politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Trying to work out who will turn out in the referendum of J

As we get closer to the referendum there’s a lot of effort going on to try look at the polling more closely so we don’t end with another GE2015.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Meanwhile, what's going on over in Trumpville?
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/mar/30/donald-trump-revokes-pledge-to-support-republican-nominee
something significant? or nothing unusual?
I know I keep banging on about this, but we really need to know whether there has been any appreciable underlying shift in opinion one way or another.
The current suspicion is that LEAVE has been closing the gap somewhat, although it is only a suspicion and if this is indeed the case, it might explain why Dave has decided that he needs time to think things through .... a bit late for all that I would have thought!
Interesting that the phone effect as as much as a 7.5% range from the mid-point. But, if so, why did online favour (broadly) the leftish parties last time round? Was it really just a crappy sample that YouGov fixed in place?
Trump says he won't back Cruz as the nominee as he's not been treated fairly, Cruz is refusing to confirm that he'd still back Trump.
Kasich is backing off too. Sahil Kapur tweeted the whole thing, worth reading his timeline.
What a circus.
https://t.co/eg07oxlIwE
That certain to vote figure is likely too high, but if it applied across the board, we'd get the following certain to vote numbers by social class/age.
18-34 year olds. AB 53%, C1 47%, C2 40%, DE 35%.
35-54 year olds AB 80%, C1 74%, C2 67%, DE 62%.
55+ AB 85%, C1 79%, C2 72%, DE 67%.
This bit on forced choice is interesting I'm not sure that it's helpful to anyone for people to pick a side when they haven't decided.
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/mar/29/support-leaving-eu-referendum-overstated-polls-analysis-suggests
Not my area of expertise, but it did read a little like whistling in the dark.
It's really all about the turnout, nothing else. Anything significantly (5%+) below GE levels and Leave wins. At around GE levels it will be close. Above GE levels and Remain wins.
The breakdown of turnout by SE group and age below looks about right to me. I am not convinced that low turnout favours Leave.
I really don't understand how this is relevant to the certainty to vote in the referendum. There is no comparator and if Leave supporters are more strongly motivated, and there seems some evidence for that, then they are more likely to vote in this referendum than they were in the general.
The motivation factors are on a different level but Sindy was an example of this. Poor run down areas, where turnout is traditionally very poor had much higher turnout than had ever been seen before. Many of these people were not even on the electoral register until shortly before Sindy, they were consistent non voters, and yet they turned out.
All of this makes the job of the Pollsters very difficult because there are no effective comparators but the idea that if we have 60% turnout for Brexit it will necessarily be the same dutiful ABs who bother to turn up in general and local elections seems to me to be a very uncertain base from which to work. A different approach, unfortunately subjective and relying on self assessment, would be to ask who cares enough to vote in the referendum. It might give a different answer.
No excuse if turnout is not great though - people cannot complain it will be devastating to future young people, in the event if a leave vote, or so critical we need to vote again this generation, in The event if a remain win, if turnout is low. So I hope it is high.
The people who turnout to vote are generally those people who always do.
Amongst the public I never hear the EU discussed after from by committed Leavers, which is very rare.
Low turnout, narrow Leave win, only those that care will be bothered to vote and there's not enough Remainers who'll miss the European football to vote.
Top three news stories on UK radio: potential steel nationalisation, middle east plane hijacking, EU referendum. Did I wake up in the 70s?
I hear supporters of Remain talking fairly often, at work, at social gatherings, even down the pub watching the footy.
Jacks ARSE was pretty close to the pb NOJAM consensus. I would be more confident of the former than the latter in terms of past prediction. Probing the internals of Jacks ARSE is not for the fainthearted, but it does seem quite weighted by demographic breakdown.
I really hope this is an instance of things not being as crazy as they seem, otherwise it's very worrying.
https://twitter.com/faisalislam?ref_src=twsrc^google|twcamp^serp|twgr^author
I remain able to make a good case for both leave and remain and able to demolish arguments being made for both leave or remain - neither camp is convincing. Ultimately it's a complex issue and punters don't do complex. Whoever can distill this down into a simple message and communicate it effectively will win by persuading the undecided to (a) back their side and (b) go and vote.
