I'm no fan of may, she's pretry crap, but Osbornes pieces show he has an active hate for her.
This must stem from more than just his sacking. He must have realised that it would have been impossible to stay after Cameron resigned. Surely any ambitions he had to become leader were torpedoed by Dave's morning-after resignation. Why is there no ire directed at him?
On an earlier thread there was all manner of emoting about Dave. I really don't get this. He left his country and party in the lurch. In the leadership election that ensued May was the only plausible candidate left standing. At one point Nicki Morgan was considering a bid. Nicki Morgan FFS!
Look at Corbyn. Look at May. No wonder people wish Cameron was still around. Different level altogether. And honourable enough to resign after defeat.
Cameron's handling of the referendum was inept and having aligned himself completely with one side gave himself no room for manoeuvre in defeat. But I don't wish him ill or have any hatred for him as Osbourne seems to have for May.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
If Corbyn does turn up, it'll put all the focus on him, trust me.
He won't be facing forensic questioning, and the others will be attacking may ateast as much as him There's risk, to be sure, but also reward.
May won't be there in person, though. Remember when Miliband tried this at the last election? He took most of the flack, not the absent David Cameron.
I don't see much up side here for Corbyn, especially after his car crash this morning. He isn't very good under any questioning from someone who knows their stuff and isn't feeding him softballs.
Name blind recruitment for all jobs proposed. We will be assigned work by the state at this rate.
How do you interview someone without seeing their face or asking their name?
It will be accompanied no doubt by quota regulations.
I guess if everyone had to wear the full burqa for interviews, that might achieve something along the lines Corbyn wants. But I still would want to know the name of someone I was looking to employ.
The warped minds that come up with such rubbish as this need treatment, they really do.
The real world must be such a difficult place for them.
People have done studies which show that an identical CV, with different names attached, is viewed differently - presumably due to unconscious discrimination on the basis of the ethnicity implied by the name.
This makes the "real world" a much harder place for some people.
Name blind recruitment for all jobs proposed. We will be assigned work by the state at this rate.
How do you interview someone without seeing their face or asking their name?
You potentially just stop interviewing. The available evidence is that overall interviewers make terrible recruitment decisions and are impressed by all the wrong things - some research last year suggested you get better candidates by tossing a coin than by interviewing.
Not that name-blind makes much sense in an era of LinkedIn. If you want to know who the candidate is, thirty seconds with google should cover it for anything above entry level jobs.
Personality counts for so much when making recruitment decisions. You need to look someone in the eye and make an assessment of whether they are going to fit in well with the ethos and atmosphere of your team/company.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
Name blind recruitment for all jobs proposed. We will be assigned work by the state at this rate.
How do you interview someone without seeing their face or asking their name?
It will be accompanied no doubt by quota regulations.
I guess if everyone had to wear the full burqa for interviews, that might achieve something along the lines Corbyn wants. But I still would want to know the name of someone I was looking to employ.
The warped minds that come up with such rubbish as this need treatment, they really do.
The real world must be such a difficult place for them.
People have done studies which show that an identical CV, with different names attached, is viewed differently - presumably due to unconscious discrimination on the basis of the ethnicity implied by the name.
This makes the "real world" a much harder place for some people.
I am not denying that - but you cannot have a completely anonymous recruitment process. People's identity has to be revealed at some point - and quite rightly so.
The key to tackling this is not through quotas or anonymous applications but through education and social change. Not through regulation.
Name blind recruitment for all jobs proposed. We will be assigned work by the state at this rate.
How do you interview someone without seeing their face or asking their name?
I think it's about shortlisting, so you only see theit work and education details, not personal ones, before culling the numbers for interview.
I recall in his post 2015 conference speech Cameron was more exercised by this ssue than the ekection corbyn. As people with non white sounding names tend to do worse.
If Ian warren is lurking here (I'm not on twitter) -
Are your % 18-24 of the electorate figures based on the 27/3/2011 census, or 6/5/2015? or some other data source?
If the kids have *gone home* a seat like nottingham south starts to look vulnerable, even though models may say otherwise.
I think we're overplaying the importance of 18-24 yr olds here. Presumably people over 24 vote as well, and who's to say that all the other age groups aren't drifitng towards the Tories? If one extra 18-24 yr old votes Labour, another oldie or 24-65 yr old might vote Tory for the first time because of Brexit, therfore cancelling out the impact.
There are only so many people in one age bracket in one constituency who can have a material impact on an election.
I'm no fan of may, she's pretry crap, but Osbornes pieces show he has an active hate for her.
This must stem from more than just his sacking. He must have realised that it would have been impossible to stay after Cameron resigned. Surely any ambitions he had to become leader were torpedoed by Dave's morning-after resignation. Why is there no ire directed at him?
