I find YouGov's model very interesting. They've made a serious attempt to try to model how a change election might work. There will be some very surprising results on Thursday.
If YouGov correctly predict a number of "surprising" results, while still getting the overall total wildly wrong, is that a win for them or not?
No. A good model ought to be good at predicting surprises AND non-surprises. If you're predicting black swans simply by claiming every other swan will be black, that's not impressive at all. The quality of any model is really about hits AND correct rejections.
You can make a good career as a media talking head by making lots of rather unlikely predictions on the basis that a small handful will be correct and you can shout, "there, see, I told you I was right" (while keeping quiet about all the predictions you made that didn't turn out). But it doesn't make you a sage, it makes you a charlatan.
YouGov is all based on the assumption we will see that the youth will turnout like never before (or for a long long time). Something that very much has to be seen to be believed.
If the Youth of this country were holding mass Obama style rallies across the country backing Labour and Corbyn then I would have to buy into it.
But we aren't so I just can't see it, we would be seeing a lot more signs of it if it was on the cards, more than just polling found by these companies.
@Calum - if Labour form the next government, whether with or without a majority, they will try to keep Britain in the single market and the customs union. Will Nicola Sturgeon then withdraw the request for a referendum, or at least put it on hold?
I'd expect that as the EU have already indicated that a Corbyn government would be given extra time to negotiate Brexit, that Nicola would kick IndyRef2 into the longer grass but wouldn't take it off the table completely pending how Corbyn fares in the negotiations.
YouGov is all based on the assumption we will see that the youth will turnout like never before (or for a long long time). Something that very much has to be seen to be believed.
If the Youth of this country were holding mass Obama style rallies across the country backing Labour and Corbyn then I would have to buy into it.
But we aren't so I just can't see it, we would be seeing a lot more signs of it if it was on the cards, more than just polling found by these companies.
Looks like much of the country is going to be very very wet on Thursday, not sure that will lead to a great turn out amongst those who are typically less inclined to vote historically.
This gets raised at every election. There is no evidence that poor weather has an impact on turnout.
Film review in today's Guardian (of '71, set during The Troubles):
"..this is a ferocious action movie suffused with nailbiting tension, as Hook tries to stay ahead of provisionals and equally deadly undercover agents."
ie for Graun readers and I daresay plenty of others, The Troubles, PIRA, Warrington, etc are now in the realms of history where, as with much historical analysis, equivalence can be drawn between each opposing side.
In this context, I wonder, especially of course for the young, how much of an effect all this banging on about Jezza and the IRA will have.
PS. great film, '71.
I've not seen it but it looks like it's on tonight on Film 4,? So it's worth a record and then watch?
Yep def. Good gritty drama, only incidentally about NI. Jack O'Connell particularly good, but then I'm a fan.
Cool I will check it out, just read a little about it (not spoilers) and some of it was filmed in Blackburn, Lancashire my home town! Don't think I have seen many of his films so far, but I remember him from This is England and Skins.
I find YouGov's model very interesting. They've made a serious attempt to try to model how a change election might work. There will be some very surprising results on Thursday.
If YouGov correctly predict a number of "surprising" results, while still getting the overall total wildly wrong, is that a win for them or not?
No. A good model ought to be good at predicting surprises AND non-surprises. If you're predicting black swans simply by claiming every other swan will be black, that's not impressive at all. The quality of any model is really about hits AND correct rejections.
You can make a good career as a media talking head by making lots of rather unlikely predictions on the basis that a small handful will be correct and you can shout, "there, see, I told you I was right" (while keeping quiet about all the predictions you made that didn't turn out). But it doesn't make you a sage, it makes you a charlatan.
That's how magic and primitive religion work. You remind people of all the times sacrificing a virgin made the crops grow and hope they forget about all the times it didn't. If they remember you simply insist she can't have been a virgin after all.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
I suspect it's probably just that JC performs best in front of thousands of cheering fans, and they reckon it's a fair chance they'll gain more from doing that on the 6pm news than rounding up a few stray libdems in a marginal. (But they also need to be doing the latter if they want a YouGov rather than an ICM result!)
