United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019

[Oryxslayer]

Anyway, the SNP have now joined the LibDems and filed a legal suit with ITV over their decision to make the first debate 1v1. The SNP is citing their position as 3rd largest party, the LibDems cited their competitive poll numbers, numbers that are similar to what Clegg had before the surge. Essentially ITV needed to set out SOME parameters for getting into their debate, they could have been high AF and restricted it to the top two, but setting out none and saying top two looks like you're playing favorites.

[Serenity Now]

Kantar's first poll of the campaign: Con 37, Lab 27, LDem 17, BP 9, Greens 3, SNP 3, Others 3

This is possibly of some minor interest as throughout the Autumn, Kantar had been consistent in showing Conservative leads of 14pts.

For what it's worth (very little) that poll apparently showed a 1pt Labour lead before demographics were weighted by likelihood to vote. If true the 'interesting' part of this, I guess, is the implied importance for Labour of boosting turnout.

[Serenity Now]

Still no polling from Scotland.

To me that seems pretty crazy.

[jaichind]

The lastest yougov poll does it both ways (exclude BXP for voters where BXP have stood down AND just display BXP for everyone)

The result where one removes BXP where BXP is not standing gives

CON    42
LAB     28
LDEM  15
BXP      4
Green   4

The one that have BXP everywhere

CON   39
LAB    26
LDM   16
BXP     9

https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/w3ohbvr6zt/Sky_TheTimes_VI_191112_w.pdf

By looking at 2016 Leave vs Remain votes it seems most BXP voters when not given BXP as a choice mostly went CON or Other (BXP rebels?).  For 2016 Remain voters by not having BXP as an option actually shifted some LDEM voters over to LAB (tactical voting now that they see BXP is not there to split the CON vote?)

Anyway this poll seems to show that in Southern seats (where CON mostly won in 2017) the BXP voter are mostly CON voters.  I suspect in the North the BXP voter are much more likely to be LAB Leave voters so BXP running there does take LAB votes that would otherwise go back to LAB if BXP is not running.

[Quislings Anonymous]

A Northern Ireland Poll appears!

https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/status/1194716512411631617?s=21

DUP: 28% (-1)
SF: 24% (-1)
ALL: 16% (-5)
SDLP: 14% (+6)
UUP: 9% (=)

Polling taken 30 Oct to Nov 1, before Hermon dropped out
Changes from early August

https://twitter.com/electionmapsuk/status/1194718137511534592?s=21

[God-Empress Stacey I of House Abrams]

Huh, why is the SDLP surging back into relevance all of a sudden?

[Silent Hunter]

Sinn Fein are abstentionists, so people feel that's giving the Tories half a seat for free.

[God-Empress Stacey I of House Abrams]

Sinn Fein are abstentionists, so people feel that's giving the Tories half a seat for free.

The swings suggest that it's mostly Alliance voters switching to them though.

[Oryxslayer]

Huh, why is the SDLP surging back into relevance all of a sudden?

They are seriously contesting, and potentially likely to win two seats. Foyle has their leader running and its a straight Sinn/SDLP fight there so nobody fears vote splits. South Belfast is kinda a three way, but the DUP are sending out feelers that the seat may already be lost, we just don't know if its going to be to the Alliance or to SDLP. There is also the cross-party endorsements and stand-downs that occurred between the remainers. Contrast this with the UUP who are failing to find good candidates and only really have a shot in F&S and maybe north down if they become the anti-DUP candidate, not the Alliance. But those two are tossups at best, whereas the SLDP's were potentially leaning in their favor before today. Now South Down may even be in the cards.

[CumbrianLeftie]

Kantar's first poll of the campaign: Con 37, Lab 27, LDem 17, BP 9, Greens 3, SNP 3, Others 3

This is possibly of some minor interest as throughout the Autumn, Kantar had been consistent in showing Conservative leads of 14pts.

For what it's worth (very little) that poll apparently showed a 1pt Labour lead before demographics were weighted by likelihood to vote. If true the 'interesting' part of this, I guess, is the implied importance for Labour of boosting turnout.

The "certain to vote" figure amongst 18-24 year olds was reportedly a completely ridiculous 10%.

[Pericles]

DaWN what do you see as the realistic best case scenario for the election? It seems to me that since only Labour or the conservatives can realistically form the government, in most constituencies people should vote Labour even if they aren't enthusiastically for Corbyn.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Kantar's first poll of the campaign: Con 37, Lab 27, LDem 17, BP 9, Greens 3, SNP 3, Others 3

This is possibly of some minor interest as throughout the Autumn, Kantar had been consistent in showing Conservative leads of 14pts.

For what it's worth (very little) that poll apparently showed a 1pt Labour lead before demographics were weighted by likelihood to vote. If true the 'interesting' part of this, I guess, is the implied importance for Labour of boosting turnout.

The "certain to vote" figure amongst 18-24 year olds was reportedly a completely ridiculous 10%.

