With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
To be fair, the number of Romanians has increased from near-zero to whatever.
That a migrant population contains its share of ne'er-do-wells doesn't come as a surprise, especially if they have been encouraged to leave by the authorities.
Romanians are 8x more likely to commit crime than Britons, according to the stats.
A meaningless statistic unless age profile is taken into account.
As Southam Observer has pointed out ad nauseam, new immigrants are overwhelmingly young.
Strange that Michael Gove has had nothing to say about the statistics.
"MailOnline contacted the Ministry of Justice for comment."
Incidentally, did you spot this amusing typo in the article?
Wiltshire police force saw a surge of 82 per cent while West Murcia, Gloucestershire and Suffolk divisions also saw high increases.
Chief Constable Frank, as Gold Commander of Myrrhcia, was incensed....
Rob Marchant I'm shocked, shocked! Mail reports Seumas Milne deleting passages criticising Russia in briefing to Labour MPs https://t.co/KXZIy5z9uQ
Mr Milne, who took leave from The Guardian to take up his post with Mr Corbyn, wrote a series of pro-Russian articles when he was at the newspaper.
In one piece, he wrote: ‘Communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment.’
------------------
I can't see this being trotted out time and time again during a GE campaign at all....Vote for the terrorist sympathiser PM with the commie spin doctor and the Maoist loving CoE...
To be fair, the number of Romanians has increased from near-zero to whatever.
That a migrant population contains its share of ne'er-do-wells doesn't come as a surprise, especially if they have been encouraged to leave by the authorities.
Romanians are 8x more likely to commit crime than Britons, according to the stats.
A meaningless statistic unless age profile is taken into account.
As Southam Observer has pointed out ad nauseam, new immigrants are overwhelmingly young.
Strange that Michael Gove has had nothing to say about the statistics.
"MailOnline contacted the Ministry of Justice for comment."
Incidentally, did you spot this amusing typo in the article?
Wiltshire police force saw a surge of 82 per cent while West Murcia, Gloucestershire and Suffolk divisions also saw high increases.
Chief Constable Frank, as Gold Commander of Myrrhcia, was incensed....
Sounds like a Wise choice, possibly a Star to follow.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The idiocy is in comparing it to parliamentary VI.
Absolutely. Lots of people vote for Lib Dems/Residents/Ratepayers/Independents who vote otherwise at Parliamentary level.
The main debate here is whether the phone polls which show around 2% of Labour 2015 voters switching or Yougov which shows 5 times that number is the correct one .
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
They gained seats in the full blown locals, didn't they?
Yes but not as many as they have lost in by elections and through defections in the last 12 months . They have fewer councillors now than 12 months ago .
Rob Marchant I'm shocked, shocked! Mail reports Seumas Milne deleting passages criticising Russia in briefing to Labour MPs https://t.co/KXZIy5z9uQ
Mr Milne, who took leave from The Guardian to take up his post with Mr Corbyn, wrote a series of pro-Russian articles when he was at the newspaper.
In one piece, he wrote: ‘Communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment.’
------------------
I can't see this being trotted out time and time again during a GE campaign at all....Vote for the terrorist sympathiser PM with the commie spin doctor and the Maoist loving CoE...
Has he actually been to Russia? Never seen such squalor.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
this article is written by someone who wants Labour to support Brexit, and it shows.
I worry that the analysis is slightly partial. Greens switching to Labour are described as being due to Corbyn, not Europe. But maybe that means Leavers switching from Labour are due to Corbyn, not Europe. Indeed, I would say the latter hypothesis is highly likely to be true, because there has been no great collapse in Labour polling numbers since the increased prominence of the referendum.
OK, I'm quite happy to admit that my assertion on the Green switchers wasn't evidenced. In my defence, I recall that there was some polling back in late 2015 (i.e. post Corbyn) that showed that 2015 Green voters had been switching to Labour in significant numbers, before the EU came to dominate the political agenda, which is I think the comment is a reasonable one.