On an earlier thread there was all manner of emoting about Dave. I really don't get this. He left his country and party in the lurch. In the leadership election that ensued May was the only plausible candidate left standing. At one point Nicki Morgan was considering a bid. Nicki Morgan FFS!
I agree with you on Cameron, he was very cowardly in leaving the country in the lurch as he did. It was his decision to hold the referendum last year and he said he would not quit even if he lost. He then just walked away, the man is a charlatan. He was also a shit PM and this comes from someone who supported him at the ballot box and volunteered for the Tories at election time in the past.
They were going to force him out if he hadn't stood down, a lot of those MPs that were saying he should have stayed on a bit longer behind the scenes I strongly suspect thought something entirely different.
Withour question. Knowing he would go they were free to say they didn't want that so they didn't appear disloyal
Probably the right decision and the simplest explanation for the last minute nature of the decision. The conspiracy theorist in me would like to think it's because they've lined up a (serious and well-briefed) celebrity not a politician.
I'm no fan of may, she's pretry crap, but Osbornes pieces show he has an active hate for her.
This must stem from more than just his sacking. He must have realised that it would have been impossible to stay after Cameron resigned. Surely any ambitions he had to become leader were torpedoed by Dave's morning-after resignation. Why is there no ire directed at him?
On an earlier thread there was all manner of emoting about Dave. I really don't get this. He left his country and party in the lurch. In the leadership election that ensued May was the only plausible candidate left standing. At one point Nicki Morgan was considering a bid. Nicki Morgan FFS!
Look at Corbyn. Look at May. No wonder people wish Cameron was still around. Different level altogether. And honourable enough to resign after defeat.
Cameron's handling of the referendum was inept and having aligned himself completely with one side gave himself no room for manoeuvre in defeat. But I don't wish him ill or have any hatred for him as Osbourne seems to have for May.
You're right re the referendum. May could have made her life much easier by allowing Osborne to step down with some dignity. She's reaping the reward for a simple lack of courtesey.
Probably the right decision and the simplest explanation for the last minute nature of the decision. The conspiracy theorist in me would like to think it's because they've lined up a (serious and well-briefed) celebrity not a politician.
Rudd (and May) will be hammered, if that's true.
She can't follow up by attending too, if Corbyn does, because she'll look weak.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
We need to put an end to these 'debates' - they don't help further the political discussion in this country. I have never watched one and I never will. They are there for the media not the electorate.
So what? Do they detract from the debate? No more than stupid posters, videos and leaflets . If they do sway someone, fine, if they don't, no harm.
Objection seems to come in 2 firms. That they don't matter, and that they have too big an impact. Occasionally, and contradictorily, both.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
I bought my house in the middle of the Great Recession (in 2009) and am looking to upsize, and at my age, with mortgage rates as they are, I'm quite relaxed about price. I just want a sale.
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
I bought my house in the middle of the Great Recession (in 2009) and am looking to upsize, and at my age, with mortgage rates as they are, I'm quite relaxed about price. I just want a sale.
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
My humble abode will be on the market shortly ! *Le gulp*
We need to put an end to these 'debates' - they don't help further the political discussion in this country. I have never watched one and I never will. They are there for the media not the electorate.
So what? Do they detract from the debate? No more than stupid posters, videos and leaflets . If they do sway someone, fine, if they don't, no harm.
Objection seems to come in 2 firms. That they don't matter, and that they have too big an impact. Occasionally, and contradictorily, both.
I don't mind the US ones because you have two candidates, two parties. Because of the multi party political situation that we have over here it doesn't feel like it works as well.
We need to put an end to these 'debates' - they don't help further the political discussion in this country. I have never watched one and I never will. They are there for the media not the electorate.
So what? Do they detract from the debate? No more than stupid posters, videos and leaflets . If they do sway someone, fine, if they don't, no harm.
Objection seems to come in 2 firms. That they don't matter, and that they have too big an impact. Occasionally, and contradictorily, both.
My objection is neither of those. My concern is about the level of political debate and how it has fallen. We have seemingly lost the ability to convince through reasoned argument and persuasion and these artificial debates do nothing to bring that back. They are opportunities for attacks and grandstanding - not reason. That is why I don't like them as a format.
Name blind recruitment for all jobs proposed. We will be assigned work by the state at this rate.
How do you interview someone without seeing their face or asking their name?
You potentially just stop interviewing. The available evidence is that overall interviewers make terrible recruitment decisions and are impressed by all the wrong things - some research last year suggested you get better candidates by tossing a coin than by interviewing.
Not that name-blind makes much sense in an era of LinkedIn. If you want to know who the candidate is, thirty seconds with google should cover it for anything above entry level jobs.
