politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The official investigation into the GE2015 polling fail has

SystemSystem Posts: 12,293
edited 2016 19 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The official investigation into the GE2015 polling fail has, as expected, put the blame on unrepresentative samples

There’s a conference in London this afternoon which I will be attending.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    First!
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Second.
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,641
    First - after spiral of silence adjustment :lol:
    PClipp said:

    First!

  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    So in essence garbage in garbage out



  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,624
    And in other news I can exclusively reveal that the pope is catholic....bears shit in woods....
  • weejonnieweejonnie Posts: 3,820
    Tim_B said:

    So in essence garbage in garbage out



    But the question is whether the garbage was intentional - to boost Labour.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,107
    Yes, but as all you others are over-represented nutters, you can be downweighted, making me first.
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited 2016 19
    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    That's a decent enough theory, as the Lib Dems were indeed overestimated in 2010, with Labour slightly underestimated iirc.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    The TRUE sample size of a phone poll (No of attempted contacts) should also be given out in the tables methinks (Online has issues of it's own so this wouldn't be appropriate).

    If say 8000 people are ontacted, 250 Labour voters found and 240 Tories - we can form a better true MoE picture than the given 1000 sample size....
  • Tim_BTim_B Posts: 7,669
    Glenn Frey is a desperado already gone to the hotel California taking it easy with a tequila sunrise
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 78,753
    Tim_B said:

    Glenn Frey is a desperado already gone to the hotel California taking it easy with a tequila sunrise

    Indeed.

    RIP.
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 23,107
    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    I agree with your first paragraph. Unfortunately I also agree with your second.
  • RobDRobD Posts: 60,233
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    First - after spiral of silence adjustment :lol:

    PClipp said:

    First!

    First! (Based on SNP projections)
  • Sunil_PrasannanSunil_Prasannan Posts: 52,641
    Watching David Bowie in "The Man Who Fell To Earth" on Horror Channel (Freeview 70)
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    Worth re-reading the BES summary too - which appears to be in line with the toplines here:

    http://www.britishelectionstudy.com/bes-resources/why-the-polls-got-it-wrong-and-the-british-election-study-face-to-face-survey-got-it-almost-right/#.Vp2lcDaSckw


    In other news - interesting blog from Le Monde - and if this view is widely held across Europe, I suspect our neighbours don't understand us at all:

    The main opponents of the EU.....are regressive Tories who speak for a considerable proportion of voters (Labour as well as Conservative) and who still have not come to terms with Britain’s drastically diminished power and influence since the long gone days of Empire.

    So its our fault for not coming to terms with our place in the world?

    Nowt to do with free movement of Labour into one of the EU's most successful economies and home of the global lingua franca......

    https://mondediplo.com/blogs/brexit-the-challenge-for-europe
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    Sunil_Prasannan said:

    Watching David Bowie in "The Man Who Fell To Earth" on Horror Channel (Freeview 70)

    Roeg is a great director. Bad Timing is another interesting piece of work by him.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    How long before our friends on the Left in Scotland who vote SNP finally twig that the SNP is all about middle class perks?

    Nicola Sturgeon has been challenged to match "record with rhetoric" on tax in the first debate between party leaders ahead of the Holyrood elections in May.

    The SNP leader and First Minister came under pressure to set out "progressive" policies during the event hosted by Dundee University Students' Association.

    SNP plans to cut air passenger duty (APD) were criticised by opposition leaders during the debate at the University of Dundee.