Turning to your hypothesis: 1. "there has been no great collapse in Labour polling numbers since the increased prominence of the referendum". I suspect we have in the short term seen the effect of internecine Conservative warfare on Conservative support generally cancel out the weakness in Labour support which is clearly confined to supporters of Leave. 2. "Leavers switching from Labour are due to Corbyn, not Europe". The effect on Labour support of Corbyn as a specific leader and its position on the EU aren't independent of one another. Corbyn had an opportunity to steer Labour towards a more agnostic position on the EU, instead of tearing up a card that could have given Corbyn specifically some appeal to working class electors in general, including those who have defected to UKIP from Labour both before and after 2015. Only Corbyn was in a position to do this, given that he had been arguing against the EU since entering parliament. See Sean F's earlier point.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
Their purpose isn't to judge national parliamentary VI polls.
Mr. Urquhart, I'll give it a crack. Not sure how Le Blanc will be. Suspect Evans will be tedious.
Supermodels of SHIELD is on tonight too.
Like you I will give it a try, but I have to say that old Top Gear (with the odd exceptional episode) had run its course for me. It felt tired and everything was so over contrived (and I suspect the Amazon version will be more of the same).
I will be surprised if the overly PC, 5000 presenter reboot of it will be an improvement, but going in with low expectations I might be pleasantly surprised.
Mr. Urquhart, yes and no. There were some horrendous episodes/specials (India was rubbish, as was the Sweeney car chase episode) but also still some good stuff (enjoyed the final special).
Yes Phil , you have to be careful about comparing poll responses and council election results but there remains the current conundrum . Phone polls say UKIP support is around 12% , Online polls say it is around 18% . They cannot both be right and whatever the turnout the local elections is some evidence of which is correct and it is not Yougov on whose figures your study is based .
I confined the analysis to the VI of those who voted in 2015, ignoring those who did not vote. So it's not following YouGov methodology, just using their raw data to establish trends, based on comparisons between how people said they voted in May 2015 when asked in May 2015 and how the same people say they would vote now.
For the record, the UKIP 2015 voters (who in case you missed the point are not the main focus of the article) were 12.5% of the sample of 1527 voters, almost identical to their 2015 vote share.
Phil , I understand your methodology , but the problem remains with your source data . If you look at the last Ipsos Mori poll for example , the data tables show just 2 2015 Labour voters switching to UKIP now out over over 200 less than 1% . The Yougov figure as you say is very much higher . Similarly the ICM phone poll this month had just 3 Labour 2015 voters switching to UKIP . Even the ICM online poll had only just over 3% of 2015 Labour voters switching to UKIP .
Mark, you are ignoring the problem of false recall. It is a particular issue amongst those who have switched from supporting a different party than they voted for previously, if you don't ask the question until long after they voted. For example, I recall discussions back before 2015 about how many disillusioned 2010 Lib Dem voters were really going to own up to the fact that they once supported Nick Clegg. YouGov are far less susceptible to this than other companies because they established the 2015 voting record of their panel in the immediate aftermath of the GE - before opinions had had a chance to change.
Mr. Urquhart, yes and no. There were some horrendous episodes/specials (India was rubbish, as was the Sweeney car chase episode) but also still some good stuff (enjoyed the final special).
Anyway, we shall see how it goes.
If you want to see a really bad Top Gear...watch Top Gear US...they manage to take all the best concepts from the UK Top Gear shows / challenges and make them unwatchable.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
Their purpose isn't to judge national parliamentary VI polls.
Oh yes it is !!! Curtice and Fisher for example state that their PNS ( equivalent to R and Ts NEV ) " Is an estimate of the vote share each party would have win in a GB wide Parliamentary level General Election .... "
I voted by post on Saturday and didn't notice anything like that. I do agree it'd be wrong if it was real (though I wonder if it would really change any votes).
this article is written by someone who wants Labour to support Brexit, and it shows.
