General Election 2017

[TrentVilla]

10 hours ago, darrenm said:

Well Labour are certainly winning social media. Twitter and Facebook is just full of people supporting Labour and Corbyn.

On the Theresa May page it's just full of people ripping into her. Even on the Torygraph and Daily Fail pages the idiots get shouted down.

On neutral ground and Labour/Corbyn pages obviously it's just a whitewash.

Twitter had #publicduty trending where doctors and nurses were urging people to vote Labour to save the NHS.

I wonder how Facebook and Twitter can be skewed so much one way and polls skewed the other. Is it another young Vs old like brexit? Then will this new influx of newly registered young voters make a difference?

We've been here before with the last election and with Brexit. Social media simply isn't in any way an accurate barometer of the electorate.

Those of the left simply shout louder on social media, those on the right take a lower profile. It's really no different to people who lie during polls/exit polls.

I don't think for one moment that what happens on social media will be in any way indicative of what happens on polling day.

[blandy]

11 hours ago, darrenm said:

Well Labour are certainly winning social media. Twitter and Facebook is just full of people supporting Labour and Corbyn.

On the Theresa May page it's just full of people ripping into her. Even on the Torygraph and Daily Fail pages the idiots get shouted down.

On neutral ground and Labour/Corbyn pages obviously it's just a whitewash.

Twitter had #publicduty trending where doctors and nurses were urging people to vote Labour to save the NHS.

I wonder how Facebook and Twitter can be skewed so much one way and polls skewed the other. Is it another young Vs old like brexit? Then will this new influx of newly registered young voters make a difference?

Twitter and Facebook show you (anyone) what you want to see. My twitter feed is full of stuff about villa and other interests because that's what I'm interested in. If I was a Tory it would be full of whatever tories do...

so social media content shows people what they want to see, not the whole picture.

[blandy]

11 hours ago, darrenm said:

People are noticing it now though. People are already sick of 'strong and stable' and 'coalition of chaos' which seem to be the 2 chosen phrases this time.

Yes they are. And they're sick of "go compare" ads on the tv, but they still show them, too, because annoyingly, they work.

[a m ole]

also a big proportion of conservative voters are pensioners who have little interest in twitter or facebook.

[Dodgyknees]

2 hours ago, a m ole said:

also a big proportion of conservative voters are pensioners who have little interest in twitter or facebook.

This is it. Exactly this. 

I don't have the exact stats, but I helped with some SM research during the 2015 election and we found that most of those interacting (likes/comments) were aged 25-34 (35-44 year old women were also one of the highest). The % for over 60 was below 8% (7.4 I think). Of course, where I live has a high number of 60+ residents, so it will be a little different elsewhere. Women were more active than men across all ages and ranges.

[mjmooney]

1 minute ago, DK82 said:

This is it. Exactly this. 

I don't have the exact stats, but I helped with some SM research during the 2015 election and we found that most of those interacting (likes/comments) were aged 25-34 (35-44 year old women were also one of the highest). The % for over 60 was below 8% (7.4 I think). Of course, where I live has a high number of 60+ residents, so it will be a little different elsewhere. Women were more active than men across all ages and ranges.

Funny, that. Pretty much every one of my over-60 friends and relatives is highly active on Facebook and/or Twitter. 

[darrenm]

3 hours ago, blandy said:

Twitter and Facebook show you (anyone) what you want to see. My twitter feed is full of stuff about villa and other interests because that's what I'm interested in. If I was a Tory it would be full of whatever tories do...

so social media content shows people what they want to see, not the whole picture.

Slightly offended you'd think I'd be so naive to not realise how that works. Hence why I described in detail how even the Theresa May facebook page has mostly just abuse for the Tories and May there. And the same with all the papers. Yes if you stay inside your own bubble you will only see what is of interest to you, but as I described above, it's the same story for social media as a whole.

[Dodgyknees]

10 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Funny, that. Pretty much every one of my over-60 friends and relatives is highly active on Facebook and/or Twitter. 

Think it's an Isle of Wight thing mate. We're a bit... behind  

[Chindie]

22 minutes ago, darrenm said:

Slightly offended you'd think I'd be so naive to not realise how that works. Hence why I described in detail how even the Theresa May facebook page has mostly just abuse for the Tories and May there. And the same with all the papers. Yes if you stay inside your own bubble you will only see what is of interest to you, but as I described above, it's the same story for social media as a whole.

I'm not sure Theresa Mays Facebook page much helps your argument.

