|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 19, 2020, 10:40:58 am
News:
If you are having trouble logging in due to invalid user name / pass:

Consider resetting your account password, as you may have forgotten it over time if using a password manager.

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: Gustaf, afleitch, Hash)
  United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 ... 70
Author Topic: United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019  (Read 90493 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 63,294
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1350 on: December 09, 2019, 08:52:41 am »

You can read too much into this sort of thing, but from the tone of some of their tweets and the little summary article they put together, Survation don't seem to be particularly happy with the sample for that poll. A lot of emphasis put on it being 'just a snapshot' and so on - familiar euphemisms. Such things do, of course, happen - they are even statistically unavoidable.

Of course the very odd and abnormal nature of so much of this election means that it technically isn't impossible that a sample that seems to stink isn't bad. Who knows.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 63,294
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1351 on: December 09, 2019, 08:58:54 am »

How much damage can the Brexit Party do to Labour?

No one really knows what their impact will be, in any sense.
Logged
Lord Halifax
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,283
Papua New Guinea


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1352 on: December 09, 2019, 10:02:44 am »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink

Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,340
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1353 on: December 09, 2019, 10:06:09 am »

I mean, that's very nice looking, but it is basically just guesswork. Not that I think the polls are definitely right of course, I've thought for quite a while that the pollsters don't have the tiniest idea of what kind of electorate will turn out on Thursday.
Logged
7sergi9
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 295


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1354 on: December 09, 2019, 10:06:30 am »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink



Lol
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1355 on: December 09, 2019, 10:07:23 am »

All the polls are wrong. Just thought I'd let you guys know. Wink



Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.

Anyway...



Con+6 appears to be the Tories low end right now, with Con+12 the high end. Fairly good spread pointing towards something like +8/9.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,286
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1356 on: December 09, 2019, 11:10:40 am »
« Edited: December 09, 2019, 11:30:39 am by cp »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1357 on: December 09, 2019, 11:50:06 am »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.

Polling companies by their nature are supposed  to try and get accurate numbers. They do not want to release bad data because the people paying for these polls won't give the  polling company money in the future if the results are just going to be off. I remember how hungover it was around the YouGov office after Brexit because we had put out the 'exit poll' calling a Remain victory, and I also remember the proverbial champagne coming out after 2017 for a similar reason.

If you start messing around with naturally low crosstabs then you are asking for trouble. How many times on this forum have people noticed how high the GOP vote in the crosstabs is with African Americans? Or what about the Urban/Suburban/Rural breakdown? Or how about in this very thread, where we have to be cautious about low-response constituency polls.

Now, why might groups be weighted in some fashion? I dunno, perhaps because the electorate is going to be different than 2017? Is that really hard to believe, especially considering how different the circumstances are between the two elections? All but the worst pollsters (McLaughlin) have no reason to lie with their data, so this is their best estimate. If they are off, they will be off, and we will know either with YouGov on Tuesday or the exits on Thursday.

If the polls are going to be off, it won't be because we went diving into the weights and found errors. Rather it is what I alluded to earlier: there is a high number of undecided voters this late into the campaign. British polls love to remove these guys from the topline, but if they move as a block (who knows...) than the polls can be both right and off.
Logged
Serenity Now
tomm_86
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,158
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1358 on: December 09, 2019, 12:01:40 pm »

I've noticed some modelling has come out from an organisation called Datapraxis which was founded by Paul Hilder, who has been associated the the Open Democracy website and various other left-leaning online campaigns. While it doesn't seem to provide an interactive guide for all constituencies, it does provide themed reports based on modelling for selected constituencies. Here's the URL links to the reports:

https://www.dataprax.is/65-battleground-seats-for-labour
https://www.dataprax.is/65-battleground-seats-for-labour
https://www.dataprax.is/tory-landslide-or-hung-parliament
https://www.dataprax.is/seven-seats-that-could-change-brita
https://www.dataprax.is/24-seats-where-liberal-democrats-co

The first report concludes that they think there is "absolutely no chance of a Labour majority" and that the "likeliest scenario remains a significant Tory majority" but with the caveat that "Anti-Tory tactical voting, Labour Leavers coming home and increased youth turnout could block Boris Johnson from forming the next government."

