politicalbetting
Home› General

Howdy, Stranger!

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

Sign In Register

Categories

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why you should be wary of hypothetical polling

SystemSystem Posts: 12,173
edited September 2018 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Why you should be wary of hypothetical polling

Please indulge me as I take a minute today to complain about poll questions that ask people whether they'd be more or less likely to vote for a candidate if the candidate did X thing.

Read the full story here


«1345

Comments

  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,565
    If there was a new TSE thread, would you be more likely to get a first?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    They are particularly flawed because a large number of people don't even know who any other Tory except Boris is
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,631
    edited September 2018
    Richard III

    Polling on much more than basic VI on party leader satisfaction is becoming increasingly difficult, we;ve already seen from recent examples that slight wording changes in the questions can produce wildly different results.
  • IanB2IanB2 Posts: 49,871
    Fourth like Boris, falling fast
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,301
    "Trump's hypothetical support for a bill to legalize kicking puppies..."

    Would be pointless, as it will clearly be ruled a constitutional right by the SC after Kavanaugh's confirmation.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    IanB2 said:

    Fourth like Boris, falling fast

    Clear favourite on BF.
  • NemtynakhtNemtynakht Posts: 2,329
    I think they are flawed because in a lot of cases you have the base vote for the party, who will vote for them whatever. Say this is 25% for Tories and Labour. Then the bit that matters is the other 50%, and what they would think. It is slightly more dynamic as well as some people leading a party may put off some of their own voters, or solidify the opposition vote against them
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Another day, another exposure of the rot that lies beneath.
    https://twitter.com/Democracy_A2/status/1036562290953338880
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    Anorak said:

    Another day, another exposure of the rot that lies beneath.
    https://twitter.com/Democracy_A2/status/1036562290953338880

    Perhaps it was an anti-Semitic-anti-apartheid-movement. Perhaps they were worried the main one had been taken over by the Jews.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    fpt

    London Mayor betting.

    Shaun Bailey is now second favourite after Sadiq Khan at 3s (BF) and 5/2 (Laddies).

    I see that Joy Morrissey (25s) has just been endorsed by Andrea Leadsome.

    No idea about Andrew Boff but if Bailey gets the nomination then his odds are likely to shorten further, especially if, as seems possible from today's ES, George is gunning for Sadiq.
  • AnorakAnorak Posts: 6,621
    Just had to cross my legs.
    https://twitter.com/Baddiel/status/1036624826398650368
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    https://twitter.com/TheRedRoar/status/1036613225197051904
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Anorak said:

    Another day, another exposure of the rot that lies beneath.
    https://twitter.com/Democracy_A2/status/1036562290953338880

    Perhaps it was an anti-Semitic-anti-apartheid-movement. Perhaps they were worried the main one had been taken over by the Jews.
    Mandela was a Blairite before Blair was. That'll be the reason.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,752
    https://twitter.com/adamfleming/status/1036626846593568768
  • PeterMannionPeterMannion Posts: 712
    Donald Turnip likes well done steaks?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    rottenborough said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Anorak said:

    Another day, another exposure of the rot that lies beneath.
    https://twitter.com/Democracy_A2/status/1036562290953338880

    Perhaps it was an anti-Semitic-anti-apartheid-movement. Perhaps they were worried the main one had been taken over by the Jews.
    Mandela was a Blairite before Blair was. That'll be the reason.
    Ah yes, he was rather fond of the middle way. Jezza's followers are more from the Winnie Mandela tradition of "necklacing" anyone who disagrees with them
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    PeterMannion said:

    Donald Turnip likes well done steaks?

    It wouldn't surprise me if he also likes pineapple on his pizza
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,301
    If Trump weren't a Russian pawn, I'd assume this woman was working for them...
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/omarosa-reportedly-taped-nearly-every-conversation-she-had-at-the-white-house.html?
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    Nigelb said:

    If Trump weren't a Russian pawn, I'd assume this woman was working for them...
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2018/09/omarosa-reportedly-taped-nearly-every-conversation-she-had-at-the-white-house.html?