Social media heavily skews young and that demographic in turn heavily skews left. The Tories also aren't the party to court younger voters. And again, shy Tories... Couple that to the fact that generally people are more likely to moan about things openly that praise them (hence general public online reviews/discussions of products for example will often have the complaints much more visible than the praise, unless the thing is very very good) and it's no surprise Theresa Mays Facebook page is not supportive.

Edited April 26, 2017 by Chindie

[PaulC]

I wonder whether the Libdems will end up with more seats than Labour. I think Labour will loose a lot of the working class voters and Conservatives will gain on the UKIP voters.. If it is to be about Brexit mainly. that's where  the Lib dems will gain ground. 

[tonyh29]

4 minutes ago, Chindie said:

I'm not sure Theresa Mays Facebook page much helps your argument.

Social media heavily skews young and that demographic in turn heavily skews left. The Tories also aren't the party to court younger voters. And again, shy Tories... Couple that to the fact that generally people are more likely to moan about things openly that praise them (hence general public online reviews/discussions of products for example will often have the complaints much more visible than the praise, unless the thing is very very good) and it's no surprise Theresa Mays Facebook page is not supportive.

Indeed .. presumably if loads of angry stock brokers were to take over  Corbyns Twitter and Facebook pages and hurl abuse  ..it would be proof that Corbyn isn't a shoe in to be our next Prime Minister ?

My Facebook feed is probably like a lot of people's  ..I see a lot of anti Tory and Brexit stuff ... usually always by the same posters , posters who are more politically active , abreast with current affairs , posters who sorta feel that facebook isn't for sharing pictures of food , more for showing your intellectual superiority by calling a Tory a word removed .... I think there is 1 person on my feed who posts pro_tory stuff and he's Scottish and appears to be doing it to wind up SNP voters in his circle of friends   .... so using the scientific Facebook method for determining the result of the election , based on my News feed Labour will have a majority of about 300 ...

 

 

 

 

[TrentVilla]

My Facebook feed seems to be full of pictures of people's kids and cats. I'm therefore expecting either Boss Baby or Garfield to win the election.

(apologies darrenm if you think me making a joke is aiding our Tory overlords)

More seriously, as I said previously I think using social media as any form of barometer of voter intentions is utterly flawed for a number of reasons and has previously been shown to be.

I think to view it as being representative that Corbyn is doing better than just about every other indicator suggests is in danger of being an example confirmation bias.

[Davkaus]

It's as if the generations that benefitted from free university tuition, and cheap houses don't give a shit that the ladder has been pulled up after them. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-polls-snap-general-election-2017-live-poll-under-40s-young-people-older-winning-a7702616.html

 

Quote

 

Labour easily beating Tories among voters under 40 despite being 20 points behind overall

Labour is solidly ahead of the Conservatives with voters under 40 years old despite being more than 20 points behind in the polls overall, according to a significant new poll.

The mega-poll of nearly 13,000 voters by YouGov conducted over a two and a half week period found Jeremy Corbyn would be heading to Downing Street were the election decided by 18-40 year olds.

Labour is particular popular with women under 40, who split 42 per cent in favour of Mr Corbyn’s party and 27 per cent for Theresa May’s. 12 per cent support the Lib Dems. Men under 40 also back Labour by 32 per cent to 31 per cent for the Conservatives, with 18 per cent backing the Lib Dems.

 

But Labour is well behind in the polls overall – by around 20 points – because of significantly lower expected turnout among young voters and a huge generational divide. 

The headline voting intention figures from the same poll are 44 per cent for the Tories, 25 per cent for Labour, Ukip 9 per cent, Lib Dems 12 per cent, and Green Party 3 per cent.

A clue to the gap comes because those under 40 report being significantly less likely to vote than those over 40. Just over 40 per cent of the younger cohort say they are “certain to vote” compared to 64 per cent of the older cohort.

The divide in the poll mirrors the split at the European Union referendum, where older voters pulled Britain out of the European Union against the overwhelming wishes of younger voters.

Younger and older voters have not always split this way. In 1979 Margaret Thatcher attracted a large proportion of younger voters, with 42 per cent of 18-24 year olds backing her at that election, according to Ipsos MORI polls from the time.

Support for the Conservatives at this time was particularly strong among middle class women – a mirror of  the current situation where women lean strongly towards Labour.

 

Housing tenure, one of the best predictors of how a person will vote, has mapped closely with age in recent decades. Older voters are now overwhelmingly more likely to own a home while younger voters cannot afford to do so – with the gulf increasingly growing. Voters over 65 are also overwhelmingly less likely to be in work.

