Is there any collection of these polls results showing with DKs included in the results. I think that would be really useful to see if there is big differences between polling companies DK figure
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Anyone believing *anything* that's in The Sun, even an ICM poll, so close to polling day where Murdoch and his cronies would see power slipping away from them is just plain dumb. What could lower the turnout of Labour supporters? Make them think there's no point in voting, make out that to get rid the Tories is impossible.
Surely they'd want the reverse? A tight poll to motivate the Tory vote?
Anyone believing *anything* that's in The Sun, even an ICM poll, so close to polling day where Murdoch and his cronies would see power slipping away from them is just plain dumb. What could lower the turnout of Labour supporters? Make them think there's no point in voting, make out that to get rid the Tories is impossible.
I think YouGov's polls do more for the Tory cause than the ICM ones...
Me thinks this is what Messina polls are telling the Tories. At least that would explain the lack of panic and seeming like little need to go nuclear and just skip interviews and debates.
Yes, every day that goes by without Project Fear suggests Tories are comfortable with the situation, and they can let the press get on with mobilising their vote.
Has anyone actually done any serious analysis on whether all these polls ARE actually different? Or are all the differences just down to pollster adjustments? Are YouGov giving significantly different raw data, for example?
So I am genuinely wrestling with the 'WFT is happening with the pollsters' question like everyone else...
(Sorry, posted this on last thread, but seemed even more relevant here)
Ahead of expected political egg on more than a few pollsters faces in 6 days time, does it *really* matter to their long term credibility and businesses if they are wrong? I mean, there's a lot of conspiracy theories about pollsters since the infamous YouGov poll (i.e. Murdoch wanted something to scare the Tories with) but common sense would seem to suggest that pollsters *do* care about their reputation, so wouldn't road test dodgy methodologies until they got something that fit the 'Labour bounce' narrative that the right-wing press needed to shore up the Tory support following the manifesto grumbles.
Being a cock-up rather than conspiracy kind of a guy, I'm left thinking that some of the polling companies really do road-test 'experimental' methodologies, because a) there are usually a whole load of caveats they can deploy, and b) by the time of the next election we'll all have forgotten the inaccuracies (and in the meantime, the more eye-catching pollsters will have plenty of business from increase brand recognition). I mean, I went to the YouGov website in search of methodology explanations, and spent time learning about all their other polling business...
(And of course, they may genuinely find an innovative new methodology. Perhaps elections are a fabulous way to use all that media cash to do some research)
I appreciate this leaves one very cynical about psephology, but - does it matter? Are we so jaded / time-poor that we'll have forgotten all about it next election? Is it better to be wrong than to be ignored? This is an important question: election polling is not "harmless fun", there are real economic and political consequences...
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
Yep ur right.
The one common factor is that the polls are reaching the engaged but not the unengaged. Pollster calls at the door: "not today thank you". Pollster phones up: you hang up. Pollster tries to accost you in the high street: cross the road and walk on. Pollster sends you an email: click delete.
How is anyone to know how the unengaged see this elecfion? All the polls rest on the assumption that they will break the same as the rest of us.
Anyone believing *anything* that's in The Sun, even an ICM poll, so close to polling day where Murdoch and his cronies would see power slipping away from them is just plain dumb. What could lower the turnout of Labour supporters? Make them think there's no point in voting, make out that to get rid the Tories is impossible.
Surely they'd want the reverse? A tight poll to motivate the Tory vote?
seems like with Covfefe and Father Ted we've had a couple of Momentum sorts (or maybe just one!) infiltrate the boards with little of substance to offer.
Me thinks this is what Messina polls are telling the Tories. At least that would explain the lack of panic and seeming like little need to go nuclear and just skip interviews and debates.
Yes, every day that goes by without Project Fear suggests Tories are comfortable with the situation, and they can let the press get on with mobilising their vote.
I think for most of the Tory core, project fear isn't necessary. Corbyn scares them shitless, the Conservatives don't need to tell them that.
So I am genuinely wrestling with the 'WFT is happening with the pollsters' question like everyone else...
