politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The CON GE2015 target seat over-spending issue throws into que

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The CON GE2015 target seat over-spending issue throws into question the mathematics of GE2017

Tonight on #c4news: CPS confirm 15 separate police forces have sent files on 30 Tory MPs and agents relating to #electionexpenses scandal.

Read the full story here

surbiton

First. When will the charges be made ? Will anyone be arrested ?

Theuniondivvie

2nd because Surbiton overspent.

CarlottaVance

Third - like SLAB!

surbiton

Arthur_Penny said:

surbiton said:

walterw said:

'OK - well one point - the pound dropped by 10% against the Euro - imposing a 10% tariff would merely result in the price of UK goods in the EU being the same as at June 22nd 2016. At the same time the price of EU goods in the UK would be 20% higher.'

20% higher as things stand now without any further devaluation of Sterling.

Could for example be the final tipping point for VW, $16 billion lawsuit in the US,probably the same again in Europe & then their vehicles sold in their second largest export market are subject to a 20 - 30% price increase.

Their biggest market is still the EU. The question should be asked: what % of their output is sold in the UK, rather than pompous words like "second largest". 1% / 2%, if that.

I am pretty sure China is a much bigger market for them even though they produce in China.

Edit: VW sold 10.3m cars last year. About 150k in the UK. So I make it ~ 1.5%.

Yes, a 20% jump will kill VW - the largest car producer in the world. Think NOT.

Remember most of their competitors are also non-UK.

But not necessarily EU.

Although of course the Euro may rocket sharply in value - after all if the agreement is going to be terrible for the UK and marvellous for the EU (as everyone says - cough, cough) that is bound to happen.

Look the WTO tariffs does not mean trade will come to an end. The whole world works with WTO tariff. Yes, there might be a reduction in exports. From 1.5% of their output to, say, 1.3% of their output. It is part of natural annual variation.

dr_spyn

LD in Bath ex Tory.
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news/11095/local-election-candidate-interview-wera-and-william-hobhouse

surbiton

Theuniondivvie said:

2nd because Surbiton overspent.

I am Michael Crick and I demand £10.

DavidL

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

geoffw

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

The meme is "we was robbed". It provides succour to losers.

dr_spyn

Bath LD candidate coverage in local rag.

http://www.bathchronicle.co.uk/live-liberal-democrats-select-their-bath-candidate-for-the-2017-general-election/story-30304887-detail/story.html

philiph

Charges may be made, but would that make the waters even murkier?

Charges and guilt are different. After charges what discussions are allowable in public?

Big_G_NorthWales

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

They do not know this Country or Theresa May. Also reports from France that Macron is getting worried as Le Pen closes on him. He is calling for wide scale EU reform and does look a bit worried.

The French election is only going to add to the EU problems no matter the result.

murali_s

philiph said:

Charges may be made, but would that make the waters even murkier?

Charges and guilt are different. After charges what discussions are allowable in public?

If charges are made will Conservative candidates have to step down? Is there time for replacement candidates?

This couild be big...

ThreeQuidder

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

Big_G_NorthWales

philiph said:

Charges may be made, but would that make the waters even murkier?

Charges and guilt are different. After charges what discussions are allowable in public?

None

murali_s

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

You worried brother?

BigRich

With all dew respect to Mr Smithson, I don't think this will be a factor, at least not in the way he discuses it, for the simple reason that most if not all of the 2015 Target seats, will be safe Conservatives seats this time. (outside Scotland that is)

MikeSmithson

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

So all this effort by the Tories produced nothing. Would the Tories have won Thanet South if Nick Timothy and his team not been holed up in the smart Ramsgate hotel for weeks? He was certainly given the accolades afterwards.

I know you are a loyal Tory but really.

Baskerville

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

They do not know this Country or Theresa May. Also reports from France that Macron is getting worried as Le Pen closes on him. He is calling for wide scale EU reform and does look a bit worried.

The French election is only going to add to the EU problems no matter the result.

If the EU27 leave Juncker and Barnier in charge, there will be no deal.
http://lifestuff.xyz/blog/deal-or-no-deal

CarlottaVance

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

Only the Tories

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/dec/07/lib-dems-fined-20000-for-undeclared-election-spending

Big_G_NorthWales

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

A couple of days ago Theresa May said that the expenses issue was over the battle buses and not relevant to the individual MP's. She accepted that mistakes had been made but that the other parties were involved themselves.

Expect this to be the line if any charges are made. Make no mistake she will bring in the other parties battle buses

CarlottaVance

murali_s said:

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

You worried brother?

Are you?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/25/labour-fined-20000-for-undeclared-election-spending-including-for-ed-stone

HYUFD

I am fairly confident the fact the Tories delivered a few extra leaflets and had a few extra CF visits to some LD target seats was not the main factor in their gaining them, the main factor was the LDs abysmal poll rating in 2015

philiph

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

I think this batch is.

