Jump to content

General Election 2017


ender4

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, peterms said:

I gather the main difference is in methodology, and especially how they account for different rates of turnout among different parts of the public.  There's also something about whether some sampling methods have over-represented people who engage online, I think.

On the turnout, the common method seems to be to take the raw polling data and then apply a discount factor equivalent to the turnout of that age group across an average of recent elections, to allow for older people voting more consistently than younger ones.  That's a reasonable starting point, and would work if turnout rates are similar across age groups to what they have been previously.

The question for Labour will be whether efforts to get younger people to register and then to vote can produce a greater turnout in that age group than in other elections.  It will certainly have some effect, but I don't imagine either pollsters or anyone else is in a good position to say how much.

The Electoral Calculus site described the polling method which the Times are using as 'eye-catching', which presumably must be a euphemism for something.

My guess is that the media tend to prefer polls which understate the Tories' lead because there is just not enough news mileage in a shoo-in.

The media did the same in 1987 but despite Labour winning 20 more seats, it turned out to be total thrashing (376 v 229).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The Electoral Calculus site described the polling method which the Times are using as 'eye-catching', which presumably must be a euphemism for something.

Did it?

Electoral Calculus:

Quote

In an eye-catching Times story on 31 May, YouGov revealed a new model which predicts the Conservatives will only get 310 seats, leaving them short of a majority.

Not only is this prediction notably different from the predictions from Electoral Calculus and others, but the methodology used is very different from normal polls. Traditional polls simply aim to calculate the fraction of the overall population which supports each of the major parties. And they do this with the standard market research techniques of asking questions and adding up how many people gave each answer.

YouGov have tried something much more ambitious and modern. Using what they describe as multilevel regression and post-stratification analysis (which is reminiscent of the machine learning techniques of the big tech companies), they are trying to model how each individual voter in the country thinks. They need a big poll to do this (with a sample size of 50,000) plus regression against census demographics and British Election Study data.

This approach looks similar to that used by Electoral Calculus to calculate EU Referendum voting at the locality and ward level, as well as the other political measures as described in our Thirty Extreme Places in Britain article.

So Electoral Calculus salutes YouGov for their modern approach of combining polls and models to get richer and more insightful predictions. We will know next week whether their approach has got it exactly right this time. If it's right, then they will be justly celebrated. But even if it isn't, it is still the right thing to do and the method can be refined in future years to be more accurate. One day, maybe all polling will be like this.

Nonetheless, and for the record, the Electoral Calculus prediction is still that the Conservatives will get a sizeable majority.

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PaulC said:

personally I think if it is causing a problem for her, because one of the side effects of taking insulin or the condition itself is fatigue, then she should never have gone for the party leadership.

Rupert the Kingmaker is very persuasive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The Electoral Calculus site described the polling method which the Times are using as 'eye-catching', which presumably must be a euphemism for something.

If it was the Mail rather than the Times it'd be a euphemism for the 14 year old daughter of a celebrity, photographed wearing a bikini on holiday.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Xann said:

A friend is campaigning locally with this chap right now...

 

He was canvassing in Darlo this week also. Unfortunately I was at work.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, mjmooney said:

Izzard might alienate as many as he attracts to the cause. Always a problem with celebs. 

Plus he just looks like Anne Robinson these days.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Young people, including many who are engaged in political activity but not traditional parties, care very deeply about climate change.

Since Labour are trying hard to mobilise these people, May's failure to criticise Trump is baffling.

I expect Labour will now have a social media campaign aimed at publicising this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, MakemineVanilla said:

The opposition parties' supporters seem to feel defrauded because May declined the offer of appearing in the BBC's televised slanging match, which managed to bring politics to a new low and made everyone look petty, spiteful and shabby.

Bearing that in mind, May's decision to avoid that vulgar pandering to the tastes of the demos, looked like a wise one.

Corbyn's late decision to take part was obviously as tactical as May's but his late change of mind is now being presented as an act of heroic bravery.

As Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War: The supreme art of war is to subdue the enemy without fighting.

There's certainly truth in that.

What does Sun Tzu have to say about leaders that claim to be strong and stable but manage to be laughed at in their absence by Radio 4's Woman's Hour?

I'm not suggesting she will lose the election, but she's going to give it a bloody good go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, chrisp65 said:

What does Sun Tzu have to say about leaders that claim to be strong and stable but manage to be laughed at in their absence by Radio 4's Woman's Hour?

I'm not suggesting she will lose the election, but she's going to give it a bloody good go.

Sun Tzu says: appear strong when you are weak and weak when you are strong.

Which would cover it, I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, MakemineVanilla said:

Sun Tzu says: appear strong when you are weak and weak when you are strong.

Which would cover it, I guess.

I'm not sure that covers it.

2171165.main_image.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I just read someone making the point that if you look how successfully Corbyn has campaigned the last few weeks, then you have to accept he didn't give a toss about remaining in the EU referendum. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Just read that pollsters haven't been within 4 points of a result since 1979, makes things rather interesting given the current results.

I think they have Labour closer than the reality of what will happen on the day at present.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, TrentVilla said:

Just read that pollsters haven't been within 4 points of a result since 1979, makes things rather interesting given the current results.

How does that work? "Pollsters" isn't a single entity. There are lots of companies producing lots of different results.

Are you saying that no poll, at any point has been within four points of a result?

Considering pretty much every poll now and previously covers the full gamut of results short of a Plaid Cymru majority I'd say that it's statistically very unlikely that "pollsters haven't been within 4 points of a result since 1979".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The polls are absolutely wrong. They've overplayed Labours gains massively IMO. I've no doubt Labour will poll far better next week than they would have a month so, but the gap will be bigger than the polls getting people excited. And the Tories will make gains.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My name is Dean and I argue with Conservatives on Facebook.

I know it's ridiculous and a waste of time, but I find it so satisfying. I'mpart of a local Facebook politics group so it's fair game.

I'm winning debate after debate. I'm starting to feel slightly bad because I'm better informed than the people I debate with.

Some of the people I debate with are Conservative councillors. And I've had them ending debates by calling me a liar. 

Am I wrong to destroy their Conservative utopia? I know they will angrily vote Conservative anyway.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

my understanding is the polls dont work because they dont actually reflect the voting demographic, the biggest poll i think is yougovs online poll, the biggest voting demographic is the over 65s, at a guess how many of the over 65s do you think are doing an online poll? and the over 65s largely vote tory

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â