    http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/14213125.Nicola_Sturgeon_challenged_on_tax_at_leaders__debate/?ref=mr&lp=9
  • redcliffe62redcliffe62 Posts: 342
    I agree with much of the above. The last minute media barrage was in some ways similar to the barrage at indyref which swayed 4 or 5% of the most influenced non anoraks i.e. gullible late on. I suspect people wanted to vote for indy and wanted to vote for Labour but to be on "safe side" voted for the party which seemed to be most popular in media. That was enough to skew results. People knew Miliband was rubbish but most had no idea why he was rubbish except the papers told him so. Focus groups failed on Sturgeon so attacked Salmond with less success. Just a theory but the gullible who bother to vote do follow like sheep and regret it afterwards.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 53,362
    edited 2016 19
    First - based on the Laughably Optimistic UKIP Seat Expectations (LOUSE) Index)
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited 2016 19
    Slowest Chinese growth for 25 years at 6.9%:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-35349576
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    It's just a tad quiet politically right now - just the sort of time for PB's very own tennis expert Henry G Manson to spread a little happiness with a couple of tennis tips from the Australian Open if he feels so inclined.
  • peter_from_putneypeter_from_putney Posts: 6,956
    edited 2016 19
    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    Indeed .... what some might call "unshy" (if such a word exists) or perhaps more correctly bold or upfront LibDems in 2010 and Labour supporters in 2015.
    With very few exceptions, Tories seldom proclaim their political support by shouting about it from the rooftops, it's simply not their style. This is nothing new.
    Perhaps the pollsters (and indeed OGH for that matter) are seeking more complicated explanations which simply don't exist.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    Someone should charge the pollsters with animal cruelty. Poor old Basil was shifting those goalposts for the crossover when he could have been safely up his tree, having gathered enough Crobynites for winter ... :)
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    redcliffe62 said:

    I agree with much of the above. The last minute media barrage was in some ways similar to the barrage at indyref which swayed 4 or 5% of the most influenced non anoraks i.e. gullible late on. I suspect people wanted to vote for indy and wanted to vote for Labour but to be on "safe side" voted for the party which seemed to be most popular in media. That was enough to skew results. People knew Miliband was rubbish but most had no idea why he was rubbish except the papers told him so. Focus groups failed on Sturgeon so attacked Salmond with less success. Just a theory but the gullible who bother to vote do follow like sheep and regret it afterwards.

    Wasn't the Scottish Independence polling equally dire, especially as it was a much simpler binary-choice question?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560
  • AndyJSAndyJS Posts: 29,395
    edited 2016 19
    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Baroness Warsi in particular should be ashamed of herself.
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    The same has been said about BBC Question Time, the same Mr & Mrs Guardian are much more likely to want tickets, and MUCH more likely to have a view, and feel that the rest of the world is desperate to know what it is.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    Trouble at t'mill:

    http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2016/01/18/a-reply-to-james-kelly/

    Now who would have thought James Kelly to be a pompous self important precious drama queen?

    Quite the revelation!

    So, to add to Labour internal warfare we can add Nats - basically between 'broad church' and 'one true faith Nicola is my saviour'........
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Tim_B said:

    Glenn Frey is a desperado already gone to the hotel California taking it easy with a tequila sunrise

    He took it to the limit, but although there's heartache tonight, in the long run he'll have that peaceful easy feeling.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    It looks like some GM Zafira diesels are also using defeat devices...
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    JosiasJessop said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Baroness Warsi in particular should be ashamed of herself.
    If there were other groups of people where greater numbers couldn't speak English, then they'd have a point, but this is atrocious special pleading by the 'I hate Cameron' brigade.....
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    There is no 'veil ban' - he explicitly ruled out going down the French route - but did make comments on schools.

    If you think he's suddenly become interested in improving the lot of disadvantaged minorities you haven't been paying attention.....
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    rcs1000 said:

    It looks like some GM Zafira diesels are also using defeat devices...

    Really?

    If true this backs up my suspicion, mentioned when the VW scandal emerged, that it had not come to light earlier because many//all of the major manufacturers were cheating, if not in the same way.

    My reasoning being that each large manufacturer would do a tear-down of their competitors' products to see exactly what they were doing and learn from it, and it was unlikely that they would not have found VW's defeat device. This is particularly true as they'd want to know how VW were meeting the difficult standards.

    If that's the case, there's only one reason for them to remain silent: they were also cheating in some way, and it was a case of MAD. If (say) GM reported VW, then either VW would report GM, or external bodies would examine all cars, including GM, more closely...
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    It looks like some GM Zafira diesels are also using defeat devices...

    Oops.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    JosiasJessop said:

    rcs1000 said:

    It looks like some GM Zafira diesels are also using defeat devices...

    Really?

    If true this backs up my suspicion, mentioned when the VW scandal emerged, that it had not come to light earlier because many//all of the major manufacturers were cheating, if not in the same way.

    My reasoning being that each large manufacturer would do a tear-down of their competitors' products to see exactly what they were doing and learn from it, and it was unlikely that they would not have found VW's defeat device. This is particularly true as they'd want to know how VW were meeting the difficult standards.

