politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the big gainer with Ipsos-MORI while LAB retains a lea
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » UKIP the big gainer with Ipsos-MORI while LAB retains a lead
53% told Ipsos Standard poll they thought it's “time for a change” & just 32% said Tories deserved to win election.
Comments
-
Need the leader ratings. Must have the leader ratings.
Also the all giving a VI figures.
Come on Ipsos Mori, pull tha bloody finger out.0 -
Tables.... must have tables....
(Cons 1.3% ahead in part-ELBOW for polls so far this week up to last night's YG)0 -
Guardian journo nicked for breaking the law shocker...
Illegal use of a tripod (I kid you not)
https://instagram.com/arusbridger/p/0IEm3OPKWe/0 -
What was Lembit doing?!FrancisUrquhart said:
Guardian journo nicked for breaking the law shocker...
Illegal use of a tripod (I kid you not)
https://instagram.com/arusbridger/p/0IEm3OPKWe/0 -
I think Farage may overperform in the run up to tthe election. the more the other parties paint him as a fascist for just mentioning obvious things, the more the message will resonate. Never going to be everyone's cup of tea of course, but that is not the point.0
-
Ha - you beat me to it...!Plato said:What was Lembit doing?!
FrancisUrquhart said:Guardian journo nicked for breaking the law shocker...
Illegal use of a tripod (I kid you not)
https://instagram.com/arusbridger/p/0IEm3OPKWe/
0 -
LOL!Plato said:What was Lembit doing?!
FrancisUrquhart said:Guardian journo nicked for breaking the law shocker...
Illegal use of a tripod (I kid you not)
https://instagram.com/arusbridger/p/0IEm3OPKWe/
0 -
0
-
BTW Mike, it's Ipsos MORI (no hyphen).0
-
Spiked had a good piece on Farage-the-awful the other day:Cityunslicker said:I think Farage may overperform in the run up to tthe election. the more the other parties paint him as a fascist for just mentioning obvious things, the more the message will resonate. Never going to be everyone's cup of tea of course, but that is not the point.
"The mainstream media and chattering-class fury with Farage is really a story of the terrifying narrowing of the political sphere in Britain in recent years.
Concrete consensuses have emerged on everything from the environment (endangered) to economic growth (not a great idea), from the spread of the welfare state (unquestionably brilliant) to the policing of personal lifestyle (all good).
And a vast battery of insults, often pathological, have arisen to chastise anyone who pricks any of these consensus views. Question the environment thing and you’re a DENIER. Wonder if Western democracy is superior to Islamist radicalism and you’re ISLAMOPHOBIC. Challenge the smoking ban and you’re PRO-CANCER.
The things it is acceptable to think and say shrink all the time, and the parameters of thought and opinion are tightly policed by the media, the Twittersphere and politicians themselves.
Farage is feared, across the board, because he stands, often self-consciously, outside the bland, ideology-free, human-suspicious moral and political agenda now promoted by all sides in British politics and the media."
http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/im-taking-on-the-establishment-and-they-hate-me-for-it/
0 -
TSE bought by the Spaniards? Will you be moving to sunnier climes?TheScreamingEagles said:TSB about to be bought out by the Spaniards
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-31848517 0 -
Vautour pisses up - hope everyone took advantage of Coral 3-1 offer this morning.
~£40 profit on the day, which means I think I'm down about a fiver for the festival overall.0 -
Cyclefree said:
Agree entirely; ditto re the laws on sexual discrimination etc. Equality under the law matters and someone who is discriminated against because of their sex/sexuality/whatever - when that is irrelevant - is not being treated equally under the law.
Going back to such days is not attractive - however much it may be to those who support UKIP.
The problem is that the law, as is, rarely provides equality (I can point to discrimination in gender, sexuality and employment law) but instead provides positive discrimination for various groups. One could argue that all Farage is doing is changing the dynamics of who receives that positive discrimination.0 -
Reinstate the big ape is nearing 750k signatures...If it hits a million, I think SeanT might explode.0
-
I already live in the paradise that is Yorkshire, no point me moving. Did you know the location of the Garden of Eden was in Yorkshire?Sunil_Prasannan said:
TSE bought by the Spaniards? Will you be moving to sunnier climes?TheScreamingEagles said:TSB about to be bought out by the Spaniards
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-318485170 -
Leader ratings pls0
-
These Mullins horses are something else tbh.