    He that lives by reality TV..... well lets hope so anyway (in a political sense)
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    I got quite a talking to by our college Nurse on matriculating; apparently being honest on the 'units of alcohol' question wasn't customary, so doubling the true figure gave her cause for concern.....
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Mortimer said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    I got quite a talking to by our college Nurse on matriculating; apparently being honest on the 'units of alcohol' question wasn't customary, so doubling the true figure gave her cause for concern.....
    I thought the only possible answer was 'Sufficient, thank you'.
  • MortimerMortimer Posts: 14,127
    edited September 2018
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Mortimer said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    I got quite a talking to by our college Nurse on matriculating; apparently being honest on the 'units of alcohol' question wasn't customary, so doubling the true figure gave her cause for concern.....
    I thought the only possible answer was 'Sufficient, thank you'.
    I suspect that new undergraduates, without access to the cellar, should have been the least of her concerns!
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    Mortimer said:

    Richard_Nabavi said:

    Mortimer said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    I got quite a talking to by our college Nurse on matriculating; apparently being honest on the 'units of alcohol' question wasn't customary, so doubling the true figure gave her cause for concern.....
    I thought the only possible answer was 'Sufficient, thank you'.
    I suspect that new undergraduates, without access to the cellar, should have been the least of her concerns!
    Yeah, I have a young relative who was recently at Trinity, Cambridge, and was able to buy some of the wines which the dons didn't want, at very favourable prices. All I can say is that, if those are the wines the dons rejected, one wonders what ones they decided to keep.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    Apparently people suspended from the Labour Party are still allowed to vote in NEC elections.

    I know 'innocent until proven guilty' and all that. But surely voting is something that should only be open to full, current members?

    https://twitter.com/mishtal/status/1036626046269960192
  • DavidLDavidL Posts: 53,892
    PeterMannion said:

    Donald Turnip likes well done steaks?

    I used to like my steaks really well done but increasingly over the years I have become more of a pinko now preferring medium rare. What this says about my politics I am not entirely sure but its no doubt meaningful.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,814
    Mr. Topping, once again, cheers for posting that. Useful for my modest betting position.

    Comrades, all the Commissars beloved of the Chairman have received the proletariat's seal of approval. What more could one want?
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    Was it on here that someone said that doctors only began to worry if their patients drank twice as much as they did?
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,081
    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?

    Although mine isn't quite that - I do drink, regularly: one glass of Tio Pepe every Christmas. Or New Year's eve, if I happen to miss out at Christmas.

    Good afternoon, everyone.
  • AlastairMeeksAlastairMeeks Posts: 30,340
    AnneJGP said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?

    Although mine isn't quite that - I do drink, regularly: one glass of Tio Pepe every Christmas. Or New Year's eve, if I happen to miss out at Christmas.

    Good afternoon, everyone.
    Five times zero is zero. Similarly twice zero.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    FPT:
    DavidL said:


    It was just such a rotten deal from our perspective that you assumed that there were compromises and understandings behind it which had got her to that position. To get there all by herself would be a remarkable achievement, even for Olly Robbins.

    It doesn't look like it was agreed, the whole indivisible four freedoms is something that the UK seems to assume can be fudged, and the EU says "Never! Never! Never!" to.

    We seem to have truly screwed up the negotiation, we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that. Instead we've been trying to have our cake and eat it, and assumed that the EU would give ground, and I expect they assumed we'd realise they can't or won't.
  • FishingFishing Posts: 5,059
    AlastairMeeks said:

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    Even if responses are given under oath, people are quite capable of lying or overstating.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/BBCNormanS/status/1036638602409766912
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    glw said:

    we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that.

    Nissan would have upped sticks and the Government would have fallen.

    Apart from that, great plan
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    edited September 2018
    Scott_P said:

    glw said:

    we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that.

    Nissan would have upped sticks and the Government would have fallen.

