I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
According to the first Techne UK weekly tracker poll for The Independent, Labour has increased its lead over the Tories from 10 per cent on the day of the election to 12 per cent.
Sir Keir’s party is still the number 1 choice among pensioners aged 65 and over, with 19 per cent compared to 14 per cent for the Conservatives. This despite the much criticised decision to cancel winter fuel payments for 10 million pensioners.
Overall, excluding “don’t knows” or “wouldn’t vote”, Labour polls at 33 per cent, just one point below what they received on election day. The Tories, who are still looking for a leader to replace Rishi Sunak, are down three points to 21 per cent. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party is up four points to 18 per cent.
The big story here is that neither Lab nor Con is remotely close to being popular, with 54% between them, after DKs etc have been removed.
The opportunity here for LDs and Reform is enormous.
According to the BBC the big story concerns the sex crimes of a deceased Egyptian shopkeeper. Other squirrels are available.
When have local by-elections ever been frontpage national news?
Bishops Ward (Waterloo to Lambeth Walk) Vauxhall, July 1981. First time Liberals and SDP fought and won a seat each in a dual by election, taking the two seats from Labour. Both sides endorsed the other in their election literature. All the major newspapers covered.
According to the first Techne UK weekly tracker poll for The Independent, Labour has increased its lead over the Tories from 10 per cent on the day of the election to 12 per cent.
Sir Keir’s party is still the number 1 choice among pensioners aged 65 and over, with 19 per cent compared to 14 per cent for the Conservatives. This despite the much criticised decision to cancel winter fuel payments for 10 million pensioners.
Overall, excluding “don’t knows” or “wouldn’t vote”, Labour polls at 33 per cent, just one point below what they received on election day. The Tories, who are still looking for a leader to replace Rishi Sunak, are down three points to 21 per cent. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party is up four points to 18 per cent.
The big story here is that neither Lab nor Con is remotely close to being popular, with 54% between them, after DKs etc have been removed.
The opportunity here for LDs and Reform is enormous.
For the Counties next year, The Tories are still coming down from a high water mark, indeed they have overall control in all but two counties. Reform are not organised except in a few, local areas. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, could be on course to match a previous local high. So although Labour are unlikely to shine, the news could still be very grim for the new Tory leader.
Oh dear, how sad... etc.
If the kind of results that are coming from local by-elections are maintained next year, I expect the Conservatives' lead over Labour will be considerably bigger than the 7% they recorded in 2021.
So, in all likelihood, seat losses to the Lib Dems and Reform will be matched by seat gains from Labour. That may still mean an overall loss in councils. But, I'd expect counties like Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire to remain Conservative.
A quick glance I made yesterday of all the LBEs since July had Labour down about 1.5% on their defended position and Con down about 3.5%.
It depends on the balance of defences from 21, 22, 23 and 24, which I didn't check, what the NEV position being defended is, but I'd expect it most likely to be from a small Labour lead.
Don't just go on the minority of cherry picked wow results.
I need to get a bit of paper from a Court in England to get my mortgage in Ireland.
It's been established, over four days of emails, that the Court has a copy of this bit of paper. I need to pay a fee of £11 for them to send it to me.
To pay the fee I can either post them a cheque, or I can pay over the phone. The phone line is open for four hours each day. So far I have phoned... 29 times.
Most of the time I receive a message "sorry your call cannot be continued" straight away. If I'm lucky, it rings for 90 seconds first, and then I get the message. Why do they not even have a proper phone queue system (let alone an online payment portal)?
I'm going to have to post a cheque.
Is this what living in Britain has been like in the two years since I left? 40th time lucky?
Now I'm remembering that the GP surgery in Edinburgh wouldn't simply email our medical notes. My wife had to take a day trip to Edinburgh to collect a print out.
51 calls. All failed.
We are not allowed to email medical details to non NHS accounts because of the risk of confidential data being exposed.
The NHS App gives me access to pretty much my entire record, accessed via a finger print.
I still don’t really understand why Labour didn’t really grasp the media narrative over the summer and do some big set piece moments of positivity and change rather than focussing on the doom and gloom of the upcoming budget and how wrong everything is.
I know Boris boosterism was derided but there is something in a leader being able to encourage, motivate and inspire the voters and Labour haven’t really been trying on that front.
I think the truth is Starmer is just a misery. Pure and simple. A Rachel's even worse!
Another thing I pointed out before the GE. SKS doesn't do positive, and that will be a big problem for him.
Yep. He also doesn’t do charm and humour
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
Much more likely it's a Civil Servant still smarting from personal criticism after her report on the lockdown parties.
Which is annoying, in fact, as any of the bastards involved should have been fired on the spot.
Westminster Village story. Civil servant earns more than PM is yet another non-issue. Some civil servants earn more than the PM and have done for a long time.
I need to get a bit of paper from a Court in England to get my mortgage in Ireland.
It's been established, over four days of emails, that the Court has a copy of this bit of paper. I need to pay a fee of £11 for them to send it to me.
To pay the fee I can either post them a cheque, or I can pay over the phone. The phone line is open for four hours each day. So far I have phoned... 29 times.
Most of the time I receive a message "sorry your call cannot be continued" straight away. If I'm lucky, it rings for 90 seconds first, and then I get the message. Why do they not even have a proper phone queue system (let alone an online payment portal)?
I'm going to have to post a cheque.
Is this what living in Britain has been like in the two years since I left? 40th time lucky?
Now I'm remembering that the GP surgery in Edinburgh wouldn't simply email our medical notes. My wife had to take a day trip to Edinburgh to collect a print out.
51 calls. All failed.
What's the British postal service like these days?
Should I send two cheques just in case one gets lost?
Will my bank be a bit suspicious about a nine and a half year gap between cheques?
I still don’t really understand why Labour didn’t really grasp the media narrative over the summer and do some big set piece moments of positivity and change rather than focussing on the doom and gloom of the upcoming budget and how wrong everything is.
I know Boris boosterism was derided but there is something in a leader being able to encourage, motivate and inspire the voters and Labour haven’t really been trying on that front.
I think the truth is Starmer is just a misery. Pure and simple. A Rachel's even worse!
Another thing I pointed out before the GE. SKS doesn't do positive, and that will be a big problem for him.
Yep. He also doesn’t do charm and humour
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
I think if they are out after one term and the unlikely result is the Tories back then Sunak will look to have played a blinder - they were going to lose anyway so let Labour have to pick up the shit and become hated then walk back in.
I need to get a bit of paper from a Court in England to get my mortgage in Ireland.
