Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Opinium poll
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Opinium poll
The usual caveats apply, this is but one poll, we need to see other polling to see if this UKIP surge is occurring or not. My own thought is that, this is more a return to the status quo for Opinium with regards to UKIP, their last poll, a fortnight ago, had UKIP down to their lowest point since February 2013, and that didn’t feel right.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Mind you, I did enjoy the comments on the previous thread claiming that ISIS being beastly in Iraq would boost UKIP's vote share.
If anyone wants to bet UKIP to get no seats with 21% of the vote I will sell my flat and have the lot on at EVS that they get at least one
IMHO. FWIW!
Wonder how the Turks feel about the Kurds getting tooled up. The alternative might be having a country of insane violence all along the southern Turkish border.
I suspect these and more will all be used this evening to explain the UKiP surge. ; )
Post hoc ergo propter hoc (Latin: "after this, therefore because of this") is a logical fallacy (of the questionable cause variety) that states "Since event Y followed event X, event Y must have been caused by event X."
All very scholarly, even with the wikipedia link, but I reckon that @TSE as just quoting West Wing (Series 1, Episode 2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_West_Wing_(season_1)#Episodes
IS = Islamic State = Islamic = Islamist campaigning in the UK eg. against "our boys" = backlash = UKIP gaining.
(Edit: did I miss the nuances?)
South Yorkshire Police have complained to the BBC, after the BBC learned of details about a search:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-28823699
Gosh.
My favourite bit of Latin, apart from Catullus 16, is Semper ubi, sub ubi
If ISIS had been beaten back rather than making startling gains and Ukraine had gone all peaceful Gaza might yet be the biggest foreign story, and broadcasters would be wibbling on about Warsi.
So the model doesn't work and they warn why it might not work:
http://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/Analysis_UKIP.html
"This analysis has been conducted with the best available models and using national opinion poll support levels. It is the current best estimate of possible general election outcomes, but the growth of UKIP is a new phenomenon and there are a number of assumptions and approximations involved in the calculations. These sources of possible error include:
Assumption of uniform support The calculations assume that UKIP support is fairly evenly distributed, or at least it is evenly created from defecting Conservative and Liberal Democrat voters. The calculations have not used local election results to estimate possible locations of heavy UKIP support. If UKIP support is concentrated, rather than being evenly spread, then they will get more MPs despite lower levels of popular support.
Assumption of homogeneous defectors The transition model assumes that defecting voters behave identically, no matter which party they previously supported. Using the May 2013 polls, around 20% of Conservative voters and about half of Liberal Democrats are expected to defect. These defectors are assumed to break evenly between Labour and UKIP. In reality we might expect that the ex-Conservatives would be more attracted to UKIP, and the ex-LibDems to Labour. This might affect the accuracy of the calculations, especially in strong Conservative areas.
Absence of strong candidates The numerical models have no data on any strong UKIP candidate who might stand at the next general election. If a strong candidate with good local backing emerges, then UKIP could win that seat against the numerical odds. The election of Caroline Lucas (Brighton Pavilion, Green) in 2010 is a useful example of this possibility."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2726501/World-wouldnt-helped-independent-Scotland-says-Australias-prime-minister-believes-backing-independence-arent-friends-freedom.html
FPTP screws smaller parties.
Don't they realise that the more they critizise YES the more people will want to vote YES?
Who'd have thought it eh?
There are 4 possibilities
1. The BBC has helicopters flying over every Police HQ to see where columns of unmarked cars are going.
2. Someone in SYP rang the BBC "off the record".
3. The BBC has hacked into SYP mobile phones.
4. Invisible giant green lizards in SYP are in telepathic communications with relations in the BBC.
5. Thames Valley Police were the source of the leak.
Ill bet as much as you like that if UKIP score, I will be generous, 17% they will win at least one seat.
£5000 at EVS?
Bet void if they don't get 17%
If all these polls show anything its that the electorate have the attention span of a goldfish - bumping from one contrary opinion to the next. I appreciate I am apparently delivering malcomg levels of contempt for fellow voters here but really - what is the level of attention and thought processes which commit a voter to give an answer to a pollster. Voters have lives to lead. Are people really interested?
Edited extra bit: mind you, it was a lot of intellectually self-confident cretins who decided to embark on the eurozone madness. Judgement and intelligence don't always go hand-in-hand.
Dubyas speech to Iraqi's assuring them its all going to be ok, now he has gotten rid of Saddam, and the assurances US forces will leave once they've sorted it all out..
All I can picture is some kind of ISIS nutter coming on BBC1 telling me the UK will be ok now they have liberated it.. no wonder they hate us so!
