politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tories are right to take heart from today’s YouGov lead

MarqueMark

Salmond and SNP are to legislate to prevent councils collecting any more poll tax.

MSM spinning this heavily against the SNP (no change there), but Labour's confused opposition to the move will do them no favours in their (former?) heartlands, particularly
as the amount collected last year was less than £400k. Just the usual Labour in Scotland knee-jerk anti-SNP response.

This is another clever move by the SNP in a World where Cameron's conference speech virtually quotes Johan Lamont (of the British Labour Party in Scotland) on a "something for nothing" society.

Mr. Eagles, probably a smart move (he's miles ahead in the polls and doesn't want to replicate the Darling mistake with the second Scottish debate) for the constituency.

However, if UKIP duck debates there it may give ammunition to other parties to say they can't run away from debates then demand to be included later [there's a qualitative difference between a local news/by-election debate and a national/general election one, of course].

TheScreamingEagles said:

@PopulusPolls: Latest Populus VI: Lab 38 (+2), Con 33 (-1), LD 8 (+1), UKIP 13 (-1), Oth 8 (-1). Tables here: http://t.co/lYS81q2IjA

26% of women were don't knows..... There's the battleground for next May.

TheScreamingEagles said:

SimonStClare said:

An 8 point swing! – So, quite a good speech then ?

Point of pedantry it is a 4% swing.

Cheers - Does the betting on a YG cross over still count – or had it expired?

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.

Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.

If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.

What polls ?

The polls that show the SNP sustaining a substantial lead in Holyrood after being 7 years in power, and vying with Labour for biggest Westminster vote share. If you've got any other evidence for 'SNP backlash' (apart from you devoutly wishing it), I'd be fascinated to see it.

I'd advise everyone to take Scottish polls with a pinch of salt after they missed the crushing 11% for No just 2 weeks ago.

In that case the 60-40 brigade should also preserve a dignified silence.

anotherDave said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Cluck cluck (or should that be oink woof for a traitorous pig dog)

@CCHQPress: Looks like @DouglasCarswell last night bottled debating our candidate @GilesWatling when he didn't show for an ITV Anglia Clacton debate

The Daily Politics did a little video profile of all the Clacton by-election candidates.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=977047362312122

I'm a bit surprised. Personally liked (and needing more), pretty good on his feet, I would have Carswell would go for this sort of thing.

We shall see.

SimonStClare said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

SimonStClare said:

An 8 point swing! – So, quite a good speech then ?

Point of pedantry it is a 4% swing.

Cheers - Does the betting on a YG cross over still count – or had it expired?

It does if you had crossover in h2/q4 of 2014

Grandiose said:

anotherDave said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Cluck cluck (or should that be oink woof for a traitorous pig dog)

@CCHQPress: Looks like @DouglasCarswell last night bottled debating our candidate @GilesWatling when he didn't show for an ITV Anglia Clacton debate

The Daily Politics did a little video profile of all the Clacton by-election candidates.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=977047362312122

I'm a bit surprised. Personally liked (and needing more), pretty good on his feet, I would have Carswell would go for this sort of thing.

We shall see.

The source is a CCHQ tweet.

Yay - My afternoon thread now features one of the most famous and memorable military defeats in human history.

Obviously, I compare a current party leader to a famous military commander.

anotherDave said:

Grandiose said:

anotherDave said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Cluck cluck (or should that be oink woof for a traitorous pig dog)

@CCHQPress: Looks like @DouglasCarswell last night bottled debating our candidate @GilesWatling when he didn't show for an ITV Anglia Clacton debate

The Daily Politics did a little video profile of all the Clacton by-election candidates.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=977047362312122

I'm a bit surprised. Personally liked (and needing more), pretty good on his feet, I would have Carswell would go for this sort of thing.

We shall see.

The source is a CCHQ tweet.

That's sort of what I meant; I await the other side of the story (dubitante as they say).

