The other thing that is interesting about the data is the current leader for each constitutency
Labour are currently leading in 498 Lib Dems are leading in 65 Tories are leading in 53 SNP are leading in 8 Green are leading in 2 Plaid are leading in 2 Reform are leading in 1
Wow... that would be pretty meaningful
Carol Vorderman says there are only 13 seats where all pollsters show a tory lead.
Saw a spreadsheet this wkend showing recent polling for each constituency from all major pollsters
Guess approx number of seats the Tory is predicted to win by ALL pollsters?
It’s a shocker!!
Only 13 SEATS where all the pollsters said a Tory win!!
#MondayMotivation Last edited 9:29 AM · Jul 1, 2024 · 295.2K Views
Hunter Biden has joined meetings with President Biden and his top aides this week at the White House, four people familiar with the matter tell my colleagues, who are told the reaction from some senior White House staff has been, “What the hell is happening?”
Hunter has the crack, he’s got good suppliers - and they probably all need it right now, including Pa
Where is Sunak spending his final days campaigning? Normally safe seats. We’ve been to…
Stratford on Avon (notional Con majority 19,020) Whitney (15,674) Banbury (13,799) Nuneaton (13,144) Stoke on Trent South (15,393) Hinckley & Bosworth (22,851)
H&B might well be LD rather than Lab as per this Survation, as per @Icarus
It is possible that Sunak is in such "safe seats" in order to avoid difficult f2f with voters, rather than what he thinks defensible. More likely he is an that punch drunk stage where he just wants it to end.
Couple of mentions of "shy Tories" on here. It's worth mentioning that in the only post 1992 GE where "shy Tories" were mentioned as a possible factor in polling innacuracy, 2015, the BPC found that the true reason for underestimation of the Tory vote was unrepresentative samples -
We found weak evidence that there may have been a very modest late swing to the Conservatives between the final polls and Election Day, although this can have contributed – at most – around one percentage point to the mean absolute error on the Conservative lead. The widely held view that the polling miss was due to deliberate misreporting - ‘shy Tories’ telling pollsters they intended to vote for other parties - is difficult to reconcile with the results of the re-contact surveys carried out by the pollsters and with the two random surveys undertaken after the election. We reject deliberate misreporting as a contributory factor in the polling miss. Differential turnout was also pointed to after the election as a likely cause of the errors; so-called ‘lazy Labour’ supporters telling pollsters they would vote Labour but ultimately not turning out to vote. Data from a number of sources shows no support for differential turnout misreporting making anything but a very small contribution to the polling errors.
As the report says, the logic of the 'shy Tory' idea is that the Conservative party are viewed by many as advancing policies which favour the advantaged at the expense of the needy and that a vote for the Conservatives thus indicates a preference for personal again over the public good. People are, therefore, reluctant to admit to voting Conservative and choose a different party, when asked, but still end up voting Conservative in the election. I don't think the first premise is true this time round. Saying that voting Tory will advance anyone's personal gain is, to put it mildly, a tough sell.
Where is Sunak spending his final days campaigning? Normally safe seats. We’ve been to…
Stratford on Avon (notional Con majority 19,020) Whitney (15,674) Banbury (13,799) Nuneaton (13,144) Stoke on Trent South (15,393) Hinckley & Bosworth (22,851)
Nuneaton always used to be a marginal?
Dartford used to be the bellwether seat. And Greater London was the region whose voting most reflected the nation as recently as the eighties. Things change.
Byelections next term are going to be fun. Government will be defending in maybe three quarters of them...
Looking at 1997-2001 just over half the by-elections were Labour ones, but in 2010-2015 only a quarter were Tory or LD.
Not sure if we can learn anything from that, it's just a glance, but interesting nonetheless. If it is simple odds based on overall numbers of MPs, you could be right.
Maybe I should have stuck to my beliefs two years ago that the tories were viscerally loathed by large swathes of Britain.
Clearly been spending too long lately in leafy Surrey. Although they’re not popular here either, if you can hear the voices over the din of the leaf blowers.
Tbf, you have been saying for a long time, that the Torys were in for a hell of a beating, I didn't believe it back then, but am starting to come round, surely the polls can't be this wrong
Maybe I should have stuck to my beliefs two years ago that the tories were viscerally loathed by large swathes of Britain.
Clearly been spending too long lately in leafy Surrey. Although they’re not popular here either, if you can hear the voices over the din of the leaf blowers.
If I have this correct, a lot of PBers are more engaged with the issue of Tory possible wipeout than lots of Labour seats.
It seems to me this is right and captures the zeitgeist. The utterly distinctive feel of this election is Get Tories Smashed not Get Labour In - that was 1997.
Which is why, I think, Survation are about right. 75-80% of voters are ganging up in effect to ensure the Tories are decimated and both conscious and unconscious tactical voting will be enormous. In a sense I am an invisible example. I shall vote Labour. If I voted in one of the Tory/LD seats I would transfer to LD without thinking at all, and wouldn't even reckon I was voting tactically.
This could well prove to be the post of the campaign.
There was a bloke on here called @eadric who, in the few weeks before lockdown, was banging on about “normalcy bias”. He generally spoke a lot of shite but if he still posted on here he would be pointing out that a lot of people on here are dismissing this poll on the basis that “it could never happen here”. I get the criticisms, I’m not a fan of the very long period in which the survey was conducted, but it is still to be taken seriously..
I agree about normalcy bias !!
