Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fewer voters have made up their mind on how to vote than in

SystemSystem Posts: 8,489
edited March 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Fewer voters have made up their mind on how to vote than in the past

Ipsos Mori have done some polling which asks how many voters have made up their mind on how to vote, and what will influence the way they will vote. The fieldwork for the polling was early to mid February, so well before the recent contretemps over the debates.

Read the full story here


«134

Comments

  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    first of the brave.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Second out of the kitchen...
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053
    edited March 2015
    I see nothing on pollsters influence. Which may mean that the polls we on PB argue about maybe next to meaningless for the general voter.

    Oh I see it now: 8%. LOL
  • IndigoIndigo Posts: 9,966
    edited March 2015
    Do people know what actually influences their vote ? I suspect they don't, they just have a feeling that the more dramatic events might have more influence. The reality is this probably isn't the case, people will listen to the debate(s) with scepticism, their guard up and bullshit detectors on maximum.

    The most likely thing to effect votes is personal experience, because it's visceral, someone getting a bad experience in hospital, kids have good or bad experiences at school, being out of work or having got a job recently.
  • surbitonsurbiton Posts: 13,549
    What odds on Bangladesh beating India ?
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    The obvious one that seems to be missing is conversations with other people.

    And what peple say will decide their vote does not always match what will decide their vote.

    I think many will never decide. This is a further pointer to a low turnout.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited March 2015
    surbiton said:

    What odds on Bangladesh beating India ?

    4/1 with Hills
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,506
    Well it's on trend but that's a remarkable change in voting attitude. Even if relatiely few people WILL change their mind it does suggest a remarkable shift in attitude.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    Well it's on trend but that's a remarkable change in voting attitude. Even if relatiely few people WILL change their mind it does suggest a remarkable shift in attitude.

    Yes. The end of tribal voting.

    Apologies for hitting "off topic"!
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    edited March 2015

    The obvious one that seems to be missing is conversations with other people.

    And what people say will decide their vote does not always match what will decide their vote.
    [snip]

    I agree with that from a personal perspective. As a someone who is enthused by neither the Conservatives or UKIP but will 100% certainly vote for one or the other I find listening to supporters of both parties is invigorating, interesting and for me potentially swaying.

    I find listening to lefties is reinforcing, though. So it doesn't work completely.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,506
    fpt

    Amazing how there's so much more interest in some BBC employee than what is going on in Russia. The President of the world's largest nation state with thousands of nuclear weapons seems to have disappeared. Perhaps it's nothing. Maybe he has some minor pinko illness that would ruin his macho reputation if it were to be made public. All very odd though. Even our own election seems a little trifling by comparison.
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 56,044
    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 56,044
    Coming to an SNP poster soon.....

    http://m.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-31894388
  • MikeSmithsonMikeSmithson Posts: 7,276
    Totally disagree on influence of press. Circulations down sharply on 2010 and many key public now behind paywalls.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,084
    edited March 2015

    Totally disagree on influence of press. Circulations down sharply on 2010 and many key public now behind paywalls.

    That isn't true if they then set the agenda for the BBC / Sky news. Of course a story on the front of the Guardian has a much higher chance of getting picked up by the BBC, than something in the Sun, despite one being read by basically nobody and the other millions.

    What has changed I think is the likes of the Times used to run a full time investigation team, which was making news rather than reporting it. They don't do that now, so like most other outlets they are either dependent on leaks or number crunching public data sources, which rarely lead to explosive stories i.e increasingly the print media is reactive, rather than pro-active.

    Even the Telegraph scope on Straw / Rifkind was really small beer..not like the much more involved investigations the Times and the NOTW used to run.
  • justin124justin124 Posts: 11,527
    edited March 2015
    February 2015 was 3 months before polling day - rather than the 1 month re - the other three elections so not quite comparing like with like.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Second out of the kitchen...

    which kitchen?
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Charles said:

    Second out of the kitchen...

    which kitchen?
    The large family one, that we as a large family dont use, we leave that to the nanny, we use the small one.

    The Range Rover? Nah the 65 plate Discovery isnt ours, that's the nany's we use the small Corsa.
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,084
    Charles said:

    Second out of the kitchen...

    which kitchen?
    The one the nanny cooks in or the one for tea and snacks?
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,084
    edited March 2015
    notme said:

    Charles said:

    Second out of the kitchen...

    which kitchen?
    The large family one, that we as a large family dont use, we leave that to the nanny, we use the small one.

    The Range Rover? Nah the 65 plate Discovery isnt ours, that's the nany's we use the small Corsa.
    Crappy Ford Focus I will have you know....but he doesn't mind the old Rolls Royce Phantom.
  • GIN1138GIN1138 Posts: 19,325
    Are these people saying they've not made up their mind actually shy Tories?
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    On topic

    Any 'research' that excludes the influence of the TV, Radio and Internet News and political coverage outside the Debates, PPB's and social media is deeply flawed as this following article demonstrates:

    Nearly twice as many tune in to TV for news than read newspapers, with BBC rated most important source

    Of those surveyed, 78 per cent said they used TV as a source of news, compared to 40 per cent using newspapers, 35 per cent radio and 32 per cent the internet.