Other parties are fined earlier.

HYUFD

ORB has the Tories' biggest poll lead in Wales, the Tories also ahead in the South East, South West, London, the East, the East Midlands, the West Midlands and Yorkshire and Humber. Labour ahead in the North West and North East and the SNP in Scotland with the Tories second
https://twitter.com/montie/status/858590606829989888/photo/1

CarlottaVance

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I was mystified - apart from the rather unedifying spectacle of Juncker calling Mutti on her mobile at 7am the following morning - what are they trying to achieve. Do they want to strengthen May's majority? Reinforce the - already present - perception that if it breaks down its their fault?

I think the biggest issue is Britain wants to make Brexit a success and that simply does not compute for the EU. Brexit has to be a failure - or they're in trouble - we are looking for 'win-'win' - they want 'win-lose'

chestnut

FPT

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

THE NORTH - subsamples

Ipsos:………….. Con 50 Lab 32 LD 8 UKIP 5
ComRes:………. Con 45 Lab 36 LD 9 UKIP 8
Survation:…..... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 8 UKIP 8
Panelbase:….... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 9 UKIP 6
ICM:……………. Con 37 Lab 33 LD 9 UKIP 6 (SNP 12???)
ORB:………….... Lab 41 Con 40 LD 9 UKIP 9
Yougov:……….. Lab 43 Con 41 LD 9 UKIP 9

Do you have the ABC1 and C2DE splits ?

Sorry, I don't.

From a brief read through of the PDFs of some of these I would categorise as follows though:

Cons 45% across the range (maybe 47 ABC1/ 43 C2DE)
Lab 28% across the range (maybe 27 ABC1/ 30 C2DE)

There's little difference between the categories.

The real difference between these two NRS groupings sits with the 25% or so that vote either Lib Dem or UKIP or others.

The ABC1 office workers split 13 LD / 5 UKIP
The C2DE trades workers split 5 LD / 9 UKIP

Scott_P

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

No

The comments were made by an EU rep, in the EU for the EU.

The reporting of those comments here is entirely down to the UK press, who of course have their own agenda.

And "this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them" should of course read, this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who appears to live on another planet.

Y0kel

Big G probably has this right but it shows a difference of mentality between the UK and large parts of the continent. As a populous you back the British people up against a wall and the likely response is 'come on then, do your worst you sack of bastards'.

Too many EU officials are giving off the kind of approach that is likely to get just such a reaction. I'm not sure they get that.

If this was a domestic situation the jilted partner, in this case the EU, would have a restraining order taken out against it for obsessive behaviour.

Those who voted against Leave are by and large under no illusions. Those who cant handle the result have spent their time denigrating the majority of those who voted.

another_richard

' It is entirely possible that the Tories will be defending seats on June 8th that would not have been won if spending had been kept with the constituency limits. '

Such as which seats ?

Here's the list of marginal Conservative seats if you'd like to give some names:

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/conservative-defence/

How many extra votes did this supposed extra spending meant to have achieved ?

10 ? 20 ? 50 ? 100 ? 200 ? 500 ?

Perhaps its time we had some actual numbers suggested.

Scott_P

CarlottaVance said:

I was mystified - apart from the rather unedifying spectacle of Juncker calling Mutti on her mobile at 7am the following morning - what are they trying to achieve. Do they want to strengthen May's majority? Reinforce the - already present - perception that if it breaks down its their fault?

No

Juncker called Merkel because he was astonished at what he heard at dinner. May apparently really believes some of the bullshit she has been spreading.

It would have been more surprising had he not called.

The_Taxman

Dam! I didn't vote in the 2016 general election as referred to in paragraph one. In fact it completely passed me by without noticing it.

BigRich

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

All of the party's used whatever they could to maximise their vote it where it mattered to them the most. and will have paused the rules to the maximum they thought they could get away with.

I suspect that this is now a Tory thing because the conservatives won the seats that they paused the rules in. Lab and Lib Dem did not, but it may also some technical rule was interpreted one way by one party and defiantly by enough.

For what it is worth, having low spending laments in each constituency (and comparatively big national ones) is a silly situation:

1) it sets up a legalese arms race and each party tyres to find loop hopes, thus disadvantaging any party that attempts to stick to the spirit of the low,

2) it moves power from the MPs to the Party machines, as the PMs in close seats will be reliant on the Party machines

3) it reduces the possibility of independent MPs as they can not be helped by the party machines money, so will have a lower effective speeding limit.

4) it is fundamentally a curb on Free speech.

Big_G_NorthWales

Scott_P said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

No

The comments were made by an EU rep, in the EU for the EU.

The reporting of those comments here is entirely down to the UK press, who of course have their own agenda.