I have not yet been able to look into this in enough detail to get any idea of how good or bad their model is.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,286
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1359 on: December 09, 2019, 12:15:14 pm »


snip

Oh yeah I saw some labourite mentioning this guy earlier. You know your side isn't doing so hot when the Romney style "unskew'ers" come out of the woodwork.


I think that's a little unfair. The unskewed polls guy from 2012 assumed incorrectly that because Republicans in 2012 were more 'engaged' than Democrats, any polling that didn't have GOP/Dem party identification at least equal were using unrepresentative samples. (Note the logical leap: 'engagement' =/= 'party ID').

The Dr Moderate thread/logic is, as far as I can gather, all about weighting, not sampling. They note few polling companies (read: Kantar) are underweighting youth turnout and overweighting 65+ turnout, leading to abnormally high Tory numbers in individual polls and an inflation of the aggregate polling average. This is quite readily observable in the relevant pollster's data, and has been commented upon on here more than once. They also argue Leavers are being overweighted and new (likely to be Remainer/young/non-Tory) voters are being underweighted. The former point I'm not too sure about, but the latter point seems valid, as polling companies do appear to double weight young, previous non-voters in their modeling.

Obviously there's a degree of motivated reasoning going on, at least for me, but I think there's more credibility here than with the unskewed polls guy.

Polling companies by their nature are supposed  to try and get accurate numbers. They do not want to release bad data because the people paying for these polls won't give the  polling company money in the future if the results are just going to be off. I remember how hungover it was around the YouGov office after Brexit because we had put out the 'exit poll' calling a Remain victory, and I also remember the proverbial champagne coming out after 2017 for a similar reason.

If you start messing around with naturally low crosstabs then you are asking for trouble. How many times on this forum have people noticed how high the GOP vote in the crosstabs is with African Americans? Or what about the Urban/Suburban/Rural breakdown? Or how about in this very thread, where we have to be cautious about low-response constituency polls.

Now, why might groups be weighted in some fashion? I dunno, perhaps because the electorate is going to be different than 2017? Is that really hard to believe, especially considering how different the circumstances are between the two elections? All but the worst pollsters (McLaughlin) have no reason to lie with their data, so this is their best estimate. If they are off, they will be off, and we will know either with YouGov on Tuesday or the exits on Thursday.

If the polls are going to be off, it won't be because we went diving into the weights and found errors. Rather it is what I alluded to earlier: there is a high number of undecided voters this late into the campaign. British polls love to remove these guys from the topline, but if they move as a block (who knows...) than the polls can be both right and off.

Well, yes, but then the issue at hand is *how* one believes the 2019 electorate will be different and what premises led one to that conclusion. I'd be fascinated to read what YouGov (or any other pollster's) logic is for adjusting the weighting as they do. If they make a convincing case based on reasonable assumptions and/or polling, then they lend credence to their results. If not, or in the absence of such explanations, we're left with little more than reputation and venerability on which to base a conclusion. The Twitter thread referenced above at least gives something of a justification.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1360 on: December 09, 2019, 12:21:05 pm »



Okay, this is a serious problem for Labour.

These were the barometers from 2017:



And these are the ones so far in 2019, currently without the poll released today:



So this is effectively comparable to the last Barometer of 2017. The barometers from that campaign more or less followed the national picture at the period of polling. The final barometer was very accurate, and well within the  margin of error. Therefore, this could be very close to the final welsh results, maybe slightly underpolling Labour.

So lets start with the seats. Labour fortunately has little to fear in regards to their welsh majority. The southern Valley's either have too large Labour majorities or too prominent Remain leads for the Tories to pierce them. Boris regaining Gower, Bridgend, or Cardiff North, or say picking up a Newport seat would be a serious shock. In this election, therefore Labour likely has a floor of 22ish thanks to their geographic advantage.

That floor of 22 though is separated by a large gap from their present ceiling. The majorities  in the northern Leave seats are far more shaky, and Labour is likely to lose  more votes up there than in the inflexable south. This poll spells it out plainly enough: it would be a surprise if Labour held one of their six northern seats. Five are going Blue, and one is a Tory/PC battleground.

Finally, the Lib-Dem number is to small to inferr anything serious from. Depending on how concentrated their vote is in the two seats where it matters, Ceridigion and B & R, they could have a decent night.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 63,294
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1361 on: December 09, 2019, 12:49:46 pm »

Given that the poll suggests a swing of around 6pts and most of the seats in question have 2017 majorities that would fall at pretty much that exact point, I'm not sure how you get to 'this poll suggests no chance at holding any' from that?