Everyone still has it in their heads that one of the two big parties gets a big majority that dwindles then swings the other way because that’s what happened 1983 to 2010
There is nothing that means that has to be the case !!
Cons could do badly … and never recover Labour could win HUGE … and collapse next time
We underestimate this because it doesn’t fit our mental model
Look at how people STILL interpret what has happened since 2010 to now using that model but it’s not what happened is it? Coalition then slim Con majority then Con minority then bigger Con majority then likely collapse
Voters are definitely more volatile now with many of the old allegiances either breaking down or already completely broken.
Counted stakeboards again (different route): 16 LD, 0 Lab, 0 Con, 0 Green. But did see 5 Labour canvassers in a team, led by one (1) Nick Palmer.
Stopped for a brief an congenial chat, wished each other luck (both of us with crossed fingers, naturally), and continued on.
Definite LD gain imo.
It was nice to run into Andy! We had 10 canvassers out (two teams), but my best guess is that the Tories will come third in what would normally be a safe Tory seat.
I wonder if the Tories greatest achievement this Parliament is to hold the Union together for the foreseeable. Not their priority obviously and helped by some kamikaze actions by the SNP, but a win is a win is a win right? Southgate will vouch for that.
I am picking up a sense that however much the rest of Britain may dislike Truss, there are people in SW Norfolk who have disliked her longer, harder & with greater specificity. By a stroke of good fortune, these are also the people who actually get a vote on her future.
I, literally, live 400 yards from the border of the New Ashford constituency and the Weald of Kent. Based on posters alone, while I don't think it will go red, I do think it will be close.
I wonder if the Tories greatest achievement this Parliament is to hold the Union together for the foreseeable. Not their priority obviously and helped by some kamikaze actions by the SNP, but a win is a win is a win right? Southgate will vouch for that.
How selfless of them - future generations will thanks them.
I think I've worked it out. Every single poll for the last two years has been utterly and completely wrong. The pollsters have, collectively, fallen for the tricks played by the electorate. Millions of shy Tories have sat on their hands, refusing to tell pollsters their intentions. Meanwhile, a few thousand cocky Labour types have wormed their way on to the pollsters' panels to give a completely distorted result. Sunak's spreadsheets confirm this.
So, on Thursday, the truth will out. That pent-up Tory majority will proudly descend on polling stations up and down the country to mark their cross against the only truly patriotic party, and give Sunak another five years.
A striking stat from the latest YouGov research is that, given a free choice, Labour would only poll around 28-29% of the voters actively wanting them as their first preference. All the rest - another 10% plus - comes from LibDem and Green and other minor party voters reluctantly throwing their lot in with Labour in seats the smaller parties will never win.
Worth remembering, when Labour bestride the stage with their humongous majority. Not that anyone will.
You can see why Labour aren't offering a move to a fairer voting system...
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
The dream scenario for my US betting is Biden wins the nomination then steps down afterwards to leave my big green book on Harris for the presidency.
The polling today must have boosted her chances of that happening. She's doing better than any of the other potential contenders.
She's also the current VP, the optics of drafting in Newsom ahead of her to run for the presidency would be beyond bad for the Democrats
Yes. If it’s not Biden, Harris is the only option unless she chooses not to run. But at risk of opening up the convention to chaos she is probably the only option.
And they should get behind her. Because I think she can win. She is immediately more attractive a prospect than Trump or Biden, by virtue of looking like she’s actually capable of running something for four years (a low bar - but look at those two…). And if she doesn’t win at least the Democrats can go down having offered the country fresh leadership and a clear choice. They won’t win with Biden.
Couple of mentions of "shy Tories" on here. It's worth mentioning that in the only post 1992 GE where "shy Tories" were mentioned as a possible factor in polling innacuracy, 2015, the BPC found that the true reason for underestimation of the Tory vote was unrepresentative samples -
We found weak evidence that there may have been a very modest late swing to the Conservatives between the final polls and Election Day, although this can have contributed – at most – around one percentage point to the mean absolute error on the Conservative lead. The widely held view that the polling miss was due to deliberate misreporting - ‘shy Tories’ telling pollsters they intended to vote for other parties - is difficult to reconcile with the results of the re-contact surveys carried out by the pollsters and with the two random surveys undertaken after the election. We reject deliberate misreporting as a contributory factor in the polling miss. Differential turnout was also pointed to after the election as a likely cause of the errors; so-called ‘lazy Labour’ supporters telling pollsters they would vote Labour but ultimately not turning out to vote. Data from a number of sources shows no support for differential turnout misreporting making anything but a very small contribution to the polling errors.
As the report says, the logic of the 'shy Tory' idea is that the Conservative party are viewed by many as advancing policies which favour the advantaged at the expense of the needy and that a vote for the Conservatives thus indicates a preference for personal again over the public good. People are, therefore, reluctant to admit to voting Conservative and choose a different party, when asked, but still end up voting Conservative in the election. I don't think the first premise is true this time round. Saying that voting Tory will advance anyone's personal gain is, to put it mildly, a tough sell.
Yeah sure someone whos mortgage has just gone up £400 a month is unlikely to be a shy Tory.
Latest @Survation MRP predicts just 3 Tory MPs in London - Ruislip, Northwood & Pinner; Chelsea & Fulham; and Sutton & Cheam. Five Lib Dems and 67 Labour. Corbyn predicted to lose in Islington North
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
Starmer has been this evening to Cannock Chase constituency.
