politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » This week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast
On this week’s PB/Polling Matters podcast we continue the new format of the show where each guest picks a polling or elections topic to talk about and the group discuss it.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
It starts on what I find to be a slightly flawed and overly optimistic premise, common in politics, that too many of his supporters don't know these things('What I discovered was that [Thoughtful, moderately Left-Wing Corbyn supporters] knew almost no facts about him or his fellow travellers) and, implicitly, can therefore be woken up if only they realise.
The problems being:
a) All those criticisms have been widely circulated, some well before he became leader. If those 'thoughtful moderate' types really are not aware of them by now, with non-Corbynites and Tories blaring them out constantly for over a year, then they have avoided those point by choice, steering away from them, since as Corbyn supporters they are explicitly more politically inclined than most people, and the target for that information, and yet still missed it.
b) Even if they become aware of those facts, there's no guarantee it would bother them. Yes, some would, we've seen the previously loyal turn coup plotter over some of them, but witness how many, upon discovering he has done something from that list, then defend it vociferously or use distraction tactics. It's tribalism at work, and no end of people defend near every one of those negative points.
It'd be nice to think if only people are told fact x they will realise they are on the wrong path, they'll realise socialism/Thatcherism/whateverism is the one true way if only they understood, but I think it would take a lot more practical impact before it happened.
That explains the constant spamming of pro-Smith articles on PB.
But TSE has promised a pro-Corbyn thread. Like many pro-Corbyn initiatives, he somewhat distracted from it himself.
Like Seumus Milne in a league of 3 journalists, sorted by quality.
As Mike will tell you, Don was responsible for Mike winning lots of money on Harriet Harman becoming Deputy Leader in 2007 when everyone else was saying Alan Johnson was nailed on.
Don was working on the campaign, and he knew his stuff.
"Don Brind who regularly contributes to the PB site and is currently working with Saving Labour on Owen Smith’s leadership campaign."
If Owen Smith hasn't admitted defeat in public yet, why should Don Brind who works for him do so publicly ?
Naughty.
I worry sometimes.
Reality does not intrude on their private dreams
"The Stronger In campaign has finally thrown in the towel, all those corporate millions, Roland Rudd’s spin, Cameron and Osborne’s careers and all they have to show for it is a Commander of the British Empire for Will Straw. Will says the “Stronger In” organisation is no longer.
Which is amateurism until the end. The database built up at great expense cannot therefore legally be used by another organisation."
https://twitter.com/EuroGuido/status/768493259618390018
I'll recite a thousand PB Tories as a penance.
Maybe the Scots will follow your lead and vote for Independence, economics be damned
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/768458503694454784
So it's very unlikely, I can't see the registered supporters breaking 2-1 for Smith under any circumstance.
Scotland's £14.8bn budget hole (Sturgeon says she is looking into it)
Or soemthing.
I though he was just an idiot making a fool of himself by spamming "Smith has a chance" on PB all the time, while in fact that was his job.
No one should be ashamed of his job, but certainly he should say beforehand that he is biased due to his present employment.
The Lords apparently rule that reading of speeches is 'alien to the customs of the House and injurious to the traditional conduct of its debates'. If you do need to have some notes, they are not supposed to follow them too closely.
May being blamed for Brexit on the podcast. I imagine if things go poorly that might become more pronounced a view.
The SNP's success was founded on North Sea Oil, now that oil revenues have plunged 97% the party is over.
I know you base a lot on the debates for Trump, but there is an issue beyond the known ones.
The moderators.
The Commission on Presidential Debates has delayed it's decision to appoint moderators because it has trouble finding a journalist that hasn't got ties to the nominees or had a public spat with ( finding one that Trump hasn't got into a fight with is impossible).
http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/24/media/debate-moderators/index.html
It's a bipartisan commission so both sides have to agree.
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-poll-exclusive-idUSKCN10Z2MO?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews&utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=Social
The pollster who has Hillary leading by 12 points nationally has her tied in Pennsylvania and Michigan.
"The candidates are running about even in eight states, including Pennsylvania, Michigan and North Carolina, and the polling sample is too small to determine the winner in Alaska, Wyoming and Washington D.C. "
Worst thing about it is that it's not even a proper poll:
"The project, which combines opinion polls with an analysis of voting patterns under different election scenarios"
Goodnight.
http://www.politico.com/story/2016/08/tony-blairs-clinton-blues-227342
http://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2016-election-forecast/updates/#plus
Swing States
Pennsylvania - Tie
Iowa - Trump +1
Arizona - Trump +9
Colorado - Clinton + 3
Florida - Clinton +6
Georgia - Trump +5
Michigan - Tie
Minnesota - Clinton +7
Nevada - Clinton +1
New Hampshire - Clinton +1
North Carolina - Clinton +1
Ohio - Clinton +6
Virgina - Clinton +5
Wisconsin - Clinton +1
But. It's failing in Florida (big time), and Virginia.
If the race tightens, it could the Trump strategy could look very smart.
My personal guess is that the Great Lakes strategy will end up almost working, but at the expense of losses in New Mexico, Nevada, Florida, and Colorado (i.e. states with meaningful Hispanic populations). A narrow Clinton victory, but with a somewhat surprising set of results.
Also: Period is quite extended covering (I think) both Conferences and ending about a week ago - a week that has generally been good for Mr Trump I think.
So - take with a large pinch of NaCl.
Clinton by 3-5% , I reckon.
I think, as Michael Moore and others have said, this contest is tighter than the narrative of the last few weeks (since the DNC) would have one believe, a Trump voter is more likely to actually show up at the polling booth than a Hillary voter, and Trump is being dragged down (luckily for Hillary) more by his own party than by the electorate.
There is definitely a Brexit feel about this election, and although there is still the potential for a strong Democratic victory in the presidential and senate elections, it will require a lot of hard work over the next couple of months. Any lapses in concentration could be fatal.
Can someone tell me what I am seeing is real???
"The inconsistency was gleefully jumped on by a U.K. press corps that is solidly anti-Corbyn. (The Tory press and Rupert Murdoch’s Sky News are again him because he stands for everything they loathe; the BBC and The Guardian because his hard-left policies are badly hitting Labour’s poll ratings)."
http://fortune.com/2016/08/24/richard-branson-jeremy-corbyn-train/
‘Labour press officer Don Brind is currently working with Saving Labour.’
Hmm, so I was correct the other day when I pointed out Don’s latest offerings read more like a political broadcast for ‘Saving Labour’ . A minor point perhaps, but in future could we have the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth, rather than just some chap who ‘regularly contributes to the PB’ ?
My notes of caution revolve around the minute sample size in some states but mostly the demographic turnout model :
White - 70 .. Black 58 .. Asian 45 .. Hispanic 30
My point was that during the Salmond years, the apparent boom in Ireland, and to a lesser extent the apparent financial independence of Iceland, offered models of success that contributed to the rise of the SNP's Indy campaign. Nowadays, not so much.
Ah SeanT
Sandbrook lays into Jezza over traingate this morning. Mostly predictable, none the less hits the target well. The hardcore cultists are not going to switch, but maybe some of the undecided, longer standing Labour members and unions bods who are voting this week, will think twice about the alleged 'integrity' of a man who pulls stunts like this.
"These days, Labour have been reduced to squatting in a train corridor, even though there are seats available further down the carriage. There is surely a metaphor in there somewhere."
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3757395/Corbyn-s-Virgin-train-stunt-shows-s-stuck-1970s.html#ixzz4IK2mRYmy
NEW THREAD NEW THREAD