It's been established, over four days of emails, that the Court has a copy of this bit of paper. I need to pay a fee of £11 for them to send it to me.
To pay the fee I can either post them a cheque, or I can pay over the phone. The phone line is open for four hours each day. So far I have phoned... 29 times.
Most of the time I receive a message "sorry your call cannot be continued" straight away. If I'm lucky, it rings for 90 seconds first, and then I get the message. Why do they not even have a proper phone queue system (let alone an online payment portal)?
I'm going to have to post a cheque.
Is this what living in Britain has been like in the two years since I left? 40th time lucky?
Now I'm remembering that the GP surgery in Edinburgh wouldn't simply email our medical notes. My wife had to take a day trip to Edinburgh to collect a print out.
51 calls. All failed.
We are not allowed to email medical details to non NHS accounts because of the risk of confidential data being exposed.
The NHS App gives me access to pretty much my entire record, accessed via a finger print.
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
Much more likely it's a Civil Servant still smarting from personal criticism after her report on the lockdown parties.
Which is annoying, in fact, as any of the bastards involved should have been fired on the spot.
Westminster Village story. Civil servant earns more than PM is yet another non-issue. Some civil servants earn more than the PM and have done for a long time.
According to the first Techne UK weekly tracker poll for The Independent, Labour has increased its lead over the Tories from 10 per cent on the day of the election to 12 per cent.
Sir Keir’s party is still the number 1 choice among pensioners aged 65 and over, with 19 per cent compared to 14 per cent for the Conservatives. This despite the much criticised decision to cancel winter fuel payments for 10 million pensioners.
Overall, excluding “don’t knows” or “wouldn’t vote”, Labour polls at 33 per cent, just one point below what they received on election day. The Tories, who are still looking for a leader to replace Rishi Sunak, are down three points to 21 per cent. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party is up four points to 18 per cent.
The big story here is that neither Lab nor Con is remotely close to being popular, with 54% between them, after DKs etc have been removed.
The opportunity here for LDs and Reform is enormous.
For the Counties next year, The Tories are still coming down from a high water mark, indeed they have overall control in all but two counties. Reform are not organised except in a few, local areas. The Lib Dems, on the other hand, could be on course to match a previous local high. So although Labour are unlikely to shine, the news could still be very grim for the new Tory leader.
Oh dear, how sad... etc.
If the kind of results that are coming from local by-elections are maintained next year, I expect the Conservatives' lead over Labour will be considerably bigger than the 7% they recorded in 2021.
So, in all likelihood, seat losses to the Lib Dems and Reform will be matched by seat gains from Labour. That may still mean an overall loss in councils. But, I'd expect counties like Lancashire, Nottinghamshire, Derbyshire to remain Conservative.
A quick glance I made yesterday of all the LBEs since July had Labour down about 1.5% on their defended position and Con down about 3.5%.
It depends on the balance of defences from 21, 22, 23 and 24, which I didn't check, what the NEV position being defended is, but I'd expect it most likely to be from a small Labour lead.
Don't just go on the minority of cherry picked wow results.
Labour's results are getting steadily worse, however.
I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
Seriously. Can anyone tell me what is Labour’s big new plan for the economy?
We are being dragged further into a death loop debt spiral. Rich taxpayers are fleeing the dire warnings of higher taxes. Those higher taxes are going on absurdly generous pay deals for train drivers
Net zero via Ed Miliband is crushing us further. The government is actually cancelling infrastructure. Meanwhile the boats keep coming which means more billions spent. The government seems utterly uninterested in radical new tech which might help us
So, what is it? What’s the plan?
I don’t think they have one. Just vague and feeble hopes and damaging woke instincts
I need to get a bit of paper from a Court in England to get my mortgage in Ireland.
It's been established, over four days of emails, that the Court has a copy of this bit of paper. I need to pay a fee of £11 for them to send it to me.
To pay the fee I can either post them a cheque, or I can pay over the phone. The phone line is open for four hours each day. So far I have phoned... 29 times.
Most of the time I receive a message "sorry your call cannot be continued" straight away. If I'm lucky, it rings for 90 seconds first, and then I get the message. Why do they not even have a proper phone queue system (let alone an online payment portal)?
I'm going to have to post a cheque.
Is this what living in Britain has been like in the two years since I left? 40th time lucky?
Now I'm remembering that the GP surgery in Edinburgh wouldn't simply email our medical notes. My wife had to take a day trip to Edinburgh to collect a print out.
51 calls. All failed.
We are not allowed to email medical details to non NHS accounts because of the risk of confidential data being exposed.
The NHS App gives me access to pretty much my entire record, accessed via a finger print.
Email is, security wise, the equivalent to giving a folded piece of paper to someone, who will pass it to various people they have never met, to eventually deliver it.
Assume that email you send in the clear is read by Bad People.
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
This is the first poll where they've done their stretching and squashing based on the 2024 actual outcomes. (Which is presumably what all the pollsters have been working on since July, recalibrating their internal models.)
So it should (famous last words) be pretty accurate in a way that the pre-election polls weren't.
Seriously. Can anyone tell me what is Labour’s big new plan for the economy?
We are being dragged further into a death loop debt spiral. Rich taxpayers are fleeing the dire warnings of higher taxes. Those higher taxes are going on absurdly generous pay deals for train drivers
Net zero via Ed Miliband is crushing us further. The government is actually cancelling infrastructure. Meanwhile the boats keep coming which means more billions spent. The government seems utterly uninterested in radical new tech which might help us
So, what is it? What’s the plan?
I don’t think they have one. Just vague and feeble hopes and damaging woke instincts
= disaster
Why don't you wait until Reeves' autumn statement before slitting your wrists and emigrating to Timbuktu?
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
I don't think Klouseau's footie tickets and clothing are PB Tory anecdotes. As for Rosa Klebb, if she does the right thing in the budget everyone will hate it and her, if she gets it wrong everyone will point at her and laugh, and in either case they will ask, For this we waited three unnecessary months while the economy was bombed into looking like the future scenes in The Terminator?
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Andy Bruce @BruceReuters 💥 Biggest September drop for consumer confidence since 1976 👇
Survey company @GfK links this to messaging around the Budget and withdrawal of winter fuel allowance.
Quite a serious charge - the idea that the government is risking a self-fulfilling prophecy of gloom.
As I said yesterday, the amount of doom and gloom coming from the new government is going to result in big reduction in growth for the end of this year and the start of next year. Companies are looking at all of the uncertainty surrounding the UK and battening down the hatches, balance sheets are being solidified with investment being cut to achieve that. What's completely crazy about this is that there was no need for any of it, the Tories handed over an economy growing at an annualised rate of 2.5% with lots of upside still available with smart investment decisions.
