Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The real answer to the “shy Tories” phenomenon is Boris
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The real answer to the “shy Tories” phenomenon is Boris
A lot has been written in the past week about so-called “shy Tories” who are reluctant to tell pollsters on the phone or when they complete online questionnaires that they’ll support the blues.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Also no western government will lift a finger against ISIS, they think they need them as a scarecrow to keep the voters in line and they are not an actual threat.
The absurd demonisation of the Tories by the left leads some people being reluctanct to admit they'd vote Tory.
It's very hard to demonise Boris, with his affable persona (whether you believe it's genuine or not is beside the point). It was very easy to demonise Ken, however.
And that's the answer to the 'discrepancy' in Mike's piece. You're welcome.
This comment is not entirely serious.
First he unveils that George W. Bush is his closest middle east advisor, then he says that he would have invaded Iraq even if he knew what we know now, and finally he accidentally declared his candidacy yesterday.
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/05/jeb-bush-mideast-israeli-adviser-george-w-bush-117829.html
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/note-jeb-bush-days-answers-iraq/story?id=31037863
http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/05/13/us-usa-election-bush-idUSKBN0NY2I620150513
Many are wondering now if Jeb Bush is not actually the smartest of the brothers.
In 1992 it was wrong demographic weightings.
In 2015 it was wrong turnout weightings.
In both occasions the mistake was that the pollsters had the recipe wrong not that people were lying to them.
You can lay him at 3.05 on Betfair - Which I've just done, looks a touch short to me.
Ooh. Len on newsnight
These voters aren't shy Tories. They are people at work, busy living their lives, with no interest in politics, who won't answer a phone pollster or register for an online panel.
Come election time they look around. If they reckon the government (of whatever party) is doing a good job they vote to re-elect them. If they're not, then they vote for the other lot (provided they are credible. If the government and the opposition are both a bit shit they stay at home.
It really is that simple
I can only see a long term way forward and that is to break the misogynistic cultures that exist in that part of the world by continually pushing for the liberation and education of women in those cultures.
Just catching up from the previous thread regarding the Labour Leadership battle.
Some really interesting points made but a few comments / questions.
- 2010 Diane Abbot was included because they "needed" a female candidate-in 2015 I cannot see how Chuka-the only non-white candidate can fail to get the required support to go through.
But he will be as popular in Lancashire as a Yorkshireman and wont win.
-AB is is the only obvious "Northern" (better still Lancastrian) candidate-he goes through
-S
You have 3 women fighting it out for realistically 2 places (although I accept mathematically there are are potentially a further 3 places)
I think YC and MC are the most likely to go through.
-But as was mentioned below this is the most Left wing intake for a very long time-And I am assuming that MP's will have an influence on how their local party will vote-people talk etc.
-I think therefore the most Left wing candidate will garner strong support in all voting sections in the later stages.
-The election is by STV so the order in which candidates fall out is very important. Therefore working out the winner is -in part-working through the the list in reverse order.
Chukka-goes early-possibly even first eviction
His support split mainly between YC and MC as they will come come from London Left
-AB is a mildly Left wing man-question is will enough people vote FOR him? he could easily be the next out-or it could be the continuity candidate YC as the Party want a break from the past.
On the basis IF AB can stay in the race in the first 2 rounds I think he should win-if he doesn't Yvette should on the basis as the other candidates drop out their supporters revert to the mean-ie the middle ground. She has no USP other than she has been around a long time and is well known.
BUT MC could come through the outside on STV - if she can get a bedrock of 25%+ early on she will be hard to beat.
The danger for Labour in a tight race is that the 3rd or 4th placed candidate comes through the middle and "wins" and spends years justifying their position as "least worst candidate"
I am increasingly of the opinion that the leadership battle for Labour is not going to produce a happy outcome-none of the declared runners is either very good or very different.
I agree. Mr Finkelstein is 100% bang on the money as far as I can see. No intricate plotting or secret cabals to "keep Labour out", no Machiavellian manoeuvres - just simple, common, everyday apathy about politics.
We're talking about people who DID respond to pollsters on the phone or registered for an online panel, but said Don't Know.
If you subtract 20% of those who said they would vote under the age of 65 you get closer to the actual result.
The voter turnout by age group of the voter was the only thing affecting the Labour, the Tory and the Green vote which the pollsters missed, while not affecting the LD and the UKIP vote which the pollsters got right.
Like in a Sherlock Holmes novel, the dog that didn't bark gave the solution.
If you are hard at work you don't waste your day on a political blogging website
Although if your wife is watching some utter drivel on the TV you may log-on in the evening
Hunt getting pulled up for not answering... good response from Farage.
So you can't boil it down to two elections, or simply a demonisation of the Tories.
This would assume that Labour people are not shy to tell the pollster their opinions. In my experience very few Labour supporters are shy in telling someone that they support Labour and that Labour's policies are the most fair and just. Lefties just seem to be more politically motivated.