Anyway, Welsh polling is historically very volatile - it can sometimes be about right, but it can also be quite badly off and in all potential directions.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 63,294
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1362 on: December 09, 2019, 12:52:12 pm »

So this happened today.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,286
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1363 on: December 09, 2019, 12:59:16 pm »


It gets worse (for the Tories). Matt Hancock, the Health Secretary, made an unscheduled trip to the hospital. He was heckled as he left, but the BBC falsely reported it (based on 'Tory sources', of course) as a Labour activist punching a Tory aide. Considering this is the event in question, I'd say it's *just possible* that was a misleading source.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1364 on: December 09, 2019, 01:54:55 pm »

Given that the poll suggests a swing of around 6pts and most of the seats in question have 2017 majorities that would fall at pretty much that exact point, I'm not sure how you get to 'this poll suggests no chance at holding any' from that?

Anyway, Welsh polling is historically very volatile - it can sometimes be about right, but it can also be quite badly off and in all potential directions.

Because vote efficiency is a thing. Labour loses votes easier outside of the Valleys these days than inside. Generally, the Valleys are inflexible. So a implied 6% swing is far larger than said 6% in the  north of Wales, and less in the south.

This is the great fallacy of national swing: seats do not swing uniformly unless it becomes a landslide. As well all know, demographics move differently. it's why the MRP is so powerful, and it is why Bassetlaw flips before Canterbury. In 2017, when Labour surged to match May's Conservatives, the picture was very spotty. In 1/3 of seats (non-scot or NI), labour gained more than their national swing; these seats were mostly in London, the surrounding Remain shires, and other urban areas across the country. In about 1/3 of seats, the Tories had a positive swing; mostly in the North/Northeast, East Midlands, and other areas that gave overwhleming Leave majorities. In between these two poles was the other 1/3 of seats that swung to Labour by less then the national swing.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1365 on: December 09, 2019, 02:50:22 pm »



Next poll to release.
Logged
Cassius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,079


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1366 on: December 09, 2019, 02:50:44 pm »

If that Welsh poll is on the money I wouldn’t rule out the Tories winning Gower and Bridgend. Bridgend is not part of the Welsh valleys and has had a rather different political trajectory to the valleys seats to the north of it. The Tories have always had a solid base of votes there, even in elections like 1997, and it has been fairly marginal since 2010. Gower is a slightly odd constituency, being one part ex-industrial (and sometimes still partly-industrial, like Clydach) areas in the Swansea valley proper and to the west of it (Pontarddulais), and part rural farming and touristy country (the Gower peninsula). It too is a marginal and the Tories actually won it, very narrowly, in 2015, which was ironic given that it had been represented by a Labour MP for over a century. The margins in the referendum seem to have been very narrow and they are not the kind of places where there will be a large, intensely pro-EU vote to help Labour, although the planned closure of the Ford plant in Bridgend, (which Ford blamed on Brexit), may provoke some kind of anti-Brexit backlash there.

Cardiff North may be less likely to fall, given that it’s much more affluent and given the fact Cardiff voted to Remain by such a large margin in 2016, which could make it a bit stickier for Labour in a two horse race. I wouldn’t be surprised though if the Tories get a lot of close results in Wales but ultimately underperform that poll and make very few (or no) gains on the night.
Logged
DistingFlyer
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 394
Canada


Political Matrix
E: 0.25, S: -1.74

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1367 on: December 09, 2019, 03:15:43 pm »
« Edited: December 09, 2019, 04:28:50 pm by DistingFlyer »

Three-day poll aggregate update (9 Dec):

Cons - 43.4% (-0.1%), 352 MPs (+34)
Lab - 32.9% (-8.2%), 216 MPs (-46)
Lib Dem - 12.4% (+4.9%), 17 MPs (+5)
Nat - 4.2% (+0.6%), 46 MPs (+7)
GP - 2.2% (+0.6%), 1 MP

Overall majority: 54
Overall swing: 4.0% to Cons

The polls indicating 6% and 14-15% leads to have come out in the last day or so appear to have created a net change of almost nil; the three-day averages have remained almost identical for the last week. Sometimes such steadiness is a precursor to a surprise last-minute swing, but just as often it's not.
Logged
King of Kensington
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,803


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1368 on: December 09, 2019, 03:22:25 pm »

Only Boris Johnson can save us from the anti-Semitic Corbynites:

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-book-jews-control-media-general-election-a9239346.html
Logged
Cassius
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 3,079


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1369 on: December 09, 2019, 03:33:38 pm »

Really desperate stuff.