    Apart from that, great plan
    If we crash out both of those things are probable, and we seem to be heading to that by default because of lousy preparation and negotiation on the part of the government.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,752
    glw said:

    We seem to have truly screwed up the negotiation, we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that. Instead we've been trying to have our cake and eat it, and assumed that the EU would give ground, and I expect they assumed we'd realise they can't or won't.

    We did start from a hard Brexit base. That's what the Lancaster House speech was all about. The problem was that it was a transparent bluff.
  • AnneJGPAnneJGP Posts: 3,081
    AlastairMeeks said:

    AnneJGP said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?

    Although mine isn't quite that - I do drink, regularly: one glass of Tio Pepe every Christmas. Or New Year's eve, if I happen to miss out at Christmas.

    Good afternoon, everyone.
    Five times zero is zero. Similarly twice zero.
    Mathematically correct, but the important difference there is the change from disbelief of the patient's self-reporting to belief in it. I wonder why that is?
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,814
    Mr. glw, which is why a second vote is still plausible. May's dithering and capitulation has put us in a poor position. There may not be the votes for any deal.
  • NigelbNigelb Posts: 71,301
    AnneJGP said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?
    ...
    Hold the patient with tongs, and scrutinise them with exceeding caution.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    williamglenn said:

    glw said:

    We seem to have truly screwed up the negotiation, we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that. Instead we've been trying to have our cake and eat it, and assumed that the EU would give ground, and I expect they assumed we'd realise they can't or won't.

    We did start from a hard Brexit base. That's what the Lancaster House speech was all about. The problem was that it was a transparent bluff.
    It should not have been a bluff. Start from that point and build on it in areas where we can agree with the EU. Instead we still seem to be asking the EU for things they asbolutely refuse to accept. Maybe the EU negotiators are bluffing, but if they are not we are in a real mess.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. glw, which is why a second vote is still plausible. May's dithering and capitulation has put us in a poor position. There may not be the votes for any deal.

    We seem to be in a bloody brilliant position where we can neither leave or stay in the EU. :)
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    Labour NEC results

    RESULTS (9 to elect)
    DAR, Yasmine 88,176 ELECTED
    WEBBE, Claudia 83,797 ELECTED
    LANSMAN, Jon 83,072 ELECTED
    GARNHAM, Rachel 81,702 ELECTED
    ELMI, Huda 80,371 ELECTED
    WILLIAMS, Darren 79,361 ELECTED
    HENDERSON, Ann 79,176 ELECTED
    MISHRA, Navendu 75,224 ELECTED
    WILLSMAN, Peter 70,321 ELECTED
    IZZARD, Eddie 67,819
    BAXTER, Johanna 50,185
    SINGH JOSAN, Gurinder 48,643
    BLACK, Ann 45,566
    BECKETT, Jasmin 43,955
    PETO, Heather 43,774
    AKEHURST, Luke 43,156
    CAZIMOGLU, Eda 40,807
    WIMBURY, Mary 40,507
    BANES, Lisa 37,993
    MASTERS, Marianna 35,061
    FLETCHER, Jonathan 15,303
    GUY, Stephen 14,985
    MORRISON, Nicola 10,671
    CRAIGIE, James 10,326
    SPEDDING, Gary 9,854
    STANNERS, Stephen 8,909
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    glw said:

    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. glw, which is why a second vote is still plausible. May's dithering and capitulation has put us in a poor position. There may not be the votes for any deal.

    We seem to be in a bloody brilliant position where we can neither leave or stay in the EU. :)
    :smile:
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    glw said:

    If we crash out both of those things are probable, and we seem to be heading to that by default

    Some people pointed this out before the vote.

    It was labelled "Project Fear" and ridiculed as "experts" by Gove.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,752
    glw said:

    williamglenn said:

    glw said:

    We seem to have truly screwed up the negotiation, we should have started with the hard Brexit base and built on that. Instead we've been trying to have our cake and eat it, and assumed that the EU would give ground, and I expect they assumed we'd realise they can't or won't.