    The top three individual news sources were all TV channels. BBC One led the way, with 57 per cent using it for news. A third of respondents used ITV/UTV/STV, while 17 per cent used BBC News 24.

    The top website was also the BBC, with 16 per cent using it. The Sun was the most used newspaper (10 per cent), while BBC Radio 2 was the most used radio station (8 per cent).


    http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nearly-twice-many-tune-tv-news-read-newspapers-bbc-rated-most-important-source

    Given the BBC should clearly be a separate item on its own in any such research and given the disregard for TV, Radio and Internet news sources generally I would suggest that survey is pretty much worthless
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
  • FrancisUrquhartFrancisUrquhart Posts: 72,084
    So no Top Gear tonight...instead Channel4 has a riveting sounding Great Canal Journeys....I can see that selling to 300 million people worldwide....
  • OldKingColeOldKingCole Posts: 28,959
    GIN1138 said:

    Are these people saying they've not made up their mind actually shy Tories?

    No, shy LibDems.

    Do I hear the sound of whistling to keep up spirits?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,931
    edited March 2015
    FPT
    CD13 said:

    Viewcode,

    Had Clarkson sexually assaulted seven-year-old BBC producers on a regular basis and been protected by the Establishment, you might have a case. We accept you don't like Clarkson.

    What makes you think I don't like Clarkson? I enjoyed his VC and convoy documentaries, the car dvds he produced during the interregnum between old and new Top Gears, even his brief hosting of "Robot Wars" (which nobody but me remembers)[1] Doctor Who, Mock the Week, This Week and Top Gear are the only things I regularly watch on BBC these days, and I have a copy of "I Know You Got Soul" in my book boxes. It's easy to separate the artist from the art and his sins as a human being fall within the category of "dumb f**k" rather than "evil b*****d". Given the way he has treated his wives I wouldn't be happy if he married my daughter but I know people who are much worse. Being a prat is not illegal nor grounds for being fired.

    My distate on the proceedings stems from a longstanding opinion that justice in the UK depends on who you know and the size of lawyer you can hire, and the unwritten rule is SLEBS CAN DO WHAT THEY LIKE. The commentariat were rapidly deployed to support Clarkson (Pearson's Telegraph article was frankly ludicrous) and the entire process is wearily depressing. If there weren't independent witnesses to the event, I'd expect Tymon to be prosecuted for hurting Clarkson's fist with his nose.

    Clarkson is a human being. He has the right to critically examine the evidence against him and confront his accuser. Tymon is a human being. He has the right to not be assaulted as he goes about his work. Both have the right to be heard by independent judges in a timely fashion and have their cases considered calmly and soberly.

    But this is Britain. And we don't actually do that...:-(

    [1] Although I thought his brief talk show stint was boring, to be honest
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,937
    edited March 2015
    On IMDB the film site the public score films from 1-10 each subdivided into a further 10. It then tells you the number of people who have voted. A huge box office hit will have a score of say 8.8 from as many as 400,000 voters (Godfather for example)

    But the really strange thing is how little these ratings change from week one when 500 might have voted till week twenty when that number might have reached 400,000. This is a self selecting sample and often it'll start being released in one country and then work its way around the world.

    Why we should all be so consistent in our tastes is a complete mystery
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,931
    edited March 2015
    CD13 said:

    If Ed was suspended from the Labour party under any circumstances, would he get 900 or even 90 people to sign a petition to bring him back?

    I should imagine the number of signatures on #BringBackEd would be solely dependent on how many time he can sit on his left hand and still hold a pen.

    So about five, then
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Roger said:

    On IMDB the film site the public score films from 1-10 each subdivided into a further 10. It then tells you the number of people who have voted. A huge box office hit will have a score of say 8.8 from as many as 400,000 voters (Godfather for example)

    But the really strange thing is how little these ratings change from week one when 500 might have voted till week twenty when that number might have reached 400,000. This is a self selecting sample and often it'll start being released in one country and then work its way around the world.

    Why we should all be so consistent in our tastes is a complete mystery

    Not entirely, Roger. Anchoring. Subsequent posters will see the existing average score and their score will be anchored around that. Law of large numbers applying, new scores will be even around the anchor number, making that number stable.
  • felixfelix Posts: 14,262

    Totally disagree on influence of press. Circulations down sharply on 2010 and many key public now behind paywalls.

    Yes - but much of the press is reported on TV and many access news sites on-line.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    Roger said:

    On IMDB the film site the public score films from 1-10 each subdivided into a further 10. It then tells you the number of people who have voted. A huge box office hit will have a score of say 8.8 from as many as 400,000 voters (Godfather for example)

    But the really strange thing is how little these ratings change from week one when 500 might have voted till week twenty when that number might have reached 400,000. This is a self selecting sample and often it'll start being released in one country and then work its way around the world.

    Why we should all be so consistent in our tastes is a complete mystery

    Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034

    fpt

    Amazing how there's so much more interest in some BBC employee than what is going on in Russia. The President of the world's largest nation state with thousands of nuclear weapons seems to have disappeared. Perhaps it's nothing. Maybe he has some minor pinko illness that would ruin his macho reputation if it were to be made public. All very odd though. Even our own election seems a little trifling by comparison.