The most tragic thing is that someone, somewhere, has actually chosen to wade through that turgid novel and given it a close reading in the hopes of gleaning something controversial for publication in that comic.
Logged
TheDeadFlagBlues
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,905
Mexico


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1370 on: December 09, 2019, 03:34:07 pm »

Boris Johnson's ghoulish reaction to the image of the boy in the hospital is about the worst possible story for the Tories in the most critical period of the campaign because it puts the spotlight on the NHS' problems while suggesting that Boris Johnson will do nothing to solve them. Considering that 8-12% of voters remain Undecided and that the Tory lead is ~8 points when Undecideds are taken into account, this could be devastating for the Tories...

Seems like the sort of story that cuts through for a week tbh. I expect the Tories to try to slam a bunch of rats on the table to change the topic. The extent to which they do this will reveal how damaging the story is.
Logged
The Hunt for the Red October Surprise
Fubart Solman
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 6,069
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1371 on: December 09, 2019, 04:06:54 pm »

Boris Johnson's ghoulish reaction to the image of the boy in the hospital is about the worst possible story for the Tories in the most critical period of the campaign because it puts the spotlight on the NHS' problems while suggesting that Boris Johnson will do nothing to solve them. Considering that 8-12% of voters remain Undecided and that the Tory lead is ~8 points when Undecideds are taken into account, this could be devastating for the Tories...

Seems like the sort of story that cuts through for a week tbh. I expect the Tories to try to slam a bunch of rats on the table to change the topic. The extent to which they do this will reveal how damaging the story is.

I wish that British polls had undecided numbers.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,266
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1372 on: December 09, 2019, 04:53:59 pm »

Boris Johnson's ghoulish reaction to the image of the boy in the hospital is about the worst possible story for the Tories in the most critical period of the campaign because it puts the spotlight on the NHS' problems while suggesting that Boris Johnson will do nothing to solve them. Considering that 8-12% of voters remain Undecided and that the Tory lead is ~8 points when Undecideds are taken into account, this could be devastating for the Tories...

Seems like the sort of story that cuts through for a week tbh. I expect the Tories to try to slam a bunch of rats on the table to change the topic. The extent to which they do this will reveal how damaging the story is.

Remember that postal votes are being sent in at the moment. Also, any major change might not be picked up in time; some people will decide in the booth.

As for me, I'm in a safe Conservative seat and since I find a lot of stuff about Labour objectionable at present, I intend to vote Lib Dem to bolster their national numbers.
Logged
Oryxslayer
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,858


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1373 on: December 09, 2019, 05:01:20 pm »
« Edited: December 09, 2019, 05:04:28 pm by Oryxslayer »







(Last?) Three Deltapoll constituency polls are re-polls of the West London seats. On their first pass, it appeared closer to the higher end up London expectations. This time, we have entered the more average projection. Now, the overwhelming amount of voters here are still open to tactical voting and would still comfortably elect Lib-Dems if it was only a Lib-Dem and a Tory with a realistic shot at winning. However, it no longer is. Throwing Putney and Wimbledon onto the pile for good measure we get a collection of seats now where a majority of voters will likely not want Conservatives, but the two groups who are willing to kick out the conservatives have different goals. Now, this is one of the best regions demographically for tactical voting to occur, so perhaps these  polls will actually influence the final outcome. The picture  however now is far more murky than how it appeared six weeks ago.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,266
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1374 on: December 09, 2019, 05:14:57 pm »

Finchley & Golders Green isn't West London, it's North. It's noteworthy as it's a Tory marginal that was Labour from 1997 until 2010. Secondly, the previous seat used to have Margaret Thatcher sit for it.

Thirdly and most importantly here, that general area has the highest Jewish population in the UK; on the times I've been through the south of it on London Overground, there's been at least one Haredi Jew on the train.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 50 51 52 53 54 [55] 56 57 58 59 60 ... 70  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.688 seconds with 13 queries.