So did 'the speech' turn things around or are YouGov pants?

.....and as so often only the BBC can spot the difference between froth and a story which is why it's the most respected news organization in the World.

Take note PfP

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I'm beginning to think I'm dead, in the Greek afterlife, and trying to educate you about classical history is my Sisyphian labour.

Don't worry, I'm not comparing anyone to Hannibal, the military defeat I'm referencing is frightfully modern.

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Obviously YouGov are the gold standard.

Did ICM lie fallow in September ?

Nope. It showed the Lab lead falling.

Last ICM was a 2 point labour lead

Lib Dem candidate at Clacton says 'it's not about personality.' For his sake, I hope he's right...

Roger said:

So did 'the speech' turn things around or are YouGov pants?

The only shift that may be real is the widening of the 'best PM' gap between Cameron and Miliband - the OA voting number is 'noise'......

anotherDave said:

Fabians: UKIP vs Labour
"...there are first the five seats that Labour currently holds at risk of turning purple,

but more serious is the indirect threat. There are sixteen Labour seats that could turn blue because of UKIP

and there are four Labour target seats in which UKIP voters could deny Labour the gains it needs. "

http://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/RevoltOnTheLeft-Final2.pdf

"There are five critical and high-risk seats under direct threat by UKIP, for both Labour and the Conservatives each:

• Labour seats under direct UKIP threat: Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Plymouth Moor View, Rother Valley, Rotherham

• Con seats under direct UKIP threat: Clacton, South Thanet, Thurrock, Great Yarmouth, Waveney

Six critical and very serious indirect threat seats that the Conservatives might lose to Labour as a result of the UKIP threat: Warwickshire North, Cardiff North, Broxtowe, Stroud, Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire, and Pudsey

Sixteen critical and very serious indirect threat seats which Labour might lose to Conservatives as a result of UKIP-Labour considerers: Southampton Itchen, Great Grimsby, Walsall North, Plymouth Moor View, Telford, Dudley North, Halifax, Wolverhampton NE, Birmingham Edgbaston, Blackpool South, Walsall South, Leicester West, Nottingham South, Southampton Test, Birming- ham Northfield, and Wakefield

Four critical and very serious indirect threat Labour target seats which it could fail to win as a result of UKIP-Labour considerers: Plymouth Sutton & Devonport, Carlisle, Lincoln and Ipswich."

Re: Fabian study- Edgbaston and Nottingham South? I'd like to see their workings for them seats.

Fenman said:

Lib Dem candidate at Clacton says 'it's not about personality.' For his sake, I hope he's right...

"Well, we in the Adder Party have fought this campaign on issues, not personality."

foxinsoxuk said:

anotherDave said:

anotherDave said:

Fabians: UKIP vs Labour
"...there are first the five seats that Labour currently holds at risk of turning purple,

but more serious is the indirect threat. There are sixteen Labour seats that could turn blue because of UKIP

and there are four Labour target seats in which UKIP voters could deny Labour the gains it needs. "

http://www.fabians.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/RevoltOnTheLeft-Final2.pdf

"There are five critical and high-risk seats under direct threat by UKIP, for both Labour and the Conservatives each:

• Labour seats under direct UKIP threat: Great Grimsby, Dudley North, Plymouth Moor View, Rother Valley, Rotherham

• Con seats under direct UKIP threat: Clacton, South Thanet, Thurrock, Great Yarmouth, Waveney

Six critical and very serious indirect threat seats that the Conservatives might lose to Labour as a result of the UKIP threat: Warwickshire North, Cardiff North, Broxtowe, Stroud, Carmarthen West & South Pembrokeshire, and Pudsey

Sixteen critical and very serious indirect threat seats which Labour might lose to Conservatives as a result of UKIP-Labour considerers: Southampton Itchen, Great Grimsby, Walsall North, Plymouth Moor View, Telford, Dudley North, Halifax, Wolverhampton NE, Birmingham Edgbaston, Blackpool South, Walsall South, Leicester West, Nottingham South, Southampton Test, Birming- ham Northfield, and Wakefield

Four critical and very serious indirect threat Labour target seats which it could fail to win as a result of UKIP-Labour considerers: Plymouth Sutton & Devonport, Carlisle, Lincoln and Ipswich."