    If that's the case, there's only one reason for them to remain silent: they were also cheating in some way, and it was a case of MAD. If (say) GM reported VW, then either VW would report GM, or external bodies would examine all cars, including GM, more closely...
    There's a story on Belgian radio this morning, apparently, that Opel dealers have been sent software updates to be installed on all Zafira 1.6 turbodiesels. When it is installed, NoX emissions drop, as does performance.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    rcs1000 said:

    It looks like some GM Zafira diesels are also using defeat devices...

    Its the cover up that gets em.......

    http://gmauthority.com/blog/2015/12/opel-reaffirms-its-diesels-do-not-over-pollute/
  • tlg86tlg86 Posts: 26,346
    So can TSE please apologise to those of us who called the pollsters out for herding?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Ken couldn't spend all his time sympathising with visiting terrorists.....
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Indigo said:

    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    The same has been said about BBC Question Time, the same Mr & Mrs Guardian are much more likely to want tickets, and MUCH more likely to have a view, and feel that the rest of the world is desperate to know what it is.
    Perhaps the next Tory manifesto will call for the Guardian to be suppressed.

    As I have said here many times before, unless you are a Tory, you are a traitor. And traitors should be hanged, and hanged high.

    Preferably by loyal citizens, rather than supinely waiting for the State to act.

    Any Peebie who has made more than 10,000 posts should be ABOVE THE LAW!!!
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    CarlottaVance said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    There is no 'veil ban' - he explicitly ruled out going down the French route - but did make comments on schools.

    If you think he's suddenly become interested in improving the lot of disadvantaged minorities you haven't been paying attention.....
    I think you're missing the point, I agree wholeheartedly with what Cameron has said, my point is if Farage had said it there would be outrage.

    The people you're referring to don't hate Cameron, they just can't bear to have their own prejudices addressed.

  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    blackburn63 said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    There is no 'veil ban' - he explicitly ruled out going down the French route - but did make comments on schools.

    If you think he's suddenly become interested in improving the lot of disadvantaged minorities you haven't been paying attention.....
    I think you're missing the point, I agree wholeheartedly with what Cameron has said, my point is if Farage had said it there would be outrage.

    I don't think that's anything dubious, simply a question of perceived motive - it's why brand positioning is so important.

    For instance the Mail and the Spectator often share articles (they are differently written but by the same author and have the same prescription). Given the Spectator's branding they are seen as challenging/provoking; in the Mail the same article is viewed as pandering to its readers' prejudices.

    Cameron is a centrist politician so if he stretches to the right* it's because he is seeking a solution to a problem and reaching for the most appropriate tool. Farage is perceived as a right winger, so clearly the same policy is just part of his plan to do down immigrants.


    * For the sake of argument: I don't think Cameron's policy is particularly right or left wing
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 60,281
    Schools should be free to ban Muslim girls from wearing face veils during lessons, the head of the education watchdog has said.

    Ofsted inspectors have found the coverings are causing communication problems in the classroom on occasion, according to Sir Michael Wilshaw.

    It comes after David Cameron said he would back institutions that have "sensible rules" over Muslims wearing full-face veils.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/education/schools-should-be-free-to-ban-muslim-girls-from-wearing-veils-ofsted-chief-says-a3159646.html
  • JohnLilburneJohnLilburne Posts: 6,372
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?
  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,302
    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    Charles said:

    blackburn63 said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    There is no 'veil ban' - he explicitly ruled out going down the French route - but did make comments on schools.

    If you think he's suddenly become interested in improving the lot of disadvantaged minorities you haven't been paying attention.....
    I think you're missing the point, I agree wholeheartedly with what Cameron has said, my point is if Farage had said it there would be outrage.

    I don't think that's anything dubious, simply a question of perceived motive - it's why brand positioning is so important.

    For instance the Mail and the Spectator often share articles (they are differently written but by the same author and have the same prescription). Given the Spectator's branding they are seen as challenging/provoking; in the Mail the same article is viewed as pandering to its readers' prejudices.

    Cameron is a centrist politician so if he stretches to the right* it's because he is seeking a solution to a problem and reaching for the most appropriate tool. Farage is perceived as a right winger, so clearly the same policy is just part of his plan to do down immigrants.


    * For the sake of argument: I don't think Cameron's policy is particularly right or left wing
    My point is that people will take a view dependent on who said it rather than what is said.