    We did start from a hard Brexit base. That's what the Lancaster House speech was all about. The problem was that it was a transparent bluff.
    It should not have been a bluff. Start from that point and build on it in areas where we can agree with the EU. Instead we still seem to be asking the EU for things they asbolutely refuse to accept. Maybe the EU negotiators are bluffing, but if they are not we are in a real mess.
    It was necessarily a bluff because the reality of our trade relationships as well as the political situation in Northern Ireland meant that starting from WTO terms was never a credible option and the EU knew it.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    glw said:

    It should not have been a bluff. Start from that point and build on it in areas where we can agree with the EU. Instead we still seem to be asking the EU for things they asbolutely refuse to accept. Maybe the EU negotiators are bluffing, but if they are not we are in a real mess.

    How does that work?

    Negotiation, Day 1: "We don't need any of your crap. Now what will you give us?"

    Can't see any problem with that...
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 61,814
    Mr. glw, the Romans had a saying: holding a wolf by the ears. You can't hold on, and you can't let go.

    But thinks will be resolved, one way or the other.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    williamglenn said:

    It was necessarily a bluff because the reality of our trade relationships as well as the political situation in Northern Ireland meant that starting from WTO terms was never a credible option and the EU knew it.

    And yet it seems to be where we are headed. As taking Barnier at his word Chequers appears to be dead.
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. glw, the Romans had a saying: holding a wolf by the ears. You can't hold on, and you can't let go.

    That's brilliant.
    Morris_Dancer said:

    But thinks will be resolved, one way or the other.

    I hope so, but I don't see any signs of the EU negotiators being willing to compromise on the fundamentals of the single market.
  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,752
    glw said:

    williamglenn said:

    It was necessarily a bluff because the reality of our trade relationships as well as the political situation in Northern Ireland meant that starting from WTO terms was never a credible option and the EU knew it.

    And yet it seems to be where we are headed. As taking Barnier at his word Chequers appears to be dead.
    Chequers is irrelevant to the Withdrawal Agreement.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849
  • glwglw Posts: 9,916
    Scott_P said:

    glw said:

    It should not have been a bluff. Start from that point and build on it in areas where we can agree with the EU. Instead we still seem to be asking the EU for things they asbolutely refuse to accept. Maybe the EU negotiators are bluffing, but if they are not we are in a real mess.

    How does that work?

    Negotiation, Day 1: "We don't need any of your crap. Now what will you give us?"

    Can't see any problem with that...
    It's better than spending two years asking to have our cake and eat it too.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/lewis_goodall/status/1036642735581741058
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    glw said:

    It's better than spending two years asking to have our cake and eat it too.

    But that was "the will of the people".

    Easiest deal in history. They need us. German car makers.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    They all seem to have a bee in their bonnet about the Jews. This is the google page for Luke Akehurst. Out of three tweets, one of them is about guess what...

    https://google.co.uk/search?q=luke+akehurst&oq=luke+akeh&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.2430j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    edited September 2018
    oxfordsimon said:

    Apparently people suspended from the Labour Party are still allowed to vote in NEC elections.

    I know 'innocent until proven guilty' and all that. But surely voting is something that should only be open to full, current members?

    https://twitter.com/mishtal/status/1036626046269960192

    Says Racist blogger David Collier
  • SlackbladderSlackbladder Posts: 9,773
    Poor Eddie Izzard......
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    It looks as though around 400,000 of the 540,000 claimed Labour members didn't bother to vote. Am I reading this correctly?
  • tpfkartpfkar Posts: 1,565
    Morris_Dancer said:

    Mr. glw, which is why a second vote is still plausible. May's dithering and capitulation has put us in a poor position. There may not be the votes for any deal.