Anyone have any idea what Vautour will race in next year though - Arkle ?0 -
I thought Kerala was God's Own Country?TheScreamingEagles said:
I already live in the paradise that is Yorkshire, no point me moving. Did you know the location of the Garden of Eden was in Yorkshire?Sunil_Prasannan said:
TSE bought by the Spaniards? Will you be moving to sunnier climes?TheScreamingEagles said:TSB about to be bought out by the Spaniards
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-318485170 -
Sack the big ape at 18,498FrancisUrquhart said:Reinstate the big ape is nearing 750k signatures...If it hits a million, I think SeanT might explode.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/sack-jeremy-clarkson?bucket&source=facebook-share-button&time=1426109503
And let's not forget, that means that 64,081,502 people haven't signed the petition to get him sacked
0 -
The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
I guess that part of this apparent paradox might be down to a substantial number of people who would like the coalition to continue, but definitely don't want a tory majority govt. i.e they think the economy and deficit reduction is all going well, but they don't want the Euro-loons to get anywhere near the levers of power. If this is your view, it's rather difficult to know how to cast your vote - you probably have to wait for the final polls before deciding.0
-
Sunil_Prasannan said:
BTW Mike, it's Ipsos MORI (no hyphen).
It-is-ok. I-think-we-understand what-he-means.
0 -
FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate0 -
https://twitter.com/sturdyAlex/status/575991541866577921FrancisUrquhart said:Reinstate the big ape is nearing 750k signatures...If it hits a million, I think SeanT might explode.
0 -
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate0 -
I thought Winston had been sacked as a UKIP spokesman a few days ?Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate
0 -
Crossover just before/ after the Election.JonnyJimmy said:
Sack the big ape at 18,498FrancisUrquhart said:Reinstate the big ape is nearing 750k signatures...If it hits a million, I think SeanT might explode.
https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/sack-jeremy-clarkson?bucket&source=facebook-share-button&time=1426109503
And let's not forget, that means that 64,081,502 people haven't signed the petition to get him sacked0 -
Even with favourable questions, it's surprising a poll could come out with that outcome.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
It might be right, it might be wrong, and the questions might be leading but 11-2 on the Lib Dems there is a decent price for such uncertainty.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.0 -
Ok 2nd Lab lead in a row and a phone poll also I think.32% want the government to continue =32% con support.plenty of scope for tactical voting and giving Conservatives a thump.0
-
The programme broadcasts tonight at 9pm.ThomasNashe said:
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate
http://www.channel4.com/programmes/things-we-wont-say-about-race-that-are-true0 -
Disappointing poll for the Tories yet again. If they are in the lead it is by shavings of a percent which is not enough.
As if Labour did not have enough advantages. Having the election on a Thursday must be worth at least another 3% to them.0 -
Don't worry about it. I concluded some time ago that he's a troll, and now ignore his posts.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.0 -
Hmm, sample size 404, no tables, Survation, no indication of weighting = Ignore, IMOPulpstar said:
It might be right, it might be wrong, and the questions might be leading but 11-2 on the Lib Dems there is a decent price for such uncertainty.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
Isn't the answer to that problem to place a cap on damages to the actual economic harm suffered rather than have unlimited damages and damages for hurt feelings etc?ThomasNashe said:
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate
0 -
Except that isn't what it said, was it...SMukesh said:Ok 2nd Lab lead in a row and a phone poll also I think.32% want the government to continue =32% con support.plenty of scope for tactical voting and giving Conservatives a thump.
More than half the public — 53 per cent — think it is “time for a change” and only 32 per cent agreed the Conservatives deserved to win the election.
Time for a change can mean, Tory government only, Lib Dem government only, Labour government only...and "deserve" to win the election from a pushed question.0 -
I will be seriously surprised if the Lib Dems do not come 3rd in Kincardine. I am a long way from being confident about the accuracy of Ashcroft polls but I do think he has got the order right here.Pulpstar said:
It might be right, it might be wrong, and the questions might be leading but 11-2 on the Lib Dems there is a decent price for such uncertainty.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/
SNP on 25%? Yeah right.0 -
just watched this ...