    You only have to read this blog, otherwise intelligent and rational people lose their senses over politicians, it's absurd.

  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    JohnLilburne said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?
    Because it's a vicious leftie plot.

  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    I'm not sure of your point, mine is that a large % of foreign aid goes missing, it's ridiculous virtue signalling by politicians perfectly happy to waste our money.

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,451
    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    It didn't surprise Crosby which shows how ridiculous our politicians are. His private polling was accurate, others relied on focus groups and sycophants hoping for a job.

  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,354
    I am at least one of the last people to stand up for pollsters but I do think that there are two different effects being conflated here which exaggerated the error. The main reason the polls were "wrong" is that people took their results and applied extremely inaccurate universal swing models to them. This made Labour the largest party and Ed PM. (EICIPM rings a bell).

    In 2015 the bias in the system in favour of Labour was much reduced and the Tory vote became much more efficient. This partly happened as a result of the massacre of the innocents but it also happened because almost all of the modest gain in Labour votes happened in safe seats, especially in London. The massacre of the incompetents in Scotland also played an important part of course.

    Labour still gained from the system, if the Tories had lost by the same margin I suspect they would have been struggling to get 200 again, but much less than before. If the bias had remained as great as it was in 2005 or even 2010 then the implications of underestimating the Tory share by 3-4% would have been much less and there would have been less angst.

    Personally, I am convinced that herding took place. The repressed (but accurate) poll, the falling into line of ICM (which, if anything, indicated a late swing the other way) and the consistency of results reported all strongly indicate that. I do not believe for a second this was driven by political bias. I think it was driven by an already existing anxiety about the quality of the samples, uncertainty about how adjustments should be made (we saw several changes in the run up) and a commercial imperative of not being out of step and "wrong".
  • Blue_rogBlue_rog Posts: 2,019
    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    Ooh err 1.4/9 doesn't equal 33%
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,548
    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    I don't think it has. He made a speech on integration and extremism shortly after the election which covered similar ground. If anything, it shows that he is taking this seriously and understands that if you're going to undermine the forces which make it easier for extremism to develop you need to have a range of measures and not just focus on the security issues. The key is not what he says but whether there is effective follow through.

    But in any case it is a self evident truism that people living in a country should speak its language. It is an utter disgrace that there should be women living here for 40 years or more who do not speak English - the daughter of one such was interviewed on the news last night. And the judgment in the Tower Hamlets voting scandal also described this same phenomenon.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    blackburn63 said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    It didn't surprise Crosby which shows how ridiculous our politicians are. His private polling was accurate, others relied on focus groups and sycophants hoping for a job.

    And/or the media are now reliant on Crosby telling them what a great job Crosby did.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,548
    JohnLilburne said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?
    Indeed, why should we let in immigrants who don't speak the language in the first place?
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    In meaningful social research, based on a properly randomised sample, there is a clear pecking order in terms of who is easy to reach as well as who is likely to participate and give up their time for the research.

    Pensioners are the easiest to contact and are most likely to help unless they are very elderly, disabled etc.

    After that it is easy to contact public sector workers and part timers as well as benefit recipients.

    People working in the private sector, working full office hours plus commute, are difficult to reach and less willing to give up time.

    Full time self employed tradesmen, business owners etc are the hardest to contact and gain participation from.

    Voting intention polls are likely to experience the same problems, and end up with a skew that is reflective of that contact pattern.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,354
    Having caught up with the thread I think that the reason that Crosby was more accurate was mainly the first effect I have described.

    He skilfully and carefully targeted Tory resources to ensure that their vote became more efficient and that they won votes where they actually needed to. As he was not applying the grossly inaccurate Universal Swing models he could be confident that the Tories would do far, far better in terms of seats than was being indicated, even without the error in the polling.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 25,548
    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    OT MI5 is Britain's most gay friendly employer
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35345515

    But isn't that Antifrank's mob at number five? (And number two in Scotland.)
    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/top_100_employers_2016.pdf

    Tower Hamlets is fifth in local government, which might surprise a few people.

    The top government organisations section has a 1,2 for Wales with the National Assembly for Wales narrowly beating the Welsh Government. The Home Office is separately listed as a star performer.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Muslims don't want to immigrate into England. They - or most of them, at least* - want to conquer it. They just don't have the power to do so - yet.

