Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » All current surveys with CON leads are from pollsters whic
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » All current surveys with CON leads are from pollsters which’ve been tested in a GE unlike all but one of those with LAB leads
Make of this what you will and it might just be a huge coincidence but there appears to be a split between the pollsters that have been tested in a general election and those that haven’t.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11434695/Over-a-quarter-of-British-Muslims-have-sympathy-for-the-Charlie-Hebdo-terrorists.-That-is-far-too-many.html
Unless the firms come into line someones going to get fingers burnt this time. The demographics in 2015 are so different. Onliners are almost all politically aware & older non-workers non-swing voters. Phones? I mean who uses a landline these days? And mobiles make geo-local sampling nigh imposs.
Next throw into the pond fact that no-one's talking about the election. Except here and Westminster.
Unsure what to make of it right now & urge some betting caution until the waters clear maybe post Easter.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31623659
Ahem.
I doubt the compulsory levy idea will be very popular amongst the public. Neither will moving to a subscriptions service with the need for everyone to get new set top boxes - only a few years after we all went digital. Besides, removing free-to-air would make the BBC like all the other competing services and drive an HGV-sized hole through their finances.
So we're faced with either a massively unpopular compulsory levy or something that will cost the public a fortune and will remove the BBC's USP.
The BBC as we know it is dying. It will live on in some reduced form, but the Auntie we knew and loved is in its dotage.
Which is sad, as I like the BBC and don't mind paying the licence fee.
Besides, one of the things being proposed is that it would be a compulsory household levy, which would mean that the 20% who did not want it are screwed.
(Among PB TOTY recipients)
The HoCs Culture, Media and Sport Committee concluded that the best alternative to the licence fee would be a compulsory broadcasting levy paid by all households, regardless of whether they watch TV, or how they watch.
Strikes me as a very odd proposal - If TV ownership is excluded from the equation for paying what is now the TV tax, what you are left with is BBC taxation in perpetuity. - f'k that for a game of soldiers.
I would miss their radio. But locking people up for not paying the licence fee is an abomination and has to stop.
'I think they want a compulsory levy - one might almost call it a BBC Tax. I really do not think the BBC get it. The internet is killing it off in its current form - and good riddance too.'
What is so special about the BBC that it doesn't have to compete & has to be funded by a tax?
Having said that, they have it in Germany, at a rate of around 18 euros per month (more expensive than the BBC's licence fee), but the German fee funds two organisations.
And there's the nub. *If* it was to happen, then other services should be able to apply for a slice as long as they fulfil certain 'public' criteria. But the BBC would have to do that as well.
As it is, it would be an utterly anti-competitive in a rapidly fragmenting market (both in terms of content and delivery), It'd be madness, and a massive political hot potato.
This election is very difficult to call. My expectation is that at some point the pollsters will huddle together for warmth and protection from the big bad electorate to avoid looking particularly stupid. No one will want to look particularly stupid. Its bad for business.
Whether they will huddle in the right place is of course anyone's guess but it will probably have some effect on the result.
"Straw clutching" the art of gaining large sums of money whilst a Member of Parliament"
You should write Dan Hodges gags for for him.
I've reconciled myself to five more years but this time without Lib Dem involvement. There's never been a better time to be rich or a newspaper proprietor or a tax avoider. Dig in folks!
I do find it bizarre that polls are judged on anything other than a trend over time. The problem with whatever methodology His Lordship is using is that trends are much more difficult to ascertain. This may be down to changes in who is doing his polling for him. I think all we can say for now is that it appears to fully use all the bandwidth of margin and error - and some.
I also wonder to what extent polls are tweaked to provide an answer nearer that it perceives its client wants to get. So for example, do they worry a leftish paper might not continue employing a firm that comes up with polling good for Conservatives/UKIP? You would hope note, but it is a doubt that never quite goes away.
RBS posts 7th annual loss in a row with another £ 3.5bn down the Swannee.
This was helped by £2.2bn of fines from "bankers' ethics" issues. So far the bank has lost £50bn since 2008.