I worry that the analysis is slightly partial. Greens switching to Labour are described as being due to Corbyn, not Europe. But maybe that means Leavers switching from Labour are due to Corbyn, not Europe. Indeed, I would say the latter hypothesis is highly likely to be true, because there has been no great collapse in Labour polling numbers since the increased prominence of the referendum.
OK, I'm quite happy to admit that my assertion on the Green switchers wasn't evidenced. In my defence, I recall that there was some polling back in late 2015 (i.e. post Corbyn) that showed that 2015 Green voters had been switching to Labour in significant numbers, before the EU came to dominate the political agenda, which is I think the comment is a reasonable one.
Turning to your hypothesis: 1. "there has been no great collapse in Labour polling numbers since the increased prominence of the referendum". I suspect we have in the short term seen the effect of internecine Conservative warfare on Conservative support generally cancel out the weakness in Labour support which is clearly confined to supporters of Leave. 2. "Leavers switching from Labour are due to Corbyn, not Europe". The effect on Labour support of Corbyn as a specific leader and its position on the EU aren't independent of one another. Corbyn had an opportunity to steer Labour towards a more agnostic position on the EU, instead of tearing up a card that could have given Corbyn specifically some appeal to working class electors in general, including those who have defected to UKIP from Labour both before and after 2015. Only Corbyn was in a position to do this, given that he had been arguing against the EU since entering parliament. See Sean F's earlier point.
According to yougov around 25% of Labour voters will back Leave while 50%+ of Tory voters will vote Leave. I suspect some Labour voters will switch to UKIP but more Tory voters will do so. Almost 40% of Labour voters in Scotland backed Yes and switched to the SNP so even if every Labour Leave voter switched to UKIP it would still not be as bad for Corbyn as it was for Miliband
The comments are interesting. This can't happen when we are in the EU of course we have been assured. I doubt they will ever be returned hence more will come. Of course controlled immigration is fine and welcome. This illegal entry is not and how much has this rescue just cost the taxpayer and the charitable contributions.
They are economic migrants at this point not fleeing from war zones they have crossed many countries where they can claim right of abode. Oh no ...they keep going the land of milk and honey free housing and handouts await.
All because Merkel opened her big gob and out so called EU partners and faceless bureaucrats wave them through to the French coast where we are expected to take in people because of the dire conditions in which they find themselves..... In France FFS!
Yes Phil , you have to be careful about comparing poll responses and council election results but there remains the current conundrum . Phone polls say UKIP support is around 12% , Online polls say it is around 18% . They cannot both be right and whatever the turnout the local elections is some evidence of which is correct and it is not Yougov on whose figures your study is based .
I confined the analysis to the VI of those who voted in 2015, ignoring those who did not vote. So it's not following YouGov methodology, just using their raw data to establish trends, based on comparisons between how people said they voted in May 2015 when asked in May 2015 and how the same people say they would vote now.
For the record, the UKIP 2015 voters (who in case you missed the point are not the main focus of the article) were 12.5% of the sample of 1527 voters, almost identical to their 2015 vote share.
Phil , I understand your methodology , but the problem remains with your source data . If you look at the last Ipsos Mori poll for example , the data tables show just 2 2015 Labour voters switching to UKIP now out over over 200 less than 1% . The Yougov figure as you say is very much higher . Similarly the ICM phone poll this month had just 3 Labour 2015 voters switching to UKIP . Even the ICM online poll had only just over 3% of 2015 Labour voters switching to UKIP .
Mark, you are ignoring the problem of false recall. It is a particular issue amongst those who have switched from supporting a different party than they voted for previously, if you don't ask the question until long after they voted. For example, I recall discussions back before 2015 about how many disillusioned 2010 Lib Dem voters were really going to own up to the fact that they once supported Nick Clegg. YouGov are far less susceptible to this than other companies because they established the 2015 voting record of their panel in the immediate aftermath of the GE - before opinions had had a chance to change.