I got the final count today and my company has taken down 14 open roles, salary budget for those 14 roles was an average of £74k which is well over a million quid that we won't spend in the UK and will push into Australia instead.
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
This is the first poll where they've done their stretching and squashing based on the 2024 actual outcomes. (Which is presumably what all the pollsters have been working on since July, recalibrating their internal models.)
So it should (famous last words) be pretty accurate in a way that the pre-election polls weren't.
If you trust them to do it properly, given that they had Labour on 41% just before election day it doesn't seem like they've got a very good handle on polling.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yup, they're in the ignore pile along with most other pollsters who had Labour in the 40s.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
The Express getting very excited and what a line up for the speakers at Reform Conference
I would rather watch paint dry
According to Techne, 33% would now vote Labour, down two since the election but down a whopping seven since Techne's last poll the day before the election.
The Tories are down three points, to just 21% in the polls, a perilous position as they continue debating who should replace Rishi Sunak.
Reform, however, are the only winners, up 3 points since the election to 18%.
This means they are now on the verge of becoming the second most popular party in Britain, just three points behind the Conservatives.
Meanwhile the LibDems and Green Party remain unchanged, on 13% and 7% respectively.
The poll comes just hours before the great and good of Reform UK take to the stage of the Birmingham NEC and set out their roadmap to winning the next general election.
Among the speakers will be all five of the party's MPs - including Richard Tice, Rupert Lowe, Lee Anderson and James McMurdoch - Ann Widdecombe, TV star Ant Middleton and party chairman Zia Yusuf.
Nigel Farage will conclude proceedings at 4pm, where he will "share his powerful vision for the country's future".
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's the same methodology, it's just that the past vote they're weighting by has changed.
It's possible that they would be more accurate because we're closer to the previous election, but that's hard to test. I suppose you might compare their polls over the course of the last Parliament and see if they diverged further from the more accurate pollsters as the Parliament progressed.
For a large number of reasons we have no way of knowing what systematic biases the pollsters will have until we see the exit poll, and they do change from election to election.
I think it's fair to say that Labour haven't had a stellar start to their time in government, and there's numerous other data that suggests people aren't happy, so it would seem weird to rely overmuch on this one poll as a contrary indicator.
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
“Golden showers” basically.
Shit happens, I suppose?
It does cast a new light on Roy Cooper saying he didn't want to be considered for the Democratic VP slot, as he was worried about Robinson taking on 'acting governor' powers if he went out of state.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
According to the first Techne UK weekly tracker poll for The Independent, Labour has increased its lead over the Tories from 10 per cent on the day of the election to 12 per cent.
Sir Keir’s party is still the number 1 choice among pensioners aged 65 and over, with 19 per cent compared to 14 per cent for the Conservatives. This despite the much criticised decision to cancel winter fuel payments for 10 million pensioners.
Overall, excluding “don’t knows” or “wouldn’t vote”, Labour polls at 33 per cent, just one point below what they received on election day. The Tories, who are still looking for a leader to replace Rishi Sunak, are down three points to 21 per cent. Meanwhile, Nigel Farage’s Reform UK party is up four points to 18 per cent.
The big story here is that neither Lab nor Con is remotely close to being popular, with 54% between them, after DKs etc have been removed.
The opportunity here for LDs and Reform is enormous.
According to the BBC the big story concerns the sex crimes of a deceased Egyptian shopkeeper. Other squirrels are available.
The BBC hardly ever report opinion polls these days, and with good reason, particularly with 58 months of the parliament left to run and when it's a pollster whose track record leaves something to be desired.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
The week of their debate, Kamala Harris outspent Donald Trump by 20 to 1 on Facebook and Instagram. It was just one sign of how uneven their online advertising battle has become.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
A fair point
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Indeed. Plus the MOE of the difference between two parties is approximately twice the MOE of the value of each party. Plus you can't use MOE for panel polling because they aren't random samples from representative panels, there's self-selection involved (this is why the BPC insist on the pollsters specifying it in the tables) and thus violates the central limit theorem. So this poll is uninformative.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
Interesting, the pollsters themselves seem to be saying that the polls are equivalent...
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
Actually it’s not an outlier. It shows Labour down seven since the GE - a dramatic fall
Opinium in Scotland shows a similar fall, albeit even greater. Ten points (albeit using the GE as a marker)
New Scotland Only Westminster poll, Opinium 5-11 Sep (changes vs GE 2024):
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
A fair point
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
All the opinion polls were crap. Only two polls in all of 2023 and 2024 gave a Labour lead of 10pp, compared to the result of 10.3pp.
I wouldn't expect opinion polls to be precise, but it's a very big failure when they don't even have the result within their spread.
126 calls My brain's melted, I don't even think I can write a cheque now.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
A fair point
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
It's worth waiting for a few successive polls from the likes of YouGov. Not a few pollsters are lily to have tweaked their methodology since the election, but a run of two or three from the same reputable pollsters will give a better clue about the lie of the land.
It's not as though they're going to matter ahead of the Budget anyway. And by then, we'll be able to get a fair idea of how the public react to that first big test.
In the meantime, we've got the biggest quadrennial betting event to worry about. And the ongoing Tory leadership market for those interested.
I still don’t really understand why Labour didn’t really grasp the media narrative over the summer and do some big set piece moments of positivity and change rather than focussing on the doom and gloom of the upcoming budget and how wrong everything is.
I know Boris boosterism was derided but there is something in a leader being able to encourage, motivate and inspire the voters and Labour haven’t really been trying on that front.
I think the truth is Starmer is just a misery. Pure and simple. A Rachel's even worse!
Another thing I pointed out before the GE. SKS doesn't do positive, and that will be a big problem for him.
Yep. He also doesn’t do charm and humour
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
Another one for your anthology of crap predictions….
I still don’t really understand why Labour didn’t really grasp the media narrative over the summer and do some big set piece moments of positivity and change rather than focussing on the doom and gloom of the upcoming budget and how wrong everything is.
I know Boris boosterism was derided but there is something in a leader being able to encourage, motivate and inspire the voters and Labour haven’t really been trying on that front.
I think the truth is Starmer is just a misery. Pure and simple. A Rachel's even worse!
Another thing I pointed out before the GE. SKS doesn't do positive, and that will be a big problem for him.
