Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Options

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » I hope this is not the first step in the state regulation of p

SystemSystem Posts: 11,698
edited July 2017 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » I hope this is not the first step in the state regulation of polling

What the recently announced House of Lords Committee on political polling might be looking at. https://t.co/kQ1A1vvxnZ pic.twitter.com/rFF24KpcBZ

Read the full story here


«13

Comments

  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    edited July 2017
    Agree with TSE... State regulations would be a bad idea.

    It's people's fault for believing polls... And I wager most voters don't anyway.

    Also - first?
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,676
    It isn't the regulation that is broken, it is some of the methodologies.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake
  • Options
    freetochoosefreetochoose Posts: 1,107
    I vehemently oppose state regulation of polling
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,115
    In France polls are banned in the final few days but any more than that would be unacceptable as far as I am concerned. Of course the last 2 general elections you could ignore every poll bar the final poll from Survation
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,289
    HoL should go and whistle.
  • Options
    Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,820
    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.
  • Options
    AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    edited July 2017
    As with every policy these days it will benefit the rich (1).

    Private polling would be rampant (surely they can't ban that) and only those that could afford to commission it would benefit on the financial and betting markets.

    Plus it's just not British (2).

    (1) © Mr. J. Corbyn.
    (2) © Mr. N. Farage.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,360
    Regulation is a very bad idea. Holding pollsters to account for so distorting our election for the second time in a row doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,289

    It isn't the regulation that is broken, it is some of the methodologies.

    Was surprised to see one of the pollsters had changed its methodology. Hard to compare pre and post election positions.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,360
    First set to Konta but its looking seriously hard and hot work.
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138
    DavidL said:

    Regulation is a very bad idea. Holding pollsters to account for so distorting our election for the second time in a row doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

    Agree totally with the second part of this, David. The question is how. Any ideas?
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091
    edited July 2017
    DavidL said:

    First set to Konta but its looking seriously hard and hot work.

    Her game is obviously quite effective, but it seems so ugly and lacking in flair to me.

    Laura Robson was always much more enjoyable to watch I found. I suppose beggars can't be choosers though.
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    First set to Konta but its looking seriously hard and hot work.

    Her game is obviously quite effective, but it seems so ugly and lacking in flair to me.

    Laura Robson was always much more enjoyable to watch I found. I suppose beggars can't be choosers though.
    I always enjoyed watching Francois Durr, but I was a young teenager back then
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    NO.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    That was a function of her lack of flexible thinking and ability to show empathy, not the core message.
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,115
    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    The fact Boris Johnson, ever the populist, has come out against the public sector pay cap this week tells you everything
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
  • Options
    PClippPClipp Posts: 2,138

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    They just use other means to control what you do.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,026

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    With inflation rising I think the fallout from the public sector cap will increase.
    The fact that TM's party are divided over it also makes it worse.
  • Options
    rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 54,052
    HYUFD said:

    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    The fact Boris Johnson, ever the populist, has come out against the public sector pay cap this week tells you everything
    It tells you he wants to be Prime Minister.
  • Options
    nigel4englandnigel4england Posts: 4,800
    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    If it matters to you so much why not go and live in the EU?
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,360
    PClipp said:

    DavidL said:

    Regulation is a very bad idea. Holding pollsters to account for so distorting our election for the second time in a row doesn't seem so unreasonable to me.

    Agree totally with the second part of this, David. The question is how. Any ideas?
    Well the embarrassment of explaining their performance in a public forum is one incentive! Mr Boon will not be looking forward to his invitation.

    But I have no doubt that they were all doing their best and the filters that they used were genuinely based on their interpretation of historical data and trends. Which makes it difficult.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,898
    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    Most of don't want to be EU citizens. It's why we voted to secede.
  • Options
    Ishmael_ZIshmael_Z Posts: 8,981
    Knee jerk response: state regulation can't make them much worse, so the only way is up.

    On further thought: nothing is so useless that state interference cannot make it worse.