Would love to see him saying this with Carswell sat next to him.
http://www.channel4.com/info/press/news/farage-ukip-government-could-scrap-race-discrimination-laws
0 -
Just to be clear, I don't support the repeal of antidiscrimination legislation. I was merely distinguishing between what makes sense as an argument and what doesn't.Cyclefree said:
Isn't the answer to that problem to place a cap on damages to the actual economic harm suffered rather than have unlimited damages and damages for hurt feelings etc?ThomasNashe said:
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate0 -
18 months ago, I think the best the Tories would have hoped in their heart of hearts is to go into the GE campaign neck and neck. What I don't see, and have never really seen is how they get more than 35%, and if that is the case they have to somehow rely on Labour getting Gordon Brown-esque numbers, and I don't see that either.DavidL said:Disappointing poll for the Tories yet again. If they are in the lead it is by shavings of a percent which is not enough.
As if Labour did not have enough advantages. Having the election on a Thursday must be worth at least another 3% to them.0 -
We shall see, my book is chock full of SNP on this seat already though at round about Evens.DavidL said:
I will be seriously surprised if the Lib Dems do not come 3rd in Kincardine. I am a long way from being confident about the accuracy of Ashcroft polls but I do think he has got the order right here.Pulpstar said:
It might be right, it might be wrong, and the questions might be leading but 11-2 on the Lib Dems there is a decent price for such uncertainty.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/
SNP on 25%? Yeah right.0 -
Neither do I. I do think that having unlimited damages is absurd though. Damages - whatever the claim - should be limited to the harm suffered with an obligation on the claimant to take reasonable steps to mitigate their loss. It should not be seen as way of making money out of an employer simply because your claim has been shoe-horned into a particular category.ThomasNashe said:
Just to be clear, I don't support the repeal of antidiscrimination legislation. I was merely distinguishing between what makes sense as an argument and what doesn't.Cyclefree said:
Isn't the answer to that problem to place a cap on damages to the actual economic harm suffered rather than have unlimited damages and damages for hurt feelings etc?ThomasNashe said:
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate
0 -
Thank you.ThomasNashe said:
Don't worry about it. I concluded some time ago that he's a troll, and now ignore his posts.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.0 -
No, I said that either you deny the offences took place or you deny that they were facilitated by the race relations legislation. You need to brush up on your Boolean operators.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race. Are you happy with that situation? Or do you think we should tell ourselves that it is absolutely fine, because that is not the effect the statute was intended to have?0 -
They link VI back to 2010 vote... Might as well just make it upQuincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
Interesting poll. Another nail in Dave's coffin, another reason for Ed and Justine to "think curtains".
EdM will be PM 8 weeks tomorrow.0 -
Wounding, coming from someone else who has failed to master the "either...or" construction. Obviously time I stopped posting.ThomasNashe said:
Don't worry about it. I concluded some time ago that he's a troll, and now ignore his posts.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.0 -
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.0 -
RRA 1976, I would have thought.dugarbandier said:
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.0 -
FPT Sir Norfolk Passmore
Having lived in Portland, Oregon myself (and never paid a penny of UK income tax to date) and being something of a distance runner (at a very modest standard indeed these days), I question any weather advantage from training in Portland over London in the winter. Slightly milder temperatures in return for almost daily rain in the winter months. There is an earlier onset of spring and more suitably undulating terrain, but it's hardly warm weather training territory. Then for much of the summer it is unpleasantly hot. I believe his move was to hook up with Salazar.
My wider point is that it is easy for him to find work here (regardless of changes in discrimination laws) and often that work results in no income for the exchequer (e.g. when he films one of those quorn adverts). Therefore, he is a poor example for use by people with an axe to grind over whatever the hell Farage was trying to say.0 -
Presumably they are using the same methodology as in the Hornsey & Wood Green poll.Richard_Nabavi said:
Hmm, sample size 404, no tables, Survation, no indication of weighting = Ignore, IMOPulpstar said:
It might be right, it might be wrong, and the questions might be leading but 11-2 on the Lib Dems there is a decent price for such uncertainty.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/
http://www.markpack.org.uk/files/2015/03/Hornsey-Wood-Green-Lib-Dem-poll.pdf0 -
We are all pedants nowMarkHopkins said:Sunil_Prasannan said:BTW Mike, it's Ipsos MORI (no hyphen).