Yep. He also doesn’t do charm and humour
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
I think if they are out after one term and the unlikely result is the Tories back then Sunak will look to have played a blinder - they were going to lose anyway so let Labour have to pick up the shit and become hated then walk back in.
If that happens it will also flip the conventional wisdom about timing an election to save the maximum number of seats on its head.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
Actually it’s not an outlier. It shows Labour down seven since the GE - a dramatic fall
Opinium in Scotland shows a similar fall, albeit even greater. Ten points (albeit using the GE as a marker)
New Scotland Only Westminster poll, Opinium 5-11 Sep (changes vs GE 2024):
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
Interesting, the pollsters themselves seem to be saying that the polls are equivalent...
I still don’t really understand why Labour didn’t really grasp the media narrative over the summer and do some big set piece moments of positivity and change rather than focussing on the doom and gloom of the upcoming budget and how wrong everything is.
I know Boris boosterism was derided but there is something in a leader being able to encourage, motivate and inspire the voters and Labour haven’t really been trying on that front.
I think the truth is Starmer is just a misery. Pure and simple. A Rachel's even worse!
Another thing I pointed out before the GE. SKS doesn't do positive, and that will be a big problem for him.
Yep. He also doesn’t do charm and humour
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
I think if they are out after one term and the unlikely result is the Tories back then Sunak will look to have played a blinder - they were going to lose anyway so let Labour have to pick up the shit and become hated then walk back in.
If that happens it will also flip the conventional wisdom about timing an election to save the maximum number of seats on its head.
And if Notts County win the FA Cup it will flip the conventional wisdom that the trophy is always won by a club from the top two divisions.
OT. Despite the unseemly squealing from the usual posters Labour still hold a 12% lead with Techne from their nearest challenger which would give them a slightly increased lead from the 230 odd majority that they hold at the moment
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Are you "unskewing" the polls now?
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
Actually it’s not an outlier. It shows Labour down seven since the GE - a dramatic fall
Opinium in Scotland shows a similar fall, albeit even greater. Ten points (albeit using the GE as a marker)
New Scotland Only Westminster poll, Opinium 5-11 Sep (changes vs GE 2024):
The poll shows Labour well ahead despite doing unpopular stuff. It is an excellent poll for Labour.
Again – again! – Labour are not courting popularity. Indeed they would be mad to do so FIVE YEARS from an election.
They are scraping the barnacles off the boat. Get the shit out of the way early and take the hit.
Yet they remain streets ahead of the Tories, nevertheless.
Good for them.
What are these amazingly unpopular decisions they’ve taken that are nonetheless gonna steer UK into prosperity?
They’ve taken winter fuel off pensioners. Saving £1.5bn. That’s it. That’s the barnacle removed, now, following that immensely brave choice we can look forward to the sunny uplands. Right?
They are dreadful. Venal, petty, woke, puritan, hypocritical, talentless and devoid of any ideas at all
Ref the Techne poll, this is what happens when you come into government without much of a positive plan, without much of a narrative other than 'the other lot are incompetent and corrupt and we're not' and without a decent day-to-day political ops team.
Labour did virtually none of the groundwork on the economy in getting the message across (unlike Blair/Brown pre-1997, even though the Tories had already done most of the hard lifting, and unlike Cameron pre-2010, when it really was valid). Starting off by cutting benefits may or may not be a sensible move from a Treasury point of view but it's one the country really wasn't ready for politically because there'd not been the case made that things were that bad - or if they were that bad, why the cuts had to fall there.
Meanwhile, Sue Grey doesn't have the political background to manage the private office, to anticipate and neuter hostile stories (whether towards her or Labour), or to push the government's own agenda (not least because there isn't a Big Picture from them at the moment). She might be a competent manager; she might be a decent person; she's not a politician - elected or administrative - and as such she's in the wrong job.
For a party which has been on the back foot in terms of media and public support / hostility for most of the time since 2002, they've adopted a remarkably passive attitude to letting things happen. Either you make the news or the news makes you.
Seriously. Can anyone tell me what is Labour’s big new plan for the economy?
We are being dragged further into a death loop debt spiral. Rich taxpayers are fleeing the dire warnings of higher taxes. Those higher taxes are going on absurdly generous pay deals for train drivers
Net zero via Ed Miliband is crushing us further. The government is actually cancelling infrastructure. Meanwhile the boats keep coming which means more billions spent. The government seems utterly uninterested in radical new tech which might help us
So, what is it? What’s the plan?
I don’t think they have one. Just vague and feeble hopes and damaging woke instincts
= disaster
THAT LABOUR PLAN IN FULL 1 Tax things 2 Tax working people 3 Take benefits away 4 Build houses (viewcode like!) 5 Use private hospitals to cope with waiting list patients (I hae my doots about that) 6 Coal, oil bad, wind farms good, tidal ignored, nuclear um?
THINGS IT OMITS 1 How to cope with a world where HNWIs and skilled labour are internationally mobile 2 How to cope with a world where migration waves are washing over Europe 3 How to build an armed forces that can handle 21st century warfare when the one we have doesn't know how, has shit equipment, and there aren't enough of them 4 How to cope with a multipolar world where the USA retreats from superpower status.
So some of their policies are good but others are bad or not thought thru, and the major state-threatening issues are not considered. This, combined with their authoritarian instincts, make them both overbearing and incompetent, a bad combo.
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
"Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate "
Dear me.
Do you ever learn anything from this site ?
If you have selection bias or sampling bias, you can poll 20,000 people and may not get more accuracy.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
I regularly fill in YouGov polls and get 50 points. When it reaches 5000, I get £50 in my bank account, so 50p a poll. But that's not why I fill in the polls. I like to share my views, particularly on politics. Some boring commercial polls I just abandon. Not worth 50p of my time.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
"Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate "
Dear me.
Do you ever learn anything from this site ?
If you have selection bias or sampling bias, you can poll 20,000 people and may not get more accuracy.
You're a bit of a grumpy knickers this morning.
As the site's only genuine footy fan what's gone wrong? Still upset that Carlisle lost out to Fleetwood in a close run game last Saturday?
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
"Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate "
Dear me.
Do you ever learn anything from this site ?
If you have selection bias or sampling bias, you can poll 20,000 people and may not get more accuracy.
But we don’t know WHAT was wrong with their polling because they haven’t dslcussed it or publicly analysed it
Also, we don’t know if they have actually changed their methodology in a significant way
All we know is that Labour are down 7 since the GE
I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
Have I got this right ?
He's as bad as the other lot is good enough for you? You don't want him to be better?
