared on their website last night, but with the figures re-worked?
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
OGH reports a TNS poll as Lab 33%, Con 27%, UKIP 18%, Lib Dem 6%, Green 8%, Others 8%. Is that the poll that appeared on their website last night, but with the figures re-worked?
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
It strikes me that it does not matter if an EVEL bill is passed or not before the election. What matters is that the Lab/LDs are exposed for blocking it. I would have thought that is the best scenario for Tories in the GE in English seats. Tories in favour of EVEL and the rest demonstrably against it. If anyone is missing the boat its Labour.
"TNS Omnibus interviewed a representative sample of 1,182 adults in Great Britain between the 29th January and 2nd February 2015. All interviews were conducted as online self-completion.
The TNS Omnibus uses the Lightspeed Research access panel as its sample source. The data was weighted to match population totals for age, sex, social grade, working status, presence of children, 2010 General Election voting patterns and region. The voting intention figures were additionally weighted to reflect 2014 European election voting patterns and a Likely Voter Model based on the 2010 British Election Study was also applied."
Just saw some of the disgusting footage in that Yorkshire abattoir. I also note this sentence:
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Compassion in World Farming report that 80% of the cattle and sheep slaughtered under the Halal method in the UK are effectively stunned before slaughter, and they are campaigning to remove the religious exemption - which would seem to be unnecessary.
Yesterday's TNS poll was not politically weighted (I think because it was for the BBC, who don't allow their polls to be weighted as such, IIRC). This one is presumably their regular poll.
Do you have evidence of that? Last night's poll certainly includes data on how people voted in 2010, presumably for weighting purposes. Having said that, I haven't looked at the tables myself yet as I have been doing internet on my phone since it was posted, and the file is just too big and clunky to look at easily.
The weighted tables have 2010 vote recall as Con 31% Lab 29% LD 14%.
Is there evidence the data have been adjusted for vote recall or otherwise? The BBC policy tells us nothing and does not state that they never commission politically weighted polls.
I agree the BBC guidance page isn't clear on the matter but it is my recollection from on-air explanations in the past that they don't politically weight.
The TNS pdf is a nightmare to navigate but it's pretty clear from table 6 that they haven't weighted on 2010 vote.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
Spin it how you like - Con support based on this poll are heading for opposition.
"TNS Omnibus interviewed a representative sample of 1,182 adults in Great Britain between the 29th January and 2nd February 2015. All interviews were conducted as online self-completion.
The TNS Omnibus uses the Lightspeed Research access panel as its sample source. The data was weighted to match population totals for age, sex, social grade, working status, presence of children, 2010 General Election voting patterns and region. The voting intention figures were additionally weighted to reflect 2014 European election voting patterns and a Likely Voter Model based on the 2010 British Election Study was also applied."
But that's for their (usual) online polls, such as those on 19th and 8th Jan.
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
It strikes me that it does not matter if an EVEL bill is passed or not before the election. What matters is that the Lab/LDs are exposed for blocking it. I would have thought that is the best scenario for Tories in the GE in English seats. Tories in favour of EVEL and the rest demonstrably against it. If anyone is missing the boat its Labour.
I think it matters that it actually IS an EVEL bill, not some sort of halfway house chicken-out all-things-to-all-men bill that satisfies no one except the Tory leadership and pisses off half the party. Deliberately or negligently making splits in the CPP this close to the election is just idiotic.
Things are already so bad for Labour in Scotland it would be extraordinary if Ashcroft does not give them some mild relief. Either way I see no long-term future for the Union in its present form We need a new settlement, not least for England.
Absolutely right ..... the Union as it stands is toast. A completely new framework is required and a definitive commitment to this effect from one or more of the major parties may have a major influence at the forthcoming GE, particularly with English voters who are becoming heartily sick of being treated as second class citizens when it comes to the sharing out of the UK cake. Things have to change big time and soon.
The expression 'be careful what you wish for' springs to mind when viewing the sweeties & goodies being paraded before Scottish voters.....
Quite. My mummy told me never to accept sweeties from strange men, and also from Mr Brown and Mr Murphy. The chemical analysis of their mint humbugs is proving an interesting topic of discussion in the newspapers.