(Sorry, posted this on last thread, but seemed even more relevant here)
Ahead of expected political egg on more than a few pollsters faces in 6 days time, does it *really* matter to their long term credibility and businesses if they are wrong? I mean, there's a lot of conspiracy theories about pollsters since the infamous YouGov poll (i.e. Murdoch wanted something to scare the Tories with) but common sense would seem to suggest that pollsters *do* care about their reputation, so wouldn't road test dodgy methodologies until they got something that fit the 'Labour bounce' narrative that the right-wing press needed to shore up the Tory support following the manifesto grumbles.
Being a cock-up rather than conspiracy kind of a guy, I'm left thinking that some of the polling companies really do road-test 'experimental' methodologies, because a) there are usually a whole load of caveats they can deploy, and b) by the time of the next election we'll all have forgotten the inaccuracies (and in the meantime, the more eye-catching pollsters will have plenty of business from increase brand recognition). I mean, I went to the YouGov website in search of methodology explanations, and spent time learning about all their other polling business...
(And of course, they may genuinely find an innovative new methodology. Perhaps elections are a fabulous way to use all that media cash to do some research)
I appreciate this leaves one very cynical about psephology, but - does it matter? Are we so jaded / time-poor that we'll have forgotten all about it next election? Is it better to be wrong than to be ignored? This is an important question: election polling is not "harmless fun", there are real economic and political consequences...
If there is indeed a conspiracy going on, someone has cocked it up for sure.
Don't forget guys - these polls are all shite. Bank Holiday week. We know all Tories have been away on holiday this week, invisible to the pollsters. So stick a couple on to the Blues at least, knock 3 off for Labour no-shows....(much more likely now as they can see their guy is going to get crushed, so what's the point.....)
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Eastenders doesn't rate like it used to and is particularly low in the summer when the big storylines dry up. Barb figures suggest a lot of people switched over to BGT.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout. Yougov had it tied in its final 2015 poll and the Tories led by 7%, so if the Tories lead by 4% with Yougov and they make the same error that suggests the Tories will be 11% ahead on the night
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Eastenders doesn't rate like it used to and is particularly low in the summer when the big storylines dry up. Barb figures suggest a lot of people switched over to BGT.
I stopped watching it years ago - it was great between 2007 - 2012, but since then it's gone down and never really recovered.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout. Yougov had it tied in its final 2015 poll and the Tories led by 7%, so if the Tories lead by 4% with Yougov and they make the same error that suggests the Tories will be 11% ahead on the night
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Someone posted viewing figures below. It wasn't 40% of the electorate.
If you ask people the question in that way a significant percentage will lie and say they watched it to make themselves look more informed. Did you see the vox pops during the US election where people gave their reaction to a debate that hadn't happened yet?
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Thank goodness somebody can cut through all the crap, Cov.
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Someone posted viewing figures below. It wasn't 40% of the electorate.
If you ask people the question in that way a significant number of people will lie and say they watched it to make themselves look more informed. Did you see the vox pops during the US election where people gave their reaction to a debate that hadn't happened yet?
There is an extremely interesting recent Freakonomics podcast on survey responses vs actually what they think...called How Big is My Penis?
Anyone questioning the integrity of the pollsters is going on the naughty step
It's fine to critique a poll and polling, but don't accuse them of producing polls to please their clients. They are taking legal action against people who say that.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout.
But the huge YouGov model weights on 2010 and 2015 turnout. You need to think of an extra reason for believing ICM and Comres and not the big YouGov model.
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Someone posted viewing figures below. It wasn't 40% of the electorate.
If you ask people the question in that way a significant percentage will lie and say they watched it to make themselves look more informed. Did you see the vox pops during the US election where people gave their reaction to a debate that hadn't happened yet?
Suspect that effect would be mitigated by the fact it is an online panel.
Yeah, even if the 72% is watched or heard of it, the poll claims 40% watched some of it live, which is rubbish.
Yes a 40% audience share is complete bollocks tbh.
People polled in the morning are less likely to have been out on the p*ss the night before. And are therefore more likely to have watched it. An unbalanced sample was entirely predictable.
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Thank goodness somebody can cut through all the crap, Cov.
RIP Cov, banned before we truly knew ye. Look forward to your next guise.
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Eastenders doesn't rate like it used to and is particularly low in the summer when the big storylines dry up. Barb figures suggest a lot of people switched over to BGT.