Personality counts for so much when making recruitment decisions. You need to look someone in the eye and make an assessment of whether they are going to fit in well with the ethos and atmosphere of your team/company.
You can't do that on paper. Or by tossing a coin.
Yes, and it's what the research suggests most recruiting managers are absolutely, shockingly, awfully, bad at doing. Especially through interviews.
My anecdotal experience would suggest the research is right. "Good fit" candidates have tended either to be good at saying what they think people want to hear, good at the talk but weak at the walk, or both.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
I bought my house in the middle of the Great Recession (in 2009) and am looking to upsize, and at my age, with mortgage rates as they are, I'm quite relaxed about price. I just want a sale.
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
My humble abode will be on the market shortly ! *Le gulp*
Remember: nothing means anything until they sign a contract in blood!
If polling companies like survation have 18-24 turnout rates so high, surely this looks barmy in the grand scheme of things and their methodology should be revisited? Or are they taking a gamble that these individuals will turn out to vote in the numbers they say they will.
Surely after the last polling disaster reputations are at stake here.
I'm no fan of may, she's pretry crap, but Osbornes pieces show he has an active hate for her.
This must stem from more than just his sacking. He must have realised that it would have been impossible to stay after Cameron resigned. Surely any ambitions he had to become leader were torpedoed by Dave's morning-after resignation. Why is there no ire directed at him?
On an earlier thread there was all manner of emoting about Dave. I really don't get this. He left his country and party in the lurch. In the leadership election that ensued May was the only plausible candidate left standing. At one point Nicki Morgan was considering a bid. Nicki Morgan FFS!
Look at Corbyn. Look at May. No wonder people wish Cameron was still around. Different level altogether. And honourable enough to resign after defeat.
Cameron's handling of the referendum was inept and having aligned himself completely with one side gave himself no room for manoeuvre in defeat. But I don't wish him ill or have any hatred for him as Osbourne seems to have for May.
You're right re the referendum. May could have made her life much easier by allowing Osborne to step down with some dignity. She's reaping the reward for a simple lack of courtesey.
I don't disagree with you there but the way that Osbourne is dealing with it looks very immature. The Conservative Party is more than just Mrs May.
George Osborne is now in the entertainment industry. Watching many Conservative voters turn beetroot with rage as they read his crisp and well-chosen words is certainly entertaining.
It is sometimes said that politics is entertainment for ugly people but you're right: it's really journalism which deserves that description.
Not only is it geographical (Like the USA), but there are also more than 2 parties with "extra" parties chucked in in various different regions.
& We've also got an electorate that simply will almost always act differently from how they're polling - mostly toward the Tories but also see 1983 for Labour.
Of course there are a load of highly correlated r^2 leadership, BE, LE elections that one can use too that show "revealed preference", and add to that the fact that pollsters simply can't reach a heck of alot of the politically disinterested these days.
People would have to be utterly mad to risk money on this stuff.
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
I bought my house in the middle of the Great Recession (in 2009) and am looking to upsize, and at my age, with mortgage rates as they are, I'm quite relaxed about price. I just want a sale.
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
My humble abode will be on the market shortly ! *Le gulp*
I must admit I am now living in what is I hope the last house I ever intend to buy. The plan is they will carry my coffin out of the front door - hopefully in no less than 50 years time.
As a result and being purely selfish I am hoping for a very large readjustment in house prices which will then allow my children to get on the housing ladder in a reasonable time after they leave home.
We need to put an end to these 'debates' - they don't help further the political discussion in this country. I have never watched one and I never will. They are there for the media not the electorate.
They're there for the 3-4 million people who watch them, and the others who hear about them.
I'm for keeping them because I worry about the whole campaign being fought invisibly or semi-invisibly on soshal meeja (much as I enjoy reporting that the IRA video has clocked up 4,039,000 views and viewing rates have increased by about 75000 a day since yesterday). A thing on the TV, not tailored to a particular internet demographic, provides a common denominator.
If polling companies like survation have 18-24 turnout rates so high, surely this looks barmy in the grand scheme of things and their methodology should be revisited? Or are they taking a gamble that these individuals will turn out to vote in the numbers they say they will.
Surely after the last polling disaster reputations are at stake here.
"Either this a full re-writing of the psephological textbook or needs to be viewed with extreme caution. Our own poll, suggests that about half that number (44% saying 10/10 certainty) of 18-24s will actually vote (even when full unweighted, it was only 50%)."
Not only is it geographical (Like the USA), but there are also more than 2 parties with "extra" parties chucked in in various different regions.
& We've also got an electorate that simply will almost always act differently from how they're polling - mostly toward the Tories but also see 1983 for Labour.
Of course there are a load of highly correlated r^2 leadership, BE, LE elections that one can use too that show "revealed preference", and add to that the fact that pollsters simply can't reach a heck of alot of the politically disinterested these days.