Sky wins the rights to the Open golf - I now officially want to opt out of a tv licence.
How long before Wimbledon goes the same way (only the finals have to remain free to air)? Though they have pulled back from golf coverage far more than tennis so that may not be such a threat.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
***** Betting Post ***** As an alternative to my suggested Bet of the Week upthread, footy afficionados may prefer a modest flutter on Man Utd defeating Camb Utd by 4+ goals in their F.A. Cup replay tonight at Old Trafford, where those nice folk at BetVictor are offering odds of 9/5 (2.8 dec.) However should you consider that Cambridge will emerge victorious, then odds in excess of 40/1 are available from Betfair ..... not bad for a two horse race! DYOR.
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass. .... What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
If the pollsters get the wrong result then they are putting themselves out of work. Herding would do them no good would it? But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Thats not Orkney and Shetland is it?
Yep - Of course the big No vote there should see Carmichael home comfortably enough.
The same is not true of Charlie in the Highlands however
The TNS poll was online and is embargoed until 5am tomorrow morning
So at 5.01 we'll be getting a positive thread header for the Tories given the significant shift in their favour vs the last TNS poll (which I assume was an outlier) unwinds?
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass. .... What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
If the pollsters get the wrong result then they are putting themselves out of work. Herding would do them no good would it? But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
Why does talk of mthodology make you suspicious, trying to get a random sample of the population from either phoning up people or online is to all intents and purposes IMPOSSIBLE
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Thats not Orkney and Shetland is it?
Yep - Of course the big No vote there should see Carmichael home comfortably enough.
The same is not true of Charlie in the Highlands however
Mind you, there is the issue of how the coalition are perceived to deal with the crisis in the oil industry. That could complicate things depending on what happens in the Budget.
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass. .... What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
If the pollsters get the wrong result then they are putting themselves out of work. Herding would do them no good would it? But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
TNS is weighting back to the 2014 Euros which explains their generally higher UKIP share and low LD one. Odd thing to link to really because turnout was only 36%
The TNS poll was online and is embargoed until 5am tomorrow morning
So at 5.01 we'll be getting a positive thread header for the Tories given the significant shift in their favour vs the last TNS poll (which I assume was an outlier) unwinds?
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Thats not Orkney and Shetland is it?
Yep - Of course the big No vote there should see Carmichael home comfortably enough.
The same is not true of Charlie in the Highlands however
Mind you, there is the issue of how the coalition are perceived to deal with the crisis in the oil industry. That could complicate things depending on what happens in the Budget.
No need to worry, whatever they do Sturgeon will claim it's not enough. Maybe the Nats should change the Scottish National Anthem to " Anything you can do I can do better".
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Still, it's pretty nice to see the Conservatives shameless opportunism, lust for power, ideological belief in entrenched mass privatisation and shameless support for lower taxation for the wealthiest turn into one single ridiculous policy.
You're funny. Student?
Not at all. I used to be right-wing when I was younger but then I grew up.
Interesting, and the polar opposite to most people. Was there a moment of epiphany, or was it more a gradual, creeping realignment?
Gradually over many, many years. I went from growing up hard right, much like my parents, to right, to centrist, to left-wing, to becoming hard left across the last few years.
There's many reasons but a major one is exposure to people's views on the Internet. Indeed, it was being exposed to the views of the right, which demonstrated a warped and narrow world view and a lack of nuance or outright dismissal of complicated real-world issues.
Which led to me becoming far more left wing... and far less political, largely because reading the news makes me feel increasingly miserable and hopeless about the direction of the world.
Thank you for the response. The internet magnifies and focuses views and behaviour. There is no way to tell the loon from the troll from the joker from the terminally stupid in many cases. Only a small minority of the right (i.e. Tory voters) think the way you think they do. Just as only a small minority of Labour voters are union-loving marxists-in-disguise.
The TNS poll was online and is embargoed until 5am tomorrow morning
So at 5.01 we'll be getting a positive thread header for the Tories given the significant shift in their favour vs the last TNS poll (which I assume was an outlier) unwinds?
Or not...?
Except they are different polls!
Last night's is a phone poll (Lab 39/Con 28), whereas the one to be un-embargoed tomorrow is an online poll and should be compared with TNS' last online poll, which had a fieldwork end-date of 19th Jan.