Interesting. Of course this is a big feature of polling these days - they are no longer social surveys that ask a political question, but an attempt to guess the 'right' result. The polling failure at the last election was to a great extent a result of that: assumptions being made, polls being adjusted accordingly... and those assumptions turning out to be incorrect.

Not that this means we can simply assume the same will happen again and in the exact same way and direction (that's voodoo), but it is something to be eternally aware of.

[Pericles]

Yeah I think there'll probably be some sort of polling error, but it's very risky to guess what the error would be. Maybe it will be a 2015-style polling error or a 2017-style polling error, or maybe the LibDems or Brexit party are significantly overestimated or underestimated by the polls. Even a regional polling error, if the SNP is overrated by 5% or underrated by 5%, could have a meaningful impact on the results.

[EastAnglianLefty]

Again, to equate Corbyn himself with Ruth George, the individual pro-Remain Labour MP in question, is disingenuously misguided.

When the time comes, Duffield, George and all the other Remainer Labour MPs will do what Corbyn tells them to or face instant deselection.

One of the underconsidered stories of the past few months has been how few Labour MPs actually got triggered. None of those triggered can be considered a particularly strong Remainer, with the possible exception of Hodge (who was primarily triggered for being a strong critic of Corbyn and who comfortably won the reselection ballot.) Several of those triggered, on the other hand, were on the more Brexit-y wing of the party. There are other things at play besides that, of course, but some conclusions can still be drawn.

[Blair]

Again, to equate Corbyn himself with Ruth George, the individual pro-Remain Labour MP in question, is disingenuously misguided.

When the time comes, Duffield, George and all the other Remainer Labour MPs will do what Corbyn tells them to or face instant deselection.

One of the underconsidered stories of the past few months has been how few Labour MPs actually got triggered. None of those triggered can be considered a particularly strong Remainer, with the possible exception of Hodge (who was primarily triggered for being a strong critic of Corbyn and who comfortably won the reselection ballot.) Several of those triggered, on the other hand, were on the more Brexit-y wing of the party. There are other things at play besides that, of course, but some conclusions can still be drawn.

Yes Dawn is being either woefully wrong about the internal dynamics in the Labour Party or engaging in pearl clutching. There's not a single case of an MP being deselected over being too pro EU & if you think Corbyn has the power to point and deselect ask how Neil Coyle, Ian Murray and the most vitriolic anti-Corbyn MPs sailed through...

There's at least 50 MPs who have rebelled regularly & are actively encouraged and supported by their local party.

There's another 50 who have proved wiling to also rebel against the leadership

[DaWN]

DaWN what do you see as the realistic best case scenario for the election? It seems to me that since only Labour or the conservatives can realistically form the government, in most constituencies people should vote Labour even if they aren't enthusiastically for Corbyn.

Some kind of Labour-Lib Dem agreement probably. But even that comes with a few caveats
1) I'm not sure Lab+LD on their own reaching a majority counts as realistic and any government with the SNP in it is not a government worth having
2) The Lib Dems have not exactly proven themselves as the sharpest party of them all over the last few days so their ability to actually stop Corbyn doing anything bad is probably limited
3) Let's not forget what happened the last time the Lib Dems went into a coalition... so their ability to actually stop Corbyn doing anything bad is probably limited.

I've been resigned to a bad election outcome for a long time though.

EDIT: It also doesn't mean I think Labour deserves the vote of any Remainer because they don't

[GoTfan]

I think the point is that a lot of Lib Dems at least feel they can get something out of Corbyn, while they can't with anyone else.

[Helsinkian]

Conservatives -- party of the working class.

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Not this **** again.

a) the 'social grade' system was faulty even in the 1970s and is a complete disaster now; it in no way reflects the realities of a service sector economy with a very large elderly population (it is true, by the way, pensioners are routinely rolled into category DE by some polling firms).* I can go into far too much detail about this if anyone is interested: I have done before. But for now: how many people in Great Britain consider, for example, nursing to be a middle class occupation? I suspect not many. I wonder how many people (in the countryside, where this is relevant) consider farmers to be working class? No one.

b) even were this not so, YouGov's peculiar polling methods happen to make their internal numbers completely worthless anyway. It's some real voodoo nonsense. Rubbish.

c) even were this not so, different polling firms internals show very different figures and patterns, not just from YouGov but from each other. In fact the main thing that shows up when one monitors numbers for these categories over even a short period of time (say, a month) is how absurdly volatile they are. Which is not surprising as they are almost random categories by this point.

d) this actually takes us back to a) because there are serious issues with sampling for some of the categories, particularly C2 which is a notorious disaster.

e) even were all of this not so, poll internals are not polls or surveys themselves, but a way of making sure that the poll was conducted with an appropriately balanced sample. The way they are thrown around by people who know this but have commercial reasons to ignore that fact amounts to the pollution of public discourse.

f) you wouldn't give your bank details to a 'Nigerian Prince', you don't believe anything hawked by Matthew Badwin.

