In many ways that’s the best poll the Tories have had this campaign. Includes manifesto period. Would be delighted if all the others showed Lab around 30.
Adding in YouGov gives
Con 41.5% Lab 29.4% LD 15.2% BXP 5.4% Grn 3.0%
330/220/31/0/1
I'm definitely not "herding"!
I'd be very, very surprised if a Con lead of 12% gives a majority of just 10 seats.
I know you will.
It must be low-balling it a bit? Grimsby, for example...
It's not my baseline but it's certainly a plausible scenario. Only upside for me personally will be it will turbocharge Scottish independence, followed by me getting my EU passport back.
I don't really buy this. Brexit and the Tories make nats angry, and likely to call for independence. But that's already what they are, and do. Nats gonna nat. In reality Brexit makes leaving the UK more awkward, and less sellable. That's the only definite outcome of it.
Brexit has certainly broadened the audience for independence. I used to be a Unionist, no more (although I don't have a vote I know plenty of Scottish residents who have had a similar conversion). Brexit is basically Scotland being pissed on from a great height.
It has not really.
In 2015 before the Brexit vote the SNP got 50%, the latest polls after the Brexit vote only have the SNP on about 43%
I think there are people who like independence more than the SNP, probably a growing number. Presumably there is polling on this.
I find that extremely unlikely.
I would agree with poster and also that I doubt there is any polling on it. I vote SNP for two reasons, main one is independence and fact that there is absolutely no sane opposition you could vote for otherwise. They would have no guarantee of my vote after independence if a decent centre right opposition party emerged. I much preferred Alex Salmond's SNP.
SNP support may be polled at 43%, but don't ignore SGreen support (currently polling 4%) which takes it to about 47%. Of course not every vote is Indy based, there are Green and SNP voters who are not pro Indy, but far less proportion - there are 30% Lab voters who say they support Indy.
great post , good to see some unbiased posting on here.
Except for the strange omission of the % of SNP voters who don’t support Indy?
I didn't omit the issue; the 'strangeness' is that I couldn't include a figure as I couldn't find one anywhere for SNP voters who are not Indy supporters; though it could reasonably assumed to be fairly low in the absence of other information given the plethora of other parties (unless they're tactical voting). If you or anyone knows a figure that'd be most welcome.
An Ashcroft poll in the summer found that only 69% of SNP voters support a second referendum. 8% of 2017 SNP voters opposed independence.
The tone of the Labour posters here is very reminiscent of what it was like being a Tory in 1997. You knew you had lost to Blair. He was going to win. You thought it might be bad. But you looked for something....anything....to show it might yet be close.
It never came.
Our theme tune at that time. Happy to share. (From one of the best albums from one of the best bands of all time. Should have been bigger than the Beatles.)
Waiting for a Miracle (But Nothing Ever Happens) - The Comsat Angels
My question is the same as before. There was a systematic error in polling in 2017 which resulted in the Tory lead being overstated by about 5 points. Was the cause of that error definitely identified and corrected by the pollsters?
If not, we should be saying the lead is perhaps between 6 and 17 points, with two and a half weeks to go. Bearing in mind that last time the lead diminished by about 4 points over the last two and a half weeks of the campaign.
You are conveniently ignoring that the trend is completely different this time.
I'm ignoring nothing.
Just cautioning people against blind trust in the polls this time, unless they're satisfied that the systematic error last time has been identified and corrected.
I note that you don't have anything to say about that.
Their Leader couldn't change them.
Their Manifesto couldn't change them.
But the Party Faithful had One Last Hope.
Systematic Polling Error.
In their favour.
You really are not very bright, are you?
Just read my earlier post again, and - with the help of a numerate friend if necessary - try to work out whether I am assuming polling error is necessary in Labour's favour.
Or whether I am just advocating caution in general about the accuracy of the polls in general.
Listening to one podcast or another someone who should know (it might have been Times Red Box talking to sir John Curtice) said that most of the stuff that was done for 2017 by the pollsters have been taken out. There will always be some polling error out there though, the trick is not to trust any one poll.
Obviously, if there's a systematic error, the trick is not to trust any of them!
Your impression may be right of course, but before I'd put money on the error having been corrected, I'd want something more definite that "most of the stuff that was done for 2017 by the pollsters have been taken out." Some idea of what "stuff" it was, and why they thought it should be taken out.
I think it was weighting down younger cohorts as pollsters didn't believe the reported likelihood to vote, when in fact the reported levels were broadly correct. But I might be wrong. The main bone of contention now is under-recall among 17 Labour voters, with Yougov and Survation taking opposite approaches - although their polls have now converged so who knows. My guess is the polls could still be massively wrong but in any direction.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
EDIT My spreadsheet shows the MRP shares for each constituency and also all local constituency polls so you can compare. I'm trying to be transparent in my assumptions and also flaws in the model in order to try to improve it.