And "this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them" should of course read, this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who appears to live on another planet.

What agenda does Sky have. Faisal Islam is Juncker in disguise

You may not like the fact that Theresa May is standing up to them but thousands, no millions will be voting her into Office on the 8th June

CarlottaVance

Baskerville said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

They do not know this Country or Theresa May. Also reports from France that Macron is getting worried as Le Pen closes on him. He is calling for wide scale EU reform and does look a bit worried.

The French election is only going to add to the EU problems no matter the result.

If the EU27 leave Juncker and Barnier in charge, there will be no deal.
http://lifestuff.xyz/blog/deal-or-no-deal

Just one last point. If Juncker thinks the way to intimidate the Brits is by threatening them, he really ought to read a bit more history.

HYUFD

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

I was mystified - apart from the rather unedifying spectacle of Juncker calling Mutti on her mobile at 7am the following morning - what are they trying to achieve. Do they want to strengthen May's majority? Reinforce the - already present - perception that if it breaks down its their fault?

No

Juncker called Merkel because he was astonished at what he heard at dinner. May apparently really believes some of the bullshit she has been spreading.

It would have been more surprising had he not called.

The most interesting news today is even Macron, previously the Europhile's Europhile, has said the EU must reform or die. Juncker and Merkel though remain as obstinate as ever confirming once at for all that it is Germany that drives the EU show

CarlottaVance

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

I was mystified - apart from the rather unedifying spectacle of Juncker calling Mutti on her mobile at 7am the following morning - what are they trying to achieve. Do they want to strengthen May's majority? Reinforce the - already present - perception that if it breaks down its their fault?

No

Juncker called Merkel because he was astonished at what he heard at dinner. May apparently really believes some of the bullshit she has been spreading.

It would have been more surprising had he not called.

In Juncker’s leaked version of the Downing Street dinner, Mrs May said to him: “We want Brexit to be a success”. “Brexit cannot be a success”, he replied.

So, Brexit 'cannot be a success'?

Speaks volumes.

philiph

Scott_P said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

No

The comments were made by an EU rep, in the EU for the EU.

The reporting of those comments here is entirely down to the UK press, who of course have their own agenda.

And "this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them" should of course read, this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who appears to live on another planet.

I for one would be really disappointed if any UK government saw the first draft of the other sides negotiating tactics and positions and aid "yes, anything you say"

If you don't have a different position, you have nothing to negotiate. If your starting positions are close you don't have much to negotiate.

It looks as if they are miles apart, which is a good starting point.

theakes

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

Theuniondivvie

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

another_richard

chestnut said:

FPT

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

THE NORTH - subsamples

Ipsos:………….. Con 50 Lab 32 LD 8 UKIP 5
ComRes:………. Con 45 Lab 36 LD 9 UKIP 8
Survation:…..... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 8 UKIP 8
Panelbase:….... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 9 UKIP 6
ICM:……………. Con 37 Lab 33 LD 9 UKIP 6 (SNP 12???)
ORB:………….... Lab 41 Con 40 LD 9 UKIP 9
Yougov:……….. Lab 43 Con 41 LD 9 UKIP 9

Do you have the ABC1 and C2DE splits ?

Sorry, I don't.

From a brief read through of the PDFs of some of these I would categorise as follows though:

Cons 45% across the range (maybe 47 ABC1/ 43 C2DE)
Lab 28% across the range (maybe 27 ABC1/ 30 C2DE)

There's little difference between the categories.

The real difference between these two NRS groupings sits with the 25% or so that vote either Lib Dem or UKIP or others.

The ABC1 office workers split 13 LD / 5 UKIP
The C2DE trades workers split 5 LD / 9 UKIP

Thanks

I think the change in class voting might be a good predictor as to individual seats.

Scott_P

Big_G_NorthWales said:

You may not like the fact that Theresa May is standing up to them but thousands, no millions will be voting her into Office on the 8th June

I am under no illusions as to what Tezza is doing, and why, but at no point does that include securing the best possible deal for the UK.

Scott_P

CarlottaVance said:

So, Brexit 'cannot be a success'?

Speaks volumes.

It doesn't really, ignoring the fact that's a translation.

The EU position has always been that being in the club grants more success than being outside it. That is what he said.

Only an idiot could take offence at that

HYUFD

Scott_P said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

You may not like the fact that Theresa May is standing up to them but thousands, no millions will be voting her into Office on the 8th June

I am under no illusions as to what Tezza is doing, and why, but at no point does that include securing the best possible deal for the UK.

Depends on what you mean by the 'best possible deal'. For you it obviously means full membership of the single market and customs union, for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Morris_Dancer

Good afternoon, everyone.

Scott_P

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

you forgot "5-10% cut in GDP" h/t SeanT

ThreeQuidder

philiph said:

ThreeQuidder said:

Are we still pretending it was only the Tories?