Tory majority of 19,879
Blimey.
They wouldn’t be doing it at this stage just for lols. These ’safe' tory seats are evidently in play.
They may think they are in play and be wrong, parties internal predictions are no more likely to be right than any publicly known ones, but they appear to have decent reason to think they are in play.
I love the charming idea politicians have that a leader topping up in a given constituency moves material numbers of votes. Would love to test that statistically, but I suspect I already know the answer.
Maybe I should have stuck to my beliefs two years ago that the tories were viscerally loathed by large swathes of Britain.
Clearly been spending too long lately in leafy Surrey. Although they’re not popular here either, if you can hear the voices over the din of the leaf blowers.
Tbf, you have been saying for a long time, that the Torys were in for a hell of a beating, I didn't believe it back then, but am starting to come round, surely the polls can't be this wrong
Thanks, that’s kind.
I’ve pulled back more recently from the ELE idea but I do remember two years ago being astonished at the venom (a word I used on here) being spat at the Conservatives.
The thing is, they have managed to pee off almost every section of society in one way or another.
At these numbers, do the official opposition have enough members to fill all the posts?
The LDs show the way, you only need a dozen to fill out necessary posts in opposition, the rest is just titles for titles sake to look important.
And if necessary you plug lots of gaps in the more junior positions with peers.
Anyway, the importance of the Opposition in the Commons to any Government with a substantial majority is overstated. So long as the Prime Minister avoids major rebellions, he can do what he likes.
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
The difference is much of the population is hurting financially in a way they werent in 1997.
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
social media has made for a much more visceral hatred of the Tories than 5 years ago. Even if it's not a huge percentage of voters it can and will make tactical voting much more efficient.
I think I've worked it out. Every single poll for the last two years has been utterly and completely wrong. The pollsters have, collectively, fallen for the tricks played by the electorate. Millions of shy Tories have sat on their hands, refusing to tell pollsters their intentions. Meanwhile, a few thousand cocky Labour types have wormed their way on to the pollsters' panels to give a completely distorted result. Sunak's spreadsheets confirm this.
So, on Thursday, the truth will out. That pent-up Tory majority will proudly descend on polling stations up and down the country to mark their cross against the only truly patriotic party, and give Sunak another five years.
Unsarcastically, that may happen. The thing that frightens me is unbalanced panels. We know that panels that pay for membership are unbalanced. They try to balance them by weighting but that can only be best-guess and it's gone wrong before. If the panels are systematically biased, whether thru greedy people being unrepresentative or simple brigading, then the likelihood of a polling failure increases.
The discrepancy between normal polls (Cons 150-200) and MRPs (Cons 50-150) means that one (or both) is wrong, and we will find out Thurs at 10pm.
As my only betting (grrr!) is Greens 2+ and Bristol Central Green win, I am overexposed on the Greens but at this point it's a 50/50 split so I'm not bothered: the worst that can happen is I lose £140.
At these numbers, do the official opposition have enough members to fill all the posts?
The LDs show the way, you only need a dozen to fill out necessary posts in opposition, the rest is just titles for titles sake to look important.
And if necessary you plug lots of gaps in the more junior positions with peers.
Anyway, the importance of the Opposition in the Commons to any Government with a substantial majority is overstated. So long as the Prime Minister avoids major rebellions, he can do what he likes.
Churchill had the right idea facing a mega-majority. Appoint a Shadow Cabinet of about five people, supported by some juniors, then don’t really bother most of the time. Piss off to paint in France or lecture in American and come back at the end to ride a wave of public discontent back into Number 10.
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
I remember the William Hague log flume stunt, but he lacked Davey's panache.
Pretty ridiculous - that's the one case that didn't involve any official acts, but at most he happened to be President when signed some checks for his personal lawyer.
Keep remembering, everyone, that it’s a model, not a (local) poll. The wood might be in the right place but the trees are most unlikely to be.
I’m not sure what your argument is. Virtually ALL the polls show a Tory wipe out and Tories sub 100. Whether they are MRP or normal or online or phone or done by witch doctors flown in from Chad, they show wipe out. Isn’t the overall polling average for the Tories something like 20-23%? That’s wipe out, even if we ignore tactical voting
Eg Baxter’s Poll of Polls show the Tories winning 20% and 61 seats
The Telegraph poll tracker has the Tories on 21.7% - also wipe out,. Etc
Extraordinary, the most corrupt US President of all time looks like he’ll escape any punishment for his catalogue of crimes .
The Dems need to dump Biden and find a candidate who can stop Trump . The Dems need to understand this is now the last chance to save what’s left of US democracy .
Something needs to be done about the Supreme Court which is out of control.
If so our PB Trumpers will have to come up with something other than "senile Joe!" as their figleaf for rooting for him.
How about 'useless Kamala who is only there for her identity rather than her ability'? Still preferable to Trump, obvs. And Biden, given his condition. But can they not find someone good? It's a nation of 300 million. They appear to be starting from the least suitable of all and working slowly upwards from there.
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
So you are predicting a massive polling failure, one of the biggest we’ve seen in decades? You might be right, but thats bold
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
The upside for Davey, who was prior to the campaign seen as another anonymous grey eminence along with Starmer, is that he has got his personality and life story across and that will stick with him whether the result is merely decent, or amazing, which appears to be the range. If they can secure at least the third party spot, that will see him well for the remainder of his leadership.
