FlyTheNest

rearofthestore wrote:

SpinningHugo wrote:Can someone do the (un-)weighting on these polls?

What were the scores before all the magic jiggery pokery they do?

Remember. With the SNP winning all or nearly all Scottish seats, the numbers that matter are in ENGLAND ONLY. Scotland is gone.

If there is an England swing of 4%, EM is comfortably PM with SNP MPs.

EM is now 4/6 to be PM, the shortest odds for months

http://www.oddschecker.com/politics/bri ... l-election" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Since you ask (and I know others think it is pointless) the ComRes poll is highly dubious IMO (I sound a lot like broken record I know).
Poll sample size is actually only 817 before weighting only 654 after weighting
Things that stand out Age Group 25-34 CONS 39% LAB 28% Con Lead 11%
In fact lead for CON as compared to LAB is based on just 234 people as opposed to 212 people
Results for Scotland ridiculous but based on a sample of just 55 people unweighted
FWIW

Oh FFS tweet the sample size to Smithson and point out the cross breaks.

Bollocks poll.

Something from the other night - a short student film shown as part of a regular strand on Channel 4 news, this was on on Tuesday night. I think it's a very very good piece of film making and a very good thing generally.

Diary of a Homeless Girl

RobertSnozers wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Why is it I get the impression that Smithson is a tadore excited when a poll shows Labour trailing?


Maybe it's just me?

He seemed all ready for a 'disaster for Labour' announcement if Yougov showed a Tory lead

I think he is a polling addict looking for a breakthrough. The reason he gets excited is because right wing twats tweet about pro Tory polls before they are released.

I think he is probably right about YouGov though, which is I think a more established pollster than the other three. I would be pissed off if that showed a Con lead as well.

This will come down to turnout. They all make assumptions about it, if those assumptions are wrong and more young people vote it will be wildly out. This is where Labour's ground war may give an edge.

RobertSnozers wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Why is it I get the impression that Smithson is a tadore excited when a poll shows Labour trailing?


Maybe it's just me?

He seemed all ready for a 'disaster for Labour' announcement if Yougov showed a Tory lead

Ha! I don't know where Yougov get their figures from for their political polls, but I've filled out a lot of online surveys for them lately where I've been asked who I'll vote for so I'd like to think I helped to contribute to his disappointment (if, indeed, that last Yougov did disappoint him. We may be being unfair. Being a poll follower he could just be disappointed that nothing seems to be happening to the polls at all - they've been remarkably static of late).

Willow904 wrote:

RobertSnozers wrote:

letsskiptotheleft wrote:Why is it I get the impression that Smithson is a tadore excited when a poll shows Labour trailing?


Maybe it's just me?

He seemed all ready for a 'disaster for Labour' announcement if Yougov showed a Tory lead

Ha! I don't know where Yougov get their figures from for their political polls, but I've filled out a lot of online surveys for them lately where I've been asked who I'll vote for so I'd like to think I helped to contribute to his disappointment (if, indeed, that last Yougov did disappoint him. We may be being unfair. Being a poll follower he could just be disappointed that nothing seems to be happening to the polls at all - they've been remarkably static of late).

I have been reviewing the pollsters 2010 campaign polls here.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_ ... l_election

YouGov have relatively few outliers and are close to the final result. But the 2010 campaign contained the Nick Clegg black swan effect. So the polls change mid campaign.

Blimey! Yougov appear to be throwing in the towel on hopes of clear poll movement:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/23/we ... -election/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Back in February, it was still considered a near-certainty by the media pundits that the Conservatives would end up significantly ahead. Ed Miliband was unconvincing, the economic numbers coming in were all positive, and now the SNP were wiping out Labour in Scotland: the Conservatives themselves felt a certain inevitability about their return to power after May 7th.

We published the ‘Nowcast’, but as the name implied, we expected it to change. As Peter Kellner’s forecasts at the time made clear, for all sorts of good reasons based on past behaviour, we expected the campaign to move gradually in the Conservatives’ favour.

It hasn’t. And with only two weeks to go, it is hard to see how it now can.

No wonder the bounce has gone out of Cameron. Sturgeon has been busy today making it plain that the Tories have to win more seats than Labour and the SNP if they want to form the next government. If she's true to her word, on current polling (which Yougov is now convinced won't change) Cameron is toast.

There's brass neck...and then there's the PM who totally failed to meet his own net migration target telling us that labour will go back to uncontrolled immigration.





That positive message didn't last long did it?

Edit - it'll be interesting to see the comments under this - I doubt they'll be that complimentary to Cameron.

Anyone seen tomorrow's Daily Shite?!

Does everyone who works there leave their self respect by the entrance?

Obviously Roger beat me to it!