I think this batch is.

Other parties are fined earlier.

If both main parties and at least one of the minor parties broke the rules, it needs to be considered whether the parties or the rules were at fault,considering the hybrid local/national nature of the modern general election campaign.

HYUFD

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

FPT

another_richard said:

chestnut said:

THE NORTH - subsamples

Ipsos:………….. Con 50 Lab 32 LD 8 UKIP 5
ComRes:………. Con 45 Lab 36 LD 9 UKIP 8
Survation:…..... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 8 UKIP 8
Panelbase:….... Con 42 Lab 40 LD 9 UKIP 6
ICM:……………. Con 37 Lab 33 LD 9 UKIP 6 (SNP 12???)
ORB:………….... Lab 41 Con 40 LD 9 UKIP 9
Yougov:……….. Lab 43 Con 41 LD 9 UKIP 9

Do you have the ABC1 and C2DE splits ?

Sorry, I don't.

From a brief read through of the PDFs of some of these I would categorise as follows though:

Cons 45% across the range (maybe 47 ABC1/ 43 C2DE)
Lab 28% across the range (maybe 27 ABC1/ 30 C2DE)

There's little difference between the categories.

The real difference between these two NRS groupings sits with the 25% or so that vote either Lib Dem or UKIP or others.

The ABC1 office workers split 13 LD / 5 UKIP
The C2DE trades workers split 5 LD / 9 UKIP

Thanks

I think the change in class voting might be a good predictor as to individual seats.

Basically the biggest Tory gains are likely to be in Labour seats with lots of C2DE voters but they may face a threat from the LDs in Tory seats which voted Remain with lots of ABC1s

CarlottaVance

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

So, Brexit 'cannot be a success'?

Speaks volumes.

that's a translation.

What's the original?

The Guardian account:

“Let us make Brexit a success,” May is said to have beseeched the commission president. According to the German newspaper, Juncker said while he wanted an orderly exit, not chaos, after Britain withdraws from the EU in 2019, it would be a third country state for the EU, adding: “Brexit cannot be a success.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/01/jean-claude-juncker-to-theresa-may-on-brexit-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before

I think they are looking for 'win-lose' - we are looking for 'win-win'

philiph

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

I thought they were halal

DavidL

MikeSmithson said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

So all this effort by the Tories produced nothing. Would the Tories have won Thanet South if Nick Timothy and his team not been holed up in the smart Ramsgate hotel for weeks? He was certainly given the accolades afterwards.

I know you are a loyal Tory but really.

What evidence do you have that it did? Certainly, and beyond doubt the intention to make a difference was there. But that does not mean that it did nor that the results are therefore distorted and not a proper basis for assessment in 2017 which I think was your point.

Of course whether they were successful or not is an entirely different question from whether criminal offences were committed. There is absolutely no need for the CPS to show the expenditure made a difference. Which might be just as well.

philiph

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

Or on some occasions voters are known to say

"We know who we want, we just elected them. Now we are giving them a bigger majority."

williamglenn

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that. There is - we'll be poorer and weaker.

Charles

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

GIN1138

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

ThreeQuidder

theakes said:

It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already.

All the way from impossibly titanic majority to very comfortable majority...

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that. There is - we'll be poorer and weaker.

They were actually told throughout the referendum campaign that if they voted Leave there would be an economic apocalypse but they still voted Leave anyway

MarkHopkins

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

I think this is right - only if the MP was banned somehow would they need a re-election? And that seems unlikely.

philiph

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

Assuming the MPs are not given a six month or longer mandatory holiday.

HYUFD

IFOP Macron 59% Le Pen 41%
http://dataviz.ifop.com:8080/IFOP_ROLLING/IFOP_01-05-2017.pdf

Macron leads 64% to 36% with under 35s but by a narrower 57% to 43% with over 35s

williamglenn

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that. There is - we'll be poorer and weaker.

They were actually told throughout the referendum campaign that if they voted Leave there would be an economic apocalypse but they still voted Leave anyway

Not because they were ok with that, but because they believed the people who said it would be plain sailing.

Cyan

Theuniondivvie said:

Cyan said:

williamglenn said:

Theuniondivvie said:

German is an official language of Luxembourg isn't it?

https://twitter.com/TonyParsonsUK/status/858995006648066049

The stoopids are in charge now.

Part of the country really has gone mad. Is padded cell Brexit an option?

You should come to Scotland, William. Last night I encountered a young SNP supporter who insisted that the SNP are polling at 66%; the Scottish government has a say in immigration policy; the Scottish parliament has a legal right to call another independence referendum; Shetlanders view themselves as Scots; the SNP has a majority at Holyrood, without support from anyone else; that if an independent Scotland joins the EU and rUK stays outside the single market and customs union then it will be up to the Scottish government whether or not to have the border as a hard external EU one or to be in a single market with rUK; and that the three main Scottish unionist parties are not Scottish but are "branch offices" of "English" parties.