The downside for the party is that the ability to catch public attention through imaginative stunts is probably a trick with diminishing returns, and if the party doesn’t recover a higher national profile from the election, the next leader will have to think of something else.
Starmer has been this evening to Cannock Chase constituency.
Tory majority of 19,879
Blimey.
They wouldn’t be doing it at this stage just for lols. These ’safe' tory seats are evidently in play.
They may think they are in play and be wrong, parties internal predictions are no more likely to be right than any publicly known ones, but they appear to have decent reason to think they are in play.
Strangely, most of the seats with mid-sized majorities, where Labour are expected now to win, aren't showing up on their canvassing website. They're still asking for volunteers in the tightest marginals, like Bury North and South, which will definitely go Labour, but not in places like Fylde or Tatton, which most MRPs have going Labour, but are much closer.
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
If so our PB Trumpers will have to come up with something other than "senile Joe!" as their figleaf for rooting for him.
How about 'useless Kamala who is only there for her identity rather than her ability'? Still preferable to Trump, obvs. And Biden, given his condition. But can they not find someone good? It's a nation of 300 million. They appear to be starting from the least suitable of all and working slowly upwards from there.
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
The upside for Davey, who was prior to the campaign seen as another anonymous grey eminence along with Starmer, is that he has got his personality and life story across and that will stick with him whether the result is merely decent, or amazing, which appears to be the range. If they can secure at least the third party spot, that will see him well for the remainder of his leadership.
The downside for the party is that the ability to catch public attention through imaginative stunts is probably a trick with diminishing returns, and if the party doesn’t recover a higher national profile from the election, the next leader will have to think of something else.
The real win for them is third party status. They get back in the zeitgeist. And if they do get 50+ MPs they might matter in some votes again, so long as Labour do get pinned at 380-400.
At these numbers, do the official opposition have enough members to fill all the posts?
The LDs show the way, you only need a dozen to fill out necessary posts in opposition, the rest is just titles for titles sake to look important.
And if necessary you plug lots of gaps in the more junior positions with peers.
Anyway, the importance of the Opposition in the Commons to any Government with a substantial majority is overstated. So long as the Prime Minister avoids major rebellions, he can do what he likes.
Churchill had the right idea facing a mega-majority. Appoint a Shadow Cabinet of about five people, supported by some juniors, then don’t really bother most of the time. Piss off to paint in France or lecture in American and come back at the end to ride a wave of public discontent back into Number 10.
In the contemporary media landscape you do need to be seen to be trying a little harder than that, but the general point is taken. And the job of critiquing the administration can be done more effectively through media channels than in Parliament, the proceedings of which interest a negligible fraction of the electorate.
Keep remembering, everyone, that it’s a model, not a (local) poll. The wood might be in the right place but the trees are most unlikely to be.
I’m not sure what your argument is. Virtually ALL the polls show a Tory wipe out and Tories sub 100. Whether they are MRP or normal or online or phone or done by witch doctors flown in from Chad, they show wipe out. Isn’t the overall polling average for the Tories something like 20-23%? That’s wipe out, even if we ignore tactical voting
Eg Baxter’s Poll of Polls show the Tories winning 20% and 61 seats
The Telegraph poll tracker has the Tories on 21.7% - also wipe out,. Etc
The point is not to take any single seat prediction too seriously. The MRP aims to get the general picture right - the MOE on any single seat is considerable
I think in all the trivial questions about polls, betting and even who is going to form the next government the real important issue is being missed. Have we ever had a LOTO who is known to bungee jump, fall off a paddle board and ride a roller coaster? Certainly PMQs would be more interesting.
I remember the William Hague log flume stunt, but he lacked Davey's panache.
I haven't commented for a long time, but I think this Survation MRP must be wrong. There is surely ample evidence of a modest tory recovery and a significant labour decline towards say 38% The gap on other polls seems to be around 15% I cannot believe that the Tories will be on 64 and my hunch is that the SNP will do much better than this poll.
I see this as an outlier - if all the stars aligned for Labour this is a conceivable option.
I am not in the habit of Eating Hats, but I would be astonished if the Tories don't get over 100 seats
JLP, Savanta, and two More in Common polls have had a 15pp gap in the past week. There have been fifteen other polls with larger gaps.
This Survation MRP has an implied gap of 19pp, exactly the same as the R&W poll an hour earlier, and lower than the gap in the most recent Deltapoll, We Think, Techne, and Opinium polls.
The MRP algorithm may be wrong, or the application of it may be wrong. But the underlying sample doesn't seem like a massive outlier to me.
Spot on. I’m not agreeing with this MRP. I’m disagreeing with people who just say it’s crap without any other explanation.
And that is classic normalcy bias. It is generally found when people are confronting highly unusual and UNPLEASANT phenomena - plagues, invasions, electoral catastrophes, planes flying into New York towers
Some of the people dismissing these polls don’t want to believe them because they presage an electoral wipe out which is distressing to them. That doesn’t mean these PBers are wrong, but that emotion is surely in play
I suspect a couple of PBers don’t want to believe these polls because they can’t believe the result will be THAT good and desirable
I've never voted Conservative in my life, but I don't want to see them eviscerated. They are part of the national furniture. What I would like to see is a revitalised Conservative Party led by a Rory Stewartesque leader. Surely you would too.