    The problem with the Putin story is nothing new is happening (save the clock of no show ticking longer) so it's all just repetitive speculation. I agree that it is supremely more importance than most other things happening globally at the moment, but "nothing new to report" is hardly gripping news and frankly, having read on article airing all the speculation, I am bored with that ilk of reporting.

    The only thing left to do is to read the twitterverse for ever more amusing explanations. For me the best so far is the picture from Weekend at Bernies with Putin's face photoshopped onto Bernie's.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Charles said:

    Roger said:

    On IMDB the film site the public score films from 1-10 each subdivided into a further 10. It then tells you the number of people who have voted. A huge box office hit will have a score of say 8.8 from as many as 400,000 voters (Godfather for example)

    But the really strange thing is how little these ratings change from week one when 500 might have voted till week twenty when that number might have reached 400,000. This is a self selecting sample and often it'll start being released in one country and then work its way around the world.

    Why we should all be so consistent in our tastes is a complete mystery

    Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501
    Snap. See my post two before yours.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,937
    Viewcode.

    Thank you for drawing my attention to the the article in the Telegraph by Alison Pearson "I like Clarkson. He's a good egg". I laughed out loud! Not since Paula Yates breathless hagiography to Michael Hutchence have I read such vacuous nonsense
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 56,044

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,122
    Putin has had botox and a face lift. That is not that exciting.
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    felix said:

    Totally disagree on influence of press. Circulations down sharply on 2010 and many key public now behind paywalls.

    Yes - but much of the press is reported on TV and many access news sites on-line.
    With 24 hour TV and Internet news coverage they will be able to report the election campaign as it happens. The physical newspapers will only be able to report it daily and are generally half a day behind. More and more the dead tree press are dancing to the tune of the Internet and TV.

    As the article I linked below indicates the newspapers come well behind the BBC and other TV stations in their influence regarding current affairs. Combine that with Radio and Internet sources and the fact that increasing numbers of the newspaper web sites are going behind paywalls and its not hard to envisage that the newspapers will not control the narrative at all soon in my opinion
  • initforthemoneyinitforthemoney Posts: 736
    edited March 2015
    The graphic compares Feb 2015 with Apr 2005 and Apr 2010. Surely we would expect more to have decided a month out than three months out?

    Furthermore, when 81% had supposedly made their mind up in 1992 weren't the polls further out from the actual result than in the two more recent elections?
  • viewcodeviewcode Posts: 11,931
    Roger said:

    Viewcode.

    Thank you for drawing my attention to the the article in the Telegraph by Alison Pearson "I like Clarkson. He's a good egg". I laughed out loud! Not since Paula Yates breathless hagiography to Michael Hutchence have I read such vacuous nonsense

    You're welcome

  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    Roger said:

    Viewcode.

    Thank you for drawing my attention to the the article in the Telegraph by Alison Pearson "I like Clarkson. He's a good egg". I laughed out loud! Not since Paula Yates breathless hagiography to Michael Hutchence have I read such vacuous nonsense

    You don't read much then.
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
    You mean the same Dan Hannan who has also utterly condemned his leaders stance on the EU referendum and denounced that it will be a genuine referendum? I get the feeling Hannan is becoming so conflicted he doesn't know whether he is coming or going. His partisan loyalty is admirable in its way though I suppose.

    As for the forensic demolitions, I'll save that for sources other than cheap propaganda sites which aren't worth the bother.
  • NickPalmerNickPalmer Posts: 19,636
    Indigo said:

    Do people know what actually influences their vote ? I suspect they don't, they just have a feeling that the more dramatic events might have more influence. The reality is this probably isn't the case, people will listen to the debate(s) with scepticism, their guard up and bullshit detectors on maximum.

    The most likely thing to effect votes is personal experience, because it's visceral, someone getting a bad experience in hospital, kids have good or bad experiences at school, being out of work or having got a job recently.

    I meet a few voters like that - something I've done, or Anna S has done, or even something Attlee did in one case. But the more usual in my experience is that many voters treat politicis like football - they have a side and cheer it on, and it's only if the manager is corrupt or something amazing happens that they switch. UKIP is a bit like having a new team start up near where you live - people feel that's quite interesting, maybe they'll give them a go.

    It's really rare tht you get asked anything substantive - what exactly will you do about the housing shortage, why is the deficit still there, how will you pay for the extra nurses? Maybe 1% of conversations.

  • dr_spyndr_spyn Posts: 11,166
    rcs1000 said:

    Putin has had botox and a face lift. That is not that exciting.

    Isn't he recovering from riding the weasel and woodpecker.

    http://www.theguardian.com/technology/photography-blog/2015/mar/03/weasel-riding-a-woodpecker-the-five-best-weaselpecker-memes
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,506

    Indigo said:

    Do people know what actually influences their vote ? I suspect they don't, they just have a feeling that the more dramatic events might have more influence. The reality is this probably isn't the case, people will listen to the debate(s) with scepticism, their guard up and bullshit detectors on maximum.