First time I have seen it.. how utterly patronising...uh-oh Blairs on now
Here it is.. listen to the bullshit spew
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T0xGWaDb2Yg
The problem with Labour voters is 1) they are a bit slack about voting especially at mid-term type elections and 2) when they are annoyed at Labour they'll still say they support them but stay at home and not vote.
old way:
step 1) knock on door and ask if support labour
step 2) if yes mark address on bit of paper
step 3) election day look at bit of paper, knock up and ask if voted yet
net result: one day of nagging to offset the slackness
new improved postal voting way:
step 1) knock on door and ask if support labour
step 2) if yes mark address on bit of paper *and* try and persuade them to get a postal vote
step 3) come election time go out knocking up those with postal votes *after the postal votes have been sent out* and ask if they've sent it him yet, want help filling them in, want someone to post it for them etc. Keep doing it till election day.
net result: weeks of nagging to offset the slackness
If it was just that I wouldn't be bothered personally but it also partially counters the silent rebellion effect.
(edit: so postal votes are more important the more unpopular Labour are with their voters.)
This is separate both from the fraud aspect - important but overplayed imo - and the bit that looks like fraud but is actually just a side effect of how some ethnic groups self-organize which leads to 100% turnout from those groups.
All tolled a pretty big deal with the first bit being more important overall and the second bit more important in some areas.
You can make seat projections with those opinion polls in 62 constituencies though it is doubtful that those 62 seats are a representantive sample.
Using a probability model in each seat I get LAB 380, CON 182, LD 34, UKIP 24, SNP 10, PC 2
The seat model really depends on those 62 seats being representative of the whole country (which I don't think they exactly are).
Or if you want percentages of vote (which I believe is more accurate) you get the average change of the vote from each constituency and apply it to the 2010 results, so you get LAB 34, CON 28, UKIP 18, LD 9, Greens 3.
A 6% swing from CON to LAB.
I prefer the vote share because it is more accurate and in line with national opinion polls.
As someone who was involved at a ,coal level we confidently expected much more and as Election night wore on became more and more despondent. I can see the same happening to Kippers.
Under FPTP there's nothing for second place!
Given that SYP are under criticism for Hillborough then I for one can imagine they would relish complaints against celebreties as a way to shake off the flak. The police felt confident enough to fit up a cabinet minister so I don't think anyone is safe and if the police here are at fault then it is in their self interest to keep the pot boiling and spread as much dirt as possible.
Amazingly there was a time once when I trusted the police. Then they arrested Damien Green and raided his office in Parliament. Then we read the investigated Stephen Lawrence's family then we read about Hillsborough.
Both forces seem to be denying something that is self evidently true and not even attempting to investigate a corrupt person in their ranks, indeed not even admitting the possibility that such a person exists. I do hope the Home Affairs Select Committee roasts the Chief Constables. Of course the respective Police and Crime Commissioners should already be doing that if they were doing their jobs, but it would seem they are not.
In the East End of London the police were known as the Filth. I always thought it was unfair, but over the years I have changed my mind.
I saw that one. Had to mute it.
The stand-in woman was less annoying than the usual presenters though.
"Things happening in far-off countries don't affect UK elections, unless the UK is directly and heavily involved."
Far to preoccupied with hunting for paedos.
Tonight the view in the public house where I drink was that someone would come forward, with the expectation that coin o f the realm would be forthcoming.
So 0.9% = 1 seat
21% / 0.9 x 1 = 23 seats
1. I point out that even a big vote for UKIP only succeeds in giving a resounding result to a Europhile Labour Party and denies us a referendum (which I would welcome). How very clever of UKIP.
2. I draw attention to this pollsters a) flip flopping of its own results and b) the fact that it is way out of line with other polls. Where does that leave ones faith?
Admitedly I used a bit of cryptic shorthand to point this out in order to save typing time. Hey ho.
They just both sound like evil villains who want to change someone else's country to the way they would like it to be, and assume the people who live there will suffer it. I can really empathise with Islamists nutters having watched that
ISIS persecuting Christians (and other religious minorities)=Cameron says (and does) sweet FA=Cameron doesn't defend Christians no matter how innocent they are=Cameron wouldn't defend Christians in UK no matter how badly treated they are=Vote UKIP!
Incidentally, a letter about Iraq from the Archbishop was read out at mass last Sunday and there was a second collection for Iraq as well.