In many ways that’s the best poll the Tories have had this campaign. Includes manifesto period. Would be delighted if all the others showed Lab around 30.
Adding in YouGov gives
Con 41.5% Lab 29.4% LD 15.2% BXP 5.4% Grn 3.0%
330/220/31/0/1
I'm definitely not "herding"!</<blockquote
Libdems increase their vote efficiency from ~1.62 seats per 1% nationally to 2 seats per 1% nationally.
That is an improvements of about 40%.
Does that seem reasonable. I'm genuinely unsure. 🤔
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
You are arguing that Grimsby is a unique seat? That the significant differences between your model and the polling there is only a problem for that one seat, and not indicative of a problem for the model?
The tone of the Labour posters here is very reminiscent of what it was like being a Tory in 1997. You knew you had lost to Blair. He was going to win. You thought it might be bad. But you looked for something....anything....to show it might yet be close.
It never came.
Our theme tune at that time. Happy to share. (From one of the best albums from one of the best bands of all time. Should have been bigger than the Beatles.)
Waiting for a Miracle (But Nothing Ever Happens) - The Comsat Angels
I don't think it will be close. As I have said, the polls might be wrong, but they could be wrong in either direction, and I am marginally more inclined to believe they are wrong in the Tory landslide direction. I have my personal preferences but professionally I am well versed in separating out what I want to happen and what I expect to happen (generally they are different). The only chink of light I see is that this might well be 1992 rather than 1997 - a good election to lose.
So Tories still have a huge 12% lead after the first debate and Labour manifesto launch and only movement 1% from the Brexit Party to the LDs
Give or take its roundabout of movement, moe etc. It’s Tories plus BREX 45 which sounds about right, and it BREX squeezed to the pips and Tories on 42.
Are there really hundreds of thousands of under 35’s registering to vote?
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
What about Derby North or Stoke North. Tiny Lab majorities of 2,000 votes, the former has Chris Williamson standing and yet they are just down as a tie rather than a Tory gain despite a 12% polling lead. Your model effectively suggests that there is no more than a 2% Lab to Con swing in the North and Midlands despite all polling suggesting the opposite.
To me the seat totals and seat changes you have are quite likely with a 6 point Tory lead but not a 12 point one.
Should point out in the run up to GE2015 most people thought the Tories needed a 10% lead to get a majority, but the Lib Dem collapse turned that theory on its head.
Including OGH. It’s fair to say that there’s a lot more uncertainty around a 12 point lead for the Tories. Roles reversed and Labour would be certain if a 140+ seat landslide.
That’s an artefact of FPTP and outdated boundaries.
We saw in 2005 a small Lab lead give a decent majority of 66.
The Tories had a bigger lead in 2010 and just short of a majority.
Hopefully the Tories will see the light and ditch FPTP and go for AV.
The YouGov panel survey - presumably published Sunday - will set the narrative and override all the other polls. After success last time, it’ll be seen as the gold standard (until it gets it wrong). A shame that in my seat YouGov hadn’t updated their candidates list for the Remain alliance deal; we just have to hope they haven’t made too many mistakes like that.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
EDIT My spreadsheet shows the MRP shares for each constituency and also all local constituency polls so you can compare. I'm trying to be transparent in my assumptions and also flaws in the model in order to try to improve it.
I'll continue to plough my lonely furrow.
OK, but that suggests you believe that Grimsby is a one-off. How many Grimsby-style polls would it take for you to change the model?
In many ways that’s the best poll the Tories have had this campaign. Includes manifesto period. Would be delighted if all the others showed Lab around 30.
Adding in YouGov gives
Con 41.5% Lab 29.4% LD 15.2% BXP 5.4% Grn 3.0%
330/220/31/0/1
I'm definitely not "herding"!
I'd be very, very surprised if a Con lead of 12% gives a majority of just 10 seats.
I know you will.
It must be low-balling it a bit? Grimsby, for example...
I know about Grimsby. There are some other local situations that go in the opposite direction e.g. Kensington a Remain seat which the model has as a clear Tory win but the MRP and constituency polls indicates a much closer fight. It doesn't have local special knowledge.
The YouGov panel survey - presumably published Sunday - will set the narrative and override all the other polls. After success last time, it’ll be seen as the gold standard (until it gets it wrong). A shame that in my seat YouGov hadn’t updated their candidates list for the Remain alliance deal; we just have to hope they haven’t made too many mistakes like that.
Hard-Left Jewish activists are knocking on doors to tell voters that Labour’s anti-Semitism crisis has been cooked up by the media.
The pro-Corbyn Jewish Voice for Labour group, which claims the party does not have a problem with anti-Semitism, has put together a guide for canvassers.
The document says claims that Labour has a problem with anti-Jewish racism reflect ‘unremitting mainstream media bias’.
In many ways that’s the best poll the Tories have had this campaign. Includes manifesto period. Would be delighted if all the others showed Lab around 30.