    *Otherwise they become ex-Muslims, like Saqid Javid.
  • blackburn63blackburn63 Posts: 4,492
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    blackburn63 said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    It didn't surprise Crosby which shows how ridiculous our politicians are. His private polling was accurate, others relied on focus groups and sycophants hoping for a job.

    And/or the media are now reliant on Crosby telling them what a great job Crosby did.
    Nobody can dispute what a great job he did, he was employed to win the election.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,842
    Cyclefree said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.

    Clearly it is wrong that people of either sex can spend years living in this country without learning to speak English. However, dismissing all those who have concerns about Cameron's plans as patriachs and vested interests is not the way forward. If we are serious about this, it is something that should be discussed and implemented as effectively as possible. The goal, surely, is to make sure that everyone learns to speak English, not to score political points.

  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,842
    DavidL said:

    Having caught up with the thread I think that the reason that Crosby was more accurate was mainly the first effect I have described.

    He skilfully and carefully targeted Tory resources to ensure that their vote became more efficient and that they won votes where they actually needed to. As he was not applying the grossly inaccurate Universal Swing models he could be confident that the Tories would do far, far better in terms of seats than was being indicated, even without the error in the polling.

    It seemed obvious to me that Labour was going to do much worse than the polls suggested. Ed Miliband was unelectable. It was that simple. But turning most seats into an overall majority was a triumph of effective and targeted campaigning. Crosby did brilliantly.
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 54,354
    Cyclefree said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    ?

    Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.
    I think this is the key point. Cameron is challenging a patriarchal mindset that treats a significant number of UK citizens as second class. In doing so he is of course attacking the multicultural nonsense that tolerated that state of affairs for far too long, hence the squeals from the Guardianistas.

    More power to his elbow I say. Communities that remain detached from the mainstream will indeed have a greater propensity to nurture and create extremists who hold those mainstream values in contempt. If we are to defeat home grown terrorism we need to ensure that all of our population is inculcated in our essential values and willing to stand up for them when some sad nutter deludes himself. As Cameron said yesterday women have a very important role in preventing the creation of that mindset in the first place.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,276
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    OT MI5 is Britain's most gay friendly employer
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35345515

    But isn't that Antifrank's mob at number five? (And number two in Scotland.)
    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/top_100_employers_2016.pdf

    Tower Hamlets is fifth in local government, which might surprise a few people.

    The top government organisations section has a 1,2 for Wales with the National Assembly for Wales narrowly beating the Welsh Government. The Home Office is separately listed as a star performer.

    The RAF, meanwhile, seems to be a cesspit of intolerance.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,842
    JohnLilburne said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?

    I'd hazard that most people travelling on the tube are either tourists or speak sufficient English anyway. The people this initiative is aimed at would tend not to travel on the tube.

  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,276
    SouthamObserver said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.

    Clearly it is wrong that people of either sex can spend years living in this country without learning to speak English. However, dismissing all those who have concerns about Cameron's plans as patriachs and vested interests is not the way forward. If we are serious about this, it is something that should be discussed and implemented as effectively as possible. The goal, surely, is to make sure that everyone learns to speak English, not to score political points.

    The goal, surely, is to make sure that no one who lives in this country wants to blow us up. Cam I think has played this well as the issue is littered with boobytraps. Do I care that a Fujianese grandmother living in Mile End has never learned English? Does anyone?

    Meanwhile CiF are just about united that his initiative is a good idea.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    JosiasJessop said:

    redcliffe62 said:

    I agree with much of the above. The last minute media barrage was in some ways similar to the barrage at indyref which swayed 4 or 5% of the most influenced non anoraks i.e. gullible late on. I suspect people wanted to vote for indy and wanted to vote for Labour but to be on "safe side" voted for the party which seemed to be most popular in media. That was enough to skew results. People knew Miliband was rubbish but most had no idea why he was rubbish except the papers told him so. Focus groups failed on Sturgeon so attacked Salmond with less success. Just a theory but the gullible who bother to vote do follow like sheep and regret it afterwards.

    Wasn't the Scottish Independence polling equally dire, especially as it was a much simpler binary-choice question?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_Scottish_independence_referendum,_2014
    Add the DKs to the No vote and it was spot on.
  • SouthamObserverSouthamObserver Posts: 39,842
    The goal, surely, is to make sure that no one who lives in this country wants to blow us up. Cam I think has played this well as the issue is littered with boobytraps. Do I care that a Fujianese grandmother living in Mile End has never learned English? Does anyone?