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Thats not Orkney and Shetland is it?
Yep - Of course the big No vote there should see Carmichael home comfortably enough.
The same is not true of Charlie in the Highlands however
Mind you, there is the issue of how the coalition are perceived to deal with the crisis in the oil industry. That could complicate things depending on what happens in the Budget.
If you want a safe as houses Lib Dem bet then the 1-16 for Westmorland and Lonsdale is an order of magnitude better than the 1-14 available for Carmichael imo.
94.1% chance for Farron to hold, vs 93.3% Carmichael
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass. .... What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
If the pollsters get the wrong result then they are putting themselves out of work. Herding would do them no good would it? But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
No, if one pollster gets the wrong result then they are out of work qv. Angus Reid. If they all do, then it's 1992 all over again, learn lessons and all that, but polls will still be commissioned. Hence the temptation to herd.
Combined with his plans to make housebuilding less economic, it's perfect storm for the young.
I really feel sorry for the poor mugs who will pay the price if we get a Miliband government. Ironically, those who will suffer most will be Labour-voting demographics.
If they are mad enough to vote for Ed and Labour and by inference those policies then the fact that they suffer most does not seem unreasonable.
Listen, On the poll - it is most likely too good for Labour - heck I'd be out of pocket with my various constituency bets and Labour getting a decent majority (Even with Scotland taken into account) if this was the result that came to pass. .... What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
If the pollsters get the wrong result then they are putting themselves out of work. Herding would do them no good would it? But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
Why does talk of mthodology make you suspicious, trying to get a random sample of the population from either phoning up people or online is to all intents and purposes IMPOSSIBLE
I think the only way you could get a random sample would be if you made it an additional requirement of Jury Service (or excusing oneself from Jury Service) to answer a political opinion poll, with suitably draconian punishments for not responding.
Unfortunately, that would probably undermine people's faith in the independence of the judicial system.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Mrs Thatcher spent countless hours explaining to the people why and how socialism doesn;t work. With examples.
If alive today she would be linking Greece and Venezuela, relentlessly, to policies being espoused by ed Miliband. And she would be demanding Greece be made an example of.
I repeat, the conservatives are losing because they are not challenging the ridiculous notion that austerity can be 'turned away from'.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Is a smaller moe not evidence of greater accuracy? And a 2k sample has moe of 2%, compared to a 1k sample with 3% moe.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
Just saw some of the disgusting footage in that Yorkshire abattoir. I also note this sentence:
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Compassion in World Farming report that 80% of the cattle and sheep slaughtered under the Halal method in the UK are effectively stunned before slaughter, and they are campaigning to remove the religious exemption - which would seem to be unnecessary.
Right. The vast majority of Muslims and Jews are happy to eat livestock that was stunned before death. It's only the 20% of real nutters that get an opt out from the law. Why? What's the point? Are these people really so valuable to the country that we should abandon the principle of equal treatment and our belief that animals shouldn't suffer?
It really shows the moral cowardice of the establishment they're not willing to do this.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Is a smaller moe not evidence of greater accuracy? And a 2k sample has moe of 2%, compared to a 1k sample with 3% moe.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
MofE and consequently sample size is of less importance than using the right or wrong methodology .
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
I am sure the aninal liberation types are up in arms about this and of course RSPCA will no doubt be on the case big time.
The TNS poll was online and is embargoed until 5am tomorrow morning
So at 5.01 we'll be getting a positive thread header for the Tories given the significant shift in their favour vs the last TNS poll (which I assume was an outlier) unwinds?
Or not...?
No prizes for guessing which!
And I thought it might be a candidate for **** bet of the week ****
AFAIK, stunning is frowned upon far more by Jewish scholars than Islamic scholars. So yes would have to be the answer (but you should have written it as 'kosh').
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Is a smaller moe not evidence of greater accuracy? And a 2k sample has moe of 2%, compared to a 1k sample with 3% moe.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
Phone polls tend to have far less adjusting than online for whatever reason, I've noticed. I think a good methodology phone poll with a high sample size is probably best.