No way will Leicester West be other than Labour.

Waveney isn't going to go UKIP, Great Yarmouth is unlikely. I suggest Lincolnshire is more likely.

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I'm beginning to think I'm dead, in the Greek afterlife, and trying to educate you about classical history is my Sisyphian labour.

Don't worry, I'm not comparing anyone to Hannibal, the military defeat I'm referencing is frightfully modern.

Tom Watson at Gleneagles ?

Eck Salmond at Clackmannan ?

No, I did upset the Yestapo/Waffen Yes Yes when I compared Alex Salmond to Mitt Romney last week.

High praise indeed from a minor functionary of Stormfront Lite.

is @OblitusSumMe‌ back from the Clyde yet?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

TGOHF said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. Eagles, I'm beginning to think I'm dead, in the Greek afterlife, and trying to educate you about classical history is my Sisyphian labour.

Don't worry, I'm not comparing anyone to Hannibal, the military defeat I'm referencing is frightfully modern.

Tom Watson at Gleneagles ?

Eck Salmond at Clackmannan ?

No, I did upset the Yestapo/Waffen Yes Yes when I compared Alex Salmond to Mitt Romney last week.

High praise indeed from a minor functionary of Stormfront Lite.

I'd love to respond, but I'm busy sticking burning crosses in the front yards of some black families and some Muslim famiies

Err, you have responded.

A bit shit, but still a response.

Question for Labour supporters.

Let's say in the election Labour poll around 31%-32% and the Tories get 36%, but due to the dodgy boundaries and lack of EV4EL manage to get a small working majority. Would you happily back Labour as having a mandate to govern?

I have a feeling such a result long term would do them no good whatsoever.

Mr. Eagles, Tigranocerta?

chestnut said:

OblitusSumMe said:

The only demographic or geographic groups that the Conservatives lead in that poll are: those aged 65+, AB voters and the Midlands. Historically, older AB voters have been more likely to turnout and the Midlands has been seen as the election battleground - so it's not all bad news for the Tories - but the real move in the Tories favour is the continued ageing of society.

The Tories are now the party for the retired. The workers are voting for Labour.

You seem to be placing all your faith in one pollster.

IPSOS (telephone polling)

Private Sector: Tory 42: Lab 29
FT Workers: Tory 37: Lab 33 (Labour lead among PT workers - more likely to be benefit recipients)
Homeowners: Tory 38, Lab 28

Labour have strong leads in the public sector, among the claimant state and among renters - especially in social housing.

When I look at the unweighted numbers of many polls there appears to be an incredible over-subscription of public sector workers and 2010 Labour voters in some.

YouGov had a poll the other day, where there was massive regional oversubscription in London and Scotland.

The more I look at the polls, especially online ones, the more wary I am of their accuracy and the scope for them being targeted by activists whilst failing to connect with ordinary people.

I forgot that Mori also do a breakdown for private/public sector. I checked Yougov, ICM and Ashcroft, but none of them provided that detail.

While that's two things I've been wrong on here so far today, at least I hope I was right about the first statement I made...

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.

Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.

If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.

What polls ?

The polls that show the SNP sustaining a substantial lead in Holyrood after being 7 years in power, and vying with Labour for biggest Westminster vote share. If you've got any other evidence for 'SNP backlash' (apart from you devoutly wishing it), I'd be fascinated to see it.

I'd advise everyone to take Scottish polls with a pinch of salt after they missed the crushing 11% for No just 2 weeks ago.

In that case the 60-40 brigade should also preserve a dignified silence.

better 4.7% out than 12% out..