People would have to be utterly mad to risk money on this stuff.
This one is particularly hard to solve !
That's all true. What I can't work out is how the runes have moved (in truth) since the locals.
The results all seemed to validate Corbyn's dire polling and performance (we were all saying a Tory win in Brum, and still more one in Tees Valley, pointed to a landslide) and that was less than a month ago. And, if he was here, I'm sure Rod's swingback model - particularly with the data from Copeland - would point to the same.
I'm struggling to believe just one manifesto fuck-up can kill all that stone dead.
Suggests that the Facebook barrage against Corbyn and Abbott has had no effect, or alternatively that it's countering effects that would otherwise have narrowed the lead more. I'd guess the former - people who care what they said 40 years ago have already factored it in.
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
Suggests that the Facebook barrage against Corbyn and Abbott has had no effect, or alternatively that it's countering effects that would otherwise have narrowed the lead more. I'd guess the former - people who care what they said 40 years ago have already factored it in.
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
Think you're right that Labour are withstanding the Tory barrage SO FAR, but I'm getting worried that they have pretty much lost control of the narrative these last few days.
Labour really need to find something new to say (maybe on the NHS, or something else) to grab attention in the final week, I think.
Suggests that the Facebook barrage against Corbyn and Abbott has had no effect, or alternatively that it's countering effects that would otherwise have narrowed the lead more. I'd guess the former - people who care what they said 40 years ago have already factored it in.
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
The changes in the last three ICM polls have been MOE. We'll have to see if that's reflected in other polls.
Least Angus Robertson is also there. So Amber Rudd won't look too out the ordinary.
In fact a good portion of the viewers will probably think she IS the leader !
The fact that she's been sent suggests that she's the effective Deputy.
Possible Chancellor in less than a fortnight.
Possible, but FS in less than a fortnight more possible?
I thought the word on the street was that Boris/Fox/Davis are safe, for now, but there was a deafening silence on Hammond?
May blames others for their mistakes, not herself. She said so last night: she accepts responsibility "for decisions I make", which was rather equivocating.
She will in all likelihood have blamed Hammond for the NI rise U-turn, and consequent PR disaster, and not herself, and will certainly have marked his card with something.
Tory 45, Labour 33. = 88% for main two parties! 'Look at the share not the lead'. A 45% (+?) share with others in the basement equates to a very healthy majority. We might be witnessing a Jezza revival and wipeout all at the same time.
Suggests that the Facebook barrage against Corbyn and Abbott has had no effect, or alternatively that it's countering effects that would otherwise have narrowed the lead more. I'd guess the former - people who care what they said 40 years ago have already factored it in.
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
Martin Boon (ICM) said the folllwoing re the survation poll which had 6% tory lead
"the Survation poll this morning revealed that 82% of 18-24s would/already have voted, which compares favourably with the next two older age cohorts and is only a tick below that of the uniformly voting 55+ cohorts."
given that only 50% of 18y go to college, I cant see why the 50% who don't go would be so enthusiastic re the abolition of tuition fees?
I will let you know what it is like when we stick the sign in the garden. It will be post-election though...
Thanks. Our estate agent hasn't ever mentioned or cited Brexit once, and we did ask, and we have a very good relationship with him.
He has said the snap General Election has led to the whole market stalling.
I could believe that the market has stalled. There is also something of a business stall too. I have seen this twice in the past and both times were on the leading edges of the previous recessions / downturns and I am seeing what looks like a third. Whether it is the election or Brexit or both I have no idea.
I can't deny that isn't a possibility.
I worry that it is more than a possibility. It is why I am downsizing to a mortgage-free property as fast as I can.
I bought my house in the middle of the Great Recession (in 2009) and am looking to upsize, and at my age, with mortgage rates as they are, I'm quite relaxed about price. I just want a sale.
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
My humble abode will be on the market shortly ! *Le gulp*
A couple of other small points of interest: Corbyn arrived with pages of notes and during the break Seumas Milne came on set and Corbyn went off set with him; during May’s break she came to talk to the audience which was well received. After his Paxman interview Corbyn quickly left the set, while May came and thanked us for taking part.
There will be some deep sighs of relief in the Conservative Campaign headquarters after ICM. The tide may not yet have swung back in their favour but it does seem to be ebbing leaving them comfortably high up the beach.
Goodness knows if the polls are anywhere near right but the most remarkable thing in this election to date is the incredible stability of Tory support. Given the apparent constituent make up of this support (oldies etc with a very high propensity to vote) this should make them pretty confident.
The Labour surge, on the other hand, despite being on the face of it very impressive, seems to have a lot less secure foundations. My gut feel is that ICM are calling this better than some of the other pollsters but maybe that is just wishful thinking.