Many comments have been made to the effect that ‘If Clegg says X..’ Or ‘Clegg decides Y’. I think this significantly exaggerates the extent of any influence that Clegg is likely to have after May 7th – even in relation to his own party nevermind anything else. If Clegg were to come out again in favour of the Tories when the results are known quite a few of his surviving colleagues will invite him to ‘go forth and multiply ‘ and simply ignore him. Thus, if 30 LibDems are returned, I can imagine perhaps only 20 being willing to follow his lead
The Lib Dems are now down to 4% in Scotland, according to Yougov. Even if they could concentrate all of those votes in the 11 seats they hold, that would only come to an average of 22%.
Nat 36.7%, Lib Dem 35.9%
Can you guess which seat this is the current UNS prediction for ?
Don't think you would apply UNS to the Sinclair inheritance so it's either Chuckles or Carmichael.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Is a smaller moe not evidence of greater accuracy? And a 2k sample has moe of 2%, compared to a 1k sample with 3% moe.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
MofE and consequently sample size is of less importance than using the right or wrong methodology .
"of less importance", sure.
But Mike said "It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy"
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
I'd feel that I had more in common, politically, with an economically left wing politician who believed in the former (say Peter Shore or Austin Mitchell) than I had with an economically right wing politician who favoured the latter (say, Angela Merkel).
Agreed. Also, poor economic policy can be reversed quite quickly: see the Thatcher revolution. However things like cultural change from mass immigration could take a hundred years to correct.
I don't think what has been done since 1997 can be corrected now. In the USA blacks are about 12% of the population and it is clear that their race issues are beyond any solving. The 12% isn't going to become 1% again or even 91% for that matter.
@MikeK It's the same ritual in both cases? I have pointed out before. that at one time it was a reasonably humane form of slaughter compared to many others. Time moves on though, and religion and ritual are always conservative for the majority.
LAB 33% (+2) CON 27% (-4) UKIP 18% (+2) GREEN 8% (+1) LIB DEM 6% (-2) OTHER 8% (+1)
Do you have a link to those headline figures? As they are different to those extracted from the data by posters last night. It would be interesting to see if they are from different data or just a different analysis of the same data.
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies.
You're totally wrong. You're dismissing a poll you dont like and scrounging around for reasons to do so and coming up with nonsensical ones. I look forward to your impending predictions of Tory electoral successes which have every chance of being correct by coincidence.
TNS are the first to pick up the Boots bounce for Labour as the nation recoils against the capitalist cronie Cameron.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
Pick apart the poll if you like. Just dont use the sample size as a reason for dismissing it because that would be silly.
The poll with the smallest weighted base so far this year was Ashcroft's 18th Jan poll = 508!
It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy as YouGov found at GE10.
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Is a smaller moe not evidence of greater accuracy? And a 2k sample has moe of 2%, compared to a 1k sample with 3% moe.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
MofE and consequently sample size is of less importance than using the right or wrong methodology .
"of less importance", sure.
But Mike said "It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy"
Complete nonsense?
Remember the original Literary Digest poll which set off polling in 1936 . A sample size of 2.4million which got the wrong result
Sky news footage of the treatment of animals at a North yorkshore halal abattoir is absolutely horrific... I shouldn't think the treatment at non halal abattoirs is much better but it's worth a watch...
Can't imagine I'll eat mammal meat again
Pithy comment alert, but the real animals are the scum that work there. Would like to seem them thrown about and beaten see how they like it
I am sure the aninal liberation types are up in arms about this and of course RSPCA will no doubt be on the case big time.
If not, why not?
There are a lot of animal welfare charities with a specific focus on farming. Animal Aid obtained the footage in this instance, and Compassion in World Farming also.
Why are you trying to link this to some grudge you hold against the RSPCA?
Having a number of animal charities allows for diversity of opinion and for charities that do not represent public opinion to fail to attract potential donors. Yet you seem to be criticising the RSPCA for not exercising a monopoly on animal rights activism. Frankly it's a bizarre attitude to take.
Lots of comment about oppositions losing share in the run up to the election - question is when ? Steady decline - last 200 days , 100 ? 50 ? 10 days ?