On the bright side the Chairman says the strategy is working ( WTF? ),
Colombian drug cartels ask him what he's on as they can see a fantastic new product line for distribution.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/banksandfinance/11436222/RBS-posts-seventh-straight-annual-loss.html
What will happen is:
- funding from central government to a Public Broadcasting Trust
- PBT funds (a) public service broadcasting - the stuff I suspect you like about the BBC; and (b) for a transition period - say 3 years - gives the BBC a declining income stream
- BBC then spins off into a commercial organisation. I mean, why are we being forced to pay for a lot of the rubbish on BBC1. I don't remember the last time I watched it personally & if they want to compete with ITV then they should be funded like ITV (or Sky)
- public service broadcasting pot is available for anyone to pitch for (and may be they have their own PBS channel) to fund interesting programmes that fall within the remit
Still much still to do to clear up the mess left by the last management team.
Tic toc.
I seem to recall that for some by-elections this parliament, some pollsters issued initial polls which were wildly inaccurate but their subsequent polls just before the by-election were much closer to the result.
"once again our brilliant financial sector shows why we need it so much.
RBS posts 7th annual loss in a row with another £ 3.5bn down the Swannee.
This was helped by £2.2bn of fines from "bankers' ethics" issues. So far the bank has lost £50bn since 2008."
Don't be so parsimonious. We're all Tories now
http://www.aronline.co.uk/blogs/archive/archive-british-leyland-turns-in-loss-of-more-than-123m-for-the-year/
World War 2 only lasted 6 years
Since 2008 we are now on management team 2, 3, 4 ? so which ones are the current bunch cleaning up after ?
And more to the point are you forecasting a profit next year ?
For 5 years you and I have been banging on about RBS with you telling me I don't understand banking and it will be all right this time next year. Well yet anotrher year has gone by and your record needle is still stuck.
Break it up and move on, the taxpayer has been fleeced and will never get his money back.
But the share price is back above 400p which suggests progress is being made
http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/feb/27/rbs-bonuses-loss-pay-market-rate
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11435529/Britains-brightest-leaving-in-brain-drain-and-replaced-with-low-skilled-migrants.html
F1: Alonso's sitting this test out, and has been replaced (for the test) by Kevin Magnussen.
On-topic: the 7 point Labour leads look a bit silly. It does seem more or less level-pegging overall.
Indeed. A shocking condemnation of British business culture.
"What would be useful would be a repeat of the "accuracy" chart showing how accurate a prediction the pollsters were 2 months before GE 2010 compared to the actual result,"
A quick look at the chart for late Feb 2010 shows it to be TNS. So using that yardstick I'd say Labour with a majority that should see them through till about 2025.
Don't choke on your porridge
" progress is being made"
it's like a communique from Passchendale
I just love the way the left blame the right when it all goes wrong. Despite the prawn cocktail circuits and the banks being the lefts best buddies for 13 years.
All easily allow Ed Miliband and the Rainbow Coalition to rule for five
glorious years
Cameron needs to have a coalition total above 50% to get into power
unless he gets 40% on his own and since the coalition hasnt
had that level since late 2010 then the fact still remains that bar
a very good campaign for the Blues or a very bad campaign for
the natural party of Government then Dave will be out in a couple
of months
“Women are just one of a number of groups that tend not to vote for Ukip. Others include young people, those with university degrees, and ethnic minorities, who tend not to be concerned over immigration and Europe.
Indeed, an excellent question. The state could have done it - as owners of Lloyds and RBS. I'm sure St Vince Cable would have been up for it. Perhaps it looked too complicated. Or perhaps the fiasco at Co-Op bank warned ministers off the idea of smaller banks with more community-minded aims.
Personally, I have long been in favour of Will Hutton's idea of regional banks, along the lines of those in Germany (although some of them were also up to their necks in the US housing scam if I remember rightly).
"It is ridiculous that people who do not want to receive the BBC's services are made to pay for them anyway."
