politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The likely final polls with when we can expect them

Flightpath1 said:

''The East Dumbartonshire Star; the Plymouth and Southsea Express; The Herald; The Oxford Observer.
To voters, these sound like plausible local newspapers. So when they read headlines like "Jo Swinson set to win" and "Gerald Vernon-Jackson set to win!" it has an impact.
But, of course, these are not independent newspapers. They are Liberal Democrat leaflets dressed up as papers to make them more convincing.''
(from BBC)

Thats LD campaigning for you.

"Plymouth and Southsea Express" I see LibDems grasp of English geography is as sound as its commitment to keeping private conversations, private.

GeoffH said:

Neil said:

GeoffH said:

Yorkcity said:

Sandpit said:

Yorkcity said:

Does it help Nick Clegg, to get his private conversation leaked with David Cameron, saying that the PM told him, he can not win a majority ?

First story on the 1PM BBC NEWS.

I would have thought not.

This and the Danny Alexander stuff from last week just underline a massive lack of trust in the LDs. Surely there was a formal meeting before the campaign where everyone agreed that what went on in government should stay in government (for 30 years anyway)?

I agree , I do not like it,especially if if the leak has been officially authorised by Clegg.
I hope Cameron does not feel the need to retaliate and leak other private conversations.

This is a particularly shabby piece of LibDem politicking.

By using the word, 'private', it is impossible for Cameron to respond. It may also be a lie; no such 'private' conversation took place and Cameron, again, is in an impossible position.

If he say's, 'No' to either the proposition of the conversation, then it simply invites the Many Rice Davis response.

I doubt any such conversation took place. I doubt Cameron every vouchsafed such an idea and that this is a deliberate LibDem lie.

You're making a strong case for it being a particularly effective piece of Lib Dem politicking.

Shabby was the word I used. If you think that lying about supposed 'private conversations' with a former political partner and current opponent is a particularly 'effective' piece of politicking then we really are very close to the bottom of the barrel.

I may not be at the bottom of the barrel but I think I can see it through a haze of self-righteousness.

Chameleon said:

OllyT said:

felix said:

GeoffH said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Steven_Whaley said:

Ishmael_X said:

Dair said:

Just completed a panelbase survey which appears to be specifically for Scottish VI. Possible Scottish Eve of poll from them.

What a tiny pond the online pollsters are fishing in. Given the population size being polled at all should be a blue moon, black swan event, not something that happens twice in the first 14 posts in a thread (one of them "again").

Sunil's proposed thread is well overdue.

I've just done a YouGov voting intention poll too. It's my third one since the election campaign began.

I have done 3 too.

I have just completed my sixth.

This is, I think, a problem with daily online polls. Has there been any research into the concept of 'survey fatigue'?

Repetaedlt polling the same small band of respondents may severly distort the results.

The only change I have been able to record in the six I have done is to become ever more emphatic in my answers where that is possible.

I stopped doing them because there were so many and so tedious. I also do not see how they can avoid being packed full of tribalists and political nerds both of which groups do not resemble remotely the average jo!

If online polls are all as useless as some are trying to have us believe do you not think that they would have lost all credibility by now and the companies concerned might have changed their methodology

Because in the past there hasn't been much of a difference between the two types of polling. However this time one type is showing a 2.79 Con lead and the other a 0.88 Lab lead (3.67% difference). Clearly one type is wrong. Since online polls have self-selecting samples and phone ones are random samples it makes sense to go with the one which doesn't break the first rule of polling.

The evidence only come on Thursday night. I mean, that's really obvious, right?

Just saw Eddie Izzard walking along Princes Street with Mark Lazarowicz and leafletters.

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

I believe most "women's" events like this can actually be entered by men if they want.

e.g "The Moon Walk" used to be an event targeted squarely at women, but lots of men got involved in it. It is still very women orientated and most of the men who get involved dress as women.

Conservatives @ 1-8 in Christchurch with William Hills.

Amazing annualised return right there.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

I believe most "women's" events like this can actually be entered by men if they want.

e.g "The Moon Walk" used to be an event targeted squarely at women, but lots of men got involved in it.