Least Angus Robertson is also there. So Amber Rudd won't look too out the ordinary.
In fact a good portion of the viewers will probably think she IS the leader !
The fact that she's been sent suggests that she's the effective Deputy.
Possible Chancellor in less than a fortnight.
Has anyone seen Philip Hammond?
Would anyone want to?
I'd go for a cup of tea with him. I'm sure he's an amiable chap.
Maybe I'm projecting, but it seems to me like he's clocked what an impossible task austerity + brexit is going to be. He basically hasn't done anything for the last 10 months and he's already hated and gets little public support from #10.
Tory 45, Labour 33. = 88% for main two parties! 'Look at the share not the lead'. A 45% (+?) share with others in the basement equates to a very healthy majority. We might be witnessing a Jezza revival and wipeout all at the same time.
Maths worth of Diane Abbott. I think you'll find that is 78% between the main two parties
Tory 45, Labour 33. = 88% for main two parties! 'Look at the share not the lead'. A 45% (+?) share with others in the basement equates to a very healthy majority. We might be witnessing a Jezza revival and wipeout all at the same time.
So... based largely on the issues with sampling and reported turnout (and tending towards the ICM side of things) and adding in a healthy chunk of uncertainty in Lib Dem target seats (and defences), plus a few other completely subjective best guesses and gut feels, I think the final seat tallies will be (low-most likely-high; note that "most likely" is NOT the centre of the range because a lot of these are skewed one way or the other):
I don't disagree with you there but the way that Osbourne is dealing with it looks very immature. The Conservative Party is more than just Mrs May.
Oh no, Mr Clown. I have had just one leaflet from the blues, and it was all about Mrs May. I don`t live in Maidenhead either, where it would have been explicable. This election is all about her and her lust for unrestrained power.
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
Least Angus Robertson is also there. So Amber Rudd won't look too out the ordinary.
In fact a good portion of the viewers will probably think she IS the leader !
The fact that she's been sent suggests that she's the effective Deputy.
Possible Chancellor in less than a fortnight.
Possible, but FS in less than a fortnight more possible?
I still can't get away from the thought that Gove is going to make a comeback - and in a high ranking position.
Gove has behaved, so he may well do so.
I'm unsure in what capacity.
As I've said before, I'd put him and his aide Dominic Cummings, in charge of Brexit. They are brainy, stubborn, hard working and radical. And were probably more responsible for Brexit than anybody else as the intellectual power behind Vote Leave.
Let them take on the EU the way they took on the UK establishment. It may be explosive in parts but they'd be shrewd enough to know when it's sensible to concede.
So... based largely on the issues with sampling and reported turnout (and tending towards the ICM side of things) and adding in a healthy chunk of uncertainty in Lib Dem target seats (and defences), plus a few other completely subjective best guesses and gut feels, I think the final seat tallies will be (low-most likely-high; note that "most likely" is NOT the centre of the range because a lot of these are skewed one way or the other):
Least Angus Robertson is also there. So Amber Rudd won't look too out the ordinary.
In fact a good portion of the viewers will probably think she IS the leader !
The fact that she's been sent suggests that she's the effective Deputy.
Possible Chancellor in less than a fortnight.
Possible, but FS in less than a fortnight more possible?
I still can't get away from the thought that Gove is going to make a comeback - and in a high ranking position.
Gove has behaved, so he may well do so.
I'm unsure in what capacity.
As I've said before, I'd put him and his aide Dominic Cummings, in charge of Brexit. They are brainy, stubborn, hard working and radical. And were probably more responsible for Brexit than anybody else as the intellectual power behind Vote Leave.
Let them take on the EU the way they took on the UK establishment. It may be explosive in parts but they'd be shrewd enough to know when it's sensible to concede.
Agree with all of this.
I wish our politicians were more comfortable in surrounding themselves with the best talent in their parties, rather than those who just happen to be ultra-loyalists and agree with them.
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
Hammond is being hidden to avoid questions about putting up taxes. He tried it in the budget, and this time round the Conservatives have dropped the no tax rise pledge.
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
If polling companies like survation have 18-24 turnout rates so high, surely this looks barmy in the grand scheme of things and their methodology should be revisited? Or are they taking a gamble that these individuals will turn out to vote in the numbers they say they will.
Surely after the last polling disaster reputations are at stake here.
"Either this a full re-writing of the psephological textbook or needs to be viewed with extreme caution. Our own poll, suggests that about half that number (44% saying 10/10 certainty) of 18-24s will actually vote (even when full unweighted, it was only 50%)."
What Martin Boon writes makes a lot of sense and I can see the logic of his argument.
However, the 18-24 olds turnout was drastically different in 2015 from 2010.