Is it? We pay for art galleries that we don't visit. We pay for roads we don't drive down. We subsidize theatres that we never go near....the BBC is much more accessable and worthwhile than many things we pay for but don't use. If the BBC's output isn't to everyone's taste then do something about it (though the overwhelming evidence is that it is).
Imagine if everyone were forced, by law, to pay a levy for my books, regardless of whether they wanted to read them!
Wait a minute...
"The MPs suggested every household could pay a new compulsory levy instead."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31623659
That's unjustifiable.
Hodges might as well write an article complaining about cigarettes not doing enough in the war against lung cancer
However, it may be worth checking the odds on him not to be classified, when the Betfair market gets going.
It isn't.
If the taxpayer via HMG is offering loans and guarantees ( currently we're on the hook for £1trn ) and is in effect their bank, then like any bank HMG can call in loans to protect its interest and force a restructuring. The shareholders just have to stand back and suck it up or come up with more money of their own.
Williams & Glyn
Plus Shawbrook, Aldermore, Metro
Cameron could get back into power on 35% of the vote.
"Oh dear... no ifs, no buts.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11435529/Britains-brightest-leaving-in-brain-drain-and-replaced-with-low-skilled-migrants.html
One in ten of Britain’s best workers have been lured from the UK in a brain drain and been replaced by low skilled migrants, research has found.
The country’s most highly skilled workers are emigrating because they can earn more money and enjoy better standards of living overseas, according to University College London.
Dr John Jerrim, of the UCL Institute of Education, said: “Immigrants account for one in four of the 9.6 million working age adults living in the United Kingdom with low level numeracy skills."
We create a culture where everyone is for sale to the highest bidder which is apparently why we pay crap bankers a fortune and then we blame the country for not making them even more comfortable so they do us the honour of not emigrating. Wouldn't it be better to change the greedy Thatcherite culture? Go visit Cuba and see a country where surgeons are paid the same as road sweepers but stay because they like the country and like helping people.
26/02/2015 07:49
Immigration now higher than when Coalition took power in 2010, figures expected to reveal today sunpl.us/60140QHI
The question that needs answer is this: what is the purpose of the BBC? If it is to deliver high-quality programming then it generally works: I could complain about Eastenders and Strictly, but others love them and hate some of the things I like (e.g. BBC 4).
When the BBC was set up, it was a sensible way of providing high-quality content, first on the radio, and then TV. But the world is different now, and ITV, Sky, Channel 4 and increasingly t'Internet are all capable of producing high-quality TV programs.
And that's the problem: the BBC is not the only way of delivering high-quality content any more, and treating them as if they are is damaging to everyone.
Mostly for not paying the licence fee or sticking to the speed limit I suppose... And of course factor in the Mets institutional racism
"More than a quarter of London’s prison population are Muslims, prompting urgent calls for an inquiry into what is happening in the justice system.
Official figures have revealed that record levels of Muslim people are serving jail sentences and that the numbers are still growing. Across England and Wales the proportion has risen from eight per cent a decade ago to 14 per cent now.
In London, the figure is an “astonishing” 27 per cent, which is more than double the 12 per cent of the capital’s population who are Muslim. In two prisons, Feltham and Isis, a third of the inmates were Muslim."
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/calls-for-inquiry-as-figures-show-27-of-londons-prisoners-are-muslim-9221167.html
That's odd given F1 car safety features. Some people are wondering if he got an electrical shock from the KERS system (perfectly possible), but again, the after-effects seem rather lingering to this non-expert.
Putting my tinfoil-hat on: I really hope to God that this is not the case, but might it be similar to the Richard Burns situation?
"if you choose not to visit Ludlow it's your loss Roger"
I know. They need an advertising campaign.....
"You can see lots more on a Ludlow tour............"