It-is-ok. I-think-we-understand what-he-means. 0 -
Can you walk me through the logic here? I'm struggling to see how that worksIshmael_X said:
RRA 1976, I would have thought.dugarbandier said:
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.0 -
Mo Farah is saving millions on his tax bill after changing his residency. I don't believe that is 100% for tax reasons, otherwise you would do a Lewis Hamilton, but it is a nice brucey bonus.SirNorfolkPassmore said:
Not everyone living abroad is a tax exile. Farah trains in the US, as do very many distance athletes due to the facilities and climate. Again in common with other athletes, he is taxed on appearance fees and prizes in the countries where he competes as you'd expect.initforthemoney said:
AFAIK Farah is a tax exile living in the United States who probably never needs to work again.
Paula Radcliffe did the same, registering herself in Monaco and I bet on closer inspection a lot of athletes do. They are in that luxury position of earning around the world and also residing in several countries for legitimate training reasons.0 -
Per ComRes for BBC Newsbeat - only half, that's right half, of 18 to 24s are registered to vote.
Is this being accounted for in poll weightings?
It's not trivial.0 -
One of my favourite Daily Mail articles was about a woman who applied for a job in a hairdressers, and then sued because not getting the job 'hurt her feelings'.Cyclefree said:
Neither do I. I do think that having unlimited damages is absurd though. Damages - whatever the claim - should be limited to the harm suffered with an obligation on the claimant to take reasonable steps to mitigate their loss. It should not be seen as way of making money out of an employer simply because your claim has been shoe-horned into a particular category.ThomasNashe said:
Just to be clear, I don't support the repeal of antidiscrimination legislation. I was merely distinguishing between what makes sense as an argument and what doesn't.Cyclefree said:
Isn't the answer to that problem to place a cap on damages to the actual economic harm suffered rather than have unlimited damages and damages for hurt feelings etc?ThomasNashe said:
OK. That might have made some sense, if he'd put it that way - but he didn't.Paul_Mid_Beds said:FPT
I dont know what McKenzie said as I didn't listen to it but I fear that the race discrimination laws make it much harder to get a job if you are a minority.ThomasNashe said:R4 World at One. Winston McKenzie gives one of his most bizarre interviews yet. He seems to be arguing that the way to tackle endemic discrimination against black men seeking employment is to repeal race discrimination laws. Matha K understandably came across as rather perplexed by the line.
Sure big businesses and public sector are no problem, but most jobs, especially if you have lower qualifications are with small businesses.
A small business knows that a race discrimination case might well ruin the business. They know that if they hire someone from a minority who turns out to be a bad egg or incompetent and they try and get rid of them they might face such a claim and the burden of proof is on them not the complaint.
Hire a non disabled white male and they can fire them at will with no comeback for the first two years.
Businesses avoid risk and it is very difficult to prove discrimination in the recruitment process unless the recruiter is crass or stupid.
So the white man gets the job and minority unemployment becomes disproportionate
"'I kept thinking: "I've worked hard all my life - how can it be possible that someone can come into my shop, talk to me for ten minutes and then sue me for £34,000? How is that possibly fair?".'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1027300/How-I-nearly-lost-business-refusing-hire-Muslim-hair-stylist-wouldnt-hair.html0 -
Could have sworn I saw a Mike Smithson post appear here on Lib Dem highlands polling that has promptly disappeared off the face of the earth.0
-
Casey and Jay both found that police and council officials failed to investigate complaints for fear of being accused of racism, because the complaints were consistently being made about Pakistani muslims. Those accusations would have been allegations of breaches of the RRA 1976 (and presumably other rules and regulations either made under it or in accordance with its spirit - hence my "I would have thought")dugarbandier said:
Can you walk me through the logic here? I'm struggling to see how that worksIshmael_X said:
RRA 1976, I would have thought.dugarbandier said:
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.