    Meanwhile CiF are just about united that his initiative is a good idea.



    The evidence seems to indicate that all those in this country who want to blow us up and kill us speak very good English.

    For me, this is not about terrorism it is about the simple fact that if you choose to make your home here you should speak our language.

  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    @DPJHodges: We are seriously meant to believe all polling companies all coincidently made the same sampling error, but only for the final poll.

    Well, quite...
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    OT MI5 is Britain's most gay friendly employer
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-35345515

    But isn't that Antifrank's mob at number five? (And number two in Scotland.)
    http://www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/top_100_employers_2016.pdf

    Tower Hamlets is fifth in local government, which might surprise a few people.

    The top government organisations section has a 1,2 for Wales with the National Assembly for Wales narrowly beating the Welsh Government. The Home Office is separately listed as a star performer.

    Yes, we're very proud of our record on this front.
  • AlistairAlistair Posts: 23,670
    The lesson being is you can't just throw away DKs to produce a headline figure which is what is happening in the EuroRef Polling.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    CarlottaVance said:

    How long before our friends on the Left in Scotland who vote SNP finally twig that the SNP is all about middle class perks?

    Some of them have.

    My uncle, a lifelong Labour voter, now votes SNP because "free prescriptions"
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,451
    Cyclefree said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.
    Exactly. Although that does beg the question why so many (English speaking btw) Muslim women are also making the same arguments in opposition.

    (1) and (2) have worked perfectly well in closing down discussion on this subject in the past.

    I'm a big supporter of Cameron on this, but what's going to be different this time?
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    TOPPING said:

    SouthamObserver said:

    Cyclefree said:

    Casino_Royale said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    He hasn't quite gone that far. It's that learning English will be a factor in the government deciding whether one should have permanent leave to remain and that not obscuring your face in schools, courts and other public buildings should be supported by government, particularly when those institutions make a policy decision to do so.

    It's all about inclusion and integration.

    What I've found interesting (disappointing) is that - with the exception of tabloids such as the Sun and the Mail - almost all the broadsheet press seem to be rebuking him.

    This is going to be a big long fight of attrition. I don't want to be accused of melodrama but with the vested interests involved, the closest political parallel I can think of is the Miner's Strike.
    There are vested interests at stake: mainly those in power in patriarchal communities who may well feel threatened if women in their communities are not dependant on them, as they undoubtedly are if they have to rely on them to communicate with the outside world or if said women decide to make their own decisions about their lives. And, of course, those who benefit from or are dependant on the patriarchs in those communities. And those who can't bear criticism of whichever group they are currently patronising. Plus those who are scared of saying or doing anything which might lead to others reacting violently, even if they're usually too timid to admit publicly to such fears. And those who have a vested intellectual interest in separate communities and cultural relativism etc.

    So making a change involves facing down or ignoring such groups who are very good indeed at two things: (1) ignoring the obvious; and (2) making a lot of noise with their outrage.

    Clearly it is wrong that people of either sex can spend years living in this country without learning to speak English. However, dismissing all those who have concerns about Cameron's plans as patriachs and vested interests is not the way forward. If we are serious about this, it is something that should be discussed and implemented as effectively as possible. The goal, surely, is to make sure that everyone learns to speak English, not to score political points.

    The goal, surely, is to make sure that no one who lives in this country wants to blow us up. .
    You wouldn't object if someone tried to blow up Jeremy Corbyn - and all those who put him where he is - would you?

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,451
    SouthamObserver said:

    DavidL said:

    Having caught up with the thread I think that the reason that Crosby was more accurate was mainly the first effect I have described.

    He skilfully and carefully targeted Tory resources to ensure that their vote became more efficient and that they won votes where they actually needed to. As he was not applying the grossly inaccurate Universal Swing models he could be confident that the Tories would do far, far better in terms of seats than was being indicated, even without the error in the polling.

    It seemed obvious to me that Labour was going to do much worse than the polls suggested. Ed Miliband was unelectable. It was that simple. But turning most seats into an overall majority was a triumph of effective and targeted campaigning. Crosby did brilliantly.
    Crosby certainly earned his money.