I am ignoring nothing . I am simply pointing out that Yougov ( on whose figures your calculations are based ) are showing many more Labour 2015 to UKIP now switchers than the phone pollsters and more even than ICM online polls Having just checked Comres last online poll their figure is 4% similar to ICM and well below Yougovs figure .
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
They gained seats in the full blown locals, didn't they?
Yes but not as many as they have lost in by elections and through defections in the last 12 months . They have fewer councillors now than 12 months ago .
And 7 AMs more than they did 12 months ago.
Nine more, Seven on the Welsh Assembly, Two on the London Assembly. Narrowly missed out on one on the Northern Ireland Assembly.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
Their purpose isn't to judge national parliamentary VI polls.
Oh yes it is !!! Curtice and Fisher for example state that their PNS ( equivalent to R and Ts NEV ) " Is an estimate of the vote share each party would have win in a GB wide Parliamentary level General Election .... "
"One way to think about these figures is that they represent what would have happened had the whole of Britain held local elections yesterday and if the pattern of candidature had been similar to that in a general election (i.e. if the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and UKIP were standing in nearly all wards, and similarly for nationalists in Scotland and Wales)."
You appear to be implying that even in the 1940s and early 1950s the working class fell well short of being 50% of the electorate. On that basis, what would you suggest was the social breakdown of the residual 50- 60% non-working class at that time?
Yes I am, but it is difficult to answer your second question without defining 'working class', because I have seen that argued all sorts of ways. Coal, steel, shipbuilding workers were always considered working class. They considered themselves working class, for a start. But what about railway workers, where there was considerable stratification within the ranks and drivers considered themselves (rightly) skilled workers and often therefore (contestably) middle class? The same arguments could be made over cutlers, and even cotton workers.
Income is also not a reliable guide, as a shopkeeper in a poor area would be considered middle class and a foreman of a pit or factory who earned more and had a guaranteed income, often for much less work, would still be 'working class'.
Without therefore defining your parameters it is hard to answer your question. I would say a reasonable estimate would be 35-40% working class, 50-55% middle class and 5-10% upper class, but the figures I have seen are such a confusion that it is hard to draw realistic conclusions.
What we can say is that England and to a lesser extent Scotland and Wales, by urbanising early and being dominated to a greater extent than most realise by what we now call SME, opened more opportunities for socio-economic advancement than say, France or Russia. For example, in Russia, where shopkeeping was limited and most industrial enterprises were very large, offering less scope for advancement, just 1% of the population were recognisably middle class under the Tsars. In France, the equivalent figure varied but was als much lower - 30% seems about the average. Therefore it is not surprising that in both countries Marxism was considerably stronger than liberalism and in France, authoritarianism flourished as a result.
Hope that is of interest even if it is frustratingly vague in places.
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
Yes I do but I also understand their limitations and failings. Something you seem inclined to ignore when it suits you.
I voted by post on Saturday and didn't notice anything like that. I do agree it'd be wrong if it was real (though I wonder if it would really change any votes).
With an average turnout of less than 25% it indicates no such thing . Turnout in the local elections was almost 50% higher
So you would rather choose local elections where UKIP stood in far fewer seats. This is the idiocy of NEV.
The calculation of NEV allows for uncontested seats .
It didn't for the PCC elections. The official NEV is 13.68% which is simply the % of the total vote in all 40 PCC elections. It does not take account of the fact that UKIP didn't stand in 6 of those elections. The actual % vote in the 34 constituencies they stood in was 15.84%
The NEV calculation also allows for areas without PCC elections at all which is primarily Scotland where UKIP are almost non existent and London where UKIP support is well below average
I wasn't talking about areas without elections. I was talking about areas where there were elections but UKIP didn't stand.
You still dont understand the NEV calculations and their purpose do you ?
Their purpose isn't to judge national parliamentary VI polls.