South Yorks police seem to have invented a new method of Criminal Investigation. In effect take a celebrities name and publicly ask for allegations about them. I am not sure how that fits in with the way we are accustomed to be policed, and Robert Peel is probably spinning in his grave. If it catches on of course it need not be confined to celebrities. Suppose, to pull a name out the hat, Leicester Police are short of a few convictions to meet their targets what would there be to stop them advertising in the Leicester Echo, "We are investigating Dr. Smith, any one who wants to make an allegation against him, no matter long ago the offence took place, should contact us".
http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/uk-polling-report-average-2
Church launches bitter attack on PM's 'incoherent' Middle East policy
Bishop of Leeds slams failure over Islamist extremism in scathing letter backed by the archbishop of Canterbury
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/aug/16/church-of-england-attack-david-cameron-middle-east-policy
http://www.newstatesman.com/node/135233
There is a discussion to be had about suspect anonymity, but on the other hand, would Harris, Hall and Clifford have been jailed for their crimes without the publicity persuading other victims to come forward?
I'm really not sure where the scales should balance on this one. For reasons regular readers would know, I'm veering towards the victims rather than the suspects. It's a difficult one, though, especially when the press and media get involved.
Occasionally there are violent Islamic extremists in Britain and it would be his job to deal with them, but they generally tackle themselves by things like setting fire to their own van and crashing it into a concrete bollard outside an airport then getting the shit kicked out of them by off-duty baggage handlers.
Incidentally, what message do you suppose it sends (and to whom) when the West only intervenes when Christians are being persecuted after Sunnis have had to suffer years of discrimination?
Of course we are far from the topic (IS being beastly benefits UKIP) but as I said, IS in Iraq being beastly to Christians does, I think, benefit UKIP.
Or were you making a different (yet more nuanced) point altogether?
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/08/16/UKIP-to-donate-dodge-donation-to-charity
Your example proves UKIP will not be winning anything close to the number of seats that are proportional to their voteshare, that's true. But 8-10 seats is very possible on the sort of polling numbers they currently have.
Leave aside the corrupt leaking of information for a moment (even though it was in itself probably a criminal offence), How would you feel if your local force asked in the national news papers for people with allegations against you to come forward, even though they had never interviewed you for any offence, let alone been arrested you. The conduct of South Yorkshire police is scandalous, possibly unlawful, and probably corrupt (if they didn't leak it Thames Valley did).
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/timstanley/100283280/travelodge-removes-the-bibles-from-its-rooms-on-grounds-of-diversity-were-satanists-complaining/
‘Celebrity Police Search.’ – coming to your screens this Autumn…
It was interesting the way the investigation into Rolf Harris was reported by the BBC as "a man of xxx age living in yyy has been arrested" for weeks (despite Harris's name being on t'Internet), whilst Jim Davidson's name was reported with something approaching glee immediately.
At least, I hope I remembered that correctly ...
Of course, Davidson was innocent (the case did not even go to trial and was investigated by two different forces). Harris was not.
It stank of the media protecting their own in the case of Harris. Exactly the sort of behaviour that led to these sorts of problems in the first place.
On a matter of note: have either police force publicly asked for people to come forward wrt the latest case? I haven't been following the case that closely.
Maybe the name Church of ENGLAND should give you a clue as to why they have not formed a plan to combat Islamic Extremism in parts foreign. Mind you the CofE is so limp-wristed and so uncertain of what it believes and too terrified of actually saying anything that might be unpopular that it has, these days, all the moral authority of a haddock.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/weird-news/pastafarian-fights-for-his-right-to-wear-a-colander-on-his-head-in-driving-licence-photo-9673376.html
In those exact terms, no. But as near as as makes no difference.
Just looking at the story on the Telegraph Web Site, South Yorks seem to be digging themselves into an even bigger hole. They are showing all the signs of a public body that has been caught out doing something stupid/illegal and are flailing around like mad trying to get the problem to stop. You would think that West Yorks, of all forces, would have learned the lesson that when you have done something wrong do not try and lie (sorry spin) your way out of it.
The Chief Constable of South Yorkshire has a pay and pension package worth over £200,000 p.a.. One has to ask, why?
Else
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BvMInp4CMAAh56G.jpg
Nick Sutton ✔ @suttonnick
Scotland on Sunday front page - "Poll: Yes vote advances despite currency fears" #tomorrowspaperstoday #bbcpapers pic.twitter.com/YCnsBNcsDE
Didn't people like him ever go to school?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iraq/11039214/PM-Our-generational-struggle-against-a-poisonous-ideology.html
I love the bits where he talks about the UKs military prowess, you know those capabilities he is determined to cut even further. Then there is the great section when he says the police are going to act against people promoting Islamist views in the UK. Its comedy gold stuff.