The Hung Like a Donkey General Election December 2019 Thread

[colhint]

I think, and it's only gut feel, that many traditional Labour  voters may vote for the brexit party. I'm basing this on 2017 when Labour were saying we will honour the referendum result. They could carry on with their own narrative,, brexit wasn't really on the table like it will be this time.  Now they have gone Volte-face. I think the switch to the BP is,  Many Labour voters couldn't vote  Tory under any circumstance, and a switch to the Lib Dems  is opposite to what they want.

[StefanAVFC]

A lot of traditional labour voters already went to UKIP in 2015 then Tories in 2017

Labour voters from 2017 are profoundly more likely to have voted remain

[Vive_La_Villa]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

People ought to expect scrutiny of their opinions and their claims otherwise there's no point.

Fair enough but I’ll be honest. I find the manner of your posts a little rude and condescending.  But FWIW according to an article in the Guardian the total cost of Labours pledges is circa 144 billion.  Tories is circa 69 billion.  

Im not going to post the link because I don’t know how and I’m not going to post a spreadsheet with my workings because I can’t be bothered.  I’m also not expressing my opinion or a claim or what I’m going to vote. I’m just stating what I read in The Guardian and why I said spending seems high. (Just google party pledges if you really care which article it was).

So I’ll leave it at that if it’s ok with you? Good day to you sir.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[Vive_La_Villa]

50 minutes ago, bobzy said:

If you're claiming that Labour's policies are "extremely costly", "unrealistic" and you'd "fear for the state of the country" I think it'd be expected that you'd get some querying on those views.

Which policies do you think fit with the above?

The nationalisation of utility companies mate. It will be very costly and I fear also poorly run.  I did take my statements back though as I appreciate they are unfounded. 

[snowychap]

40 minutes ago, blandy said:

What analysis have you seen, Darren? to help with understanding. Thansk.

This was the post with the most recent of the Rob Ford twitter threads (there are a lot of other threads/articles, I think):

On 01/11/2019 at 12:47, snowychap said:

 

 

23 minutes ago, blandy said:

On the twitter thread above the same statistical argument/factors, but in the reverse direction applies to Labour and Cons switching to LDs, I believe.

As I posted, I accept that it doesn't factor in the other movement as the main point of those analyses is to counter the narrative about Labour held leave voting constituencies (and the Mann line - not solely his, I grant).

Is there any data to support this belief that the magnitude the other way will be the same? That's a genuine question as I haven't yet seen any. Obviously, one could just say that polling data and drawing conclusions from analyses of (incomplete) electoral data is little more than belief anyway but in that situation we may as well all give up and consult the runes.

[snowychap]

28 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Im not going to post the link because I don’t know how...

Fourth button in on the menu of the editor is a link button.

Click on that, paste the URL in the first box and write some text in the second box to represent what the link is (e.g. Grauniad article).

13th button in is quotation marks, select that and you get a quote box. Copy and paste a line or so from the article in to the quote box and you're done.

Edited November 5, 2019 by snowychap
paste for past

[snowychap]

25 minutes ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Just google party pledges if you really care which article it was

That shouldn't be how it works but given the above, I've had a look.

I'm guessing that you're referrring to this article:

Quote

The 2019 election will be the first in decades where both Labour and the Conservatives promise to turn on the public spending tap. The manifestos have yet to be released, but both have already made multibillion-pound pledges as the era of austerity comes to an end.

Is that correct?

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

That shouldn't be how it works but given the above, I've had a look.

I'm guessing that you're referrring to this article:

Is that correct?

Yes it is.

Edited November 5, 2019 by Vive_La_Villa

[colhint]

1 hour ago, StefanAVFC said:

A lot of traditional labour voters already went to UKIP in 2015 then Tories in 2017

Labour voters from 2017 are profoundly more likely to have voted remain

I found a piece in the Guardian, sort of backs my line of thought

Quote

Labour’s policy platform buried the lazy caricature of Ukip supporters caring only about immigration – and offered a plan to relieve economic insecurity

jeremy-corbyn-brought-ukip-voters-back-labour

 

[tonyh29]

You have to feel for the Lib Dems , they make up a  £50bn pledge and can't even afford a bus to print it on

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, Vive_La_Villa said:

Yes it was. 

Well, there are a couple of things there.

Firstly, as it says, this is a couple of weeks before the release of manifestos so it's a bit premature to take that as the sum total of all commitments;

Secondly, as the article doesn't five any totals (your post: 'the total cost of Labours pledges is circa 144 billion.  Tories is circa 69 billion), have you arrived at these figures in your post by adding up selective and selected costs quoted under individual measures? If so then I think that's an error.

[Vive_La_Villa]

2 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Well, there are a couple of things there.

Firstly, as it says, this is a couple of weeks before the release of manifestos so it's a bit premature to take that as the sum total of all commitments;

Secondly, as the article doesn't five any totals (your post: 'the total cost of Labours pledges is circa 144 billion.  Tories is circa 69 billion), have you arrived at these figures in your post by adding up selective and selected costs quoted under individual measures? If so then I think that's an error.

