|           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 30, 2020, 12:35:51 pm
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, Hash, Should've left the Pangolins alone)
  United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 70 Print
Author Topic: United Kingdom General Elections: December 12th, 2019  (Read 85708 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 62,999
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #550 on: November 15, 2019, 10:50:24 am »

There was also a ComRes out... I think yesterday? that showed Con 40, Lab 30, LDem 16, BP 7, SNP 4, Greens 3.

So, again, a small upwards Con tick from the Brexit Party. Neither they nor Panelbase are what you'd call 'good', of course.

This whole 'half of constituencies' thing is going to be such a mess for pollsters and for people tying to work out the implications of polls.


They say that they ask for a second-choice party and make appropriate adjustments - claim the effect is Con +1.
Logged
Estrella
Rookie
**
Posts: 153
Norfolk Island


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #551 on: November 15, 2019, 11:24:09 am »

What a boring election.

But basically everyone has no one to blame but themselves

Labour for not ditching Corbyn

LibDems for a ridiculous policy of defying the will of the people regardless of what they might say in a second referendum

Brexit - for not fighting the Tories nationwide. If they did I think they could actually win a handful of seats. But not fighting a full campaign has definitely discouraged voters and Farage not running was a putrid mistake because most Brexit party voters look up to him a lot and would be more motivated to vote for them knowing they’d be led by Farage in parliament.

Yawn
Labour isn't New Labour anymore.

Yup. And they’re paying the price for it.

New Blair would throttle this Tory party

You do realize there already is a party for the metropolitan upper class? A non-insignificant part of Corbyn's success comes from people who are left wing economically and, for the want of a better term, anti-SJW. How exactly would turning the party into Lib Dems but in red help, I don't understand.

In any case, it's not the 90s, when everybody was trying to be the centristest centrist (on the left at least). The strategy worked well then,  but then is then and now is now. Just see my sig.
Logged
c r a b c a k e
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 16,973
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #552 on: November 15, 2019, 11:36:39 am »

worth noting that New Labour was many things, but it wasn't what Tony Blair thinks it is now (i.e. a socially liberal version of Thatcherism). If anything it was the most naked form of populism we've ever seen the party go down, given it mainly consisted of focus grouped targets and catchy slogans that polled well with non-ideological types.
Logged
CumbrianLeftie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,167
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #553 on: November 15, 2019, 11:41:13 am »

Some polls recently showing big Tory headline leads also have a near tie in their basic findings before likelihood to vote is taken to account. Clearly the promise to "get Brexit done" has solidified the Tory base and Labour needs to counter that in some way to get voters attention. The announcement on broadband is an excellent start there - more like that please Smiley

(some interesting polling evidence out recently, too, that adopting a pro "freedom of movement" line might not be the massive vote loser for Labour some have assumed - as so often, it depends on the FRAMING)
Logged
Arkansas Yankee
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 971
United States
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #554 on: November 15, 2019, 12:07:05 pm »

Forget the Tory gain in the Panelobase poll.  Note your magnificent Campaigner Corbyn gained nothing. 

Please note most Conservative Remainers are not going to vote Labour this election even tactically.

I guess you think large numbers Conservative Leavers who were going to vote Brexit in the Tory held seat will not vote.   Stop dreaming.
Logged
(CT) The Free North
CTRattlesnake
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,827
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #555 on: November 15, 2019, 12:32:19 pm »

Given the chart posted on the previous page, it would seem that Labour's continued rise is contingent on the Lib Dems shedding a significant amount of their support. Is that likely given their Brexit posturing and the importance of that issue this time around vs 2017?
Logged
parochial boy
parochial_boy
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,965


Political Matrix
E: -8.38, S: -6.78

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #556 on: November 15, 2019, 12:53:36 pm »

Some polls recently showing big Tory headline leads also have a near tie in their basic findings before likelihood to vote is taken to account.

That would seem to indicate that the pollsters' sampling collectively is still crap, and they know it, and are trying to re-weight to get a "credible" looking score. Which makes it impossible to know who might be the "most" accurate; and tbh, just means they are going to continue coming out with crap until they can address the root problem which is their inability to get the sampling right.