Peak anecdotage.

I've got one. I 'met' someone on here last year pre referendum who suggested that the EU Leave vote might be higher in Scotland than the rUK. He was a sharp one alright.

You're not trying to throw factually wrong statements in with a wrong prediction? They're very different.

The kind of brainwashed SNP-voting bigots of whom I met a specimen last night are all over the place in Scotland and online. Things go a certain way and within a short period they could easily be putting people's windows in.

Do you find that using fashionable phrasing such as "peak anecdotage" helps you convey what you want to say?

AnneJGP

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

calum

I wonder how many Tory activists from the outside DCT were deployed to help retain the seat?

http://www.scotsman.com/news/politics/david-mundell-retains-single-scottish-tory-seat-1-3767016

DavidL

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

The question would be whether or not the candidates were eligible. If not there will be a bye-election. But my guess is that the person most likely to be charged and potentially convicted is the poor old agent. In which case there will not be.

Morris_Dancer

Miss JGP, I quite agree.

Miss Vance, quite.

Black_Rook

BigRich said:

With all dew respect to Mr Smithson, I don't think this will be a factor, at least not in the way he discuses it, for the simple reason that most if not all of the 2015 Target seats, will be safe Conservatives seats this time. (outside Scotland that is)

An entirely valid point. This election will be fought, not wholly but largely, around a different set of marginals to the last one. Certainly, in terms of Conservative defences, if you make the crude assumption that about half of the Ukip vote in each seat will defect, then there are only two sitting Tory MPs starting with majorities of less than 5% (David Mundell in Dumfriesshire and Gavin Barwell in Croydon Central.) In fact, we can probably assume that virtually all of the Tory MPs are safe, save for a small handful - principally those facing Liberal Democrat challengers - in Remain-leaning areas.

The swings that are likely to come into play are mainly in Labour's defences, and most of the tight ones that the Tories missed out on last time can, and in many cases will, fall given Ukip defections alone, before the Conservatives even have to try to convert any other new voters. The maths of this electoral map is entirely different from 2015.

Relative to the wider movements of voters between the parties, any difference made by campaign overspend in the last election is likely to be negligible.

(FWIW I don't think that there will be CPS announcements this side of June 8th either. These lawyers aren't thick, and presumably they won't want to find themselves caught in a similar kind of shitstorm to that which they will have seen engulf James Comey and the FBI in the States last Autumn.)

MarkHopkins

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

The logic is strong with this one.

surbiton

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

And, good afternoon to you. Is this the latest line from CCHQ ? You are trying to muddy the waters ?

No other party is being investigated.

Sean_F

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that. There is - we'll be poorer and weaker.

They were actually told throughout the referendum campaign that if they voted Leave there would be an economic apocalypse but they still voted Leave anyway

Not because they were ok with that, but because they believed the people who said it would be plain sailing.

Or they considered that economic and political problems would be manageable.

Big_G_NorthWales

Tear gas being fired in Paris

spudgfsh

if anyone cares there's a new constituency poll for Tatton (Tories on 58%)

http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Final-Tatton-Tables-38-Degrees-5c0d7h-210317LICH.pdf

chestnut

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that.

Most leavers perceive a period of turbulence and change. They perceive it to be surmountable though and worth enduring for the medium to long term gain.

The UK has already shown itself to be far more resilient than the naysayers were suggesting pre-referendum.

HYUFD

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

williamglenn said:

HYUFD said:

for most Leave voters it means ending free movement and reducing contributions to the EU and regaining sovereignty

Most Leave voters think there is no economic or political cost to doing that. There is - we'll be poorer and weaker.

They were actually told throughout the referendum campaign that if they voted Leave there would be an economic apocalypse but they still voted Leave anyway

Not because they were ok with that, but because they believed the people who said it would be plain sailing.

Osborne, Clegg, Cameron, Blair all said the sky would fall in the moment we left the EU and it did not. They voted Leave to regain sovereignty, gain control of their borders and reduce payments to the EU, for now that will be the priority, it may be a future Labour government returns us to the single market in a decade or so but for now the focus is on regaining control

Dadge

GIN1138 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

"Google Surveys run thousands of surveys a day, across a network of online news, reference and entertainment sites where it's embedded directly into content.

"On the web, users answer questions in exchange for access to that content. The user's gender, age, and geographic location are inferred based on anonymous browsing history and IP address.

"Using this data, Google Surveys can automatically build a representative sample of thousands of respondents."

So not voodoo, but voodoo-ish

Big_G_NorthWales

surbiton said:

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

And, good afternoon to you. Is this the latest line from CCHQ ? You are trying to muddy the waters ?