    The most likely thing to effect votes is personal experience, because it's visceral, someone getting a bad experience in hospital, kids have good or bad experiences at school, being out of work or having got a job recently.

    I meet a few voters like that - something I've done, or Anna S has done, or even something Attlee did in one case. But the more usual in my experience is that many voters treat politicis like football - they have a side and cheer it on, and it's only if the manager is corrupt or something amazing happens that they switch. UKIP is a bit like having a new team start up near where you live - people feel that's quite interesting, maybe they'll give them a go.

    It's really rare tht you get asked anything substantive - what exactly will you do about the housing shortage, why is the deficit still there, how will you pay for the extra nurses? Maybe 1% of conversations.

    But according to the thread title that appears to be what is changing. Much less automatic loyalty to the team.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,344
    Good afternoon, everyone.

    F1: post-race analysis up here:
    http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/australia-post-race-analysis.html
  • CarlottaVanceCarlottaVance Posts: 56,044
    rcs1000 said:

    Putin has had botox and a face lift. That is not that exciting.

    It's not as if he hasn't had work done before:

    http://beautyeditor.ca/2014/02/21/vladimir-putin-before-and-after
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    The hard pressed Russian population will no doubt be massively impressed with Putin's new look as they face even greater hardship due to his mad policies and the subsequent sanctions.
    Playboy Putin

  • I meet a few voters like that - something I've done, or Anna S has done, or even something Attlee did in one case. But the more usual in my experience is that many voters treat politicis like football - they have a side and cheer it on, and it's only if the manager is corrupt or something amazing happens that they switch. UKIP is a bit like having a new team start up near where you live - people feel that's quite interesting, maybe they'll give them a go.

    labour = rangers?

  • i guess that's SLAB
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    US Presidential primaries. This piece claims that the Obama clique have a strategy to prevent Hillary from getting the nomination. It is the NY Post, so all appropriate caveats, and the quotes of Bill are via an unnamed 'friend', so they could be entirely made up. But if this is true, then Hillary is no way as inevitable as the current numbers would indicate.

    Or, being the Clintons, this could be Bill knowing where and what all the skeletons are and trying to lance the scandals before they inevitably hit the press.

    http://nypost.com/2015/03/14/obama-adviser-behind-leak-of-hillary-clintons-e-mail-scandal/
  • Nick Clegg rules out formal coalition with Ukip and SNP

    http://www.channel4.com/news/nick-clegg-liberal-democrat-spring-conference-speech

    Which is fortunate for the Libdems seeing as both the SNP and UKIP have ruled out formal coalitions with anybody........
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 8,091

    Indigo said:

    Do people know what actually influences their vote ? I suspect they don't, they just have a feeling that the more dramatic events might have more influence. The reality is this probably isn't the case, people will listen to the debate(s) with scepticism, their guard up and bullshit detectors on maximum.

    The most likely thing to effect votes is personal experience, because it's visceral, someone getting a bad experience in hospital, kids have good or bad experiences at school, being out of work or having got a job recently.

    I meet a few voters like that - something I've done, or Anna S has done, or even something Attlee did in one case. But the more usual in my experience is that many voters treat politicis like football - they have a side and cheer it on, and it's only if the manager is corrupt or something amazing happens that they switch. UKIP is a bit like having a new team start up near where you live - people feel that's quite interesting, maybe they'll give them a go.

    It's really rare tht you get asked anything substantive - what exactly will you do about the housing shortage, why is the deficit still there, how will you pay for the extra nurses? Maybe 1% of conversations.

    But according to the thread title that appears to be what is changing. Much less automatic loyalty to the team.
    Yup. Imo, the people who view a political party with football-like tribal loyalty are mostly all older people, a generation that bluntly is dying out. Most people of, say, 50 or younger just don't see politics that way. Parties just can't take supposed "core votes" for granted anymore and think they've got their votes in the bag without offering them anything they want -- If people don't get a good answer to "what have you done for me lately" then they're not going to see why they owe any loyalty to a particular party.
  • Danny565 said:

    Indigo said:

    Do people know what actually influences their vote ? I suspect they don't, they just have a feeling that the more dramatic events might have more influence. The reality is this probably isn't the case, people will listen to the debate(s) with scepticism, their guard up and bullshit detectors on maximum.

    The most likely thing to effect votes is personal experience, because it's visceral, someone getting a bad experience in hospital, kids have good or bad experiences at school, being out of work or having got a job recently.

    I meet a few voters like that - something I've done, or Anna S has done, or even something Attlee did in one case. But the more usual in my experience is that many voters treat politicis like football - they have a side and cheer it on, and it's only if the manager is corrupt or something amazing happens that they switch. UKIP is a bit like having a new team start up near where you live - people feel that's quite interesting, maybe they'll give them a go.

    It's really rare tht you get asked anything substantive - what exactly will you do about the housing shortage, why is the deficit still there, how will you pay for the extra nurses? Maybe 1% of conversations.