Adding in YouGov gives
Con 41.5% Lab 29.4% LD 15.2% BXP 5.4% Grn 3.0%
330/220/31/0/1
I'm definitely not "herding"!
I'd be very, very surprised if a Con lead of 12% gives a majority of just 10 seats.
I know one of the guys who did the seat modelling for one of the parties.
It is possible, if the Lib Dem surge (and doubling your vote share since last time counts as a surge) is uniform across Great Britain then a 12% lead puts you into landslide territory.
If the Lib Dem surge is focussed in Con held Remain leaning seats then a 12% lead could equal a small majority/Con largest party in a hung parliament.
Remember the Boris Johnson strategy is to sacrifice Tory held seats in Remania to win Labour Leave seats.
Now personally I think the Lib Dem surge will be uniform and the Lib Dems will win an awful lot of second places which is good news for the Tories.
If the Tories really do break through in loads of these working class Northern seats it will really be quite something. I still remain doubtful that it will happen in a way that leads to a landslide. There are just too many people who have voted Labour all their life (same with the Tories but for this argument, just mentioning Labour) and their daddy and their daddies daddy did too.
They might hate Corbyn, they might want Brexit, but will convince themselves that their local Labour MP is one of the good sort and need them in parliament.
Huge numbers of people had only ever voted Tory.
Until they voted for Tony Blair.
Whatever Boris Johnson is, he is not Tony Blair.
Except, he is. Blair was not your typical Labour "Up the workers!" "All out, lads!" embodiment of what the Labour Party was thought of by those who voted unfailingly, unthinkingly Tory through the sixties and seventies and eighties. Boris is not seen as the typical embodiment of the bosses.
Boris is a Tory who said "Fuck business." That can't be right? This is a Tory who chucked 20-odd of his MPs out the Party because they wouldn't implement Brexit. Boris is a guy standing up for me and thee, against the weight of the Establishment. So this once, we'll lend him or votes and see how he gets on.
Hard-Left Jewish activists are knocking on doors to tell voters that Labour’s anti-Semitism crisis has been cooked up by the media.
The pro-Corbyn Jewish Voice for Labour group, which claims the party does not have a problem with anti-Semitism, has put together a guide for canvassers.
The document says claims that Labour has a problem with anti-Jewish racism reflect ‘unremitting mainstream media bias’.
1. Nick Timothy has been locked in a shed without internet. 2. The Tory policy is to Chuck more borrowed money at the problem short term, appeal for help from across the political spectrum on proper answer for the long term.
In many ways that’s the best poll the Tories have had this campaign. Includes manifesto period. Would be delighted if all the others showed Lab around 30.
Adding in YouGov gives
Con 41.5% Lab 29.4% LD 15.2% BXP 5.4% Grn 3.0%
330/220/31/0/1
I'm definitely not "herding"!
I'd be very, very surprised if a Con lead of 12% gives a majority of just 10 seats.
I know you will.
It must be low-balling it a bit? Grimsby, for example...
I know about Grimsby. There are some other local situations that go in the opposite direction e.g. Kensington a Remain seat which the model has as a clear Tory win but the MRP and constituency polls indicates a much closer fight. It doesn't have local special knowledge.
It might be interesting to compute implied regional swings and compare those to recent polls. That shouldn't rely on local special knowledge.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
You are arguing that Grimsby is a unique seat? That the significant differences between your model and the polling there is only a problem for that one seat, and not indicative of a problem for the model?
There are several seats that the model doesn't fit. They are outliers usually with an explanation of why they don't fit. The Grimsby poll was indicative of a problem with my assumption about BXP tactical voters that i have addressed but not over-fitted to the Grimsby poll (which might be wrong anyway).
What I'm not going to do is react to assertions that a 12% lead over Labour means a big Tory majority. It is more complex than that, and that's what I'm trying to model.
1. Nick Timothy has been locked in a shed without internet. 2. The Tory policy is to Chuck more borrowed money at the problem short term, appeal for help from across the political spectrum on proper answer for the long term.
OK, the launch is tomorrow:
Matt Hancock said the Conservatives will unveil a three-point plan to tackle the issue when the party launches its manifesto on Sunday.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
What about Derby North or Stoke North. Tiny Lab majorities of 2,000 votes, the former has Chris Williamson standing and yet they are just down as a tie rather than a Tory gain despite a 12% polling lead. Your model effectively suggests that there is no more than a 2% Lab to Con swing in the North and Midlands despite all polling suggesting the opposite.
To me the seat totals and seat changes you have are quite likely with a 6 point Tory lead but not a 12 point one.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
You are arguing that Grimsby is a unique seat? That the significant differences between your model and the polling there is only a problem for that one seat, and not indicative of a problem for the model?