Are you serious? YES i want them eviscerated: I want the Tories dead and buried, and then I want the corpse of the Tories exhumed so the body can be pulped and the resultant gore burned in a nuclear furnace which turns it to ashes which can be eaten by pigs which are flown to the moon to excrete the dung
'It has been an election campaign marked by controversial claims and counter-claims, but a row in the parliamentary constituency of Torbay in Devon has perhaps topped the lot.
A local charity for visually impaired people, Devon in Sight, has accused Tory canvassers of “stooping to an all-time low” by allegedly suggesting that the local Liberal Democrat candidate, Steve Darling, is not actually blind.'
TBF they will know how keen the Tory government has been in claiming that the disabled are a bunch of skivers and fiddling the assessments to fulfil that prophecy.
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
Of course not. Sir Kier would just sit on his majority and do whatever he can to defend it.
snip... Due to the probability of increased tactical voting it's likely that the opposition parties will become much more efficient in their votes... snip
I'm really not convinced that tactical voting will be all that effective.
We're seeing large national swings. We have new boundaries. We have tactical voting websites that can't agree on who is the anti-Tory challenger. We have Labour and Lib Dem activists contesting the same seats. We have the near certainty of a heavy Tory defeat.
These factors all make tactical voting more difficult and less urgent.
Set against that, the voters really want the Tories to lose. And Starmer and Davey don't excite much in the way of antipathy.
I'd expect tactical voting to be relatively inefficient at this election. However, provided Starmer's government doesn't completely bomb*, then improved tactical voting at GE 2029 is one of the factors that would make a Tory recovery exceptionally difficult.
* I think it will be a tough job for Starmer to avoid imploding, but he might manage it.
Keep remembering, everyone, that it’s a model, not a (local) poll. The wood might be in the right place but the trees are most unlikely to be.
I’m not sure what your argument is. Virtually ALL the polls show a Tory wipe out and Tories sub 100. Whether they are MRP or normal or online or phone or done by witch doctors flown in from Chad, they show wipe out. Isn’t the overall polling average for the Tories something like 20-23%? That’s wipe out, even if we ignore tactical voting
Eg Baxter’s Poll of Polls show the Tories winning 20% and 61 seats
The Telegraph poll tracker has the Tories on 21.7% - also wipe out,. Etc
The problem is that the model beneath is likely to be accurate only in general rather than in particular. As soon as you dive into a particular seat’s modelling - as many have been doing above - it falls apart, or so it would appear.
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
Labour were rather cautious on voting. Yes, they are promising votes at 16, which is quick and easy to do, but on the other hand they did not say they would get rid of Voter ID laws (only address inconsistencies in them).
Lacking even a committment to change the voting system, why would they even consider it?
I cannot see the Tory opposition helping out if Labour split on the issue, unless they merge with Reform. We remain committed to the First Past the Post system for elections, maintaining the direct link with the local voter.
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
The difference is much of the population is hurting financially in a way they werent in 1997.
That is very true. No one is listening but things are actually getting better. Inflation down, interest rates signalling down, growth improving, unemployment down...Rishi could go on. But people have also been hit with humungous new mortgage bills, many of them this year and recently, and everything is baseline more expensive than it was a few years ago. Neither are people prepared to listen to the 2x exogenous shock arguments.
I also understand the "Tories must be destroyed" vibe. But I don't think that will be the motivating factor for as many people as certainly PB believes. I think many people might ponder the certain tax rises and how that will affect their pockets and maybe even take a glance at those economic aggregates before they vote. But I appreciate this may make me the most ridiculous PB poster, come 10:00:00:576 on Thursday night.
If so our PB Trumpers will have to come up with something other than "senile Joe!" as their figleaf for rooting for him.
Surely you are smarter than this? I am saying Senile Joe because I want someone capable of beating Trump. It is actually possible and usually desirable to state facts as one perceives them rather than as one would like them to be.
I remember when Osborne or Cameron said to much scoffing from those that follow polls that they thought they’d get a majority in 2015. While unlikely, it’s not completely completely inconceivable that there may be a huge shock coming Thursday night and it is more like hung parliament territory.
I keep saying till I am blue in the face that, whatever the polls say, getting a majority of 1 when you have to win ~120 seats (140 including boundary changes) in two countries where most seats are currently held by two separate parties, is no easy task.
Starmer has been this evening to Cannock Chase constituency.
Tory majority of 19,879
Blimey.
They wouldn’t be doing it at this stage just for lols. These ’safe' tory seats are evidently in play.
They may think they are in play and be wrong, parties internal predictions are no more likely to be right than any publicly known ones, but they appear to have decent reason to think they are in play.
Strangely, most of the seats with mid-sized majorities, where Labour are expected now to win, aren't showing up on their canvassing website. They're still asking for volunteers in the tightest marginals, like Bury North and South, which will definitely go Labour, but not in places like Fylde or Tatton, which most MRPs have going Labour, but are much closer.
That’s their strategy to make sure of the working majority, and treat the rest as windfall. Just as the LibDems are (or should be) focusing on getting to 30-40, and hopefully recover third party status, and not getting carried away sending money and people to long shots, like they did last time.
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
I completely agree on electoral reform, and that’s not just coz the Tories are getting hammered (I want them hammered)
I’ve felt for several years, persuaded in part by articulate arguments on here, that PR is much better. We need a system where all voices can be heard and new parties can form and make coalitions and bring in new ideas. We have been badly governed since about 2001, to my mind - since the Iraq war (which to my eternal shame I supported, tho I was lied to by my PM)
How much more evidence do we need? Our system isn’t working, and this is one part of the dysfunction we need to fix
I wonder why there is such disbelief on here this evening. The polls have been showing a huge Labour victory and the Lib Dem’s and the Tories being neck and neck for second place all the way through. Why are people surprised nothing has changed? The polls may be wrong of course, but pretending this is somehow a surprise is strange. It is just more of the same.