RfL has had a lot of deserved criticism in the past for not allowing men - or even young boys - on it. The rules were apparently loosened slightly, but not that much afaik.

Ah:
http://raceforlife.cancerresearchuk.org/why-is-race-a-women-only-event/index.html

Apparently they think allowing men to enter would raise *less* money, by some weird calculation. Although they are willing to use men for volunteering at events.

Freedom of Association, whatever happened to that?

JohnLilburne said:

surbiton said:

MikeK said:

The segregated, largely muslim audience for a Labour rally, has finaly made it to the BBC via the underhand and unlikely rout of the Daily Politics:

Segregated audience

Daily Politics
BBC Two
Posted at 13:28


Asked if she was comfortable with segregated audiences she said: "It depends where these events are happening, and the context in which it occurred."

The Daily Express have also reported on the issue, click here for their story.

However, not many people will notice it as it's buried in the BBC Election Live blog.

Did they mention for purposes of balance the Round Table meeting only for Men and attended only by Tories, UKIP and the Lib Dems ?

Round Table is, I believe, a voluntary organisation for men. Had they been at a WI meeting the audience would have probably been all women.

Personally I have never understood why I would want to be a member of an organisation that excluded the other gender, but clearly some people find it appropriate.

I think the question to be asked is: was the Brum event in a mosque, or hosted by a mosque or Muslim religious organisation? If so there is a good argument for saying the Labour politicos were guests and therefore it was down to the mores of their hosts. However, if this is a Labour party event, run for, by and on behalf of the Labour party I think it's a different matter.

If it's a religious service then I would agree that it is only good manners to abide by the rules of the hosts e.g. I cover my hair and take off my shoes when I visit a mosque.

But a political rally / debate / meeting in a mosque is a secular event and I see no good reason why segregation should be acceptable at such an event, any more than it would be acceptable at a political lecture, particularly not for a party which wears its sex/gender equality heart so very much on its sleeve when attacking others on sex/gender issues. It's no use having pink vans to talk to women about the issues affecting them when the very first issue which affects women is not being thought of as equal and being treated differently and worse on account of one's sex.

At some point if there is a conflict between a belief that people should be treated equally and in women's rights and those communities who do not believe in women having equal rights, then you have to choose.

And before Surbiton jumps down my throat I responded to his question last night. I think it equally unacceptable for a hustings to be limited to one sex / group etc.

Since all adults have the vote all have a right to listen to candidates' views and all have the right to make their own decision as to their vote, without fear or favour and without pressure from anyone.

MikeSmithson said:

Mistake on chart. I had the ICM lead wrong. It was 3% not 4%

"Your powers are weak, old man!"

@patrickwintour: Guardian-ICM will be publishing a poll from Nick Clegg's constituency of Sheffield Hallam this afternoon.

Outside shot Carly Fiorina announces she's running for president:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/05/us/politics/carly-fiorina-2016-presidential-bid.html

The poll named and didn't name Clegg

TheScreamingEagles said:

The poll named and didn't name Clegg

I'm getting out of dodge if he's behind on named ICM methodology. That surely is the most beneficial to Clegg, ever.

JosiasJessop said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

I believe most "women's" events like this can actually be entered by men if they want.

e.g "The Moon Walk" used to be an event targeted squarely at women, but lots of men got involved in it.

RfL has had a lot of deserved criticism in the past for not allowing men - or even young boys - on it. The rules were apparently loosened slightly, but not that much afaik.

Ah:
http://raceforlife.cancerresearchuk.org/why-is-race-a-women-only-event/index.html

Apparently they think allowing men to enter would raise *less* money, by some weird calculation. Although they are willing to use men for volunteering at events.

There have always been men's and women's sporting events as women have very different physical capabilities. Although road running is mostly mixed but I think cross country still more likely to be segregated.

Pulpstar said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

The poll named and didn't name Clegg

I'm getting out of dodge if he's behind on named ICM methodology. That surely is the most beneficial to Clegg, ever.