The last 30 days usually favours the Opposition. This was true in 1959 - 1964 -1966 - 1970 - Feb 1974 -Oct 1974 - 1987 - 2001 - 2005 -2010. 1983 was neutral because of a swing from Labour to the Alliance - but the Tories lost several 5 points in the campaign 1979 and 1997 both saw the incumbents make up some ground in the campaign but went on to lose decisively having been well behind. However, Tory optimists can still point to 1992.
Just saw some of the disgusting footage in that Yorkshire abattoir. I also note this sentence:
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Compassion in World Farming report that 80% of the cattle and sheep slaughtered under the Halal method in the UK are effectively stunned before slaughter, and they are campaigning to remove the religious exemption - which would seem to be unnecessary.
Right. The vast majority of Muslims and Jews are happy to eat livestock that was stunned before death. It's only the 20% of real nutters that get an opt out from the law. Why? What's the point? Are these people really so valuable to the country that we should abandon the principle of equal treatment and our belief that animals shouldn't suffer?
It really shows the moral cowardice of the establishment they're not willing to do this.
Fear of being labelled racist trumps everything else: animal rights, child protection, gender discrimination, sexual discrimination, freedom of expression, social harmony..
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 17m17 minutes ago revised ELBOW 1st Feb due to TNS phone poll: Lab 33.5, Con 32.7, UKIP 15.4, LD 6.8, Green 6.3. Lab lead 0.8% not 0.4%
Harper won a federal majority in 2011 off the back of a national vote for the Conservatives of ~40%.
Also, Tony Abbot's centre-right coalition won a majority in Australia in 2013 with ~45% of the vote. John Key in New Zealand won 47% of the vote last year and was one seat off an absolute majority, with a mixed-member system.
Cameron has achieved neither the vote share, nor the majority. He has a lot of explaining to do as to why his party is one of the most poorly performing conservative parties in the anglosphere.
Ummm: aren't more than half of EU governments "right wing" in the accepted sense?
For example, Germany, Belgium, Spain, etc
And you could argue that in Italy and other places, there are left wing government implementing right wing policies (labour market reform and balanced budgets)
I'm assuming by "right wing" we mean pro-capital, free-market, sound budget, reduced labour market regulation, and by "left wing" you mean the opposite.
I don't accept your definition.
There are plenty of left wing politicians - i.e. people who support state intervention - who believe in the sovereignty of domestic institutions, support free speech, etc.
I'd feel that I had more in common, politically, with an economically left wing politician who believed in the former (say Peter Shore or Austin Mitchell) than I had with an economically right wing politician who favoured the latter (say, Angela Merkel).
Agreed. Also, poor economic policy can be reversed quite quickly: see the Thatcher revolution. However things like cultural change from mass immigration could take a hundred years to correct.
I don't think what has been done since 1997 can be corrected now. In the USA blacks are about 12% of the population and it is clear that their race issues are beyond any solving. The 12% isn't going to become 1% again or even 91% for that matter.
It doesn't matter what colour people's skin is. What matters is what culture they follow. In the US there is now a large black middle class that follows mainstream American norms. We need to assimilate immigrants to our culture. Some immigrant groups do that pretty quickly, but unfortunately some do not.
Just saw some of the disgusting footage in that Yorkshire abattoir. I also note this sentence:
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Compassion in World Farming report that 80% of the cattle and sheep slaughtered under the Halal method in the UK are effectively stunned before slaughter, and they are campaigning to remove the religious exemption - which would seem to be unnecessary.
Right. The vast majority of Muslims and Jews are happy to eat livestock that was stunned before death. It's only the 20% of real nutters that get an opt out from the law. Why? What's the point? Are these people really so valuable to the country that we should abandon the principle of equal treatment and our belief that animals shouldn't suffer?
It really shows the moral cowardice of the establishment they're not willing to do this.
Fear of being labelled racist trumps everything else: animal rights, child protection, gender discrimination, sexual discrimination, freedom of expression, social harmony..
Do you have to have this kind of outlook on the world to consider voting UKIP or does it just help?
Cameron's ability to (miss) manage the commons is becoming almost legendary. How to take a nice simple issue that would have clear appeal to voters and totally fsck it up and turn it into a very public division within the party.