Normalcy bias
Well that´s a bit glib. ;-)
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
No.
In which case the Lib Dems are going to have a perfect stick to beat Labour over the head with for the next five years.
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
So you are predicting a massive polling failure, one of the biggest we’ve seen in decades? You might be right, but thats bold
As far as I see now the tory core vote is down to wealthy socially liberal but fiscally dry pensioners plus some of the top 5% with kids in private schools. Thats it.
I've been doing a rewatch of Star Trek TNG for the first time in 25 years, and coming upon an episode where an elderly legend is past their prime and being coddled by their loved ones to achieve a last great task even at cost of their pride, health, and dignity, is hitting close to home.
Sarek?
Spot on.
S1 was of, er, variable quality, S2 was hit or miss, but S3 has a lot of great episodes I had forgotten.
I watched it all the way through for the first time at the start of this year. An ex-gf used to watch it on Netflix to de-stress so I'd seen a few episodes before, but I'd never sat down to properly watch them.
But, actually, it's really good, isn't it? I skipped over all the low-rated episodes in the first couple of seasons, which helped - but, as you say, from S3 onwards almost all of them are watchable.
And the HD remastered version looks great, better than most films of a similar vintage. It would easily pass for being half its age if it weren't for the universally bad haircuts...
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
So you are predicting a massive polling failure, one of the biggest we’ve seen in decades? You might be right, but thats bold
As far as I see now the tory core vote is down to wealthy socially liberal but fiscally dry pensioners plus some of the top 5% with kids in private schools. Thats it.
No, the Tory core is down to “wealthy socially liberal but fiscally dry pensioners who like massive amounts of immigration and dinghy people”
I think that normalcy bias can lead people astray when it comes to black swan events where there is precious little precedent in living memory.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
The difference is much of the population is hurting financially in a way they werent in 1997.
That is very true. No one is listening but things are actually getting better. Inflation down, interest rates signalling down, growth improving, unemployment down...Rishi could go on. But people have also been hit with humungous new mortgage bills, many of them this year and recently, and everything is baseline more expensive than it was a few years ago. Neither are people prepared to listen to the 2x exogenous shock arguments.
I also understand the "Tories must be destroyed" vibe. But I don't think that will be the motivating factor for as many people as certainly PB believes. I think many people might ponder the certain tax rises and how that will affect their pockets and maybe even take a glance at those economic aggregates before they vote. But I appreciate this may make me the most ridiculous PB poster, come 10:00:00:576 on Thursday night.
That is a curious definition of 'getting better'. "Not getting worse as quickly" is another possible phrasing.
The other thing that is interesting about the data is the current leader for each constitutency
Labour are currently leading in 498 Lib Dems are leading in 65 Tories are leading in 53 SNP are leading in 8 Green are leading in 2 Plaid are leading in 2 Reform are leading in 1
Wow... that would be pretty meaningful
Carol Vorderman says there are only 13 seats where all pollsters show a tory lead.
Saw a spreadsheet this wkend showing recent polling for each constituency from all major pollsters
Guess approx number of seats the Tory is predicted to win by ALL pollsters?
It’s a shocker!!
Only 13 SEATS where all the pollsters said a Tory win!!
#MondayMotivation Last edited 9:29 AM · Jul 1, 2024 · 295.2K Views
This is the same Voderman that was saying she had insider knowledge that Sunak was definitely getting replaced 2 days into the campaign. She has turned into left wing Plato (formerly of this parish). All tweets require fact checking now.
Sadly I will miss the epic reactions when the exit poll drops on Thursday night, but I expect it to be glorious no matter what it shows.
I may go to bed early. I'm not overfond of the incoming Lab, and whilst I'm pleased to see Con out I'd be a fool not to concede that there are a lot of good Cons people who will be hurt by this. Nothing except a battle lost is sadder than a battle won, and a' that.
I've been doing a rewatch of Star Trek TNG for the first time in 25 years, and coming upon an episode where an elderly legend is past their prime and being coddled by their loved ones to achieve a last great task even at cost of their pride, health, and dignity, is hitting close to home.
Sarek?
Spot on.
S1 was of, er, variable quality, S2 was hit or miss, but S3 has a lot of great episodes I had forgotten.
I watched it all the way through for the first time at the start of this year. An ex-gf used to watch it on Netflix to de-stress so I'd seen a few episodes before, but I'd never sat down to properly watch them.
But, actually, it's really good, isn't it? I skipped over all the low-rated episodes in the first couple of seasons, which helped - but, as you say, from S3 onwards almost all of them are watchable.
And the HD remastered version looks great, better than most films of a similar vintage. It would easily pass for being half its age if it weren't for the universally bad haircuts...
When I thought about it I remember a lot more of DS9 and Voyager, but I actually didn't get to the end of either.
I've seen some people, even when praising it, giving it a backhanded 'progressive...for its time' kind of compliment, but intent is important with that kind of thing I think, and it was a show which was bold enough to often attempt a message, usually an optimistic non-cynical one, and when the writing was good it could explore some quite deep questions in an intelligent way without being overly preachy. Even if, yes, there are some seriously goofy episodes too.