I think the Leave camp's simple message is probably self-determination - you can't control your borders and set your laws and stay in the EU. For remain they're trying various "jobs" and "security" arguments which are nullified by leave making the same case in reverse. I've argued for "project terror" instead of project fear and think it could work - foreign investment and foreign manufacturing will all leave so that's your kids future knackered. But I wouldn't deploy that until the final fortnight. Otherwise I struggle with how Remain funds a simple cut through persuasive message. Which is why in my opinion Leave are winning this.
It could just be that an Ambrose Evans-Pritchard report in the Daily Telegraph is not the most disinterested source of information on this case :-)
Perish the thought.
There's a huge difference between outlawing speech and sacking someone who criticises you.
It will be interesting to see how Tata workers vote
As you say the greatest challenge is that punters don't do complex. There is one school of thought (I ascribe to it 49%) that says this doesn't matter because they will decide what they decide regardless of whether it is deemed optimal by one side or the other.
As for pithy one-liners (the next PB competition?), how about:
Leave: The right to manage our country, our laws, and our economy without interference.
Remain: Create and shape our future in a strong Europe engaging with the world.
It is often considered the "polite" attitudinal response by respondents, and that follows through with face-to-face research. In the anonymity of the polling booth, however.
In Sindy and GE2015 polling, phone polls were less accurate than online polls at gauging the left/right spectrum, and certain pollsters are pretty conspicuous for their margins of inaccuracy.
My rule of thumb with all of them is to take their results, and then adjust for how wrong they normally are.
It worked reasonably well last May.
You have to get to the pub early if trying to watch away games, difficult to get a view otherwise. People talk about many things while waiting for the games.
Remain needs to counter the inward looking nature of its arguments.
Firstly, is it really a problem? Personally I'd say yes: making steel could be seen as a vital national capability. But is that true, and if so, how much, and what kind of steel?
Secondly, what are the issues facing the national steel industry? After all, it has been contracting for years. energy prices? China dumping steel? Lack of investment? Poor productivity? Poor management?
Thirdly, how do the proposed solutions (e.g. nationalisation) go towards curing or itigating those problems?
I'd have loved the left to have screamed this much when Butterley shut down after two hundred years of brilliant specialist steelmaking and fabrication. But that happened under a Labour government, so they said nothing ...
If people wanted to answer, they would have.
Pushing people gathers unconvincing responses and will often drive respondents to say what they think they 'should' say.
In part, that's a comparison between chalk and cheese, as at least 10% of names on the electoral register are dead/moved/double counted.
What is the United States - outside the EU's - tariff?
Whichever way they play this - their subservience to the EU becomes obvious.
S&P cuts eurozone growth projections to 1.5% 2016 (versus 1.8%) and to 1.6% in 2017. Eurozone economies "flying on one engine" - consumers
Looks to me from the Faisal Islam{Javid} excerpts that it is the EU looking for the "protectionist" measures.
Faisal Islam's work isn't convienent to any "leaver" campaigning near say Port Talbot, and no doubt the perception will be different to the reality, but it seems to be as close to the truth as far as I can tell right now.
Other EU nations haven't done this. Why have we? In France there was a national scandal when Eurostar bought Siemens trains instead of Alstom. Here we seem giddy that Hitachi has opened a warehouse to screw together imported train components for a few years before shutting the place citing lack of orders.
The above graph is one of the reasons I have yet to budge from thinking we'll have a comfortable Remain win.
Saying “I support the EU because I like Europe” is rather like saying “I support FIFA because I like football”.
#VoteLeave @Vote_Leave
Would football be better without FIFA?
Would FIFA be better is we left it?
The Leftists are making a huge fuss and looking uglier every time. No wonder Trump's supporters are getting louder.
I don't bother with any UK commentary on him. It's almost all ill-informed nonsense.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-35922858
To be fair, this is less ridiculous than wanting to ban a 1920s or Oriental Express ball because of (allegedly) racism.