Err, the 60-40 brigade were 9.4% out.

Mr. Royale, might I tempt you to peruse the Morris Dancer Party manifesto? It is replete with sensible policies for a happier Britain.

Just checked, and it actually includes this (relevant to a recent discussion):
The reversion to proper imperial measurements, for weights, distance, fluid measures and money.

TGOHF said:

Brent crude down again $93.4 now - despite the middle east at war.

Extraordinary.

FTSE down 5.7% since the 19th despite the UK staying together.

TGOHF said:

Brent crude down again $93.4 now - despite the middle east at war.

Extraordinary.

POVPWAS

Mr. Eagles, your reference must be horrendously modern. Operation Market Garden?

CopperSulphate said:

Question for Labour supporters.

Let's say in the election Labour poll around 31%-32% and the Tories get 36%, but due to the dodgy boundaries and lack of EV4EL manage to get a small working majority. Would you happily back Labour as having a mandate to govern?

I have a feeling such a result long term would do them no good whatsoever.

The likelihood of Labour winning 325+ seats on those numbers is very very remote.

More polls needed.

Like the one showing SNP potentially gaining 20 seats? I'd have thought you'd want fewer of those.

Plato said:

Golly - apparently they had a Falklands number plate on it. What a hoot!

Jeremy Clarkson, Richard Hammond and Richard May flee Argentina under police escort after locals stone cars and Top Gear crew in a row over a Porsche number plate

Not quite - It was a UK number plate that ended with the letters FKL according to the T'graph.

Sean_F said:

CopperSulphate said:

Question for Labour supporters.

Let's say in the election Labour poll around 31%-32% and the Tories get 36%, but due to the dodgy boundaries and lack of EV4EL manage to get a small working majority. Would you happily back Labour as having a mandate to govern?

I have a feeling such a result long term would do them no good whatsoever.

The likelihood of Labour winning 325+ seats on those numbers is very very remote.

Ok maybe the numbers don't quite add up, but you get what I mean. Would Labour be happy with governing on a significantly lower vote share, whilst using Scottish votes to pass English legislation?

The populus Lab share this morning looks remarkably like the Yougov Lab share from just 48 hours ago.

What happened to YouGov yesterday?

Just saying.

TGOHF said:

Alistair said:

TGOHF said:

Brent crude down again $93.4 now - despite the middle east at war.

Extraordinary.

FTSE down 5.7% since the 19th despite the UK staying together.

Lol - the

Alistair said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Theuniondivvie said:

TGOHF said:

Sorry yes I worded my critique poorly - you mentioned in a Labour/SNP way - but if you look at the map of % Yes/No you will see huge areas of the country where No support is very strong but the SNP have seats and Labour probably isn't the challenger. Voters may be tempted to look at the bar graphs in places like Perth and select the challenger most likely to boot the SNP in the Salmonds.

Just how toxic is the SNP after the referendum - that is the question.

If the polls are too be believed, that's not even a question. I'm sure you're getting a different vibe from FollowFollow though.

What polls ?

The polls that show the SNP sustaining a substantial lead in Holyrood after being 7 years in power, and vying with Labour for biggest Westminster vote share. If you've got any other evidence for 'SNP backlash' (apart from you devoutly wishing it), I'd be fascinated to see it.

I'd advise everyone to take Scottish polls with a pinch of salt after they missed the crushing 11% for No just 2 weeks ago.

In that case the 60-40 brigade should also preserve a dignified silence.

better 4.7% out than 12% out..

Err, the 60-40 brigade were 9.4% out.

What were the 52-48 yes out by then ? 17 % ?

Either we are talking about the absolute difference (your crushing 11%) or we are talking about the Yes response level (in which case Yes missed out by 5.3%)

Predictions 52-48 to Yes were out 14.6% on absolute difference or 7.3% on Yes response level

Labour supporters relying on the polls reminds me of the hero of the Scottish play relying on the witches.

