Jump to content

General election? June 8th?

trousers

By trousers
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
guess it depends on the pollster you trust the most.

Yougov say that the tories could lose seats (but give an 80 seat margin of error)

comres believe that if voting trends remain largely the same as 2015, the tories could win by a 100+ seat majority.

 

I meant in relation to negotiating Brexit.

 

Not sure how much of a majority the Tories will win, though am highly sceptical of the polls that predict a close race - as if younger voters are going to come out in force.

buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
am highly sceptical of the polls that predict a close race - as if younger voters are going to come out in force.

 

MORI today have Labour with a lead of 43-40 over the Tories but losing 40-45 once likelihood of voting is taken in to consideration. Id say the 'fail to vote' gap will be wider.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
MORI today have Labour with a lead of 43-40 over the Tories but losing 40-45 once likelihood of voting is taken in to consideration. Id say the 'fail to vote' gap will be wider.

You can't go on unweighted polls. The whole point of weights is to turn the polls into a representative sample of the population.

 

By definition an unweighted poll means it is not representative of the population.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted (edited)
You can't go on unweighted polls. The whole point of weights is to turn the polls into a representative sample of the population.

 

By definition an unweighted poll means it is not representative of the population.

 

Erm, no it doesnt. Are you Wes' Mini Me? The poll is a representative sample of the population and reflects who they would vote for if they could be arsed. The weighting is to adjust for likelihood to actually vote, based on age and social group.

 

The people who vote are not representative of the population as a whole, they are disproportionately the elderly retired.

Edited by buctootim
Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted

The polls are actually doing a great job.... They're doing a great job getting out the Tory vote , and a great job in driving floating voters in marginal seats, towards the Tories. I'm just hoping the last polls prior to Thursday point to Steptoe, propped up by Krankie,Little Timmy & Lucas.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
Erm, no it doesnt. Are you Wes' Mini Me? The poll is a representative sample of the population and reflects who they would vote for if they could be arsed. The weighting is to adjust for likelihood to actually vote, based on age and social group.

 

The people who vote are not representative of the population as a whole, they are disproportionately the elderly retired.

Here's some reading for you.

 

http://ukpollingreport.co.uk/faq-weighting

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted

What is most interesting imo is how the class loyalty to a particular party has broken down. Both Tories and Labour now have almost exactly the same proportions of ABC1 and CDE voters as each other. The big indicator of political support is now age - the young for Labour and old for the Tories. Its always been there, but not to this extent.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/0/general-election-2017-polls-odds-tracker-latest/

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

The polls are all over the place. New survation one for the Mail on Sunday has 1 pt between conservative and Labour.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

Survation data is at their website.

 

The psephologists on twitter have pointed out the extrapolation of the figure of those who "watched all of qt on Friday" would amount to 19m people.

 

It says actually watched by 4 million, so implies that the survey samples too politically active people rather than a correctly weighted sample.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Batman

Batman

Posted
Posted (edited)
Of course they would. He has already praised their actions.

 

of course he has said that, no way he would not.

does not mean him or more so, Abbot, would not restrict the security services even further at the same time, refuse (even more than the current government) to admit we have a problem with certain parts of the islamic communities in this country

 

Cresssda **** says the Met police is well resourced, they need to review how they deploy that resource

Edited by Batman
CB Fry

CB Fry

Posted
Posted
who believes that Corbyns crew would have let the police shoot to kill last night?

How many of the eight minutes between them being called, arriving on scene and shooting the perpetrators did the police spend getting permission from the Prime Minister?

aintforever

aintforever

Posted
Posted
of course he has said that, no way he would not.

does not mean him or more so, Abbot, would not restrict the security services even further at the same time, refuse (even more than the current government) to admit we have a problem with certain parts of the islamic communities in this country

 

Cresssda **** says the Met police is well resourced, they need to review how they deploy that resource

 

I don't agree with Labour or Lib Dems on their policy for security, they need more powers of surveillance and more powers to lock people up. But the idea that the cops would not shoot to kill in these situations under Labour is nonsense.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

The issue is how we deal with terrorism.

 

We know Corbyn tried to get Hamas off the terrorism list. We know he was friends with the IRA. We know as chair of "stop the war" he opposed everything the west ever did. "Stop the war" doesn't criticise any one but the UK and US.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

On the 26th of May Corbyn said...

 

"I have spent my political life working for peace and human rights and to bring an end to conflict and devastating wars. That will almost always mean talking to people you profoundly disagree with."