Do you really dispute or have difficulty with any of that? If so, which bits?0 -
Afternoon all and while I personally wouldn't rely on anything produced by Survation, the interesting thing is both Ashcroft and Survation have the Tories in 2nd place and therefore the party best placed to come through the middle. We will see in a few weeks time.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
Two police officers have been shot in the US city of Ferguson, where tensions have been running high since the killing of an unarmed black teenager by a white policeman in August 2014.
The shootings happened outside police headquarters, where protesters had gathered following the resignation of the chief of police.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-318464250 -
Survation have disowned these LD polls.Easterross said:
Afternoon all and while I personally wouldn't rely on anything produced by Survation, the interesting thing is both Ashcroft and Survation have the Tories in 2nd place and therefore the party best placed to come through the middle. We will see in a few weeks time.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/
"Survation were not responsible for drafting the questionnaires used, sampling design discussions or analysis of the results. These polls should therefore not properly be described as “Survation polls”. "
http://survation.com/in-reference-to-recent-liberal-democrat-polling-shared-privately-with-the-media/0 -
If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.0 -
Tricky to win a 3 way marginal on a seemingly static 25.5 odd% though.Easterross said:
Afternoon all and while I personally wouldn't rely on anything produced by Survation, the interesting thing is both Ashcroft and Survation have the Tories in 2nd place and therefore the party best placed to come through the middle. We will see in a few weeks time.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
LD 30 Con 26 SNP 25 is what you would expect if only polling Lib Dem voters. Maybe that's what they did.isam said:
They link VI back to 2010 vote... Might as well just make it upQuincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
I don't think anyone should *ever* pay any attention to political party contracted polls. Their purpose is not to accurately gauge support, but to encourage tactical voting.anotherDave said:
Survation have disowned these LD polls.Easterross said:
Afternoon all and while I personally wouldn't rely on anything produced by Survation, the interesting thing is both Ashcroft and Survation have the Tories in 2nd place and therefore the party best placed to come through the middle. We will see in a few weeks time.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/
"Survation were not responsible for drafting the questionnaires used, sampling design discussions or analysis of the results. These polls should therefore not properly be described as “Survation polls”. "
http://survation.com/in-reference-to-recent-liberal-democrat-polling-shared-privately-with-the-media/
It will be interesting to see if they work.0 -
I do not deny the offences took place. Nor do I deny the attitudes behind why they were overlooked. I have been - from memory - rather more vigorous than you in criticising those attitudes.Ishmael_X said:
No, I said that either you deny the offences took place or you deny that they were facilitated by the race relations legislation. You need to brush up on your Boolean operators.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race. Are you happy with that situation? Or do you think we should tell ourselves that it is absolutely fine, because that is not the effect the statute was intended to have?
The reasons why such attitudes developed and took root are rather more complex than you seem to allow. The fact that some people have - wrongly - shouted "racism" in order to try and avoid scrutiny does not mean that we should not continue to deal sensibly with genuine discrimination on irrelevant grounds when it occurs.
The fact that so many people have cheered the idea of getting rid of anti-discrimination laws suggests to me that some of them, anyway, are quite indifferent to the harm that such discrimination causes, both to individuals and wider society. Using child rape as the justification for why the removal of anti-discrimination laws is necessary is pretty low, frankly. We will end up dealing with neither problem properly.
0 -
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.0 -
I reckon the 18-24s that didn't bother to vote previously were the unregged ones.0
-
But wasn't MikeL talking about how it would affect opinion polls?Grandiose said:
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.0 -
Actually the more relevant legislation here is not the RRA 1976, but the statutory duty to promote racial equality in the amended act of 2000.Ishmael_X said:
Casey and Jay both found that police and council officials failed to investigate complaints for fear of being accused of racism, because the complaints were consistently being made about Pakistani muslims. Those accusations would have been allegations of breaches of the RRA 1976 (and presumably other rules and regulations either made under it or in accordance with its spirit - hence my "I would have thought")dugarbandier said:
Can you walk me through the logic here? I'm struggling to see how that worksIshmael_X said:
RRA 1976, I would have thought.dugarbandier said:
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.
Do you really dispute or have difficulty with any of that? If so, which bits?
This duty is the most pernicious, it acts like a witchfinder not just in the institution, but in every thing it has its finger in. A duty to promote racial equality, means taking action that assist those who are minority groups.