Offer the party two options, declare without any evidence that the one the executive like and the rank and file hate is the winner, then talk about the possibility of pushing it through on Labour votes. ON LABOUR VOTES !? three months from an election, has he totally taken leave of his senses ?
It strikes me that it does not matter if an EVEL bill is passed or not before the election. What matters is that the Lab/LDs are exposed for blocking it. I would have thought that is the best scenario for Tories in the GE in English seats. Tories in favour of EVEL and the rest demonstrably against it. If anyone is missing the boat its Labour.
I think it matters that it actually IS an EVEL bill, not some sort of halfway house chicken-out all-things-to-all-men bill that satisfies no one except the Tory leadership and pisses off half the party. Deliberately or negligently making splits in the CPP this close to the election is just idiotic.
True. But its Billy Hague. Look at the mess he made over referendum policy...
I hesitate to teach a grandmother to suck eggs, but I think Professor Curtice is wrong in his final paragraph. I don't think Ms Sturgeon will have any difficulty whatsoever simultaneously riding the various post-election horses. She just needs to blame Westminster for everything and be generally stroppy and difficult, a role to which she is admirably suited.
94.1% chance for Farron to hold, vs 93.3% Carmichael
I'll gladly frame a bet at 11-10 with a massive push chance that Farron holds and Carmichael doesn't.
More interesting exercise for you - price up LD v Tory seats in Scotland
All one of them ?
Berwickshire Roxburgh I assume you mean.
Lets see
LD 45.4% Con 33.8% Lab 10.2% SNP 9.2% UKIP 1.2% Jacobite 0.3%
Lets deal with the no hopers first:
Labour - drop to 7%
Lets up UKIP to 6%.
And we'll keep Jacobite at 0.3%
Lab 7% UKIP 6% Jacobite 0.3%
Leaves 86.7% for the SNP, Con, LD
The SNP will go up, but it is borders and a big No area so the rise will be far less than elsewhere.
Lets give them a 16% rise.
SNP 25.2
That leaves 61.5% for Con/LD
Cons must drop, but Lib Dems must drop more...
Also the swing may behave more like England because it is borders rather than Scotland - So
Lib Dem down 13 to 32.5, Conservatives down 4.8 to 28
Lib Dem 32.5 Con 28 SNP 25.2 Lab 7 UKIP 6
Independent or Jacobite 500-1 (You never know) Lab 1,000-1 (4th and going backwards) UKIP 100-1 (They are going forwards...) SNP 4-1 Con 6-5 Lib Dem 8-11
For a bit of an overround...
Note I have NOT looked at the odds whilst doing this exercise. And I'm not offering those odds either.
Sunil Prasannan @Sunil_P2 · 14m14 minutes ago Revised "Super-ELBOW" for Jan 2015, due to late TNS phone poll. Lab 33.3, Con 32.1, UKIP, 15.2, LD 7.3, Green 6.5
Comments
Neil, sorry just saw that. You're partially right of course for which apologies. But there looks to have been a dog's breakfast mess of getting this poll right. The figures have been published differently several times with varying base and headline figures. It looks like the paymasters were Woman's Hour and TNS-BNRB have piggybacked a GB poll. It's exactly the same group of interviewees. That could be ok, depending on the driver which in this case is Woman's Hour for the BBC. There are a lot of issues here about correct weighting.
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/news
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/uploads/files/BBC_Womans_Hour_Tables_-_All_adults.pdf
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/uploads/files/TNS_BMRB_Tables_-_All_adults.pdf
Look, I know I'm biased but I'd say the same if it was the other way around: this is for the can.
That having been said, don't think there's too much doubt that for 2 or 3 days we've seen a slight nudge up on Labour's share. It's not so much a Cons fall, but Labour firming up.
http://www.tns-bmrb.co.uk/uploads/files/TNS_BMRB_Tables_-_All_adults.pdf
One of these looks more in line with (what I think are) reasonable expectations of voting intentions for over 55s.