I stopped watching it years ago - it was great between 2007 - 2012, but since then it's gone down and never really recovered.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout. Yougov had it tied in its final 2015 poll and the Tories led by 7%, so if the Tories lead by 4% with Yougov and they make the same error that suggests the Tories will be 11% ahead on the night
Weighing on 2015 turnout might be a big mistake. Young voters may turn out in sharply greater numbers, post-the Brexit disappointment for many of them.
I think I would be better relying on how many seconds my next piss takes....Tory lead = seconds of full stream...
But like the polls it does depend on the time of day the sample is taken. If 2 in the morning to many old people who have multiple opportunities to participate if 12 on a Sunday too many youngsters just getting up. It's all about getting the right "specimum"
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout.
But the huge YouGov model weights on 2010 and 2015 turnout. You need to think of an extra reason for believing ICM and Comres and not the big YouGov model.
Ashcroft has a model with a Tory majority of 60 seats based on 2015 turnout, which is more in line with ICM and Comres. The Yougov model predicting a hung parliament is likely to be as wrong as their main polling unless there is a surge in youth turnout on Thursday
Reflecting on the campaigns today, it strikes me that the Conservative campaign hasn't really been the worst of all time, at least not in execution. It hasn't been massively inspiring, and the manifesto contained a tad more realism than is to the taste of the average voter, but Diane Abbot alone has given us two moments more excrutiating than anything the Tories have produced. I'd say the Tory campaign has, in execution, been rather better than that either of the Labour Party or the Lib Dems. The problem for the Tories was it turned out that 'Jez is awful' was already priced in - Labour would have had to come up with something far more amazingly awful than not being able to cost their own policies to have sunk further in the voters' estimation. Meanwhile, the election stopped being a general election on who do you most trust to run the country, and instead became a massive by-election on do you like the government. The Tories were obviously rather better placed in relation to the first question than the second. I don't think this is a result of either campaign - I think it is partially the giddiness of an unscheduled election, and partly the early Tory landslide meme.
Anyone questioning the integrity of the pollsters is going on the naughty step
It's fine to critique a poll and polling, but don't accuse them of producing polls to please their clients. They are taking legal action against people who say that.
Quite right. I wouldn't suggest that of any of them. I have serious reservations about their competence though.
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Thank goodness somebody can cut through all the crap, Cov.
RIP Cov, banned before we truly knew ye. Look forward to your next guise.
You have to understand the mentality of Momentum. This forum is broadly pro-Tory. If it can be turned to the light side of the force then Jeremy can will a majority of 704
Survation (the ones with the 1% difference now), interestingly, were the only polling company to call the 2015 election correctly. That was with a phone poll and the numbers were so different to anything else, including their own online polls, they pulled it as rogue.
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Eastenders doesn't rate like it used to and is particularly low in the summer when the big storylines dry up. Barb figures suggest a lot of people switched over to BGT.
I stopped watching it years ago - it was great between 2007 - 2012, but since then it's gone down and never really recovered.
Very similar, it's now lacking in strong characters and overun with trivial storylines. The Mrs has it on but only because we are creatures of habit.
I think I would be better relying on how many seconds my next piss takes....Tory lead = seconds of full stream...
But like the polls it does depend on the time of day the sample is taken. If 2 in the morning to many old people who have multiple opportunities to participate if 12 on a Sunday too many youngsters just getting up. It's all about getting the right "specimum"
I shall do what the pollster do...adjust for these factors ;-)
Anyone questioning the integrity of the pollsters is going on the naughty step
It's fine to critique a poll and polling, but don't accuse them of producing polls to please their clients. They are taking legal action against people who say that.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout. Yougov had it tied in its final 2015 poll and the Tories led by 7%, so if the Tories lead by 4% with Yougov and they make the same error that suggests the Tories will be 11% ahead on the night
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No. The Tories should manage a % or two more, especially if it's not raining on Thursday. And Labour need everyone who's promised to vote for them to actually turn out and do it, which really isn't going to happen. So 44-36 is more likely.
Labour's no.2 priority next week (GOTV being no.1) is to target squeezable LibDem votes. If the LibDem total is really 9% that's a killer. 7% gives Labour a chance to limit its losses.
Me thinks this is what Messina polls are telling the Tories. At least that would explain the lack of panic and seeming like little need to go nuclear and just skip interviews and debates.
