Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take polls with large pinch of salt. Do not consume in exc
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Take polls with large pinch of salt. Do not consume in excess!
In a search for more accurate vote intention estimates following the debacle of 1992, one modification we made was to prompt respondents with the names of the main political parties, Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrat (and SNP or Plaid Cymru in relevant areas). The prompts reminded people of the existence of the Liberal Democrats – a partly forgotten alternative between elections.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23597233
Hardly a surprise that The Guardian has its knickers in a twist - next week it will call for bans on Yes Minister.
Just watched the first episode of Southcliffe on 4oD and it was so compelling that I immediately watched the second one:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/reviews/tv-review-southcliffe-might-not-be-cheery-but-this-is-rare-and-brilliant-sunday-night-viewing-8745428.html
http://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2013/aug/04/southcliffe-i-love-my-country-tv-review
Off topic - who said this then?
"“We believe we can maintain the current arrangement and we’ve got legal advice to that effect,” he said."
http://www.scotsman.com/news/education/come-clean-on-tuition-fees-alex-salmond-told-1-3032975
Discuss.
Top 3 Cameron vs Miliband:
Sticks to what he believes in: +9 (+1)
Decisive: +11 (+2)
Charismatic: +13 (+1)
Top 3 Miliband vs Cameron:
In touch with ordinary people: +13 (-1)
Honest: +2 (-1)
Strong: -9 (-) (Miliband's next two after Honest are Cameron's top two - shown above)
http://cdn.yougov.com/cumulus_uploads/document/2y1mc7eaxz/YG-Archive-Pol-Sun-results-060813.pdf
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/liberaldemocrats/10224801/Lib-Dems-ban-petrol-and-diesel-cars-from-UK-roads-by-2040.html
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/multimedia/archive/00438/Brookes_07_438728a.jpg
From Mr Bloom himself.
Perhaps the Guardian should start a letter-writing campaign also
Cameron may well get his 5% for UKIP. Will Clegg get back his erstwhile supporters? That remains the key question.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10226881/Milibands-MPs-warn-Labour-must-fight-harder-against-Tories.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385753/Godfrey-Bloom--Leaked-recording-UKIP-MEPs-racist-outburst.html
Bloom giving robust account of himself on R4
Tim Shipman (Mail) @ShippersUnbound
Godfrey Bloom says he will apologise to the Bongo Bongo Land ambassador at the Court of St James
Foreign aid is 'treason' says Godfrey Bloom
Thanks to Mr. Sparrow for his interesting piece.
The graph indicates the first significant rise in Others in 1997. This also tallies with the Alistair Campbell approach of New Labour to dominate the media with negative stories, putting people off voting for parties rather than promoting one's own. This has (amongst other things) led to an increase in people being less willing to vote for the big parties and opened an avenue of opportunity to the Others.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/10226881/Milibands-MPs-warn-Labour-must-fight-harder-against-Tories.html
Warning. There is a video attached to this story where you would struggle to believe Ed Miliband actually believes what he was saying. Noone else will.
Of course anyone who has been involved at the sharp end of giving aid to developing countries should know that you NEVER let the money touch the country - too many people have off-shore bank accounts.
Also if the aid is in the form of food or product, you give the food directly to the people who need it and install the product so that it will be used and not sold.
Of course, there will be squeals of "you do not trust us" but that is a fact of life. However, politicians and other well salaried people at the top of DFID and major charities are often astonishingly naive.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100230005/theres-a-hole-at-labours-heart-that-not-even-mandelson-can-fill/
As for the cartoon: I heard someone on the radio saying that the threat was an explosive that was inert when wet. This meant that you could spray it on your clothes, and when it dried it was explosive (with ignition source).
I'm rather doubtful about the power such explosive clothes might yield, but I certainly wouldn't want to be wearing them.
Which makes me wonder what sort of chemical compound it is - although I doubt we'll get to know for a long time.
Dylan Sharpe @dylsharpe
Until recently Godfrey Bloom MEP had a page on his website titled "Godfrey Bloom: The Misogynist?" featuring photos of himself & young women
It is staggering that donors still think they know best how to distribute aid to recipients.
If you disintermediate the governments you force them down other less attractive avenues. If you don't like the governments, well there is your problem right there.
Similar are used to "ignite" air bags in cars
Worth noting that the Government approval rating, which got people excited yesterday when it "shot up" to the dizzy heights of -22, has "collapsed" to -29 today. In reality I doubt if anything has happened at all on either day - it's just sampling variation.