Burham Wood come to Dunsinane???....not in this lifetime mate...

BenM said:

The populus Lab share this morning looks remarkably like the Yougov Lab share from just 48 hours ago.

What happened to YouGov yesterday?

Just saying.

When was the populus research done?

The Herald, the Nats paper of choice before the No vote...

NEVER kick a man when he's down," my dad says.

He'd make a terrible politician, my dad.

"Is there ever a better time?" Alex Salmond's opponents seemed to grin as they laced up their best stomping boots for FMQs today.

It was watch-through-your-fingers stuff.

Haunted by the rustle of two million No votes, power draining away faster than the fun from a Yes Scotland results party, and even Nicola Sturgeon, absent on personal business, unable to whisper the answers to him, all the FM lacked was a target on his back.

The Unionists simply couldn't miss.

So for 30 minutes Mr Salmond was thrown down every circle of political hell until eventually he hit rock bottom - being lectured by Ken Macintosh.

http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/alex-salmond-opponents-put-the-boot-in-at-fmqs.1412272399

Lame duck Salmond takes a beating;
http://www.heraldscotland.com/news/home-news/alex-salmond-opponents-put-the-boot-in-at-fmqs.1412272399

YouGov's methodology looks very suspect to me but maybe it's just the YouGov messengers who are not to be trusted.

There is actually a case for returning to Imperial -it would ensure that people are numerate. I for one would be stuffed if everything was pounds, shillings, pence, feet, yards -but if brought up on it from birth, it must be extremely beneficial. You can learn the imperial system and pick up the metric system in two seconds, but you can't do the other way around.

CopperSulphate said:

Question for Labour supporters.

Let's say in the election Labour poll around 31%-32% and the Tories get 36%, but due to the dodgy boundaries and lack of EV4EL manage to get a small working majority. Would you happily back Labour as having a mandate to govern?

I have a feeling such a result long term would do them no good whatsoever.

Not likely - the difference between British and Scottish outcomes has been hovering around 2%, and the SNP surge may wipe it out altogether. But yes, we have to go with whatever the current system produces - I don't like it either (I'm a PR man) but it's impossible to govern if most MPs oppose you.

chestnut said:

When I look at the unweighted numbers of many polls there appears to be an incredible over-subscription of public sector workers and 2010 Labour voters in some.

YouGov had a poll the other day, where there was massive regional oversubscription in London and Scotland.

The more I look at the polls, especially online ones, the more wary I am of their accuracy and the scope for them being targeted by activists whilst failing to connect with ordinary people.

There's an important statistical point here, separate from political preference. The effect of under- or over-sampling of one group is that the undersampled group get their views uprated and the oversampled group get theirs downrated. Posts that find that e.g. there are too many 2010 Labour voters in a sample don't seem to realise that.

The only statistically valid effect of an unrepresentative sample is if the small number of the undersampled group are in some way untypical of their group. Say, for instance, that a poll has only half as many 2010 Tories as there really were. The pollster will then double the weight of the ones that he found. If that group is in some way atypical - tending to shift more or less than 2010 Tories as a whole - then it will affect the poll figure, otherwise not.

The fuzzy point is false recall. If a party becomes really unpopular (as currently the LibDems), people who voted for them may blot out the recollection. That means that the sample will seem to find fewer people who voted LibDem in 2010, and will uprate the remaining super-loyalists. That's dangerous since actually they perhaps found the correct number but some aren't admitting it. Consequence: very unpopular parties may actually be polling higher than reality, and very popular parties lower.

bigjohnowls said:

taffys said:

Labour supporters relying on the polls reminds me of the hero of the Scottish play relying on the witches.

Burham Wood come to Dunsinane???....not in this lifetime mate...

Wheras Tories relying on the one poll that puts them 1 pt ahead despite all the others showing them to be behind.

Is a lot like YES

independence (tory win) clearly nailed on

There's currently two pollsters whose last poll has the Tories ahead.