AFollow @MSmithsonPB // < ![CDATA[ // < ![CDATA[ xfunction(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); // ]]>
Comments
On-topic: who'd be a pollster? In particular, the last election had a large number of very odd and ultra-close results. We could easily have had a blue majority. Or a very bad case of the Trots.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/jun/21/queens-speech-2017-theresa-may-promises-humility-and-resolve-as-she-publishes-legislative-programme-politics-live
Anyway, I must be off. Play nicely.
You lost. And worse, the hard left are now cemented at the top of a once great party.
https://stv.tv/news/politics/1379124-brexit-holyrood-to-have-consent-vote-on-repealing-eu-law/
The model had a different set of assumptions.
https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/877566999223840768
Of course, it could be because this is her last Queen's Speech while we are in the EU.....
......paging SeanT........
Fair enough
As this is our final call before the election we made two minor changes to our method. The first is that rather than asking people which party they’d vote for, we showed respondents a list of the people actually standing in their constituency and asked which one they would vote for. Hopefully this will help pick up any tactical vote considerations and remove any issue of people saying they would vote UKIP or Green in seats where UKIP or the Greens are not actually standing.
Herding
Secondly we have reallocated those respondents who say don’t know, but who also say they are very likely to vote (voters who my colleague Adam McDonnell described earlier in the campaign as “true undecided”). We assume uncertain voters who say they “don’t know” at this stage won’t actually vote, but those who say they are 8+/10 certain to vote we have reallocated back to the party they voted for in 2015.
Look at the undecided break here
http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2017-united-kingdom-general-election
and why are the the Tories putting Boris Johnson Jacob Rees Mogg and Andrea Leadsom in front of the cameras if they're looking for consensus?
They couldn't have chosen 3 more incendiary candidates. All they were short of was Michael Gove......
Survation didn't. They weren't going to have a rerun of their 2015 debacle. Game Set Match Damien.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RMONGMDEerI
https://twitter.com/ShippersUnbound/status/877566576731365376
TM hasn't been there long but what successes can she point to?
EU Blue: 0 : 51 : 153
Tory Blue: 0 : 135 : 220
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flag_of_Europe
http://blog.richardallen.co.uk/uk-political-party-web-colours/
Curiously Labour's 'red' has a little bit of 'blue' in it - and no green...
In any case, the queen's outfit was more RGB 100, 214, 213 or 'moderate blue' - having a bit of red in there as well....
Tentative evidence of a god, I suppose - but it is only limited overs...
How does Corbyn do in that universe?
I've just heard Jeremy Corbyn say that the firefighters at Grenfell Tower did a great job. I wouldn't be so sure:
https://tinyurl.com/y72bwxgr
https://www.bloomberg.com/energy
(1) The large model
(2) The individual polls, original formulatiom
(3) The indicidual polls, last-minute panic formulation.
(edit, That's better, ABdV)
So I think the view that they just got lucky would need to be backed up with some evidence.
[Edited to add: Maybe your comment was based on the view that the unexpected result was due to big changes in turnout patterns since previous elections. I don't know that we have the data to show that yet.]
Also, I haven't seen this reported on the TV news which is pretty poor in my opinion.
Also, if as you say the large model was based on experience of turnout in 2010 and 2015, isn't that quite similar to what the other pollsters did?
Is it just to create headlines and sell fish and chip wrapping?
That's why we're leaving.