    Conclusion: clip their wings - have French type rules about publication in the last week of campaigning.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,979
    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    With inflation rising I think the fallout from the public sector cap will increase.
    The fact that TM's party are divided over it also makes it worse.
    The cap is one of the things keeping inflation under control to be honest. But noone is going to come out and say it.
  • Options
    DavidLDavidL Posts: 51,360
    Danny565 said:

    DavidL said:

    First set to Konta but its looking seriously hard and hot work.

    Her game is obviously quite effective, but it seems so ugly and lacking in flair to me.

    Laura Robson was always much more enjoyable to watch I found. I suppose beggars can't be choosers though.
    Indeed. Some of her groundstrokes when she gets really low and puts a lot of topspin on the ball are very impressive but she is generally functional rather than artistic or creative. Struggling again in the second set.
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    I think the criticism of polling companies is a bit rich. They are making adjustments for the last election for the next one, and things like the Theresa May honeymoon period where voters invest lots of things into an unknown leader distort perceptions.
  • Options
    Sean_FSean_F Posts: 35,898
    What problem is State regulation of polling companies intended to solve?
  • Options
    HYUFDHYUFD Posts: 117,115
    rcs1000 said:

    HYUFD said:

    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    The fact Boris Johnson, ever the populist, has come out against the public sector pay cap this week tells you everything
    It tells you he wants to be Prime Minister.
    Well he did not win 2 London Mayoral elections and an EU referendum for nothing
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    Pulpstar said:

    rkrkrk said:

    Danny565 said:

    FPT

    LMAO at this idea that the Tories "defending austerity" is the key to them recovering politically and getting a majority next time.

    One of May's biggest faux-pas during the campaign is precisely when she implicitly defended the Tories' economic record (the Question Time "magic money tree" moment). Sneerily telling people who want better for themselves and their families that they just need to get their heads out of the clouds is not a recipe for political success - especially when it now comes at a time when magic money trees conveniently sprout up in Belfast when the Tories' own personal claims on power are at stake

    With inflation rising I think the fallout from the public sector cap will increase.
    The fact that TM's party are divided over it also makes it worse.
    The cap is one of the things keeping inflation under control to be honest. But noone is going to come out and say it.
    It may be a factor.
    But the fall in the pound is much stronger.
  • Options
    dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,289
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    I think the criticism of polling companies is a bit rich. They are making adjustments for the last election for the next one, and things like the Theresa May honeymoon period where voters invest lots of things into an unknown leader distort perceptions.

    If anything the criticism should be of journalists who keep going on about them rather than the actual issues!

    Plus this time we didn't have herding, and a few of the pollsters got it pretty spot on.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    edited July 2017
    dr_spyn said:
    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    dr_spyn said:
    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.
    And parachuting in?
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133

    It isn't the regulation that is broken, it is some of the methodologies.

    Also the interpretation, with it being by far the biggest driver of the narrative.
  • Options
    NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 21,358
    Agree with TSE that it's a bad idea if it goes as far as banning polls during election periods, but a House of Lords ad hoc committee is about as influential as a PB pubmeet. It's not an unreasonable subject for such a committee to reflect upon and offer its thoughts, but I don't expect anything to happen as a result.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,556
    dr_spyn said:
    He's just a centime shop Ruth Davidson.
  • Options
    BromptonautBromptonaut Posts: 1,113

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    If it matters to you so much why not go and live in the EU?
    He does.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,979

    It isn't the regulation that is broken, it is some of the methodologies.

    Also the interpretation, with it being by far the biggest driver of the narrative.
    It's the complete and total CERTAINTY that the newspapers have in THEIR pollsters findings that is irritating.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    I never asked for it, nor do I even accept it as a concept. And I am fully satisfied with British citizenship and always have been.

    People are citizens of nation states (and nation states alone) in my eyes.
  • Options
    Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    I think the criticism of polling companies is a bit rich. They are making adjustments for the last election for the next one, and things like the Theresa May honeymoon period where voters invest lots of things into an unknown leader distort perceptions.