TNS 8th Jan = 567
Ashcroft 11th Jan = 527
Ipsos-MORI 13th Jan = 559
Ashcroft 18th Jan = 508
TNS 19th Jan = 553
ICM 19th Jan = 558
Ashcroft 25th Jan = 562
ComRes 25th Jan = 588
TNS 26th Jan = 517 (ie. "last night's")
Ashcroft 1st Feb = 591
Here is the BBC guidance on opinion polling: http://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/page/guidance-polls-surveys-summary/
There are claims of a *different* TNS poll, though, or perhaps this same poll but weighted to past-vote, and it is those data tables, giving the six-point Labour lead, rather than the 11-points of last night, that I am asking after.
It won't, Labour are simply not 5% ahead - the poll of polls polling average tells us this, and since it is using all different methodologies, it is the best guide we have.
But this poll needs to be added, TNS are on the polling council and this poll is no less or no more valid than other opinion polls. It'll shift the average very very slightly toward Labour and that is fine, the system is working well.
What we should and must be extremely careful to look out for are pollsters changing methodology, particularly to get results more in line with each other, as this will cause herding towards a false average and the poll of polls average will be a far less accurate guide
Clearly from the spin men that brought you Gordon Brown's favourite band being the Arctic Monkeys and cringe worthy I like all foods (before listing 10 different ethnic foods), Ed the under-age boozer.
All politicians do it, why don't they just be honest and say, hey I was brought up in an academic household, I was brought up to work hard and focus on my studies and that is what I did....rather than look like a whazzock trying to be cool when you just clearly aren't as we all know politics is showbusiness for boring and ugly people.
The Thick It and the "ZeitGeist" tapes episodes on full display there.
http://www.tnsglobal.com/press-release/latest-polling-from-tns-on-uk-voter-intention
F/work dates 23-26th.
Slaughterhouses in the UK are required to stun animals before they are killed to minimise pain, but Muslim and Jewish slaughterhouses are exempt due to religious requirements.
Why on Earth is this the case? Moderate Jews and moderate Muslims have accepted stunning. It's only the fundamentalists we are appeasing. As with the free speech issue, this needs to end. Your rights to practice your religion however you want end when it causes the suffering of others, and that includes animals.
Our lust to follow in the footsteps of Greece and Venezuela to a socialist dream is finally showing in the polls.
AAARRRGGGHHHH NO NO NO !!!!!!!!!
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/feb/03/george-osborne-stay-uk-chancellor-general-election
FFS Conservatives give the economy a chance. :-(
Weighted base 517
Labour 200
Cons 144
UKIP 74
LD 23
Green 42
"TNS Omnibus interviewed a representative sample of 1,182 adults in Great Britain between the 29th January and 2nd February 2015. All interviews were conducted as online self-completion.
The TNS Omnibus uses the Lightspeed Research access panel as its sample source.
The data was weighted to match population totals for age, sex, social grade, working status, presence of children, 2010 General Election voting patterns and region. The voting intention figures were additionally weighted to reflect 2014 European election voting patterns and a Likely Voter Model based on the 2010 British Election Study was also applied."
Compassion in World Farming report that 80% of the cattle and sheep slaughtered under the Halal method in the UK are effectively stunned before slaughter, and they are campaigning to remove the religious exemption - which would seem to be unnecessary.
The TNS pdf is a nightmare to navigate but it's pretty clear from table 6 that they haven't weighted on 2010 vote.
Sky wins the rights to the Open golf - I now officially want to opt out of a tv licence.
Poll embargoes are a crock of s*it.
As an alternative to my suggested Bet of the Week upthread, footy afficionados may prefer a modest flutter on Man Utd defeating Camb Utd by 4+ goals in their F.A. Cup replay tonight at Old Trafford, where those nice folk at BetVictor are offering odds of 9/5 (2.8 dec.)
However should you consider that Cambridge will emerge victorious, then odds in excess of 40/1 are available from Betfair ..... not bad for a two horse race!
DYOR.
But do they understand what is going on? Its all this talk of methodologies which makes me suspicious.
The same is not true of Charlie in the Highlands however
Or not...?
ICM's 1k sample poll was far more accurate than YouGov's 6k sample one. On that day five of the top six pollsters used the phone - five of the bottom six were online.
Last night's is a phone poll (Lab 39/Con 28), whereas the one to be un-embargoed tomorrow is an online poll and should be compared with TNS' last online poll, which had a fieldwork end-date of 19th Jan.
Daniel Hannan on target.