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
A fair point
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
It's worth waiting for a few successive polls from the likes of YouGov. Not a few pollsters are lily to have tweaked their methodology since the election, but a run of two or three from the same reputable pollsters will give a better clue about the lie of the land.
It's not as though they're going to matter ahead of the Budget anyway. And by then, we'll be able to get a fair idea of how the public react to that first big test.
In the meantime, we've got the biggest quadrennial betting event to worry about. And the ongoing Tory leadership market for those interested.
The most Labour has to offer us is Budget bingo.
Yup. It's quite possible that this poll is systematically wrong.
All you can really do with polls is look at the variation over several reports of a single pollster. Even if there is a bias, that bias will be the same each time, so the changesare telling us something. But you need more than two reports, because of the random noise in each poll.
But this one is different enough to the last Techne poll that it isn't comparable. Most of the art of polling is how you rescale from the raw totals to the published results, and they are doing that differently in this poll to the last one.
Quite amusing seeing some of the usual suspects leap on this with "this cannot be" responses. After all, the polls now are otherwise telling us nothing of import.
Alright, having seen at least a portion of them, I now understand why CNN didn’t publish all of Robinson’s comments. There’s stuff that you straight up can’t run on daytime TV and you frankly do not want to read. The links are floating around if you want to see https://x.com/ShamebyJames/status/1836902852414894591
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
I regularly fill in YouGov polls and get 50 points. When it reaches 5000, I get £50 in my bank account, so 50p a poll. But that's not why I fill in the polls. I like to share my views, particularly on politics. Some boring commercial polls I just abandon. Not worth 50p of my time.
They are wise to that, and normally stick the political VI and related Qs on the end of a fifteen minute survey about chocolate bars or somesuch.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
YouGov pays you in "points", worth a penny each. They've just offered me a survey taking about 20 minutes (their estimate; they often over-estimate) for which I would get 50 points, so 50p. This is way below minimum wage. General election questions are usually part of a longer survey, a few questions at the end. Once you've amassed 5000 points, you can cash that in for £50. There isn't an endless supply of surveys, however. At most, you'll be doing a few a week through YouGov... although you can sign up to other companies, so you could probably get up to a few per day.
The financial gain is low. I think the people who do it do it because they quite like completing surveys. The money is a nice extra.
It is a hugely important question as to why people do these surveys and how representative they are of the general population. The government uses these sorts of surveys to track behaviour during COVID-19. I was on the team analysing the data. We want to know whether 26% of survey participants saying something means 26% of the general population or not, the same problems as the election pollsters have.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
A fair point
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
It's worth waiting for a few successive polls from the likes of YouGov. Not a few pollsters are lily to have tweaked their methodology since the election, but a run of two or three from the same reputable pollsters will give a better clue about the lie of the land.
It's not as though they're going to matter ahead of the Budget anyway. And by then, we'll be able to get a fair idea of how the public react to that first big test.
In the meantime, we've got the biggest quadrennial betting event to worry about. And the ongoing Tory leadership market for those interested.
The most Labour has to offer us is Budget bingo.
Yup. It's quite possible that this poll is systematically wrong.
All you can really do with polls is look at the variation over several reports of a single pollster. Even if there is a bias, that bias will be the same each time, so the changesare telling us something. But you need more than two reports, because of the random noise in each poll.
But this one is different enough to the last Techne poll that it isn't comparable. Most of the art of polling is how you rescale from the raw totals to the published results, and they are doing that differently in this poll to the last one.
Quite amusing seeing some of the usual suspects leap on this with "this cannot be" responses. After all, the polls now are otherwise telling us nothing of import.
Except that the 7 point Labour fall here matches the 10 point Labour fall in Scotland (opinium) and they both tally with the widely polled plunge in Labour/Starmer’s popularity
For Labour, the polling is bad. That’s all we know
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
YouGov pays you in "points", worth a penny each. They've just offered me a survey taking about 20 minutes (their estimate; they often over-estimate) for which I would get 50 points, so 50p. This is way below minimum wage. General election questions are usually part of a longer survey, a few questions at the end. Once you've amassed 5000 points, you can cash that in for £50. There isn't an endless supply of surveys, however. At most, you'll be doing a few a week through YouGov... although you can sign up to other companies, so you could probably get up to a few per day.
The financial gain is low. I think the people who do it do it because they quite like completing surveys. The money is a nice extra.
It is a hugely important question as to why people do these surveys and how representative they are of the general population. The government uses these sorts of surveys to track behaviour during COVID-19. I was on the team analysing the data. We want to know whether 26% of survey participants saying something means 26% of the general population or not, the same problems as the election pollsters have.
When they started out and were keen to expand their panel, you could rely on a regular flow of surveys and if you did them all could get £50 several times a year. Nowadays I think they have more panellists than they really need (except for the MRP) - particularly I’d guess in the PB demographic of mostly old farts with too much time on our hands - and a survey only comes along relatively rarely, such that it takes a couple of years to achieve the £50.
You’re right that there’s likely bias in the sort of people who do the surveys reliably. But of course their core panel is big enough that they’re effectively constructing a bespoke, chosen sample for each survey, based on the huge amount of data they already have on us.
https://www.status.news/p/olivia-nuzzi-rfk-new-york-magazine New York magazine on Thursday said its Washington correspondent, Olivia Nuzzi, is on leave after learning the star journalist had allegedly engaged in a romantic relationship with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. "Recently our Washington Correspondent Olivia Nuzzi acknowledged to the magazine’s editors that she had engaged in a personal relationship with a former subject relevant to the 2024 campaign while she was reporting on the campaign, a violation of the magazine’s standards around conflicts of interest and disclosures," a spokesperson for New York magazine said in a statement in response to questions from Status. "Had the magazine been aware of this relationship, she would not have continued to cover the presidential campaign," the spokesperson added. "An internal review of her published work has found no inaccuracies nor evidence of bias. She is currently on leave from the magazine, and the magazine is conducting a more thorough third-party review. We regret this violation of our readers’ trust."..
I think the conclusion is correct. It is not fatal. They can recover. But will they.
"This is not a fatal moment for Sir Keir’s prime ministership. But it is a failure from which it is vital that Sir Keir should learn. He needs a stronger commitment to standards, effectively and independently enforced, so that politics and government can begin to be trusted again. That is not happening at the moment. But it is indispensable. Without it, the risks facing Labour in government will only continue to grow."
Starmer has shown himself able to learn lessons in the past but learning this one involves making personal sacrifices. I get being an addicted fan of a football team, I am one, but he is the PM. Maybe the solution is just not to go to matches. And he can clearly afford to buy his own glasses.
