Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If it was just online polls the referendum narrative and th
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » If it was just online polls the referendum narrative and the betting would look very different
This week being the third of the month has seen a glut of phone polls. We’ve had ICM, ORB, Ipsos MORI and last night ComRes all showing substantial REMAIN leads.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Luvvies against Brexit.....
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/2016/05/19/letters-actors-artists-and-writers-look-in-the-mirror-and-see-a/
I cannot see Remain as value at current prices, just too many unknowns out there.
You state that "The big thing, of course, is confirmation bias. People, as we see so often on PB and I am as guilty as anyone, trust most the evidence that supports their position."
I support Leave, but nonetheless, expect Remain to have a winning margin >10%. Although I hoped from afar that Scotland would vote Yes in 2014, and have far more respect for Nicola Sturgeon than any of the disreputable current leaders of the other Scottish political parties, I predicted No to have a winning margin >10% in the IndyRef, as turned out to be the case.
On line polls are inherently suspect in predicting an actual result, as they potentially suffer from selection bias, and once chosen, the panel is fixed, as Yougov and others found to their cost in 2015. However, in repeat questioning of a selected panel, on line polls should be better at detecting trends.
It is interesting to note Farage's comment about wanting a re-run if the vote for Remain is close, almost as if he is expecting a Remain result. He has been the most formidable campaigner for Leave over the years, and it is primarily thanks to his efforts that there has even been a referendum, but I suspect that he is expecting his fox to be shot on 23/6/16.
Today's thread - OGH - "I don’t regard the REMAIN price as value."
Arf.....
What is clear is that a Leave win would be a bigger shock to the markets than a Tory majority was. Just.
Though as it happens, I do disagree with Mike on this. It would be dull if everyone always agreed.
https://twitter.com/paulwaugh/status/733541313392443392
Otherwise we are trying to compare apples and pears?
Wikipedia has poll results going back to 2010
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_United_Kingdom_European_Union_membership_referendum
Remain told a pack of lies about the nature and got away with it in 1975 because there was no social media and only the pro Soviet Left and a few eccentrics supported leave.
Leaves task this time is to stop Remain doing the same. Call Remains lies out and explain what the EU is really about.
What would happen after Brexit is for the government to explain not Leave, because it is the government not leave who will do the negotiating. (one reason Wilson was so much wiser than Cameron in staying largely neutral in 1975)
Hereditary Liberal Party Prime Ministers, who would have thought it?
Altogether now.
LLOYD GEORGE KNEW MY FATHER, FATHER KNEW LLOYD GEORGE
LLOYD GEORGE KNEW MY FATHER, FATHER KNEW LLOYD GEORGE
Anyway now to his views:
"Two years later, he defended Canadian federalism at a student event at the Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf, an elite high school which he attended
In October 2006, Trudeau criticized Quebec nationalism by describing political nationalism generally as an "old idea from the 19th century", "based on a smallness of thought" and not relevant to modern Quebec. This comment was seen as a criticism of Michael Ignatieff, then a candidate in the 2006 Liberal Party leadership election, who was promoting recognition of Quebec as a nation. Trudeau later wrote a public letter on the subject, describing the idea of Quebec nationhood as "against everything my father ever believed
(source for Italics - wikipedia
Federalist supports federalism, who'd a thought it?
So we can't even deny them entry, if we think they're a threat to national security - without showing how we know...
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/terror-curbs-undermined-by-eu-ruling-8vb35p5sh
Laters...
It'll probably move a few votes into the Leave camp.
Expecting a Liberal Prime Minister to say anything else before the referendum would be a little naive.
The In Case: We are incapable of running ourselves and our politicians are numpties so we would be better off being run by a gaggle of Belgian Ticket Inspectors
Anything else campaigned on is flannel.
Verdict: We can change our politicians every five years, we can't change the Belgian Ticket Inpectors if we let them run the country so OUT.
PS - the Belgian ticket inspectors are just as incompetent as our politicans and more corrupt so OUT.
"I am grateful to Emma Thompson who has come out against X. I have found, when I am considering issues, that long and careful analysis invariably leads me to take exactly the opposite position to her and therefore that she has declared her thoughts now saves me much time in coming to the opposite conclusion..."
On a more serious note, I'm not sure why Alastair feels the need to suggest some sort of infantilism in the Leave campaign. We have perfect demonstration of infantilism from all sides; but also of seriousness on all sides.
What will he do if after a Remain vote the likes of Johnson and Gove, or Haider and Wilders get control of the EU?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-36339782
He is probably more political than most politicians.
The idea that they may simply be saying what they think is discounted as too unlikely to be worth contemplation.
Basically, the UK or any other Member State, have to give a reason for the refusal. They can claim national security on the information and the Court (probably SIAC in our case) can determine whether that is properly done. If so fine. If not and the State refuses to disclose then the court must make the decision on the public information alone.
The most worrying bit is "there is no presumption that the reasons invoked by a national authority in order to refuse disclosure of those grounds exist and are valid." It may be that they are simply emphasising that it is for the Court to make the decision, not the Minister, but that will be hooked on to by defence counsel.
Last May UKIP overperformed their polls.
All these headline numbers are after they, and all polling companies, have taken a set of raw data and applied their assumption of the month to them.
http://www.redstate.com/streiff/2016/05/19/report.-bernie-sanders-full-metal-jacket-burn-mode/
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/may/18/bernie-sanders-backers-have-nothing-to-lose-from-d/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
But they do not make Leave, Alastair, and you know it.
https://twitter.com/ncpoliticseu/status/733414423264530432
Remain = Tories against Tory government.
You may regard Paul Mason's opinions as somewhat bizarre (though the specific point on how the Tory party might use freedom from the EU does drive a decent amount of Labour remain sentiment), but not sure you need to resort to such bizarre lines of argument to rebut them.
Anecdote, but I suspect he's not the only one.
How accurate were the polls in the Scottish referendum?
44 minutes 44 seconds
A few have remained quiet - but those who have got involved, including our PM, have revealed many faults.
If that was the Mail, I could understand the piss-taking...
https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/733404605292249089
It shows the problems of a long career.
Gove, who freed schools from government control and wants to introduce the most sweeping reform prisons to prisons ever suggested.
Or Johnson, who was the first Tory in power after TONY Blair, in that liberal bastion city of London.
If anything, Gove and Johnson are far more liberal than Cameron and Osborne.
Clinton 35 .. Trump 44
http://big.assets.huffingtonpost.com/VanderbiltTNSpring2016_FinalTopline0512.pdf