 

In the days before the election, he needs to say when he will go to Raqqa, Syria to do his ludicrous talking. Or if he won't talk to these ideologists what will be do?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

eurosaint

eurosaint

Posted
Posted

Corbyn's policy is very clear, first ban the British bomb ( which he could have control over ! ) and then speak to the despots around the world in the hope that they will listen carefully to his pleas for peace !

A principled strategy, how could it possibly fail :mcinnes:

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
How many of the eight minutes between them being called, arriving on scene and shooting the perpetrators did the police spend getting permission from the Prime Minister?
the Police/security forces have rules of engagement. The rules can be changed on change of government.
OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
Everyone who isn't a deluded moron believes that.
hopefully the electorate are not as trusting as you are and make their verdict. If they don't and Corbyn wins then we will find out.
Verbal

Verbal

Posted
Posted
hopefully the electorate are not as trusting as you are and make their verdict. If they don't and Corbyn wins then we will find out.

 

Corbyn won't win, so you can stop panicking. Corbynistas are going to be one solid bunch of unhappy bunnies on 9 June because they're convinced that Labour is going to shade it. May will have an overall majority - and much bigger than the one she has now - despite the fact that she's run a campaign so uniquely awful that she's frittered away most of a 20-point lead. And she'll win on hard demographic facts rather than political argument - for example that Corbyn appeals to people where Labour votes are already piled high (the cities), and to younger people whose apparent enthusiasm for Corbyn isn't matched by an inclination actually to go into a polling station.

 

Anyone who thinks of May's victory as a good thing will have been warned. Her incompetence and spinelessness will have been noted by EU negotiators for the start of Brexit talks on 19 June, when the 'terrible deal is better than a bad deal' nonsense will be tested to destruction. Terrible deal it is - with the free trade jiahists behind her on the Tory backbenches screaming their approval.

Patrick Bateman

Patrick Bateman

Posted
Posted
On the 26th of May Corbyn said...

 

"I have spent my political life working for peace and human rights and to bring an end to conflict and devastating wars. That will almost always mean talking to people you profoundly disagree with."

 

In the days before the election, he needs to say when he will go to Raqqa, Syria to do his ludicrous talking. Or if he won't talk to these ideologists what will be do?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

He wouldn't ever go in person, they'd try to decapitate him and even if they didn't, how the f**k is he going to talk through a peace process after he's agreed to them eradicating western cultures, as presumably that would include democracy.

 

He's such a turd.

Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
for example that Corbyn appeals to people where Labour votes are already piled high (the cities), and to younger people whose apparent enthusiasm for Corbyn isn't matched by an inclination actually to go into a polling station.

 

Walking the mutt earlier I was listening to podcast with some polling bod on. He claims there are 60 seats where if,and it's a big if, youngsters turn out in the same numbers as the over 60's , they will outnumber oldies. In those 60 seats labour hold 57 of them already

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

Following all the current psephologists on twitter. Their consensus is essentially that their polls focus too heavily on people who are politically engaged.

 

The surveys are seeing numbers like 19mil people watched question time. Or 60% of respondents could name their MP.

 

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted

"Enough is enough"? How vacuous can you get? What does she mean - Manchester was okay but this is going too far? Its not hard ffs - sympathise with the dead and wounded, praise the police, invoke the public's courage and promise to look into what more can be done.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
"Enough is enough"? How vacuous can you get? What does she mean - Manchester was okay but this is going too far? Its not hard ffs - sympathise with the dead and wounded, praise the police, invoke the public's courage and promise to look into what more can be done.

To find our what she means, I suggest you read the rest of the speech.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

buctootim

buctootim

Posted
Posted
Don't worry folks , this time next week Diane Abbott could be in charge of policing

 

Abbot is distinctly unpromising, but at least she hasnt been a repeat proven failure at the Home Office.

sotonjoe

sotonjoe

Posted
Posted
On the 26th of May Corbyn said...

 

"I have spent my political life working for peace and human rights and to bring an end to conflict and devastating wars. That will almost always mean talking to people you profoundly disagree with."

 

In the days before the election, he needs to say when he will go to Raqqa, Syria to do his ludicrous talking. Or if he won't talk to these ideologists what will be do?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

He answered that specific question on the Newsnight special the other night. It's not his fault if you can't be arsed to actually follow the coverage before forming your opinions.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Pamplemousse

Pamplemousse

Posted
Posted
Corbyn won't win, so you can stop panicking. Corbynistas are going to be one solid bunch of unhappy bunnies on 9 June because they're convinced that Labour is going to shade it. May will have an overall majority - and much bigger than the one she has now - despite the fact that she's run a campaign so uniquely awful that she's frittered away most of a 20-point lead. And she'll win on hard demographic facts rather than political argument - for example that Corbyn appeals to people where Labour votes are already piled high (the cities), and to younger people whose apparent enthusiasm for Corbyn isn't matched by an inclination actually to go into a polling station.