I loved this spoof
Европейский комиссар @MoodySlayerUK
UKIP statement "Well, he didn't say nig-nog, we were worried he might slip it in"
RT @BBCr4today: LISTEN: Godfrey Bloom @Goddersukip on 'bongo bongo land' and UK foreign aid comments bbc.in/189ud2m #R4Today
Godfrey Bloom is hilarious, long may he continue to say what he likes.
The day ukip bind their members in political correctness in its own meetings will be the day they halve their (meaningless?!) share of the vote in the polls
I was disappointed, but not surprised, that you side-stepped my question as to why anyone would Labour, by saying that you were waiting for policies to emerge.
I am sure that you said more to the selection committee and would certainly say more to any inquiring voter. Would you care to revisit my question?
When Messina’s appointment was announced, rumours started circulating that he’d been approached by Labour too, but had rejected their advances. Anyone wanting to know why Jim Messina made that choice needs look no further than Labour’s reaction to the appointment of Jim Messina."
http://youtu.be/D1bCi5QroLk
"Urbane, witty, well informed and sensitive, even as he punches your lights out."
Work on the multinational ITER experimental fusion reactor in France is already two years late, with no significant parts on site. ITER is the prototype for DEMO, a demonstration commercial plant, and DEMO cannot go ahead until lessons have been learnt from ITER.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23408073
People holding on for fusion power will have a long wait with any of the currently-proposed methods. The US laser fusion project (National Ignition Facility) is also having significant problems.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Ignition_Facility#DOE_Report.2C_July_19.2C_2012
If we get commercial fusion within the next forty years, it will not be by any of the methods that we are throwing billions into at the moment. Instead, it will come from a WTF! finding in physics that occur every so often. But I wouldn't bet the bank on it ...
Many expert commentators, like Mike Smithson, are saying things such as 'UKIP will have a big influence on the next GE even if they win 0 MPs'.
If we can make this effect more widely known, it undermines the criticism that a 'vote for UKIP is a wasted vote'. The more votes UKIP receives, anywhere, the more influence it has.
"Bloom's remarks caused outrage among many MPs and campaigners. Rushanara Ali, a shadow development minister, said: "It's just offensive and the kind of thing that should have been consigned to the history books. It's completely at odds with the 21st century.
"If Nigel Farage is serious about getting rid of racism and intolerance in his party, he should take action against politicians who think it's acceptable to speak of people in developing countries in that way."
John Mann, Labour MP for Bassetlaw, said Ukip should "throw him out and stop him standing as an MEP". A spokesman for the Hope, Not Hate campaign said Bloom's remarks were reminiscent of the "Tory party of 1985", when Alan Clark provoked outrage by referring to Africa as "bongo bongo land" in an official meeting."
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/07/ukip-godfrey-bloom-bongo-bongo-land?CMP=twt_fd
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BRDNbpECIAAr6f_.jpg:large
If the Conservatives lose seats, Labour gains and we get a Lib-Lab Coalition there will be no referendum. At best UKIP will be irrelevant, at worst it will have cost us an In/Out referendum.
[Yes yes, I accept many distrust Cameron over the cast-iron media operation to revise history regarding what he said, but even if you do then you can trust the Conservative backbenchers to kill Cameron's career if he gets a majority and does not hold a referendum].
The fact of the matter is that the more votes UKIP get the more chance we have of electing a Europhile Labour government.
I respect your right to vote UKIP but for someone who is anti-EU it just doesn't make sense. UKIP are never going to be in power, ever. So the choice is between Labour and the Conservatives. I know who I'd prefer in charge when it comes to EU matters.
Breaking the dam is hard as no one really wants to touch that third rail - then Kippers come along and say it outloud and everyone either looks at their shoes or says Actually I Agree.
The Ukip leader recently ensured an Italian MEP was expelled from Ukip's European alliance for saying a black minister was part of a "government of bongo bongo" which would impose "tribal traditions".
http://www.politics.co.uk/news/2013/08/07/the-ukip-dilemma-what-to-do-with-the-bongo-bongo-mep
Nice to see that you've talked to each and every UKIP voter personally to ascertain why they voted the way they did.
" Sir Stephen, who runs the Association of Chief Executives of Voluntary Organisations, accused those who question executive pay of hating good causes, and questioned the agenda of Conservative MP Priti Patel, who helped with the research.
Writing on his blog, Sir Stephen said: “Let’s just notice who was one of those behind, this story in the Telegraph: Priti Patel, Tory MP.
“Let’s be clear on what is happening. Many MPs on the right hate effective charities who campaign. They particularly dislike international charities who have been so effective in raising the concerns of the world’s poor.
“So let’s be robust in defending pay. What I am particularly angry about is that this risks giving the impression that all charities pay 100k salaries. So in effect Mr Shawcross risks bringing the sector into disrepute by this attack.”