Ok fair points mate. Let’s wait for the manifesto. 

[blandy]

34 minutes ago, snowychap said:

Is there any data to support this belief that the magnitude the other way will be the same?

If we're not at cross-purposes, then yes. And it's widely available

My point is that according to available data (from memory) something like 65-70% of labour voters voted remain. Something like <20% of Tory voters voted remain. Therefore (and consistent with the stats argument above) drift from Labour to Lib Dem will be much more significant than from Tory to Lib Dem.

[snowychap]

22 minutes ago, blandy said:

If we're not at cross-purposes, then yes. And it's widely available

To quote you:

 

1 hour ago, blandy said:

What analysis have you seen?

Edit: Actually, there's some data via a link later in that Chris Prosser twitter thread to voting intention among Con/Lab remain voters according to YouGov. I'll see what that suggests.

Edited November 5, 2019 by snowychap

[HanoiVillan]

1 hour ago, blandy said:

There's a take on it in this twit thread which says it's pretty decent

 

It's very interesting analysis, but it doesn't answer the point of the thread in my comment, which is simply that the polling now is already very different from the polling 2-3 weeks ago, and as far as anyone can tell, they haven't updated their model with new polling data. 

[ml1dch]

2 hours ago, snowychap said:

Why do you suppose greater numbers of Labour moving than Conservative?

Is this based on current polling versus 2017 election results?

Or are you supposing that more Labour voters will defect to Lib Dems than Tories and at a bigger rate than the more that are likely to defect from Conservative to NF than Labour to NF.

Edit: Or are you even saying that you think more Labour voters will depart for each other party than Tories will? If so the analysis I've seen doesn't support that (obviously it could be wrong and equally obviously it isn''t a sure guarantee of future choices)?

Yes to the first two. No to the third. 

If you feel that my suggestion on the question of the hypothetical scenario which could result in a Conservative majority isn't correct, and you feel that there are other, more likely methods that could result in that hypothetical scenario occurring then I'm more that happy to entertain them...

[snowychap]

1 minute ago, ml1dch said:

Yes to the first two. No to the third. 

If you feel that my suggestion on the question of the hypothetical scenario which could result in a Conservative majority isn't correct, and you feel that there are other, more likely methods that could result in that hypothetical scenario occurring then I'm more that happy to entertain them...

Funnily enough, I'm just plugging some numbers in to a spreadsheet (genuinely).

They're largely based on the analysis of the YouGov Remain v Leave voting intentions, though, so taking in to account your post above then you're probably more in the same area that I am in that too much consideration may be being given to remain v leave in so far as actually marrying up people's concerns on that and the overall polling data?

[tonyh29]

Hammond standing down .. guess my constituency will be boring after all

[blandy]

49 minutes ago, HanoiVillan said:

It's very interesting analysis, but it doesn't answer the point of the thread in my comment, which is simply that the polling now is already very different from the polling 2-3 weeks ago, and as far as anyone can tell, they haven't updated their model with new polling data. 

Yeah. What it does is suggest that the modelling and "advice" they give/gave is/has been "fair" and as accurate as is possible - it's not slanted to favour Labour or Libs etc.

As the data is updated, the predictive element may come up with a diffeent recommendation, but your comment that "don't use these tools" isn't really supported by the analysis which suggests, if you want to find a recommendation, the toll(s) are as fair(unbiased) and accurate as is possible.

[blandy]

1 hour ago, snowychap said:

there's some data via a link later in that Chris Prosser twitter thread to voting intention among Con/Lab remain voters according to YouGov. I'll see what that suggests

I was thinking of the various reported Labour polling, post Ref polling and surveys - a summary here

Quote

The widely respected British Election Study (BES) conducted a face-to-face survey of 2,194 people across the country.

Its central estimate for the 2017 election was that 30% of Labour voters had voted Leave in the referendum. Labour received 12,877,918 votes in that election - 30% of that would be 3.9 million....As this figure is based on a survey, there is a margin of error involved. In this case it is four percentage points, so the survey estimate is actually between 26% and 34% - between 3.3 million and 4.4 million.

"Nigel Farage's figure suggests that almost one third of Leave voters were Labour supporters, but the reality is that almost one third of Labour supporters voted Leave, which is, of course, not the same thing," said Prof Jane Green, co-director of the British Election Study.

The BES figure is somewhat higher than the estimate from Ipsos-Mori, which put it at 24%, or 3.1 million.  Lord Ashcroft Polls conducted a poll on election night in 2017 in which 25% of those who said they had voted Leave in 2016, said they had voted Labour - that would be 3.2 million.

The latest estimate from Comres is that 26% of those who voted Labour in 2017 voted Leave in 2016 - that's 3.3 million people.

And YouGov reckons that 29% of those who voted Labour in 2017 and voted in the EU Referendum, voted Leave - that's about 3.5 million.

Yougov detail here