 

Anyone who thinks of May's victory as a good thing will have been warned. Her incompetence and spinelessness will have been noted by EU negotiators for the start of Brexit talks on 19 June, when the 'terrible deal is better than a bad deal' nonsense will be tested to destruction. Terrible deal it is - with the free trade jiahists behind her on the Tory backbenches screaming their approval.

 

The collapse of the UKIP vote means that the Tories are all but guaranteed victory.

 

2022 will be a different story though, a Labour victory is very likely I'd say.

Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted (edited)

 

2022 will be a different story though, a Labour victory is very likely I'd say.

 

Not if Corbyn stays on it won't be. Even if he doesn't the new boundaries will give them a mountain to climb, unless the SNP vote collapses.

 

This is the defining moment in labour history. If Corbyn stays, and I suspect it'll be down to Unite whether he does, they're ****ed. The defeat will be blamed on disloyalty, the boundary changes will give momentum the excuse to de select people and they'll go into 2022 with a 70 ish hard leftie or some other hard left half bake. They may not even be facing May, never under estimate the Tory ruthlessness when it comes to binning leaders. Cameron came from nowhere, it could be Corbyn against some fresh faced flavour of the month Tory. Rather than 2017 being the new 1983, where everybody thought Corbyn would do a Foot. It could be the new 1979, with a 1983 style meltdown coming in 2022.

 

The big question is how do the moderates get rid of Corbyn after such a good campaign. These people are nuts, if he gets over 31%, he's going nowhere, unless Len tells him to. Even then he'll make sure there's another head banger on the leadership ballot

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Edited by Lord Duckhunter
Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
He answered that specific question on the Newsnight special the other night. It's not his fault if you can't be arsed to actually follow the coverage before forming your opinions.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What night sat the Newsnight special on? He certainly didn't answer in the question time special.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

so22saint

so22saint

Posted
Posted

So, as a classic floating voter, I think that May has been an appalling PM and run an appalling campaign but that she is going to win, and increase her majority (but not by as much as she should have). Big question then, should she be ousted by the Tories as soon as they get in and if so, who should be PM?

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
So, as a classic floating voter, I think that May has been an appalling PM and run an appalling campaign but that she is going to win, and increase her majority (but not by as much as she should have). Big question then, should she be ousted by the Tories as soon as they get in and if so, who should be PM?

Nothing will be done until 2019. But I'd bet you'd be seeing more cabinet style than presidential.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Lord Duckhunter

Lord Duckhunter

Posted
Posted
Have any of those polsters in the UK asked any members of that totally peaceful religion who they will vote for?

 

They asked in tower hamlets & 115% of the voters went for labour

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OldNick

OldNick

Posted
Posted
He answered that specific question on the Newsnight special the other night. It's not his fault if you can't be arsed to actually follow the coverage before forming your opinions.

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After the Paris attack he said it was wrong to deploy Police to shoot the terrorists
shurlock

shurlock

Posted
Posted
After the Paris attack he said it was wrong to deploy Police to shoot the terrorists

 

You mean in relation to a quote that was taken out of context by the cretinous Kuenssberg and for which she was found to breach impartiality and accuracy guidelines?

 

Stop farting around in your robe, lapping up everything the Tory campaign tells you and instead show a bit more scepticism and curiosity, old boy.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

We all know what Corbyns idea for the bad guys is.

 

Invite them over for some Jam.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Sheaf Saint

Sheaf Saint

Posted
Posted

I saw a brilliant tweet from somebody yesterday (can't find it again to share it unfortunately). He had a very clear, simple, 4-step plan to reduce the threat of terrorism in the UK...

 

1. Stop selling £bns worth of arms to states who propagate and sponsor salafist extremism

2. Stop bombing their kids

3. Stop reducing the numbers of police on the streets

4. Stop cutting vital mental health and youth worker services

 

Can't really argue with any of it, but none of it will never happen with the Tories in power.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted

Sweden has not bombed anyone's kids

Germany has not bombed anyone's kids

 

Didnt stop attacks there did it.

 

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

shirleysfc

shirleysfc

Posted
Posted
We all know what Corbyns idea for the bad guys is.

 

Invite them over for some Jam.

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

 

You're starting to unravel. Go have a lie-down.

Nolan

Nolan

Posted
Posted
You're starting to unravel. Go have a lie-down.

You don't fancy a bit of Hamas and jam?

 

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...