Sir Stephen, who represented Labour in Lambeth, south London, continued: “No quarter should be given. There is not a problem here that needs solving.
"Trustees know they need to pay good salaries to attract CEOs at all levels in out sector. Gone are the days when charities were run by retired colonels and the daughters of the aristocracy!” http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/10226355/Right-wingers-hate-us-because-we-are-so-effective-at-campaigning-say-charity-leaders.html
Cameron would be gain more credence for his promise for an in/out refendum if he went on to timetable what would happen if there were a No vote. If he said 'the following day, we will give immediate notice to leave the EU, and would arrange a 2-year transition period, starting today, to sort out the various administrative details', it would make him a more believable figure. But he does not seem to be close to this approach. Just by setting out a leaving timetable would give himself valuable extra clout during any 're-negotiation'.
But even DC's friends would describe him as more a 'mediator' than a negotiator.
Can anyone show me the way to Bongo Bongo land. Perhaps Harry Potter knows the way ?
"Some of the senior executives at the charities had senior roles under the Labour Government, or continue to work for the party.
Justin Forsyth, Save the Children’s chief executive who was paid £163,000 in 2012, was previously director of strategic communications in Number 10 under Gordon Brown, when he was Prime Minister.
Sir Nick Young, chief executive of the British Red Cross whose pay jumped 11 per cent to £184,000 in 2012, sat on the NHS Modernisation Board under Labour....The charity’s chairman is businessman Sir Charles Allen, who has also been chairman of the executive board of the Labour Party for over a year."
The entire article sums up perfectly what has gone wrong with too many charities - over-paid, over-politicised and over politically correct.
As soon as he publishes one thing then it's a barrage from both sides as to why he's wrong because they don't agree with him. The tail would simply wag the dog. UKIP wouldn't accept to operating under those conditions so why should any other political party ?
I have lots of views on policy which I put to the members, and they're not secret, just too long to reproduce here. If you want to email me (nickmp1 at aol.com) I can send you a copy of my intro letter to members, and you can quote from it if you want to within reason. I won't disclose your email address to anyone. Alternatively you can dig up anything I've ever said about anything, including embarrassing stuff from years back, with a subject search in the 662 commentaries stored here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BroxtoweInfo/messages
Still keen to locate that pb'er who is an expert on wikipedia if he'd like to email me too? It's a technical question with political implications.
"Hideous hypocrisy of the charity fat cats"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2385705/Hideous-hypocrisy-charity-fat-cats.html
There are areas of fusion and related research that I would put limited amounts of money into as a country:
1) Understanding the deep physics of fusion. I.e. using experimental apparatus such as the polywell to firm-up equations and models.
2) Investigate high temperature, pressure and neutron-flux resistant materials.
3) Investigate direct conversion of charged particles from a reactor, improving on the 30-40% efficiency in thermal-cycle reactors (i.e. the steam cycle)
4) Artificial transmutation of nuclear waste.
These would all have large returns, possible for relatively small monetary inputs.
(Edit: forgot #4)
Whilst everyone else is saying 'lovely man, salt of the Earth, never had a crossed word with anyone'... they chip in with 'I thought he was a sour old codger who shut out anyone who didn't agree with him'...
So your argument is hogwash.
But as a free market capitalist I have no problem with paying people a market rate.
Unless the charity CEOs are political appointees. Perish the thought.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-23599115
.@Goddersukip on furore: “They are in the business of being offended – I don’t represent them, I represent hte people in the pub.” @BBCNews
The stronger UKIP is, the more likely any govt is to offer a referendum. And much more importantly and quite differently, the more likely we are to win one.
By far the worst result for UKIP would be a reluctant, unethusiastically given referendum, to humour us. That to be followed by masses of EU money to artificially prop up the stay-in vote, accompanied by relentlessly negative and untruthful campaigning (see any of Clegg's relevant comments for a sample).
And worst of all, we then lose the vote by whisker.
It sort of says back to the drawing board for BOOers.
The vibe does take some time to establish, and it is really difficult to understand the vibe of the two Eds. I expect that even with a daft manifesto and lame campaign they would be unlikely to fall below 30%. Leaving it too late runs the risk of having policy battles in public, which is not a good vibe.
Thanks for the excellent article. I agree with Nick and note that OGH and tim (below) believe that the GE 1997 experience matters. I disagree but am happy that the offie leftie and OGH are happy with the way things are going with the polls. They seem to want to fit the narrative to suit their hopes.