The other point, as he admits, is getting enough 18-24 year olds in his sample. He acknowledges that Survation may have done a better job.
On balance, I would agree with Martin Boon. I do not agree that 82% of 18-24 year olds will turn out. I do not think any age group will have a turnout of more than 80%.
If the 55+ group turns out more this time, then the additional numbers maybe voting against the Tories after the Social care fiasco.
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
I honestly cannot recall an election campaign where the Chancellor of the Exchequer has been so invisible. When economic competence is a key advantage (according to the polling) it really is extraordinary. Are the Tories planning to go big on the economy in the last week and wanted to hold him back? Or is he just toast?
Hammond is being hidden to avoid questions about putting up taxes. He tried it in the budget, and this time round the Conservatives have dropped the no tax rise pledge.
Even by the standards of this campaign that would be incredibly stupid. The Tories should be clear that they will do whatever is necessary to help the economy and protect public services. That message should come from the Chancellor as the money man with a grip on the figures. It would also put the spotlight on McMao which cannot be a bad thing for the Tories. It is probably the most favourable comparator available, even more than the leader.
Hiding the Chancellor is fighting with a hand tied behind your back.
So... based largely on the issues with sampling and reported turnout (and tending towards the ICM side of things) and adding in a healthy chunk of uncertainty in Lib Dem target seats (and defences), plus a few other completely subjective best guesses and gut feels, I think the final seat tallies will be (low-most likely-high; note that "most likely" is NOT the centre of the range because a lot of these are skewed one way or the other):
More bullish on the LDs than I would be but, otherwise, very credible.
I feel similarly to you. But the caveat I have is based around the Scottish elections last year, where the SNP increased their vote, the LDs slipped to just 5% of the list vote, and yet doubled their FPTP constituencies.
I remember in the run up, there was much discussion about whether they would win *any* seats in Scotland.
Last year saw substantive tactical voting for the LDs in Scotland. Could we see similar this year at Westminster? If we did, it would likely hand half a dozen seats in Remainia to them. Is it likely? No. I reckon 10-11 is the most likely seat count, and 6-9 is more likely than 12-15. But it is possible.
"Patterns of turnout remain relatively unchanged, with concerning implications for the future of democratic engagement. There appears to be no significant increase in turnout among young people, with 18-24s almost half as likely to vote as those aged 65% (43% vs 78%; in 2010 estimated turnout for 18-24s was 44%). Similarly, turnout remains lower among the working classes, renters, and BME communities."
There will be some deep sighs of relief in the Conservative Campaign headquarters after ICM. The tide may not yet have swung back in their favour but it does seem to be ebbing leaving them comfortably high up the beach.
Goodness knows if the polls are anywhere near right but the most remarkable thing in this election to date is the incredible stability of Tory support. Given the apparent constituent make up of this support (oldies etc with a very high propensity to vote) this should make them pretty confident.
The Labour surge, on the other hand, despite being on the face of it very impressive, seems to have a lot less secure foundations. My gut feel is that ICM are calling this better than some of the other pollsters but maybe that is just wishful thinking.
I could imagine turnout rising among younger voters, but not to 82%.
So... based largely on the issues with sampling and reported turnout (and tending towards the ICM side of things) and adding in a healthy chunk of uncertainty in Lib Dem target seats (and defences), plus a few other completely subjective best guesses and gut feels, I think the final seat tallies will be (low-most likely-high; note that "most likely" is NOT the centre of the range because a lot of these are skewed one way or the other):
More bullish on the LDs than I would be but, otherwise, very credible.
The LDs are a nightmare to model in any way, because so much is so local with them, and tactical vote might (or might not!) make a sizeable comeback. Regional differences, targetting, even seat-by-seat issues mean that - especially at this scale - any algorithm based on national shifts could have huge issues.
They're throwing the kitchen sink, microwave, and dishwasher at their target seats and defences - with half to a third the number of seats on which they're focusing this time coupled with a doubling of membership and activists means that some of these could be almost by-electiony.
Or not. It's almost impossible to tell. I could even see numbers outside those extremes (call those 95% confidence intervals); they wouldn't really shock me.
Because of this unpredictability, my "most likely" number is skewed heavily left on their range. If the potential positives appear, they've got a fairly broad comparative upside - but there's absolutely no guarantee of that at all. I think 1-2 gains in Scotland are highly probable, as is Twickenham - say worst case they should get 1-2 of those - which implies 4-5 losses of held seats on that bottom end.
Suggests that the Facebook barrage against Corbyn and Abbott has had no effect, or alternatively that it's countering effects that would otherwise have narrowed the lead more. I'd guess the former - people who care what they said 40 years ago have already factored it in.