He had a meeting in Beeston a couple of days ago which attracted the largest audience in the last 20 years - and that's in Broxtowe, which needs a 4% swing. Not sure you can read much into the pattern TBH.
Is Labour 'hopeful' in Broxtowe, 'quietly confident' even ?
Soubry won't appeal to kippers so that vote might just stick UKIP !
I think Soubry would be a great loss to the Commons and her party. I'd vote for her
Soubry looks like she did a big squeeze job on the Lib Dem vote in the 2015 GE there.
You can also see why Nick might have thought he'd win there when he got 98.4% of his previous vote from 2010.
I think Soubry wins because the tactical Lib Dems stick with her.
Looks like much of the country is going to be very very wet on Thursday, not sure that will lead to a great turn out amongst those who are typically less inclined to vote historically.
This gets raised at every election. There is no evidence that poor weather has an impact on turnout.
I imagine voting will be "brisk". A "voting is brisk" report fills in a good three minutes on 24 hour news on what has to be the quietest news day of the year.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
If there is a 1-12% spread then some pollsters will, surely, have got it right. The GE2015 polling inquiry happened because ALL pollsters got it wrong.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
I'd forgotten to tell you all my amusing GE17 dream last night. I was reading a newspaper report which said 'shock poll shows GREEN surge to 35% putting them ahead in the Midlands' I'd say DYOR but I don't think this one needs it
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
If there is a 1-12% spread then some pollsters will, surely, have got it right. The GE2015 polling inquiry happened because ALL pollsters got it wrong.
So this time half the room can tell the other half why they were totally wrong.
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
The 1% poll is the most extreme because Survation not only uses the Youth Tsunami model, like YouGov, but also deletes everyone who won't say or is undecided from their sample without doing any demographic rebalancing. Hence, because very few younger voters are undecided or won't say, they have a weighting towards the young greater even than YG. Realistically the Survation result is impossible even if the young turnnout en masse.
Film review in today's Guardian (of '71, set during The Troubles):
"..this is a ferocious action movie suffused with nailbiting tension, as Hook tries to stay ahead of provisionals and equally deadly undercover agents."
ie for Graun readers and I daresay plenty of others, The Troubles, PIRA, Warrington, etc are now in the realms of history where, as with much historical analysis, equivalence can be drawn between each opposing side.
In this context, I wonder, especially of course for the young, how much of an effect all this banging on about Jezza and the IRA will have.
PS. great film, '71.
I've not seen it but it looks like it's on tonight on Film 4,? So it's worth a record and then watch?
Yep def. Good gritty drama, only incidentally about NI. Jack O'Connell particularly good, but then I'm a fan.
Cool I will check it out, just read a little about it (not spoilers) and some of it was filmed in Blackburn, Lancashire my home town! Don't think I have seen many of his films so far, but I remember him from This is England and Skins.
Hopkins is just trying to boost her profile and get work again having been sacked by LBC.
There's lots of perfectly legitimate ways to reach the conclusion the postal vote looks bad (or good) for your party.
You know who has applied for postal votes and, if you've canvassed them, their voting intention. You can guess their voting intention even if you don't know it, based on ward and property type. You know more if you knock on their door and ask whether they've used it and if so for whom. You know in broad terms the return rate. You know how it all compares to last time. These are all ways that you can form a sensible, fairly robust view without seeing a single X on a ballot.
Not sure the Tories necessarily want to move the conversation to possible electoral law offences.
Played 12, won 11 and one rained off (sub judice), I'd say they were very up for it. Not even the DPP would bottle out of this one given the voluntary confession inWestcombe's later tweet
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
If there is a 1-12% spread then some pollsters will, surely, have got it right. The GE2015 polling inquiry happened because ALL pollsters got it wrong.
I wouldn't be hugely surprised if the Tories win by 15 pp.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
Looks like much of the country is going to be very very wet on Thursday, not sure that will lead to a great turn out amongst those who are typically less inclined to vote historically.