Oh yes it is !!! Curtice and Fisher for example state that their PNS ( equivalent to R and Ts NEV ) " Is an estimate of the vote share each party would have win in a GB wide Parliamentary level General Election .... "
"One way to think about these figures is that they represent what would have happened had the whole of Britain held local elections yesterday and if the pattern of candidature had been similar to that in a general election (i.e. if the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and UKIP were standing in nearly all wards, and similarly for nationalists in Scotland and Wales)."
See Curtice and Fishers article on the same website 2 days earlier for a more detailed explanation
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Sad to see people so desperate to escape France.
BBC take on the story
Coastguard rescues suspected migrants off Kent coast
"Eighteen Albanians, who are believed to be migrants, are among 20 people to have been rescued from a boat off the Kent coast in the English Channel"
18 Albanians in the channel in a sinking inflatable boat and the BBC headline " suspected immigrants". Jeez I knew Paris airports and Ryan Air was bad but this takes it to a whole new level.
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Sad to see people so desperate to escape France.
BBC take on the story
Coastguard rescues suspected migrants off Kent coast
"Eighteen Albanians, who are believed to be migrants, are among 20 people to have been rescued from a boat off the Kent coast in the English Channel"
18 Albanians in the channel in a sinking inflatable boat and the BBC headline " suspected immigrants". Jeez I knew Paris airports and Ryan Air was bad but this takes it to a whole new level.
Only "Suspected"....is it common for 20 people to pack themselves into tiny inflatable boat in the channel, rather than use the Chunnel or the ferry when returning home? Or were they just on a pleasure cruise?
BBC Archives #ICYMI We trawled the archives to bring you the other @BBC_TopGear presenters who appeared prior to the famous three https://t.co/d5JfYwmc3Y
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
And leaving the EU would make what difference? I suppose that if we dropped any veneer of caring we could let them drown and/or set up summary executions if they struggle ashore.
Here's everyone you ever knew and everyone you might have met saying Remain. Oh, and look, we took a survey of all the people that you'd never meet and they say Remain too.
The Remain campaign has convinced me to vote Leave. They can't make a good case because the EU is such a mess.
I'm only a little convinced though. I may change my mind.
You appear to be implying that even in the 1940s and early 1950s the working class fell well short of being 50% of the electorate. On that basis, what would you suggest was the social breakdown of the residual 50- 60% non-working class at that time?
Yes I am, but it is difficult to answer your second question without defining 'working class', because I have seen that argued all sorts of ways. Coal, steel, shipbuilding workers were always considered working class. They considered themselves working class, for a start. But what about railway workers, where there was considerable stratification within the ranks and drivers considered themselves (rightly) skilled workers and often therefore (contestably) middle class? The same arguments could be made over cutlers, and even cotton workers.
Income is also not a reliable guide, as a shopkeeper in a poor area would be considered middle class and a foreman of a pit or factory who earned more and had a guaranteed income, often for much less work, would still be 'working class'.
Without therefore defining your parameters it is hard to answer your question. I would say a reasonable estimate would be 35-40% working class, 50-55% middle class and 5-10% upper class, but the figures I have seen are such a confusion that it is hard to draw realistic conclusions.
What we can say is that England and to a lesser extent Scotland and Wales, by urbanising early and being dominated to a greater extent than most realise by what we now call SME, opened more opportunities for socio-economic advancement than say, France or Russia. For example, in Russia, where shopkeeping was limited and most industrial enterprises were very large, offering less scope for advancement, just 1% of the population were recognisably middle class under the Tsars. In France, the equivalent figure varied but was als much lower - 30% seems about the average. Therefore it is not surprising that in both countries Marxism was considerably stronger than liberalism and in France, authoritarianism flourished as a result.
Hope that is of interest even if it is frustratingly vague in places.
The working class were a majority in the UK from the industrial revolution of the 19th century, prior to which most people were peasants. By the 1980s a small majority of the population were middle class as service industries, particularly in offices, overtook manual labour in the factories and mines
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
And leaving the EU would make what difference? I suppose that if we dropped any veneer of caring we could let them drown and/or set up summary executions if they struggle ashore.