Indeed. Squeaky bum time for Clegg

Chameleon said:

OllyT said:

felix said:

GeoffH said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Steven_Whaley said:

Ishmael_X said:

Dair said:

Just completed a panelbase survey which appears to be specifically for Scottish VI. Possible Scottish Eve of poll from them.

What a tiny pond the online pollsters are fishing in. Given the population size being polled at all should be a blue moon, black swan event, not something that happens twice in the first 14 posts in a thread (one of them "again").

Sunil's proposed thread is well overdue.

I've just done a YouGov voting intention poll too. It's my third one since the election campaign began.

I have done 3 too.

I have just completed my sixth.

This is, I think, a problem with daily online polls. Has there been any research into the concept of 'survey fatigue'?

Repetaedlt polling the same small band of respondents may severly distort the results.

The only change I have been able to record in the six I have done is to become ever more emphatic in my answers where that is possible.

I stopped doing them because there were so many and so tedious. I also do not see how they can avoid being packed full of tribalists and political nerds both of which groups do not resemble remotely the average jo!

If online polls are all as useless as some are trying to have us believe do you not think that they would have lost all credibility by now and the companies concerned might have changed their methodology

Because in the past there hasn't been much of a difference between the two types of polling. However this time one type is showing a 2.79 Con lead and the other a 0.88 Lab lead (3.67% difference). Clearly one type is wrong. Since online polls have self-selecting samples and phone ones are random samples it makes sense to go with the one which doesn't break the first rule of polling.

Alternatively, the Tories are about 1% ahead and both are right, well within the margin of error, but with an apparent consistent bias.

Brand says vote LAB

GIN1138 said:

Who is BMG?

A market research company that has decided to branch out into political polling http://www.bmgresearch.co.uk/voting-intention-and-electorate-opinion-poll/ its first VI poll was done for May2015.com.

@isam

'What's the spread on PB people that admit losing overall on election betting?'

We only hear about people winning.

RobbieBox said:

Monkeys said:

Just saw Eddie Izzard walking along Princes Street with Mark Lazarowicz and leafletters.

In a kilt?

Pink mohair

FrancisUrquhart said:

MikeSmithson said:

Brand says vote LAB

Have you been asleep all morning?

Except ....... somewhere he said vote Green which was right after his sofa cuddle with Millstoneband

MikeL said:

isam said:

What's the spread on PB people that admit losing overall on election betting?

Over the years I've often read on here about PB posters making lots of money - but almost never does anyone admit to losing money.

However - I also remember an awful lot of bets being tipped on here (by posters who I think would generally be highly regarded) which have turned out to be losers.

Funny eh?

My Lib Dem book is a mess due to following various "over" tips, nothing too large done mind. Who was responsible for the 41-50 tip way back ?

twitter.com/Number10cat/status/595232717991747584/photo/1

Combination of Ed Stone and Princess Charlotte, but is Ed Stone a Cheltenham on course bookie?

Flightpath1 said:

JohnLilburne said:

JosiasJessop said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

I believe most "women's" events like this can actually be entered by men if they want.

e.g "The Moon Walk" used to be an event targeted squarely at women, but lots of men got involved in it.

RfL has had a lot of deserved criticism in the past for not allowing men - or even young boys - on it. The rules were apparently loosened slightly, but not that much afaik.

Ah:
http://raceforlife.cancerresearchuk.org/why-is-race-a-women-only-event/index.html

Apparently they think allowing men to enter would raise *less* money, by some weird calculation. Although they are willing to use men for volunteering at events.

There have always been men's and women's sporting events as women have very different physical capabilities. Although road running is mostly mixed but I think cross country still more likely to be segregated.

Yes why can't women enter the men's 100m?

I think it's a practical thing, especially in longer track races the women would end up being lapped and you would have two races in one event to try to keep track of. Road running is generally mixed apart from at elite level (such as the Olympics) but cross country still seems to separate out men and women at club level.

Daniel said:

Correction: Brand says vote to start his revolution...

Correction...Brand says vote to start his revolution, otherwise known as increasing his bank balance...did he tell you he has a movie out?

I see that the Royal Baby name has passed the committee stage.
One name after the granddad, one after the grandmother and one after the great-grandmother.

TheScreamingEagles said:

I took part in that poll.

You're going to have to adjust for me saying I was planning on voting Lib Dem.

But I changed my mind following Lib Dem perfidy.

You're still in the blue camp?

RobbieBox said:

Monkeys said:

Just saw Eddie Izzard walking along Princes Street with Mark Lazarowicz and leafletters.

In a kilt?

The Emperor's New Kilt?

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I took part in that poll.

You're going to have to adjust for me saying I was planning on voting Lib Dem.

But I changed my mind following Lib Dem perfidy.

You're still in the blue camp?

Yes.

Princess Charlotte, it seems:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-32583432

Cameron 'will try to cling to power even if coalition loses majority'

Labour fears Tories will try to form government with Lib Dems and Democratic Unionists and to claim a minority Labour government would have no legitimacy

http://bit.ly/1K7UrEO

Philip_Thompson said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

I believe most "women's" events like this can actually be entered by men if they want.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Philip_Thompson said:

Wonder where all the criticism is for Cancer Research UK's women-only Race For Life event.

Where are we drawing the line on gender segregation?

Its not Women's only...men take part

CRUK themselves call Race for Life women only.

http://raceforlife.cancerresearchuk.org/why-is-race-a-women-only-event/index.html

But the question is... why? Don't men get cancer too?

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I took part in that poll.

You're going to have to adjust for me saying I was planning on voting Lib Dem.

But I changed my mind following Lib Dem perfidy.

You're still in the blue camp?

Yes.

Cool! But I haven't actually decided yet!

Patrick said:

RobbieBox said:

Monkeys said:

Just saw Eddie Izzard walking along Princes Street with Mark Lazarowicz and leafletters.

In a kilt?

Pink mohair

Mm, fetching. Is he angling for an all-wimmin-shortlist seat like Mr Harman? Purely to defy the wicked gender stereotypists, of course.

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

I took part in that poll.

You're going to have to adjust for me saying I was planning on voting Lib Dem.

But I changed my mind following Lib Dem perfidy.

You're still in the blue camp?

Yes.

Cool! But I haven't actually decided yet!

You should vote Conservative

If you don't, no more Depeche Mode themed nighthawks.

SquareRoot said:

Just done a long You Gov survey.
One of the questions was the biggest issue facing the Country.. Just for fun /half seriously I wrote "the Threat of a Labour Govt", and was then asked how Labour would handle the threat of a Labour Govt.. v badly was all I could venture as a reply!

Don't give up the day job!

Excellent choice of name.

In fieldwork terms, no Phone polls since the Indy on Sunday ComRes (fieldwork end 30th April).

rullko said:

JohnLilburne said:

More bizarrely, milord Scriven's tweet is worded thus "So Cameron has taken to lying on Tory Maj." He seems to be accusing of lying about whether there will be a majority or not, not that he told Clegg that. Well... how can you lie about an event in the future that is undetermined? I could tell you Arsenal will win the Cup Final, if they lose it was hardly a lie.

Yeah, but if you tell me that you believe they *can* win, that's a statement about the present. So if Cameron really believes the Tories can't get a majority, he's lying when he says he does.

But a lie is only bad if it harms someone. How this alleged lie does that is something that reports on the matter have declined to explain.

Either way it's not very credible that he doesn't believe it's possible. The chance of a significant UKIP squeeze on polling day is enough to give hope whatever the state of the polls.

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

BBC reporting that Jim Murphy is campaigning in Glasgow with comedian Eddie Izzard..!

Hmmm. - Not the luckiest talisman I’d have thought.

getting a real barracking as well , and whinging that it must be the SNP, what a plank.

As I'm following various BT hacks and supporters my Twitter went into a BT Project Fear Meltdown when Jim and Eddie were shouted at by 4 protestors. Having tracked down the footage as far as I can tell the main pushing and shoving was being done by SLAB activists, who were manhandling some chap with a loudhailer:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32580153

All I can say is before Twittering condemnation of violence on the streets of Glasgow best to view the evidence first, I guess the BT/MSM mantra of why let the facts get in the way of a story is alive and well.