    But according to the thread title that appears to be what is changing. Much less automatic loyalty to the team.
    Yup. Imo, the people who view a political party with football-like tribal loyalty are mostly all older people, a generation that bluntly is dying out. Most people of, say, 50 or younger just don't see politics that way. Parties just can't take supposed "core votes" for granted anymore and think they've got their votes in the bag without offering them anything they want -- If people don't get a good answer to "what have you done for me lately" then they're not going to see why they owe any loyalty to a particular party.
    if you look at the behaviour of the parties from 1992 onwards Tory sleaze, cash for everything, expenses etc and then consider how the establishment parties have in large part deserted their traditional support and traditional ethos (Clause IV, Tory modernisation,, Libdem coalition) in effect denouncing their traditional support for a new common elitism (much of the new common ethos is highly critical of the electorate) it is hardly surprising.

  • Bollocks.
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642

    Nick Clegg rules out formal coalition with Ukip and SNP

    http://www.channel4.com/news/nick-clegg-liberal-democrat-spring-conference-speech

    Which is fortunate for the Libdems seeing as both the SNP and UKIP have ruled out formal coalitions with anybody........

    He may not be in a position to make such statements come May.

  • Bollocks.

    i take it that is a football reference?

  • Bollocks.

    i take it that is a football reference?
    Barely.
  • MikeKMikeK Posts: 9,053

    Military at war with David Cameron as top brass threaten to quit over cuts http://t.co/wC3OxhWkeH pic.twitter.com/VTSDsqHt5o

    — Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) March 15, 2015
  • TheWatcherTheWatcher Posts: 5,262
    MikeK said:

    Military at war with David Cameron as top brass threaten to quit over cuts http://t.co/wC3OxhWkeH pic.twitter.com/VTSDsqHt5o

    — Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) March 15, 2015

    'Unnamed' bosses. More lazy journalism from the industrial phone hackers at The Mirror.
  • You know it's a bad day, when Barndoor is brought on as a sub.

    Feeble by all concerned.
  • Champagne Socialists 0 Cultural Marxists 1?

    Exclusive: Green Party cancels black tie fundraiser following members’ revolt

    http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/03/green-party-cancel-lavish-fundraiser-after-backlash-from-members/

    Peapod Wine anyone?
  • richardDoddrichardDodd Posts: 5,472
    MK "Military at War with Cameron"...Daily Mirror..did the Mirror hack that info..The Mirror is a busted flush as far as integrity in its reporting goes.
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
    You mean the same Dan Hannan who has also utterly condemned his leaders stance on the EU referendum and denounced that it will be a genuine referendum? I get the feeling Hannan is becoming so conflicted he doesn't know whether he is coming or going. His partisan loyalty is admirable in its way though I suppose.
    Can you source that? My impression was that he has said it is the referendum pledge which keeps him in the party, so presumably if he didn't believe it was genuine he'd join Ukip?
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,180
    Imagine for a moment that you are the Chairman of the Board of a big company. This company has a long history of success. Diverse endeavours throughout the years, and across the world. You've unfortunately found yourself in need of a CEO - someone to guide and nurture the company in the years ahead. Personally if Ed turned up for the job I'd shoot him on general principals. The rest of them too, but way way ahead in my choice for first of the barrels would be Ed.

    Why should this odious little twerp presume to offer to govern us?

    Has anyone actually voted for him? What on earth is going on?

    Why Ed Milliband? Everything and anything I know says otherwise.

    There are no men that like Ed. The concept that there might be women that like him is risible. No-one respects his views, no-one has ever been impressed by anything he's ever done. Ed is the epitome of failure.

    In short, bye-bye Ed.

  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    Charles said:

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
    You mean the same Dan Hannan who has also utterly condemned his leaders stance on the EU referendum and denounced that it will be a genuine referendum? I get the feeling Hannan is becoming so conflicted he doesn't know whether he is coming or going. His partisan loyalty is admirable in its way though I suppose.
    Can you source that? My impression was that he has said it is the referendum pledge which keeps him in the party, so presumably if he didn't believe it was genuine he'd join Ukip?
    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s coming EU renegotiation will alter nothing

    Ah, well, we are where we are. I set out nine renegotiation goals here; Business for Britain proposed ten slightly different ones here. But the Government isn’t interested in pursuing these goals. Instead, we’ll be voting on whether to remain in the EU on the present terms. Oh, sure, there’ll be a song and dance about the talks. Tame pundits will be lined up to aver that there was hard pounding. EU leaders will be wheeled out to complain theatrically that the British got their way. But, in the end, there is only one test that counts. Will there be there a new Intergovernmental Conference and a new treaty? Without them, it will be impossible to claim that there has been any substantive reform.

    Most British people, if the polls are to be believed, want a relationship with the EU based on economic co-operation rather than political integration. It’s now clear that such a deal isn’t being sought through renegotiation. It can still be secured, but now only from the outside, in the manner of Switzerland or Guernsey.


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2015/02/daniel-hannan-mep-camerons-coming-eu-renegotiation-will-alter-nothing.html

    Personally I think he's waiting to see what going to happen in the next few months (like a number of Tories) before deciding his future.
  • DairDair Posts: 6,108
    F1 question as there seems to be a few fans on here.