Nowadays where something is made can be difficult. Take the case you mentioned: the new Hitachi trains being 'made' in the new factory at (sp?)Ayton Newcliffe. For the first batch of trains, the bodyshells are coming in from Japan. The diesel engines for the bi-mode trains are from MTU of Germany. The pantographs are from the brilliant British company Brecknell Willis.
Are they British-made trains? And will they be when they finally start making bodyshells?
But you are being unfair on Hitachi: they have moved their global rail business from Japan to the UK. That is a real sign of confidence in us.
As I've said before on here, a chip designed for a British firm was manufactured in China, packaged in Austria, sent to America for testing, and then to Britain for sale. Yet the most valuable part - the IP - is British. If you buy the chip from them, not a single part was made in Britain. But where was it made?
Whilst it's not my cup of tea, the EU prevents Leftists from intervention on issues they feel strongly about.
20 years to get a result?
Justice delayed and all that
There is something wrong with the UK govt's approach to industry (possibly excessive business rates and energy taxes) when TATA feel that they should concentrate their European steel making in the Netherlands, not exactly a low cost country.
For all its faults FIFA enables and facilitates football in its member states.
Prob not what @Plato meant, that said.
It's also demonstrably untrue.
It's the only way the Remain campaign feel they can drive the apathetic but Remain inclined non-voters into the polling booth.
the alleged victim is hardly a leftist though.
And while Trump's supporters get louder they will look more misogynist
Important to understand whether this is based on employment law or on some wider principle. Most organisations will dismiss employees who breach confidentiality or who criticise their employers publicly. If it is based on a wider principle i.e. that the EU should be beyond criticism then that is wrong and very worrying indeed.
Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we can do so.
Under Remain, we have no choice, even if we don't want to do something or don't agree or don't think it is the right priority
So let's leave FIFA and start our own World Cup.
Dan you are a star get the analogy on those BSE pizza leaflets.
"So, you've invoked Article 50, what kind of future relationship would you like with the EU?"
"Errrr... We'll get back to you on that."
It's entirely possible we'd want further discussions, and maybe even a new government, before we decided what we want.
I have a bit of sympathy for Trump and his sidekick on the alleged battery - grabbing someone approaching the candidate by the arm is the sort of thing anyone might do in a crowded room with emotions running high. I'm surprised it's actually going to court.
The more significant thing is that it is increasingly apparent that Trump won't endorse another candidate and they won't endorse him. That has to be wonderful news for Hillary. If Trump is selected, I imagine his rivals will say they're going to vote GOP in everything from Senate to dog-catcher but they'll sit out the Presidential election. But it's also becoming clearer that unlikely allies like Cruz and Kasich are going to make common cause at the convention if they can stop Trump. Perhaps a simple Cruz-Kasich ticket might be possible even though Kasich has so far ruled it out.
Do you think it's different for France and Germany ?
Yet they still keep their major industries going.
Do you not worry about not having capacity to make steel in this country? Given that we tend to be involved in continental conflicts at least every 100 years, I'd say moving towards relying on imports for a basic commodity such as steel is foolish. And I think most would agree I am generally a free trader.
And if the govt have been actively working against raising steel tariffs as seems to be suggested down thread, there is a huge risk of govt action sounding like hypocrisy.
At the moment, I'm not sure I'd even vote for this govt in a by-election.
For all its faults, there are some things the Eu does that cannot be done from without. Are they important? People will disagree, but it's at least reasonable in theory if not in practice, unlike Fifa.
However the analogy is a good one, as it is about falsely conflating things.
FIFA wouldn't be better without us - but we have tried to reform it and failed. Far better to breakaway and set up a fresh, better organisation than support the corrupt institution it has become.
You are falling into the "something must be done. this is something. it must be done" fallacy
The problem with that is that if the co-operation with Europe and the world is not in their interest, they have no reason to do so. Leavers act as though we will have the say on everything.
it should be: "Leave's philosophy is that where co-operation with Europe and with the world is in the UK's interests we may be able to do so, if it is in their interests as well."
we could easily end up with worse deals than we have at the moment.
Which is why he is threatening to do so.