    Poor message discipline, positioning strategy and seat targeting could have led to a very different election result.
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    Danny565 said:

    As I said in the last thread - more and more, I think the reason for the polling failure is simply that a certain type of leftwinger (let's call them Mr and Mrs Guardian) is MUCH more enthusiastic about taking part in opinion polls than the average member of the population, and that gives an artificial boost in the polls to whoever Mr and Mrs Guardian are supporting at a particular election. That was the Lib Dems in 2010 (who were overestimated by 3-4% in the final polls), and Labour in 2015.

    Though I have no idea how such a bias in the polling could be corrected in future.

    That seems pretty decent.

    Chap on BBC said there were two groups who typically under-reported.

    Victor Meldrews was one, highly busy business types the other.

    I don't think they're massive groups but once you start to add them up ...
  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,451
    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Muslims don't want to immigrate into England. They - or most of them, at least* - want to conquer it. They just don't have the power to do so - yet.

    *Otherwise they become ex-Muslims, like Saqid Javid.

    You've gone all MikeK there.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    Blue_rog said:

    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    Ooh err 1.4/9 doesn't equal 33%
    Half of EU aid is wasted, costing us 1.4bn. So double the 1.4bn to work out our total EU aid cost.
  • ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    SouthamObserver said:

    JohnLilburne said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?

    I'd hazard that most people travelling on the tube are either tourists or speak sufficient English anyway. The people this initiative is aimed at would tend not to travel on the tube.

    Or, indeed, anywhere else.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    JohnLilburne said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    Recall yesterday how we discussed which useful idiots usual suspects would be out to denounce Cameron's English language skills comments (because Cameron made them)......

    http://www.thenational.scot/news/cameron-compared-to-trump-as-he-targets-muslim-women-for-english-tests.12560

    Makes you nostalgic for the times when Conservative governments attacked the GLC under Ken Livingstone for subsidising English classes for immigrants.
    Immigrants should be expected to learn English at their own expense. When I was in Berlin recently there were loads of ads on the U-Bahn for German classes (at quite reasonable rates). Why don't you get them on the Tube?
    You gets hundreds of adverts for English as a foreign language around Tottenham Court Road
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    'More power to his elbow I say'

    But it still all looks like mood music or, frankly, posturing.

    Nothing of substance is being proposed here that will make any difference. Without radical changes in immigration rules and other public policies involving language provision, education etc. we will still be dealing with this problem - and perhaps a far worse one - twenty years from now.

    The fact that the left get so worked up about mere rhetoric of this kind just illustrates how shallow our politics has become, and how obsessed they have become with trying to control 'un-PC' speech and thoughts - even of people who died a hundred years ago.
  • BannedInParisBannedInParis Posts: 2,191
    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    except we've got Messina saying the week before he and Crosby made their final prediction of 315odd.

    And the Labour poller popping up saying "we knew it wasn't rosy"

    Incidentally, the herding should have rung MASSIVE alarm bells. Massive CLANKING bells.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Poor sampling is the root of the problem. Must be as least as big of problem for the EURef. Are Labour Leavers more or less likely to respond or vote than Labour Remainers?

  • Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 61,451
    On topic, there are three lessons I will take away from 2015GE:

    (1) pollsters and polls might never be reliably right; it's just the mistakes might differ
    (2) that doesn't mean they should be ignored as "rogues" as that almost always means selectively embracing those that favour your own side
    (3) John Curtice knows what he's talking about and his exit polls (considering the small samples involved) continue to impress

    Polls are useful for trends, and when read in conjunction with other best PM and economic data (as Mike S has pointed out now, and as I did before the election) but you can't just make assumptions on turnout, average them all and tap them into a seats calculator and expect it to be more or less right.

    Not that people will stop doing that, of course.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    BannedInParis said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    except we've got Messina saying the week before he and Crosby made their final prediction of 315odd.

    And the Labour poller popping up saying "we knew it wasn't rosy"

    Incidentally, the herding should have rung MASSIVE alarm bells. Massive CLANKING bells.
    Should have listened to RodCrosby and Jacks ARSE. I would not agree with them on all matters, but they do have a pretty good track record on here.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    George Eaton
    Polling inquiry says any late swing to the Tories was "not large". That means they likely lead from 2013 onwards.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 43,276
    rcs1000 said:

    Blue_rog said:

    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    Ooh err 1.4/9 doesn't equal 33%
    Half of EU aid is wasted, costing us 1.4bn. So double the 1.4bn to work out our total EU aid cost.
    Do we know which half?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 62,138
    Good morning, everyone.