There are several seats that the model doesn't fit. They are outliers usually with an explanation of why they don't fit. The Grimsby poll was indicative of a problem with my assumption about BXP tactical voters that i have addressed but not over-fitted to the Grimsby poll (which might be wrong anyway).
What I'm not going to do is react to assertions that a 12% lead over Labour means a big Tory majority. It is more complex than that, and that's what I'm trying to model.
Is there any academic peer reviewed foundation to your model?
One thing that impressed me with Rod Crosby was he could point you to all the academic literature which formed the backbone of his model. All the rest of his "internet research", now that is a totally different matter.
Patriotic Labour moderates in the North and Midland are much closer to Boris's one nation Toryism than they are to Corbyn and his cabal of Britain hating marxists. Boris is recruiting 20,000 more coppers and spending much more on the NHS thereby reassuring them of his centrist credentials.
Corbyn by comparison is taking away their marriage tax allowance and, for many of the self employed and pensioners, hugely increasing their dividend taxes. He's also launching a pointless investigation into our colonial past because he's ashamed to be British.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
You are arguing that Grimsby is a unique seat? That the significant differences between your model and the polling there is only a problem for that one seat, and not indicative of a problem for the model?
There are several seats that the model doesn't fit. They are outliers usually with an explanation of why they don't fit. The Grimsby poll was indicative of a problem with my assumption about BXP tactical voters that i have addressed but not over-fitted to the Grimsby poll (which might be wrong anyway).
What I'm not going to do is react to assertions that a 12% lead over Labour means a big Tory majority. It is more complex than that, and that's what I'm trying to model.
Is there any academic peer reviewed foundation to your model?
One thing that impressed me with Rod Crosby was he could point you to all the academic literature which formed the backbone of his model. All the rest of his "internet research", now that is a totally different matter.
No. I've made it up and adjusted it as I go along. I have a lifetime's experience in modelling and I enjoy it. I'll either have egg on my face when Big Ben dongs on the 12th, or a smirk.
One thing I will do after the 12th is substitute the actual shares into the model to see whether the difference from the actual results is mainly due to a polling difference or my other assumptions.
I have posted this before, but it is really worth a listen.
In this episode of the Making Sense podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Bari Weiss about her book How to Fight anti-Semitism. They discuss the three different strands of anti-Semitism (rightwing, leftwing, and Islamic), the Tree of Life shooting in Pittsburgh, the difference between anti-Semitism and other forms of racism, “Great Replacement Theory,” the populist response to globalization, the history of anti-Semitism in the U.S., criticisms of Israel, the fate of Jews in Western Europe, and other topics.
Patriotic Labour moderates in the North and Midland are much closer to Boris's one nation Toryism than they are to Corbyn and his cabal of Britain hating marxists. Boris is recruiting 20,000 more coppers and spending much more on the NHS thereby reassuring them of his centrist credentials.
Corbyn by comparison is taking away their marriage tax allowance and, for many of the self employed and pensioners, hugely increasing their dividend taxes. He's also launching a pointless investigation into our colonial past because he's ashamed to be British.
Afternoon Ms Arcuri. Good to see you've forgiven him already.
Looking at the manifestos, it's concerning that Labour, and to a degree other parties, are not taking a nuanced view on Zero Hour contracts - ability to work (by app etc..) on demand on both sides (i.e. when a worker wants to and when a digital service requires people) is a huge boon to flexible working. Protecting works should not remove choice from workers, or a flexible economy.
I have advised numerous clients who are in precarious positions and due to mental health, or physical health, distance, or care commitments, cannot and do not want to have fixed contracts, not to be 'employed'. This includes cyclists delivering food for Deliveroo, plumbers, and Uber drivers. Many of these people could not work before. As a case study, one friend of mine due to depression could not work, and her character makes it very to work with her. However, since cycling for Deliveroo and Stuarts delivery, her mental health has improved, her physical fitness, and her financial health. Her dependency on friends and family (she can't claim benefits) is removed. She also has an active social life seeing people every day (and helping people) and is far less lonely. Some weeks she can't work at all, other times for only an hour or two. Previously she could not work, or get any job, and if she did, no-one would keep her very long.
If work regulation is bought back to some anachronistic form of employment (with reporting and fixed hours) I fear many people like that will be made unemployed, more unhealthy, and more of a financial burden, this will increase poverty and hit the poorest and most precariously placed members.
Further, I like working when suits me, indulgent perhaps, but I don't want to, many people are not of that character and do not want that 'security' - the same goes for housing (like minimum contract lengths). Gov should prevent abuse but not dictate choices or close down flexibility or diversity.
Patriotic Labour moderates in the North and Midland are much closer to Boris's one nation Toryism than they are to Corbyn and his cabal of Britain hating marxists. Boris is recruiting 20,000 more coppers and spending much more on the NHS thereby reassuring them of his centrist credentials.