Incidentally, would it be possible to like, ban anyone with a US IP address from posting in this thread or something?
Logged
Fubart Solman
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 5,496
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #557 on: November 15, 2019, 01:02:55 pm »

Incidentally, would it be possible to like, ban anyone with a US IP address from posting in this thread or something?

How about you just ignore drivel from Americans you don’t like and let others be?
Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,112
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #558 on: November 15, 2019, 01:23:31 pm »

Incidentally, would it be possible to like, ban anyone with a US IP address from posting in this thread or something?

That's not entirely fair as quite a few Americans have made some good posts in this thread. We shouldn't lump these good posters in with MillenialModerate etc. who clearly are talking out of their arses.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,166
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #559 on: November 15, 2019, 03:31:29 pm »

Incidentally, would it be possible to like, ban anyone with a US IP address from posting in this thread or something?

That's not entirely fair as quite a few Americans have made some good posts in this thread. We shouldn't lump these good posters in with MillenialModerate etc. who clearly are talking out of their arses.

Agreed. The place for mindless venting and baseless speculation is the general discussion forum. Or the Telegraph.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 62,999
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #560 on: November 15, 2019, 04:21:27 pm »

That would seem to indicate that the pollsters' sampling collectively is still crap, and they know it, and are trying to re-weight to get a "credible" looking score. Which makes it impossible to know who might be the "most" accurate; and tbh, just means they are going to continue coming out with crap until they can address the root problem which is their inability to get the sampling right.

This almost certainly relates to the issue I was complaining about yesterday: if you have a society marked by strong socio-economic disparities, one in which these are an observable driver of a very high proportion of voter-behaviour no less, but you persist in failing to bother to measure them in appropriate manner, then, well, your surveys will probably be a bit shit won't they.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,089
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #561 on: November 15, 2019, 05:19:57 pm »

worth noting that New Labour was many things, but it wasn't what Tony Blair thinks it is now (i.e. a socially liberal version of Thatcherism). If anything it was the most naked form of populism we've ever seen the party go down, given it mainly consisted of focus grouped targets and catchy slogans that polled well with non-ideological types.

Arguably built on pillars of sand with all the PFI borrowing.
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,089
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #562 on: November 15, 2019, 05:20:24 pm »



In a surreal turn, here we see Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn photographed holding a blu-ray of a fanmade spinoff movie of an obscure Doctor Who villain from the 1980s. I wish this was fake.

Sil. Arguably a parody of the sort of capitalist Thatcher made common...
Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,112
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #563 on: November 15, 2019, 05:22:00 pm »



In a surreal turn, here we see Leader of the Opposition Jeremy Corbyn photographed holding a blu-ray of a fanmade spinoff movie of an obscure Doctor Who villain from the 1980s. I wish this was fake.

Sil. Arguably a parody of the sort of capitalist Thatcher made common...

I know perfectly well who it is lol. Doctor Who has a proud history of political analogy but I'm not sure Sil was one of its strongest examples.
Logged
SANDSLIDE 2020🌹
wolfentoad66
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,350
Northern Mariana Islands



Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #564 on: November 15, 2019, 05:23:24 pm »

lmao guys I just realized Jared O'Mara actually managed to stay until dissolution
Logged
DaWN
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,112
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #565 on: November 15, 2019, 07:01:22 pm »



Ah, good, something about trains. I can finally get into my element. And its a distraction from all the depressing Brexit sh!t.

TL;DR: This is a very stupid idea from a very stupid person in a very stupid party who doesn't have a leg to stand on when accusing Comrade Useless of ill-considered spending plans.

Beeching was an exceptionally unfortunate inevitability of years of mismanagement of the railways. Did it go too far? Absolutely. Was it, in the end, necessary? Absolutely. Reversal of Beeching in itself is therefore immediately impractical because that would involve reinstating thousands of miles of track that serves nobody and sets money on fire. (I'm sure the 20 people in one of those tiny hamlets in Cumbria that had a branch from the Settle & Carlisle line are delighted though.)