_{*And there are reasons to be a mildly dubious as to how thorough the ones that say they do not do this actually are.}

[Walmart_shopper]

Conservatives -- party of the working class.

https://twitter.com/GoodwinMJ/status/1194917892527022080

It must be all of the economic distress that EU subsidies cause people.

[jaichind]

Not this **** again.

a) the 'social grade' system was faulty even in the 1970s and is a complete disaster now; it in no way reflects the realities of a service sector economy with a very large elderly population (it is true, by the way, pensioners are routinely rolled into category DE by some polling firms).* I can go into far too much detail about this if anyone is interested: I have done before. But for now: how many people in Great Britain consider, for example, nursing to be a middle class occupation? I suspect not many. I wonder how many people (in the countryside, where this is relevant) consider farmers to be working class? No one.

b) even were this not so, YouGov's peculiar polling methods happen to make their internal numbers completely worthless anyway. It's some real voodoo nonsense. Rubbish.

c) even were this not so, different polling firms internals show very different figures and patterns, not just from YouGov but from each other. In fact the main thing that shows up when one monitors numbers for these categories over even a short period of time (say, a month) is how absurdly volatile they are. Which is not surprising as they are almost random categories by this point.

d) this actually takes us back to a) because there are serious issues with sampling for some of the categories, particularly C2 which is a notorious disaster.

e) even were all of this not so, poll internals are not polls or surveys themselves, but a way of making sure that the poll was conducted with an appropriately balanced sample. The way they are thrown around by people who know this but have commercial reasons to ignore that fact amounts to the pollution of public discourse.

f) you wouldn't give your bank details to a 'Nigerian Prince', you don't believe anything hawked by Matthew Badwin.

_{*And there are reasons to be a mildly dubious as to how thorough the ones that say they do not do this actually are.}

This is most likely too America-centric but why cannot the polls instead group the population by education (grad school, university, vocational, and high school etc etc)?

[Walmart_shopper]

Not this **** again.

a) the 'social grade' system was faulty even in the 1970s and is a complete disaster now; it in no way reflects the realities of a service sector economy with a very large elderly population (it is true, by the way, pensioners are routinely rolled into category DE by some polling firms).* I can go into far too much detail about this if anyone is interested: I have done before. But for now: how many people in Great Britain consider, for example, nursing to be a middle class occupation? I suspect not many. I wonder how many people (in the countryside, where this is relevant) consider farmers to be working class? No one.

b) even were this not so, YouGov's peculiar polling methods happen to make their internal numbers completely worthless anyway. It's some real voodoo nonsense. Rubbish.

c) even were this not so, different polling firms internals show very different figures and patterns, not just from YouGov but from each other. In fact the main thing that shows up when one monitors numbers for these categories over even a short period of time (say, a month) is how absurdly volatile they are. Which is not surprising as they are almost random categories by this point.

d) this actually takes us back to a) because there are serious issues with sampling for some of the categories, particularly C2 which is a notorious disaster.

e) even were all of this not so, poll internals are not polls or surveys themselves, but a way of making sure that the poll was conducted with an appropriately balanced sample. The way they are thrown around by people who know this but have commercial reasons to ignore that fact amounts to the pollution of public discourse.

f) you wouldn't give your bank details to a 'Nigerian Prince', you don't believe anything hawked by Matthew Badwin.

_{*And there are reasons to be a mildly dubious as to how thorough the ones that say they do not do this actually are.}

This is most likely too America-centric but why cannot the polls instead group the population by education (grad school, university, vocational, and high school etc etc)?

In the UK educational attainment is at least as horizontal as it is vertical. So private vs public school can be at leaat as or even more meaningful than PhD vs BA or BA vs vocational work. The point is that you would have to weight for different TYPES as well as levels.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

This is most likely too America-centric but why cannot the polls instead group the population by education (grad school, university, vocational, and high school etc etc)?

They often do, but the huge changes to education policy over the past fifty years and the massive expansion of higher education from the 1990s means that while you're clearly measuring something interesting by doing that, it is no longer that closely related to class.

What they could (and should) do is use occupational breakdowns based on the census categories the ONS use. They don't because of laziness on their part and a certain deranged conservatism on behalf of their clients, many of whom seem to like ABC1C2DE as a sort of comfort blanket.

A couple of firms, I have noticed, ask for income instead: these are mostly newer firms, without legacy clients.

[Oryxslayer]

https://twitter.com/YouGov/status/1195020836652113920

Just something interesting I saw, and one of the (many) reasons why there is a lot of potential energy trapped right now waiting to explode and throw polling one one of countless directions.

[Dereich]

What do people make of Corbyn saying that in a hung parliament he would not agree to a coalition with the SNP (and presumably the Lib Dems) and would force them decide between supporting a Labour minority or the Tories? I'd call it electioneering, but it seems pretty consistent with the Labour position earlier this year around the "national unity government" debate.