Corbyn by comparison is taking away their marriage tax allowance and, for many of the self employed and pensioners, hugely increasing their dividend taxes. He's also launching a pointless investigation into our colonial past because he's ashamed to be British.
Afternoon Ms Arcuri. Good to see you've forgiven him already.
Don’t forget jez answer last night, he’s taken away marriage tax allowance for social engineering reasons to turn us all into atheists as he is. Corbyn said it encourages people to get married and raise their family’s in the protection and stability of that, rather than live in sin, was his reason given for scrapping it.
I believe him. I believe corbyn was being honest and telling the truth.
So Tories still have a huge 12% lead after the first debate and Labour manifesto launch and only movement 1% from the Brexit Party to the LDs
Give or take its roundabout of movement, moe etc. It’s Tories plus BREX 45 which sounds about right, and it BREX squeezed to the pips and Tories on 42.
Are there really hundreds of thousands of under 35’s registering to vote?
Yes. 208,000 registered yesterday: that's roughly THREE TIMES the number registering at Polling Day minus 20 in 2017 or 2015. And the number of under 35s registering has been consistently 2-3 times their 2017 or 2015 levels for the past week.
Mind you, at 70% turnout (=32.6 mn across the UK), 200k a day needs to be sustained to have any earth-moving significance. Yesterday was the first day in this election total new under-35s hit over 100k. And in 2017, new registrations stopped dead 16 days before the election. In effect: this coming Tuesday.
But I guess we MIGHT see another 800k under 35s between this morning and Tuesday night.
Labour abolishing the Marriage Tax allowance only hits the 95% and not the 5%.
That's a £250pa per household impacted.
That will mostly be made up for by their free broadband, which is allegedly both FTTP and 30mbps.
I have FTTP and have 30mbps.
The main thing compared to ADSL is that the 30mbps is rock fucking solid no matter the time of day or day of week.
As compared to the notional 16mbps we had on ADSL which could be any figure between that and half a Meg.
You have fttp and only bothered with 30Mb?! If I had fttp I'd be getting the full 1Gb for sure.
FTTP came with the new build I bought. Don't have a copper line at all.
Sure, but why only 30Mb?!
Price. We only had the option of going with BT and their faster options were eye wateringly expensive.
Ah right it's with BT. That's shite, hyperoptic are definitely the best fttp provider. Apparently we've registered enough interest on our road to get them to take notice. Hopefully we'll get it next year some time.
I didn't see lat night's debate, but I take it Boris bombed.
If you only read twitter, perhaps.
The audience were youngish public sector workers leaning towards labour. In this sort of format Boris “with everything already built in to the polling” as HY calls it was always going to have a hard time after years giving out ammo even if the audience wasn’t bent against him. He dealt with it very well never losing his rag.
1. Nick Timothy has been locked in a shed without internet. 2. The Tory policy is to Chuck more borrowed money at the problem short term, appeal for help from across the political spectrum on proper answer for the long term.
OK, the launch is tomorrow:
Matt Hancock said the Conservatives will unveil a three-point plan to tackle the issue when the party launches its manifesto on Sunday.
Currently if you have more than £23,250 in assets you have to pay for your own care? This means pensioners' life savings can be drained while they languish in a home. However a policy with a much higher 'floor' of say £100,000 will benefit hundreds of thousands of the poorest older people mostly pensioners who've got savings, but could never afford a house, but not help those above the floor.
Is there a cross party solution to be had with this, surely a floor type policy helps poorer labour voters so they would be happy with it, but it would be hard sell for any Tory in their press. So the stop gap solution Tory’s have in their manifesto “throw money at it to pest control negative headlines” becomes default long into the future?
1. Nick Timothy has been locked in a shed without internet. 2. The Tory policy is to Chuck more borrowed money at the problem short term, appeal for help from across the political spectrum on proper answer for the long term.
OK, the launch is tomorrow:
Matt Hancock said the Conservatives will unveil a three-point plan to tackle the issue when the party launches its manifesto on Sunday.
Currently if you have more than £23,250 in assets you have to pay for your own care? This means pensioners' life savings can be drained while they languish in a home. However a policy with a much higher 'floor' of say £100,000 will benefit hundreds of thousands of the poorest older people mostly pensioners who've got savings, but could never afford a house, but not help those above the floor.
That was the Tory policy in 2017. To be applied to those still at home as well as to those in residential care. Excoriated as a "dementia tax" and credited with costing the Tories their majority.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
What about Derby North or Stoke North. Tiny Lab majorities of 2,000 votes, the former has Chris Williamson standing and yet they are just down as a tie rather than a Tory gain despite a 12% polling lead. Your model effectively suggests that there is no more than a 2% Lab to Con swing in the North and Midlands despite all polling suggesting the opposite.
To me the seat totals and seat changes you have are quite likely with a 6 point Tory lead but not a 12 point one.
OK We'll see on the night of the 12th.