This can be interpreted in the purest forms of multiculturalism. It defines as all non white no british cultures are a minority in society, and are overwhelmed by the (racist and oppresive) host culture. Action must be taken to level up minority cultures and level down the host culture. This morphs into a criticism of a minority culture could be damaging to general relations because we dont want to reinforce prejudices, and they are already oppressed.0 -
The opinion polls should probably have been just as in/accurate as before.RobD said:
But wasn't MikeL talking about how it would affect opinion polls?Grandiose said:
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.0 -
Jeremy Clarkson's Who Do You Think You Are just starting on SKY channel 538 for anyone interested.0
-
I think there will be a proportion of 18-24 that were registered, because parents or uni did it for them, and that ultimately come the GE actually end up voting, where as this time around come the campaign proper and they become vaguely engaged the deadline for registration will have passed.
How large that proportion will be is another matter.0 -
Well, yes; but the "proper" weightings should be turnout in 2010, not voter registrations as Mike implies.RobD said:
But wasn't MikeL talking about how it would affect opinion polls?Grandiose said:
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.
In other words, YouGov's weightings may be wrong, but the voter registration changes won't have had a significant effect, in my opinion.
0 -
In the old days the producer wouldn't have been allowed in the hotel... I wonder if any black dogs are residents?
Alex Wickham (@WikiGuido)
12/03/2015 14:22
.@popbitch has an (x-rated) update to the Clarkson story... pic.twitter.com/XyQ8UOzVV10 -
So the ones with the lowest Labour leads most accurate? ExcellentPulpstar said:
The opinion polls should probably have been just as in/accurate as before.RobD said:
But wasn't MikeL talking about how it would affect opinion polls?Grandiose said:
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power. 0 -
Why is it "pretty low, frankly", if the anti-discrimination laws facilitate large-scale child-rape, as seems to be accepted in two highly authoritative reports into the affair? Like saying that "Using lung cancer as the justification for why the introduction of plain packaging is necessary is pretty low, frankly." You seem to think that legislation is incapable of being damaging, if it is well-intended.Cyclefree said:
I do not deny the offences took place. Nor do I deny the attitudes behind why they were overlooked. I have been - from memory - rather more vigorous than you in criticising those attitudes.Ishmael_X said:
No, I said that either you deny the offences took place or you deny that they were facilitated by the race relations legislation. You need to brush up on your Boolean operators.Cyclefree said:On the previous thread Ishmael_X seemed to imply that if I was against the removal of anti-discrimination laws that somehow meant that I was denying that child rape took place in Rotherham, an argument so wrong and, incidentally, offensive, as to take my breath away.
For the record, I have never said any such thing, do not believe it, have argued vigorously in favour of prosecution of all those involved and against the sort of attitudes which led to people turning a blind eye in Rotherham and elsewhere
It is possible to believe that a person should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their race in relation to employment and at the same time think that that person should not be exempt from prosecution if they themselves breach the law or indeed be exempt from criticism simply because they are of a particular race. The two are not mutually exclusive.
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race. Are you happy with that situation? Or do you think we should tell ourselves that it is absolutely fine, because that is not the effect the statute was intended to have?
The reasons why such attitudes developed and took root are rather more complex than you seem to allow. The fact that some people have - wrongly - shouted "racism" in order to try and avoid scrutiny does not mean that we should not continue to deal sensibly with genuine discrimination on irrelevant grounds when it occurs.
The fact that so many people have cheered the idea of getting rid of anti-discrimination laws suggests to me that some of them, anyway, are quite indifferent to the harm that such discrimination causes, both to individuals and wider society. Using child rape as the justification for why the removal of anti-discrimination laws is necessary is pretty low, frankly. We will end up dealing with neither problem properly.0 -
Race relations legislation has moved a long from way, from outlawing malicious acts of discrimination, to promoting equality of outcome between different groups.notme said:
Actually the more relevant legislation here is not the RRA 1976, but the statutory duty to promote racial equality in the amended act of 2000.Ishmael_X said:
Casey and Jay both found that police and council officials failed to investigate complaints for fear of being accused of racism, because the complaints were consistently being made about Pakistani muslims. Those accusations would have been allegations of breaches of the RRA 1976 (and presumably other rules and regulations either made under it or in accordance with its spirit - hence my "I would have thought")dugarbandier said:
Can you walk me through the logic here? I'm struggling to see how that worksIshmael_X said:
RRA 1976, I would have thought.dugarbandier said:
what legislation was it, that had that effect?Ishmael_X said:
It may be perfectly possible to believe what you believe, but the fact remains that the current legislation acted as a de facto exemption from the law for one particular race.