This gets raised at every election. There is no evidence that poor weather has an impact on turnout.
Yes, but in this election we're concentrating on people who may not usually vote anyway. If YG's model is relying on that section, then yes, poor weather may well have an effect. People who usually vote won't be bothered, as you say.
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
If there is a 1-12% spread then some pollsters will, surely, have got it right. The GE2015 polling inquiry happened because ALL pollsters got it wrong.
Hope you have booked your seat at the polling inquiry!
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
I believe that a polling firm followed their established procedures for estimating public opinion and were confronted with the result of a 1% lead for the Conservatives over Labour. I believe that really happened.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
I'd suggest this is not fertile ground for Corbyn.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
How many of those measures would you have voted for?
"Got to feel sorry for pollsters. If their numbers are close together they’re accused of herding – if not they’re said to be “all over the place"
LOL....There is not herding and then there is 1-12% spread...Wonder what dates the polling disaster inquiry The Sequel is set for...
Who actually believes that 1% poll?
If there is a 1-12% spread then some pollsters will, surely, have got it right. The GE2015 polling inquiry happened because ALL pollsters got it wrong.
So this time half the room can tell the other half why they were totally wrong.
IF turnout starts to vary significantly from one election to the next, in ways that both cross-correlate with voting intention and are difficult to predict, then accurate polling becomes impossible.
The post-2017 inquiry could be as simple as "the young turned out / the young didn't turn out". Case closed.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
I don;t think anybody has found any sort of rational pattern in where Jezza visits in relation to target seats.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Looks like much of the country is going to be very very wet on Thursday, not sure that will lead to a great turn out amongst those who are typically less inclined to vote historically.
This gets raised at every election. There is no evidence that poor weather has an impact on turnout.
I imagine voting will be "brisk". A "voting is brisk" report fills in a good three minutes on 24 hour news on what has to be the quietest news day of the year.
I reckon that voting will be 'steady', just like the rainfall.
Hopefully the guys with vans and knives won't stop it being a quiet news day.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
@Calum - if Labour form the next government, whether with or without a majority, they will try to keep Britain in the single market and the customs union. Will Nicola Sturgeon then withdraw the request for a referendum, or at least put it on hold?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
I am very glad to se she voted against the insidious ID cards scheme, and the absurd 42 day detention proposals.
Would be fascinated to see how you think it might have stopped the latest attack.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
It's good that YouGov are trying something different as regards seat modelling. I look forward to their next update.
Agree.
Tomorrow's update may not mean so much due to technical problems with their survey over the weekend. Wednesday's (final?) update will be the key one, which might also pick up any post-London Bridge late swing.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
There is a lot that could be done with YouGov's type of model. It seems fairly clear that some groups of voters have shifted quite dramatically from 2015. It also seems fairly clear that these groups are not evenly distributed across constituencies. By modelling how these groups of voters have changed voting intention, the ultimate seat tally should be more accurate than uniform national swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
I'd suggest this is not fertile ground for Corbyn.
May thinks it is for her as it diverts the public away from her abysmal record of failure at the Home Office
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Technical point for anoraks: the 37.8% the Tories polled in GB at GE2015 is arrived at by including John Bercow's votes in the Conservative total. If it isn't included they polled 37.7%. (To two decimal points, 37.78% and 37.66% respectively. Interesting how one seat can make that sort of difference).
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
How many of those measures would you have voted for?
How many of those did the security services say they didn't need.
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
.
I'd suggest this is not fertile ground for Corbyn.
May thinks it is for her as it diverts the public away from her abysmal record of failure at the Home Office
Yes, fertile ground for the Tories as Corbyn doesn't have the perception of being strong on security issues.