No other party is being investigated.

They have been and both labour and lib dems fined

Theuniondivvie

Cyan said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Cyan said:

williamglenn said:

Theuniondivvie said:

German is an official language of Luxembourg isn't it?

https://twitter.com/TonyParsonsUK/status/858995006648066049

The stoopids are in charge now.

Part of the country really has gone mad. Is padded cell Brexit an option?

You should come to Scotland, William. Last night I encountered a young SNP supporter who insisted that the SNP are polling at 66%; the Scottish government has a say in immigration policy; the Scottish parliament has a legal right to call another independence referendum; Shetlanders view themselves as Scots; the SNP has a majority at Holyrood, without support from anyone else; that if an independent Scotland joins the EU and rUK stays outside the single market and customs union then it will be up to the Scottish government whether or not to have the border as a hard external EU one or to be in a single market with rUK; and that the three main Scottish unionist parties are not Scottish but are "branch offices" of "English" parties.

Peak anecdotage.

I've got one. I 'met' someone on here last year pre referendum who suggested that the EU Leave vote might be higher in Scotland than the rUK. He was a sharp one alright.

You're not trying to throw factually wrong statements in with a wrong prediction? They're very different.

The kind of brainwashed SNP-voting bigots of whom I met a specimen last night are all over the place in Scotland and online. Things go a certain way and within a short period they could easily be putting people's windows in.

Do you find that using fashionable phrasing such as "peak anecdotage" helps you convey what you want to say?

'Fashionable', lol.

I think it covers the sort of 'anonymous bloke makes rubbish point badly with unverifiable story' pish that abounds on the internet.

I mean, I could say that I talked to some dude last night that said you used to post on here under another name but got banned for tinfoilhattery with an anti-semitic tinge, but that wouldn't make it true, would it?

SirNorfolkPassmore

philiph said:

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

Assuming the MPs are not given a six month or longer mandatory holiday.

Isn't it still 12 months rather than six? Although I think they'd struggle to cling on practically with any period of incarceration... Huhne wasn't technically disqualified as an MP due to sentence, but in practice had to take the whisky and revolver.

But I doubt the penalty would be custodial here. This may embarrass May later in the year, but the election takes the sting out of it really.

FrancisUrquhart

Big_G_NorthWales said:

Tear gas being fired in Paris

Normal day in Paris then?

surbiton

Big_G_NorthWales said:

surbiton said:

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

And, good afternoon to you. Is this the latest line from CCHQ ? You are trying to muddy the waters ?

No other party is being investigated.

They have been and both labour and lib dems fined

These are in a different league. In one of them, we are allegedly talking about a £200k overspend.

IanB2

Tories - naughty

GIN1138

Dadge said:

GIN1138 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

"Google Surveys run thousands of surveys a day, across a network of online news, reference and entertainment sites where it's embedded directly into content.

"On the web, users answer questions in exchange for access to that content. The user's gender, age, and geographic location are inferred based on anonymous browsing history and IP address.

"Using this data, Google Surveys can automatically build a representative sample of thousands of respondents."

So not voodoo, but voodoo-ish

That's what I thought. Thanks.

viewcode

GIN1138 said:

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

There's a question with enormous salience.

We know about voodoo polls: polls at the bottom of articles saying "What do you think about this? Vote NOW!!!", which are open to self-selection abuse and multiple voting and rightly decried.

We know about online opt-in panel polls such as YouGov, where people opt-in to a panel and responses are weighted to the general population. This is good but has disadvantages, the main one being politically-engaged folk opt-in in too many numbers and demographic weighting not curing the subsequent bias, a problem YouGov are committed to trying to solve.

But there are also ones in the middle. ComRes augments its panel with popup polls, and I think (not sure here) SurveyMonkey does as well.

The line is becoming increasingly blurred. Following GE2015 and EU2016, telephone panels are dead in the water and online are the only game in town. How they will develop over the next ten years will be very interesting...in the Chinese sense.

calum

CarlottaVance said:

Baskerville said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

The reporting on the EU today and May standing firm will be adding thousands of votes for her. The EU just fail to understand that their behavior is only increasing the anger to them but then this is the same EU that has no idea how to handle someone who stands up to them

I do wonder if they are of the misguided opinion that by making their comments in the way they have that opinion in the UK is likely to force Theresa May to surrender to them

They do not know this Country or Theresa May. Also reports from France that Macron is getting worried as Le Pen closes on him. He is calling for wide scale EU reform and does look a bit worried.

The French election is only going to add to the EU problems no matter the result.

If the EU27 leave Juncker and Barnier in charge, there will be no deal.
http://lifestuff.xyz/blog/deal-or-no-deal

Just one last point. If Juncker thinks the way to intimidate the Brits is by threatening them, he really ought to read a bit more history.