And for those that sneer at things like science fiction and fantasy in general, exploring issues of today through fictitious allegories can be all the more effective.
Comments
Saw a spreadsheet this wkend showing recent polling for each constituency from all major pollsters
Guess approx number of seats the Tory is predicted to win by ALL pollsters?
It’s a shocker!!
Only 13 SEATS where all the pollsters said a Tory win!!
#MondayMotivation
Last edited
9:29 AM · Jul 1, 2024
·
295.2K
Views
https://x.com/carolvorders/status/1807692959707488346
Tory majority of 19,879
It is possible that Sunak is in such "safe seats" in order to avoid difficult f2f with voters, rather than what he thinks defensible. More likely he is an that punch drunk stage where he just wants it to end.
We found weak evidence that there may have been a very modest late swing to the Conservatives between the final polls and Election Day, although this can have contributed – at most – around one percentage point to the mean absolute error on the Conservative lead. The widely held view that the polling miss was due to deliberate misreporting - ‘shy Tories’ telling pollsters they intended to vote for other parties - is difficult to reconcile with the results of the re-contact surveys carried out by the pollsters and with the two random surveys undertaken after the election. We reject deliberate misreporting as a contributory factor in the polling miss. Differential turnout was also pointed to after the election as a likely cause of the errors; so-called ‘lazy Labour’ supporters telling pollsters they would vote Labour but ultimately not turning out to vote. Data from a number of sources shows no support for differential turnout misreporting making anything but a very small contribution to the polling errors.
- https://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/id/eprint/3789/1/Report_final_revised.pdf , p.70
As the report says, the logic of the 'shy Tory' idea is that the Conservative party are viewed by many as advancing policies which favour the advantaged at the expense of the needy and that a vote for the Conservatives thus indicates a preference for personal again over the public good. People are, therefore, reluctant to admit to voting Conservative and choose a different party, when asked, but still end up voting Conservative in the election. I don't think the first premise is true this time round. Saying that voting Tory will advance anyone's personal gain is, to put it mildly, a tough sell.
And Greater London was the region whose voting most reflected the nation as recently as the eighties.
Things change.
Not sure if we can learn anything from that, it's just a glance, but interesting nonetheless. If it is simple odds based on overall numbers of MPs, you could be right.
I’m going to lose money if they go <100 seats
I am picking up a sense that however much the rest of Britain may dislike Truss, there are people in SW Norfolk who have disliked her longer, harder & with greater specificity. By a stroke of good fortune, these are also the people who actually get a vote on her future.
They wouldn’t be doing it at this stage just for lols. These ’safe' tory seats are evidently in play.
But what we are talking about here is the population of the UK many of whom will suffer from normalcy bias and hence may well make the prophecy of a "more normal" result come true. Because with such a large population the scope for extreme events is vastly restricted.
Hence I stick by my guesstimate of Lab 38%, Cons 27%, Reform 10%, LibDems 14%, Green 5%.
But don't take my word for it, there is a forthcoming poll shortly which will confirm/disprove my hypothesis.
And they should get behind her. Because I think she can win. She is immediately more attractive a prospect than Trump or Biden, by virtue of looking like she’s actually capable of running something for four years (a low bar - but look at those two…). And if she doesn’t win at least the Democrats can go down having offered the country fresh leadership and a clear choice. They won’t win with Biden.
Donald Trump’s former Sec. Def. Mark Esper: “[Trump] was suggesting that...we should bring in the troops and shoot the protesters.”
Q: “The commander-in-chief was suggesting that the U.S. military shoot protesters?”
Esper: “Yes, in the streets of our nation’s capital.”
https://x.com/David_Leavitt/status/1808133015312208348
Latest
@Survation MRP predicts just 3 Tory MPs in London - Ruislip, Northwood & Pinner; Chelsea & Fulham; and Sutton & Cheam. Five Lib Dems and 67 Labour. Corbyn predicted to lose in Islington North
There are several problems, not least the age of the data and the contrast with the headline poll numbers and trends. There is also the very narrow gap in several constituencies which makes for quite wide margins for error in seat number forecasts. The MRP methods are also rather untested, so it is hard to see if there is any systematic bias in the stratification.
Yes Labour are going to win big. However the questions remains open as to how the seats break between Tory and Lib Dem. That is where several of these polls are going to stand or fall. It would be easier if the Tories were in free fall, but so far the evidence is that they may have found a floor. The question is with tactical voting, targetting and local swing, is that floor 140 or 50.
Survation says closer to 50, It is brave call, but if it is accurate then MRP is vindicated.
But FPTP would be totally discredited when if gets 75% of the seats on 40% of the vote. the Tories are third in seats, despite coming second in votes, the Lib Dems are second is seats but fourth in votes, and RefUk gets 16% and not much to show for it.
The voting system is basically indefensible on these numbers. Would SKS have the courage to take that bull by the horns?
I’ve pulled back more recently from the ELE idea but I do remember two years ago being astonished at the venom (a word I used on here) being spat at the Conservatives.
The thing is, they have managed to pee off almost every section of society in one way or another.
So maybe these MRPs really are onto something.
Though most still then decide to vote for him, making them seem cowardly.
ALASTAIR CAMPBELL
@campbellclaret
·
37m
These MRP polls are a menace. If this is the result I will eat
@RoryStewartUK
hat live on
@Channel4
https://x.com/campbellclaret/status/1808213500545884381
Anyway, the importance of the Opposition in the Commons to any Government with a substantial majority is overstated. So long as the Prime Minister avoids major rebellions, he can do what he likes.