YouGov's poll of 12,746 GB adults was conducted between 2 and 20 April 2017. The deliberately large poll was conducted so that sub-samples of the electorate could be examined without a large margin of error

 

 

[StefanAVFC]

3 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's as if the generations that benefitted from free university tuition, and cheap houses don't give a shit that the ladder has been pulled up after them. 

Perhaps the wrong thread but the attitude towards young people, by those who were handed everything and messed it all up, is galling.

[tonyh29]

2 minutes ago, Davkaus said:

It's as if the generations that benefitted from free university tuition, and cheap houses don't give a shit that the ladder has been pulled up after them. 

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/labour-polls-snap-general-election-2017-live-poll-under-40s-young-people-older-winning-a7702616.html

 

 

From that article , it seems to be Women under 40  that would put Corbyn in power  ?

Labour is particular popular with women under 40, who split 42 per cent in favour of Mr Corbyn’s party and 27 per cent for Theresa May’s. 12 per cent support the Lib Dems. Men under 40 also back Labour by 32 per cent to 31 per cent for the Conservatives,

[tonyh29]

1 minute ago, StefanAVFC said:

Perhaps the wrong thread but the attitude towards young people, by those who were handed everything and messed it all up, is galling.

 

is there some evidence to support this claim ?

 

[itdoesntmatterwhatthissay]

13 hours ago, PompeyVillan said:

To be honest, and I'm not being insulting but it think many people believe that the anti Tories, like myself, are exaggerating. 

They hear some of the things I perceive and point out as immoral but they don't see them. 

They don't experience them themselves.

I'm not being critical, I work with liberal but politically ambivalent people who have said things in a general sense like "Well things have been okay for me under the Conservatives". 

Or "When I last went to the doctors it was good". 

Call them "Shy Tories" if you want, they're not evil or selfish monsters that hate the poor. Just people who are probably not that bothered, and thought New Labour was quite"trendy" too. They might be slightly bothered by immigration too.

Then there are of course those that are ideologically driven by Conservative politics like @tony29 who eat babies, kick puppies, drive with full beams on at all times and steal from collection  boxes.

 

Ignorance is bliss.
I sometimes attend some high level political events where v wealthy donors appear (usually Labour events). Imo there is little difference between the two parties at that level; the level which runs the party....

You do make a good point though;
A Lib Dem potentially winning in Richmond.
Labour in Birmingham keeping seats.
Caroline Lucas voters forgetting the Green record in the city.
Labour voters forgetting that the guys who made all the mistakes are still running the party.

I make my voting decision on how engaged my local candidate is, not on the rhetoric put out by twitter/parties/uninformed voters/media. When I lived in Moseley it was Jerry Evans, near Lichfield Chris Pincher and now in Brighton, well, the opposition to the Tories do not deserve speaking about. Maybe I'll go independent.

Edited April 26, 2017 by itdoesntmatterwhatthissay

[StefanAVFC]

14 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 

is there some evidence to support this claim ?

 

It was a generalisation, based on my own experiences.

It isn't unfair to say that generally people born in 50s/60s/70s bought cheap houses on low mortgages with low deposits, had free university, and their wealth comes from that. My parents were able to sell a terraced house in Birmingham and buy a 3 bed semi in a village for 70k. Now it's worth nearly 300k. That isn't just inflation.

[Davkaus]

11 minutes ago, tonyh29 said:

 

is there some evidence to support this claim ?

 

Is there an institute for recording and analysing every day interactions?

Find me someone under 30 that hasn't had patronising comments about pulling themselves up by their bootstraps by some walking, talking penis who could afford a massive house on a single income decades ago.

Sure, it's not everyone. I'm sure there are some people like you are beside themselves for the younger generations who have been **** over by the greed and short-sightedness of the baby boomers and their kids.  

But there's a fairly sizeable chunk of old **** who had it easy, didn't pay enough in, benefitted massively from the property boom, welfare state and free education, and now moan about freeloaders and scroungers while they enjoy their pension triple lock. What's austerity again?

No, I don't have statistics or graphs. Just lots, and lots and lots of anecdotal evidence, that I'm sure you'll point out isn't representative.

[StefanAVFC]

Just now, Davkaus said:

But there's a fairly sizeable chunk of old **** who had it easy, didn't pay enough in, benefitted massively from the property boom, welfare state and free education, and now moan about freeloaders and scroungers while they enjoy their pension triple lock.

You missed "the biggest block who pulled young people out of the EU"