Was he in the Bullingdon Club along with Boris?
On Burnham, he probably was the right leader in 2010 - there's far more to him than people give him credit for on here. He finished fourth because he was seen as a Blairite and those who would've been his base were firmly in the David M camp. Would've provided more of a contrast with Cameron as non-metropolitan and would've almost certainly been more in touch with what was going on on the ground than was the case. Mid-Staffs would've undoubtedly been banged on about by the Tories, but as Burnham ordered an enquiry not long after becoming health secretary it wasn't something he was personally tied to (Alan Johnson, many people's dream ticket could be more criticsised). In 2015 however he's lost the element of being new broom that he'd have provided and will be still be hammered by the Tories as Labour retreating into its past. Whether he wins, and whether he'll be any good is dependent on whether he can transform himself again from the SHS beloved by the party to a purveyor of hard truths.
Cooper - ditto, would've made a strong leader in 2010, now it's fairly clear Labour need to build from scratch to win over people who still think of the party as the 2005-2010 government they've rejected. Unfair, but if Lynton's back in 2020 you can see the smiling Mr Cooper in front of No. 10 daubed on posters now.
Liz Kendall - untested but early signs seem promising, sounds human and seems to have the gift of articulating the right of the Labour party's positions without sounding like she's pining for a lost world or in the wrong party. Midlands MP from outer London so gets the areas Labour needs to improve in. Although once a SPAD, didn't fall out of Oxbridge into a party job. All in all, if she gets big name backing and momentum and isn't squeezed out by Cooper could be the one to beat Burnham.
Ummuna - Nope. Might be a decent appointment as S Chancellor - the role doesn't require the human touch and seems to be popular with business.
Creagh - Surely running to raise her profile, have a good campaign and get a good job. Decent but lacks star quality.
Hunt - Maybe in the days when a 'Tristram' was playing against type, but given that two of the groups of people Labour has to win are specifically annoyed at Labour's perceived poshness, a non-starter (Scots and working class former Lab voters).
Others: Surprised Caroline Flint isn't having a pop. Come too early for Stella Creasy, which is a shame - probably the best candidate for Dep Leader given her campaigning successes, amiability and media qualities.
http://www.lucidtalk.co.uk/yougovs-peter-kellner-on-the-uk-ge2015/
"In retrospect, the 1992 election came just a few weeks too soon for the pollsters. Shortly after Major’s victory, the key findings of the 1991 census were published. These showed that Britain had changed since the previous, 1981, census far more than anybody – well, any social scientist – had realised.
In that Thatcher decade, there had been a sharp reduction in the Labour-inclined working classes and faster growth in the mainly-Tory middle classes. Pollsters all used much the same sampling design, and failed to take adequate account of all this. Had they known what was in the 1991 census, their election figures would not have led them, or us, so far astray. (In retrospect, the 1987 election should have flashed warning signals. The Eighties economic and social revolution was under way, and most polls understated Tory support, probably because the pollsters’ social mix had started to diverge from reality.)"
It really is that simple
Or simply that working people are too busy and tired to vote on a working day, that is why turnout was 10% lower than what the polls said.
If you subtract 20% of those who said they would vote under the age of 65 you get closer to the actual result.
The voter turnout by age group of the voter was the only thing affecting the Labour, the Tory and the Green vote which the pollsters missed, while not affecting the LD and the UKIP vote which the pollsters got right.
Like in a Sherlock Holmes novel, the dog that didn't bark gave the solution.
I haven't seen the figures but how did postal votes in 2010 compare to 2015-I wonder if the tighter rules had an impact on the Postal vote factories??
I may be having a brain fade, but who the hell is MC?
Mary Creagh
If @bbcquestiontime was on ITV, Farage could resign at the end of each segment & be leader again by the time they came back after the break
In any other party he'd been an entirely busted flush... But in UKIP... He may just get away with it.
I thought you were supposed to be a Tory!
@iainmartin1: Peak Farage. He's had it. @bbcquestiontime
Worst outcome for Labour obviously.
Genuine question. Must people interested in politics, ie people that post on here, are on twitter and will be following political news. Why do you post them on here as if it's some kind of scoop or a service you are providing?
They're just the same thing said a dozen different ways most of the time and often the first one is a repeat if you're on twitter
If they don't then they will drift and the referendum will be lost because the Out side will be fatally fractured.
IF AB already has 70 nominations of support then clearly he is the man to beat-but do 70+-ie 25% + of the PLP think AB is the Leader and Solution to their problems???
If they do, the PLP is up shit creek with no paddle and no map.
1997: 26,662
2001: 17,170
2005: 14,760
2010: 12,605
2015: 12,220
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stoke-on-Trent_Central_(UK_Parliament_constituency)#Elections_in_the_2010s
China and NAFTA are a bigger market that the EU.