Do you really dispute or have difficulty with any of that? If so, which bits?
This duty is the most pernicious, it acts like a witchfinder not just in the institution, but in every thing it has its finger in. A duty to promote racial equality, means taking action that assist those who are minority groups.
This can be interpreted in the purest forms of multiculturalism. It defines as all non white no british cultures are a minority in society, and are overwhelmed by the (racist and oppresive) host culture. Action must be taken to level up minority cultures and level down the host culture. This morphs into a criticism of a minority culture could be damaging to general relations because we dont want to reinforce prejudices, and they are already oppressed.
0 -
There is a fairly constant downweighting of Labour raw numbers in the Yougovs in general - I expect this failure to get out of bed of the yoof is part of that.RobD said:
So the ones with the lowest Labour leads most accurate? ExcellentPulpstar said:
The opinion polls should probably have been just as in/accurate as before.RobD said:
But wasn't MikeL talking about how it would affect opinion polls?Grandiose said:
I'm afraid I disagree. Under the old system, many young people were registered but didn't vote; now those people are not registered. So the change will not actually drive much of a change in voting numbers per se. But it is a timely reminder that the number of 18-24s actually voting is low, even if that number hasn't changed.MikeL said:If only half of 18 to 24s are registered:
Weighted samples in today's YouGov:
18 to 24 (7 year band) = 206 = 29 people per year
25 to 39 (15 year band) = 437 = 29 people per year
Assuming same number of people of each age (and it certainly won't vary much) then 18 to 24s are being weighted exactly the same as 25 to 39s.
So if only half of them are registered they have been massively overstated - on the face of it getting on for double the correct weighting (if we assume say 90% are registered above age 24).
And YouGov had Lab ahead by 12 points amongst 18 to 24s.
This looks like it could be very significant - Individual Voter Registration might be the single most important thing Cameron has done for his chances of remaining in power.0 -
At Oxford I tried convincing people to vote on the day, but to little success. You can register a fortnight before, in the middle of the campaign, in five minutes, and so people unconvinced then at unlikely to decide to bother on the day. While there will be some I doubt it is many.FrancisUrquhart said:I think there will be a proportion of 18-24 that were registered, because parents or uni did it for them, and that ultimately come the GE actually end up voting, where as this time around come the campaign proper and they become vaguely engaged the deadline for registration will have passed.
How large that proportion will be is another matter.0 -
The effect of non-voter registration will be huge in seats not currently safe Tory seats (where there will be a disproportionately larger % of older voters).Pulpstar said:I reckon the 18-24s that didn't bother to vote previously were the unregged ones.
In the past the Universities and Colleges automatically registered ALL students living in Halls of Residence etc. Therefore a great many students could vote on polling day because they had been registered by someone else. This time round, far fewer will be registered because they have to get off their arses and do it for themselves. I saw a reference last week to either Bristol or Cardiff where they reckoned that student registration is down by something like 50%.
It will also be interesting to see turnout in those marginal constituencies where there has been a history of voter fraud, particularly within some sections of the South Asian community. It will be fascinating to see how much the electoral roll changed in seats like Dewsbury and some of the Birmingham seats. It will also be fascinating to see the effect of individual voter registration on the number of postal/proxy votes.0 -
Agree that those less likely to vote are those who won't be registered.
But that can't possibly explain the whole discrepancy.
Bottom line is that today's YouGov assumes someone 18 to 24 is as likely to vote as someone 25 to 39.
It's just about impossible that the above could happen if only 50% of 18 to 24s are registered. It would require turnout of literally just about 100% of the 50% who are registered - and even that might not be quite enough.