Oh do bugger off with the extreme rhetoric and execution squads FFS
Cameron said this doesn't happen if we stay. Well we are in and it's happening. We should rescue them and send them straight back to France. We won't of course which will just encourage more to attempt the crossing.....and die in the process.
The ones who make and are not sent back ( that probably all of them) it will have to be housed and then the family will follow and the kids under the right to family life etc etc etc fecking cetra.
Not sure you understand quite what a dangerous place the channel can be. The Channel will let them drown and is in itself an execution squad. It ain't the med.
Here's everyone you ever knew and everyone you might have met saying Remain. Oh, and look, we took a survey of all the people that you'd never meet and they say Remain too.
The Remain campaign has convinced me to vote Leave. They can't make a good case because the EU is such a mess.
I'm only a little convinced though. I may change my mind.
I know how you feel. I thought one of the best speeches I've heard so far was Theresa May's where she was honest about her doubts and misgivings about the EU - but still judged that remain was right on balance. If only the Remain campaign had adopted a similar tone rather than the approach they have.
Well it is up against the Antiques Roadshow and the British Soap Awards so it has a reasonable chance of good ratings with that competition, especially with the middle aged!
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Sad to see people so desperate to escape France.
BBC take on the story
Coastguard rescues suspected migrants off Kent coast
"Eighteen Albanians, who are believed to be migrants, are among 20 people to have been rescued from a boat off the Kent coast in the English Channel"
18 Albanians in the channel in a sinking inflatable boat and the BBC headline " suspected immigrants". Jeez I knew Paris airports and Ryan Air was bad but this takes it to a whole new level.
Actually the story first headlined like this: "20 people rescued from sinking vessel near Dungeness". Nothing about possible illegal immigrants at all.
I am ignoring nothing . I am simply pointing out that Yougov ( on whose figures your calculations are based ) are showing many more Labour 2015 to UKIP now switchers than the phone pollsters and more even than ICM online polls Having just checked Comres last online poll their figure is 4% similar to ICM and well below Yougovs figure .
"Well below Yougovs figure"? Not so. Check out the source data and you'll see that there were 477 Labour voters in total from 2015 (282 In, 137 Out, 58 Uncommitted). 22 of these (all Out) have switched to UKIP. So that's YouGov finding 4.6% (22/477) Lab to UKIP switchers compared to 4% ComRes. Thus there are 16% (22/137) Lab Out to UKIP switchers, the figure I cite in the piece. Overall 42% of the 137 2015 Lab Out voters have switched, to various parties or DK/DV/Ref, so the UKIP element in that is a minority of the total anyway.
I am also pointing out the existence of false recall for switchers, the difficulty of phone pollsters in dealing with it, and that it is a much less serious issue for YouGov. As a consequence I would be concerned if in the source data YouGov were not identifying more switchers than phone pollsters. Because of that I fail to see the grounds for your claim that "the problem remains with your source data".
Too much emphasis on polling and not enough on voting behaviour will likely lead to false hope for the Leave campaign. Leave has a series of hurdles to overcome. Voter turnout which has been pushed by the media as helping is less likely because their strongest group DE is less likely to vote. Risk aversion which seems to have not been effecting older voters so far will cause some drop off in that groups Leave vote. Leave cannot win unless they score a big majority in older voters, theres no upwards movement left in that group , and the trend is likely to be towards a closing of the Leave lead.
Its a shame we haven't had any weekend polling, I'd expect some temporary bounce for Leave after the immigration figures. Its clear that this is Leaves last card to play as their economic argument doesn't stack up and they simply can't overcome the leap in the dark narrative. To overcome risk aversion you need voters to believe that outside the EU life in the UK would definitely be better.
LewisDuckworth said: Anecdote alert. My niece's husband supervises 30-odd welders at a power station on the west coast. He assures me that he will be voting BREXIT and, furthermore, ALL his welders seem similarly inclined.