    I kind of agree, but the problem is the pollsters themselves often present their polls as firm forecasts of what the election is going to be. How often did pollsters write a bit of accompanying commentary ahead of the 2015 election saying words to the effect of "a hung parliament looks almost guaranteed"? Or ahead of this year's election things like "the question is just how big Theresa May's majority will be"? That's before even getting into that moron from ICM who trash-talked any pollsters who produced better results for Labour.

    If the pollsters simply presented their polls on their own, as simply snapshots of one moment in time, without trying to seem like soothsayers who are giving you a preview of the actual election results, maybe they wouldn't come in for such criticism.
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908
    "Arlene Foster must be the most expensive right winger since Criistiano Ronaldo!"
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    PClipp said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    They just use other means to control what you do.
    Enlighten me.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    I have mixed feelings about the subjects covered. I think the BPC is working pretty well.

    Banning polls during an election period might make sense. In 2010, the tracker from YouGov drowned out other polls, and had a disproportionate impact, creating news rather than reflecting views.

    I share the concern implied that the powerful in politics might seek to curtail or alter the way polls are run and publicised for partisan advantage.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Mr. Royale, I agree entirely on citizenship.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,556

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    I never asked for it, nor do I even accept it as a concept. And I am fully satisfied with British citizenship and always have been.

    People are citizens of nation states (and nation states alone) in my eyes.
    So do you consider yourself a citizen of England or The United Kingdom?
  • Options
    ThreeQuidderThreeQuidder Posts: 6,133
    DavidL said:

    First set to Konta but its looking seriously hard and hot work.

    It is very hot in the sun in London.
  • Options
    Dura_AceDura_Ace Posts: 13,026

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    I never asked for it, nor do I even accept it as a concept. And I am fully satisfied with British citizenship and always have been.

    People are citizens of nation states (and nation states alone) in my eyes.
    Your particular brand of chauvinism has nothing to do with your original point that the Tories don't tell people what to do. They do.
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    edited July 2017

    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.

    It does look a bit like that. Politics is very rapidly starting to look like a game show, half the buggers seem more concerned by the number of likes they get than actually doing stuff. I just hope it doesn't go down the Running Man or Long Walk path.

    And seeing as I've mentioned a couple of King's novellas, I ought to say again that Trump is a very Stillson like character right out of the Dead Zone. And over here in "reality" Trump has blocked King on Twitter because he doesn't like the criticism King has dished out.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    glw said:

    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.

    It does look a bit like that. Politics is very rapidly starting to look like a game show, half the buggers seem more concerned by the number of likes they get than actually doing stuff. I just hope it doesn't go down the Running Man or Long Walk path.
    It all about the perfect social media post, but then that is what a lot of the kidz are all about.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,953
    What's all this citizenship malarkey - I'm a British Subject and proud.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    Mortimer said:

    What's all this citizenship malarkey - I'm a British Subject and proud.

    The status of British Subject was abolished almost entirely in 1981

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Theresa May's internet regulations?
    David Cameron and pornography?
    Thatcher and gay rights/Section 28?
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,953

    Mortimer said:

    What's all this citizenship malarkey - I'm a British Subject and proud.

    The status of British Subject was abolished almost entirely in 1981

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
    And what? I can self identify as one...
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    If it matters to you so much why not go and live in the EU?
    After Brexit he may not be able to!
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    What's all this citizenship malarkey - I'm a British Subject and proud.

    The status of British Subject was abolished almost entirely in 1981

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
    And what? I can self identify as one...
    The immigration officer may take a dim view...
  • Options
    glwglw Posts: 9,549
    edited July 2017

    glw said:

    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.

    It does look a bit like that. Politics is very rapidly starting to look like a game show, half the buggers seem more concerned by the number of likes they get than actually doing stuff. I just hope it doesn't go down the Running Man or Long Walk path.
    It all about the perfect social media post, but then that is what a lot of the kidz are all about.
    Even when it is serious, it's policy at 140 characters at a time. The most complex of issues reduced to a single sentence.