Yes, every day that goes by without Project Fear suggests Tories are comfortable with the situation, and they can let the press get on with mobilising their vote.
I would agree, if the data they are getting matches some of the narrower tory poll leads I would have expected one last ditch vicious attack in the media and it hasn't happened yet.
So I think their data shows a narrowing but still a decent majority (their data/feedback could be wrong of course) so no panic.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout.
But the huge YouGov model weights on 2010 and 2015 turnout. You need to think of an extra reason for believing ICM and Comres and not the big YouGov model.
Ashcroft has a model with a Tory majority of 60 seats based on 2015 turnout, which is more in line with ICM and Comres. The Yougov model predicting a hung parliament is likely to be as wrong as their main polling unless there is a surge in youth turnout on Thursday
To repeat - the huge YouGov model weights turnout according to data for 2010 and 2015. In other words, the assumption about youth turnout is that it will be the same as in previous elections.
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Thank goodness somebody can cut through all the crap, Cov.
RIP Cov, banned before we truly knew ye. Look forward to your next guise.
Ooh, and it was straight red. The PB equivalent of the knee-high lunge.
Its not really nuclear though....they haven't got a killer story about Corbyn, just May reminding readers what Corbyn is about.
A month ago I expected Mail will wall to wall terrorist, dodgy voting record, hit pieces of his previous marriages, all the dodgy people in his inner circle.
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Having lost the 'strong and stable' mantle, I don't think it's a good move to spend the last few days campaigning on the basis of being more willing to use nuclear weapons than the other guy.
You prefer Barca then? I'm not too keen on either.
Poor Juve. Lost to RM and Barca in CL finals in recent years.
Just realised - RM did the impossible - they retained the CL title. Have to give props to Zidane, many did not think he would be anywhere near as good as he has been!
Survation (the ones with the 1% difference now), interestingly, were the only polling company to call the 2015 election correctly. That was with a phone poll and the numbers were so different to anything else, including their own online polls, they pulled it as rogue.
Who says that poll wasn't a rogue poll in itself, and their methodology could be tweaked?
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No. The Tories should manage a % or two more, especially if it's not raining on Thursday. And Labour need everyone who's promised to vote for them to actually turn out and do it, which really isn't going to happen. So 44-36 is more likely.
Labour's no.2 priority next week (GOTV being no.1) is to target squeezable LibDem votes. If the LibDem total is really 9% that's a killer. 7% gives Labour a chance to limit its losses.
Last forecast I saw was a horrid week weatherwise.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout.
But the huge YouGov model weights on 2010 and 2015 turnout. You need to think of an extra reason for believing ICM and Comres and not the big YouGov model.
Ashcroft has a model with a Tory majority of 60 seats based on 2015 turnout, which is more in line with ICM and Comres. The Yougov model predicting a hung parliament is likely to be as wrong as their main polling unless there is a surge in youth turnout on Thursday
To repeat - the huge YouGov model weights turnout according to data for 2010 and 2015. In other words, the assumption about youth turnout is that it will be the same as in previous elections.
It obviously doesn't weigh it as well as ICM and Comres and Ashcroft do and its main poll only filters by stated certainty to vote, not actual 2015 turnout demographics
I think I would be better relying on how many seconds my next piss takes....Tory lead = seconds of full stream...
But like the polls it does depend on the time of day the sample is taken. If 2 in the morning to many old people who have multiple opportunities to participate if 12 on a Sunday too many youngsters just getting up. It's all about getting the right "specimum"
I shall do what the pollster do...adjust for these factors ;-)
I forgot that it was directly proportional to the fluid intake the previous evening and wether a curry was involved
Any woman with the dress sense of Theresa May is not gonna click with the public. And just *what* is that giant chain round her neck all about? Asks everyone.
Thank goodness somebody can cut through all the crap, Cov.
RIP Cov, banned before we truly knew ye. Look forward to your next guise.
Ooh, and it was straight red. The PB equivalent of the knee-high lunge.
Reminiscent of Jason Crowe's red card for Arsenal:
Having lost the 'strong and stable' mantle, I don't think it's a good move to spend the last few days campaigning on the basis of being more willing to use nuclear weapons than the other guy.