With a few exceptions this site is full of people utterly clueless about football & supporters.
He's had a season ticket for at least 18 years. He takes his kid, probably knows the people sitting nearby. The idea posted by someone that a couple of burly constables should sit either side is laughable as a security measure.
So far in the last couple of months we have had people suggesting he shouldn't have Shabbat dinner at home with his family & now can't go to a match.
Even politicians need a life.
The glasses, clothes etc is inexusable.
Tosser, you obviously have no principles or morals and happy that politicians engage in shafting teh public and cocking a snout at the plebs. You are not one of teh exceptions then , how many football fans that have bought season tickets for countless years get handed free private boxes smart arse.
Only the most aching of simpletons would have no concept of the security arrangements required for a PM
Every second out of Downing Street will require a risk assessment. Among the highest risk will be when you are a static target in a very public environment at a known time.
I've seen Rishi Sunak in a tiny village in North Yorkshire with his family on a quite Sunday. Two close protection officers were within 10 metres. Probably more close by.
Margaret Thatcher had close protection 24/7 for the 23 years after she left office.
How many football fans require this level of security "smart arse" ?
He's the fucking PM, he needs to decide what's more important. Going to football to see his "beloved" Arsenal for free and trousering over a hundred grand in freebies, which then paints him as a grifter and lose all credibility, or he wants to taken seriously as the Labour PM that came into power to sort out the country after 14 years of the Tory clownshow, including cutting the WFA for many pensioners. Currently, he looks like he likes the trough more than the country.
But John Major going to Lords to watch cricket or Stamford Bridge to watch the footbal was presumably fine.
I reckon the polling before GE 24 wasn't as far off as people make out, with Labour in the early 40s. But come July 4th, everybody knew Labour were going to win. So, at the last minute, quite a lot of those who intended to vote Labour to get rid of the Tories didn't (including members of my own family). Instead, they went Green, Lib Dem, Independent, or just didn't bother voting. Result: Labour at 33%.
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
Have they changed their methodology?
I’ve no idea. Have you? They’ve not mentioned it on their TwiX feed
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
Yes they have. From their methodology small print,
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
That's a change to their baseline, not the methodology. They don't seem to have done anything about the big Labour bias or at least it isn't mentioned.
Not only that their massive Labour bias is incredible
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
A large sample improves the precision of a poll, but not its accuracy. So their large sample just meant they were more precisely wrong.
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Why does anyone respond to opinion poll questions? What is their motive? How honest would their response be? I gather from occasional comments on here that YouGov pays a fraction of a penny for each interaction. Does this mean their sample is desperately poor? What about the others? How many questionnaires would I need to fill in, more or less truthfully, to pay the central heating bill?
YouGov pays you in "points", worth a penny each. They've just offered me a survey taking about 20 minutes (their estimate; they often over-estimate) for which I would get 50 points, so 50p. This is way below minimum wage. General election questions are usually part of a longer survey, a few questions at the end. Once you've amassed 5000 points, you can cash that in for £50. There isn't an endless supply of surveys, however. At most, you'll be doing a few a week through YouGov... although you can sign up to other companies, so you could probably get up to a few per day.
The financial gain is low. I think the people who do it do it because they quite like completing surveys. The money is a nice extra.
It is a hugely important question as to why people do these surveys and how representative they are of the general population. The government uses these sorts of surveys to track behaviour during COVID-19. I was on the team analysing the data. We want to know whether 26% of survey participants saying something means 26% of the general population or not, the same problems as the election pollsters have.
When they started out and were keen to expand their panel, you could rely on a regular flow of surveys and if you did them all could get £50 several times a year. Nowadays I think they have more panellists than they really need (except for the MRP) - particularly I’d guess in the PB demographic of mostly old farts with too much time on our hands - and a survey only comes along relatively rarely, such that it takes a couple of years to achieve the £50.
You’re right that there’s likely bias in the sort of people who do the surveys reliably. But of course their core panel is big enough that they’re effectively constructing a bespoke, chosen sample for each survey, based on the huge amount of data they already have on us.
Yes, they're doing quota sampling to match samples to demographic profiles, and some commercial surveys are highly targeted to people working in particular fields, etc. But quota sampling can't undo a systematic bias in the type of person interested in doing online surveys. For example, we've found, and this isn't very surprising, that online respondents tend to be more technologically literate than the general public.
I see SKS freebie ticket donors include Mullaley & Co, fined £8 million for unsafe cladding after Grenfell.
Definitely no Conflict of Interest there.
That's why these freebies are problematic for all politicians. You may not give the donor an advantage; the donor may not want, or be thinking of, an advantage. But it can appear extremely problematic from the outside.
Which is why they need declaring. And why SKS's repeated failure to declare in time is so utterly stoopid.
I reckon the polling before GE 24 wasn't as far off as people make out, with Labour in the early 40s. But come July 4th, everybody knew Labour were going to win. So, at the last minute, quite a lot of those who intended to vote Labour to get rid of the Tories didn't (including members of my own family). Instead, they went Green, Lib Dem, Independent, or just didn't bother voting. Result: Labour at 33%.
Either that or SKS LAB were always nailed on to get 3.2m fewer votes than Corbyn in 2017
So SKY BET offering 14/1 on them getting less than 12.788m votes was the bet of the Century
Before my time but I sense The Herd might be back?
Anybody sane wanted the Tories out, and would know that that would mean Starmer as PM. I thought he'd be boringly competent and the country would grind slowly forward with no drama. Turns our he loves a freebie more than any PM in recent history and he absolutely has to watch his "beloved" Arsenal, it's non-negotiable. Am I allowed to be disappointed?
Ref the Techne poll, this is what happens when you come into government without much of a positive plan, without much of a narrative other than 'the other lot are incompetent and corrupt and we're not' and without a decent day-to-day political ops team.
Labour did virtually none of the groundwork on the economy in getting the message across (unlike Blair/Brown pre-1997, even though the Tories had already done most of the hard lifting, and unlike Cameron pre-2010, when it really was valid). Starting off by cutting benefits may or may not be a sensible move from a Treasury point of view but it's one the country really wasn't ready for politically because there'd not been the case made that things were that bad - or if they were that bad, why the cuts had to fall there.
Meanwhile, Sue Grey doesn't have the political background to manage the private office, to anticipate and neuter hostile stories (whether towards her or Labour), or to push the government's own agenda (not least because there isn't a Big Picture from them at the moment). She might be a competent manager; she might be a decent person; she's not a politician - elected or administrative - and as such she's in the wrong job.