At the risk of going all Love Actually, after the intel leaks, paris withdrawal and Trumps latest comments/tweets, I wonder what TMay removing / deferring her invite to the Pres would do in the short term.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
There is a lot that could be done with YouGov's type of model. It seems fairly clear that some groups of voters have shifted quite dramatically from 2015. It also seems fairly clear that these groups are not evenly distributed across constituencies. By modelling how these groups of voters have changed voting intention, the ultimate seat tally should be more accurate than uniform national swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
Have some groups of voters shifted dramatically? Or is a younger cohort of tech-savvy Labour supporters learning how to game the polls? It would be richly ironic (and well-deserved) if their success in conjuring a Labour surge out of thin air merely stiffens the sinews of those determined to resist it.
There is a lot that could be done with YouGov's type of model. It seems fairly clear that some groups of voters have shifted quite dramatically from 2015. It also seems fairly clear that these groups are not evenly distributed across constituencies. By modelling how these groups of voters have changed voting intention, the ultimate seat tally should be more accurate than uniform national swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
They claim to be monitoring changes of voting behaviour both by geography (a tiny sample at seat level but a perfectly respectable one if ten or so seats are taken together) and demography (blending their extensive data on their panellists with local census data). So I'd be surprised if national swing is an input; the output of their 50,000 panel, weighted for demography and turnout, is presumably the 42/38 national VI. Once set up I expect the model is dynamic - when a panellist changes their intended vote, it feeds through both locally and via their demographic. Certainly they got today's update out early this morning which doesn't suggest it needs a lot of re-work before you get the output.
The confidence levels at seat level must be huge (as the lines on the website seat boxes indicate!)
Local political history is the one thing they will not be able to model without a larger sample living in each seat.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
There is a lot that could be done with YouGov's type of model. It seems fairly clear that some groups of voters have shifted quite dramatically from 2015. It also seems fairly clear that these groups are not evenly distributed across constituencies. By modelling how these groups of voters have changed voting intention, the ultimate seat tally should be more accurate than uniform national swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
Have some groups of voters shifted dramatically? Or is a younger cohort of tech-savvy Labour supporters learning how to game the polls? It would be richly ironic (and well-deserved) if their success in conjuring a Labour surge out of thin air merely stiffens the sinews of those determined to resist it.
It's not as if they have to actively try to game it. These panels will self-select the politically engaged.
There is a lot that could be done with YouGov's type of model. It seems fairly clear that some groups of voters have shifted quite dramatically from 2015. It also seems fairly clear that these groups are not evenly distributed across constituencies. By modelling how these groups of voters have changed voting intention, the ultimate seat tally should be more accurate than uniform national swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
Have some groups of voters shifted dramatically? Or is a younger cohort of tech-savvy Labour supporters learning how to game the polls? It would be richly ironic (and well-deserved) if their success in conjuring a Labour surge out of thin air merely stiffens the sinews of those determined to resist it.
You're thinking too much about one side of the fence. UKIP's vote has apparently largely decamped.
Back in the real world Corbyn is in County Durham! They didn't specify on sky which one of the seats he is visiting but they seem to range from approximately 4,000 majority to about 15,000.
So is this evidence of a strategic genius who is going to win the GE or alternatively and more likely Labour are in panic mode scuttling around trying to save what they have got?
Not sure the Tories necessarily want to move the conversation to possible electoral law offences.
Played 12, won 11 and one rained off (sub judice), I'd say they were very up for it. Not even the DPP would bottle out of this one given the voluntary confession inWestcombe's later tweet
Would it not be more exact to say: Played 12, lost 11 but got through on a technicality; Then one postponed for clearer weather?
Terrorism Act 2000 May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading) Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001 May absent at Third Reading Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003 May: Voted against it Control Orders The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act. May: Voted against it introduction of ID cards 2006. May voted against it The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010. Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings May voted against it Counter-terrorism Act 2008 This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days May: Absent from the vote Legislation for closed press free courts. May: absent at Third Reading
Just making a point if you are in the same lobby more often than not it undermines your point somewhat.
However when your actual record in Government is one of abject failure on Police cuts and you accuse those warning you of crying wolf etc etc etc
Doesnt need spinning it hits you between the eyes unless you are a PB Tory
Posting cut together bits of video and trying to pass it off as what most people would have seen on the TV is a bit desperate, and further dents what we could, with a certain charity, call your credibility.