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
Wasn't the polling done 26 to 29 May 2017, so that's hardly 'changes since the weekend' ? If that's the case, then surely a bit early to be making solid judgments.
Much relief in Tory circles at that ICM. The surge has peaked, it seems.
I reckon TMay will achieve a ten point lead or more, and with an extra boost in marginals and Scotland, and young people failing to turn out, as ever, she will win at a canter.
After all this huffing and puffing, fully a month later, maybe my original prediction of a 80-100 seat majority was quite accurate.
Comments
Are your % 18-24 of the electorate figures based on the 27/3/2011 census, or 7/5/2015? or some other data source?
If the kids have *gone home* a seat like nottingham south starts to look vulnerable, even though models may say otherwise.
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/2015guide/nottinghamsouth/
This makes the "real world" a much harder place for some people.
You can't do that on paper. Or by tossing a coin.
The key to tackling this is not through quotas or anonymous applications but through education and social change. Not through regulation.
I recall in his post 2015 conference speech Cameron was more exercised by this ssue than the ekection corbyn. As people with non white sounding names tend to do worse.
https://twitter.com/ChukaUmunna/status/869548372612579330
There are only so many people in one age bracket in one constituency who can have a material impact on an election.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/may/30/general-election-2017-may-corbyn-paxman-snp-manifesto-politics-live?page=with:block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f#block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f
Well, pollsters can't be accused of herding this time.
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/869555773772361728
She can't follow up by attending too, if Corbyn does, because she'll look weak.
Objection seems to come in 2 firms. That they don't matter, and that they have too big an impact. Occasionally, and contradictorily, both.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/may/30/general-election-2017-may-corbyn-paxman-snp-manifesto-politics-live?page=with:block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f#block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f
Appreciate it's different for those wishing to release equity.
Unless anything changes massively in the next 9 days, it'll take a polling error of historic proportions to deny May a comfortable majority.
Con 45 (-1) Lab 33 (+1) LD 8 (nc) UKIP 5 (nc)
Changes since the weekend. https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/may/30/general-election-2017-may-corbyn-paxman-snp-manifesto-politics-live?page=with:block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f#block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f
Sent from my iPhone
My anecdotal experience would suggest the research is right. "Good fit" candidates have tended either to be good at saying what they think people want to hear, good at the talk but weak at the walk, or both.
Surely after the last polling disaster reputations are at stake here.
Not only is it geographical (Like the USA), but there are also more than 2 parties with "extra" parties chucked in in various different regions.
& We've also got an electorate that simply will almost always act differently from how they're polling - mostly toward the Tories but also see 1983 for Labour.
Of course there are a load of highly correlated r^2 leadership, BE, LE elections that one can use too that show "revealed preference", and add to that the fact that pollsters simply can't reach a heck of alot of the politically disinterested these days.
People would have to be utterly mad to risk money on this stuff.
This one is particularly hard to solve !
As a result and being purely selfish I am hoping for a very large readjustment in house prices which will then allow my children to get on the housing ladder in a reasonable time after they leave home.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/live/2017/may/30/general-election-2017-may-corbyn-paxman-snp-manifesto-politics-live?page=with:block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f#block-592d3a2ee4b0bdd87e2f163f
hmm.
The results all seemed to validate Corbyn's dire polling and performance (we were all saying a Tory win in Brum, and still more one in Tees Valley, pointed to a landslide) and that was less than a month ago. And, if he was here, I'm sure Rod's swingback model - particularly with the data from Copeland - would point to the same.
I'm struggling to believe just one manifesto fuck-up can kill all that stone dead.
TMICIPM easily
Although Martin Boon doesn't say it explicitly, this presumably has the same feature as the last ICM that it is about 8 points better for the Tory lead than if the assumptions of other polling institutes are made (essentially ICM assume that voting patterns are like last time, while others take assertions of certainty to vote at face value). So if the 14-point lead was "very close" (Martin last week) to the 5-point lead on that basis, presumably this is close to a 3-point lead. What evidence we have (unusually high registration among the young, anecdotal reports) suggests that something is happening, but Boon is convincing on it not being the whole story. Perhaps we should split the difference and guess at a less of 7-8.
Labour really need to find something new to say (maybe on the NHS, or something else) to grab attention in the final week, I think.
May blames others for their mistakes, not herself. She said so last night: she accepts responsibility "for decisions I make", which was rather equivocating.
She will in all likelihood have blamed Hammond for the NI rise U-turn, and consequent PR disaster, and not herself, and will certainly have marked his card with something.
'Look at the share not the lead'. A 45% (+?) share with others in the basement equates to a very healthy majority. We might be witnessing a Jezza revival and wipeout all at the same time.