If so our PB Trumpers will have to come up with something other than "senile Joe!" as their figleaf for rooting for him.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0xj1q47l22o
Further example: Gainsborough, (Edward Leigh) 23,000 majority, Survation put Tories and Labour level. (Leigh will win that one!).
When asked about the allegations that RFK Jr. sexually assualted his then 23 year old babysitter, his answer?
"I am not a church boy ... I said [there are] skeletons in my closet."
He then refused to comment.
https://x.com/keithedwards/status/1808199897004331215
The discrepancy between normal polls (Cons 150-200) and MRPs (Cons 50-150) means that one (or both) is wrong, and we will find out Thurs at 10pm.
As my only betting (grrr!) is Greens 2+ and Bristol Central Green win, I am overexposed on the Greens but at this point it's a 50/50 split so I'm not bothered: the worst that can happen is I lose £140.
Eg Baxter’s Poll of Polls show the Tories winning 20% and 61 seats
The Telegraph poll tracker has the Tories on 21.7% - also wipe out,. Etc
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/0/uk-election-poll-tracker-conservative-labour/
The Dems need to dump Biden and find a candidate who can stop Trump . The Dems need to understand this is now the last chance to save what’s left of US democracy .
Something needs to be done about the Supreme Court which is out of control.
Still preferable to Trump, obvs. And Biden, given his condition.
But can they not find someone good? It's a nation of 300 million. They appear to be starting from the least suitable of all and working slowly upwards from there.
So you are predicting a massive polling failure, one of the biggest we’ve seen in decades? You might be right, but thats bold
The downside for the party is that the ability to catch public attention through imaginative stunts is probably a trick with diminishing returns, and if the party doesn’t recover a higher national profile from the election, the next leader will have to think of something else.
'It has been an election campaign marked by controversial claims and counter-claims, but a row in the parliamentary constituency of Torbay in Devon has perhaps topped the lot.
A local charity for visually impaired people, Devon in Sight, has accused Tory canvassers of “stooping to an all-time low” by allegedly suggesting that the local Liberal Democrat candidate, Steve Darling, is not actually blind.'
TBF they will know how keen the Tory government has been in claiming that the disabled are a bunch of skivers and fiddling the assessments to fulfil that prophecy.
We're seeing large national swings. We have new boundaries. We have tactical voting websites that can't agree on who is the anti-Tory challenger. We have Labour and Lib Dem activists contesting the same seats. We have the near certainty of a heavy Tory defeat.
These factors all make tactical voting more difficult and less urgent.
Set against that, the voters really want the Tories to lose. And Starmer and Davey don't excite much in the way of antipathy.
I'd expect tactical voting to be relatively inefficient at this election. However, provided Starmer's government doesn't completely bomb*, then improved tactical voting at GE 2029 is one of the factors that would make a Tory recovery exceptionally difficult.
* I think it will be a tough job for Starmer to avoid imploding, but he might manage it.
The problem is that the model beneath is likely to be accurate only in general rather than in particular. As soon as you dive into a particular seat’s modelling - as many have been doing above - it falls apart, or so it would appear.
Lacking even a committment to change the voting system, why would they even consider it?
I cannot see the Tory opposition helping out if Labour split on the issue, unless they merge with Reform.
We remain committed to the First Past the Post system for elections, maintaining the direct link with the
local voter.
Our commenters are usually better than that.
That might be the most remarkable prediction of all.
I also understand the "Tories must be destroyed" vibe. But I don't think that will be the motivating factor for as many people as certainly PB believes. I think many people might ponder the certain tax rises and how that will affect their pockets and maybe even take a glance at those economic aggregates before they vote. But I appreciate this may make me the most ridiculous PB poster, come 10:00:00:576 on Thursday night.
Do you think Joe is not senile?
I’ve felt for several years, persuaded in part by articulate arguments on here, that PR is much better. We need a system where all voices can be heard and new parties can form and make coalitions and bring in new ideas. We have been badly governed since about 2001, to my mind - since the Iraq war (which to my eternal shame I supported, tho I was lied to by my PM)
How much more evidence do we need? Our system isn’t working, and this is one part of the dysfunction we need to fix
https://www.merriam-webster.com/wordplay/bury-the-lede-versus-lead
But, actually, it's really good, isn't it? I skipped over all the low-rated episodes in the first couple of seasons, which helped - but, as you say, from S3 onwards almost all of them are watchable.
And the HD remastered version looks great, better than most films of a similar vintage. It would easily pass for being half its age if it weren't for the universally bad haircuts...
On the Court’s ruling, absolute immunity for any such order.
And he could pardon anyone charged for obeying it. Which the Court has said they can’t question.
Also note the previous Survation MRP was done from 15 to 27 June.
Today's Survation MRP is just the old one (sample 23,364) with an additional sample of 11,194 added. So just under one third of it is new.
I hope so anyway.
I've seen some people, even when praising it, giving it a backhanded 'progressive...for its time' kind of compliment, but intent is important with that kind of thing I think, and it was a show which was bold enough to often attempt a message, usually an optimistic non-cynical one, and when the writing was good it could explore some quite deep questions in an intelligent way without being overly preachy. Even if, yes, there are some seriously goofy episodes too.
And for those that sneer at things like science fiction and fantasy in general, exploring issues of today through fictitious allegories can be all the more effective.