    Are Manor serious about taking part or did they just turn up to collect last years prize money and will not disband?
  • The battle for 4th is over, the war for 7th is just about to begin.

    #COYS
  • CharlesCharles Posts: 35,758
    edited March 2015

    Charles said:

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
    You mean the same Dan Hannan who has also utterly condemned his leaders stance on the EU referendum and denounced that it will be a genuine referendum? I get the feeling Hannan is becoming so conflicted he doesn't know whether he is coming or going. His partisan loyalty is admirable in its way though I suppose.
    Can you source that? My impression was that he has said it is the referendum pledge which keeps him in the party, so presumably if he didn't believe it was genuine he'd join Ukip?
    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s coming EU renegotiation will alter nothing

    Ah, well, we are where we are. I set out nine renegotiation goals here; Business for Britain proposed ten slightly different ones here. But the Government isn’t interested in pursuing these goals. Instead, we’ll be voting on whether to remain in the EU on the present terms. Oh, sure, there’ll be a song and dance about the talks. Tame pundits will be lined up to aver that there was hard pounding. EU leaders will be wheeled out to complain theatrically that the British got their way. But, in the end, there is only one test that counts. Will there be there a new Intergovernmental Conference and a new treaty? Without them, it will be impossible to claim that there has been any substantive reform.

    Most British people, if the polls are to be believed, want a relationship with the EU based on economic co-operation rather than political integration. It’s now clear that such a deal isn’t being sought through renegotiation. It can still be secured, but now only from the outside, in the manner of Switzerland or Guernsey.


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2015/02/daniel-hannan-mep-camerons-coming-eu-renegotiation-will-alter-nothing.html
    he's saying the *renegotiation* won't be genuine/effective, not the referendum. And that he will campaign for out
  • notmenotme Posts: 3,293
    Omnium said:

    Imagine for a moment that you are the Chairman of the Board of a big company. This company has a long history of success. Diverse endeavours throughout the years, and across the world. You've unfortunately found yourself in need of a CEO - someone to guide and nurture the company in the years ahead. Personally if Ed turned up for the job I'd shoot him on general principals. The rest of them too, but way way ahead in my choice for first of the barrels would be Ed.

    Why should this odious little twerp presume to offer to govern us?

    Has anyone actually voted for him? What on earth is going on?

    Why Ed Milliband? Everything and anything I know says otherwise.

    There are no men that like Ed. The concept that there might be women that like him is risible. No-one respects his views, no-one has ever been impressed by anything he's ever done. Ed is the epitome of failure.

    In short, bye-bye Ed.

    Would the PM more be akin to the company chairman, rather than CEO? The cabinet secretary is the CEO.
  • Hengists_GiftHengists_Gift Posts: 628
    edited March 2015
    Charles said:

    Charles said:

    Arf!

    If you ever feel the urge to run a failed Out campaign in an in/out referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU, here’s how to do it

    http://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2015/03/how-to-lose-an-eu-referendum-by-nigel-farage.html

    Ashcrofts limp sanitised Tory cheerleading website criticises Nigel Farage. Go figure
    Forensic demolition of the article's argument there,.......

    Dan Hannan was singing its praises on Twitter...
    You mean the same Dan Hannan who has also utterly condemned his leaders stance on the EU referendum and denounced that it will be a genuine referendum? I get the feeling Hannan is becoming so conflicted he doesn't know whether he is coming or going. His partisan loyalty is admirable in its way though I suppose.
    Can you source that? My impression was that he has said it is the referendum pledge which keeps him in the party, so presumably if he didn't believe it was genuine he'd join Ukip?
    Daniel Hannan MEP: Cameron’s coming EU renegotiation will alter nothing

    Ah, well, we are where we are. I set out nine renegotiation goals here; Business for Britain proposed ten slightly different ones here. But the Government isn’t interested in pursuing these goals. Instead, we’ll be voting on whether to remain in the EU on the present terms. Oh, sure, there’ll be a song and dance about the talks. Tame pundits will be lined up to aver that there was hard pounding. EU leaders will be wheeled out to complain theatrically that the British got their way. But, in the end, there is only one test that counts. Will there be there a new Intergovernmental Conference and a new treaty? Without them, it will be impossible to claim that there has been any substantive reform.

    Most British people, if the polls are to be believed, want a relationship with the EU based on economic co-operation rather than political integration. It’s now clear that such a deal isn’t being sought through renegotiation. It can still be secured, but now only from the outside, in the manner of Switzerland or Guernsey.


    http://www.conservativehome.com/thecolumnists/2015/02/daniel-hannan-mep-camerons-coming-eu-renegotiation-will-alter-nothing.html
    he's saying the *renegotiation* won't be genuine/effective, not the referendum. And that he will campaign for out
    He's saying that the whole thing will be a con (from the government perspective).
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,937
    TimT/Charles.