    Very true. A lot will depend on how the arm-twisting works when a deal that no-one is passionate about comes to a vote. The message to Boris, Nadine Dorries, JRM etc. needs to be "if you don't vote for this, you don't get any Brexit at all." and to the likes of Anna Soubry and Justine Greening "if you don't vote for this we crash out without a deal" The only way I can see her getting anything through parliament is if both believe her. How on earth does she manage that?
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    likely.

    In the past there have been sub 20% turnouts for NEC elections
    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It looks as though around 400,000 of the 540,000 claimed Labour members didn't bother to vote. Am I reading this correctly?

  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 5,842
    The minority of Labour members who could be bothered to.vote have confirmed that antisemitism is ok by them.

    Congratulations
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/mocent0/status/1036643762678779906
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1036644624503398401
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
    Obviously this does not apply to Conservative voters because ... reasons.
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/hzeffman/status/1036645778725502977
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/dungeekin/status/1036642104678785027
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    They all seem to have a bee in their bonnet about the Jews. This is the google page for Luke Akehurst. Out of three tweets, one of them is about guess what...

    https://google.co.uk/search?q=luke+akehurst&oq=luke+akeh&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.2430j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
    Well Luke has tweeted some more since then but it looks like the tweet you mention is a retweet of Wes Streeting MP deploring antisemitic attacks.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1036644624503398401

    Democracy mate thats what you can say.

    Its FAKE NEWS that Willsman is an Anti Semite BTW
  • FoxyFoxy Posts: 48,749
    AlastairMeeks said:

    AnneJGP said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?

    Although mine isn't quite that - I do drink, regularly: one glass of Tio Pepe every Christmas. Or New Year's eve, if I happen to miss out at Christmas.

    Good afternoon, everyone.
    Five times zero is zero. Similarly twice zero.
    Surely inebriation is the only thing that keeps Britain coping with Brexit?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    bigjohnowls said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1036644624503398401

    Democracy mate thats what you can say.

    Its FAKE NEWS that Willsman is an Anti Semite BTW
    Maybe he isn't, but he seems pretty bad at spotting it if he can sit on a disciplinary committee and never see any.
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 30,821
    AndreaParma_82 said:

    likely.

    In the past there have been sub 20% turnouts for NEC elections


    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It looks as though around 400,000 of the 540,000 claimed Labour members didn't bother to vote. Am I reading this correctly?

    Thanks - and welcome back!
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/ftwestminster/status/1036647708734513152
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 51,453
    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036647717882286080
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
    Obviously this does not apply to Conservative voters because ... reasons.
    Because the leaders of the Conservative Party, the LibDems, the Greens and even The Monster Raving Loony Party have not been recorded expressing openly racist views. I personally would never vote for a party that had a leader that I strongly suspected held offensive racist views.

    Are you happy supporting an anti-Semite bigot?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1036645354509402113
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    Let the crowing begin:

    https://twitter.com/TheMendozaWoman/status/1036646419015368705
  • AndreaParma_82AndreaParma_82 Posts: 4,714
    edited September 2018
    Those elected today will take the seats after Conference.

    Obviously the incumbents will be sit also in tomorrow's NEC along with Izzard
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,631
    rottenborough said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/BenKentish/status/1036644624503398401

    Democracy mate thats what you can say.

    Its FAKE NEWS that Willsman is an Anti Semite BTW
    Maybe he isn't, but he seems pretty bad at spotting it if he can sit on a disciplinary committee and never see any.
    Almost by definition the members of the disciplinary committee are going to see racists, sexists, homophobes and xenophobes. Any voluntary or membership organisation comes across undesirables, it's the nature of the beast.

    What matters is how they are dealt with - do they get expelled, or do they get elected to the NEC?
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    https://twitter.com/DerbyChrisW/status/1036647364533075969
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    rottenborough said:

    Let the crowing begin:

    https://twitter.com/TheMendozaWoman/status/1036646419015368705

    I hope they crow so much that the decent moderate MPs that still make up a good part of the Labour party break away and set up a rival parliamentary group
  • SandpitSandpit Posts: 54,631
    Foxy said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    AnneJGP said:

    AlastairMeeks said:

    These polls are telling you something, even if it isn't exactly what the formal results suggest.