And in practice no way will turnout be anything like 100% amongst the 50% who are registered.0 -
Montana !Sunil_Prasannan said:
I thought Kerala was God's Own Country?TheScreamingEagles said:
I already live in the paradise that is Yorkshire, no point me moving. Did you know the location of the Garden of Eden was in Yorkshire?Sunil_Prasannan said:
TSE bought by the Spaniards? Will you be moving to sunnier climes?TheScreamingEagles said:TSB about to be bought out by the Spaniards
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-318485170 -
Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-318581560 -
Good piece from Breitbart:
Farage Race Row: Once Again the Media Badly Misrepresent the UKIP Leader
http://www.breitbart.com/london/2015/03/12/farage-race-row-once-again-the-media-badly-misrepresent-the-ukip-leader/0 -
dr_spyn said:
Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31858156
0 -
Very sad news.dr_spyn said:Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-318581560 -
Yeah thats my view, same with Dumfries and galloway. If the vote doesn't go to SNP it will go to the other not Tory party. Cons are static.Pulpstar said:
Tricky to win a 3 way marginal on a seemingly static 25.5 odd% though.Easterross said:
Afternoon all and while I personally wouldn't rely on anything produced by Survation, the interesting thing is both Ashcroft and Survation have the Tories in 2nd place and therefore the party best placed to come through the middle. We will see in a few weeks time.Quincel said:The Lib Dems have leaked another good poll for themselves, West Aberdeenshire & Kincardine. Ashcroft had 39/25/20 (SNP/Con/LD), but LDs have 30/26/25 (LD/Con/SNP). No tables this time, but judging by the article the same favourability questions first and named candidates were used.
https://www.pressandjournal.co.uk/fp/news/aberdeen/517422/polling-suggests-lib-dems-can-retain-north-east-seat/0 -
It's so much easier to register to vote now with the new online system. Having recently moved I found it a lot easier than the old system, and it also seems like the new system will remove me from the register at my old address - this previously wouldn't have happened until the October following my move under the old system.Grandiose said:
At Oxford I tried convincing people to vote on the day, but to little success. You can register a fortnight before, in the middle of the campaign, in five minutes, and so people unconvinced then at unlikely to decide to bother on the day. While there will be some I doubt it is many.FrancisUrquhart said:I think there will be a proportion of 18-24 that were registered, because parents or uni did it for them, and that ultimately come the GE actually end up voting, where as this time around come the campaign proper and they become vaguely engaged the deadline for registration will have passed.
How large that proportion will be is another matter.
Such a shame that the voting system has not similarly moved with the times, and that my constituency will inevitably return a Conservative MP.0 -
That is sad.dr_spyn said:Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31858156
"This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version."
I'm furiously F5'ing, in the hope that he's risen again.
0 -
"I'll die before the endgame, says Terry Pratchett in call for law to allow assisted suicides in UK"
I hope he got his wish.0 -
I watched Roger Stone (former leader of Rotherham council) giving evidence to the Parliamentary Committee this week. A real dimwit, or a really good act. I see now what the Casey Review called 'denial'.
Full of barely-suppressed anger that anyone should question him, he didn't close down the unit dealing with the complaints - they 'needed' more management so he neutered them.
Not his fault at all.0 -
I'm sure he was personally attended by the big cloaked one himself. "HELLO TERRY"Pong said:
That is sad.dr_spyn said:Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31858156
"This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version."
I'm furiously F5'ing, in the hope that he's risen again.0 -
I suspect the Green party will have those 2000 members out trying to get every single student in Bristol to register to vote.0
-
Deeply saddening news.dr_spyn said:Terry Pratchett has died.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-31858156
0 -
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/mar2015web.pdf
The London and South numbers are worth a chuckle.0 -
Bristol Greens announce they have topped 2000 members. Good news for those of us who have bet on Green win there.
Darren Hall @DarrenHall2015 54m54 minutes ago
Today is a good day - we have just passed 2000 members of @bristolgreen. Does anybody know how we compare to the other Parties in Bristol?
0 -
I'm starting to think that Mori only have phone numbers for Brighton in the Southchestnut said:https://www.ipsos-mori.com/Assets/Docs/Polls/mar2015web.pdf
The London and South numbers are worth a chuckle.0 -
Why ? There are plenty of students who would not vote Green if they were the only party standing .Pulpstar said:I suspect the Green party will have those 2000 members out trying to get every single student in Bristol to register to vote.
0