For a party which has been on the back foot in terms of media and public support / hostility for most of the time since 2002, they've adopted a remarkably passive attitude to letting things happen. Either you make the news or the news makes you.
I went from wondering why Labour didn't share their vision to wondering whether their vision is one they know the general public won't like. So I'd now be glad to know for a fact they don't actually have one.
Comments
Is that some kind of box/special area?
I would guess that for the cricket he gets to watch with the Head Sheds, from their balcony, or maybe - https://events.kiaoval.com/room/john-major-room/
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/poll-keir-starmer-labour-winter-fuel-b2615946.html
All the major newspapers covered.
It depends on the balance of defences from 21, 22, 23 and 24, which I didn't check, what the NEV position being defended is, but I'd expect it most likely to be from a small Labour lead.
Don't just go on the minority of cherry picked wow results.
The NHS App gives me access to pretty much my entire record, accessed via a finger print.
And that is the only way for him to win back public opinion and popularity. Unless Labour are stunning successful in turning the economy round (and there is exactly zero evidence of that to date: no ideas at all)
Firm prediction. Labour will tinker with the economy, make some things better and some things worse, our decline will continue, Starmer and Reeves will become historically disliked and they will be out after one term
I now believe this is more likely than not. The total lack of ideas is the really surprising thing, even more than the instant grifting
https://outwardintelligence.com/pulse/harris-maintains-lead-over-trump
That is not quite the same thing...
Should I send two cheques just in case one gets lost?
Will my bank be a bit suspicious about a nine and a half year gap between cheques?
73 failed calls.
I might as well get the ton up.
77 calls.
Polling vs PB Tory anecdote.
LOL.
Obvious Reference to the https://wiki.lspace.org/Silver_Horde
We are being dragged further into a death loop debt spiral. Rich taxpayers are fleeing the dire warnings of higher taxes. Those higher taxes are going on absurdly generous pay deals for train drivers
Net zero via Ed Miliband is crushing us further. The government is actually cancelling infrastructure. Meanwhile the boats keep coming which means more billions spent. The government seems utterly uninterested in radical new tech which might help us
So, what is it? What’s the plan?
I don’t think they have one. Just vague and feeble hopes and damaging woke instincts
= disaster
Assume that email you send in the clear is read by Bad People.
This is the first poll where they've done their stretching and squashing based on the 2024 actual outcomes. (Which is presumably what all the pollsters have been working on since July, recalibrating their internal models.)
So it should (famous last words) be pretty accurate in a way that the pre-election polls weren't.
Good start. 💯
Here’s their last poll on election day
Lab 40% (-1)
Cons 21% (+2)
Lib Dems 11% (-1)
Reform 16% (-1)
Greens 6% (+1)
SNP 3% (=)
Others 3% (=)
https://x.com/techneuk/status/1808413756679930254?s=46&t=bulOICNH15U6kB0MwE6Lfw
So Labour have actually plunged SEVEN points in 10 weeks. Given that Techne seem to wildly overstate Labour (40% on election day??) then Labour in reality might be down in the 20s
This furore, together with the WFA and the doom and gloom is a slow burning fuse
I got the final count today and my company has taken down 14 open roles, salary budget for those 14 roles was an average of £74k which is well over a million quid that we won't spend in the UK and will push into Australia instead.
Given how badly they called the election one is tempted to ignore them entirely whatever they say
(At least I can’t find it but I am on a phone on plane; maybe it is there?)
If there has been no change in methodology then this is a massive drop of 7 points for Labour from a pollster that notoriously overstates Labour
The planned sample is represented by 1500 interviews, plus 124 over-sampling. The choice of over-sampling was based on the need to have a consistent number of cases in each weighting cell represented by the stratification between region or country and voting behavior in 2024 general elections.
https://www.techneuk.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/R122-UK-2024-9-20-METHODOLOGY.pdf
104 calls now.
The cost of postage will be nearly 20% of the cost of the fee.
Is that some kind of box/special area?
It's the West Stand in (or very near) Directors seating.
I would rather watch paint dry
According to Techne, 33% would now vote Labour, down two since the election but down a whopping seven since Techne's last poll the day before the election.
The Tories are down three points, to just 21% in the polls, a perilous position as they continue debating who should replace Rishi Sunak.
Reform, however, are the only winners, up 3 points since the election to 18%.
This means they are now on the verge of becoming the second most popular party in Britain, just three points behind the Conservatives.
Meanwhile the LibDems and Green Party remain unchanged, on 13% and 7% respectively.
The poll comes just hours before the great and good of Reform UK take to the stage of the Birmingham NEC and set out their roadmap to winning the next general election.
Among the speakers will be all five of the party's MPs - including Richard Tice, Rupert Lowe, Lee Anderson and James McMurdoch - Ann Widdecombe, TV star Ant Middleton and party chairman Zia Yusuf.
Nigel Farage will conclude proceedings at 4pm, where he will "share his powerful vision for the country's future".
https://x.com/AccountableGOP/status/1836950514551976409
It's possible that they would be more accurate because we're closer to the previous election, but that's hard to test. I suppose you might compare their polls over the course of the last Parliament and see if they diverged further from the more accurate pollsters as the Parliament progressed.
For a large number of reasons we have no way of knowing what systematic biases the pollsters will have until we see the exit poll, and they do change from election to election.
I think it's fair to say that Labour haven't had a stellar start to their time in government, and there's numerous other data that suggests people aren't happy, so it would seem weird to rely overmuch on this one poll as a contrary indicator.
113 calls.
In retrospect, a very smart decision.
Their poll on election day had an enormous sample. 5,300 people. It should have been hugely accurate
Yet it coughed up a Labour result of 40 not the 33.7 Labour finally got. Wildly wrong
Moreover - as OGH always told us - all that counts is movements between polls from the same pollsters
The poll that pb lefties were exultantly citing an hour ago actually shows Labour in free fall
The largest errors from opinion polls are not due to random sampling errors, but due to systematic biases on foot of high non-response rates.
Remember Mike's golden rule: an outlier is a poll you don't like.
NY Times
My conclusion is that Tecnhe are a bit crap with a tendency to overstate Labour
Let’s wait for a more reliable pollster. All the popularity polls (eg from YouGov last week) show Labour plunging. We also have that VI (opinium?) poll from Scotland which likewise showed a dramatic Labour fall
https://www.techneuk.com/archive/
I guess the GE miss has gone in their memory hole?