That, of course, assumes the infrastructure is still there. Which it isn't. Most of it was built over in the years immediately following the closures, and what wasn't built over is now either nature walks or heritage railways.

Now obviously Mr Shapps is not suggesting the government will reinstate every line closed (as a side note, while Wilson's government did nothing to slow down or reduce the scope of the closures, which is a black mark against it, they were started under the previous Tory government, partially engineered by Transport Sec. Ernest Marples, who had a considerable business interest in motorway construction; such a conflict of interest would hopefully never be allowed today but times being as they are...) but such a vagueness is not appreciated. There's a massive difference between reopening beneficial links and ridiculous branch lines that were only built because setting money on fire was a passtime of Victorian railway companies. Where is the line drawn? What would be economic insanity to rebuild and what would be a worthwhile investment? Does he know? Does he care? I suspect not.

But then we come to the basic problem that the railways that were closed in the 1960s were railways that served the market of the 1960s. The closure of the Great Central Main Line was a huge mistake for instance, but there's no doubt that had it remained open the services provided would have changed with the times - reopening it like for like would do nothing except relieve congestion on a few select journeys out of London (mainly to Rugby, the East Midlands and Sheffield) while doing nothing else for the overall network. It wouldn't even be any good for freight on the West Coast Main Line as that mostly goes to Birmingham and Manchester, which the GC didn't serve. Tolerate it or loathe it, HS2 has the same benefits, except its a high speed route so comes with faster journey times, and actually serves Birmingham and Manchester instead of swerving off in completely the wrong direction. What would be served by spending money on reopening the GC instead of building HS2?

Also, £500m builds you barely anything in this day and age (it cost £85 million to build a couple of bridges and a viaduct in Manchester). Unless Grant here has an idea to drastically reduce the cost of railway construction, which somehow I doubt he does. So what is this? A cynical voter-attracting ploy or is this just Shapps being an idiot? Or both?

There's no doubt the UK rail system needs to plan itself a post-Beeching network (only 50 years too late...) and that will probably require some reopenings. But it needs careful strategic planning, a decision of what new lines will be worthwhile and not just pledging money for a nice shiny policy that everyone can get behind because Beeching is a name that's synonymous with dog sh!t nowadays.  Just a reminder that as idiotic as Corbyn is, 'pledging to throw money at stuff without a real plan or thought to how it'll work' is not unique to Labour.


Logged
Lord Halifax
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,151
Papua New Guinea


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #566 on: November 15, 2019, 07:17:41 pm »

worth noting that New Labour was many things, but it wasn't what Tony Blair thinks it is now (i.e. a socially liberal version of Thatcherism). If anything it was the most naked form of populism we've ever seen the party go down, given it mainly consisted of focus grouped targets and catchy slogans that polled well with non-ideological types.

Agree absolutely. If one looks at both their Rethoric and their Actions on things such as Counter-Terrorism/civil liberties, welfare claimants, "antisocials", drug users etc. they were anything but social liberals. I would perhaps coin the term "liberal authoritarians". "Liberal" only in the sense that anyone who didn't fit in their model liberal depoliticized society was treated very illiberaly.

They prefer communitarian. Tongue
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 62,999
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #567 on: November 15, 2019, 07:51:59 pm »

Ah, Ernest Marples! Hilarious man. Not the only notable Conservative minister of the period to raise eyebrows because of ties to the construction industry: there was also Keith Joseph, though in his case there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the (radical, socially disastrous, much regretted) policies he championed were linked to that. Though the possibility does seem to have aided his relations with the various local government rogues he had to deal with: 'one of us!' they, incorrectly, assumed.
Logged
President Pericles
Pericles
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 9,100

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #568 on: November 15, 2019, 10:32:46 pm »