    I see that Reddit is now the 4th most visited web site in the US. CNN is 23rd, the NY Times 32nd. I find this quite disturbing as Reddit is a site famous for people never reading the linked articles but merely arguing about the usually misleading titles. It's the Twitter problem spreading to the web, combined with the Facebook siloing of like minded people talking to one another.
  • Options
    MortimerMortimer Posts: 13,953

    Mortimer said:

    Mortimer said:

    What's all this citizenship malarkey - I'm a British Subject and proud.

    The status of British Subject was abolished almost entirely in 1981

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_subject
    And what? I can self identify as one...
    The immigration officer may take a dim view...
    They allow republicans in the Border Force?
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    glw said:

    glw said:

    Is he trying to out Tredeau Tredeau? I guess if he was, he would have been topless.

    It does look a bit like that. Politics is very rapidly starting to look like a game show, half the buggers seem more concerned by the number of likes they get than actually doing stuff. I just hope it doesn't go down the Running Man or Long Walk path.
    It all about the perfect social media post, but then that is what a lot of the kidz are all about.
    Even when it is serious, it's policy at 140 characters at a time. The most complex of issues reduced to a single sentence.

    I see that Reddit is now the 4th most visited web site in the US. CNN is 23rd, the NY Times 32nd. I find this quite disturbing as Reddit is a site famous for people never reading the linked articles but merely arguing about the usually misleading titles. It's the Twitter problem spreading to the web, combined with the Facebook siloing of like minded people talking to one another.
    I know a number of people who only get their news and views from reddit. Scary indeed.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    Dura_Ace said:

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    I never asked for it, nor do I even accept it as a concept. And I am fully satisfied with British citizenship and always have been.

    People are citizens of nation states (and nation states alone) in my eyes.
    Your particular brand of chauvinism has nothing to do with your original point that the Tories don't tell people what to do. They do.
    A marvellous non sequitur there.

    If you view British citizenship as chauvinistic you are more than welcome to live somewhere else.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    I never asked for it, nor do I even accept it as a concept. And I am fully satisfied with British citizenship and always have been.

    People are citizens of nation states (and nation states alone) in my eyes.
    So do you consider yourself a citizen of England or The United Kingdom?
    A British citizen.
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,556
    Today's winner of the Godwin's law is

    Vince Cable: Theresa May’s Tory conference speech “could have been taken out of Mein Kampf”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/vince-cable-theresa-may-s-tory-conference-speech-could-have-been-taken-out-mein?amp
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503
    rkrkrk said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Theresa May's internet regulations?
    David Cameron and pornography?
    Thatcher and gay rights/Section 28?
    Isolated examples, and I disagree with all three.

    David Cameron scrapped ID cards, control orders and legalised gay marriage too.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300

    rkrkrk said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Theresa May's internet regulations?
    David Cameron and pornography?
    Thatcher and gay rights/Section 28?
    Isolated examples, and I disagree with all three.

    David Cameron scrapped ID cards, control orders and legalised gay marriage too.
    Oh FFS -- you'll set the Oxford comma mob off again.
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    If it matters to you so much why not go and live in the EU?
    After Brexit he may not be able to!
    He will be able to within the boundaries of the immigration law of the countries concerned, he just won't have an absolute right to do so.

    I expect it to be as simple as moving to live in the US, Canada, Australia or NZ, or non-EU European states, and possibly even more so.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Mr. Eagles, Cable showing his red colours there. If there's a party to attack over attitudes to the Jews, it isn't the blues.

    Mr. Urquhart, it perplexes me. But then, people who don't read classical history perplex me too.
  • Options
    not_on_firenot_on_fire Posts: 4,341
    edited July 2017
    rkrkrk said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Theresa May's internet regulations?
    David Cameron and pornography?
    Thatcher and gay rights/Section 28?
    There's a general theme of the Tories trying to ban/control things that they don't understand
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238
    Ishmael_Z said:

    Knee jerk response: state regulation can't make them much worse, so the only way is up.

    On further thought: nothing is so useless that state interference cannot make it worse.

    Conclusion: clip their wings - have French type rules about publication in the last week of campaigning.