    It's always worth remembering that poll responses are not given under oath. Respondents are quite capable of lying or overstating their position for emphasis.

    I understand that when you fill out medical questionnaires, doctors multiply your stated alcohol consumption by two and your stated cigarette consumption by five. Anything that is designed to show a poll respondent in a particular light should similarly be held with tongs and scrutinised carefully.

    What do they do with a "Don't smoke, don't drink" response?

    Although mine isn't quite that - I do drink, regularly: one glass of Tio Pepe every Christmas. Or New Year's eve, if I happen to miss out at Christmas.

    Good afternoon, everyone.
    Five times zero is zero. Similarly twice zero.
    Surely inebriation is the only thing that keeps Britain coping with Brexit?
    What happens when someone decides to be honest and say they drink 70 or 80 units a week?
  • DecrepitJohnLDecrepitJohnL Posts: 13,300
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
    Obviously this does not apply to Conservative voters because ... reasons.
    Because the leaders of the Conservative Party, the LibDems, the Greens and even The Monster Raving Loony Party have not been recorded expressing openly racist views. I personally would never vote for a party that had a leader that I strongly suspected held offensive racist views.

    Are you happy supporting an anti-Semite bigot?
    I am not supporting Corbyn, though I do not necessarily agree with your characterisation of him in what looks like push-polling. I have long pointed out Boris is vulnerable to similar attacks and therefore should be opposed in the next PM betting.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/mocent0/status/1036643762678779906

    Some of them will be post-truthers, who really believe the mainstream news is a pack of lies and all made up by Blair supporters.

  • williamglennwilliamglenn Posts: 51,752
    Does "returning power to the party membership" include allowing them to vote on Brexit policy?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
    Obviously this does not apply to Conservative voters because ... reasons.
    Because the leaders of the Conservative Party, the LibDems, the Greens and even The Monster Raving Loony Party have not been recorded expressing openly racist views. I personally would never vote for a party that had a leader that I strongly suspected held offensive racist views.

    Are you happy supporting an anti-Semite bigot?
    I am not supporting Corbyn, though I do not necessarily agree with your characterisation of him in what looks like push-polling. I have long pointed out Boris is vulnerable to similar attacks and therefore should be opposed in the next PM betting.
    I agree about Boris, he has equally unpleasant views, and his use of language betrays those views, as does Corbyn.

    At the moment though, Boris is not leader of the Conservatives, and while the Conservatives have problems with UKIP entryists, (who are probably racist), it has nothing like the problem that Labour has with Anti-Semitism from Momentum. As I am still a member of the Conservative Party I will do all I can do to ensure that Boris does not become leader. If it does I suspect there will be a number of Tory MPs resigning the Whip
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    TOPPING said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    They all seem to have a bee in their bonnet about the Jews. This is the google page for Luke Akehurst. Out of three tweets, one of them is about guess what...

    https://google.co.uk/search?q=luke+akehurst&oq=luke+akeh&aqs=chrome.0.0j69i57j0l4.2430j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8
    Well Luke has tweeted some more since then but it looks like the tweet you mention is a retweet of Wes Streeting MP deploring antisemitic attacks.
    https://twitter.com/lukeakehurst/status/1036605639685025794?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^tweet
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    Nigel_Foremain said:

    rottenborough said:

    Let the crowing begin:

    https://twitter.com/TheMendozaWoman/status/1036646419015368705

    I hope they crow so much that the decent moderate MPs that still make up a good part of the Labour party break away and set up a rival parliamentary group
    Is that all you got left.