I’m not saying these events will happen more I’m saying your model is a bit strange. Presumably the Tories would only scrape a majority on a 15 point polling lead. A lot of the strange outcomes cannot be justified by yourself which worries me.
The Barnesian model has Labour holding Grimsby even when the Tories have a 12 point polling lead. Seems like nonsense.
And the seat-specific polling showed it to be a goner - by a sizeable margin.
I know about the Grimsby seat specific polling. That is why I have reduced the tactical voting for Labour by BXP supporters to zero, even though many BXP supporters are ex-Labour. My model still shows Grimsby as a Labour hold which I admit seems unlikely in view of the constituency poll but I'm not going to bodge the model to just fit Grimsby. You can take one seat off Labour and add it to the Tory total if you like. There will be other cases where local knowledge would justify an adjustment. DYOR.
What about Derby North or Stoke North. Tiny Lab majorities of 2,000 votes, the former has Chris Williamson standing and yet they are just down as a tie rather than a Tory gain despite a 12% polling lead. Your model effectively suggests that there is no more than a 2% Lab to Con swing in the North and Midlands despite all polling suggesting the opposite.
To me the seat totals and seat changes you have are quite likely with a 6 point Tory lead but not a 12 point one.
OK We'll see on the night of the 12th.
I’m not saying these events will happen more I’m saying your model is a bit strange. Presumably the Tories would only scrap a majority on a 15 point polling lead. A lot of the strange outcomes cannot be justified by yourself which worries me.
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
Utterly inconsequential question but I'm curious: I've been checking Amazon a few times today, lazily browsing for Christmas.
I've also got Civ VI in my shopping basket (considering buying it, obviously). The price has continually fallen by a few pence each time today. No idea why. I can see a one-off currency correction or price match changing it, but it's happened half a dozen times and I can't work out why that would be. Any ideas?
They are cautiously optimistic (Hampstead & Kilburn).
No canvassing from Labour yet - Kinabalu, where are you?! A couple of leaflets in the last day or so emphasising that Tulip voted against triggering Article 50. Nothing from the Tories yet.
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
What's this feeling based on?
That May got 43% and was more popular across the spectrum than Johnson is. Johnson is very popular with a large-ish group of people - but I'm not convinced it's with everybody who would vote Conservative.
I think 2017 was a high point in terms of their voteshare and historically they haven't ever polled much over that, so I think higher predictions are silly.
In regards to why I think it's less than 40%, that's what Cameron was polling in 2010 and 2015 and again he appealed far more across the spectrum than Johnson does now.
I simply think the Tory vote is overstated - and the Labour vote understated. That's just my feeling about it.
In a more lefty place I know of, the main chatter is about how the world is biased against Jez and that's why he will be denied a victory, they fully intend to vote for him in the leadership election if he chooses to stand again. Even if there's a landslide victory for Bozza they will stick by Jez because it's the fault of the, err, media, bankers and other types of "internationally" owned industries.
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
What's this feeling based on?
That May got 43% and was more popular across the spectrum than Johnson is. Johnson is very popular with a large-ish group of people - but I'm not convinced it's with everybody who would vote Conservative.
I think 2017 was a high point in terms of their voteshare and historically they haven't ever polled much over that, so I think higher predictions are silly.
In regards to why I think it's less than 40%, that's what Cameron was polling in 2010 and 2015 and again he appealed far more across the spectrum than Johnson does now.
I simply think the Tory vote is overstated - and the Labour vote understated. That's just my feeling about it.
Do you think the combined Tory and BXP vote will only be around 42%?
The average Tory lead is now ahead of where it was at this stage in GE2017 (12.2% versus 11.5%). By this stage in GE17 the Tory lead had started to fall steadily. I am now resigned to the Tories getting a decent majority.
Anecdote alert:
My 82 year old mum had Carrie Symmonds with the No 10 dog knock at her door canvassing in Hastings today with the local Tory candidate. I suspect the dog has won her vote for the Tories. I don;t think she has ever voted Tory before.
Interesting that the Tories are putting so much effort into Hastings & Rye though - clearly making sure they are defending their marginals as well as attacking their targets.
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
What's this feeling based on?
That May got 43% and was more popular across the spectrum than Johnson is. Johnson is very popular with a large-ish group of people - but I'm not convinced it's with everybody who would vote Conservative.
I think 2017 was a high point in terms of their voteshare and historically they haven't ever polled much over that, so I think higher predictions are silly.
In regards to why I think it's less than 40%, that's what Cameron was polling in 2010 and 2015 and again he appealed far more across the spectrum than Johnson does now.
I simply think the Tory vote is overstated - and the Labour vote understated. That's just my feeling about it.
If you don’t mind me asking, roughly whereabouts in the country are you from? Back where I grew up in the East Midlands, Boris precisely hits the Tory G spot. However I suspect that does vary.