Maybe he should start with BT Project Fear !!

surbiton

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

philiph said:

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

Assuming the MPs are not given a six month or longer mandatory holiday.

Isn't it still 12 months rather than six? Although I think they'd struggle to cling on practically with any period of incarceration... Huhne wasn't technically disqualified as an MP due to sentence, but in practice had to take the whisky and revolver.

But I doubt the penalty would be custodial here. This may embarrass May later in the year, but the election takes the sting out of it really.

In most cases, if any, it would not result in a custodial sentence.

Theuniondivvie

GIN1138 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

Dunno, but it appears to have been done specifically for the Record. The Daily Record do have regular polls from one of the recognised pollsters, but I think this is the first one with Google.

Richard_Tyndall

I remember a fair amount of scorn and derision being directed at Crick when these investigations first started. I think it is worth recognising what a great service he has done the country in exposing these practices.

FrancisUrquhart

Don't forget to get out and vote on.....the 9th of June....

https://order-order.com/2017/05/01/oh-gloria/

HYUFD

GIN1138 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

The Daily Record is basically the equivalent of the Scottish Daily Mirror, its main rival the Scottish Sun and is traditionally Labour supporting though it now also backs an indyref2, its agenda has always been anti Tory

GIN1138

viewcode said:

GIN1138 said:

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

There's a question with enormous salience.

We know about voodoo polls: polls at the bottom of articles saying "What do you think about this? Vote NOW!!!", which are open to self-selection abuse and multiple voting and rightly decried.

We know about online opt-in panel polls such as YouGov, where people opt-in to a panel and responses are weighted to the general population. This is good but has disadvantages, the main one being politically-engaged folk opt-in in too many numbers and demographic weighting not curing the subsequent bias, a problem YouGov are committed to trying to solve.

But there are also ones in the middle. ComRes augments its panel with popup polls, and I think (not sure here) SurveyMonkey does as well.

The line is becoming increasingly blurred. Following GE2015 and EU2016, telephone panels are dead in the water and online are the only game in town. How they will develop over the next ten years will be very interesting...in the Chinese sense.

MORI is still polling by phone?

williamglenn

Brexit and the slide into nationalism:

https://twitter.com/sam1fleming/status/859042767435165696

Big_G_NorthWales

SirNorfolkPassmore said:

philiph said:

Charles said:

theakes said:

There is still a police referral re prominent Lib Dem official. Having said that this could run and run for the Conservatives. If it all happens after the election, as one suspects, (the CPS would not want to be accused of interfering in the process), it could then still affect those individuals involved, their seats and by elections. The Criminal Law does not regnise intervening situations it deals with the alleged offences whenever they were allegedly committed.
It is therefore very important for the Conservaives to get at least a 40 -50 seat majority next month to cover this possibility and the polls are closing already. I doubt if the defence policy of Corbyn, what exactly that is, will affect Labour or Lib Dem voters, especially if they anticipate a Conservative victory. The Conservatives overall grand strategy could therefore fail for a number of different reasons. If I was them I would instruct the right wing press and its opinion pollsters to say it is much closer, thereby causing some Labour and Lib Dem voters to hesitate.

I don't believe you would have by elections. Even if the 2015 results were set aside, the 2017 results would be valid

Assuming the MPs are not given a six month or longer mandatory holiday.

Isn't it still 12 months rather than six? Although I think they'd struggle to cling on practically with any period of incarceration... Huhne wasn't technically disqualified as an MP due to sentence, but in practice had to take the whisky and revolver.

But I doubt the penalty would be custodial here. This may embarrass May later in the year, but the election takes the sting out of it really.

The guilt verdict is very high and in any case I cannot imagine any verdicts this year.

Theresa May has had plenty of time to consider her response and I expect labour and the lib dems will be drawn into it

TheWhiteRabbit

HYUFD said:

IFOP Macron 59% Le Pen 41%
http://dataviz.ifop.com:8080/IFOP_ROLLING/IFOP_01-05-2017.pdf

Macron leads 64% to 36% with under 35s but by a narrower 57% to 43% with over 35s

Not that much narrower. Enthusiasm for Macron gives way to dislike of Le Pen.

Big_G_NorthWales

surbiton said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

surbiton said:

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

And, good afternoon to you. Is this the latest line from CCHQ ? You are trying to muddy the waters ?

No other party is being investigated.

They have been and both labour and lib dems fined

These are in a different league. In one of them, we are allegedly talking about a £200k overspend.

The amount does not come into it

FrancisUrquhart

dr_spyn said:

LD in Bath ex Tory.
http://www.rochdaleonline.co.uk/news-features/2/news/11095/local-election-candidate-interview-wera-and-william-hobhouse

If you aren't in Maomentum, we are all Tories these days....