    "Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501"

    I take your point but film goers have no need to score the films. It's not like politics where people might have a 'team'. I'm quite sure they make independent judgements. Why shouldn't they? What's interesting is that 500 is nearly always precisely representative of 500,000.
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,344
    Mr. Dair, as far as I know, deadly serious about returning. I haven't heard any serious claim otherwise.
  • OmniumOmnium Posts: 8,180
    notme said:

    Omnium said:

    Imagine for a moment that you are the Chairman of the Board of a big company. This company has a long history of success. Diverse endeavours throughout the years, and across the world. You've unfortunately found yourself in need of a CEO - someone to guide and nurture the company in the years ahead. Personally if Ed turned up for the job I'd shoot him on general principals. The rest of them too, but way way ahead in my choice for first of the barrels would be Ed.

    Why should this odious little twerp presume to offer to govern us?

    Has anyone actually voted for him? What on earth is going on?

    Why Ed Milliband? Everything and anything I know says otherwise.

    There are no men that like Ed. The concept that there might be women that like him is risible. No-one respects his views, no-one has ever been impressed by anything he's ever done. Ed is the epitome of failure.

    In short, bye-bye Ed.

    Would the PM more be akin to the company chairman, rather than CEO? The cabinet secretary is the CEO.
    I'd certainly not quibble about the details. My point was mainly that if you had the job spec in one hand and Ed's CV in another you'd never in a moment connect the two.

  • DairDair Posts: 6,108

    Mr. Dair, as far as I know, deadly serious about returning. I haven't heard any serious claim otherwise.

    The company has been CVA'd and as such has virtually no liability. it would seem that with a £20m prize pot to collect, it would cost very little to turn up to the event with last years car (which they did) and some crew and not run. once they have secured the money, they quietly dissolve the company pocketing a substantial chunk of cash.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,122
    Re Putin. My Russian sources (well, really source singular) is absolutely certain there has been no coup.

    While he could be either (a) mistaken, or (b) lying, I think it's very unlikely.

  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,937
    edited March 2015
    Hengists Gift

    "Exclusive: Green Party cancels black tie fundraiser following members’ revolt"

    I love that story. My girlfriend of the time used to work for Shelter. Their ad agency organized a £200 a ticket black tie event on a Thames riverboat. Peter Cook and Dudley Moore were there as were all the glitterati in London at the time. The workers at Shelter found it completely inappropriate and were really pissed off

    Just as the evening was getting into full flow the team leader went onto the stage lifted the mike and said;

    "Ladies and gentlemen. I'd like to propose a toast to the homeless without which none of this would have been possible"
  • Morris_DancerMorris_Dancer Posts: 59,344
    Mr. Dair, Justin King's involved, and I believe his son is on the driving side. It really doesn't seem the case to me.

    I could be wrong (cf the race), but I'd be surprised.
  • FrankBoothFrankBooth Posts: 6,506
    rcs1000 said:

    Re Putin. My Russian sources (well, really source singular) is absolutely certain there has been no coup.

    While he could be either (a) mistaken, or (b) lying, I think it's very unlikely.

    Unless he's very well connected is he really likely to know the answer?
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Roger said:

    TimT/Charles.

    "Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501"

    I take your point but film goers have no need to score the films. It's not like politics where people might have a 'team'. I'm quite sure they make independent judgements. Why shouldn't they? What's interesting is that 500 is nearly always precisely representative of 500,000.

    Roger, 'anchoring' is not really about making independent judgments, it's about a systematic dysfunction in how we perceive and think. It is a universal cognitive bias:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
  • EPGEPG Posts: 4,637
    Green Party support redistribution of wealth, so instead of taking money from rich people at a ball, they're going to... let them keep their money. Amazing! Buy these people a (communal) pint.
  • oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455
    I sometimes wonder what level of polling UKIP might achieve if they were organised and focused. Not a word have I seen about our immediately allowing three committed jihadists to jet back to the UK after being discovered in Turkey. They were off to pledge allegiance to our deadly enemies. Why make them our problem again? I guess the complicated answer is that if we didn't, Turkey might become less assiduous at detecting future such cases - but in the mind of a floating voter I would rather they were in Syria than Streatham.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    Roger said:

    TimT/Charles.

    "Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501"

    I take your point but film goers have no need to score the films. It's not like politics where people might have a 'team'. I'm quite sure they make independent judgements. Why shouldn't they? What's interesting is that 500 is nearly always precisely representative of 500,000.

    500 may be nearly as precise as 500 000 if the Standard Error of the Mean is not very large.
  • RogerRoger Posts: 16,937
    TimT

    Thanks for that. Very interesting. A bit like the 23 people in a room having a 50% chance of having the same birthdate. Hard to get your head round and hard to test
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    A Russian coup could well be quite a black swan event. I suppose it all depends on who has mounted it, whether Russias foreign policy changes.

    Is Falseflag about in order to explain the Neo Con plot that is undoubtably behind the mystery?
  • PongPong Posts: 4,693
    edited March 2015
    MTimT said:

    Roger said:

    TimT/Charles.

    "Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501"

    I take your point but film goers have no need to score the films. It's not like politics where people might have a 'team'. I'm quite sure they make independent judgements. Why shouldn't they? What's interesting is that 500 is nearly always precisely representative of 500,000.