I think the combined result of the two main parties will be a lot better than people expected. Despite strong dissatisfaction with both parties, most people have a party they clearly dislike more, so people are starting to panic about the possibility of their 'greater evil' party winning and moving to the lesser evil (on both sides of the Brexit debate). The stakes being so high for this election are also increasing the momentum for a shift to the two main parties. The exception will probably be in Scotland where the SNP is the best chance to stop either the Tories or Labour in most seats and they are a good outlet for dissatisfaction with the main two.
Logged
kongress
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 506
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #569 on: November 15, 2019, 11:21:53 pm »

As an American train enthusiast, I just want to see the railways nationalized so we can no longer see the many ugly brands and liveries that plague the current UK network.
Logged
cp
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,166
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #570 on: November 16, 2019, 02:44:54 am »

Something a bit different today. A couple of political scientists constructed an election forecasting model around the concept of pendulum swing, with a little extra weighting given to party leader approval/popularity.

As I understand it, the conceit here is that whenever a party wins an election (i.e. has a 'swing' toward it) its popularity automatically starts decaying away. Over time, the residual popularity of the initial win decays enough that the party loses (i.e. has a 'swing' against it). Notably, the size of the initial win (or a larger win for the incumbent in its first attempt at reelection) determines the 'half life' of the party's decay rate. So, a big win means greater likelihood of winning subsequent elections; a small win means the party will likely lose power more quickly.

The popularity of the incumbent party leader can accelerate/arrest this process, and third party performance is factored in as well; the model doesn't seem to take into account opposition leader popularity, though there's some evidence to say such un/popularity can help exaggerate existing trends.

So what does the model predict for 2019?

Tory: 311
Labour: 268

It's worth keeping in mind these numbers are a function of a distribution; 311 is the most likely result, with a bell curve of possibilities on either side. A Tory majority is, all told, about a 1/3 possibility.

I kind of like this model (no, not for its hopeful result) because it tries to quantify a gut feeling I think a lot of people have about governments wearing out their welcome. It's also reassuringly predictive. In the paper this article was based on, the model predicted the eventual 'winner', i.e. the party that got to form the government, in every election but once since 1929 (the model called the 1951 election wrong. Go figure.)
Logged
Silent Hunter
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 8,089
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #571 on: November 16, 2019, 03:04:41 am »

Ah, Ernest Marples! Hilarious man. Not the only notable Conservative minister of the period to raise eyebrows because of ties to the construction industry: there was also Keith Joseph, though in his case there doesn't seem to be any evidence that the (radical, socially disastrous, much regretted) policies he championed were linked to that. Though the possibility does seem to have aided his relations with the various local government rogues he had to deal with: 'one of us!' they, incorrectly, assumed.

Also fled the country to avoid tax evasion charges... via the Night Ferry sleeper train.
Logged
Justice Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Concerned Citizen
*****
Posts: 7,779
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #572 on: November 16, 2019, 03:13:01 am »

What a boring election.

But basically everyone has no one to blame but themselves

Labour for not ditching Corbyn

LibDems for a ridiculous policy of defying the will of the people regardless of what they might say in a second referendum

Brexit - for not fighting the Tories nationwide. If they did I think they could actually win a handful of seats. But not fighting a full campaign has definitely discouraged voters and Farage not running was a putrid mistake because most Brexit party voters look up to him a lot and would be more motivated to vote for them knowing they’d be led by Farage in parliament.

Yawn

Yawn this shows you don’t know a lot about British politics.
Logged
CumbrianLeftie
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,167
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #573 on: November 16, 2019, 09:20:40 am »

For reasons that genuinely escape me, the LibDems seem to have endorsed the same "permanent government surplus" plan that went down like a cup of cold sick when Liz Kendall put it forward in the 2015 Labour contest.
Logged
Oryxslayer
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,980


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #574 on: November 16, 2019, 10:05:08 am »
« Edited: November 16, 2019, 11:12:11 am by Oryxslayer »



Good chart. The tories are standing three more than labour because 4 NI conservatives are running in safe unionist seats and won't get their deposits back, and of course team blue are not standing in the speakers seat.

Sourced from the BBC.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 18 19 20 21 22 [23] 24 25 26 27 28 ... 70 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines