politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The great grad-non grad voting divide in both the US and U
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The great grad-non grad voting divide in both the US and UK
The above table highlights a big trend in the Republican primaries which has strong echoes in the UK. The quite different voting patterns of those who went to university and those who didn’t.
0
Comments
Few more markets up on Ladbrokes. May actually have to start thinking about what my guess should be...
.@CBSNews Poll - WOW! New Hampshire TRUMP 38% CARSON 12% BUSH 8% South Carolina TRUMP 40% CARSON 23% CRUZ 8% Iowa TRUMP 27% CARSON 27%
As serious analysis this rates as Background Meh.
I'm a graduate and a professional who works in London. I share the same concerns about immigration, tiptoeing around free speech and identity politics. There are several other friends of mine of a similar background who share these concerns.
Are we in a minority amongst our pool of fellow graduates and friends? Absolutely. But we are a resolute one.
Frank Field told Sky News' Murnaghan programme he and a "huge number" of his party colleagues stand ready to campaign for anyone ousted from their seat."
http://news.sky.com/story/1575872/call-for-by-elections-if-labour-mps-picked-off
Betting PostBacked Perez and Hulkenberg to be top 6 at just over evens with Betfair.
Bet works in rain or dry, but as dry's forecast they should be able to pass the Red Bulls early on, at the straights. Both skilled drivers and starting far up the grid diminishes the chances of lap 1 collateral damage.
I'll put the pre-race piece up shortly. [NB Post-race will go up tomorrow, most likely].
http://enormo-haddock.blogspot.co.uk/2015/10/us-pre-race.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-jeb-bush-jabs_562cde8ee4b0aac0b8fd2898
Though no one knows when the boundary changes will be adopted, and I don't know how long the new selections process will take for the old MP's to be thrown out from the moment the seats and boundaries change, and also if the MP resigns after the new boundaries have been adopted will the by-election use the old ones even if the seat is abolished.
I have moved on to Sunday dinner prep. Pork and apple....
http://edition.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/
Though a better education has shown that it reduces and breaks down old stereotypes and prejudgments by creating new ones.
I think university graduates are a reflection of social conditions in their classes, most of them are multicultural with many foreigners and have lots of travel in foreign countries, plus on matters of sex they are always more open, also their education gives them a sense of privilege of opinion over others hence their strong mindedness of excluding others with different thinking.
In conclusion, it's a very authoritarian liberal environment.
It's a change since the past when universities where festered with communism, though they are still the worlds trouble makers like they are always through history.
There's a difference between minority and negligiblity.
Sure, there's a difference, but that difference is small compared to his support vis-a-vis other candidates. It's like people saying that UKIP does poorly in London, when they are actually the third most supported party there. People like to look into minor data variances to create stereotypes.
A graduate banker who's a homeowner and commutes daily from Kent is likely to have different politics from one working in new media, or for a major NGO, and houseshares in Hackney.
Plenty of the remainder of my peer group who hold more mainstream 'graduate' views will limit their involvement to a like or retweeting on social media.
It is really UKIP who do worst amongst graduates, they get their lowest score with them, doing 14% worse than those with only GCSEs or lower, by contrast the Tories did only 3% worse with graduates than those with only GCSEs or lower. The LDs did best with graduates, doing 6% better than those with only GCSEs or lower, even better than the Greens who did 4% better. Labour did slightly better, getting a 3% higher voteshare with graduates than those with GCSEs or lower. The SNP did better with those with just A Levels than either with graduates or those with just GCSEs or below
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/06/08/general-election-2015-how-britain-really-voted/
The thread header premise is interesting to play with but, as others have said, the numbers don't seem all that different, really.
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/256737-trump-rubio-a-perfect-little-puppet
Going through the opinion polls the only thing I found about the likelihood to vote is the ICM enthusiasm for the referendum, which is twice as much for those who want to leave than for those who want to remain.
Sociology Art Drama English Education History Politics Languages Law Biology Medicine IT Maths Physics Chemistry Engineering Business Studies Economics
I think the closest comparison will be not the GE but somewhere between the AV referendum and the scottish referendum.
Because in terms of importance the EU referendum is more important than the AV one but less important than the scottish one and nowhere close enough to a GE.
In 1997, 65% voted Labour or LD and under 32% voted Conservative or UKIP.
Talk about a turnaround.
I think it's hard to argue that it'd still be Labour now with anyone other than Gisela Stuart as the candidate.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/11953997/Halloween-pumpkin-shortage-leaves-ghouls-turning-to-the-turnip.html
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2015/10/23/how-readers-of-the-different-national-papers-voted-at-ge2015/
Andrew Fisher @AndrewFisher79
Dear @SimonDanczuk MP, if you're going to write right-wing propaganda for The Scum, fuck off and join the Tories (cc @UKLabour)
Retweeted by Sam Coates Times
UKIP attracts realists who appreciate that not all change is for the best.
For me, what makes it unattractive is not its Euroscepticism, but its social conservatism. UKIP used to be a libertarian party. Douglas Carswell is a libertarian, and were I in Clacton, I think I'd probably vote for him.
But UKIP is the party that opposed gay marriage. And not because of any real ideological reason, but because they wanted to be the repository for those who dislike social change.
And for that reason, while I might vote for them if I liked the local candidate (were it Douglas Carswell or Richard Tyndall), I could never support them.
If there is a by-election then the by-election must occur under old boundaries. Otherwise you could end up with the situation where someone has 2 MPs representing them ... and far worse you could end up with the situation where someone has nobody at all representing them.
The fact is there is a difference and to bet successfully means to understand differences. To drop all discussions because someone might be offended by inference is an utterly absurd position to take.
So if Rochdale is abolished, Danzcuk will cause a by-election, in case he is rejected from standing in other seats, some months before the GE in a seat that won't exist after a few months.
It won't be very interesting to see a by-election in a seat just before a GE that won't be fought in a GE simply because it will not exist, but everyone would be glad to get rid of Danzcuk a few months early.
Now that I'm there I understand that those things still exist in the public sector, but I still like having a job with a moral purpose (NHS).
At some point it would be fun to start my own business, but not sure if I have the requisite skills.
All that to say, sometimes your philosophy dictates your career choices rather than vice versa.
When I left school very few went to uni, those that did almost without exception studied a worthwhile subject and went on to successful careers, now it seems that to tens of thousands every year uni is the end not the means.
From the sublime (Frank) saying he will form a Lab MP Citizens' Army to defend un-Jezza MPs, to Simon D doing his thing.
I wonder whether the public is actually noticing any of this. At some point surely they will see in front of them the chaos. I mean it hardly requires too incisive analysis or priveleged information to work out what's happening. It is happening in broad daylight for all to see.
Or does the public not particularly care as long as they have someone left-ish to put a tick against or tell polls they are fans of.
The others were immigration and general dissatisfaction with the LD.
However UKIP can never move upwards if it doesn't expand it's policy ranges, simply adding some social policies like immigration and gay marriage expanded them from 3% to 13%, but they need 15% to start to gain seats.
What happens on here is that conservatives appoint themselves experts based on the fact the party they vote for won a general election, they are quick to patronise and abuse supporters of other parties purely because their team won.
Of course that doesn't apply to all, some are very polite and reasonable, it tends to be the young and naive who have yet to realise that in politics never lasts for long and hubris gets the better of everybody.
There is in fact serious trouble in the parliamentary party, but it's not about this tiny band of malcontents doing the media rounds.
I think I also perceived that there would be more toxic office politics and having to 'sell yourself' to go further in the private sector... again, I think an oversimplified view of the world.
I had little choice,my upbringing was pre determined, the Grammar school I attended had only one way out, that was University.
The careers advisory tutor, was staggered when I chose Engineering,we were supposed to choose Priesthood, and second best Religious studies Teacher.
Engineering taught a logical discipline, employment and running a business, finished my training,and that is how I became moderately right wing.
I'm willing to bet that mostly people vote for the party although MP's can have large personal votes it's not enough to overcome the party vote.
Lets say that for instance Liz Kendall needs a by-election, she is:
a.Not very popular with Labour voters.
b.Popular among Tory voters.
So she would need a minimum of 10% of the electorate to be her own personal vote assuming a full commitment by the Tory party to support her and without any Tory leaks to UKIP if the Tory-Kendall candidacy becomes unappealing to some Tories.
Similarly Danzcuk will need an even larger minimum personal vote (14%) to at least cost Labour the seat.
The implications for the EUref are that voters are going to be swayed by similar factors. The winning side is going to be the one that has the meme that appeals to the majority.
Anyway, my point was that many people may have known, suspected or guessed that there was the mother of all internecine battles going on within Lab and between Blair/Brown.
But in public it was all smiles and business as usual.
You had to be relatively geeky or politico-y to work it out. But this is front and centre all over the papers, radio, you name it.
Hence my question - which perhaps you have answered. The public is not interested in politics to a hitherto (to me) unthought of degree.