Return of The Last Leg tonight, with Nick Clegg and Piers Morgan guesting; as Clegg said "at last, a popularity contest I can win"! Clegg was savaged again, but Morgan achieved the dubious distinction of being the first ever guest to be booed onto the show.

Willow904 wrote:Blimey! Yougov appear to be throwing in the towel on hopes of clear poll movement:

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/04/23/we ... -election/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Back in February, it was still considered a near-certainty by the media pundits that the Conservatives would end up significantly ahead. Ed Miliband was unconvincing, the economic numbers coming in were all positive, and now the SNP were wiping out Labour in Scotland: the Conservatives themselves felt a certain inevitability about their return to power after May 7th.

We published the ‘Nowcast’, but as the name implied, we expected it to change. As Peter Kellner’s forecasts at the time made clear, for all sorts of good reasons based on past behaviour, we expected the campaign to move gradually in the Conservatives’ favour.

It hasn’t. And with only two weeks to go, it is hard to see how it now can.

No wonder the bounce has gone out of Cameron. Sturgeon has been busy today making it plain that the Tories have to win more seats than Labour and the SNP if they want to form the next government. If she's true to her word, on current polling (which Yougov is now convinced won't change) Cameron is toast.

"Senior" people at work don't believe Cameron will lose. They still believe in a late swing. I however agree with YouGov, barring some crazy event (maybe Greece?)

1. Cameron has not made enough people better off.
2. Osbornes cuts are massive over-reach.
3. While Miliband has grown, Cameron seems to have shrunk in this election.

If you add 3.5% points to YouGov as Scotland compensation you get Labour 38.5 Con 33 which is just about the 2005 election. What ComRes tells us is that even on a good result for Cameron Stalemate is the result. Why because Labours losses to the SNP are anti Tory and Tory gains from Lib Dem are pro Tory, all that effort in the South West doesn't help Dave.

I think he is gone if YouGov is accurate (and they have a good track record). Labour may even beat expectations in seats.

I noticed this earlier over the other side. From the FT.

Twenty FTSE 100 and other business leaders have told the Financial Times they are anxious that — despite presiding over an economic recovery — David Cameron has not opened a lead over Labour.

In particular, they criticise the strident personal attacks on the opposition and the flurry of big-spending promises that jar with the party’s prudent fiscal record. “The negative campaign has been disastrous,” said one company chairman.

“The strength of the performance of the coalition in terms of delivering real growth and real jobs has become almost background noise,” said another, speaking on condition of anonymity. One FTSE 100 chief said: “Why not play the positive economic note? There is a good story to tell.”

Wonder how this latest attack will go down with them?

RogerOThornhill wrote:I noticed this earlier over the other side. From the FT.

Twenty FTSE 100 and other business leaders have told the Financial Times they are anxious that — despite presiding over an economic recovery — David Cameron has not opened a lead over Labour.

In particular, they criticise the strident personal attacks on the opposition and the flurry of big-spending promises that jar with the party’s prudent fiscal record. “The negative campaign has been disastrous,” said one company chairman.

“The strength of the performance of the coalition in terms of delivering real growth and real jobs has become almost background noise,” said another, speaking on condition of anonymity. One FTSE 100 chief said: “Why not play the positive economic note? There is a good story to tell.”

Wonder how this latest attack will go down with them?

Look I have no time for any business leader who backs Cameron.

They are complete twats, only interested in lining their own pockets with no care for their company. No CEO could possibly endorse a party risking our continued membership of the EU. If nothing else it will create a 2 year investment freeze plunging us into recession.

However their complaint also shows a complete lack of awareness. The economic story is great - for them. Earnings are up - for them. Cheap labour is available - for them. Inflation is low and prices are held down - for them.

For about 70% of the population wages are down, costs are up, jobs are insecure, services are vanishing and they are cheap labour.

Work it out tossers.

I also saw this which I put up in answer to that FT quote...

British executive pay culture contributed to Tesco’s troubles

British executive pay is the highest in the world, despite our businesses being run no better than in any other countries, and as in today’s case, often worse. It is partly the fault of remuneration committees who are trapped in a race to pay the highest wages, to be in the top quartile of pay in the UK. Naturally they cannot all be in the top 25 per cent.

Tesco is a prime of example of how dysfunctionally we link pay with long-term business performance. Despite overseeing its worst results for 40 years, Tesco agreed to pay the outgoing CEO, Philip Clarke, £1,217,000, and its former finance director £970,880. This was after it was revealed Tesco had overstated its profits by £263m. They paid up to avoid a costly legal battle they felt they would lose.

And the lefty thinktank that came out with this bit of anti-capitalist junk?

Civitas.

http://civitas.org.uk/newblog/2015/04/b ... -troubles/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;