    Mr. Royale, indeed. People with significant bets should pay attention to the exit poll and amend their position, if need be, accordingly.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    BannedInParis said:

    dr_spyn said:

    BBC Coverage.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35347948

    Polling methods suspect, drove suspect narrative of papers, broadcasters, parties & leaders? But as Cowley & Kavanagh point out the result on the day surprised all of the party leaders.

    except we've got Messina saying the week before he and Crosby made their final prediction of 315odd.

    And the Labour poller popping up saying "we knew it wasn't rosy"

    Incidentally, the herding should have rung MASSIVE alarm bells. Massive CLANKING bells.
    To be fair, some posters (not me) commented as such before the GE. Only for them to be drowned out by pictures of Basil suffering his deprivations.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 58,161
    edited 2016 19
    blackburn63 said:

    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    I'm not sure of your point, mine is that a large % of foreign aid goes missing, it's ridiculous virtue signalling by politicians perfectly happy to waste our money.

    My point is that your 1.4bn number is wrong.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    rcs1000 said:

    blackburn63 said:

    Interesting article in the Times, half of all EU aid goes missing, it costs the UK £1.4 billion a year.

    That's another couple of points for Leave.

    The net EU contribution for the UK is c.£9bn/year. That would suggest a third of our net contribution goes on foreign aid, which seems a very high figure. Especially as total foreign aid across Europe, including all government and EU spending, is just £47bn.

    I think you (or @blackburn63) are slightly misunderstanding the figures. IIRC the *total* UK aid contribution to the EU is about £1.4bn (not our share of the losses).

    This comes from the DfID budget - I'm not sure if it is included within the figures for our net EU contribution?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'm trying to think of something complimentary to say about this report.

    I've failed. No Shit Sherlock and who's leg are you pulling springs to mind instead.
  • JosiasJessopJosiasJessop Posts: 44,246
    Plato_Says said:

    George Eaton
    Polling inquiry says any late swing to the Tories was "not large". That means they likely lead from 2013 onwards.

    Which has been my view since the GE. The late swing hypothesis sounded like rubbish from the start given the way the polls had behaved.
  • Innocent_AbroadInnocent_Abroad Posts: 3,294
    Casino_Royale said:

    Innocent_Abroad said:

    Muslims don't want to immigrate into England. They - or most of them, at least* - want to conquer it. They just don't have the power to do so - yet.

    *Otherwise they become ex-Muslims, like Saqid Javid.

    You've gone all MikeK there.
    No. It was a Muslim who told me - his exact words were "it is foolish to immigrate, it is wise to conquer". Certainly the English have never done the former when they could do the latter.

  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    blackburn63 said:

    Charles said:

    blackburn63 said:

    CarlottaVance said:

    AndyJS said:

    Cameron's sudden decision to ban veils and force people to learn English has come a bit out of the blue, hasn't it?

    There is no 'veil ban' - he explicitly ruled out going down the French route - but did make comments on schools.

    If you think he's suddenly become interested in improving the lot of disadvantaged minorities you haven't been paying attention.....
    I think you're missing the point, I agree wholeheartedly with what Cameron has said, my point is if Farage had said it there would be outrage.

    I don't think that's anything dubious, simply a question of perceived motive - it's why brand positioning is so important.

    For instance the Mail and the Spectator often share articles (they are differently written but by the same author and have the same prescription). Given the Spectator's branding they are seen as challenging/provoking; in the Mail the same article is viewed as pandering to its readers' prejudices.

    Cameron is a centrist politician so if he stretches to the right* it's because he is seeking a solution to a problem and reaching for the most appropriate tool. Farage is perceived as a right winger, so clearly the same policy is just part of his plan to do down immigrants.


    * For the sake of argument: I don't think Cameron's policy is particularly right or left wing
    My point is that people will take a view dependent on who said it rather than what is said.

    You only have to read this blog, otherwise intelligent and rational people lose their senses over politicians, it's absurd.

    And I agree with you - I was just explaining that there is a rationale for it rather than it just being down to whether someone is a Cameron-phile or Cameron-phobe
This discussion has been closed.