Dadge

CarlottaVance said:

Scott_P said:

CarlottaVance said:

So, Brexit 'cannot be a success'?

Speaks volumes.

that's a translation.

What's the original?

The Guardian account:

“Let us make Brexit a success,” May is said to have beseeched the commission president. According to the German newspaper, Juncker said while he wanted an orderly exit, not chaos, after Britain withdraws from the EU in 2019, it would be a third country state for the EU, adding: “Brexit cannot be a success.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/may/01/jean-claude-juncker-to-theresa-may-on-brexit-im-10-times-more-sceptical-than-i-was-before

I think they are looking for 'win-lose' - we are looking for 'win-win'

They aren't looking for for "win-lose". That's your unhelpful negative spin. Juncker's point (of course he's biased) is that the UK becoming a so-called "third country" nation would be a bad thing for the UK. He can't imagine anyone in their right mind wanting "third country" status, or how that could be a successful outcome. No doubt you and Boris have plans for making a success of it, so no problem. Ergo, ignore Juncker if you disagree with him, and go on and prove him wrong, but let's not have all this counterproductive crap about fighting them on the beaches or whatever.

Sean_F

spudgfsh said:

if anyone cares there's a new constituency poll for Tatton (Tories on 58%)

http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Final-Tatton-Tables-38-Degrees-5c0d7h-210317LICH.pdf

Almost no change on 2015.

surbiton

spudgfsh said:

if anyone cares there's a new constituency poll for Tatton (Tories on 58%)

http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Final-Tatton-Tables-38-Degrees-5c0d7h-210317LICH.pdf

Interesting. Tories on 58,2%. In GE 2015, they got 58.6%.

There was another poll in Kensington. The Tory percentage actually dropped.

philiph

surbiton said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

surbiton said:

AnneJGP said:

DavidL said:

Not sure where my post went but anyway...

I was saying that before the last election we heard interminably about Labour's ground game and the personal votes built on local activism of various Lib Dem MPs. In the end neither mattered a damn. I don't know of any reason why volunteers charging around in a bus in areas they don't even know should be more effective. I very much doubt this excess or undeclared (since in many cases the spending would not have put the candidate above the limits) had much impact at all.

Setting aside the legalities for a moment, whether one party in a seat overspent, and if so by how much, does not add much to our knowledge unless we are confident that none of the other parties in that seat overspent.

If we have no knowledge of the comparative spend in each seat among all the front runners, then surely it is impossible to say whether one side overspending had an impact or not.

Party A may have lost to Party B, but if Party A out-spent Party B's excess spending, and only Party B's expenses were investigated, what have we learned?

So if this admirable investigation only investigated one side in each constituency, we know about some law-breaking but not necessarily all of the law-breaking, and it tells us nothing of where the respective parties would be if neither of them had overspent.

And good afternoon, everybody.

And, good afternoon to you. Is this the latest line from CCHQ ? You are trying to muddy the waters ?

No other party is being investigated.

They have been and both labour and lib dems fined

These are in a different league. In one of them, we are allegedly talking about a £200k overspend.

I am a tad surprised that it is agents and MPs under investigation. From my limited knowledge I would have thought party chair or central office were more culpable than the local staff.

The agent is responsible for the accuracy of the return. Head office is responsible for the wrong information going on the return, I would have thought, if they are funding local electioneering from central funds.

isam

If the Tories were found to have overspent in 2015 in Thanet South, would it matter if the MP was charged after GE2017?

viewcode

Dadge said:

GIN1138 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

How kosher are Google surveys?

'Poll shows most Scots would prefer independence in Europe rather than face Tory rule in UK after Brexit'

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/politics/poll-shows-most-scots-would-10315662

In certain to vote they have SNP 39, SCon 25, SLab 18.
I seem to detect a slight SLab uptick lately, perhaps a reversion to reflex when a big majority Tory government hoves into view?

Is this a genuine poll from Google? Or one of those survey type ad things Google do where when you hit on a website you have to fill in the survey before you can read the page content?

"Google Surveys run thousands of surveys a day, across a network of online news, reference and entertainment sites where it's embedded directly into content.

"On the web, users answer questions in exchange for access to that content. The user's gender, age, and geographic location are inferred based on anonymous browsing history and IP address.

"Using this data, Google Surveys can automatically build a representative sample of thousands of respondents."

So not voodoo, but voodoo-ish

I'm going to argue with that, if I may. It may be *representative* after weighting , but it's not *random*: the probability of somebody participating in the panel is not proportional to their occurence in the general population.

The AAPOR had absolute conniptions about online panel polling using nonprobability sampling in the late Noughties/early teens, and even today, overwhelmed by the weight of money, they deprecate them as nonrandom. They are popular, cheap and if properly weighted, accurate. So that's not likely to change. But they are very vulnerable to changes in behavior, and when they fail, they fail bigly.