These guys have obviously never been on a night out in Glasgow or better still attended an Orange Lodge march, then they could form a better view of what constitutes violence on the streets of Glasgow.

Flightpath1 said:

Those WI women were happy to do that calender, and have a man take the photos.
Trying to compare this political meeting where the women were crudely segregated with say the WI or Round Table is pathetic.
Labour betrayed such principals as they have. Certainly all the ones they pretend to us they have.

Labour have betrayed their principALS?

Has anyone told the SNP?

antifrank said:

Excellent choice of name.

NO

Bad bad bad choice of name.

Pong's P/L on Royal Baby II;

-£78.52

antifrank said:

Excellent choice of name.

Unless you're a bookie. Ladbrokes in the DT saying that they've taken more money in the last 48 hours on the baby's name than on the election, and that Charlotte was backed in to favourite by the time of the announcement.
Fingers crossed they'll be losing a little more cash come Friday morning!

calum said:

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

BBC reporting that Jim Murphy is campaigning in Glasgow with comedian Eddie Izzard..!

Hmmm. - Not the luckiest talisman I’d have thought.

getting a real barracking as well , and whinging that it must be the SNP, what a plank.

As I'm following various BT hacks and supporters my Twitter went into a BT Project Fear Meltdown when Jim and Eddie were shouted at by 4 protestors. Having tracked down the footage as far as I can tell the main pushing and shoving was being done by SLAB activists, who were manhandling some chap with a loudhailer:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32580153

All I can say is before Twittering condemnation of violence on the streets of Glasgow best to view the evidence first, I guess the BT/MSM mantra of why let the facts get in the way of a story is alive and well.

These guys have obviously never been on a night out in Glasgow or better still attended an Orange Lodge march, then they could form a better view of what constitutes violence on the streets of Glasgow.

Murphy will try anything , you can guarantee it was stage managed. Murphy and his fake crowd as usual.
https://twitter.com/WingsScotland/status/595235989888499712

john_zims said:

@isam

'What's the spread on PB people that admit losing overall on election betting?'

We only hear about people winning.

I lost big on the Indyref as I cannot trade markets, I'm rubbish at it for in-play rugby matches and it turns out I'm rubbish at political markets.

williamglenn said:

rullko said:

JohnLilburne said:

More bizarrely, milord Scriven's tweet is worded thus "So Cameron has taken to lying on Tory Maj." He seems to be accusing of lying about whether there will be a majority or not, not that he told Clegg that. Well... how can you lie about an event in the future that is undetermined? I could tell you Arsenal will win the Cup Final, if they lose it was hardly a lie.

Yeah, but if you tell me that you believe they *can* win, that's a statement about the present. So if Cameron really believes the Tories can't get a majority, he's lying when he says he does.

But a lie is only bad if it harms someone. How this alleged lie does that is something that reports on the matter have declined to explain.

Either way it's not very credible that he doesn't believe it's possible. The chance of a significant UKIP squeeze on polling day is enough to give hope whatever the state of the polls.

Didn't Cameron when interviewed by Robinson say they 'were working hard for majority or if need be largest party' etc sort of thing? He specifically said that if there are coalition talks he would not put EU referendum into the mix. In answering that way he is clearly recognising that there may be a minority govt or coalition and that one might be Tory.
I think I'll take the horses mouth rather than a twisted hearsay.
The EU is just another reason not to vote LD, no matter which seat. Cameron's point is the risk of no referendum is why we should vote Tory.
Indeed its pretty plain that if you are worried about Lab/SNP or worried about no referendum, you should vote Tory.

Pong said:

antifrank said:

Excellent choice of name.

NO

Bad bad bad choice of name.

Pong's P/L on Royal Baby II;

-£78.52

Talking of Pong and names I am reminded of my former boss's secretary. He was the FD in our Hong Kong office and his secretary was called Fanny Pong. Really! She had no idea her name was funny to the English. :-)