Opinium in Scotland shows a similar fall, albeit even greater. Ten points (albeit using the GE as a marker)
New Scotland Only Westminster poll, Opinium 5-11 Sep (changes vs GE 2024):
SNP ~ 32% (+2)
Lab ~ 25% (-10)
Con ~ 14% (+1)
RUK ~ 11% (+4)
LD ~ 8% (-2)
Grn ~ 7% (+3)
I wouldn't expect opinion polls to be precise, but it's a very big failure when they don't even have the result within their spread.
126 calls
My brain's melted, I don't even think I can write a cheque now.
Not a few pollsters are lily to have tweaked their methodology since the election, but a run of two or three from the same reputable pollsters will give a better clue about the lie of the land.
It's not as though they're going to matter ahead of the Budget anyway.
And by then, we'll be able to get a fair idea of how the public react to that first big test.
In the meantime, we've got the biggest quadrennial betting event to worry about. And the ongoing Tory leadership market for those interested.
The most Labour has to offer us is Budget bingo.
Again – again! – Labour are not courting popularity. Indeed they would be mad to do so FIVE YEARS from an election.
They are scraping the barnacles off the boat. Get the shit out of the way early and take the hit.
Yet they remain streets ahead of the Tories, nevertheless.
Good for them.
One to ponder.
They’ve taken winter fuel off pensioners. Saving £1.5bn. That’s it. That’s the barnacle removed, now, following that immensely brave choice we can look forward to the sunny uplands. Right?
They are dreadful. Venal, petty, woke, puritan, hypocritical, talentless and devoid of any ideas at all
He wont
Labour did virtually none of the groundwork on the economy in getting the message across (unlike Blair/Brown pre-1997, even though the Tories had already done most of the hard lifting, and unlike Cameron pre-2010, when it really was valid). Starting off by cutting benefits may or may not be a sensible move from a Treasury point of view but it's one the country really wasn't ready for politically because there'd not been the case made that things were that bad - or if they were that bad, why the cuts had to fall there.
Meanwhile, Sue Grey doesn't have the political background to manage the private office, to anticipate and neuter hostile stories (whether towards her or Labour), or to push the government's own agenda (not least because there isn't a Big Picture from them at the moment). She might be a competent manager; she might be a decent person; she's not a politician - elected or administrative - and as such she's in the wrong job.
For a party which has been on the back foot in terms of media and public support / hostility for most of the time since 2002, they've adopted a remarkably passive attitude to letting things happen. Either you make the news or the news makes you.
https://www.normalisland.co.uk/p/starmer-explains-there-would-be-no
1 Tax things
2 Tax working people
3 Take benefits away
4 Build houses (viewcode like!)
5 Use private hospitals to cope with waiting list patients (I hae my doots about that)
6 Coal, oil bad, wind farms good, tidal ignored, nuclear um?
THINGS IT OMITS
1 How to cope with a world where HNWIs and skilled labour are internationally mobile
2 How to cope with a world where migration waves are washing over Europe
3 How to build an armed forces that can handle 21st century warfare when the one we have doesn't know how, has shit equipment, and there aren't enough of them
4 How to cope with a multipolar world where the USA retreats from superpower status.
So some of their policies are good but others are bad or not thought thru, and the major state-threatening issues are not considered. This, combined with their authoritarian instincts, make them both overbearing and incompetent, a bad combo.
Dear me.
Do you ever learn anything from this site ?
If you have selection bias or sampling bias, you can poll 20,000 people and may not get more accuracy.
Seriously. Can anyone tell me what is Labour’s big new plan for the economy?
To repeat endlessly that there is a £22BN black hole and impose austerity
Dont worry it wont impact you
As the site's only genuine footy fan what's gone wrong? Still upset that Carlisle lost out to Fleetwood in a close run game last Saturday?
Also, we don’t know if they have actually changed their methodology in a significant way
All we know is that Labour are down 7 since the GE
You don't want him to be better?
All you can really do with polls is look at the variation over several reports of a single pollster. Even if there is a bias, that bias will be the same each time, so the changesare telling us something. But you need more than two reports, because of the random noise in each poll.
But this one is different enough to the last Techne poll that it isn't comparable. Most of the art of polling is how you rescale from the raw totals to the published results, and they are doing that differently in this poll to the last one.
Quite amusing seeing some of the usual suspects leap on this with "this cannot be" responses. After all, the polls now are otherwise telling us nothing of import.
The financial gain is low. I think the people who do it do it because they quite like completing surveys. The money is a nice extra.
It is a hugely important question as to why people do these surveys and how representative they are of the general population. The government uses these sorts of surveys to track behaviour during COVID-19. I was on the team analysing the data. We want to know whether 26% of survey participants saying something means 26% of the general population or not, the same problems as the election pollsters have.
For Labour, the polling is bad. That’s all we know
- The Guardian
- The Star
- Harriet Harman
- A number of Labour MPs
Have joined the Tory Ultra-Right (according to some definitions here).
At this rate, the next Conservative Leader won't need to do any rebuilding.
You’re right that there’s likely bias in the sort of people who do the surveys reliably. But of course their core panel is big enough that they’re effectively constructing a bespoke, chosen sample for each survey, based on the huge amount of data they already have on us.
https://www.status.news/p/olivia-nuzzi-rfk-new-york-magazine
New York magazine on Thursday said its Washington correspondent, Olivia Nuzzi, is on leave after learning the star journalist had allegedly engaged in a romantic relationship with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
"Recently our Washington Correspondent Olivia Nuzzi acknowledged to the magazine’s editors that she had engaged in a personal relationship with a former subject relevant to the 2024 campaign while she was reporting on the campaign, a violation of the magazine’s standards around conflicts of interest and disclosures," a spokesperson for New York magazine said in a statement in response to questions from Status.
"Had the magazine been aware of this relationship, she would not have continued to cover the presidential campaign," the spokesperson added. "An internal review of her published work has found no inaccuracies nor evidence of bias. She is currently on leave from the magazine, and the magazine is conducting a more thorough third-party review. We regret this violation of our readers’ trust."..
That wasn't much of a review, then.
Definitely no Conflict of Interest there.
Which is why they need declaring. And why SKS's repeated failure to declare in time is so utterly stoopid.
So SKY BET offering 14/1 on them getting less than 12.788m votes was the bet of the Century
Thanks for the four figure win SKY BET
Turns our he loves a freebie more than any PM in recent history and he absolutely has to watch his "beloved" Arsenal, it's non-negotiable.
Am I allowed to be disappointed?
Good afternoon, everybody.