    Roger, 'anchoring' is not really about making independent judgments, it's about a systematic dysfunction in how we perceive and think. It is a universal cognitive bias:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
    I've got a vague recollection of an experiment in Kahneman's "thinking fast and slow" - where, if a supermarket limits the number of items that can be bought on a special offer, people tend to buy more of the item, than if the offer had no limits at all.

    So, when the *exclusive 70% off special offer* signage says "limited to 3 per customer", it' not that they're trying to prevent a stampede, it's because research says you're more likely to pick up three.

    We're funny monkeys, us :)
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,122
    @Roger

    You know what: those black tie events are wonderful opportunities to take tens (or hundreds) of thousands of pounds off hedge fund managers and give them to good causes.

    Basically: it enables John Jones who runs Macro Bond Leveraged Fund and earns $12m a year to hang out with some famous people like Marcus Mumford or whoever and feel important. And the charity makes good money.

  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548

    I sometimes wonder what level of polling UKIP might achieve if they were organised and focused. Not a word have I seen about our immediately allowing three committed jihadists to jet back to the UK after being discovered in Turkey. They were off to pledge allegiance to our deadly enemies. Why make them our problem again? I guess the complicated answer is that if we didn't, Turkey might become less assiduous at detecting future such cases - but in the mind of a floating voter I would rather they were in Syria than Streatham.

    I suspect that they will be in residence at Belmarsh shortly, spilling the beans to our Spooks.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,122

    A Russian coup could well be quite a black swan event. I suppose it all depends on who has mounted it, whether Russias foreign policy changes.

    Is Falseflag about in order to explain the Neo Con plot that is undoubtably behind the mystery?
    There is no Russian coup.
  • foxinsoxukfoxinsoxuk Posts: 23,548
    rcs1000 said:

    A Russian coup could well be quite a black swan event. I suppose it all depends on who has mounted it, whether Russias foreign policy changes.

    Is Falseflag about in order to explain the Neo Con plot that is undoubtably behind the mystery?
    There is no Russian coup.
    I don't think so either. Winners in coups usually go public pretty sharpish.
  • oldpoliticsoldpolitics Posts: 455

    I sometimes wonder what level of polling UKIP might achieve if they were organised and focused. Not a word have I seen about our immediately allowing three committed jihadists to jet back to the UK after being discovered in Turkey. They were off to pledge allegiance to our deadly enemies. Why make them our problem again? I guess the complicated answer is that if we didn't, Turkey might become less assiduous at detecting future such cases - but in the mind of a floating voter I would rather they were in Syria than Streatham.

    I suspect that they will be in residence at Belmarsh shortly, spilling the beans to our Spooks.
    I would be amazed if they have any significant beans to spill.
  • MTimTMTimT Posts: 7,034
    Pong said:

    MTimT said:

    Roger said:

    TimT/Charles.

    "Because we don't like to different from the mean.

    If 500 people rate it as 7.6, that will influence the views of no 501"

    I take your point but film goers have no need to score the films. It's not like politics where people might have a 'team'. I'm quite sure they make independent judgements. Why shouldn't they? What's interesting is that 500 is nearly always precisely representative of 500,000.

    Roger, 'anchoring' is not really about making independent judgments, it's about a systematic dysfunction in how we perceive and think. It is a universal cognitive bias:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchoring
    I've got a vague recollection of an experiment in Kahneman's "thinking fast and slow" - where, if a supermarket limits the number of items that can be bought on a special offer, people tend to buy more of the item, than if the offer had no limits at all.

    So, when the *exclusive 70% off special offer* signage says "limited to 3 per customer", it' not that they're trying to prevent a stampede, it's because research says you're more likely to pick up three.

    We're funny monkeys, us :)
    Pong, absolutely. That is a form of anchoring, it is suggesting that you want more than 3 even if you came into the shop only wanting one or none.
  • GeoffMGeoffM Posts: 6,071
    rcs1000 said:

    @Roger

    You know what: those black tie events are wonderful opportunities to take tens (or hundreds) of thousands of pounds off hedge fund managers and give them to good causes.

    Basically: it enables John Jones who runs Macro Bond Leveraged Fund and earns $12m a year to hang out with some famous people like Marcus Mumford or whoever and feel important. And the charity makes good money.

    famous people like Marcus Mumford

    Not a clue. I needed Google for that one. But apart from that your point is utterly sound.
  • rcs1000rcs1000 Posts: 47,122
    As an aside, has anybody else been watching Israeli politics? It looks like Netanyahu is about to be evicted from office, after calling an unnecessary election.
  • SimonStClareSimonStClare Posts: 7,976
    Party Election broadcasts? - Can’t believe 16% of the nation actually watches them. – Don’t most people nip out to the kitchen and put the kettle on before the decent programmes start?
  • Paul_Mid_BedsPaul_Mid_Beds Posts: 1,409
    So 52% of the electorate have not made their mind up and have to decide whether to stick with the devil we know as the country slowly recovers or put their future prosperity in the hands of Ed "Dwayne Dibley" and Ed "Browns Sidekick"

    Not hard to see where this is going to go.....

    Possibly the most important stat that has been posted here for a while.
This discussion has been closed.