"the Survation poll this morning revealed that 82% of 18-24s would/already have voted, which compares favourably with the next two older age cohorts and is only a tick below that of the uniformly voting 55+ cohorts."
given that only 50% of 18y go to college, I cant see why the 50% who don't go would be so enthusiastic re the abolition of tuition fees?
I'm unsure in what capacity.
https://twitter.com/dannythefink/status/869556929063989248
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/we-laughed-at-the-lack-of-soundbites-but-paxman-was-the-most-interesting-man-on-set-cc2zwbf86?CMP=TNLEmail_118918_1908108
Goodness knows if the polls are anywhere near right but the most remarkable thing in this election to date is the incredible stability of Tory support. Given the apparent constituent make up of this support (oldies etc with a very high propensity to vote) this should make them pretty confident.
The Labour surge, on the other hand, despite being on the face of it very impressive, seems to have a lot less secure foundations. My gut feel is that ICM are calling this better than some of the other pollsters but maybe that is just wishful thinking.
In utterly frivolous nonsense, it seems the next Dragon Age game (unsure if it's tactics or a DA4 type sequel to Inquisition) has been confirmed. I rambled a
bit about it here: http://thaddeusthesixth.blogspot.co.uk/2017/05/dragon-age-what-i-want-to-see-next.html
Maybe I'm projecting, but it seems to me like he's clocked what an impossible task austerity + brexit is going to be. He basically hasn't done anything for the last 10 months and he's already hated and gets little public support from #10.
Makes more sense to produce tow polling average graphs based on the two camps that pollsters seem to have split into;
1. Those that believe people when they say they'll vote
2. Those that believe historical evidence of turnout
In which case the lead is either 12.5% or 7%. Either way it's beginning to look like Labour peaked on 24/25th May.
WillS
La vengeance est un plat qui se mange froide.
based largely on the issues with sampling and reported turnout (and tending towards the ICM side of things) and adding in a healthy chunk of uncertainty in Lib Dem target seats (and defences), plus a few other completely subjective best guesses and gut feels, I think the final seat tallies will be (low-most likely-high; note that "most likely" is NOT the centre of the range because a lot of these are skewed one way or the other):
Con: 363-380-388
Lab: 183-190-201
SNP: 38-45-48
LD: 6-12-23
PC: 3-3-5
Grn: 0-1-2
Let them take on the EU the way they took on the UK establishment. It may be explosive in parts but they'd be shrewd enough to know when it's sensible to concede.
Thanks for spotting my typo! I did mean 78 but the fingers are a bit fat today clearly. :-(
I wish our politicians were more comfortable in surrounding themselves with the best talent in their parties, rather than those who just happen to be ultra-loyalists and agree with them.
Looking to replace him as Chancellor.
But with whom?
However, the 18-24 olds turnout was drastically different in 2015 from 2010.
The other point, as he admits, is getting enough 18-24 year olds in his sample. He acknowledges that Survation may have done a better job.
On balance, I would agree with Martin Boon. I do not agree that 82% of 18-24 year olds will turn out. I do not think any age group will have a turnout of more than 80%.
If the 55+ group turns out more this time, then the additional numbers maybe voting against the Tories after the Social care fiasco.
Hiding the Chancellor is fighting with a hand tied behind your back.
Mr. Isam, saw that video. He might be Chancellor in the next 10 days, and is calling for insurrection to bring down an elected government. Crackers.
I remember in the run up, there was much discussion about whether they would win *any* seats in Scotland.
Last year saw substantive tactical voting for the LDs in Scotland. Could we see similar this year at Westminster? If we did, it would likely hand half a dozen seats in Remainia to them. Is it likely? No. I reckon 10-11 is the most likely seat count, and 6-9 is more likely than 12-15. But it is possible.
https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/how-britain-voted-2015
"Patterns of turnout remain relatively unchanged, with concerning implications for the future of democratic engagement. There appears to be no significant increase in turnout among young people, with 18-24s almost half as likely to vote as those aged 65% (43% vs 78%; in 2010 estimated turnout for 18-24s was 44%). Similarly, turnout remains lower among the working classes, renters, and BME communities."
They're throwing the kitchen sink, microwave, and dishwasher at their target seats and defences - with half to a third the number of seats on which they're focusing this time coupled with a doubling of membership and activists means that some of these could be almost by-electiony.
Or not. It's almost impossible to tell.
I could even see numbers outside those extremes (call those 95% confidence intervals); they wouldn't really shock me.
Because of this unpredictability, my "most likely" number is skewed heavily left on their range. If the potential positives appear, they've got a fairly broad comparative upside - but there's absolutely no guarantee of that at all. I think 1-2 gains in Scotland are highly probable, as is Twickenham - say worst case they should get 1-2 of those - which implies 4-5 losses of held seats on that bottom end.
If that's the case, then surely a bit early to be making solid judgments.