FWIW in 1997 we had a Govt that had lost credibility over the ERM debacle. Even though Lab and LDs supported ERM. Voters saw things differently and even when the economy was improving wanted to punish the Govt for this and other mistakes. Labour and the Lib Dems were untainted by any recent Govt record (18+ years ago). In 2015 we will have a Labour party still linked to their previous record of Govt, with just 5 years passing by. Hence why 1997 is an unsuitable example of an election where the economy is growing and the Govt are kicked out.
Not sure what your point is. Surely free speech is worth defending. I'm not a UKIP supporter but you had to laugh watching him just new on the beeb giving the interviewer and Guardian journalists a complete pasting.
What has amazed me is not the salary but the increases over the last two years. Increases of 9% to 22% - something that their personal donors can only dream of.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385754/Fury-charity-boss-says-donors-dont-mind-paying-figure-salaries.html
It is time that many large Charities reverted to being charities and not pseudo government organisations who are recipients of major HMG money.
BTW, yesterday was accosted by some Chuggers in the High St. As they refused to tell me what their share of the take is, I refused to listen to them. Gathered quite a crowd round us, and the Chuggers' attitude so disgusted the on-lookers (most of whom did not realise that these people earned from the donations) that their time on the High St was fruitless. Also they were operating without the licence that the local council requires for charity collectors.
LOL - I do hope Godders is at the end of the pier for the rest of the summer season
Then if you are anti-EU to the extent of wishing to leave (which I actually doubt), you are deluded. There is no more chance of getting out of the EU with the Tories in power than there is with Labour in.
So your argument is hogwash.
-----------------------------------------------------
I don't want to leave (not yet, anyway). I think the idea of the European nations sitting round tables and agreeing what's best for the continent is a good thing. I think the anti-democratic seepage of powers to unaccountable lawmakers in Brussels is a very bad thing. I support the idea that centre-right parties, or even reality based centre left ones, wrestle back the fundamental initiative of the EU from the dogmatic federalists and socialists who appear to want some Animal Farm type power over Europeans.
So overall my fears and concerns about the EU are not too far from what the average anti-EU voter feels.
I agree that someone voting Tory thinking they will leave the EU is deluded. But from a purely pragmatic point of view, I feel a lot more comfortable with the Tories in charge of our negotiating seat in Brussels than I do when Labour* are in charge. And I think voting UKIP (based on the political realities right now) increases the chances of Labour gaining an overall majority.
So my position on this is not ideological or deluded, it is just logical.
*Labour's position on the EU and the influence of the Union barons are the two biggest reasons why I'd be reluctant to vote for them.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2385754/Fury-charity-boss-says-donors-dont-mind-paying-figure-salaries.html
Campbell "You said that Yorks women should have dinner on the table for when you get home"
Godders " Don't you think they should be represented?"
Campbell "...."
That fact is, they don't want a referendum, nor the only opportunity of actually leaving the EU. Now that Cameron has committed to the referendum, and Conservative MPs have almost unanimously supported a bill giving a deadline of 2017, the nonsense of the UKIP position is completely clear: they are just wreckers, wanting to wreck for the sake of it, to the extent of campaigning in a way designed to produce a Labour or Labour/LD government whose policy positions on every single issue, bar none, would be the diametric opposite of what UKIP claim to want.
There's only one possible explanation which makes any sense for this mad behaviour, which is that their real interest is that they enjoy moaning. It would be cruel to take away their principal excuse for moaning by actually holding the referendum, wouldn't it?
So your argument is hogwash.
-----------------------------------------------------
I don't want to leave (not yet, anyway). I think the idea of the European nations sitting round tables and agreeing what's best for the continent is a good thing. I think the anti-democratic seepage of powers to unaccountable lawmakers in Brussels is a very bad thing. I support the idea that centre-right parties, or even reality based centre left ones, wrestle back the fundamental initiative of the EU from the dogmatic federalists and socialists who appear to want some Animal Farm type power over Europeans.
So overall my fears and concerns about the EU are not too far from what the average anti-EU voter feels.
I agree that someone voting Tory thinking they will leave the EU is deluded. But from a purely pragmatic point of view, I feel a lot more comfortable with the Tories in charge of our negotiating seat in Brussels than I do when Labour* are in charge. And I think voting UKIP (based on the political realities right now) increases the chances of Labour gaining an overall majority.
So my position on this is not ideological or deluded, it is just logical.
*Labour's position on the EU and the influence of the Union barons are the two biggest reasons why I'd be reluctant to vote for them.
In which case as I say any argument you make about UKIP from the point of view of a BOO is rubbish. You admit you don't want to leave and so your views are not in any way the same as those who wish that result. For you of course that makes the Tories a perfect choice - your Europhilia and theirs are pretty much well matched.
But for anyone who is a real Eurosceptic the Tories can never be a realistic choice as long as Cameron and his clique are in charge.