Reports in the US press that Trump pulled out of Paris accord because of Macron's handshake.
What a tiny, tiny, tiny manchild
Wasn't it one of his campaign promises?
Yes. It was never going to get through the Senate anyway.
It never needed to. That's why it was termed an 'Executive Agreement' rather than a Treaty. In reality, it didn't make a great deal of practical difference in as far as the countries could have taken the actions they pledged to unilaterally anyway, though the agreement was and is symbolically important.
Comments
You can make a good career as a media talking head by making lots of rather unlikely predictions on the basis that a small handful will be correct and you can shout, "there, see, I told you I was right" (while keeping quiet about all the predictions you made that didn't turn out). But it doesn't make you a sage, it makes you a charlatan.
Now, which anti terror legislation did our ira loving Labour leadership team vote for
Are Boris's oligarch friend Evgeny and his Bullingdon pal George losing it at the Standard? That headline only harms Theresa May's image.
I might be taking the analogy a bit far!
You can also see why Nick might have thought he'd win there when he got 98.4% of his previous vote from 2010.
I think Soubry wins because the tactical Lib Dems stick with her.
May: Absent from the final vote (there was no Second Reading)
Anti-terrorism, Crime and Security Act 2001
May absent at Third Reading
Fourteen-day detention in the Criminal Justice Act 2003
May: Voted against it
Control Orders
The creation of control orders was contained within the 2005 Prevention of Terrorism Act.
May: Voted against it
introduction of ID cards 2006.
May voted against it
The coalition government, with Mrs May as home secretary, would go on to scrap the scheme in 2010.
Ninety-day detention Drafted in the aftermath of the London 7/7 bombings
May voted against it
Counter-terrorism Act 2008
This legislation gave powers to the police to question terrorist suspects after they had been charged. It also tried to extend detention without charge to 42 days
May: Absent from the vote
Legislation for closed press free courts.
May: absent at Third Reading
.
I'd say DYOR but I don't think this one needs it
There's lots of perfectly legitimate ways to reach the conclusion the postal vote looks bad (or good) for your party.
You know who has applied for postal votes and, if you've canvassed them, their voting intention. You can guess their voting intention even if you don't know it, based on ward and property type. You know more if you knock on their door and ask whether they've used it and if so for whom. You know in broad terms the return rate. You know how it all compares to last time. These are all ways that you can form a sensible, fairly robust view without seeing a single X on a ballot.
*wonders whether Trinity College, Cambridge, have their eye on the Shard as they did on the Dome*
Oh are some Tories still going on about the IRA in the 1980s and using the 1930s word "appeasement"?
bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-40111329
if any of those are IN PLAY ... then the 1 % is a crock,right?
The post-2017 inquiry could be as simple as "the young turned out / the young didn't turn out". Case closed.
Sedgefield could be
The others are safe no matter how bad Jez is.
Oh dear
Hopefully the guys with vans and knives won't stop it being a quiet news day.
What a tiny, tiny, tiny manchild
Would be fascinated to see how you think it might have stopped the latest attack.
However when your actual record in Government is one of abject failure on Police cuts and you accuse those warning you of crying wolf etc etc etc
Doesnt need spinning it hits you between the eyes unless you are a PB Tory
Tomorrow's update may not mean so much due to technical problems with their survey over the weekend. Wednesday's (final?) update will be the key one, which might also pick up any post-London Bridge late swing.
The polling companies have the necessary data to do this.
What I'm unclear about is how the confidence intervals work. For improved Conservative (or Labour) performance, how is the model tweaked from their best guess? Is it simply by reinserting uniform national swing by the back door or do YouGov model the different groups on different voting preferences?
Unless there's an odd number of Sinn Fein MPs who "don't count", or you don't count the speaker?
The confidence levels at seat level must be huge (as the lines on the website seat boxes indicate!)
Local political history is the one thing they will not be able to model without a larger sample living in each seat.