If I were Boris I would say little / nothing about Social Care in manifesto.
We saw in 2017 that vast majority of people have no idea how the CURRENT system works - and just drawing attention to the current situation outraged a lot of people.
Best to say nothing and for the issue not to be discussed in the media at all.
Even if they offer something positive, it won't outweigh how negatively the current situation is viewed. So people will still be frightened by the subject, whatever the proposals.
Labour needs to close the gap this weekend and fast. They still have time but time is running out.
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
What's this feeling based on?
That May got 43% and was more popular across the spectrum than Johnson is. Johnson is very popular with a large-ish group of people - but I'm not convinced it's with everybody who would vote Conservative.
I think 2017 was a high point in terms of their voteshare and historically they haven't ever polled much over that, so I think higher predictions are silly.
In regards to why I think it's less than 40%, that's what Cameron was polling in 2010 and 2015 and again he appealed far more across the spectrum than Johnson does now.
I simply think the Tory vote is overstated - and the Labour vote understated. That's just my feeling about it.
That sounds like a whole lot of hunches to me. Remember in 2017 the polling for the Tory share was very accurate.
Re Barnesian's model - it has come under a lot of scrutiny on here and I, like others have said, would expect CON to have more seats if 12% ahead.
But Barnesian has clearly put a lot of effort and thought into it and should be commended for that. And I think that if we (CON 😀) are 10% ahead the majority could be tight.
But as no one likes SuperJo anymore I think we can hold Richmond Park! 😀
Comments
https://order-order.com/2019/11/23/leicester-labour-party-suspends-deputy-mayor/
It never came.
Our theme tune at that time. Happy to share. (From one of the best albums from one of the best bands of all time. Should have been bigger than the Beatles.)
Waiting for a Miracle (But Nothing Ever Happens) - The Comsat Angels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O1XOW7LHRUg
Only LDs can unseat Tory.
Only Labour can unseat Tory.
EDIT My spreadsheet shows the MRP shares for each constituency and also all local constituency polls so you can compare. I'm trying to be transparent in my assumptions and also flaws in the model in order to try to improve it.
I'll continue to plough my lonely furrow.
Are there really hundreds of thousands of under 35’s registering to vote?
No, not looking for straws. This was lost with the Benn Act.
And it's worse (for us) than it was for Tories losing to Blair.
This is Boris Johnson and a Tory Party that looks captured by the right.
To me the seat totals and seat changes you have are quite likely with a 6 point Tory lead but not a 12 point one.
Get a life and get packing
Quelle Surprise.
Boris is a Tory who said "Fuck business." That can't be right? This is a Tory who chucked 20-odd of his MPs out the Party because they wouldn't implement Brexit. Boris is a guy standing up for me and thee, against the weight of the Establishment. So this once, we'll lend him or votes and see how he gets on.
The Sun yesterday has: In fact, it may only publish the full document two weeks before the general election.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/10340184/conservative-party-manifesto-policies-launch/
https://www.leicestermercury.co.uk/news/leicester-news/senior-leicester-labour-councillor-mustafa-3567972
I doubt the ERG will find many new recruits amongt this new intake.
https://news.sky.com/story/general-election-theresa-mays-dementia-tax-was-wrong-health-secretary-matt-hancock-says-11867857
1. Nick Timothy has been locked in a shed without internet.
2. The Tory policy is to Chuck more borrowed money at the problem short term, appeal for help from across the political spectrum on proper answer for the long term.
What I'm not going to do is react to assertions that a 12% lead over Labour means a big Tory majority. It is more complex than that, and that's what I'm trying to model.
Matt Hancock said the Conservatives will unveil a three-point plan to tackle the issue when the party launches its manifesto on Sunday.
My 'sanctimonious claptrap' detector went off at that point.
One thing that impressed me with Rod Crosby was he could point you to all the academic literature which formed the backbone of his model. All the rest of his "internet research", now that is a totally different matter.
The main thing compared to ADSL is that the 30mbps is rock fucking solid no matter the time of day or day of week.
As compared to the notional 16mbps we had on ADSL which could be any figure between that and half a Meg.
Corbyn by comparison is taking away their marriage tax allowance and, for many of the self employed and pensioners, hugely increasing their dividend taxes. He's also launching a pointless investigation into our colonial past because he's ashamed to be British.
https://order-order.com/2019/11/23/leicester-labour-party-suspends-deputy-mayor/
One thing I will do after the 12th is substitute the actual shares into the model to see whether the difference from the actual results is mainly due to a polling difference or my other assumptions.