    No, that would mean the great unwashed have no access to polling data while the banks, hedge funds etc can commission their own private polls.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    edited July 2017

    Mr. Eagles, Cable showing his red colours there. If there's a party to attack over attitudes to the Jews, it isn't the blues.

    Mr. Urquhart, it perplexes me. But then, people who don't read classical history perplex me too.

    With the internet, people have more information available to them ever before, but people are more ignorant than ever...
  • Options
    TheScreamingEaglesTheScreamingEagles Posts: 114,556

    Today's winner of the Godwin's law is

    Vince Cable: Theresa May’s Tory conference speech “could have been taken out of Mein Kampf”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/vince-cable-theresa-may-s-tory-conference-speech-could-have-been-taken-out-mein?amp

    Citizens of nowhere = Rootless cosmopolitans.

    Shameful from Mrs May, as nasty as Gordon Brown's BNP policy of British jobs for British Workers.
  • Options
    NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,311
    Danny565 said:

    I think the criticism of polling companies is a bit rich. They are making adjustments for the last election for the next one, and things like the Theresa May honeymoon period where voters invest lots of things into an unknown leader distort perceptions.

    I kind of agree, but the problem is the pollsters themselves often present their polls as firm forecasts of what the election is going to be. How often did pollsters write a bit of accompanying commentary ahead of the 2015 election saying words to the effect of "a hung parliament looks almost guaranteed"? Or ahead of this year's election things like "the question is just how big Theresa May's majority will be"? That's before even getting into that moron from ICM who trash-talked any pollsters who produced better results for Labour.

    If the pollsters simply presented their polls on their own, as simply snapshots of one moment in time, without trying to seem like soothsayers who are giving you a preview of the actual election results, maybe they wouldn't come in for such criticism.
    I agree that some pollsters need to be a bit more humble, it's just we don't know which ones. Are ICM the Gold Standard? There seem to be 2 problems. A - Getting the right sample, and B - applying the correct filters. It is a difficult balance, and after all you can get A and B wrong,or right by the wrong amount and still end up with the correct answer by luck. There are also the imponderables. For example, significant numbers of "progressive alliance" voters seemed to go for labour in June because that was the way to achieve the progressive alliance. This may not happen next time. Turnout amongst higher age voters, particularly those who vote Tory may improve next time if they don't go on about a dementia tax. I don't see how these concepts will work through into the numbers, and most certainly in all areas don't understand how state sponsorship could improve it unless an exit poll type survey was produced.
  • Options
    old_labourold_labour Posts: 3,238

    Today's winner of the Godwin's law is

    Vince Cable: Theresa May’s Tory conference speech “could have been taken out of Mein Kampf”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/vince-cable-theresa-may-s-tory-conference-speech-could-have-been-taken-out-mein?amp

    Citizens of nowhere = Rootless cosmopolitans.

    Shameful from Mrs May, as nasty as Gordon Brown's BNP policy of British jobs for British Workers.
    No gulags for slags?
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Mr. Urquhart, there's a great amount of information available, but people choose what they want, hence echo chambers.

    It's a bit like a supermarket. You can have anything. Almost everybody has bread and cheese to some degree. Nectarines can be bought by anyone, but only relatively few get them.

    Technology can be used to close oneself off to differing opinions, and that's something I think many people don't realise or underestimate. The ability to mute, block, silence, censor or expel people for expressing views deemed unacceptable, and actively seeking out people based on how much their views overlap with your own is an insidious aspect of the internet and, particularly, social media.

    When I first set up my Twitter (MorrisF1, for those interested) I deliberately followed a few people whom I knew I'd disagree with on most things. One of them, after some very civilised disagreement, became one of only two people [that I know if] to block me for reasons that are a mystery. [Another person blocked me after they tweeted about Empress Zoe for #InternationalWomensDay, and I pointed out she blinded her son so brutally he died and perhaps wasn't an optimal example of womanhood].
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    Team Sky look like they have the protein shakes bang on....
  • Options
    rkrkrkrkrkrk Posts: 7,908

    rkrkrk said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Theresa May's internet regulations?
    David Cameron and pornography?
    Thatcher and gay rights/Section 28?
    Isolated examples, and I disagree with all three.