    Sad really
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 82,158
    Remember when marathon became snickers, well the Labour party has become the maomentum party, now with added anti-Semitism.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 42,992
    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    DecrepitJohnL said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    Scott_P said:

    https://twitter.com/wjharte/status/1036590023905353728

    https://twitter.com/PolhomeEditor/status/1036641338719182849

    Yes and it is clear to any Labour voter that they are voting for a racist party. Hopefully a temporary split is now becoming increasingly likely until the Anti-Semite-Scumbag-In-Chief is removed from office.
    Obviously this does not apply to Conservative voters because ... reasons.
    Because the leaders of the Conservative Party, the LibDems, the Greens and even The Monster Raving Loony Party have not been recorded expressing openly racist views. I personally would never vote for a party that had a leader that I strongly suspected held offensive racist views.

    Are you happy supporting an anti-Semite bigot?
    I have long pointed out Boris is vulnerable to similar attacks and therefore should be opposed in the next PM betting.
    Amen to that.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,628
    bigjohnowls said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    rottenborough said:

    Let the crowing begin:

    https://twitter.com/TheMendozaWoman/status/1036646419015368705

    I hope they crow so much that the decent moderate MPs that still make up a good part of the Labour party break away and set up a rival parliamentary group
    "Is that all you got left.

    Sad really"
    Right there - Labour's epitaph.

  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1036645354509402113

    Your not in the party Dan

    You voted against Lab. at GE 2017

    Its nothing to do with you
  • GallowgateGallowgate Posts: 19,469
    bigjohnowls said:

    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1036645354509402113

    Your not in the party Dan

    You voted against Lab. at GE 2017

    Its nothing to do with you
    Only Labour members matter?
    What about potential Labour voters?
  • Nigel_ForemainNigel_Foremain Posts: 14,313
    bigjohnowls said:

    Nigel_Foremain said:

    rottenborough said:

    Let the crowing begin:

    https://twitter.com/TheMendozaWoman/status/1036646419015368705

    I hope they crow so much that the decent moderate MPs that still make up a good part of the Labour party break away and set up a rival parliamentary group
    Is that all you got left.

    Sad really
    That post has all the vacuousness that I would expect of a Corbyn apologist.

    What is "sad" is that a once great party ( I am not a supporter but can recognise them as such) has been taken over by a bunch of fruitcakes who idolise a man who is clearly not just not very bright but who also shows the ultimate in human stupidity; racist prejudice.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    edited September 2018
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Remember when marathon became snickers, well the Labour party has become the maomentum party, now with added anti-Semitism.

    Dear FU
    I remember when Lab (Tory Lite War Mongering Party) polled 8.6m votes in 2010

    and I remember when Lab (for the many not the few) polled 12.8m in 2017

    Yet you appear to think a return to Rascist Anti Arab Tory Lite war mongering party is the way forward.

    Fortunately your FAKE NEWS cannot stop the fact that Change that is coming

    Love BJO
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 52,628
    AndreaParma_82 said:

    likely.

    In the past there have been sub 20% turnouts for NEC elections


    Richard_Nabavi said:

    It looks as though around 400,000 of the 540,000 claimed Labour members didn't bother to vote. Am I reading this correctly?

    Well, it's not as if there was anything at much stake....other than the soul of the Labour Party.
  • bigjohnowlsbigjohnowls Posts: 22,690
    Gallowgate said:

    bigjohnowls said:

    rottenborough said:

    https://twitter.com/DPJHodges/status/1036645354509402113

    Your not in the party Dan

    You voted against Lab. at GE 2017

    Its nothing to do with you
    Only Labour members matter?
    What about potential Labour voters?
    12.9M in 2017 an increase of 4.2mM on 2010

    DH went the opposite way

    DH is irrelevant
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    Top trolling:

    https://twitter.com/paulmasonnews/status/1036651865642082308
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    FrancisUrquhart said:

    Remember when marathon became snickers, well the Labour party has become the maomentum party, now with added anti-Semitism.

    Isnt the the snickers rebrand a bit of a legend in marketing circles though? It propelled it to the top chocolate bar increasing sales.
  • rottenboroughrottenborough Posts: 62,778
    I'm seeing adverts for The Blue Wave.

    Launching soon.

    Tory Momentum?
This discussion has been closed.