In this episode of the Making Sense podcast, Sam Harris speaks with Bari Weiss about her book How to Fight anti-Semitism. They discuss the three different strands of anti-Semitism (rightwing, leftwing, and Islamic), the Tree of Life shooting in Pittsburgh, the difference between anti-Semitism and other forms of racism, “Great Replacement Theory,” the populist response to globalization, the history of anti-Semitism in the U.S., criticisms of Israel, the fate of Jews in Western Europe, and other topics.
https://samharris.org/podcasts/173-anti-semitism-discontents/
I have advised numerous clients who are in precarious positions and due to mental health, or physical health, distance, or care commitments, cannot and do not want to have fixed contracts, not to be 'employed'. This includes cyclists delivering food for Deliveroo, plumbers, and Uber drivers. Many of these people could not work before. As a case study, one friend of mine due to depression could not work, and her character makes it very to work with her. However, since cycling for Deliveroo and Stuarts delivery, her mental health has improved, her physical fitness, and her financial health. Her dependency on friends and family (she can't claim benefits) is removed. She also has an active social life seeing people every day (and helping people) and is far less lonely. Some weeks she can't work at all, other times for only an hour or two. Previously she could not work, or get any job, and if she did, no-one would keep her very long.
If work regulation is bought back to some anachronistic form of employment (with reporting and fixed hours) I fear many people like that will be made unemployed, more unhealthy, and more of a financial burden, this will increase poverty and hit the poorest and most precariously placed members.
Further, I like working when suits me, indulgent perhaps, but I don't want to, many people are not of that character and do not want that 'security' - the same goes for housing (like minimum contract lengths). Gov should prevent abuse but not dictate choices or close down flexibility or diversity.
Their prices for faster options were eye watering. Once we finish this 1 year contract we are so gone.
I believe him. I believe corbyn was being honest and telling the truth.
Mind you, at 70% turnout (=32.6 mn across the UK), 200k a day needs to be sustained to have any earth-moving significance. Yesterday was the first day in this election total new under-35s hit over 100k. And in 2017, new registrations stopped dead 16 days before the election. In effect: this coming Tuesday.
But I guess we MIGHT see another 800k under 35s between this morning and Tuesday night.
I think that’s a fair summing up.
Is there a cross party solution to be had with this, surely a floor type policy helps poorer labour voters so they would be happy with it, but it would be hard sell for any Tory in their press. So the stop gap solution Tory’s have in their manifesto “throw money at it to pest control negative headlines” becomes default long into the future?
Well, Spurs won, selfishly scoring more goals than West Ham.
Probable: Opinium, ComRes.
As it's the third Mega Polling Saturday of the General election there could be more...
I still think that Tory vote is far too strong, I think they are ahead but they're in the 30s not the 40s. I stand by my original prediction of something like 37/35
https://twitter.com/7january1610/status/1198237499090444288
There will also test libdem and lanour tactical voting
I've also got Civ VI in my shopping basket (considering buying it, obviously). The price has continually fallen by a few pence each time today. No idea why. I can see a one-off currency correction or price match changing it, but it's happened half a dozen times and I can't work out why that would be. Any ideas?
Three more constituency polls from @deltapolluk coming this evening in The Observer, scheduled for 7pm release. Full tables will be on our website.
https://twitter.com/martinboon/status/1198180361571913735
https://mobile.twitter.com/britainelects/status/1198256245142179842
They are cautiously optimistic (Hampstead & Kilburn).
No canvassing from Labour yet - Kinabalu, where are you?! A couple of leaflets in the last day or so emphasising that Tulip voted against triggering Article 50. Nothing from the Tories yet.
Back to the racing.
Bootle safe for us now!
I think 2017 was a high point in terms of their voteshare and historically they haven't ever polled much over that, so I think higher predictions are silly.
In regards to why I think it's less than 40%, that's what Cameron was polling in 2010 and 2015 and again he appealed far more across the spectrum than Johnson does now.
I simply think the Tory vote is overstated - and the Labour vote understated. That's just my feeling about it.
Now that would be drama.
That’ll probably prove decisive for my vote.
The average Tory lead is now ahead of where it was at this stage in GE2017 (12.2% versus 11.5%). By this stage in GE17 the Tory lead had started to fall steadily. I am now resigned to the Tories getting a decent majority.
Anecdote alert:
My 82 year old mum had Carrie Symmonds with the No 10 dog knock at her door canvassing in Hastings today with the local Tory candidate. I suspect the dog has won her vote for the Tories. I don;t think she has ever voted Tory before.
Interesting that the Tories are putting so much effort into Hastings & Rye though - clearly making sure they are defending their marginals as well as attacking their targets.
We saw in 2017 that vast majority of people have no idea how the CURRENT system works - and just drawing attention to the current situation outraged a lot of people.
Best to say nothing and for the issue not to be discussed in the media at all.
Even if they offer something positive, it won't outweigh how negatively the current situation is viewed. So people will still be frightened by the subject, whatever the proposals.
But Barnesian has clearly put a lot of effort and thought into it and should be commended for that. And I think that if we (CON 😀) are 10% ahead the majority could be tight.
But as no one likes SuperJo anymore I think we can hold Richmond Park! 😀