    David Cameron scrapped ID cards, control orders and legalised gay marriage too.
    I don't doubt you oppose all 3 - but to suggest the Tories don't order people what to do is wrong.
    Would you like more 'isolated' examples?

    Banning khat, general drugs policy, extremist disruption orders, ripping up human rights, European arrest warrant, abortion limits, assisted suicide...
  • Options
    rpjsrpjs Posts: 3,787

    Dura_Ace said:

    Why should one be surprised at Lord Foulkes' barmy idea? There is no aspect of human activity that Labour figures don't want to impose state regulation on.

    It's a harbinger of things to come once Labour regain office.

    The Tories may be many things, but they don't try and order you what to do.
    Except give up your rights as an EU citizen.
    If it matters to you so much why not go and live in the EU?
    After Brexit he may not be able to!
    He will be able to within the boundaries of the immigration law of the countries concerned, he just won't have an absolute right to do so.

    I expect it to be as simple as moving to live in the US, Canada, Australia or NZ, or non-EU European states, and possibly even more so.
    I can assure you that moving to live in the US is in no way "simple".
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    Here we go....who has the best TPE drugs...
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,979
    Yellow for Froome.
  • Options
    Scrapheap_as_wasScrapheap_as_was Posts: 10,059
    Konta has the worst return of serve I've ever seen.
  • Options
    FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 76,291
    edited July 2017
    Pulpstar said:

    Yellow for Froome.

    He looked human up that climb, but then he already seems to be gassing and then never blows up.
  • Options
    nunuonenunuone Posts: 1,138
    Sean_F said:

    What problem is State regulation of polling companies intended to solve?

    Perhaps they influence voters voting intentions too much.
    Would Tories have got a majority in 2015 without all the polls showing it TCTC for example.
  • Options
    PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 75,979

    Pulpstar said:

    Yellow for Froome.

    He looked human up that climb, but then he already seems to be gassing and then never blows up.
    The GC looks like a straight Aru-Froome fight based off of that.
  • Options
    tlg86tlg86 Posts: 25,196
    nunuone said:

    Sean_F said:

    What problem is State regulation of polling companies intended to solve?

    Perhaps they influence voters voting intentions too much.
    Would Tories have got a majority in 2015 without all the polls showing it TCTC for example.
    Equally, would Labour have got that close in 2017 if people hadn't thought the Tories had it in the bag?
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.
  • Options
    DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    edited July 2017

    Mr. Urquhart, there's a great amount of information available, but people choose what they want, hence echo chambers.

    It's a bit like a supermarket. You can have anything. Almost everybody has bread and cheese to some degree. Nectarines can be bought by anyone, but only relatively few get them.

    Technology can be used to close oneself off to differing opinions, and that's something I think many people don't realise or underestimate. The ability to mute, block, silence, censor or expel people for expressing views deemed unacceptable, and actively seeking out people based on how much their views overlap with your own is an insidious aspect of the internet and, particularly, social media.

    No it is not like a supermarket. It is far worse and more insidious than you suggest because sites and search engines and advertising platforms will adjust automatically and without telling you to your preferences. Not because you actively declared those preferences but based on what you bought or read or watched last time and the thousand times before that.

    Edit: If you read mainly right wing views, eventually you will only be shown those options.
  • Options
    SandyRentoolSandyRentool Posts: 20,676

    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.

    You could say the same about economic forecasting.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.

    You could say the same about economic forecasting.
    Economists regularly have their work tossed and gored in Parliament.
  • Options
    Philip_ThompsonPhilip_Thompson Posts: 65,826
    edited July 2017

    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.