94.1% chance for Farron to hold, vs 93.3% Carmichael
Unfortunately, that would probably undermine people's faith in the independence of the judicial system.
Mrs Thatcher spent countless hours explaining to the people why and how socialism doesn;t work. With examples.
If alive today she would be linking Greece and Venezuela, relentlessly, to policies being espoused by ed Miliband. And she would be demanding Greece be made an example of.
I repeat, the conservatives are losing because they are not challenging the ridiculous notion that austerity can be 'turned away from'.
European 'No-Go' Zones: Fact or Fiction?
Part 2: Britain
94.1% chance for Farron to hold, vs 93.3% Carmichael
I'll gladly frame a bet at 11-10 with a massive push chance that Farron holds and Carmichael doesn't.
Pulling one pair of polls out where the larger was less accurate doesn't really back up your assertion.
It really shows the moral cowardice of the establishment they're not willing to do this.
And cosh kosher?
Apparently Eastenders is now too white-reverse discrimination is still discrimination http://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/eastenders-boss-says-wont-pressured-5094763#ICID=sharebar_facebook …
If not, why not?
Berwickshire Roxburgh I assume you mean.
But Mike said "It is complete nonsense to suggest that a larger sample improves a poll's accuracy"
Complete nonsense?
DUP taking 'legal advice' over TV debate exclusion http://www.itv.com/news/story/2015-01-23/election-debates-to-go-ahead-even-if-leaders-do-not-take-part/ …
Mass debate falling apart.
It's the same ritual in both cases?
I have pointed out before. that at one time it was a reasonably humane form of slaughter compared to many others.
Time moves on though, and religion and ritual are always conservative for the majority.
The tories are doing a cr8p job in their election campaign so far and ed miliband is very much still in the race.
Live with it.
Why are you trying to link this to some grudge you hold against the RSPCA?
Having a number of animal charities allows for diversity of opinion and for charities that do not represent public opinion to fail to attract potential donors. Yet you seem to be criticising the RSPCA for not exercising a monopoly on animal rights activism. Frankly it's a bizarre attitude to take.
1983 was neutral because of a swing from Labour to the Alliance - but the Tories lost several 5 points in the campaign
1979 and 1997 both saw the incumbents make up some ground in the campaign but went on to lose decisively having been well behind.
However, Tory optimists can still point to 1992.
http://blog.whatscotlandthinks.org/2015/02/labour-still-deep-trouble/
The url gives the clue as to the content.
revised ELBOW 1st Feb due to TNS phone poll: Lab 33.5, Con 32.7, UKIP 15.4, LD 6.8, Green 6.3. Lab lead 0.8% not 0.4%
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/562604425689440257
The ritual killing of animals is wrong?
How do you stand on fox hunting to hounds?
Berwickshire Roxburgh I assume you mean.
Lets see
LD 45.4%
Con 33.8%
Lab 10.2%
SNP 9.2%
UKIP 1.2%
Jacobite 0.3%
Lets deal with the no hopers first:
Labour - drop to 7%
Lets up UKIP to 6%.
And we'll keep Jacobite at 0.3%
Lab 7%
UKIP 6%
Jacobite 0.3%
Leaves 86.7% for the SNP, Con, LD
The SNP will go up, but it is borders and a big No area so the rise will be far less than elsewhere.
Lets give them a 16% rise.
SNP 25.2
That leaves 61.5% for Con/LD
Cons must drop, but Lib Dems must drop more...
Also the swing may behave more like England because it is borders rather than Scotland - So
Lib Dem down 13 to 32.5, Conservatives down 4.8 to 28
Lib Dem 32.5
Con 28
SNP 25.2
Lab 7
UKIP 6
Independent or Jacobite 500-1 (You never know)
Lab 1,000-1 (4th and going backwards)
UKIP 100-1 (They are going forwards...)
SNP 4-1
Con 6-5
Lib Dem 8-11
For a bit of an overround...
Note I have NOT looked at the odds whilst doing this exercise. And I'm not offering those odds either.
Revised "Super-ELBOW" for Jan 2015, due to late TNS phone poll. Lab 33.3, Con 32.1, UKIP, 15.2, LD 7.3, Green 6.5
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/562607174619529216