I thought the Tories had decided that being so negative wasnt working?
Unless people watching clips on evening and breakfast news are counting that as seeing part of the QT programme.
The table states that 17% watched the whole event live, and 21% watched part of it live. That's just way too high.
It was on straight after Eastenders, with May on first.
Eastenders doesn't rate like it used to and is particularly low in the summer when the big storylines dry up. Barb figures suggest a lot of people switched over to BGT.
I stopped watching it years ago - it was great between 2007 - 2012, but since then it's gone down and never really recovered.
Very similar, it's now lacking in strong characters and overun with trivial storylines. The Mrs has it on but only because we are creatures of habit.
The show became too obsessed with affair storylines which ended up ruining characters in the long-term.
They should have also never killed off Ronnie, either.
Arguably the best newspaper for the 1% Tory lead to appear in, from a Conservative point of view, is the Mail on Sunday. Worst would have been the Observer.
I think this is closest to the result we might actually see, of everything that's been shown around tonight.
No, ICM and Comres will be closer as they properly weigh on 2015 turnout. Yougov had it tied in its final 2015 poll and the Tories led by 7%, so if the Tories lead by 4% with Yougov and they make the same error that suggests the Tories will be 11% ahead on the night
Comments
errr, throw a dart?
1) A Survation poll for GMB, which I'm not keen on as it is UK wide and not GB wide.
2) An Ipsos MORI poll for The Standard, out Thursday morning.
Con 43.7%
Lab 36.5%
Con lead 7.2%
(Sorry, posted this on last thread, but seemed even more relevant here)
Ahead of expected political egg on more than a few pollsters faces in 6 days time, does it *really* matter to their long term credibility and businesses if they are wrong? I mean, there's a lot of conspiracy theories about pollsters since the infamous YouGov poll (i.e. Murdoch wanted something to scare the Tories with) but common sense would seem to suggest that pollsters *do* care about their reputation, so wouldn't road test dodgy methodologies until they got something that fit the 'Labour bounce' narrative that the right-wing press needed to shore up the Tory support following the manifesto grumbles.
Being a cock-up rather than conspiracy kind of a guy, I'm left thinking that some of the polling companies really do road-test 'experimental' methodologies, because a) there are usually a whole load of caveats they can deploy, and b) by the time of the next election we'll all have forgotten the inaccuracies (and in the meantime, the more eye-catching pollsters will have plenty of business from increase brand recognition). I mean, I went to the YouGov website in search of methodology explanations, and spent time learning about all their other polling business...
(And of course, they may genuinely find an innovative new methodology. Perhaps elections are a fabulous way to use all that media cash to do some research)
I appreciate this leaves one very cynical about psephology, but - does it matter? Are we so jaded / time-poor that we'll have forgotten all about it next election? Is it better to be wrong than to be ignored? This is an important question: election polling is not "harmless fun", there are real economic and political consequences...
How is anyone to know how the unengaged see this elecfion? All the polls rest on the assumption that they will break the same as the rest of us.
Which would be another polling disaster.
This final is a walkover for RM.
50:31 on the day..... 180 majority.
Maybe.
Or Tory lead could be 60%
Con Majority 100
It's fine to critique a poll and polling, but don't accuse them of producing polls to please their clients. They are taking legal action against people who say that.
The polls are only polling people like us. That is the problem.
I reckon it is 2005 with bells on, in terms of majority, if not share of the vote.
Juve lost their mojo at half time.
Tory majority, only quibbling is how large. John Curtice will have it right.
Labour's no.2 priority next week (GOTV being no.1) is to target squeezable LibDem votes. If the LibDem total is really 9% that's a killer. 7% gives Labour a chance to limit its losses.
So I think their data shows a narrowing but still a decent majority (their data/feedback could be wrong of course) so no panic.
A month ago I expected Mail will wall to wall terrorist, dodgy voting record, hit pieces of his previous marriages, all the dodgy people in his inner circle.
Poor Juve. Lost to RM and Barca in CL finals in recent years.
Just realised - RM did the impossible - they retained the CL title. Have to give props to Zidane, many did not think he would be anywhere near as good as he has been!
https://copa90.com/all/fastest-ever-red-cards-in-english-football
They should have also never killed off Ronnie, either.
What a shower.