There is a clear objective in place to separate risk-led banking from the utility banking and I think that is absolutely the right model to follow. There's also a case for some regional banks (although I'd rather than national banks with a hub in one or two regions - otherwise everyone is going to be chasing into London rather than focusing on their core). But these things take time.
with each other so dont add them together
Secondly the DUP have voted with Labour on most issues this
parliament
Thirdly then you are left with Cam on 35% down 2 Libs on about
9 % down 13...with Alexander, Swinson and probably Clegg gone
and you are going to sell that to the country as having been given
another mandate to govern?
Good luck with that!!
The line is that the very high winds screwed the aerodynamics, he hit the wall and got concussion.
I do not believe McLaren would lie about this (reputational damage would be significant) but there might be aspects that have not yet been made public. I'm not sure about an electric shock being involved. They've used KERS and ERS for a few years now and I've never heard of such an incident (inside the cockpit).
However, it does seem rather peculiar.
I think the BBC is a national institution without which Britain would be a poorer place to live. You could draw similarities with institutions such as the National Trust and the RSPB. Neither of those are funded by a compulsory household levy, though.
the Libs losing 30 plus seats to Lab/SNP whilst Labour only lose seats.to
their Coalition partners then the shabby coalition of peoples
votes who voted for opposite things seems certain to be
replaced by a coalition of peoples votes who at least broadly
agree on a left of centre approach to things
But of course the campaign can still change things
Events dear boy Events and all that jazz
There is an argument for a limited Free Service. News, Children, Current Affairs, some sport designated free to air and some other bits no doubt, including some regional programs.
There is no logic in 4 TV stations, 1 is adequate, sell the rest.
Keep 3 National Radio stations, sell the rest.
Good QT panel as well, Shapps, Reeves, Munt, Reckless...
I'm not sure where the truth lies from the various polls either. Possibly a tiny CON lead, possibly a small LAB lead - in the scheme of things it doesn't matter very much but I suppose it's a bit of a virility test for the partisans.
As I've often said, ICM does throw out occasional outlier numbers so we'll see if it's CON +4 lead is maintained next month.
All the seat permutation theories make huge assumptions as to what parties will do as distinct from what they say now. I can't speak for the SNP or DUP let alone UKIP but from an LD perspective I don't believe the Party will want to enter into any kind of formal Coalition or even S&C with either a minority LAB or CON Government. That doesn't mean they would actively vote to bring them down on a Confidence issue - the party would abstain and let others find the numbers.
As for negotiation, I'd simply tell the Conservatives - "if you want your Euro Refrendum, you can have it but you have to introduce STV for all elections without a Referendum".
I'd tell Labour "if you want your Mansion Tax, you can have it but you have to introduce STV for all elections without a Referendum."
That would at least have the advantage of keeping the negotiations short and not keeping Nicola Sturgeon waiting.
nonentity as well as robot voiced alkie Reckless?
Hardly Galloway v the Zionists or Brand v Farage is it?
we;ve thrown two deck chairs off the Titanic and expect it to refloat.
Now I am super critical of the BBC, but those that love it, the licence fee is already totally unenforceable. The world has changed, we don't all huddle around the big old moving picture box in the corner of the living room to choose from 3 channels.
There are already a host of ways of watching the BBC and its output without the infamous detector van knowing you have done so, iPlayer is legal to watch on catchup without the licence (yes they talk about that in the report and I will come on to that), and it is only going to get worse and worse as mobile internet in a few years will many many times faster than even our current home broadband. Furthermore, Geo-location can also easily be defeated, so it is very easy for people to watch BBC output from abroad without ever having paid.
Then what are they going to do about iPlayer, ask you to put in some licence code? Well that will cost to implement and enforce, and there are already plenty of places where you can access BBC programs within minutes of broadcast at a higher quality than iPlayer, and this will just get worse.
This report is basically the head in the sand approach that the music and movie industry took for far too long (and the movie industry still does far too much of), before realising that they just couldn't enforce their old business models any longer and have / are adapting.
It is now totally bizarre model that you have to pay a licence if you ever turn on a tv or radio, even if you are using the service you are paying for and there are 999 other channels on that device like this. As I said earlier we aren't talking about paying a fee to fund basically all the output from the single static media device.