The UnionDivvie: What about their dear, old mums? Are they being kept locked in their attics on referendum day?
-----
Look, my Scotchsmart*rse, she's in hospital - and I'm relieved after 25 years of incessant moaning about pains in her ankles, hips, etc.etc. - where she'll proceed to find fault and be ungrateful to her carers. No postal vote has been arranged, and no neighbours (all have abandoned her) will get her to the polling booth. It's so damned easy to criticise other;s perceived shortcomings, as that naive idiot in Tokyo did me.
Yesterday at hospital I was witness to a really nasty old woman in a wheelchair*** speaking to her carer as if she were dirt .... obviously used to getting her own way for many years .... really, so many people have no personal experience of the fact that at least 15% of immobile old ladies are tyrants who are like me, having masses of NHS resources thrown at them
*** We were both ar hospital to have eye injections.
Comments
In one piece, he wrote: ‘Communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment.’
------------------
I can't see this being trotted out time and time again during a GE campaign at all....Vote for the terrorist sympathiser PM with the commie spin doctor and the Maoist loving CoE...
Turning to your hypothesis:
1. "there has been no great collapse in Labour polling numbers since the increased prominence of the referendum". I suspect we have in the short term seen the effect of internecine Conservative warfare on Conservative support generally cancel out the weakness in Labour support which is clearly confined to supporters of Leave.
2. "Leavers switching from Labour are due to Corbyn, not Europe". The effect on Labour support of Corbyn as a specific leader and its position on the EU aren't independent of one another. Corbyn had an opportunity to steer Labour towards a more agnostic position on the EU, instead of tearing up a card that could have given Corbyn specifically some appeal to working class electors in general, including those who have defected to UKIP from Labour both before and after 2015. Only Corbyn was in a position to do this, given that he had been arguing against the EU since entering parliament. See Sean F's earlier point.
Supermodels of SHIELD is on tonight too.
I will be surprised if the overly PC, 5000 presenter reboot of it will be an improvement, but going in with low expectations I might be pleasantly surprised.
Anyway, we shall see how it goes.
Our General Secretary .@BrendanChilton speaking in a debate in Mid Sussex earlier this week, where 'Leave' won! https://t.co/tBwzgXLcbj
He's an appealing tub thumping manner.
They are economic migrants at this point not fleeing from war zones they have crossed many countries where they can claim right of abode. Oh no ...they keep going the land of milk and honey free housing and handouts await.
All because Merkel opened her big gob and out so called EU partners and faceless bureaucrats wave them through to the French coast where we are expected to take in people because of the dire conditions in which they find themselves..... In France FFS!
http://news.sky.com/story/1703817/fears-of-med-tragedies-in-channel-after-rescue
Narrowly missed out on one on the Northern Ireland Assembly.
https://electionsetc.com/2016/05/06/bbc-projected-national-share-pns-of-the-vote-2016/
"One way to think about these figures is that they represent what would have happened had the whole of Britain held local elections yesterday and if the pattern of candidature had been similar to that in a general election (i.e. if the Conservatives, Labour, Liberal Democrats and UKIP were standing in nearly all wards, and similarly for nationalists in Scotland and Wales)."
Income is also not a reliable guide, as a shopkeeper in a poor area would be considered middle class and a foreman of a pit or factory who earned more and had a guaranteed income, often for much less work, would still be 'working class'.
Without therefore defining your parameters it is hard to answer your question. I would say a reasonable estimate would be 35-40% working class, 50-55% middle class and 5-10% upper class, but the figures I have seen are such a confusion that it is hard to draw realistic conclusions.