    If there's one thing the politicians should not be in charge of it is influencing the dynamics of politics during an election campaign. The election campaign periods belong to us the voters and the politicians are seeking our votes not the other way around. They should not be in control. If we want opinion polls we should get them.
  • Options
    Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,002
    Mr. L, that's a good point. Also algorithms can artificially boost or diminish the reach of content, and the moderators of said social media have significant power.
  • Options
    Richard_TyndallRichard_Tyndall Posts: 30,977

    Today's winner of the Godwin's law is

    Vince Cable: Theresa May’s Tory conference speech “could have been taken out of Mein Kampf”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/vince-cable-theresa-may-s-tory-conference-speech-could-have-been-taken-out-mein?amp

    Citizens of nowhere = Rootless cosmopolitans.

    Shameful from Mrs May, as nasty as Gordon Brown's BNP policy of British jobs for British Workers.
    Citizen of the World = Meaningless bollocks.

    "The World" does not provide the rights and responsibilities that are inherent with the concept of citizenship.

    May was absolutely right to say what she said. "Citizen of the World" is a meaningless concept in practice except for the ultra rich who can, to a large extent, afford to ignore the existence of states.
  • Options
    AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340

    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.

    If there's one thing the politicians should not be in charge of it is influencing the dynamics of politics during an election campaign. The election campaign periods belong to us the voters and the politicians are seeking our votes not the other way around. They should not be in control. If we want opinion polls we should get them.
    I agree.

    Politicians can still have a look at why opinion polls in Britain have been of such mediocre quality in the last two general elections.
  • Options
    RogerRoger Posts: 18,894
    Charles said:

    rkrkrk said:

    You write off this lady at your peril:
    https://order-order.com/2017/07/05/mays-defiant-defence-austerity/

    Here's a scenario:

    The Corbyn lustre fades gradually. Brexit goes through and the UK economy begins to bounce. The deficit is dealt with (if not removed) and, most importantly of all, the May camp learn from the awful mistakes of this last election campaign.

    Worth betting on a Conservative victory in 2022?

    Better than evens on Tories getting most seats would be the bet I'd go for.
    Doubt May will be leader though in 2022.

    As an aside - I doubt the economy will bounce from Brexit. The short term risk is downside.
    A transitional deal would avoid that but it won't cause a bounce.
    Just came from a really really downbeat economic briefing...
    FPT. Do your clients know you're the bank who said YES YES YES?

    (If I'd voted Leave I wouldn't even get a tampax ad!)
  • Options
    Casino_RoyaleCasino_Royale Posts: 55,503

    Today's winner of the Godwin's law is

    Vince Cable: Theresa May’s Tory conference speech “could have been taken out of Mein Kampf”

    http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2017/07/vince-cable-theresa-may-s-tory-conference-speech-could-have-been-taken-out-mein?amp

    Citizens of nowhere = Rootless cosmopolitans.

    Shameful from Mrs May, as nasty as Gordon Brown's BNP policy of British jobs for British Workers.
    Identities can be complex, but I think it's legitimate to raise an eyebrow at those who loudly profess no loyalty or affinity to the nation whose citizenship they hold, but enjoy all its benefits and privileges. Yet alone those who actively sneer at and deride it.

    A politician could quite reasonably point out that such behaviour can be both selfish and hypocritical.
  • Options
    TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 41,392
    edited July 2017

    There is a public aspect to opinion polling. Rightly or wrongly, they influence the dynamics of politics both during an election campaign and at other times. Yet they do not have a particularly distinguished track record. It's reasonable enough for politicians to ask searching questions of a highly influential yet not very accurate industry.

    You could say the same about economic forecasting.
    Economists regularly have their work tossed and gored in Parliament.
    Over the next few months and years, I think a lot of economists are going to have great big fuck off I told you so looks on their faces. This guy helped to put together the £4,300 figure used in the Brexit debate.

    ukandeu.ac.uk/brexit-fork-in-the-road/

    The interesting paradox he describes is that a worse trading position post-Brexit is supposed to be a price worth paying for Brexiters, and yet the whole point about the many and various trade agreements we will apparently be free to make (which of course require a surrender of sovereigny, almost by definition), is, so the very same Brexiters tell us, to make us better off.
  • Options
    GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 20,886
    Kaboom!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



    :D
This discussion has been closed.