What we can say is that England and to a lesser extent Scotland and Wales, by urbanising early and being dominated to a greater extent than most realise by what we now call SME, opened more opportunities for socio-economic advancement than say, France or Russia. For example, in Russia, where shopkeeping was limited and most industrial enterprises were very large, offering less scope for advancement, just 1% of the population were recognisably middle class under the Tsars. In France, the equivalent figure varied but was als much lower - 30% seems about the average. Therefore it is not surprising that in both countries Marxism was considerably stronger than liberalism and in France, authoritarianism flourished as a result.
Hope that is of interest even if it is frustratingly vague in places.
http://img2.thejournal.ie/inline/2090778/original/?width=630&version=2090778
Uh oh events are turning against Remain. It doesn't matter if this could still happen outside the E.U the public will see immigrants coming from the E.U and think "oh hell naw not having waht is happening in the med happen here."
Leave is gaining momentum and they didn't even have to do anything.
Alex Salmond is like someone who's lost his job and keeps pretending to go to work: @euanmccolm https://t.co/NzXub1SlSQ
Coastguard rescues suspected migrants off Kent coast
"Eighteen Albanians, who are believed to be migrants, are among 20 people to have been rescued from a boat off the Kent coast in the English Channel"
18 Albanians in the channel in a sinking inflatable boat and the BBC headline " suspected immigrants". Jeez I knew Paris airports and Ryan Air was bad but this takes it to a whole new level.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-36407685
BBC Archives
#ICYMI We trawled the archives to bring you the other @BBC_TopGear presenters who appeared prior to the famous three
https://t.co/d5JfYwmc3Y
Here's everyone you ever knew and everyone you might have met saying Remain. Oh, and look, we took a survey of all the people that you'd never meet and they say Remain too.
The Remain campaign has convinced me to vote Leave. They can't make a good case because the EU is such a mess.
I'm only a little convinced though. I may change my mind.
Cameron said this doesn't happen if we stay. Well we are in and it's happening. We should rescue them and send them straight back to France. We won't of course which will just encourage more to attempt the crossing.....and die in the process.
The ones who make and are not sent back ( that probably all of them) it will have to be housed and then the family will follow and the kids under the right to family life etc etc etc fecking cetra.
Not sure you understand quite what a dangerous place the channel can be. The Channel will let them drown and is in itself an execution squad. It ain't the med.
"When they finished the first prototype did they step back , go yeah...nailed it".
Pretty much sums up this new top gear really.
Well that's settled then...
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD
I am also pointing out the existence of false recall for switchers, the difficulty of phone pollsters in dealing with it, and that it is a much less serious issue for YouGov. As a consequence I would be concerned if in the source data YouGov were not identifying more switchers than phone pollsters. Because of that I fail to see the grounds for your claim that "the problem remains with your source data".
Its a shame we haven't had any weekend polling, I'd expect some temporary bounce for Leave after the immigration figures. Its clear that this is Leaves last card to play as their economic argument doesn't stack up and they simply can't overcome the leap in the dark narrative. To overcome risk aversion you need voters to believe that outside the EU life in the UK would definitely be better.
LewisDuckworth said:
Anecdote alert. My niece's husband supervises 30-odd welders at a power station on the west coast. He assures me that he will be voting BREXIT and, furthermore, ALL his welders seem similarly inclined.
The UnionDivvie: What about their dear, old mums? Are they being kept locked in their attics on referendum day?
-----
Look, my Scotchsmart*rse, she's in hospital - and I'm relieved after 25 years of incessant moaning about pains in her ankles, hips, etc.etc. - where she'll proceed to find fault and be ungrateful to her carers. No postal vote has been arranged, and no neighbours (all have abandoned her) will get her to the polling booth. It's so damned easy to criticise other;s perceived shortcomings, as that naive idiot in Tokyo did me.
Yesterday at hospital I was witness to a really nasty old woman in a wheelchair*** speaking to her carer as if she were dirt .... obviously used to getting her own way for many years .... really, so many people have no personal experience of the fact that at least 15% of immobile old ladies are tyrants who are like me, having masses of NHS resources thrown at them
*** We were both ar hospital to have eye injections.